Advice on stainless steel J Frames and Airweight snubbies

[ContinentalOp]

If you have an airweight J-frame and an all-steel J-frame, and give them the same treatment (# rounds fired, maintenance routines, practice drills, etc.) the airweight will likely wear out faster. How much faster, I couldn't say.

Regarding the reports of issues with the 442/642s, compare the number of issues reported to the very large numbers of them sold. I still think the 442/642 guns are very good values and would probably be my first choice of the ones you mentioned. I should also mention that I'm one of those 642 owners that had a failure. In my case, it was a broken hammer stud after 4 years, 1400 rounds, and probably 10x as many dry fires. S&W replaced mine under warranty for free. There are also people who've reported firing thousands of rounds through their 442/642s without issues.

A very close second would be the 640 Pro. I like the sights and the availability of no-lock models. I don't think I'd ever fire .357 Magnum rounds in it, though. Defensive loads in .38 Special serve my purposes.

The airweights are lighter than the steel guns, which give them a little more variety in carry positions (for example, pocket or ankle carrying a steel gun can be done, but won't be as comfortable/easy as an airweight). And, of course, the heavier steel guns are easier to shoot quickly. Either choice requires a compromise of some kind...you just have to decide which compromise suits your needs.

I like the Centennial models because there's no exposed hammer spur to snag; they're very streamlined. I do like the Bodyguards, too, not so much because of the SA capability but because I can keep my thumb on the hammer while holstering without having an exposed hammer spur (I would love to get a no-lock DAO Bodyguard).

If I could afford it, I'd get a 640 Pro as well as a 642 to cover my bases.

 

[Longhorn1986]

All I can speak about is my stainless 60-9. I bought it back around '97 and have pretty well shot nothing but .357 rounds through it. Admittedly, I don't shoot it all the time, but it has had a fair few rounds run through it. It is still as rock solid as the day I bought it. I have no qualms whatsoever trusting my or my family's life with it.

 

[Boudiepitbull]

Thank you everyone for your thoughtful replies. Keep it coming!!

Just to be clear, carry is not an option for me. I'm really just looking for something different to fill a hole in a collection of long barrel revolvers that will be fun to shoot.

I live in NYC, long gun and handgun permits are extremely difficult and expensive to get and carry permits are virtually impossible. There is a local range, but there I am limited to using a .22 Marlin rifle (the same gun you might give to a 7 year old) and the barrel is actually chained to the bench for safety (I kid you not). So, I actually fly to Florida to visit my son just to go shooting and only get to shoot 4 or 5 times a year. I get to use my son's guns as a guest when I visit and he takes me to the range. He likes and collects Sigs and I ask him to buy and keep the Smiths that interest me, a 617, a 686, and now most likely a 640. Someday I'll leave NYC and live in a place where he may be able to legally transfer some of the wheel guns to me (he kinda likes that 686). Until then they are registered to him and reside in his gun safe. My son will only carry his Sigs, so for at least the next few years this particular gun will join it's brethren as a range toy and not a carry piece. Anyway, that's why carry is not an option for this purchase. Sorry for the long rant. I hope some of you can actually smile at the ridiculousness of the situation.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Start with:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/481157-broke-my-new-442-airweight.html

There are accounts of failures in different threads scattered all over this forum, even some in this thread if you scroll back (there are two directly above your post if you look). I promise you I didn't imagine it or make this up. I just don't have time to search the forum for you and present it in a tidy little package. What I can say is, with out even looking and just randomly reading the forum in the last few days, I saw enough of the same complaints about the Airweights that I felt the need to ask questions to better educate myself about a potential problem before making a decision to purchase one or not.

Thanks for the reference. I certainly don't expect you to do my search for me. It sounds like Grant Cunningham is certainly telling us not to dry-fire a 642 without snap caps. I suppose you could always find an old 42 with hammer nose vice firing pin. Other than that, I can only parrot that what you see is a few problem cases in tens of thousands sold.

I also note that in a later post you say that this will not be carried. In that case, most or all of the reason for the aluminum frame goes away. Depending on your hand size, you may not even want a J frame at all. But if you're set on it, certainly a steel frame will be more comfortable to shoot.

Have fun!

