Airweight 442 & 642?

Pocketman38 · #1 07-09-2010, 09:41 PM

Been carrying .38 special for almost 40 years. My Chief's Special has scars from being dropped, thrown in a glove box, sweat upon, etc.. Qualified multiple times with and feel very comfortable carrying wheel guns. I've had a few semi-autos. "Is it cocked and locked?" "Is there one in the chamber?"

Been thinking about a Glock, but keep gravitating toward the J-frame. I am seriously considering an Airweight. What's the straight scoop:
I've heard issues with the finish not holding up.
Which is a better finish, black or "stainless?"
I saw a 642 today at a local suttler without the internal lock. Are non IL models readily available now?

500 Magnum Nut · #2 07-09-2010, 10:20 PM

The best J frame is the 442. If your like me you want a light 38 that you can shove into a pocket. If GOD forbid you need it, it won't snag on the way out.

Honestly, the finish is the last thing I worry about on a carry gun. I had mine for a year now, still looks new, FWIW. I carry it every day in the nemisis holster.
Look for a no lock model.....

442js · #3 07-09-2010, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pocketman38

Been carrying .38 special for almost 40 years. My Chief's Special has scars from being dropped, thrown in a glove box, sweat upon, etc.. Qualified multiple times with and feel very comfortable carrying wheel guns. I've had a few semi-autos. "Is it cocked and locked?" "Is there one in the chamber?"

Been thinking about a Glock, but keep gravitating toward the J-frame. I am seriously considering an Airweight. What's the straight scoop:
I've heard issues with the finish not holding up.
Which is a better finish, black or "stainless?"
I saw a 642 today at a local suttler without the internal lock. Are non IL models readily available now?

There are 642 and 442 models out there without the lock. Don't know if they are readily available, but you should be able to find them with some legwork.

I have a 442, and love it. No lock, price was right, and is an excellent carry gun.

f2 · #4 07-10-2010, 09:12 PM

FS: NIB S&W 642 or 442 - NEW - NO INTERNAL LOCK

photoman · #5 07-10-2010, 11:08 PM

Either will do you well. There has been a lot of internet chatter lately about the finish on these guns. It has been my experience that guns that are truly put to work, end up looking that way after a while. Doesn't bother me much. You can always send it to Robar and have it refinished.

wnr700 · #6 07-10-2010, 11:20 PM

I would get either. They are a dream to carry. My 442 showed wear in general after almost a year of use. I wouldn't hesitate to buy either... especially if one were available w/o lock, and that was your desire.

HEADKNOCKER · #7 07-10-2010, 11:31 PM

My 642 is now almost 20 years old with more carry time on it than you could imagine, it's been bumped & drowned in sweat & because it has an Anodized Finish the frame still looks almost new, The hammer & trigger are 100% forged & Flash hardChromed & it has realy held up, a while back I fit a 9mm 940-1 cylinder to it so it could take the same 9mm rounds & moon clips as my 940 but without the extra weight..
It's my #1 Carry Revolver..
They should start offering these with anodizing again or nickeled finish which is more durable than the spray on/Paint finishes..
The Airweight Centennials sure make a great pocket revolver..
Gary/Hk

Pocketman38 · #8 07-14-2010, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HEADKNOCKER

They should start offering these with anodizing again or nickeled finish which is more durable than the spray on/Paint finishes ...

From what I've been reading, I think most would be willing to pay a few extra bucks to get a more durable finish.

I've found a no-lock 642, which would make a good EDC. I'd preder to carry the black though. My blued 36 has been carried a lot, as evident by the bruises. I hardly ever carry the stainless model 60 and it looks new.

chp · #9 07-14-2010, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HEADKNOCKER

a while back I fit a 9mm 940-1 cylinder to it so it could take the same 9mm rounds & moon clips as my 940 but without the extra weight..
It's my #1 Carry Revolver..

HK - that's awesome. Where did you find the 9mm 940-1 cylinder and did you fit it yourself? How's the accuracy out of a .38sp barrel?

This is the configuration I wish S&W would offer from the factory.

spearcrow · #10 07-14-2010, 12:20 PM

I, like others, have seem some articles here and other places about the finish particularly on the 442. I have had mine for around a year, maybe a little over and it still looks new. I have not had it that long and have not really used it that hard. I more often than not carry it in my pants pocket, which might be a little easier on it that in a holster, but it doesn't even show a little wear. Looks new. I really like it, my wife loves it... although she has been trying to find some pick grips for it... i just keep tellin her, I'm lookin, still lookin, I'll fine some... but I won't

HEADKNOCKER · #11 07-14-2010, 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chp

HK - that's awesome. Where did you find the 9mm 940-1 cylinder and did you fit it yourself? How's the accuracy out of a .38sp barrel?

This is the configuration I wish S&W would offer from the factory.

I bought the cylinder right here on the forum, actualy traded a holster for it & fit it myself with a jewlers file & alot of patience & time..

