S&W 640 and 642

[Martial Warrior]

Just joined, first post. Hello to everyone

I've had Glocks for years. And, being an Academy Instructor it was pretty much a necessity as we use the Glock 21 .45ACP and other agencies in the area use the Glock 22 .40 S&W.

Nowadays I'm over the hump and on the tail end of my career and I don't actively teach anymore (as far as Academy or in-service firearms). And I just wanted a change.

So, I picked up a LNIB S&W 642 .38+P. I love the size and weight of the gun and carry it as my off-duty gun in a Fobus holster. Got it for a straight trade for an older (but good condition) Glock 19 I'd had for years. It came with the square 'boot' style grip and I ordered the fuller sized grip from S&W as well.

This weekend I'm planning on picking up a S&W 640 .357 for $460 NIB with two grips (one the boot style and the other the fuller sized grip). I plan on making this my main off-duty carry piece and keep the 642 for those times when my apparel requires a bit smaller/lighter firearm (I'm thinking of looking for an ankle holster for it).

So, with that background I'd like to hear from others who have/have had either or and their comments on them. I feel I got a good deal on the 642 and the deal on the 640 is also very good. Comments on that would also be welcome.

I'm leaning on getting a box of the Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel in .38+P for the 642 and in .357 for the 640.

Thank you and appreciate your comments.

 

[watchmanjimg]

Welcome! I applaud your decision to purchase both the 642 and 640. Are you getting the no-lock 640-1 or the later 640-3? $460 is a smoking deal either way. We had a big discussion about this a few days ago, but in my opinion if you're getting both guns there's not much else to talk about--you'll have all the bases covered.

Good choice of ammo too. I use Golden Saber .357 because I haven't seen the Speer .357 Short Barrel offered for sale around here, but if you can find it you should go for it.

 

[jframe]

Welcome to the Forum! You'll find a lot of good info here, and good people as well. Your choices sound right on, at least in my opinion. I carry a 642 as well, and feel that it's a perfect blend of size and weight, especially in an Alabama summer. I think the 640 .357 is also a great choice, although I recently went with a Ruger SP101 in the same caliber, mainly because the 640 I wanted my friend wouldn't part with. I think you are right on target for your carry guns and ammo as well.

 

[Martial Warrior]

Thank you for the welcome. Yes, both guns are the no-lock version.

I know I can get the Speer GD SB in .38+P in the area, but haven't yet checked for the .357 version. Both seem like very good rounds from what I've read on the various boards.

I started out 20 years ago with a S&W 64 .38 as my duty weapon and it was great. Only thing I didn't like was the thin wooden grips. I would have preferred a rubber Hogue but policy didn't allow it. And my first off-duty was a .357 so I'm happy to be getting back to it. Loved the Glocks, but there is just something about a good, solid revolver.

I can also appreciate the comment about the heat. I'm in Florida and with the heat index were breaking 100 degrees every day. Like stepping out into an oven. Nice to have something that isn't dragging your shorts down at the end of the day.

 

[surveyor47]

Because you are a cop, I dont like your trade. For civilian purposes, I would not argue with you at all. The difference is probability of actually having to fire the weapon, the civilian gun being much less likely.

I own a 642-2, which I carried for a long time without firing much. Once I started shooting it, it started making multiple trips back to S&W to correct problems that will only become apparent during shooting. For example, the gun would hang up after a couple of rounds fired, apparently caused by an excessively small barrel cylinder gap. This is the 2nd cylinder on this gun in less than 1000 rounds. If I were to buy another 642/442, the gun would have to prove to me that it is reliable before I would carry it. I now know the current one to be reliable from extensive shooting.

The Glock is reliable, easier to shoot and can put triple the number of rounds onto a target within 25 yards in comparison to the 642. The only way you have can put a similar number of rounds on target is to carry both the 640 and 642. The 642 can hit very well at 25 yards, if you take your time and aim very carefully. That is not what the gun is built for.

The one and only area where the 640/642 is superior is in safety from accidental diischarge, particularly when carried in the pocket rather than in a holster.

If you are going to have a 640, I prefer the +P38 Special, pre-lock 640 to either of the current lock equipped guns.

 

[Lowtide]

Why do you prefer the pre-lock? Is yours a practical or aesthetic viewpoint?

