642 vs. 637 opinions needed.

rayban

rayban

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
218
Reaction score
98
Location
Ohio/Mich line.
I've got in narrowed down to these two....today......
I'm liking the look and feel of the hammer in the 637 and I also like the control I believe I have with it.
But as always, I'm sure there's much I don't know, so would like your input.
The only useful feature I see in the 642 is no hammer to snag on you when pocket carrying.....but again, I would not be surprised if I'm missing something very important.
Your thoughts please. And pictures pretty please:D
 
Register to hide this ad
There was a time when any revolver I bought had to have a hammer. After reading a lot of information, I came to the conclusion it depends upon what you plan to use the gun for. If it is one that will stay home in a drawer all the time the hammer version would be to my liking. In my case I wanted something reasonably light that I could pocket carry. I tried a light weight gun with a hammer on it. It worked OK. I never had an issue with it snagging when I went to remove it from my pocket. I always drew with my thumb on top of the hammer. I sold it because the hammer opening accumulated a lot of lint and other trash. I was constantly cleaning the opening out. I found that most of the time when I practiced I fired double action anyway. In a self defense situation I do not think anyone is going to take the time to cock a gun first. One day I tried the model 642. There was just something about that gun that fit me. If you plan to pocket carry, I suspect you will practice firing double action. That being the case then why buy a revovler with an open hammer?
 
Why not get a 638 then. That way you have a shrouded hammer that allows for single action if you ever want it but it can't snag. I really love mine.
 
637 = ILS

642/442 = NO ILS

642/442 wins!!!

Mine:

2011-07-01_17-08-06_145.jpg


(Bought before the new No ILS 642's...)
 
Last edited:
My own personal preference is for the 642. All my guns (so far, anways) are primarily for self-defense and are DAO. I already have a 642. My 2" 64 has a factory bobbed hammer and I had the hammer on my 3" 65 bobbed as part of an action job. If I were to buy the 637, I'd have the hammer bobbed and converted to DAO, which is an extra expense. I'd save money by purchasing the 642.

If having an exposed hammer and having the ability to shoot SA is important, then the 637 is an obvious choice. For pocket carry you just have to practice keeping your thumb on the hammer when drawing to keep it from snagging. To me this is another advantage to the Centennials (and true Bodyguards) in that I can get a firing grip on the gun from the start (well, depending on the size of my pockets). If you want SA capability in a snag-free design the Bodyguard is the best option, IMO.

As a side note, some people are concerned about lint getting in the hammer area of the Bodyguards. I don't think it's a big deal. Just make sure it's clear at the start and end of your day. If there's any lint, just blow it out.

Regarding the lock issue, my personal preference is a no-lock gun, but it's a little further down on my priority list.

FYI, the idea of getting a Bodyguard and converting it to DAO is appealing, and I've come close to getting one for that reason. But the Centennials will still probably be my first choice.
 
This is a little pocket revolver, not a big target gun. That hammer will only get in the way!

A nice thing about the Centenials, is the high hold you can use because of no hammer to ever gouge the web of your hand.
 
Last edited:
M638

The J Frame on top is a M638 Bodyguard. It has the ability for SA or DA, as in the M637, and a semi concealed hammer, similar to the M642.
grips-1-1.jpg
 
Personally I prefer the hammer I have had very little issues with snagging. Just practice pulling the gun from your pocket until its natural. The hammer is a nice feature because you can cock it as you pull it out so that first shot is SA then follow up rounds can be DA.

Duet.jpg
 
When I bought my j frame last January I also wanted the 637. But it was also for pocket carry and I decided to get a 442. When I went to get the 442 they had a 438 (black 638) so I got that instead. Now I have da/sa without worrying about hammer snag.

You may not shoot single action in a self defense situation, but it helped me learn to shoot the j frame. I used single action to learn the sights (knowing any problems wasn't because of the long hard pull) and feel of the gun, then went to double action after I felt I knew the sights. Plus it's fun to shoot single action. I like the option.

Also my buddies with the Ruger lcr can't say they have a better trigger. Lcr may have a nice trigger, but it can't beat a single action.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I always prefer a hammer of some sort because if I'm out on the farm and need to dispatch a beaver or deer it's much easier to hit them if I can fire single action.
 
Thanks for all the feed-back ya'll...very interesting.
When I said in the Op that I liked the control of a hammer....I guess what I really meant was "the option" to go SA or DA.....
...still on the fence.....
 
HotRoderX said:
Personally I prefer the hammer I have had very little issues with snagging. Just practice pulling the gun from your pocket until its natural. The hammer is a nice feature because you can cock it as you pull it out so that first shot is SA then follow up rounds can be DA.

Duet.jpg
Click to expand...

That sounds like a HUGE mistake waiting to happen.
 
I'm having the internal debate whether to get a 4/638 or a 4/642 myself.

Pro:
1. I like the idea of having a hammer for potential SA playing
2. and to be able to visibly see what position the hammer is in.

Con:
1. I do not like the idea of lint more easily getting into the firearm. I've seen too much lint get into cell phone screens from everyday pocket carry.
2. I'm also not sure if the extra frame extension on the 638 for the radius of the hammer cocking is bothersome to me or not.
 
I don't think that they make an airweight with a 3" barrel but they did make a run of airweights with a 2.5" barrel. I like the concept but I don't know how easy it would be to find holsters for this length of barrel.

Revolvers - Smith & Wesson

To find the model I am talking about choose 38 caliber handguns and go to the top of page two and you will see a 638 with a 2.5" barrel. SKU #: 162523
 
Last edited:
I've got the 642 and am very happy with it. Was gonna get a trigger job, but basically made it much easier myself, simply with about 750 rounds through it plus some dry firing excercises. I also have the model 36, so if I just have to use a SA/DA, I've got it. Model 36 is still probably the best snubbie made.
 
I've had a 49 for years (the "real" Bodyguard) and enjoy the single action from time to time. Like on steel plates at 25 yards - just because I can. But it's too heavy for a pocket.

So I recently picked up a no-lock 442 that is perfect for pockets. I probably would never use single action in deadly earnest, so the 442 should do. But still, if I could find a no-lock aluminum frame with a shrouded hammer I'd be awfully hard put to resist it.
 
I've done gone and dun it! I'm making a trade deal on a 442....we'll git r done early next week....I'm excited!
 
On a J frame, I prefer a hammer gun...bobbed. The dimensions of a 36, 37, or a 60 with a bobbed hammer are smaller than on the shrouded or internal hammer models.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

flundertaker
642 vs 442 : Differences
Replies
4
Views
955
haywood
haywood
b737lvr
New 637-2 in place of my 442
Replies
8
Views
704
K Harris
K
Z
642 PC v. 642 PC EA
Replies
4
Views
248
sprscientist
S
M
Value of "no lock" 642
Replies
12
Views
748
Birdhunter6
Birdhunter6
W
642 Performance conflicting information
Replies
5
Views
145
Wildman101010
W

Latest posts

Back
Top