Non-Airweight S&W 442 and +P ammo

[billcalley]

Hi all,

I continually see that the S&W Model 442 "Airweight" model is rated for .38SPL +P ammo. However, I have an older (w/out an internal lock) Model 442 that is not marked anywhere on the gun as an "Airweight", and it is also not marked ".38SPL +P" either. It is about 20 years old or so. (Serial Number BPM60xx)

Is this non-Airweight S&W 442 OK to shoot with +P rounds?

Thanks!

-Bill

 

[captainjohnsofd]

Twenty years old would make it late 80's early 90's. Should be ok. I don't shoot that many +P's from my "J" frames anyway. I stick with standard .38 Specials for the bulk of my shooting. Why beat your hand and gun up unnecessarily?

 

[aterry33]

Bill, the original 442s were not +P rated. The 442-1s were +P rated, and then the current 442-2 is basically a 442-1 with an internal lock.

Not sure what S&W would say, but I'd feel okay shooting a cylinder or two of +P through a 442 no dash and carrying +P in it. But there are others here more knowledgable on me who might have a better opinion. No matter what, I'd call S&W first or check with a gunsmith.

 

[Pigirondan]

The Buffalo Bore standard pressure ammo is perfect.

 

[Pisgah]

Here's my thinking on +P ammo. If you fire +P ammo in a quality revolver, be it today's production from S+W or production from 50 years ago, you will probably find some measurable wear in sveral hundred rounds. Note I said "measurable" and not "noticeable"; by that I mean, a feeler guage may show your forcing cone/cylinder gap has grown half a thousandth, but your eye will never see it and your hand never feel it. To get a situation where the timing starts to be affected and the problems are getting obvious will take several thousand rounds.

Now, I would bet the typical carry gun gets fired no more than 100 rounds a year, and that's probably a generously liberal estimate. And those who may put a couple thousand rounds through their carry piece in a year will save most of the more expensive +P rounds for carry and do most of their practice with run-of-the-mill, standard-pressure reloads or bulk factory ammo.

So, if we're talking about factory +P ammo (not some of your neighbor's custom-built hand grenade reloads) and guns made since the mid-20th century, it's a non-issue.

 

[aterry33]

I agree with Psgah, I am just a lawyer and have to disclaim by saying call S&W to make sure

 

[billcalley]

Here's my thinking on +P ammo. If you fire +P ammo in a quality revolver, be it today's production from S+W or production from 50 years ago, you will probably find some measurable wear in sveral hundred rounds. Note I said "measurable" and not "noticeable"; by that I mean, a feeler guage may show your forcing cone/cylinder gap has grown half a thousandth, but your eye will never see it and your hand never feel it. To get a situation where the timing starts to be affected and the problems are getting obvious will take several thousand rounds.

Now, I would bet the typical carry gun gets fired no more than 100 rounds a year, and that's probably a generously liberal estimate. And those who may put a couple thousand rounds through their carry piece in a year will save most of the more expensive +P rounds for carry and do most of their practice with run-of-the-mill, standard-pressure reloads or bulk factory ammo.

So, if we're talking about factory +P ammo (not some of your neighbor's custom-built hand grenade reloads) and guns made since the mid-20th century, it's a non-issue.

I totally agree Pisgah, considering S&W must use proofing rounds that at least equal +P pressures. Either way, I am considering going to standard .38SPL rounds to try and subdue some of the brutal recoil of the 442 (I also use Monogrips to make things at least bearable with a 15oz snubbie!).

Thanks guys,

-Bill

 

[stiab]

Is this non-Airweight S&W 442 OK to shoot with +P rounds?

Howdy Bill, your gun is an airweight, whether it is marked that way or not. The airweight designation has been moved around to different locations on these guns over the years, and even left completely off for a while. I think you have gotten some pretty good advice from the other posters, I'll just add that I sometimes shoot +P in my steel and lightweight J frames, with no problems, but it does sting the palm of my hand considerabily more than non +P.

 

[DC7]

Hi all,

I continually see that the S&W Model 442 "Airweight" model is rated for .38SPL +P ammo. However, I have an older (w/out an internal lock) Model 442 that is not marked anywhere on the gun as an "Airweight", and it is also not marked ".38SPL +P" either. It is about 20 years old or so. (Serial Number BPM60xx)

Is this non-Airweight S&W 442 OK to shoot with +P rounds?

Thanks!

-Bill

Hi Bill: Your 442 is indeed an Airweight, but as Stiab mentioned above, there was a time (most of 1993) when the factory did not put the word "Airweight" anywhere on their alloy-framed revolvers. Early that year they stopped stamping it on the barrel, then several months passed before they began etching it on the sideplate. A 442 produced during that time would look like this:

Although not officially rated for it, these revolvers should easily be able to handle a limited diet of +P ammo. S&W once built a handful of prototype 442's for the Secret Service using the same Airweight frames with aluminum cylinders, and those revolvers reportedly passed a 5,000-round test using +P ammo. If the prototypes with alloy cylinders were able to handle that much +P, the commercial version with its steel cylinder should be able to handle occasional firing with +P as well.

