Finish durability on the newer J frames?

[Eagle1*]

Which finishes do you guys think are better for long term carry/use, the blued finish of 442/438 or the clearcoat/stainless finish on the 642/638? I had a blued 442 years ago and I could not keep the rust off of it once it arrived on the cylinder, just wondering if the stainless guns are better in this regard?

I have now started to wipe the gun down every couple of days since I got them but only time will tell.. Thanks..

 

[357454]

I have been carrying a 642 in either a vest or leather IWB holster for over 8 years, the finish looks like new. I do live in a low humidity area so rust is generally not a problem. My competition guns are stainless and look very good after thousands of draws from Kydex holsters and many thousands of rounds.

 

[Mister X]

The 642 will resist rust much better than a 442 since the barrel and cylinder are stainless steel. The black finish on the frame of the 442 holds up better and is easier to touch up compared with the silver finish on the 642 IMO. The frame finish issues are mostly cosmetic.

I'm more concerned with rust, so I currently carry 642's.

 

[Aerocross]

Eagle1, from what I have heard, the black finish on the 442s stands up better to being carried than the silver one on the 642s. I have no idea about whether there's a rusting difference on modern production guns; there might be if the 442s still have carbon steel cylinders.

For either the 442 or 642 though the big thing to be careful about is what you are using to clean your firearms. Anything that has ammonia in it (Hoppe's 9 for example) should not be used on any modern S&W firearm, as it will attack the finish and cause it to crack/yellow/peel on aluminum or nickel guns and discolor/remove the finish on blued guns. The manual warns people about this, but many people don't notice the warning and only find out afterwards when their gun starts looking like it had a bad case of sunburn.

 

[ContinentalOp]

I've had two 642-1s. The alloy frame finish on the first one started going bad within a few months. The alloy frame finish on the second one, obtained new one year ago, has only recently started showing some minor finish wear on the backstrap. Whenever I clean the gun (either after a range trip or every 1-2 months, whichever comes first), I use a drop of Break Free CLP on a patch to wipe down the steel parts followed by a dry rag. At the end of the day the gun gets a wipe down with a dry rag. Neither 642 has had rust on any of the steel components, and that includes carrying IWB in some very humid summers.

While I prefer a black finish, the rust resistance of the 642 gets the nod. The finish issue with the 642s is cosmetic and limited to the alloy frame, but it doesn't affect function so I basically ignore it.

The problem with the 442s is that nobody seems to be able to get a straight answer from S&W on whether it uses carbon or stainless steel. Until that happens I'll keep in mind the reports of rust on the 442s and just presume they use carbon steel.

 

[KSDeputy]

I have a model 637 with the silver finish. It appears to be holding up well. I can't wait until I can afford a model 60.

 

[H Richard]

The newer flat black finish as on these 431PD and 432PD (as well as quite a few others) has been holding up very well and seems to be very tough. A matte black finish seem very correct for a carry gun.

 

[armorer951]

Just sent a 642 back last week. Finish peeling off and oxidation forming both on the exposed area and under the grip panels. Gun has been in service for approx one year.

Model 442-1 moon clip version purchased around the same time is holding up a bit better.

 

[J. W.]

My 442 is around 6 years old and has been carried regularly. It is showing very minor wear.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Eagle1*]

Eagle1, from what I have heard, the black finish on the 442s stands up better to being carried than the silver one on the 642s. I have no idea about whether there's a rusting difference on modern production guns; there might be if the 442s still have carbon steel cylinders.

For either the 442 or 642 though the big thing to be careful about is what you are using to clean your firearms. Anything that has ammonia in it (Hoppe's 9 for example) should not be used on any modern S&W firearm, as it will attack the finish and cause it to crack/yellow/peel on aluminum or nickel guns and discolor/remove the finish on blued guns. The manual warns people about this, but many people don't notice the warning and only find out afterwards when their gun starts looking like it had a bad case of sunburn.

I use only M-Pro 7 cleaner and oil on my guns which have been Glocks, so I will see how it does on my J's...

I have a 638 strapped to my ankle as we speak and I guess I will see how it holds up to the every day carry in the Ohio valley...

 

[haywood]

My J-Frames seem to be holding up well. The 442s and the 37 are normally carried in a pocket Holster and never had a problem. I did carry the 442 with Hogue Tamer Grip AIWB this summer without a T-Shirt between my skin and the gun. The thumb latch started to rust. I cleaned it oiled it and switched holsters so it didn't touch my skin. As far as everyday carry they look ok. The 36 is usually in a leather holster AIWB and a 442 is in a pocket Holster in my left pocket.