Durable finish on J-Frames? 642 vs. 442 vs. 340

[UGlide]

The J-frame model 642 appears to have a light silver-like painted finish, the 442 is black, and the scandium frame 340 appears to be a different black finish.

1. Can someone please explain the durability of each of the finishes on these J-frames?

2. If the finish flakes, rubs or scratches off over time (normal wear or an accident), can the guns be re-finished by a gunsmith?

THANKS!

 

[gr7070]

I was thinking of starting a similar thread.

I'm curious what the difference is in finish between the 442 and 642. I don't hear issues with the 442, but do hear of some isues with the 642 finish. However, I would have expected both to have the same "clear coat" since they're both the aluminum alloy frame.

Can someone chime in on this when addressing item #1 of the OP.

 

[JayBird686]

Here is a pic of my 8 month old 442-1:

Doesnt bother me a bit. The gun is not a BBQ gun, its a save my butt gun. I would say if the finish is important to you, look for an older model. They seem to wear better.

 

[Rob1109]

The J-frame model 642 appears to have a light silver-like painted finish, the 442 is black, and the scandium frame 340 appears to be a different black finish.

1. Can someone please explain the durability of each of the finishes on these J-frames?

2. If the finish flakes, rubs or scratches off over time (normal wear or an accident), can the guns be re-finished by a gunsmith?

THANKS!

I've read the stories about the 642 finish and I'm concerned about it just as I'm concerned about the almost pristine finish on my '96 f-150. I would like to maintain them. For the 642 there is something called Renassance (sp?) wax. Seems to work well. I'm not interested in "battle scars". I realize wear and tear are inevitable, but, I will try to reduce if possible. I wonder if the 442 black finish may be more prone to nicks & scrapes than the 642. Since I only have the 642 I cannot really comment. Best.

 

[Ashlander]

In another thread by Tall Gunner he noted that S&W told him not to use Hoppes on his 642 -- it would eat his finish (ammonia based).

 

[A10]

I have carried my 442 daily for about 10 months now, in a pocket holster. I've put about 150 rounds through it in that time, and dryfired it enough to develop good trigger control. No issues with the finishso far...

 

[InTheWoods]

I have had my 642 for several years now. It gets carried quite a bit and shows only a tiny amount of wear at the corners of the rear sight. I would have to show the area to you and you still might not see it. I keep my frame waxed with Johnson's Paste Wax. No problems at all.

 

[gr7070]

Those of you with long use and little wear, what cleaning products do you regularly use? E.g. Hoppe's #9, RemOil, etc.

 

[ContinentalOp]

This is my 642-1, purchased in January. This picture was taken after about 7-7.5 months:

There's some other wear, but it's not as significant as this. Plus those pictures turned out even worse than this one. A photographer, I am not.

BTW, there is noticeably more wear on the backstrap now than when this picture was taken 2-4 weeks ago.

I will say this gun has been handled a lot in firing about 700 rounds and regular dry-fire practice drills. It's also been my primary carry gun during a hot and humid summer.

Having said that, I would probably purchase another 642 as I like the stainless steel construction. I think it's less likely to develop rust issues than the carbon steel of the 442 with the same level of care. That's more important to me than the appearance of the alloy frame's finish. At some point I'll probably get it refinished by someone like Robar.

If I do get another 642 I'll probably try applying some wax as I've read it can help. I don't have any Renaissance Wax, but I have used Blue Wonder Armadillo wax on my 65 with good results.

I almost forgot to mention that I've only used Break Free for cleaning in the time I've owned it.

 

[9399NOLES]

This is my 642-1, purchased in January. This picture was taken after about 7-7.5 months:

I almost forgot to mention that I've only used Break Free for cleaning in the time I've owned it.

Apparently Break Free is the only thing you are suppose to use on it. I have a 642 I have been cleaning with the hopps #9 for about 5 weeks now and I havent had one spec of the finish come off. Granted it is only a 5 week period but I have put about 500 rounds through it in that time as well. Its fun to shoot

 

[VaRecon]

I have a 638 that I use Flitz or Gunzilla on, I haven't had a problem after 7 monthes.
And it would be cheaper to have the factory refinish it for you then buying a new one, unless you want an extra.

 

[warrconn]

Gotta 442....clean chamber and charge holes with Hoppe's #9, and a slight spritz on the outside with Remoil and a quick rag. No probs so far.

 

[dubhelix]

In my limited experience, the frame finish on current production 442's holds up better than the frame finish on current production 642's. Since I am a big fan of long term durability, I go with solid stainless 95% of the time and carry a 640, unless I positively must have the lighter 442 for specific summer wardrobe reasons. The solid stainless lasts practically forever, and you can use all the hoppe's you want. I know it wasn't listed in the three choices, but it's true, nonetheless.

 

[southchatham]

I am surprised to see less than 1 year old guns looking like that. I have a black 438 that shows no signs of the finish wearing off. I do not baby it either. I've only used breakfree on all my guns. It was good enough for my m16 so I figure it's good enough for my personal guns. Maybe that's why my 438 still looks good. If it does wear i'm not going to worry though. I like battle scars since I put my guns to work. I'm not a collector and my guns each have a job to do.

The bad thing though is if you decide to sell, that wear will kill your resale value.

 

[revolve]

Good grief. That backstrap looks worse than the one that's just a little shiny on my 638. I bought that the first year they made 638s. Carry it in an ankle holster just about every day.

 

[revolve]

Just looked it up, 1989.

 

[338winmag]

I have a 340SC and the finish is coming off it pretty bad. I don't clean it, and it gets carried in pockets, ect. I've been looking at having someone coat it to make it look a little better, but most of the vendors say no scandium.

 

[Broadside]

There was a member here who had his silver colored, scandium frame 332 (or 331?) refinished in black by the factory. It turned out quite well based on the pictures I saw.

I think you have to resign yourself to the fact that the alloy framed revolvers are going to show wear rather quickly.

Smith is now producing the Model 640 Pro Series which is all stainless and doesn't have the internal lock. You can purchase one of these for practice and primary carry and then switch to a 442/642/340 when you need something lighter.

 

[InTheWoods]

Gee, my 642 gets shot quite a lot and carried often. I have had it for 3 or 4 years and it shows almost no wear. I do keep a coat of Johnson's paste wax on it. I really think it helps. Got to wear through the wax before the clearcoat can wear. Just a matter of simple physics.

 

[luv2rideWV]

442

My 442 has been carried for four years in a Galco horse leather pocket holster and shows significant ware along edges. Some corners are even going flat. On days I perspire, the gun needs to be wiped off to prevent rust. The gun is carried 24/7.