Inquiring minds want to know. I personally would rather have a black gun, over silver. Less noticeable IMO.
The black guns all have stainless cylinders and barrels now, so there is really no difference except color.

That's what makes the world go around I guess. If we all had but one choice, it would be a boring place to live I suppose. But, I do think the black guns are more durable in terms of finish and I own some of each.

Generally speaking, I also prefer black carry guns. The problem is that there hasn't been much consistency as to the type of steel reportedly used in the black snubs. Whenever I've read that the 442, for example, uses stainless steel I'll read something else saying it's carbon steel, including S&W sources that have been cited. Until I see definitive proof that the black snubs are made with stainless steel cylinders and barrels I'll have doubts.

BTW, I don't think I've read any mention of the yoke, just the cylinders and barrels. Are the yokes supposed to be stainless steel, too?

FWIW, despite the poor performance of the aluminum coating on my 642 the stainless steel components have been holding up very well with no sign of corrosion. The only thing I've done is wipe the gun down with Break Free CLP maybe once or twice a month when I clean the gun and a quick wipe down with a dry rag at the end of the day.

Of course, I do plan on having the gun refinished in black Cera-Hide sometime in the (hopefully) near future.

Oh, Shiny!

I hate to disagree with the other Dashiell Hammett fan, but I prefer stainless for concealed carry, but it's got nothing to do with durability.

Here's my reasoning:

I carry my gun concealed so no one can see it. I don't want to ever shoot anyone. If I ever do have to pull my gun and expose it, I hope the attacker will see it and run. I figure a shiny gun will be easier to see. If that doesn't work, it still works the same way the blued ones do.

That being said, I have always prefered the look of the dark guns, more classic and business-like!

__________________
low speed, high drag

Prefer the 642 over the 442 because it was what I could find, that's it. Prefer the 442 and Black guns actually, that is why mine (M&P 360) is black.

__________________
M66, M&P 360, 642, M85 UL/Ti

Wish all mine were nickel.....Have some stainless and blue ones too.

__________________
S&W Accumulator

I was just wondering, because most of the threads here, say, " I was looking at a 642 today" I dont think I have ever seen a thread that said, "I was looking at a 442 today"?

Supposedly the 642 & others hold up better in warm weather w/respect to rusting when carried close to the body. I prefer dark colored guns b/c they hide better and I can wipe them off more frequently when it's hot outside. One 442 is satin nickle and looks as good as it did in 1992 while the other is blue/dark and also looks like new. My EDC is the M&P 340 recently purchased for its light weight and front sight.
UPDATE: Both 442's have been traded away and I still have the M&P 340 and my practice of using a silocone cloth has kep it looking new to date.

__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)

I've got two 642's, two Model 60's, and a 686 snubby, all because smallish pistols are made for carrying, and carrying means sweating on them, and sweating on them means more maintenance and ultimately rust.

The only blued pistol I carry is a Walther PPK I bought brand new in 1974, and even it's not blue anymore. I had it redone in a satin nickel finish when it started to show some rust.
From that point on (which was probably 25 years ago), I've never seen it's finish show a bit of wear, or rust.

And that's why I don't carry blued pistols.

I agree. I have a 442 because I like black guns, but there is a definite possibility of avoiding a confrontation if the bad guy sees a glint of shininess and runs. I am seriously considering a 642 to join the 442 as a New York reload.

I prefer blue guns.
But they don't make a 442 with a 2.5' barrel. It didn't hurt that I got it for $420 NIB!
Regrets? I didn't buy 2!
Daily carry and I shoot it twice a week.
This is at 8 yds.

__________________
Field Researcher. IGC

This is the only answer I have found when faced with the impossible decision of what finish is best...! Then a person gets REALLY indecisive as in pic #3!

Blued/black guns are finding their way into my safe more and more...sickness I tell 'ya!

Attached Images

	001.jpg (68.0 KB, 219 views)
	002.jpg (77.8 KB, 284 views)
	003.jpg (75.6 KB, 211 views)

I picked a 442 for its easier to see sights (I shoot it a lot at the range) and for its lower visibility in case I'm concealing with a jacket which might get moved in a way to expose the gun in its IWB holster.

BUT - as others have noted, they are prone to rust. My yoke will rust if I don't wipe it down after a day's wear, and my cylinder has a spot where the finish has gone away. This occurred when I first started carrying it, and I treated it like the Glock it replaced - i.e., carry it and forget it. After a week or two I happened to check it out and was dismayed to see the rust. If I had it to do over I'd have picked a 642 and painted the sights.

