642 Pro Series vs. 642 (no lock) vs. 442

[SpartanZeroOne]

I am looking to buy a S&W .38 revolver as my bedside gun. My wife owns a 642 (pink grips) and my mom owns a 442 and they each like their respective gun very much. However, I am not a big fan of the internal lock feature (I know it can be removed). And I have also heard that Smith quality control may have slipped a little bit on their wheel guns in recent years. This could be just internet babble... or it could be true. That's what I'm here to find out.

Please, no debates about the effectiveness of the .38 special caliber as a home defense round - I've always heard "go with what you're comfortable with" and "the first rule of a gun fight is to bring a gun." So, the way I look at it, a S&W .38 revolver ready to go by my bedside is better than nothing! Certainly it's better than the Cold Steel Recon 1 knife that's sitting there now I also own 2 M&P 9mm's and a 12 gauge pump which are there if I ever need them.

The revolvers I am considering are the 642 Pro Series, regular 642 with no internal lock and possibly the 442... although that is in last place because I've heard on this forum several times that the 442's show more wear over time than the 642's. On the flip side, I've heard some people say that as a "grab and go" bedside gun or a gun they may carry around their property, they like the 442 better because if they have to pull it out, especially at night, it's not as flashy as a 642... that seems like a valid point!

I am curious if anyone has any experience with the 642 Pro Series and if so, what do you think of the gun? How does it compare to a regular 642? Aside from accepting moon clips, are there any other differences from the regular 642? Is the machining better since it's a Pro Series? Are the tolerances tighter? Lastly, do you HAVE TO use moon clips with the 642 Pro, or can you also load it without the moon clips? I tried to call S&W customer service last night to ask them and I was on hold for 30 minutes (most unusual based on past experience!) and I never got to speak to anyone.

Any help that you folks could offer would be much appreciated and would help me narrow down my choices!

 

[JohnHancock]

Not sure about the PS, but there seems to be more complaints about the 642 alloy finish. No problems with my 442, just don't use Hoppe's #9 on any of them!

 

[psjoe]

Hi-

Actually the 442 finish holds up better, per the consensus of a lot of threads on the topic on this forum, as above poster noted.

Additionally the 442 Pro Series has black PVD coated stainless steel barrel and cylinder. An additional tough finish over the SS.

With both the 442 and 642 pro you can load any way you like. Loose rounds, moon clip, use a speed loader or speed strips.

Any new gun deserves a good once over prior to purchase, I don't think any additional or tighter tolerances are held for the Pro over std. models - at least for 442 and 642.

Both Pro of 442 and 642 are -1 guns so no internal lock.

It comes down to personal preference, or what you can find locally.

 

[Mister X]

I would recommend the no-lock 642.

I would never use moon clips on a gun intended for defense. You can use the pro-series without them, but why pay extra for a cut cylinder and if not using Moonclips, The standard cylinder will be better than one cut.

The frame on both is aluminum alloy, so to me frame finish is not much of an issue, but I very much prefer the rust & corrosion advantage of the 642's stainless steel barrel and cylinder compared to the blued carbon steel of the 442's.

In regards to the flashiness of having to pull a gun out at night, the legally armed civilian shouldn't be worried the bad guy is going to see his gun and most likely would WANT the bad guy to see it. I once asked Massad Ayoob about that and his response was that non-reflective black guns are more likely a concern for those that sneak-up on people and operate from covert positions such as military Spec-Ops etc, whereas if I point or pull a gun on someone in a civilian self-defense situation, I'd want him to be able to see it so he knows the stakes just went up. As a civilian, you want to AVOID shooting someone if at all possible for ethical and legal reasons.

 

[riverrat38]

For a bedside gun, look at the M640 Pro.
No lock.
The Airweight guns are for pocket carry. They have no advantage for a bedside gun.
I would use Speer 135 gr Short Barrel ammo.