 

[two-bit cowboy]

I thank you for describing your situation. Helps me with two things. First, I really appreciate living in Wyoming. Next, I'd offer a further thought about a 640 for your current intended use -- I'm not sure it'll make much of a range gun.

You've already got the L-frame in that caliber. I might go the other way and pick up an N-frame in a .45 acp or lc or .44 spec or mag.

I'll shoot the three j's I mentioned in my earlier post just to remain proficient, but I don't view any of them as range guns.

My two bits,

Bob

 

[buckshotshorty]

...................Someday I'll leave NYC and live in a place where he may be able rto legally transfer some of the wheel guns to me (he kinda likes that 686). Until then they are registered to him and reside in his gun safe. My son will only carry his Sigs, so for at least the next few years this particular gun will join it's brethren as a range toy and not a carry piece. Anyway, that's why carry is not an option for this purchase. Sorry for the long rant. I hope some of you can actually smile at the ridiculousness of the situation.

There is no registration required in Florida. The happiest day of my life was the day I moved out of NYC. Moved away 12 years ago and haven't been back since.

 

[Boudiepitbull]

There is no registration required in Florida. The happiest day of my life was the day I moved out of NYC. Moved away 12 years ago and haven't been back since.

I guess what I meant by "registration" was that all the purchase related paperwork was done in his name and not mine. There has to be something about NYC you miss, the pizza? Chinese take-out?

 

[Boudiepitbull]

I thank you for describing your situation. Helps me with two things. First, I really appreciate living in Wyoming. Next, I'd offer a further thought about a 640 for your current intended use -- I'm not sure it'll make much of a range gun.

You've already got the L-frame in that caliber. I might go the other way and pick up an N-frame in a .45 acp or lc or .44 spec or mag.

I'll shoot the three j's I mentioned in my earlier post just to remain proficient, but I don't view any of them as range guns.

My two bits,

Bob

That's an interesting point of view about going bigger rather than smaller. My son is always talking about getting a Ruger Blackhawk Bisley. When we took his Grandmother's (my former mother-in-law) little .38 Rossi Model 36 clone (I don't know what the Rossi designation is) to the range we had a blast at close range after shooting all those carefully placed shots with the two 6 inch barrel tack drivers. I quickly found point and shoot resulted in tighter groups than trying to take careful aim with that little gun. That may sound a bit sacrilegious, but I think it's like taking a hook shot in basketball and getting a swish that you can't explain. You didn't line up the shot, your subconscious did...very different experience. Anyway, that's why I have the itch for smaller rather than the bigger first, and I call it a range gun because that's where it's likely to see all of it's use for a few years.

 

[Boudiepitbull]

Thanks for the reference. I certainly don't expect you to do my search for me. It sounds like Grant Cunningham is certainly telling us not to dry-fire a 642 without snap caps. I suppose you could always find an old 42 with hammer nose vice firing pin. Other than that, I can only parrot that what you see is a few problem cases in tens of thousands sold.

I also note that in a later post you say that this will not be carried. In that case, most or all of the reason for the aluminum frame goes away. Depending on your hand size, you may not even want a J frame at all. But if you're set on it, certainly a steel frame will be more comfortable to shoot.

Have fun!

I suppose the truth often is that the people who experience a problem are the most vocal while the rest of us quietly carry on unnoticed. I do want a J Frame because we already have a K and a L and we're sort of working our way thru the Smith and Wesson alphabet. Your point about steel and not benefiting from the advantages of an aluminum frame is well taken. Thank you for your input, as you said, you have 50 years of experience and no one can put a value on that. I also collect motorcycles and believe me, when I run into someone with 50 years of experience with a particular marque I'm interested in, I'm going to listen to what they have to say. Thanks again for your input!

 

[Beachcomber]

I prefer the all steel Model 640 and I own two of them... a 640 (.38 spl) for pocket carry and a 640-1 (.357 mag) that I carry in an belt holster.

 

[reppans]

I also own the 686 and 617... J-frame primary for the range? Yeah, I'd vote stainless too. If it were me, I'd go with the 60 if the gun will never be carried, and then the 649 if it may be eventually carried (and I am right now). But I guess I really like shooting single action from time to time - it just amazes me how accurate even these little snubbies can be. Although I mostly practice in DA, I always fire a few shots in SA to show me the gun is more capable than I, and of course, it's always fun out-shooting most range buddies with their plastics guns.... with a dinky "old mans" snubbie.