 

[photoman]

I own a 642-2, which I carried for a long time without firing much. Once I started shooting it, it started making multiple trips back to S&W to correct problems that will only become apparent during shooting. For example, the gun would hang up after a couple of rounds fired, apparently caused by an excessively small barrel cylinder gap. This is the 2nd cylinder on this gun in less than 1000 rounds. If I were to buy another 642/442, the gun would have to prove to me that it is reliable before I would carry it. I now know the current one to be reliable from extensive shooting.

Just to provide a counterpoint...

My two primary 642's (one a 2006 and one a 2008) have been flawless with many thousands of rounds. I do agree that it's important to shoot a new gun, how much I guess depends on the persons comfort level, before using for carry.

 

[wnr700]

With your vast experience, I think you will find them a dream to carry.

The 642 is a great coat pocket winter gun and so light and enjoyable in the summer.

I think the slighly heavier frame is my sweet spot for enjoyable shooting, so for me the 640 as a shooter.

Splitting hairs... really.

That said, I'm almost went out and got another Glock 26/27 because I shoot them far better and have a nagging doubt about being undergunned capacity-wise.

 

[watchmanjimg]

If you are going to have a 640, I prefer the +P38 Special, pre-lock 640 to either of the current lock equipped guns.

Nothing against the .38 640 no-dash, but I believe the OP mentioned that both his 642 and the .357 640 he's considering (must be the -1) are without locks. Actually the pesky lock didn't appear on the 640 until the current (?) -3 variant. The -2 is the NYPD .38 version built on the longer J-Magnum frame with 2 1/8" full-underlug barrel.

 

[snowman.45]

Hi Martial Warrior, and welcome. I'm a 33 yr. LEO in California. I, too, have rediscovered revolvers after many years of carrying autos; Glocks, 1911's and S&W's in 9mm and .45 ACP. Like you, I have been a firearms instructor for many years. As I have gotten older, I've learned to appreciate the lighter, but equally effective J-frames. I currently have a 940 in 9mm and a 342 in .38 Spec. (11 oz.). the GDHP 135 gr. is a good choice in .38 and .357. I use GDHP 124+P in the 9mm. A high round count is nice, but it will never replace shot placement.

 

[Martial Warrior]

surveyor47, first off it's nice to meet you

Secondly, I understand your point on the capacity of the Glock. I've carried over the years the 17, 19, 26, 30, 32, 36 and even the 21. They are great firearms and they have my full recommendation. On duty I've got the 21 .45 ACP.

I'm going to come at my decision to use a revolver from a different angle to hopefully explain my rationale. When I first started, we used the S&W 64 .38 special. We had the 6 rounds of .38 special +P in the gun of course...and that was it! We trained with speed loaders of course, but didn't actually have them available on-duty. So you had your 6 and that was it. In fact, we didn't get them until about seven years later. So, with only six...we really, REALLY got good with them. Many agencies were similar 'back in the day'.

As an instructor we often had access to many statistics and such. For example, the FBI did a ten year national study between revolvers and semi-autos in relation to hit %. What they found was that when officers were primarily armed with 6 shot revolvers they were hitting their target (bad guy) 78% of the time on the first shot. That is a great % considering they are under duress which usually involves an adrenaline dump. This can cause tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, loss of dexterity in the extremities (fingers), spike in blood pressure, pulse and respiration etc.

When semi-autos came into vougue, the first hit % dropped to 48% which is where the term 'spray and pray' came from. This does not mean hi-capacity semi-autos are a bad thing. Just that for a short time, good shooting practices went to the wayside.

I carry off-duty for the same reason as anyone else, personal/family self-protection. An off-duty officer isn't likely to be wearing body armor or have his radio or less-than-lethal tools with him i.e. O.C. spray, Taser etc. Therefore descretion is often the better part of valor i.e. don't run around with a big 'S' on your chest thinking your super cop. Step in when necessary of course, but then many private citizens would as well in similar circumstances.

I don't put myself in bad situations if I can help it. I don't hang out in bars, strip clubs or dark alleys. If something goes south on me, it will likely be the same sort of 'something' that could happen to Joe-private-citizen. And statistically, the number of shots fired in most shootings is very low I don't feel outgunned with what I'm carrying these days. Having many rounds is nice of course, but being able to accurately place those rounds is of more concern to me. I'm not a world shooting ace, but without patting myself on the back I'm a step up from the average officer since I've had a LOT of practice as an instructor (which is the way it should be if you're going to teach).