Best,
Rick

 

[RevolverDen]

First off, don't give a second thought about the internal lock. It's merely something that those of us who were used to a traditional design being changed not coming to grips with being "forced" to accept this change that many feel unnecessary and some feel unsafe about. I own both and don't give the IL a second thought. Even before my first IL revolver, I had a pair of IL keys with me both on my key chain and one on my para cord bracelet as several fellow officers on my squad were buying S&W revolvers as duty backup guns and the dealer gave them a box of keys to keep and pass around to members of the department. I never personally had or witnessed an IL lock self-engaging during a course of fire at the Police range where I can imagine I was present for thousands of rounds being shot through IL equipped revolvers.

As for the right Airweight for you, thankfully there are many great choices. My first Airweight is from 1996 that predates the 442 being marked for +P. I recently added 3 more as they became available: A 642 Pro (no IL)' a 442-1 (No IL) and because it arrived after my 442-1 purchase I figured what the heck and bought a 442 Pro that came into my LGS.

If you like the convenience and possible increased speed of moon clips compared to speed loaders (depending upon how efficient you are with speedloaders), go with a 442 or 642 Pro. Otherwise, a regular 442-1/442-2 -or- 642-1/642-2 will do you just fine for an awesome lightweight reliable pocket, hip or IWB J-frame.

 

[16thVACav]

If the revolver will be used only for home defense and not for pocket carry, I would recommend you expand your search to include K, L, and N frame revolvers in .38/.357 with a four inch barrel. Your ammo capacity will increase one to three rounds, and you'll likely shoot more accurately with the larger framed Smiths.

 

[kozmic]

If the revolver will be used only for home defense and not for pocket carry, I would recommend you expand your search to include K, L, and N frame revolvers in .38/.357 with a four inch barrel. Your ammo capacity will increase one to three rounds, and you'll likely shoot more accurately with the larger framed Smiths.

100% what he said^^^^.

If CC is not in the equation then a larger frame, 4" (maybe 3"-5"), .38s/.357m would ring all of my bells for home defense and some crazy fun range time.

Of course YMMV.

 

[b_san]

442 Pro or 640 Pro, love the moonclips. Also the finish on the 642s wears off really fast and it starts looking like it's got the pox, not function related but something to consider. You can always switch the 2 finger boot grip for one of the older Uncle Mikes combat style or even various larger wood grips if you need more grip.

This is my bedside gun though...

If you want .38sp you could get the TRR8/R8 instead having the light mount on the bottom is a nice feature for a bedside gun, but it should be noted that they're all 2x the price of a 640/442/642.

 

[Mister X]

OP wants a Centennial J-frame, the wife has a 642, so no need to try nd convince him a larger frame is better for defense because it's not necessarily true. It makes a lot if sense fir a husband and wife to have the exact same firearm....same speed loaders, familiarity and whatnot plus you do not need nor want single action as a option on a revolver that is intended to be used for self-defense. Try some Force-on-Force disarms with an experienced instructor using a J-frame snub vs a larger model and you will quickly see the CQ advantages of the snub.

 

[Florida J Frame]

442 Pro or 640 Pro, love the moonclips. Also the finish on the 642s wears off really fast and it starts looking like it's got the pox, not function related but something to consider. You can always switch the 2 finger boot grip for one of the older Uncle Mikes combat style or even various larger wood grips if you need more grip.

This is my bedside gun though...

If you want .38sp you could get the TRR8/R8 instead having the light mount on the bottom is a nice feature for a bedside gun, but it should be noted that they're all 2x the price of a 640/442/642.

Absolutely no problem with the finish on my 6 year old 642. It gets carried a lot and the rest of the time is a house gun. I just clean it with CLP and keep a coat of Ren Wax on it. I think the TRR8 is one of the best choices for a bedside gun but they are expensive and hard to find. Same capacity as a 1911 and impossible to limp wrist under stress.

 

[Rpg]

Consider the original M42 as the standard for comparing modern models.

Expand your search to include the two digit models (42, 40, 38, 49). You'll find better fit and finish than the 3 digit models, and no worries about locks.