Accuracy is as good as any 642 Airweight maybe even better..
It's very easy to shoot & is my favorite carry weapon..
I have it stoked with 124gr standard new old stock Nyclads..
Thanks to safearm for the cylinder & DC7 for the Nyclad ammo
There's a bunch of great guys here on this forum..
Gary/Hk

Faulkner · #12 07-15-2010, 08:26 PM

I bought a 442 earlier this week after a little research. One thing I discovered in my search is that they come in two versions. The "moon clip" version does not have the internal lock, then there is is the internal lock version.

I bought the moon clip version.

jframe · #13 07-15-2010, 08:57 PM

I got a 642-1 similar to Headknocker's yesterday. A friend traded it to me partially for some ammo. I've noticed that it not only has the durable anodizing, but also a FORGED trigger. Pretty cool. I've owned several of this model, but this may be the best of the breed.

442js · #14 07-15-2010, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faulkner

I bought a 442 earlier this week after a little research. One thing I discovered in my search is that they come in two versions. The "moon clip" version does not have the internal lock, then there is is the internal lock version.

I bought the moon clip version.

There is also a non-moon clip version without the internal lock.

chp · #15 07-15-2010, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jframe

I got a 642-1 similar to Headknocker's yesterday.

S&W made a factory 642 9mm?

Rob1109 · #16 07-16-2010, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 442js

There are 642 and 442 models out there without the lock. Don't know if they are readily available, but you should be able to find them with some legwork.

I have a 442, and love it. No lock, price was right, and is an excellent carry gun.

I received, last Friday, a 642 w/o IL, which I had ordered from my local gun shop the previous week. He also could have gotten a 442. It seems that S&W made a run (left over frames?) of J-frames w/o locks. Rumor is that there were 1000+ produced......

Combat_Diver · #17 07-20-2010, 07:52 AM

Smith has been making runs of the No Lock 442/642 for years now so that would seem to disprove the left over frame theory. I just recieved my 442 Pro without lock last week. It was shipped on 30 June from Smith to my dealer but I was again out of country to recieve.

CD

Srigs · #18 07-25-2010, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 442js

There is also a non-moon clip version without the internal lock.

That is the one I bought. I love it. I put a CT 305 on it and love to carry when working in the yard or back up to my 66-1 2.5" or Model 10-5 2"

HEADKNOCKER · #19 07-25-2010, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chp

S&W made a factory 642 9mm?

The Model 942 Airweight was a prototype & only ONE was ever produced.
It was given to a gunwriter at that time & has disappeared into a collection..
My convertible has the newer style cylinder without the pins that align the extractor but other than that it's a copy..
I fit the 940-1 9mms ratchet to the hand so I can swap back & forth & set the endshake on the new 9mm cylinder via Power Customs end shake shims..
I call it the 642/942

I wish Smith would dump this spray on finish & use something else, I see alot of beat up looking aluminum guns were that clearcoat is all but ruined, Some are ruined by the user using the wrong type of solvents but most are just from normal carry
Anodizing & Nickel plating worked great & if I remember right they changed their method because the stainless parts didn't always match the look of the anodized aluminum & it still doesn't..
I've seen a 442-1 that was Hardchromed & the carbon steel parts don't match the aluminum BUT the finish looks great & is very tough & will be on the gun when it's retired..

It's all about COST & using a Clear Coat Car Paint is much cheaper than any type of plating IMO..

Wake up S&W..
At least there offering some of their revolvers without that internal lock currently in SOME States..

If I had to choose a newer Airweight Centennial revolver I'd go with a 442-2.. The Black finish seems better to me than the clear their currently using on the 642-2..

terryjano · #20 07-25-2010, 07:27 AM

If you havn't already done so - take a look at the new Bodyguard. It is an awesome carry weapon and also cost effective with a built in laser. I started looking at and doing research on the 642 and 442 about two months ago. No matter what the hard cores write about getting used to the trigger pull - it is hard and throws off shot grouping. The Bodyguard has a great - consistent pull (almost feels like a two stage match trigger on my AR15).

Combat_Diver · #21 07-25-2010, 08:36 AM

HeadKnocker,

Do you know the difference between a 442-1 and 442-2? My new 442 Pro Series which was built last month (no lock) has a 442-1 frame. I'm assuming last month as I've been talking to Helen Piquette on when they where going to ship my Pro and she stated production hasn't started and I'll get one of the first ones. Gun was shipped from Smith on 30 Jun 10.

CD

bennettfam · #22 07-25-2010, 01:21 PM

My original satin nickel 442 no dash was not rated for +P. When the finish chipped off the cylinder S&W replaced it with the then new 642-1. This dash-1 revolver is +P rated and I've had no finish probs with the solid SS cylinder. I understand the dash-2 is when the internal locks began so.....if the lock is an issue for you, WATCH OUT!

Sonny Crocket · #23 07-25-2010, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Combat_Diver

HeadKnocker,

Do you know the difference between a 442-1 and 442-2? My new 442 Pro Series which was built last month (no lock) has a 442-1 frame.