Just my view. Hope some of it made sense.

 

[Martial Warrior]

A high round count is nice, but it will never replace shot placement.

You said in one sentence what took me a whole long-winded post

Very well put.

 

[Doc Mark]

Evening, MW and Snowman.45,

Well stated, Gentlemen, and I couldn't agree more!! Practice makes perfect, or at least as close as we're very going to get! I always tell my non-gun friends, if they ask why I feel it necessary to shoot so much, that when bad things go down, you will only do what you have practiced, and the rest is up to chance and luck. I feel much more confident when I practice quite a bit, and far less so when I don't. 'Nuff said..... Take care, and God Bless!

Every Good Wish,
Doc Mark

 

[surveyor47]

Not all that long ago, I attended a Glock match right after a range session with my 3" 65 and 642. I am not a semi auto guy, strictly revolver. Just for grins I shot the course with my 642 and one of the guys let me shoot it with his Glock 27? 40 S&W subcompact. The Glock was not much bigger than my 642, but it was a whole lot easier to shoot and my score went much much higher. Knowing what I can do with a Glock in direct comparison to a 642, I feel undergunned with the 642- which I now consider almost a "church gun", what I carry when I would otherwise carry nothign at all. I hit well with it, but tend to be slow.

I find the 640 pre lock much easier to shoot than the 642, very accurate, quick and controllable. It is smaller than the current 640.

I also own a S&W CS9 and find it easily consealable, and very easy to shoot quickly and accurately. The primary difference between the CS9 and Glock is magazine capacity and concealabilty- the CS9 being more concealable.

 

[Combat_Diver]

MW,

Welcome and enjoy the fun. I don't think you'll be undergunned. I just picked up a new 442 Pro model cut for full moon clips last month and love it. To make the buy even sweeter Smith just started a $50 off 38/357 J-frames August 2 thru December 31st.

 

[Poohgyrr]

Great 5 shooters. The 642 is great for pocket carry & the 640 has less recoil with the same rounds.

 

[Gearhead Jim]

For me, the 642 makes a great pocket gun but if I'm going to wear a belt holster, then I can comfortably go to something a little heavier, bigger, and more effective.

I have two 640's, a "-0" and the current magnum version. About once a year I carry one of them in my pocket for a day, just to remind myself why I normally carry a 340. And about once a year i carry a 640 in a belt hoslter for a day, just to remind myself that my Glock 19 is virtually equal in comfort and much more effective.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

IMO, surveyor47's comments on reliability and shootability should not be ignored, nor do I think they will be. However, the only revolver I ever had go non-functional on me was a 547 with a pierced primer. Many dozens of S&W and other revolvers, and just that one incident. [I did have a Charter Bulldog that was a 4-shot with factory ammo, but heavily crimped handloads worked fine. Also, both a 29 with fairly heavy loads and a 37 with +P managed to back up on me, but another trigger pull takes care of that.]

I seem to be able to shoot my 642 pretty well, but not as quickly as a larger gun (even a 2" 15). However, what I do doesn't count for you, and there is no doubt in my mind that you already know what you can do with those guns, and whether it satisfies your off-duty needs.

P.S. Just remembered. I did have a Diamondback that broke its firing pin, TWICE, for no reason that I could find. I no longer own a CF Diamondback (or a 547), although I do have a DS, a Cobra and an Agent with no problems.

 

[bronco45]

Martial Warrior: Welcome aboard. I too started in law enforcement in 1971 when revolvers were the ONLY weapons found in a cops' holster. Learned DA with a certain amount of precision. Carried a 19 for years.

Last issued weapon was a Glock 23 which I hated, still do. Just never fit my hand comfortably.

Retired in 03, now carry a Colt DS in a pocket holster and it's a great concept. Your choices of 642/640 are great ones, but to really take advantage of their size and weight get a good pocket holster and a speed strip or two.

 

[arrowhd]

Great discussion going on here. I carry the 642-1 when possible, ie. off work. I have higher capacity handguns, however they are almost double the size and weight. They rarely get carried because of this. I think the 642 and similar light weight revolvers bridge the gap nicely.