In fact, I have recently acquired a 649-3 in 357 (I'll put one magnum round through it some day, just to say I did it, but in practice it's a 38 Special gun for me.) It's all stainless, with a 2 1/8 heavy barrel. I painted the sights (red ramp and black notch) and now carry it almost exclusively despite its extra weight. No rust worries, and it's a lot more pleasant to shoot +P loads through than the lightweight. If I have to carry in a jacket or pants pocket I'll take the 442, but otherwise I'll put up with the extra weight of stainless.

Bought my 637 used. Had I picked the exact model I prefer it would have been the 442.

My 642-1 is silver and my 342 was refinished by S&W's Performance Shop in PD black. Six of one half dozen of another. I don't rely on the color of my J-frame being recognized as I don't I rely on the sound of my 870P sliding a round into the chamber for anything.

In stores the person ordering J Frames seems to prefer a Shiney Gun, over a Black one for inventory. This may be to help with sales to ladies. I would bet most women would pick a nice shiney SS one before a plain looking Black one any day.
Next I think most uninformed see the Black finished J Frame guns as being blued, and believe they will rust much easier. My understanding is the Black Finish is way more durable than the Silver Finish.

I carried a 638 for about 3 years. I just sold it, and the plan is to replace it with a 442 Pro one of these days.

I also have an LCR 22 and an LCR 357. No shiney option with them.

Bob

__________________
ICORE MO2908

This is basically a restatement in gun terms of the classic question of our youth in the early 70's = "Mary-Ann or Ginger?"

Some of us are old enough to remember that Bill. But then....some of the posters here are young enough not to know that Smith ever made a NL, or anodized gun.

I say....roll-your-own. On Sunday's...I dress Roscoe in stainless trim.

Attached Images

Roscoe Dressed.JPG (94.4 KB, 271 views)

Gotta love Mary Ann.

We have a WINNER!!!!!!

I had a 642-2 that rusted on the thumbpiece. It's MIM, and it rusted really bad. That made me decide to get the 442-1 that I really wanted. I use a DeSantis Superfly pocket holster for it. I reverse the non printing flap on it, and it becomes a sweat shield. No sweat gets to my gun. I have had it for a year now, and no rust. I prefer the carbon steel in it because it reminds me of my Dad's S and W's. A little new with the old. Also, the 642's peel in the finish department. YMMV.

I love my 642-2 which is a black power port 642. I had Gemini Customs in Frankfort Ky do some work on it: lighten the trigger a little, installed a gold bead in the front sight, removed the safety lock and extended the firing pin. Very satisfied with it, just really love it for CCW. Overall its a great little gun. I don't like the 442's front ramp sight, its a good gun, but I like my 642-2.

I see 20 642-series guns for every 442-series gun, the bblack ones just are not as common.

__________________
"Sacramento" Bruce Conklin

I picked up an M&P 340 to carry because of its weight, .357 capability, and ss cylinder. Color did not play a part in my decision, mostly because I got a smokin' deal on the gun.

I'm looking for a NY speed loader, and I was torn between a 640 Pro and the new Chattanooga Shooting Supplies' exclusive 442 PC.

I got a chance to handle the 442 PC Friday night, and I must admit it would make a dandy bug. My long trigger finger went around the clip grip without so much as a touch, but the clip didn't "do" what I wanted it to do for me. I'm not a fan of the exposed extractor rod, either.

I hauled around a 60-14 before getting the 340 so the extra half pound on my hip isn't a factor. I'll likely go with the 640 Pro, and the 340 will become my bug, if and when I feel the need.

Every J-frame offers trade-off combinations: caliber, weight, color, stocks, barrel length, sights, availability, and, yes, price. We each have to pick the combo that best suits us (and our needs).

And, right or wrong, testimonials -- both good and bad -- seem to influence each model's popularity.

Cheers,

Bob

__________________
Wrangler of stray Chiefs
Bob

Because theyre racist

Because they didnt offer a black one with a hammer that wasn't as cheap as a 637!

I believe Revolvers should have hammers! HAMMER TIME!

Same answer, too. Both!

__________________
Trust, but verify - R. Reagan

Nice collection there.

