I do NOT like my 642!

T

Triggernosis

Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
1,296
Reaction score
839
Location
Wilson, NC
I picked up a 642 recently and put some hip-grips on it so I can quickly slip it in my waistband or pocket when I don't want to belt-up and holster my regular carry pistol. That part I like.
The part I don't like is that little sumvamitch is a handful when you fire it! I've shot mostly mid-level handloads with 158 gr. bullets and that thing almost hurts! I tried some 125 gr. bullets as well and really didn't notice a whole lot of difference to be honest. In addition, the speed of the bullets I was shooting was 650-700 fps. If'n I'd have shot some +P loads I would have likely thrown the ******ge in the ditch afterwards!
Now, I know I could put some nice Pachmayr Compacts on it that would help tremendously with its bark, but that would negate the reason I put the small hip-grips (S&W's version made by I can't remember who) on it.
I'm seriously thinking of selling it and sticking with one of those pocket 380's, or even a Kel-Tec PF9 with a clip on it (there's no way it could kick any more than this snotty-nosed, rambunctious 642!).
 
Register to hide this ad
I tried a pair of Hipgrips and to me they do not fit anyone's hand. When a gun doesn't fit the recoil may hurt. If it hurts it's no fun, and you can't hit anything. Ditch the hipgrips, put on some rubber grips that soak up the recoil, and see why the 642 is one of the most popular J Frame's ever built. Keep in mind the reason it is nice to carry is because it is light. Gun weight soaks up recoil, and the 642 has very little weight. So, you need something to soak up the recoil.
 
Have you shot the gun with the stock grips? I find the rubber grips it comes with manage recoil quite well and I don't find it uncomfortable to shoot.

I have pocket and AIWB holsters for the 642 and the stock grips are perfect for either method of carry.

Don't give up too soon. Give it a fair chance to win you over.
 
I just bought a Kahr CM40. A pocket .40 that is less than 5.5" long and weighs only 15.8oz. If you think that it might kick too much, they make a CM9 that is the same size and weighs a little less. Worth looking at if you are looking for a pocket gun.
 
I have purchased several PC J-frames of late with these HipGrip-knock-offs installed. These grips rest in the boxes that the guns came in. The guns now sport UM boot grips. The knock-offs are difficult to shoot with: the grip screws loosen under firing and I cannot get a firm grip on the guns. While several posters have disagreed, the grips do not hold the gun securely in the waistband.

Solution? The UM boot grips are out-of-print. S&W makes an acceptable knock-off of these boot grips, which are now installed OEM (proper term?) on most J-snubbies. They may still be available on the S&W website in the "Store" section. These grips work well in IWB, OWB, and pocket carry.

And perhaps try target wadcutters as an easier shooting carry load.

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103
 
One of my EDCs is also a S&W J-frame, an M438 (I miss my old M49 Bodyguard!). Defensive loads are 158 gr. SJHPs. The stock rubber grips suit me just fine. The "clip grips" do not look comfortable at all. Knives with clips in the pocket... OK. On a pistol... not so much for a comfortable carry, or for shooting.

I am not a very large man (5' 8" - 160 lbs., and a retired old geezer to boot), and have absolutely no problem with recoil on much of anything. Strong hands and arms, yes, which helps. Control and attitude are more important, though, I believe.

As for not wanting to belt up a holster, here are a couple of IWB rigs that do quite well with belly/appendix carry. No belt needed... just slip it inside your waistband. The spring clips keep everything quite secure. The ratty, beat up holster is an old Safariland I bought in the mid-'70s for the aforementioned M49 (restitched a few times), and the other is a fairly new De Santis 106 02. I'm still breaking that one in.

And PLEASE don't ever fire +Ps in the 642... the aluminum frame will not take the beating for very long.
 

Attachments

  • DSCF0001.jpg
    DSCF0001.jpg
    139.6 KB · Views: 231
Attn Excitable Boy: Absolutely LOVE that old IWB holster! Too cool! My IWB suede pouch rigs all come from the $1/'junk' box at a range, left there by folks who did not appreciate them. If these rigs could talk..., but I'm sorta glad they can't!

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103
 
I had a 642 and feel your pain. I now have a Charter Arms Police Undercover in .38 special...it's heavier than the 642 by about 8 oz, a little bigger, AND offers 6 rounds vs 5 for the SW. Recoil isn't nearly as bad. I have found the CA to be totally reliable and accurate, regardless of other reviews. I got rid of my 642 (after carrying it for 5 years) because of the recoil issue.
 
That Desantis hip grip was the first thing that came off my 442. If you must have a hip grip I like the Barami better. Still hard plastic but it feels better in my hand. I'm still waiting on a Tyler T grip I ordered to try it as well.
But as others have said, go with rubber if it is that uncomfortable. Personally I don't find it objectionable and can shoot a box or two of ammo in a range session.
 
Perhaps Newton's Law of Physics was forgotten about here....J frames are not a pleasant gun to just go to the range and blast away. They ARE however a fabulous choice for concealed carry.

Ken Hackathorn once told me that J frame Smiths are professionals guns....not for the fire a cylinder every other year sort of thing shooter. He was right!

When a J frame is actually fired in the course of protecting its owner and such, no recoil will be noticed.

Randy
 
growr said:
Perhaps Newton's Law of Physics was forgotten about here....J frames are not a pleasant gun to just go to the range and blast away. They ARE however a fabulous choice for concealed carry.

Ken Hackathorn once told me that J frame Smiths are professionals guns....not for the fire a cylinder every other year sort of thing shooter. He was right!

When a J frame is actually fired in the course of protecting its owner and such, no recoil will be noticed.

Randy
Click to expand...

Well said.

I've found the lightweight j-frames to be unforgiving little beasts. They require some practice to shoot well. The pain...you sort of get used to it after a while...
 
growr said:
Perhaps Newton's Law of Physics was forgotten about here....J frames are not a pleasant gun to just go to the range and blast away. They ARE however a fabulous choice for concealed carry.

Ken Hackathorn once told me that J frame Smiths are professionals guns....not for the fire a cylinder every other year sort of thing shooter. He was right!

When a J frame is actually fired in the course of protecting its owner and such, no recoil will be noticed.

Randy
Click to expand...

Is that a nice way of saying that those of us who are not bothered by the recoil are "insensitive dolts"? :p
 
I still don't get the "pain" thing. My lady "co-pilot" is 5-foot nuthin', barely over 100 lbs., and the M438 doesn't bother her a bit. She still likes the Shield 9 that I got her a lot better, though. Shoots that just fine, too. It's her EDC...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Like giving $$ away on my 686 snubnose
Replies
9
Views
750
gr8
G
A
Did I do Good? Used 642-1
Replies
18
Views
1K
JMD999
J
Z
642 PC v. 642 PC EA
Replies
4
Views
244
sprscientist
S
T
Picked up my 3rd Smith, not so common 29
Replies
8
Views
614
H Richard
H Richard
F
Heavily Modified 10-7 What do I have?
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Sevens
S

Latest posts

Back
Top