Still, I stick to non-plus-P ammo in the early 442, because I've found that I shoot better with a standard pressure round like the 125gr Federal Nyclad. The reduced recoil allows faster and more accurate follow-up shots, and I'd much rather have better accuracy than slightly more power.

 

[billcalley]

A 442 produced during that time would look like this:

The reduced recoil allows faster and more accurate follow-up shots, and I'd much rather have better accuracy than slightly more power.

Thanks guys, that puts my mind at ease.

DC7's pic is my 442 exactly!

I agree too with the follow-up shots; I find it would be much more important to get more rounds downrange than pure stopping power -- and I am also just sick of the brutal +P recoil in such a light gun (even normal .38's are NO fun for me in a 15oz revolver), so I am on a 'waiting list' to purchase the virtually unavailable Hornady 'Critical Defense' .38SPL low recoil rounds (I'm impressed with that particular ammo).

Heck, while I'm quite sure no one else here would agree, I would rather carry a 9 round Taurus 990 with .22 LR Stingers than a S&W 340PD loaded with full-house .357 Mags any day (I hope I don't offend anyone by using the word "Taurus" in the same sentence as "S&W"!).


-Bill

 

[flop-shank]

Heck, while I'm quite sure no one else here would agree, I would rather carry a 9 round Taurus 990 with .22 LR Stingers than a S&W 340PD loaded with full-house .357 Mags any day (I hope I don't offend anyone by using the word "Taurus" in the same sentence as "S&W"!).

I'm known for packing hard kicking guns and I couldn't agree more. I wouldn't practice with a 340 with full power .357s and I won't carry a gun I can't practice with. I really tried to get the hang of Remington 125 grainers in my 360 PD. The last time I tried, I fired five rounds with my right hand. My right hand wasn't right for a month and a half after that. Speer SB .357 is brutal, but doable.

As far as Taurus goes, they make useable guns at a good price. I carried a 605 all day. Most of us here aren't manogamous with the S&W brand. We're just fans of their products.

 

[nitesite]

My no-dash 442 is just about right with MAX-pressure standard .38-Special loads. I've carried it for years with either 158-gr cast LSWCs or 148-gr cast DEWCs loaded below +P pressure and velocity.

For the past year or so I've relied on the standard pressure 148-gr cast DEWC such as that offered by Buffalo Bore factory ammo.

 

[billcalley]

S&W and +P ammo use for older 442's reply...

From Customer Support at S&W, received today via email:

"Anything manufactured before 1996 is not rated for +P"

Not really very useful, since the word "anything" encompasses, well, everything; and they also don't say whether my 442's serial number was assigned before or after 1996. I'll try CS at S&W again and see what happens...

-Bill

 

[billcalley]

S&W got back to me ASAP!

From Customer Support at S&W, received today via email:

"Anything manufactured before 1996 is not rated for +P"

Not really very useful, since the word "anything" encompasses, well, everything; and they also don't say whether my 442's serial number was assigned before or after 1996. I'll try CS at S&W again and see what happens...

-Bill

Wow, that was quick! Within 10 minutes S&W Customer Support got back to me via email with the (disappointing) answer:

"YOUR GUN WAS MANUFACTURED IN 1993"

So, my 442 is not rated for +P...

-Bill

 

[Stukaman]

My 442-2

is totally blacked out and is rated for +p it is stamped on the barrel.

Ps mine has no internal lock

 

[Barsch]

I've been carrying a j frame for the better part of the past 28 years. In my younger days and off duty it was a 2" model 36 (I still have it with original grips and a tyler). Now in retirement I still carry a j frame, but its a 642-1.

The ammo that I've found most accurate and reliable for me is Federal 125 Nyclad in standard 38. (yes, it is available, though you have to be diligent in looking for it)

For the purposes of this firearm and its defensive nature, a standard 38 for me makes the most sense. If I ever need to use deadly physical force, it will almost certainly be at "bad breath" length. Now living in South Florida, I'm not concerned about a perp wearing a leather jacket (or four layers of denim). In the low risk lifestyle I now lead, my personal protection needs would most likely be in parking lots, atms's, etc....where a bad guy would see this older guy with a limp and see a potential victim.

I've found that the Federal Nyclad 125 in standard 38 shoots true to point of aim within 7 yards, with minimal recoil. The ballistics for this round are more than adequate for me, considering shot placement is paramount. It's a proven, time tested round.

I've tried Gold Dot 135+p short barrel, assorted 158 gr standard loads and +p loads, and others...but I've found these nyclad 125's work best for me. Less felt recoil, more accurate follow up shots.

Now if I may editorialize for a moment...when you are at a range practicing, please practice single handed off balance shooting. If you are carrying a concealed firearm for true personal protection, please know how to use it in the way it will be used if called for. You won't be taking a proper stance. Your breathing won't be smooth and easy. You won't be using your sights at all and you won't be gently squeezing the trigger. From a distance of 3-6 feet you will be pointing and shooting, most likely single handed, off balance and possibly moving.

IMHO, the 642-1 with Federal Nyclad 125's are as close to a perfect defensive combination as there is.