MODEL 38-2

[btr4me]

Picked up a like new M38-2 with Nickel finish recently. It has been fired but not enough to have a visible turn line. By the SN(BPR42XX) it was made in 1993.

After reading the latest SCSW this M38 has two maybe unique features. One, it does not have the Airweight markings that are noted in the Catalog as being deleted in 1993 only on the Blued revolvers. Second, the M38 came with non-diamond magna stocks which really seem to be original to the gun.

Anyway, just wanted to throw these observations out to forum members that assimilate such info. Thanks for reading.

 

[Texas Star]

Looks like a dull nickel finish. Refinished?But I don't know when 38-2's were made. Could be original finish.

 

[Old cop]

Mine is a flat latch Model 38 (no dash) that was my back up to my issued Model 15 & off duty.

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

It's a Product Code 101704. They were made in matte nickel in the 1993 to 1995 time frame. The wood Magna stocks were standard. It's not unusual to not have the words "Air Weight" appear on the gun. Many AW do not. Just like Distinguish Combat Magnum has, to my knowledge, never appeared on a Model 686. It's a catalog name.

 

[JAREDSHS]

Now THAT'S what I'm talkin about !! SWEET !

 

[btr4me]

Thanks for all the comments!

 

[Cal44]

I have a 442-0 from that same time frame.

It also has a satin Nickel finish.

 

[Bill In Texas]

Nice j! Congrats!

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

I have a 442-0 from that same time frame.

It also has a satin Nickel finish...

What do you think about the durability of the matte nickel? Seem to me it wears pretty good. I have a M38 I've been pocket carrying without a holster occasionally for a couple of years, sure, I'm careful with it, but it still looks new. Not a single visible scratch or scrap.

 

[Cal44]

What do you think about the durability of the matte nickel? Seem to me it wears pretty good. I have a M38 I've been pocket carrying without a holster occasionally for a couple of years, sure, I'm careful with it, but it still looks new. Not a single visible scratch or scrap.

I haven't carried it yet, or shot it enough, to have a direct opinion on that.

But, on one of the forums, someone posted that the reason Smith came out with the satin nickel 442s was because they were having so much trouble with the finish on the early 642s, that S&W needed a durable alternative for those customers who preferred the light "stainless" appearance in a centennial.