Airweight J Frame Durability

[sonofthebeach]

Could any of you who own or have experience with the airweight J frame revolvers (rated +P) comment on their durability with extensive use of the various +P loads in these guns? I'm thinking of picking up one for concealed carry, and I'll probably be putting 100 rounds/week through it for practice.

 

[bassoneer]

This is just my opinion, so I may be wrong. First, I don't think you'll wear out the frame at all. But second, after you feel the recoil with +P rounds, I don't think you will put very many rounds through it at all. Ever. I am 6'-4", 330 pounds and this thing brings me to my knees. More so than any .357 Magnum. I've shot just about every gun out there...hunting guns with .44 magnum in single action, etc. I would rather shoot any of them then the 638 with +P rounds. It is really just uncomfortable to shoot. Now for the plus...it is the MOST comfortable carry gun on the plant. Again, I've tried a lot. So, don't let me deter you, but you should get something else if you want to shoot 100 rounds/week. This one won't be fun to shoot like that. It is a great conceal carry gun though.

Later, B

 

[matt z]

light vs heavier

two weeks ago shot my 640 next to a mp 340. I have to say that shooting 125 normal pressure rounds out of the mp, was worse than full house 357s out of the 640! So my view is that it really depends on your strategy. If you like the light weight gun, and fill it with nyclads, that sounds like a nice very light option that should do the job. If you want full house 357 or 38+p, I would go for the steel gun. I would not worry about shooting +p from the 640, as I have put 100 rounds down range in a session. No problems.

 

[bassoneer]

two weeks ago shot my 640 next to a mp 340. I have to say that shooting 125 normal pressure rounds out of the mp, was worse than full house 357s out of the 640! So my view is that it really depends on your strategy. If you like the light weight gun, and fill it with nyclads, that sounds like a nice very light option that should do the job. If you want full house 357 or 38+p, I would go for the steel gun. I would not worry about shooting +p from the 640, as I have put 100 rounds down range in a session. No problems.

Funny you should mention the 640. I just got a 640-1 about a week ago and shot it for the first time this week. I like it much better than the 638 airweight .38 +P as far as recoil. I plan to start carrying it more than the airweight. But for inside-the-pocket carry, I'll still use the 638 airweight. B

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

Could any of you who own or have experience with the airweight J frame revolvers (rated +P) comment on their durability with extensive use of the various +P loads in these guns? I'm thinking of picking up one for concealed carry, and I'll probably be putting 100 rounds/week through it for practice.

Let us know how that 100/week of +P is going after a couple of months

I've got a 337 and it is a beast to shoot with regular pressure 38's. The thought of shooting 100 rounds through it in a session makes me wince-and then to do it weekly...ouch. I've shot enough out of mine to feel comfortable with it. It ain't pleasent to shoot and not my first choice for a fun gun

 

[davel686]

I had a 637 for a short time, and had the same problem with felt recoil.
even with low pressure rounds, 50 rounds was about all I could handle.
I sold it and went to a M66 2-1/2" barrel K frame and just changed the way i carry it.
I would rather put up with the hassle of carrying a slightly heavier gun then carry one that I can't shoot comfortably.

 

[sonofthebeach]

Thanks to all of you. I really appreciate your insights and letting me know of your experiences with the lighter j frames. I know that every gun is a compromise...felt recoil, weight, concealability, durability, etc.

I guess you all are just reminding me of what I kind of suspected all along...that choosing a concealed handgun is going to be a decision based on exactly what I plan to use it for.

I have a 625 4", and a Ruger SP-101 3". Right now I'm looking for something that I can easily carry concealed without much fuss. I gather from your shooting experiences with the airweights that my running 100 rounds/wk of +P through an airweight isn't going to be very pleasant. But maybe if I put together my own mildly-loaded cartridges for practice, shoot 50-100 rounds of these, and then fire a dozen or so +P factory rounds, I should be better able to deal with the recoil issues of the +P's.

One of the greatest benefits of these forums is that we can throw out some questions, concerns, comments about stuff, and from the replies we get, we can draw on the experience of others to help us make better decisions.

