S & W service dept......"Don't clean 642 revolver with Hoppes"

[M2MikeGolf]

Scratch one model of S&W for me. For those that get wound up about the IL and MIM parts, that means nothing to me. But this one is a non-negotiable (for me). I had a nickel plated 8 3/8" Model 27 for about ten years, and always cleaned it with Hoppe's. I sold it (stupidly) for more than I paid as it looked new and hardly fired some ten years later. My grandfather introduced me to Hoppe's in 1972; his experience with it was as a machine gun platoon leader in WWI and and Infantryman for thirty six years, and swore by the stuff. I'm a retired Infantryman myself, and swear by it also; I cleaned M16s, M1911s, M60s, M240s, M9s, M4s, etc. (you get the idea) with it for years, with excellent results.

Tell me I can't use Hoppe's No. 9 to clean a firearm? May as well tell me I can't drink German beer.

 

[kbm6893]

I had a 642 and sent the gun back TWICE to have it refinished. It was covered under their warranty and I didn't pay a dime either time. I even had a seperate cleaning kit, just for that gun, so I wouldn't use any brush that might be "contaminated" with some "unsafe cleaner" like Hoppes. I sold the gun, but was always annoyed at the finish. The tech on the phone just told me to use a gun oil to clean it. I consider a gun oil a lubricant, NOT a cleaner. And for S&W, a quality firearms manufacturer, to manufacture a gun with so frail a finish, that you can't even use HOPPES #9, probably the most commonly used (for a very long time) gun cleaner on it, is just unacceptable. For me, even if i use something else to clean, I like to follow up with a quick Hoppes wipe down. Guns don't feel clean to me unless I can smell the Hoppes! I know a guy who got tired of dealing with it and just hosed down the whole gun with break cleaner, which removed the whole finish

 

[Stainz]

My 642-2, bought 2/07, is in and out of it's Mika pocket holster and my pocket several times a day - every day. It's been shot a bunch - with +P 158gr LHPSWC's and wimpy/plinker 125gr JHP's alike - and cleaned dozens of times - with Hoppes #9. It has some 'holster wear' on it's edges - but I don't mind. I didn't buy it as an example of a work of art - I bought it to 'protect my bacon'. I just assumed the ammonia-based reference referred to the old Brasso cleaner/polish. With just 5% 'ammonia', it would seem that most of that would boil away after a use or two - if you lead the lid of the bottle while you clean.

Cleaning a firearm without the smell of Hoppes #9 seems, well, un-American! Apologies to my 642, but you is going to get uglier as the years go buy... but you will be cleaned when used!

Stainz

PS Now, you wanna see ugly? I have a LEO friend who carries his old backup 442 in an ankle holster - it looks like a dirty 642 because of it's worn-off finish! It still works perfectly - and, as he says, why replace it?

 

[CigarGuy]

Thanks for the heads-up! Sounds like I'm finally going to get some use out of ALL those "other" cleaners I've bought over the years and still have a ton of as I keep going back to Hoppes.

 

[M2MikeGolf]

Guns don't feel clean to me unless I can smell the Hoppes!

Yup, Yup & Yup.

Cleaning a firearm without the smell of Hoppes #9 seems, well, un-American!

That's because it is. Next thing S&W will tell us is that you can't gargle with Ballistol.

Put it together now;

S&W take heed; A gun that doesn't smell like Hoppe's is unclean and un-American.

 

[CigarGuy]

If your hands don't burn from the application of Hoppes, what's the use?

 

[senecaap]

If it comes to not using Hoppe's or not buying (new) S&W guess which one is going. Did S&W axe their quality control and product testing divisions to save money?

 

[Broadside]

When I asked if they would put a different finish on it (say....black) since this one doesn't hold up he said no because they would have to change the model number and they wouldn't do that. Huh?

I think you need to call back and speak with a manager.

I have recently been corresponding with another Forum member about his Model 332Ti. It was originally silver, but he sent it back and had it refinished in black.

Also, $200 is the standard price to have a revolver blued or nickeled. You are just having it clear coated. That should only be $120.

S&W customer service is generally pretty good. But they do have some nit wits working for them like most companies.

