S&W 442 vs. Ruger LCP Revolver

[snubbiefan]

Valenc......EVERYBODY is entitled to their own opinion. One may be surprised to open up a cherished recent model Smith revolver to find a piece of plastic that use to be steel......I have.

 

[GeorgiaShooter]

I have to agree with that. And while I dont like the longer trigger reset as much with the LCR mine is the 357 model and I would not feel even slightly afraid to shoot it constantly at the range with 38 rounds doing 95% of the lifting and only shooting the 357 to dial myself in perfect with the carry ammo.

I admit I wobble back and forth on which is better our 442 which is a 42 model which by the way is black frame and stainless cylinder and barrel for the finish type.

While the lighter frames kill your hand with 357 they are very manageable with 38 or +P. Even my small wife shoots the **** out of the 442 with a perfect smooth pull. She's totally not afraid of it.

One thing for sure there are a lot of great guns and I agree if weight is not an issue the heavier duty guns are the way to go if that's what you like. But I'm not afraid of plastic guns, scandium whatever.

I do watch them to monitor how they wear, just in case.

 

[decaustin]

I just purchased a new Model 442-1 (no internal lock) this past weekend at a local gun show. I wanted something primarily for concealed pocket carry. I recommend you go to a range that rents and test both before buying one. I shot quite a few makes/models, including a few of the subcompact semi-autos before making my decision on the revolver. I did compare the Ruger LCR to the S&W 642. The Ruger was noticeable lighter weight, and IMO it fared somewhat better in terms of felt recoil. But I chose the S&W over the LCR based on it being more proven (units in service, years in service, reliable track record, etc.).

 

[Dftplan]

Shot both. The LCR had CT grips and stung my hands. Didn't enjoy shooting it even with 38 +P. Bought the 442. Love the factory grips. Could shoot +P all day.

 

[photoman]

I don't know beans about the Ruger lock-up and I really don't know about the 442 either. My assumption is the 442 is the blued version of the 642. If that be the case...the 442 needs to be heavily carried, but little fired. The recent 642's are very, very soft in the area of the recoil shield and I would assume the 442 is also. I am a die-hard S&W fan, but the metal in the recent lightweights just does not appear to be as strong as the older lightweights, such as the model 38 for instance. The thing I most hate about the recent lightweights is the pin-trail scar across the recoil shield. They are made for carry and not range use...consider this if you plan to do a lot of shooting with the 442. It could be the 442 is stronger due to the coating process. It bears looking into. The pin-trail across the recoil shield of a 642 that has been swung open-n-closed some 40-50 times....will scare you to death and it does not get any better.

Here is a 642 with approx. 2500 rounds through it. Looks like yuk but functions flawlessly.

 

[Maximumbob54]

My 637 looked far worse before the frame cracked. And that finish was coming off all over it. I don't get why some run like a Timex and some just die early. But that feeling is what keeps me in my love of steel. Bring back the Model 60 version of the 36!!!

 

[snubbiefan]

I went ahead and took some action on my own (against everybody's advice I may add) in an attempt to reduce this wear. Smith puts the very same strength center-pin spring in all the J-Frames. Mine happen to be 317's, but it's still a lightweight J-Frame. I cannot see the need for a +P center-pin spring in a gun that you may not routinely shoot +P ammo in....and you can't do that in a 22LR anyway.

I REDUCED the center-pin spring strength considerably and have fired several cylinders-full of every thing from rat-shot to Stingers and have had no issues at all. If you only plan to shot regular 38-special and not so much the +P...I certainly think the spring pressure on the center-pin can be reduced to prevent this degree of wear, or at least prolong the life of the gun.

Both mine are pre-lock and I doubt very much Smith would hand me another pre-lock on down the road under warranty. There is simply no need for a spring of this strength to be in a 22LR, or probably not a gun in which the use of +P ammo is rare. Solid lock-up can be achieved without a Godzilla-like center-pin spring.

 

[Goat Man]

snubbiefan said "The thing I most hate about the recent lightweights is the pin-trail scar across the recoil shield." I own a model 642 that resembles that comment. I have maybe 400 rounds through this model 642. I just took it to be the fact that aluminum is a lot softer than steel.

 

[Goat Man]

snubbiefan said "The thing I most hate about the recent lightweights is the pin-trail scar across the recoil shield."

I own a model 642 that resembles that comment. I have maybe 400 rounds through this model 642. Auminum is a lot softer than steel.

 

[snubbiefan]

Judging from Photoman's picture of his after 2500 rounds....I am pretty sure we could all safely say that weapon has another 3,000 to 4,000 rounds left in it, at least.

The whole situation may not amount to a hill-of-beans. I seriously doubt the average shooter would feed 5,000 rounds through one of these in a lifetime anyway. Surely...one would want a stronger gun for range-work and these lightweights are made for carry purposes....at least in my opinion.

Now, as for selling such a weapon on down the road.....I think you would be hard pressed to do so short of giving it away to anybody that knew anything abut guns. You don't seem to see this sort of extreme wear on many of the older lightweights, but that may be because they have been little used and just carried for the purpose intended.


If anybody is really interested, I will be happy to share what I did to reduce the center-pin wear on my lightweights. It cost less than $1 and a little time.

 

[Gearhead Jim]

I will be subjective like Maximumbob. If you are going to shoot the gun a lot....go ahead and bypass all the aluminum and plastic. It is not going to hold-up under serious fire.....meaning thousands of rounds.

If you want one to carry only and maybe fire occasionally, by all means help yourself to a lightweight. If you want one you can shoot every day, get one made from steel (blued or stainless) and a good holster to carry it in. I personally hate holsters and prefer a belly-band. Like may others, I have a drawer full of holsters that I did not like, but you can put a 155 Howitzer in a belly-band, cover it all with a shirt-tail.....and even sit down very comfortably.

My 340PD has the pin-trail across the recoil shield, but it doesn't seem to be getting any deeper, and doesn't bother me. The gun has been my constant carry piece since it came out, probably has about 2,000 rds of .38 and +P through it; still as tight as the day I first fired it and a lot tighter than some of the J frames I owned back in the supposedly "good old days."

Recoil with the light guns is another issue, I use the factory Bantam grips because I only carry it in my pocket. The 130 fmj GI-style factory ammo or wadcutters are my choice if firing a full box, the +P stuff is only fun for the first 10 rds.

 

[twistedracer]

I have a 642 and my buddy picked up an LCR. He likes the LCR better, but then again he won't buy anything but a Ruger. I try to keep an open mind and try different things and go from there. I picked up his LCR and decided I best not shoot it. It felt like it sat so high in my hand that I felt like it would flip out of my hand if I shot it. Just my 2 cents worth. Handle both and see which feels more natural to you.

 

[19max99]

I guess I'll just have to try out both. After reading all the posts I just keep changing my mind. Thanks for all the input.