__________________
Life is short,live it fully.

.......I like black, blue and Stainless but I DON'T like nickel. I don't know why that is. Maybe it was because a lot of TV cowboys had everything nickel plated.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

It all comes down to personal preference and method of carry. My PP is a 360J...

__________________
"Non sibi, sed patriae"

S&W Model 642s that I have owned /have had 'Finish Issues".
No matter how good care I have given them, the clear coating start to peel of leaving dark spots.
This finish is only under warranty for one year. The factory goes by serial number to determine the year. So if the weapon has been on a dealer's shelf for over a year, the weapon has no finish warranty when purchased.

Have had a 442 for 25+ years. Lots of carry, no actual service. Range time every few months. I have stainless guns but for pocket carry I don't have a color preference. This little black snubbie is a terrific gun and I'm just glad I've had it over the years.

__________________
Who watches the watchers?

Old thread, but you guys love pics. Right?

I really don't have a preference.

This 642 was offered with no lock and the ability to accept moon clips. I don't recall if the 442 was offered in the same specs. at the time I got it. If it was, I was probably worried about finish wear?

The 360 was a special run sold through Bud's a few years back for under $500. This is a .38 spl. version. Cheaper than the .357 version. Nice and light. It's worn as a house gun and I hardly know it's there.

__________________
Watch & Pray

Here is my 442.

Where does it fit? :-)

Satin Nickel.

Attached Images

442.jpg (50.2 KB, 1216 views)

I don't carry my 640 because of its appearance. I carry it because I prefer a pocket carry, it's hammerless so as not to snag, and it's stainless so as not to rust quite so easily here in the damp Northwest.
Add to that the fact that I'm a big guy with, um, moisture concerns, and my EDC needs all the protective qualities I can gather. Form should follow function, not precede it. But to each his (her) own.

JMHO
Larry

I split the difference, depending on whether I will carry during the day or at night.

At night, it's the 642. If I have to pull it, I want the bad guy to SEE it, and have the opportunity to back down before I choose to use it or not. With the silver finish, it will be obvious.

During the day, it's the 442. The black finish will be more visible in daylight.

If it's to be carried both day and night, it will be the 642.

Thankfully, I have plenty of alternatives - all good.

John

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

I'd go with blued. Easier to conceal in a pocket and won't rust if you take care of it. I have a blued airweight from the 1950s with no rust, although the finish is a little worn at the muzzle after lots of time in a holster.

Yeah, it makes no difference to me. My 442 is fine. As a 642 would be fine too. It's usually completely covered with a shirt, so I don't see how a lighter color will play a role in sticking out. I can see if it was temporarily uncovered, the lighter finish might stand out more. But that's not something I'd be worried about. The grip is what sticks out mostly anyways.

I like all the finishes. Well, the more normal finishes. Blue, Stainless, Nickel, matte blued and parkerized. I like Mary Ann and Ginger. But don't tell my wife. She splits the difference with beautiful medium brown hair.

I like all flavors. The 442 is my Favorite.

Attached Images

IMG_0685.jpg (82.1 KB, 65 views)

__________________
Two Handguns every day

I say bolderdash to need stainless due to rust resistance I have a late 60's blued model 36 that spent most of its life riding in an ankle holster in damp western New York weather often trudged through knee deep snow with it on and it has spots of blue worn clean off ( love the looks of a worn used blued gun!) and never had any trouble with rust. I am no meticulous cleaner either

Having lived in Hawaii and seeing the affects of carrying a blued revolver (uniform duty and even under a light shirt) at belly level. Truthfully, I didn't wipe down my duty revolver with an oily rag on a daily basis. BUT, whatever. Rust is real.

Bottom line: I prefer SS. Not saying that SS it's totally rust free and checking for rust under the grips is still recommended.

Aloha, Mark

I did not care what color my 640-1's were from Centerfire, not for the price I got them. I also have a blued M36 so I can go either way.

The shiny one was there.

__________________
John 3:16 .

I have a 638. Until recently, I was unaware they ever offered a 438. I would be fine with a black gun over a silver one in this model. A 438 would be fine but I don't think they made them when I bought my gun.

I wouldn't mind picking up a model 49, though.

All stainless steel, pocket carried, for me. Easy maintenance, and the weight doesn't bother me.

The impression on a bad guy is completely inconsequential to me. The likelihood of my having to draw the gun is minuscule; but if I'm forced to draw it, it will come out barking and its appearance won't matter a damn.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.