 

[rondo]

CCR Refinishing

Brad does great work and the "Cera-Hide" coating is tough stuff. $159 will refinish a revolver, it will look great and Hoppes won't bother it a bit. Just an option.

 

[tall gunner]

CCR Refinishing

Brad does great work and the "Cera-Hide" coating is tough stuff. $159 will refinish a revolver, it will look great and Hoppes won't bother it a bit. Just an option.

This sounds like the way to go for me. Even if S&W would apply a different finish who's to say it would be any more durable. The 442 black seems to wear off too. I thought about Duracoat but can't seem to get a consensus as to how suitable or durable this would be for a aluminum/stainless revolver.

 

[M29since14]

If you decide to have the gun refinished with the Cera-hide, I would be interested in seeing pictures of it, learning your impression of the quality of the work, and whether you are satisfied with the durability. Always good to get/give feedback on these things.

 

[ContinentalOp]

CCR Refinishing

Brad does great work and the "Cera-Hide" coating is tough stuff. $159 will refinish a revolver, it will look great and Hoppes won't bother it a bit. Just an option.

This is actually the route I'm considering. I think I'm going to wait until I can get my second Centennial (either another 642 or, preferably, a no-dash 640) before I do that so I have something else to use in the meantime.

Do you have experience using a gun with this finish?

 

[rondo]

I have had some stainless 1911 magazines coated (matte black) and I find the finish to be very durable. I know it's not quite the same as having a whole gun refinished, but my buddy had his CZ pistol done a few years ago and it still looks new. After seeing his gun, I decided to get my stainless mags blackened. The coating is very thin, slick, and after lots of use the mags are completely unscratched.

 

[ContinentalOp]

Thanks. If the finish can handle the use a magazine goes through it should do very well on a revolver.

 

[Steve in Vermont]

I have several guns dating back to the 60's and have always used Hoppes, as did my dad before me. My last 4 revolvers (all S&W) are all SS and get the Hoppes treatment. From all the comments I've heard regarding the new "lightweights", problems with cracking frames and finish, I think I'll stick to all steel. It's unfortunate that S&W has such problems when, for generations, they built good guns without these issues. The company still makes some good guns but............

 

[tguil]

This is the response I got last July from Customer Service in response to my questions about the finish on "J" frames. I specifically mentioned that I knew that both the 642 and the 442 had matte finishes.

"....Thanks for your e-mail. The 442 and 642 are both aluminum frames. The 442 is blued, the 642 is anodized and clear coated. They are equally as durable, just a matter of personal preference..."

It appears that some of the Customer Service folks really do not "know" their products well. For what it's worth I bought a 442.

Whatever...I'll use CLP on my 442 and sniff Hoppe's #9 when I clean my Rugers.

Tom

 

[dubhelix]

642 finish issues

I had a 642 that I bought new a couple years ago. The clearcoat started flaking off the frame at the bottom of the grip within a month, so I sold it. I only used Breakfree CLP on it. All my S&W's are now solid stainless except for a pair of 442-1 Airweights. The finish on the frame is holding up great, but the blueing on the barrel and cylinder is wearing. Sheesh. I'd sure like a 442 with a stainless cylinder and barrel, but blued frame. It would look funny, but I wouldn't care. Nobody sees those guns anyway.

 

[Hondo44]

Sheesh. I'd sure like a 442 with a stainless cylinder and barrel, but blued frame. It would look funny, but I wouldn't care. Nobody sees those guns anyway.

Go for it, have them changed out. I got tired of hearing and reading about all the cautions for cleaning the Ti cylinder on my 296 .44 Spl so I bought and installed a SS one made for the 696 .44 and never looked back. It even looks better.

 

[tguil]

... I'd sure like a 442 with a stainless cylinder and barrel, but blued frame. It would look funny, but I wouldn't care. Nobody sees those guns anyway.

Here you go. It's yours for $369.

S&W MOD 442 38SPL 1-7/8" DUO 0213895E : Revolvers at GunBroker.com

Good folks to deal with.

Tom

 

[dubhelix]

That's what I'm talking about. It's the wheelgun version of the two tone autoloader. Odd looking, but practical. I'll bet the sight picture is high-contrast, too. Too bad that one has a lock, or I'd scoop it up.