Thanks again to all of you for your help.

 

[Dale53]

I gather from your shooting experiences with the airweights that my running 100 rounds/wk of +P through an airweight isn't going to be very pleasant. But maybe if I put together my own mildly-loaded cartridges for practice, shoot 50-100 rounds of these, and then fire a dozen or so +P factory rounds, I should be better able to deal with the recoil issues of the +P's.

son;
THAT's the ticket. Target wadcutters make good practice ammo then end the session with a gun full of +P's.

Grips can make all of the difference, also. I use #305 Crimson Trace grips (they are the larger extended that cover the back strap). I have rather large hands and they fit MUCH better and work well for pocket carrry, also. I use a Mika pocket holster and am quite comfortable with this set up for daily carry (mine is also a 642 with the FBI load).

Dale53

 

[CTM]

Do you really need to use +P rounds for practice?

I have a 442 that is quite comfortable to shoot, for me, with WWB or Blazer standard loads.
I shoot enough +P rounds to keep familiar with the feel, but use mainly standard stuff at the range, much less expensive that way also.

If you must shoot only +P's or 357 mag's I would agree with the others that recommend a steel gun.

NEVERMIND....I see we are all on the same page.

 

[The Big D]

100 rounds of +P through an Airweight, per week, will wear you out long before the gun.

I carry a 642 every single day. NO way do I shoot weekly; and when I do shoot, it's usually about 90 rounds of standard pressure loads then a couple cylinders of +P. It's your gun, however, and your hand, too.

Be safe.

 

[Bat Guano]

Well, I do know what the old 110 grain +P+ Treasury Loads will do to a 1976 vintage M37. They will put it out of time after a few (500?) rounds. Fortunately S&W put it right, and since then practice has been either factory w/c or std. vel. handloads, with the FBI load for carry.

The M37 was my wife's gun (lucky for me I got it fixed). My carry piece is a 1996 vintage 442, and I use the same diet for it. I also load it ball and dummy (using fired cases to plug the "empty" chambers) when practicing. It's good practice for trigger control and follow through stretches the ammo supply, and is less stress on the gun.

I don't think you need to consume great quantities of ammo to develop and maintain proficiency. The ball & dummy method and a timer, combined with more frequent practice with fewer rounds fired, shows results. Particularly over the years.

 

[Dogguy]

I've wondered about the durability of the Airweights myself since I recently bought a couple of them to rotate for concealed carry. I usually practice with standard loadings since they're cheaper but I do shoot a few +P at every practice session (not weekly) and I carry +P in the guns. I've found the heavier weight 158 gr. bullets in +P loadings are considerably uncomfortable but lighterweight 125 gr. +P loadings are not bad. I've been using 125 gr. +P Gold Dots and I can't feel too much difference in those and standard loads. But I agree that the little Airweights kick pretty good with everything.

 

[sonofthebeach]

Thanks again all for your help with my question of airweight durability. I picked up a 642 yesterday, and I can't believe the difference in weight 15oz vs 45+oz of my model 625! On the way home, I picked up some bandaids and a hammer (to hit my non-shooting hand with, and take my mind off the pain in my shooting hand).

I'm happy to see you still posting here Dale 53. You helped me make a decision about shortening the barrel of my 625 not too long ago. I used to be revo686 here, but because of 2 or three internet service provider changes, and our move from Illinois to Alabama earlier this year, I lost my ability to log-in to do an updated profile.

I just blew the dust off of my .38 reloading stuff, and am ready to put together some wadcutter loads for the 642. Dale 53, do the CT 305 grips you put on your 642 add much to the height of the gun? I just put a Hogue monogrip that I had from years ago on my j frame, and although shooting the gun will be easier to manage, the butt end of the grip gets hung up on pocket linings pretty easily because of the increased height. Maybe I'll try the new CT 405 (shorter, but extra cushioning) out in the store to see how it feels.

