Smith & Wesson Forum

Advertise With Us Search
Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Revolvers > S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present

S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present All NON-PINNED Barrels, the L-Frames, and the New Era Revolvers


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-29-2012, 10:38 AM
Flyer285 Flyer285 is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default Comments on 642

Hi all, new to the forum so apologies in advance.
Looking for comments on S/W 642. Father is looking to get one to carry (CCW FL / DE ) and having a difficult time finding one. Most gun shops are steering him in this direction as he wants to stay with a revolver. Thoughts on any others he should be considering with good stopping power but easy concealment?
He also wants to stay concealed hammer to prevent snag. Load is not as important but does like the +P of the 642.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #2  
Old 03-29-2012, 10:57 AM
DUNTOV DUNTOV is offline
Member
Comments on 642  
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: IOWA
Posts: 555
Likes: 6
Liked 65 Times in 34 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer285 View Post
Hi all, new to the forum so apologies in advance.
Looking for comments on S/W 642. Father is looking to get one to carry (CCW FL / DE ) and having a difficult time finding one. Most gun shops are steering him in this direction as he wants to stay with a revolver. Thoughts on any others he should be considering with good stopping power but easy concealment?
He also wants to stay concealed hammer to prevent snag. Load is not as important but does like the +P of the 642.
Great guns for the money, there are several reasons that the 642 & 442 are S&W best sellers, simple, light weight,reliable, accurate, and affordable.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-29-2012, 11:37 AM
Bart 44 Bart 44 is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 146
Likes: 4
Liked 78 Times in 21 Posts
Default

642 is the best. Been my everyday gun since the early 90s.

Dennis.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-29-2012, 11:56 AM
Vern's Avatar
Vern Vern is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Utah
Posts: 129
Likes: 10
Liked 102 Times in 44 Posts
Default

I have a 642 and love it. Paid around $350-$375 for it new as I recall. The same store has a new 638 for $375 that I've been wondering whether I need it too. It will jump in his hand a little since it is so light, so if you dad is sensitive about recoil maybe he should rent or borrow one to give it a try first. The beauty of a revolver is that they will digest anything that fits in the cylinder. That's not always true with a bottom feeder. The hard rubber boot grips that come with the new ones aren't bad. He can get some wood grips or laser grips if he wants.


The sights aren't very big, but they work. I've got a Mika pocket holster (Mika's Pocket Holsters - Custom Made Pocket Holsters, Waistband Holsters, Vest Holsters, Tactical Pocket Mirrors And Much More.) for mine, but there are others out there. I also have a Don Hume J.I.T. belt holster that works well. The little J frames are small enough that they are easy to hide.

Vern
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #5  
Old 03-29-2012, 11:59 AM
StatesRightist StatesRightist is offline
Banned
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Posts: 1,810
Likes: 2,026
Liked 1,451 Times in 555 Posts
Default

I carry a 642 for a BUG. All of the positives listed above are true. I will say in fairness the trigger is heavy until you've gotten several thousand rounds through it, use snap caps to save money. With +p's the gun will sting your hand some, nothing unmanageable, but 20-30 rounds of +P is enough in one session. Regular 38's are no problem. You can always change grips to help with recoil. Don't get me wrong, I own 2 because they are fantastic BUG's, but I wanted to give you the complete picture.

The only other thing I would say is snub's are not what I would recommend for a 1st gun. From reading your post, it seems like he's shot before, but I thought I would mention it just in case.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-29-2012, 12:11 PM
everReady Rob's Avatar
everReady Rob everReady Rob is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Colorado Rocky Mountains
Posts: 434
Likes: 63
Liked 46 Times in 18 Posts
Default

I have had a 642 for 5+ years, paid $425 as I recall. It is a tremendous gun for what it was built for, conceal carry. If it was my dad I would encourage him to stay w/642 and a REVOLVER for sure. Probably his eyesite would benfit from CT grips, mine did, and besides its fun.

I had a 442, basically the same gun (kinda sorta) but for color (just sold it to raise some $ for another project). I think the best 3 choices for this type of gun and considering his age are (1) 642 (2) 642 (3) 642. YMMV

Good luck in helping him w/this.

Last edited by everReady Rob; 03-29-2012 at 12:14 PM. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-29-2012, 12:24 PM
Edmo's Avatar
Edmo Edmo is offline
US Veteran
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 1,200
Likes: 1,349
Liked 1,693 Times in 530 Posts
Default

My new "post-lock" 642CT is tucked away in a FEDEX truck enroute as we speak.

More to come.

Edmo
__________________
TRUTH: Don't delete my posts!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #8  
Old 03-29-2012, 12:28 PM
airman's Avatar
airman airman is offline
WW II Vet
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: South Texas
Posts: 257
Likes: 208
Liked 46 Times in 24 Posts
Default

Yup, I agree, the 642. It's a super BUG.

I began with a Hogue grip to help the grip and recoil. Then got a notion to put on the laser to aid aiming.

As old and feeble as I am the recoil finally got to me and I traded for a 3-inch J-frame revolver that I love.
__________________
USN WWII Korea
NRA
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-29-2012, 12:58 PM
BobR1 BobR1 is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SC Missouri
Posts: 1,254
Likes: 281
Liked 331 Times in 221 Posts
Default

I agree with most everyone above.
642/442 or a 638/438 are the best S&W choices in a Pocket [U]Carry[/U], Conceal Carry gun.
The Ruger LCR 38 is not a bad choice either. I have an LCR 357 and an LCR 22 to go along with several S&W Revolvers.

