Personal preference - 442 vs. 642 ?

[scottaschultz]

OK, I want an Airweight, but which one? Other than the finish, is there any functional difference between the two? My personal preference is for the 442. I am not looking for a "BBQ Gun", so cosmetics are meaningless. Is there any real reason to consider the 642?

Scott

 

[38-44HD45]

When I can, I pick stainless for my backup guns, and my Js are only carried as backups. I sweat on my backup guns, and I hate having to be too particular about their maintenance. Just lazy, I guess...

 

[460v LAC du FLAMBEAU]

I have the 642/CT factory-installed grips...dead on @25'...zero problems in 3 years!

 

[panamajack310]

Hi, I have a 642 and I love it. they are esentually the same gun. You can not go wrong with either.

 

[Sonny Crocket]

I have one of each, like them both. Do you like stainless or blued? Its as simple as that, they are the same in every other regard.

 

[jframefreak]

It's not a 442 or a 642, but I'd go for the 640.

 

[foxrazr]

OK, I want an Airweight, but which one? Other than the finish, is there any functional difference between the two? My personal preference is for the 442. I am not looking for a "BBQ Gun", so cosmetics are meaningless. Is there any real reason to consider the 642?

Scott

I think functional wise they are the same. The only reason to consider the 642 is if you like stainless more than blued. I have a 642 a friend has a 442 we carried them the same way. He has no problems with rusting and neither do I.

 

[Glock 'em down]

Give the Bodyguard series a try - models 438/638.

You'll thank me later.

 

[Wee Hooker]

I'm partial to stainless guns for carry. Mainly because they are easier to "buff up" if they get scratched. I also like to carry with no holster ( a la hip grip) so don't worry as much about the stainless against my skin vs blue/finish.

 

[Rugskipper]

Don't buff up the aluminum frame on a 642...it's clear coated.

 

[ladder13]

I have one of each, like them both. Do you like stainless or blued? Its as simple as that, they are the same in every other regard.

Also made in nickle.

 

[Cherokee Slim]

I always try to buy SS if I can nowdays but bought the 442 because it kind of just dropped in front of me. I carried a M15 for years before the state changed over to model 65's, and I never had a rust or maintenance problem. Regular cleaning and care will keep the 442 looking nice.
Cherokee Slim

 

[sipowicz]

The 642 cylinder and barrel is stainless...the frame is anodized and has a clear coat over it....from what I've seen, the black anodizing on the 442 holds up better as the clear coat on the 642 does flake off for some....but the cylinder and barrel will show more wear and possible rust on the blued 442..so it's kind of a toss up...I have the 442 and when it started to show some pitting on the cylinder, I had it hard chromed....

 

[HEADKNOCKER]

Love Those Stainless Snubbys

I realy like my Airweight 642 No Dash..
I've had it for years & it still looks like brand new..
The early 642s & 442s had anodized frames & when S&W changed to the -1 frame with the intregal cylinder stop & +P rating they went to the sprayed on clearcoat & matte finish.. They also went from forged flash chromed trigger & hammer to case hardened MIM parts somewere along the transition..
Here's a crappy pic of my 642-0 below my 940-0, also note that I just fit a 940-1 cylinder to the 642 converting it to a 9mm/38spl convertable..
Both of My Centennials have seen lots of carry & have been soaked countless times in sweat & still appear as new
I prefer stainless but will have to say that the Nickeled 442-1 of ladder13s is stunning..
Nothing against the Black/Blued 442s just prefer the stainless to help prevent corrosion & Love the way the stainless snubbys look expecialy with a nice set of Spegels
Gary/Hk
940 & 642/942 Convertable Airweight

 

[scottaschultz]

And here I thought this was going to be an easy decision!

Scott

 

[photoman]

And here I thought this was going to be an easy decision!

Scott

It is. Just buy one of each.

 

[bmcgilvray]

I've been prejudiced against stainless steel for many years. That's why I compelled myself to purchase a Model 642 in 1998, my first stainless steel anything. It's ok and its surface finish has held up very well but I think the Model 442 is the better looking revolver.

 

[jack the toad]

I'd prolly get the 642 and if/when the clear coat became chipped, etc. then duracoat with whatever color you prefer.

 

[RightWinger]

I might be way off, but I was under the impression that the ONLY difference in the 442 and the 642 was the color. I thought that the 442 has a stainless cylinder and barrel and they just coated it in black.....someone who knows more than me chime in and correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[jack the toad]

It's my understanding that the steel in a 442 is carbon while stainless in the 642.