 

[Cyrano]

I have a 638, and carry Speer +P Short Barrel Gold Dots in it. I dont' want to go broke, so I have only shot a few, just to be sure they work OK. Mostly I shoot for practice the SAECO 150 gr wadcuter with 3.0 grs of Win 231. It's a nice, light, practice load. You need to shoot enough of your full power loads to make sure you and your gun is OK with them. But, I don't think you need to practice with full power loads; if you shoot light loads for practice, when the balloon goes up and adrenaline is dripping off the end of your nose, you will grip the revolver hard enough so it won't move even with the hottest loads you can put in the cylinder.

 

[davemercer]

As others have said most of your shooting should be with a light handload. W231 powder is good choice with about 3 to 3.3 grains with a 158 gr bullet. Then shoot out your carry loads every month and you should be fine.

 

[BUFF]

I bought my first Model 642 in 1991. I have shot probably 2,500 factory Plus-P loads through it and probably that many more standard and mid-range loads. The gun has held up just fine.

They are not pleasant to shoot with Plus-P ammo. Some people find standard pressure 158 grain ammo to be all they care for. The Airweight J frame S&W's aren't fun to plink with when shot with Plus-P, at least much passed the first 10 rounds persession!

I think that the Model 642 may be the perfect CCW .38 snub!

 

[sonofthebeach]

How do you all like the stock factory grips on the 642 and other j frames with the same grips? Have any of you tried other aftermarket grips that work better (less pain/more comfortable), and still keep the gun easily concealable?

 

[srgvaz]

On my 642 for concealed carry the factory grips do the job I'm not sure about the CT grips yet. The factory grips are only good for 40 or so rounds after that the hand no longer wants to give true accuracy the Hogue's that cover the blackstrap work very well but I don't like them for pocket carry but for the range they hold up for the monthly hundred or so round. I have large hands and typically shoot at 20-25 yards which calls for me to hold the gun a little harder with the factory grips the Hogue's relieve that, but with the factory grips and 5 rounds at 5-10 yards -say- bye-bye target.

 

[Dogguy]

How do you all like the stock factory grips on the 642 and other j frames with the same grips? Have any of you tried other aftermarket grips that work better (less pain/more comfortable), and still keep the gun easily concealable?

The boot grips that come with today's J-frames simply don't fit me in any way. Something longer would be preferable since I have large hands but something longer is not an option for concealed carry in my pants pockets. While I wouldn't recommend them for everyone, I have replaced the boot grips on all my J-frames with the old-style S&W magna grips. Yes, they are small and not necessarily very comfortable but they conceal well and I actually find them easier for controlling the recoil since my hand rides up higher on the backstrap. If I use a "crush grip" when shooting, the kick is not so bad.

 

[sonofthebeach]

The reason I started this thread regarding the durability of the airweight J frames was that I wanted to have a handgun that I could conceal with a minimum of fuss, including pocket carry without suspenders. So, a revolver/pistol weighing more than 18-20 oz. and greater than 6-1/2" long would be, in my opinion too heavy/large.

In June of 2004 I printed an article from a Chuck Hawks website. The article was entitled "Ammunition for the Self-Defense Firearm", and the author of the article remained anonymous.

The part of the article which dealt with cartridges in .38 special mentioned that the aluminum-framed revos (including the Smith's wouldn't tolerate more than 100 or so +P loads before going out of time, loosening up etc.

I don't know the exact date of the article, but it stuck out in my mind, and thus the question regarding durability of airweight revos which started this thread.

BUFF, you said you put 2500 factory +P loads through your 642 since 1991, and if your experience with the 642 is typical of others' experiences, then my fears are put to rest. Whether or not I would want to or be able to run that many +P's through my 642 is another matter.

Thanks again to all of you who contributed to this thread. I truly appreciate your input.

By the way, I took my 642 out for a walk today, and I hardly noticed it in my pocket...I now know why, despite the challenge of shooting the things well, people choose these handguns as concealed carry pieces.

Am putting together some target loads for a trip to the range later this week. I'm sure I'll keep 'em all within 2" at 25yards