You owe it to yourself to handle the classics.

Just my opinion, of course.

 

[SpartanZeroOne]

Thanks for all of the responses so far! I see that at least one person says to go with the 642 and one or two have said that the 442 actually holds up better over time. So now I'm even less sure of what to do! Haha Any more feedback would be appreciated... I'm open to any thoughts/advice/criticism I can get!

I would LOVE a TRR8/R8 or a 686 plus Pro Series... as far as home defense revolvers go, those are the tops in my mind! I really like the idea of 7 or 8 rounds of .357/.38. Problem is, money is an issue for me. I have seen 642's and 442's online for around $400, give or take. sometimes as low as $370-$380. I can afford that right now. My local gun stores have J-frames for about $450-$500. I will admit that I thought about an LCR and while they have great reviews, I'm a Smith guy at heart... and the LCR's haven't been around too long, while the J-frames are at least several decades old (if I'm not mistaken) and have a well-earned reputation for reliability. In addition, this revolver is something I would carry concealed (or open depending on the situation) sometimes when I go out to get the mail, walk my dog, take a walk in the woods near my house, complete yard work, etc. This is partly why I do not want to get a larger frame revolver at this time... I need something that can do double duty (bedside "go to" gun and carry).

I agree with the post about DAO for a "go to" defensive gun. Although it would be really nice to use that hair pull single action trigger when target shooting... I'm sure accuracy would go way up! I know some folks say staging the trigger on the DAO's is almost the same, but I'm not so sure.

I love the classic .38 Smith's, but if possible I would like +P ability in case there is ever an ammo shortage again. Not saying I'd necessarily CHOOSE +P ammo, but if that's all I can get, I would appreciate the versatility of the newer guns that handle it. Nothing sharper than one of the 30-40 year old Smith snubbies in mint condition though!! My friend's dad just got a Model 36 (I think, can't remember) from an estate sale and it's really nice looking and tight as can be! Too bad they don't make things like they used to!

 

[Mister X]

Thanks for all of the responses so far! I see that at least one person says to go with the 642 and one or two have said that the 442 actually holds up better over time. So now I'm even less sure of what to do! Haha Any more feedback would be appreciated... I'm open to any thoughts/advice/criticism I can get!

I would LOVE a TRR8/R8 or a 686 plus Pro Series... as far as home defense revolvers go, those are the tops in my mind! I really like the idea of 7 or 8 rounds of .357/.38. Problem is, money is an issue for me. I have seen 642's and 442's online for around $400, give or take. sometimes as low as $370-$380. I can afford that right now. My local gun stores have J-frames for about $450-$500. I will admit that I thought about an LCR and while they have great reviews, I'm a Smith guy at heart... and the LCR's haven't been around too long, while the J-frames are at least several decades old (if I'm not mistaken) and have a well-earned reputation for reliability. In addition, this revolver is something I would carry concealed (or open depending on the situation) sometimes when I go out to get the mail, walk my dog, take a walk in the woods near my house, complete yard work, etc. This is partly why I do not want to get a larger frame revolver at this time... I need something that can do double duty (bedside "go to" gun and carry).

I agree with the post about DAO for a "go to" defensive gun. Although it would be really nice to use that hair pull single action trigger when target shooting... I'm sure accuracy would go way up! I know some folks say staging the trigger on the DAO's is almost the same, but I'm not so sure.

I love the classic .38 Smith's, but if possible I would like +P ability in case there is ever an ammo shortage again. Not saying I'd necessarily CHOOSE +P ammo, but if that's all I can get, I would appreciate the versatility of the newer guns that handle it. Nothing sharper than one of the 30-40 year old Smith snubbies in mint condition though!! My friend's dad just got a Model 36 (I think, can't remember) from an estate sale and it's really nice looking and tight as can be! Too bad they don't make things like they used to!

The black FRAME(aluminum) finish on the 442 may or may not hold up better COSMETICALLY than the 642's FRAME silver, but the stainless steel barrel on the 642 will be much more rust/corrosion resistant than the blued carbon steel barrel/cylinder on the 442.