Only downside for me with the 642 is becoming proficient with it. My humble background with handguns only goes back about 10 years, mainly semi-autos. I've been to the range with this little girl 3 times now. Just now getting rounds on target in a consistent pattern. All about trigger control for me anyway. I definetly agree that this is a tool that requires practice to be effective with.

 

[surveyor47]

Martial Warrior,
My recently deceased brother in law was a Federal police instructor and we used to shoot together regularly and he taught me a lot. His advice is always in the back of my mind. He used to go crazy at my 5 shot revolvers, telling me that those guns would get me killed in a fight. He was adamant that 6 shots was the minimum. He also didnt like my S&W CS9, because of the 7 round magazine capacity. The one gun that he really like was my 3" round butt S&W 65, and said that he carried that model for years on duty. I often pointed out that he and I carried for completely different purposes; to which he countered that once the shooting starts, your original purpose becomes irrelevent.

I think he would have approved of your plan of carrying 2 guns if carrying 5 shot revolvers, but would have been quick to point out the firepower advantage of a subcompact semi auto if carrying 1 gun. He always had a minimum of 2 guns on him.

 

[ENGINE18]

You can't go wrong with either!

 

[Lowtide]

I am looking for a voice of experience regarding speedloaders and crimson trace grips on a 640. My current factory grip prohibits access.

 

[Martial Warrior]

Again, thank you for the welcome everyone. Many good points being brought up here. Some that bear further discussion.

My recently deceased brother in law was a Federal police instructor and we used to shoot together regularly and he taught me a lot. His advice is always in the back of my mind. He used to go crazy at my 5 shot revolvers, telling me that those guns would get me killed in a fight. He was adamant that 6 shots was the minimum.

Having more rounds is always comforting. And we all base our opinions upon research and personal experiences. And not to disrespect your brother-in-law (RIP) in any way, shape or form but I would wonder what experience lead him to believe that a 5 shot revolver would get you killed vs. a 6 shot revolver?

As I mentioned, we all base our opinions upon research and personal experience. I've been on both ends of the barrel. I've been in four deadly-force situations in my career. The first was with my S&W 64 and the bad guy was approx. 7 feet away from me. The second was much later in my career with my Beretta 9mm. This was standing outside the driver side window and the bad guy in the passenger seat. Perhaps 5 feet at most. The last time with my side arm, this time my Glock 21 .45 ACP I was approx. 10 away and the bad guy was elevated about 12 feet above me. Direct line (without doing the math) would be about the same I suppose 10-12 feet. The longest was about 25 yards, but that time I had a 12g shotgun with rifled slugs and an aim point sight. That was a situation though I doubt any off-duty or private citizen would ever fing themselves in so it is the odd ball of the four.

My point is that typical situations are most often up close and personal. Statistically, most real world shootings are very few rounds. There is the odd 'rampage' types of shootings and of course Hollywood would have us believe different, but the last statistic I saw (and it was a while ago so might be dated) was something like 2.2 rounds per fight. That is both good guy and bad guy shooting. Don't hold me to that number, I'm going off memory and it very well may have gone up. But I don't think were looking at any where near double digits. Might be an interesting thing to research....

So most shootings are close range. But not all of them, and we could all be in a situation where a long range shot is necessary. But ask yourself this (anyone), would you take that type of shot? Shooting at a range, under no duress and with all the time in the world to line up the sights, squeeze the trigger, make adjustments etc is quite a bit different than being in a SHTF situation where your heart is pumping out of your chest and bystanders are a real possibility. Regardless of revolver/semi and regardless of how many rounds we have on us. Just a thought.

I like semi-autos and don't want to give the impression that I'm against them. Carried them for many years. Too be honest though, the two Glock 19's I had were nice, but overall just wasn't totally comfortable with them. Mostly because of the finger grooves. Worst thing Glock has done. I had an old generation one Glock 17 that I should have hung on to. Thing fit my hand like a glove and I could shoot very well with it. In fact, that was the gun I used not only at the FDLE firearm instructor academy but the Israeli firearm instructor academy as well. Should have hung on to it (20/20 hindsight).

