Help to choose a j frame

[stefano_chiappucci]

Hi everybody

I'm going to buy a j frame.

Those are the one i like but i can't get the differences, am i missing something?

Model 442 Revolver - No Internal Lock -------> that's the first choice

Model 642 No Internal Lock -------> it's ok but i prefer a black gun instead a nickel one

M&P®340 No Internal Lock -------> why cost double the 442/642 ??

Model 340 PD - No Internal Lock -------> i don't think it worth spend all this money to save 2 ounces

Thanks

 

[HOUSTON RICK]

I have the 340PD with no lock. It is worth it because you will physically be more likely to carry it, and psychologically it is what you want to carry.

 

[OLDSTER]

Hello from North Dakota . 642 no-lock ( still available new.) BTW, the 642 is not nickel; it's aluminum and stainless.

 

[THEmodelof1989]

Out of these, I'd get the 340.

Out of all J frames, give me a 3" model 60-10. It's hands down the epitome of j frame ingenuity. Everything you need and nothing you don't.

 

[blues7]

I carry a 642-1 (no lock). If I had my druthers I'd have the M&P 340 for the superior front (night) sight. (The difference in weight is not an issue for me, nor is the option to carry .357 which I would not choose to do.)

The only reason I haven't opted for the M&P 340 are the limited situations I carry a J frame...at home or walking distances from home. For that limited usage the M&P offers little advantage over the 642. When it is carried at night I always have a headlamp on while walking the dog in our rural, forested environment. The headlamp illuminates the painted front sight very well. So, I haven't been able to justify the M&P purchase at twice the price.

Whenever I leave home for town or further, I carry a compact semi-auto with a spare magazine.

As mentioned above, the 642 is aluminum alloy and stainless steel...not nickel. Any of your choices would be excellent in the final analysis.

 

[colt_saa]

Welcome to the Forum

Hi everybody

I'm going to buy a j frame.

Those are the one i like but i can't get the differences, am i missing something?

Model 442 Revolver - No Internal Lock -------> that's the first choice

Model 642 No Internal Lock -------> it's ok but i prefer a black gun instead a nickel one

M&P®340 No Internal Lock -------> why cost double the 442/642 ??

Model 340 PD - No Internal Lock -------> i don't think it worth spend all this money to save 2 ounces

Thanks

All four of those are very fine choices for pocket/purse carry due to the internal hammer.

What we do not know is your level of experience shooting firearms. There is a price for carrying these lightweight revolvers and that is recoil.

If you are inexperienced, or even a novice, you might want to go to a range that rents firearms and try a few. Or find an instructor in your area that can walk you through the steps.

Those are the one i like but i can't get the differences, am i missing something?

Model 442 Revolver - No Internal Lock -------> that's the first choice

Model 642 No Internal Lock -------> it's ok but i prefer a black gun instead a nickel one

These are essentially the same firearm with the exception that the 442 is alloy and carbon steel construction while the 642 is alloy and stainless steel construction.

Those are the one i like but i can't get the differences, am i missing something?

M&P®340 No Internal Lock -------> why cost double the 442/642 ??

Model 340 PD - No Internal Lock -------> i don't think it worth spend all this money to save 2 ounces

Thanks

The difference is the addition of Scandium to the frames alloy. Scandium is one of the rarest substances on Earth and is priced accordingly (over $100,000 per pound). That is what accounts for the price increase

This is not done to save weight over the 442/642 choices, this is to make the firearm strong enough to fire the 357 Magnum cartridge

Additionally the 340PD has a Titanium cylinder and is the lightest of the four revolvers mentioned. The M&P 340 has a steel cylinder and weighs approximately the same as a 442/642

If you are a new shooter, the 340s and Magnum ammunition is not the route for you to go. I have taken perhaps 100 Law Enforcemnet Officers through the off duty qualification course with Model 340s and one of the Lieutenants described the 357 Magnum recoil as "A Character Defining Moment". Only about half of the Officers passed on their first try and a good 25% of them swore off using 357 Magnum ammunition

If you fall into the Novice category of shooter, even though it is heavier, you might want to consider the all steel Model 640 due to it's reduced recoil.

I have access to a large inventory of J-frames for when we do classes. I let students try the various revolvers that they are interested in



Personally, I usually carry a Model 340PD or M&P 340 in my pocket these days, but I have had lots of practice over the decades

 

[dubshooter]

How are you going to carry it? Pocket carry, the weight might make a little difference. Belt carry, you probably won't notice.