You stated you are wanting a bedside defense gun and that DAO makes sense in that regard, but then state single action would be nice for target shooting accuracy. Why would that at all matter since if you used the gun in self-defense it would be in double action and therefore that is how you should train & practice. If you do buy a larger model that is double action, I would recommend taking it to a gunsmith and having it converted to DAO.

 

[HarrishMasher]

Try to find one of these. Hands down my favorite J Frame. It is a Black finished 642 (yep not 442). 642 Pro Series Power-Port. As you can see there is a dovetail cut into the barrel for the front sight. I put a Trijicon night sight in there. The barrel appears a little longer because it has a port cut into the top in front of the sight. It has a full length ejector rod (which is a very nice feature for positive extraction, the short rods do NOT do a good job). Full lug. It has a beautiful black finish and zero white filled markings (no trade mark or airweight insignias). It is the same weight as any airweight (15 ozs). And looks awesome.

Smith did a very small run of these a couple of years ago. I picked this up new in the box on GB for $420 2 years ago. They pop up every once in a while.

Recoil is noticeably tamer thanks to the port.

It conceals just as easy as any of my J Frames.

If you can't find one, get a 442. I just don't like silver guns.

 

[M3Stuart]

I have the 642 Pro. I've carried mine regularly for about a couple years.
- Mine shows some finish wear, but no more so that one would expect with any carry gun. Note: I shoot a lot of lead (LSWC) practice rounds out of mine and when you clean it with a brash brush to get the lead deposits off around the forcing cone, it WILL take off the finish in the areas where you brush around the cone or blast plate.
- I think the 'pro' moon clip feature is neat for a carry gun. Here's the problem: there's no moonclips for it (yea, I know you can call TK or whoever and order them for $7 each, but that 'ain't gonna happen' as I'm not gonna invest $100 in moonclips). S&W doesn't sell them either. So, don't bother with the Pro because, if you're like me, that feature will just cause you aggravation.
- I have no opinion on the lock and don't care either way.

With all that in mind, and taking the other comments into consideration, I would just ask myself "black or silver?"

I'm sure that the majority of the posters on this forum, and I'm shocked, SHOCKED, that nobody has said it yet, would advise you to "buy both!"

 

[M3Stuart]

One other relevant factor that I just remembered, more of a question for the other forum members:

What amount of truth, if any, is there to the rumor/anecdotes that S&W changed their bluing process such that Hoppe's #9 will now remove the bluing from their blued guns?

If that turns out to be fact rather than fiction, I would wait until a solution (pun intended - as in 'cleaning solution') was discovered that would not cause the bluing to be removed - thus a relevant issue in the choice between 642 and 442 (as the cylinder and barrel of the 442 are blued).

 

[b_san]

The 442 Pro isn't blued, it's all stainless with a matte black finish on frame, barrel and cylinder. I've been told that regular 442s are also coming out this way (stainless instead of carbon) too lately but I haven't bought one so I can't confirm that.

 

[JohnHancock]

The lining of the 442 charging holes are in fact blued and as mentioned, Hoppe's #9 will strip it. It will also strip the black anodized finish if you use it enough. The owners manual says do not to use harsh ammonianated cleaners, i.e. Hoppes. Here's what it did to mine. Luckily some BC cold blue tidied it right up.

 

[Fchewy]

My 442 finish has held up better than my 642's and the 442 has been carried the most, i just use Breakfree CLP or Ballistol for cleaning mine, no issues.

 

[Mister X]

Try to find one of these. Hands down my favorite J Frame. It is a Black finished 642 (yep not 442). 642 Pro Series Power-Port. As you can see there is a dovetail cut into the barrel for the front sight. I put a Trijicon night sight in there. The barrel appears a little longer because it has a port cut into the top in front of the sight. It has a full length ejector rod (which is a very nice feature for positive extraction, the short rods do NOT do a good job). Full lug. It has a beautiful black finish and zero white filled markings (no trade mark or airweight insignias). It is the same weight as any airweight (15 ozs). And looks awesome.

