I was looking at the 442 today. I was looking at it real close, and found the model number said 442-2. What is the -2? I love the size and weight of it. I am looking for something to replace my 25 auto that I keep in my pocket.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

After the 340 PD (11 & 1/2 ounces) and the 340 M&P (13 ounces),
nothing beats a 442 (15 ounces) in your pocket.
The 442 finish is better than the 642.
I have seen some 642's where the finish peels.
My 442 in electroless nickel from 1992 still looks like new.
Nowadays, your choice in a 442 is black or black.

Of course if Smith & Wesson would get off their asses
and make the 351 PD California legal, it would be right up there.

Great pistols, just picked one up myself to compliment my 640-1. Put Uncle Mikes Boot grips on and painted the front sight orange. Ran 60 rounds through it last weekend with no issues, may out the Apex spring kit in it soon.





Rhino

I've been carrying one daily for several months now. IWB, where it keeps warm and gets humid. At the end of every day I find little drops of moisture in the crane/frame joint, that I wipe out with a silicone cloth I keep on my dresser. I failed to do this for the first month or so (I was carrying a Glock and just never thought about rust) and now have some beginning rust spots on the crane. They haven't gotten bigger since I began the silicone wipedown each evening, but I hate having to keep up with this sort of daily maintenance. Still, I could never find a pocket big enough to hold a Glock 26, so . . .

I picked the 442 over a 642 because I have another stainless gun and can't see the sights in bright light. The 442 IS better in this regard, but in retrospect I think I would have been better off (less maintenance) if I'd picked the 642 and just painted the stainless sights.

I personally prefer the 640, but "anything" you can do to get the 25ACP out of your pocket will be an improvement in SD tools.

Welcome to the Forum.
If you are serious about concealed carry, you simply must have a Centennial S&W Revolver. In answer to your question about the -2 the main difference is the dreaded internal lock.
Jim

My 442 and my 340sc are the most carried guns in my collection. A J-Frame is a must have and in my opinion the best pocket carry gun hands down.

To at least partially answer your question, whenever S&W makes a change or two on a revolver's design, they add a "dash number" to the model to designate the change.

__________________
Pisgah

Check out this no lock 642:

S&W M642 38 1 7/8 No Lock Stainless $361.00 SHIPS FREE

__________________
Lou

That's where my NL 442 came from.

Why does everyone hate the lock? If you keep it unlocked it should be fine. That is a good price, but I priced a 637 from a local dealer for 339. I would think his price on the 442 shouldn't be much different.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

Please don't start ANOTHER anti lock thread, there's many of them around, do a little Google...

Meanwhile, the 442 is a super carry gun.....I never hesitate to show mine off at any opportunity.

Attached Images

misc 091.jpg (78.8 KB, 49 views)

my 442-2 is a constant. i had mine ceracoated, black, and put some Ahrends smooth finger groove grips on it. lightened the trigger, and smoothed the action. it is the single must have pocket protector ever. buy one, i'd bet my life on mine. you could expect the same from one. also welcome to the board! there is a wealth of knowledge here, and all are willing to share.

Welocme to the forum. My 442 is my only pocket gun. Get it. You won't need another either.

My EDC is a Smith M&P340, right front pocket, in a Galco horsehide holster. I have been contemplating a 442 or a 438 as a BUG worn on the left side in a Hume JIT or a good IWB at about 8:30. The 442 is looking better right now because it is available with no lock. I do, however, really like the looks of the 438. We'll see.

the galco horsehide is a must for the front pocket. it aint cheap, but you will only buy it once!

Great gun. My wife like mine so much she bought one for her carry gun and shoots it often. Going to get her a trigger job to make it a little better shooter for her.

The -2 refers to the second engineering change for the Model 442. The Model 442 is an excellent pocket gun. Much better than any .25 auto in my opinion.

__________________
Centennial Every Day

-1 = no internal lock
-2 = internal lock

__________________
This...is my BOOMSTICK

Is the frame on the current 442 still hard anodized as is the finish on my 1994 442?

The frame on my current 642 + 317 I believe is painted and feels softer.

__________________
NRA Benefactor

I have asked that question all over the forum whenever I get a chance.....maybe someone who knows will eventually chime-in. I really believe the older Airweights/AirLites are stronger, or went through some form of frame-hardening....especially in the area of the recoil shield. You can look at the older guns and tell.

I was setting the gun up to take a picture and I noticed that the frame seems to be painted and the sideplate is definately anodized. Also, this gun is my most used J frame and hardly exhibits any cylinder pin drag across the recoil shield. My brand new 642 is starting to exhibit a groove. And my 317 has a quite noticeable groove. I would agree with your assessment.

__________________
NRA Benefactor

__________________
Centennial Every Day

It positively sux. I have looked at a lot of older lightweights at shows and then sitting right by the older gun, is a new lightweight with a huge scar across the recoil shield. I have two recent lightweights, but do not plan to own another one.

I got this very stupid remark from Smith when I called to inquire. This brilliant rep. told me well...the center-pin is steel and the frame is aluminum and the pin would wear a trail. I just did not bother....simply hung-up the phone. I also e-mailed them, hoping I may get an engineering answer, but pretty much got the same response. They said...don't worry about it. I am not going to worry about it....I will not purchase another recent lightweight. I am sure the wear will stop after a certain point, or at least slow-down when the pin wears-in....if it doesn't it will eventually cut a serious slot in the recoil shield. I have steel revolvers over 25-years old that don't look as bad as these things do.

Oh yes...I know it's under warranty, but I doubt they have a stash of no-lock frames to replace cut-up no-lock frames in the future. I have my sights on an older model 38 that shows absolutely no mark at all across the recoil shield. It has the same center-pin and spring as all the other J-Frames. Keep the 442 the 642 and even the 438...I'll settle for the older Model 38 that apparently received some degree of hardening of the frame.

Mine is nowhere near as bad as the picture Photoman posted, but would be there shortly. I reduced the center-pin spring weight in both of mine. Lock-up is fine and I have no fears about the lighter spring.

welcome to S&W. glad you are here.