I have a few J Frame options, but my 442-1 is what gets carried. Pocket for BUG at work, ****ed in the waistband a lot of times off duty.

 

[haywood]

I like the 442's. I carry these Two daily. The have held up well. I shoot them to keep Familiar. Good for pocket and waistband. They are from around 2012

 

[gr7070]

I have a 642 and love it.

However, I've added a Crimson Trace laser grips to it and I've also replaced the cylinder with a titanium one by from Midway USA.

Having some ability to sight at night is likely important and the 4/642 stock have none.

While I would not have thought it matters, now that I have it the 2 oz. less weight is actually a noticeable, preferred improvement.

Both these items do add some cost to a 642, but I feel there's justified value to them. Both cost $100 each - CT had a rebate going and Midway sent me a birthday coupon.

 

[Biggfoot44]

OP answered his own question . He likes the concept of the 442 , no reason not to get one ( among the listed choices ) .

 

[jimbo728]

I bought a 3" Model 60-3 Lady Smith and have been entirely happy with it. It carries well, absorbs +P recoil and shoots accurately enough for its intended purpose.
Jim

 

[Gene L]

I have a 442 no lock and it's great. Good trigger, and is easy to carry. I had a 642 pre-lock and it was fine as well. But I like the 442 better.

 

[whitestang]

I have a 442 Pro (cut for moon clips) and I really like it. It is my warm weather gun,mostly pocket carry. It does bark at you when shooting +P ammo,but it is still fun to shoot.

 

[Mister X]

I've owned all of them except for the 340 PD. My favorite is the 642 and I own two of them.

The 642 is rust/corrosion resistant, affordable and is a nice weight that's great for carry and adequate for recoil control. I also actually prefer stainless for a carry gun due to its greater visibility in all lighting conditions. If I draw a gun, I want the bad guy to be able to see it and the 642 is more visible and immediately recognizable as a gun compared to the others. I've actually tested that out. Deterrence is preferred as I'd rather not shoot someone if I can help it.

The 340 M&P is grossly overpriced IMO and I see no need for .357 magnum in a lightweight snub. Most love it, but I don't actually care for that big dot front sight or night sights in general. Nor do I like the two piece barrel design. The PD comes with a lot of the drawbacks of the M&P, but with the added issues with the titanium cylinder which I'd rather not be bothered with.

I still own a 442 that I use as a designated trainer. I did carry it at one time, but constantly battled rust in warm weather, especially when in southern Florida. The worst issue with the 642 are some complaints about the frame finish, but I've had no issues and it would be cosmetic anyway. It wouldn't be a big deal deal to get it refinished if I did. I view rust differently.

 

[mikerjf]

What Mister X said.

But if you really like black that much better, go for the 442 and keep an oily rag around to wipe it off every day, you should be fine.

 

[BAM-BAM]

I have a 337PD for summer shorts..... you can't carry any other gun.... pocket carry and a 60-10 3" micro 686 for any other time I want to carry a J-frame.

 

[THEmodelof1989]

a 60-10 3" micro 686

I think if we all start calling them the "micro 686", they'll go up in value . Seriously though, I forsee the pre-lock magnum 60s to go up considerably in value as revolvers are making a bit of a comeback, and more people start looking for a very specific and very excellent model that wasn't made for very long at all.

Sorry for getting so off topic. Once again, I vote 340 for magnum power.

 

[BAM-BAM]

I think if we all start calling them the "micro 686", they'll go up in value .

I like the way you think.......... frankly I think we make too much of ultra small and light.........I only carry the 337PD when all else fails and I need to pocket carry with all my "other pocket stuff".

The 60-10 or my Dad old 640 are plenty small and light........

another ultra small gun I've had for decades is a 12oz (IIRC) Colt Mustang Pocketlite .380 .....lock breach 1911 pattern auto.

 

[The_Truth]

My favorite J frames right now are a Model 38 or a Model 36.

 

[tguil]

I own a 442. Some folks say that the finish of the 442 is actually more durable than the coating on the 642. I have had no problems with the finish on my 442. One other comment. It takes a lot of practice to become proficient with a double action only snubby. Regardless of which gun you buy, you might want to start with.38 special wadcutters