CD

Not Headknocker, but to answer your question...
-1 is no lock
-2 is lock
The first current production no locks were still marked -2, mine is like this. Now it seems they have finally started marking the new no locks as -1 which is correct.

The 642 -1 and -2 are the same except Smith marked them right the first time. All new production no locks have been marked -1 from what I've seen on here, including the one I have.

442js · #24 07-25-2010, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sonny Crocket

Not Headknocker, but to answer your question...
-1 is no lock
-2 is lock
The first current production no locks were still marked -2, mine is like this. Now it seems they have finally started marking the new no locks as -1 which is correct.

The 642 -1 and -2 are the same except Smith marked them right the first time. All new production no locks have been marked -1 from what I've seen on here, including the one I have.

My 442-2 which I bought more than a year ago doesn't have a lock. I think there has to be some other changes between -1 and -2. Some -2 have locks, and some don't. Don't know the differences, but don't think it was anything major.

HEADKNOCKER · #25 07-25-2010, 11:36 PM

I always thought the -1s were pre lock & the -2s had the lock but with the newer ones coming without the lock who knows??
I figure all they have to do is keep the revolver from stopping at a few CNC machines & the lock parts aren't installed, should cost less..
I wonder if the newer ones without the lock have the notch in the hammer or if they have a specific one without??

Combat_Diver · #26 07-26-2010, 01:21 AM

Thanks for the info on the -1 to -2.

CD

Rob1109 · #27 07-26-2010, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HEADKNOCKER

I always thought the -1s were pre lock & the -2s had the lock but with the newer ones coming without the lock who knows??
I figure all they have to do is keep the revolver from stopping at a few CNC machines & the lock parts aren't installed, should cost less..
I wonder if the newer ones without the lock have the notch in the hammer or if they have a specific one without??

My NEW 642 is a -1 w/o IL......anyone know how to keep the alloy laquer finish from disolving over time? or is it just going to happen regardless?

Cashdog · #28 07-26-2010, 05:00 PM

Anyone know how the use of forged parts changed throughout the different dash models? Did the earlier models have a hammer mounted firing pin? I assume it's frame mounted on the newer models, but was wondering when the change may have taken place.

InTheWoods · #29 07-26-2010, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob1109

My NEW 642 is a -1 w/o IL......anyone know how to keep the alloy laquer finish from disolving over time? or is it just going to happen regardless?

Yep. Clean it with mild cleaners like CLP and put an occassional coat of paste wax on the frame. Let the wax wear away instead of the finish. Should look good forever that way. Mine gets this care and is used/carried a lot. No wear after several years.

Many of the photos I have seen of bad finishes seem to be the result of using harsh amonia-based cleaners (that would be ok for 'regular' guns). Some were due to bad finish applications at the factory. Barring those two factors, the finish can be protected from physical wear by the wax. If you oil your blued guns, you can wax this gun.

az20gunner · #30 07-27-2010, 04:33 PM

In reading this thread I noticed discussion about having or not having an internal lock on these firearms. Think I know why no lock seems to be preferred but would like to hear from you all on this issue.
Thanks

MH375H&H · #31 07-27-2010, 04:39 PM

442 no lock in my pocket. Slight holster wear on the sharp edges. No big deal.

Rob1109 · #32 07-27-2010, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InTheWoods

Yep. Clean it with mild cleaners like CLP and put an occassional coat of paste wax on the frame. Let the wax wear away instead of the finish. Should look good forever that way. Mine gets this care and is used/carried a lot. No wear after several years.

Many of the photos I have seen of bad finishes seem to be the result of using harsh amonia-based cleaners (that would be ok for 'regular' guns). Some were due to bad finish applications at the factory. Barring those two factors, the finish can be protected from physical wear by the wax. If you oil your blued guns, you can wax this gun.

I'm going to use Carnuba paste wax....if it's good enough for auto clear coats it s/b good for the 642.....

bennettfam · #33 08-01-2010, 11:39 AM

az20gunner: for me is is a tradition thing. I also don't like plastic guns or rubber grips or laser sights or... Also the reliability question of the lock and political correctness of it bothers me. This topic really could hijack this post though. There are numerous threads on the lock elsewhere.

6pack · #34 08-01-2010, 08:14 PM

I went with the 442-no lock.

I'm sure I'll wear the finish down over time. It's no big deal. At hat point I can get it refinished or just keep on using it.

Mike22-4 · #35 08-02-2010, 04:41 PM

I just joined the forum.your question sort of goes with what I asked. I'm getting some corrosion, would suggest stainless, otherwise 642-2 a great carry gun. I guess I'll be getting a stainless next.

az20gunner · #36 08-02-2010, 06:04 PM

My new 642-1 arrived a coupke of days ago, no internal lock.
anxious to give it a test drive at the range. Yeah

az20gunner · #37 08-02-2010, 06:10 PM

Thank you bennettfam, I did find info about the locks in the "sticky" about can't get past the hole, I opted for the non lock 642-1. I am not real keen on the PC gun lock thing either and feel it is one more thing that can malfunction when your life is dependant on the firearm.
Thanks again for the reply.