 

[Cal44]

Very likely the reason you hear of problems with the 642 is because there are more 642's sold that any other model.

Also, people on a board like this tend to post about problems and can give the sense there is a bigger issue than really exists.

Steel will always be stronger and more durable that aluminum. But it's heavier. You get to choose the trade-off for yourself.

Some people choose to have an Aluminum gun for carry (like a M637) and a steel m60 (for example) for practice.

 

[BUFF]

I bought my first Model 60 in 1982 and it replaced my Model 36 as a back-up and warm weather off duty gun. I cut the hammer spur to avoid snagging. I sweat a lot (today it hit 99) and I like the improved corrosion resistance of stainless. It never had any problems.

I retired the Model 60 when I bought a Model 642 went they first started selling them early in 1991. The light weight was a big improvement in carry convenience but it kicked harder with big ammo.

I bought a Model 640 in .357 in 1995 but couldn't shoot it well with Magnum ammo unless I put big grips on it which defeats concealabilty (if that's a word).

My first Model 642 cracked the frame (more on that below) after 20 years use and a few thousand rounds, most of it Plus-P. I sent my Model 642 back home to S&W and broke out my spare one and qualified with it and started to carry it.

S&W replaced my broken 642 under their lifetime warranty and replaced it with a 642 Pro, as I wanted one without the internal lock and that was what the factory had in stock at the time. I had my new gun, delivered to my house, in under two weeks, shipping both ways paid for by S&W. Can't beat that.

My brother has a concealed carry permit and ended up with my 640. Same thing, hard to shoot Magnums without bigger grips. I gave him my second 642, he loves it and now I carry the 642 Pro.

The aluminum-framed J frames, if they fail, do so in one of two ways. The most common is the frame cracks in the thin portion just below where the barrel screws in. The metal is thin there to clear the yoke. The gun still shoots fine; I didn't find the crack until I cleaned it after shooting 50 more rounds of Plus-P through it during a department qualification.

These frame cracks there also happen occasionally in aluminum-framed K frames like the Model 12 Airweight M&P. Always check that spot when buying any Airweight S&W, they occasionally crack when being built from over-torqueing the barrel when they screw it in and QC doesn't spot it.

The second common way they fail is the hammer and trigger pins/studs breaking off inside the action, pulling themselves loose from the frame. Much less common but happens occasionally; you will notice it when it happens because the gun stops cycling!

In absolute terms, aluminum parts are weaker than steel parts of the same dimension. Is the S&W aluminum frame strong enough? I think they are, but it's a trade-off. Most Airweights will live a long, healthy life. As noted above, S&W also builds Airweight guns in .357 Magnum, so S&W seems to think so, too.

What to buy is a personal choice matter. For carry, I like the aluminum guns. For just good old range shooting and plinking, the steel guns might be a better pick.

I always advise people to get the one they like. S&W makes a big variety of J frames, and the choice can be difficult. That's a good problem to have!

Do a search (top of page) for "cracked frame" and you will find pictures. Sorry I'm so long-winded.

 

[Boudiepitbull]

Buff, thank you! That was an incredibly concise overview. Helps a lot!

 

[BUFF]

Good luck with whatever you pick.

 

[Rick_A]

The 442/642/638 make ideal pocket/ankle guns. They're plenty durable, but as some mentioned, broken hammer/trigger pins and cracked frames can happen. In general, if it makes it past 300 rounds without failure it'll likely last a lifetime.
20160407_115919 by Slick_Rick77, on Flickr

I like the 649 as a waistband carry. While I've used it for pocket carry in the past it is bulky for the task.
20150312_104857 by Slick_Rick77, on Flickr

It has the magnum capability, should you choose to use it. It's also very tame to shoot with +P specials. Magnum use is not for the uninitiated. The gun is fiesty with magnums and a little boring with specials. It fills a much needed niche of a small discreet waistband carry when dressed light.

If there was only one to get it'd be a model 37.
20150409_132722 by Slick_Rick77, on Flickr

The weight falls between the Airweights and stainless magnums. One has to be mindful of the hammer, especially when drawing from the pocket.

In short, for me it comes down to the primary use and mode of carry. In the waistband heavier guns are better suited, where having a brick in the pocket or on the ankle is a bit impractical.