Smith did a very small run of these a couple of years ago. I picked this up new in the box on GB for $420 2 years ago. They pop up every once in a while.

Recoil is noticeably tamer thanks to the port.

It conceals just as easy as any of my J Frames.

If you can't find one, get a 442. I just don't like silver guns.

Porting is perfectly fine for the range, but since the OP's intended purpose is defense, I and just about every other instructor recommends avoiding porting on a defense piece. ported snub - Glock Talk

 

[Mister X]

The 442 Pro isn't blued, it's all stainless with a matte black finish on frame, barrel and cylinder. I've been told that regular 442s are also coming out this way (stainless instead of carbon) too lately but I haven't bought one so I can't confirm that.

The S&W website lists the 442 pro as having a SS cylinder, but doesn't mention the barrel. Where did you hear that the 442's will also be coming out this way?

 

[HarrishMasher]

Porting is perfectly fine for the range, but since the OP's intended purpose is defense, I and just about every other instructor recommends avoiding porting on a defense piece. ported snub - Glock Talk

With modern ammo designed for short barrels with low flash propellants it is really not much of a concern. Have you tested the Speer or Buffalo Bore low-flash loadings? Very little flash.

With regular ammo, there is so much flash coming from the barrel, the little bit coming out of the little port up top makes very little difference.

Further this gun is intended to be used real close up, not sure how much of an issue the flash would present in a real life situation.

 

[Mister X]

With modern ammo designed for short barrels with low flash propellants it is really not much of a concern. Have you tested the Speer or Buffalo Bore low-flash loadings? Very little flash.

With regular ammo, there is so much flash coming from the barrel, the little bit coming out of the little port up top makes very little difference.

Further this gun is intended to be used real close up, not sure how much of an issue the flash would present in a real life situation.

Yes, these are close quarter defense guns and that is their real strength there lies the problem with porting since the probability of having to fire the gun from a position of retention is higher. Mas pointed that out in the link I provided.

 

[Stephanie B]

For a bedside gun, I'd think that it would be hard to beat one of the Aussie police Model 10 trade-ins. Then add on a pair of Crimson-Trace laser grips and you've got a really fine tool for the job.

 

[b_san]

The S&W website lists the 442 pro as having a SS cylinder, but doesn't mention the barrel. Where did you hear that the 442's will also be coming out this way?

I can guarantee that mine is SS on all 3 parts and a search of this site points to a thread with a call to S&W that also confirmed that the Pro is all SS.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-re...does-have-any-carbon-steel.html#post136782537
and
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-re...does-have-any-carbon-steel.html#post136789037


As to the reg 442, I can only say what my LGS mentioned when I ordered in the Pro. He asked why the Pro instead of a regular 442 so I told him the moon clips plus that it was all SS instead of carbon and he said that the last couple reg 442s he'd got in were SS cylinders. Now again I have no idea if that's accurate nor have I seen one there since so I have nothing else to go by but another call to S&W might confirm or deny it.

 

[SpartanZeroOne]

Thanks for all of the information, folks!! I have learned A LOT from reading your responses so far! Thank you also for taking the time to share your knowledge with me, as I am a relative noob to using/owning hand guns (only had our handguns for about a year).

I am kind of leaning toward the 442 now after listening to all of your comments. I agree that moon clips are not a HUGE deal, but I personally feel that they would be easier to use than a speed loader in a stressful situation (we currently own a few HKS 36-A's)... of course I say that having never used moon clips, so I can't be sure. I am pretty sure that reloading with moon clips would be A LOT faster than dropping 5 more rounds into the cylinder one by one... especially under stress. (Of course, I have also never used a speed strip... so not sure how those would compare.) Moon clips are one way, at least in my line of thinking, to mitigate the "debate" about .38 special being an effective defensive round.... ideally I would like a .357 revolver but S&W's in .357 cost $200-$300 more... so if I had a 442 or 642 Pro with 2 or 3 moon clips loaded with a nice 158 grain HP or some smaller grain +P hollow point, I would think that should suffice in almost any defensive situation at home... even the highly unlikely (in my area) home invasion... because, with practice, my wife and I would be able to reload VERY quickly.