If he is going to belt carry in a quality holster like a Lobo Enhanced Pancake, and not going to pocket carry it. A Stainless Steel 640 or a 649 will also work well and not recoil as hard as an airweight.

The heavier stainless steel J Frame guns are easier to shoot, but will not cut it for pocket carry for most of us due to weight. I carry several handguns from a 4" N frame 10mm down to an LCR 22. You will want an Air Weight J Frame for Pocket Carry.

My 2 Cents

Bob
__________________
ICORE MO2908
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #10  
Old 03-29-2012, 01:17 PM
ogilvyspecial's Avatar
ogilvyspecial ogilvyspecial is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9,644
Likes: 1,362
Liked 1,371 Times in 699 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vern View Post
I have a 642 and love it. Paid around $350-$375 for it new as I recall. The same store has a new 638 for $375 that I've been wondering whether I need it too.
You really need it too Vern. You really do.......

__________________
Ogy
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-29-2012, 09:20 PM
Robert B Robert B is offline
Member
Comments on 642  
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 422
Likes: 6
Liked 46 Times in 35 Posts
Talking 642 finish peals.

Go with the 442 because it has a better finish. Try finding a no lock version.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-30-2012, 12:19 AM
tray tray is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Another 642 No-lock here. It's my daily BUG.
__________________
T. Ray
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-30-2012, 03:44 AM
papajohn428's Avatar
papajohn428 papajohn428 is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Coastal Missouri
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 899
Liked 977 Times in 467 Posts
Default

A J-frame snubby is not the best gun for everyone, I think they're best for accomplished revolver shooters who have mastered the art of the DAO trigger. Recoil can be snappy with some loads, and if arthritis is a factor something with a little more mass is advisable. But for those with good hand strength and a learned trigger finger, they serve well. Mine came with a Crimson Trace laser attached, and it may be the only handgun I own that has not seen any real modifications. It requires regular practice to stay competent, as does any self-defense weapon. I like it.

Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #14  
Old 03-30-2012, 07:18 AM
Tyrod Tyrod is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sunny Central Florida
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 334
Liked 993 Times in 378 Posts
Default

I would advise the 442 no lock. I have the 442prelock and 642nolock and I believe the finish on the 442 is more durable. Next time he's in Florida have him come by and I'll put a Wilson spring kit in it. World of difference.
__________________
NRA Benefactor
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-30-2012, 06:11 PM
MassLiberty MassLiberty is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Peoples Republic of Mass
Posts: 37
Likes: 23
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Default My choice

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer285 View Post
Hi all, new to the forum so apologies in advance.
Looking for comments on S/W 642. Father is looking to get one to carry (CCW FL / DE ) and having a difficult time finding one. Most gun shops are steering him in this direction as he wants to stay with a revolver. Thoughts on any others he should be considering with good stopping power but easy concealment?
He also wants to stay concealed hammer to prevent snag. Load is not as important but does like the +P of the 642.
I second, third etc the choice of the 642... it's my concealed carry gun here in Mass.... rides in a Galico ankle holster.... not so good for any distance shooting , of course, but the report itself would prob scare off the bad guys! I also like the internal hammer as sometimes it just rides in my coat or pants pocket. Loaded with Speer Gold Dots.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-30-2012, 06:48 PM
RGMoore RGMoore is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Central Coast CA
Posts: 185
Likes: 30
Liked 54 Times in 38 Posts
Default 642

642 in Nemesis pocket holster. Light enough and small enough to ride in your boot, shorts or coat pocket depending on the weather which means you will carry it everyday anywhere. +p is a little snappy but manageable. Mine has CT and I like them.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-31-2012, 07:55 AM
Edmo's Avatar
Edmo Edmo is offline
US Veteran
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 1,200
Likes: 1,349
Liked 1,693 Times in 530 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edmo View Post
My new "post-lock" 642CT is tucked away in a FEDEX truck enroute as we speak.

More to come.

Edmo
It made it...

Edmo

__________________
TRUTH: Don't delete my posts!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-31-2012, 09:51 AM
photoman's Avatar
photoman photoman is offline
Member
Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642 Comments on 642  
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 5,057
Likes: 525
Liked 1,916 Times in 788 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer285 View Post
Hi all, new to the forum so apologies in advance.
Looking for comments on S/W 642. Father is looking to get one to carry (CCW FL / DE ) and having a difficult time finding one. Most gun shops are steering him in this direction as he wants to stay with a revolver. Thoughts on any others he should be considering with good stopping power but easy concealment?
He also wants to stay concealed hammer to prevent snag. Load is not as important but does like the +P of the 642.
Given the qualities he's looking for (caliber,concealment), any of the various Centennials in .38 Special will do. To purchase an Airweight or not will just depend on how much the weight bothers him. I would recommend one in stainless steel for a first gun but the Airweights carry much easier.

I would also recommend he consider using only standard pressure ammo if he chooses the Airweight.
__________________
Centennial Every Day
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
438, 442, 638, 640, 642, 649, airweight, ccw, concealed, crimson, hogue, j frame, lock, ruger, smith & wesson, smith and wesson, snubby, snubnose, tactical


Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Comments on a .45? cliff54 Smith & Wesson M&P Pistols 31 05-05-2015 06:56 AM
Comments on ads GKC FORUM OFFICE 2 06-29-2014 01:36 PM
M&P 45 any one have any comments on them? panamajack310 Smith & Wesson M&P Pistols 27 11-21-2010 09:10 PM
Comments on the SW 99 40 cal. b52buff Smith & Wesson Semi-Auto Pistols 7 03-30-2010 12:33 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:19 AM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)