Buy the one you like best. Folks here warned me when I got the first that they do tend to multiply.

 

[jeeps]

Look for a older 640-1 without mim parts or lock,if you can can't find one get a newer 640 pro

 

[BUFF]

Yes, a steel revolver MAY last longer than the same gun in aluminum, but both are capable of shooting thousands of rounds as long as they are not handloads exceeding recognized pressures. I wouldn't shoot factory-loaded Plus-Plus-P in an aluminum frame gun unless it was factory produced for .357 Mag, but remember, my first 642 broke after 20 years and thousands of rounds of factory Plus-P ammo, mostly Federal and Winchester. Outside of the frame crack, that gun was tight as a new one.

Remember, the gun's yoke, cylinder, barrel, ejector ratchet and rod and all of the action parts are steel, the big ones stainless steel, on a 642. The only aluminum part is the frame.

I think what part wears out from shooting hundreds of hot rounds in one outing is the shooter.

As for "revolvers can't hold up for thousands of rounds," that is nonsense. My Model 686, bought in 1982, was my main completion gun for years and probably has 25,000 rounds through it, fired fast double action and it is still all in factory spec.

 

[oldiesradio1560]

I've had two 640's over the past 15 years along with a 4" 686. II enjoyed my 640s the best. Yes, I have a Pac rubber 3 finger grip. It maybe a little larger grip but I have No issue with .357 magnum rounds and I guarantee you if you pocket carry it's No problem. You don't notice it after a short time. The way I see it it's All about self defense, not how many rounds to push thru it on the range. The range Never shoots back so how many .357 rounds of stopping power are you going to shoot to stop the threat??

 

[kthom]

With the Model 60 and the Model 637 we have the whole single action/double action debate, as well as the presence of the exposed hammer. The drawbacks seem to be snagging on clothing and acting like a lint trap. Really? The advantage seems to be you maintain the option and the accuracy of single action. Then again, it's a snubbie and I don't expect groups to be punching out the bullseye at 15 or 25 yards with it. On a personal note, concealed carry is not an option until I leave NY State, but it might be an option someday in years to come.

As I'm writing this I'm leaning more and more towards the Model 640 unless someone can put forth the argument that the 642 is really not as failure prone a design as some have experienced. I would also expect to pay about $200-250 more for the 640, but given enough time to save that's not really a consideration.

What do you think?

My all time favorite J Frame is the Model 640-1. I personally much prefer the Centennial style frames since I only fire these guns in the double action mode. I have come to prefer the steel framed guns as opposed to the Airweights. I own a model 442 and 642 as well as models 36, 60, and 649. The only one I carry these days is the 640. The dash one has the 2 1/8 inch barrel which I prefer and is in .357 caliber. I only carry +P .38 Special ammo. I have fired a few mag loads just to try them, but the added muzzle flash, sound, and shot recovery time does not suit my needs.
The steel framed guns are much easier to fire accurately for me. I do not pocket carry hardly at all. The steel frame weight in a good belt holster is not a problem. The 640 would be a better choice for range shooting and it would also fill the bill nicely for an EDC if and when you move to a place where you can do that. The blued guns are nice but the stainless frames for me show less wear and are easier kept looking nice, especially for EDC. For me, a good +P or even a good standard .38 Special load ( the old FBI load with a LSWCHP bullet) will do what I need done for personal protection. Target loads for range shooting are easy on the gun and easy on me! I also fire some of the +P rounds occasionally to maintain proficiency with them and confirming hits at point of aim. I personally like the 158 grain ammo in these guns, but I also like and carry the Speer Gold Dot HP bullets made for short barrels and have confidence in them for EDC.

I have had no issues with either the 442 (a no dash gun that I've had since shortly after they became available) and a 642 that has been reliable except for it's finish which deteriorated fairly quickly. That is not a concern for me with this revolver since it is a tool. Reliability is a concern. None of my airweights get fired nearly as much as my steel framed guns, although the 442 has had a fairly large number fired in it over the years. My wife also fires this revolver as well.

I like all of these guns, including the humpbacked 649, also chambered in .357. But hands down, my model 640 is my pick and choice among them for a using gun and an EDC. I believe you could do no better than a Model 640 steel framed revolver if it is a J Frame you are interested in. They are not as commonly found but they are well worth the effort and time it takes to find one.