I have to admit, as much as I love S&W's pistols, I really like the Ruger SP101... it seems like a good value for a .357. It is noticeably cheaper than S&W's .357's... even the nice Model 60. I held a SP101 at my LGS a few months ago but it was about $535 if memory serves. However, I just saw one of the 2.25 inch barrel SP101's (with exposed hammer) for $449 at KyGunCo.com last week and I was really debating pulling the trigger on it (no pun intended). At that price, that's about $50-$75 more than you can get a new J-frame for online. Anyone own or have experience with the SP101?

One thing I cannot get past (and I'll be the first to admit that it's just my own mental block) is the internal lock on the J-frames. (I believe I read somewhere that Ruger's GP100 and SP101 series do not come with internal locks) I know it's a million to one shot that it would activate accidentally at the moment you need it most... but I've also been alive long enough to know what a S0B Murphy can be and I guess I figure if you can get a J-frame without it from the factory (which I did not know at the time my wife and mom bought their 442 & 642!) then why not get it without the lock? It's easy enough to throw a trigger lock on it if you still want the extra measure of security beyond putting it in a safe. Maybe I'm way off base here, but that's my way of thinking.

 

[Shooter6br]

New 638 CCW

My 638 is my new CCW. I like the ability to fire SA with bobbed hammer

 

[Mister X]

Good luck in whatever you chose to ultimately get, but I think the Moonclips are a bad idea since you are intending this to be a defense gun.

I came real close to getting a 442 pro myself back in 2011, but asked Massad Ayoob and a few other defense instructors that recommended I avoid them on defense guns since. Here's a quote from well known defensive revolver expert Grant Cunningham on the subject of Moonclips on defense guns....

"SPEAKING OF MOON CLIPS: I get several queries per month regarding moonclips for a carry revolver, and I recommend to all that they be limited to range use. Yes, they are faster to reload (the margin depending on the cartridge) - but I don't believe that outweighs the fragility of the clips themselves, as even a small bend will tie up the gun."- Grant Cunningham

It has also been stated that it is possible to use the pro models without the Moonclips, but I would want to be sure that it is not a lot more difficult to eject spent shells before buying as that has usually been the case in the past when using Moonclip cut models without the clips.

 

[SpartanZeroOne]

Try to find one of these. Hands down my favorite J Frame. It is a Black finished 642 (yep not 442). 642 Pro Series Power-Port. As you can see there is a dovetail cut into the barrel for the front sight. I put a Trijicon night sight in there. The barrel appears a little longer because it has a port cut into the top in front of the sight. It has a full length ejector rod (which is a very nice feature for positive extraction, the short rods do NOT do a good job). Full lug. It has a beautiful black finish and zero white filled markings (no trade mark or airweight insignias). It is the same weight as any airweight (15 ozs). And looks awesome.

Smith did a very small run of these a couple of years ago. I picked this up new in the box on GB for $420 2 years ago. They pop up every once in a while.

Recoil is noticeably tamer thanks to the port.

It conceals just as easy as any of my J Frames.

If you can't find one, get a 442. I just don't like silver guns.

That's a sharp looking J-frame!! The wood grip with the black looks real nice!

I have never heard that about moon clips before... it makes sense though! Seems like some of you think a 642/442 (no lock) with speed loaders would be better for defense than a 442/642 Pro Series with moon clips. I'm glad you mentioned that... I have never thought about that angle before! I guess a slightly bent moon clip would eliminate the reliability of a revolver. I have also thought about a M&P 40c (friend has one and I can shoot the lights out with it) or a M&P 45 FS. I keep thinking that I'd like the reliability of a revolver over a semi-auto for "go to" home defense.