My strategy for a deadly force situation is to remain as calm as possible. My last situation was on Memorial Day of this year so it is pretty fresh in my mind. During it, I never got an adrenaline dump and was able to calmly and logically think through the entire situation step-by-step. And I don't mind saying that a previous prayer for calmness in this type of situation was answered. I want to gain cover. I want to shield loved ones and get them to cover as well. Fortunately the Israeli training covered this sort of thing in great detail. It was also the most brutal combat training I've ever had. Imagine standing at the 3 yard line. Then you pick up your partner who is simulating that he's injured and put him in a firemans carry. You then run backwards with him on your back as you draw your sidearm, chamber it off your belt and engage multiple targets live fire while gaining cover. That was just one of the drills.

I'm probably being long-winded again, but what I'm trying to say is that my game plan involves more than the type of firearm I'm carrying or the amount of ammo. It is part of the equation but not the totality of it.

Just some rambling thoughts to throw out there

 

[surveyor47]

My brother in law was a career Boarder Patrol/Immigrations officer. He was always going to be outnumbered, but never outgunned or out of weapons.

 

[Martial Warrior]

My brother in law was a career Boarder Patrol/Immigrations officer. He was always going to be outnumbered, but never outgunned or out of weapons.

I can now understand his perspective. I was born in Arizona so I'm familar with that type of environment. Often times you are a long way from potential help or back up. I can remember Bill Jordan and others speak of the situations that arose out in the middle of nowhere. I would also equate this to highway Troopers in many states where you can find yourself on the interstate a loooong way from anywhere or any back up.

And if I were in similar circumstances I would want all the ammo I could get as well. And more to the point, the best long gun I could get.

 

[surveyor47]

I knew him through our work for over 10 years before his sister had him "check me out". I regularly worked with him in a civilian capacity while he checked things out, before he would let me proceed with my work. He used to love telling me "No, go sit down over there and wait". So he knew me well when he gave sis the ok to date me.

His point of concern was that I would run dry with a 5 shot revolver, which was slow to reload. He knew that I was not carrying a backup gun, whereas he was carrying multiple backup guns. He was a strong believer in the 40S&W and the 357 Magnum. He also knew my preference for the +P38 Special, which concerned him as well. He was never without a long gun close by.

 

[Martial Warrior]

Did a bit of research. Take a look. Very interesting read.
NYPD Article

Of interest to this discussion;

Rapid Reloading

The average number of shots fired by individual officers in an armed
confrontation was between two and three rounds. The two to three rounds per
incident remained constant over the years covered by the report. It also
substantiates an earlier study by the L.A.P.D. (1967) which found that 2.6
rounds per encounter were discharged.

The necessity for rapid reloading to prevent death or serious injury was not
a factor in any of the cases examined.

In close range encounters, under 15 feet, it was never reported as necessary
to continue the action.

In 6% of the total cases the officer reported reloading. These involved
cases of pursuit, barricaded persons, and other incidents where the action
was prolonged and the distance exceeded the 25 foot death zone.

 

[KEN L]

An interesting read if only from a "nostalgic" point of view. These were the exact figures my chief quoted to me at the time as an argument against allowing our officers to carry autos. Unfortunately this was the aniquated thinking of many department heads at the time. His comment to me was, "Since there are less than 3 rounds fired in the average confrontation, why do we need to carry firearms with higher capacities?"

This was back in the early 80's. Hey, at least we could carry .357 magnums and use speedloaders. But, there came a time when we were limited to .38 spl in all weapons. Since some of our officers chose to carry .38's they deemed it necessary to have everyone carry only .38 loads. You know, in the event that one of them ran out of ammo, I could toss them an extra speedloader of ammo. Sorry boys, you shoot up yours, you ain't gettin' mine! Besides my L frame speedloader won't work in your K and J frames.

Fast forward a couple of years. I was finally able to convince my department and our backwards thinking chief it was time to come up to the present and catch up with the rest of the law enforcement world. Of course the FBI shootout in Miami in 86 sadly made my case. But I digress...........

I was also the primary firearms instructor for my department for 17 years, so I can appreciate your position. Those who would disagree with your decision on what to carry, especially at this stage in your career, do so from a limited perspective. Everyone has an opinion. Mine is, decide for yourself what is best for you. I may not agree, but thats the beauty of owning and carrying what you choose. I always used as part of my instruction, "If it feels good to you and your are comfortable with it, your confidence level will be high and you will shoot it well!"

As for the question that was raised about speedloaders and lasers. Safariland and Crimson Trace! JMO, of course!

 

[cg267]

I have a 640 no dash that I carry as much as I can. I found that the Buffalo Bore 158 lead H/P work great out of it.