Which J frame

[baldboy]

Am considering a j frame for pocket carry but can't decide which one 638, 442, 642 there are many choices and I would appreciate input from some of you experienced j framers.

 

[poordevil]

I have had several M-36's over the years and a M-37 with the exposed hammers. I still have a 36 I bought new in 1983. About 3 years ago I bought a 642-1 (no lock) and have to admit I think it is the best hide out snubby going. The enclosed hammer allows you to get a good high grip on it.

 

[shouldazagged]

You'll get recommendations of .357 Magnum J's, but not from me. Snubbies aren't the easiest guns to shoot well in .38 Special +P. Most people find them a lot more difficult and uncomfortable in .357.

I like the Centennial series: 640 (in .38 Special), 442, 642, etc. Virtually snag-proof on the draw, concealed hammer construction which keeps crud and lint out of the action much better, and DAO, which I consider a plus in a self-defense revolver. I don't want the option of single-action fire in my SD gun. Too easy to light off a round I didn't mean to, in a red-alert situation, and too open to accusations of negligently discharging a "hair trigger" gun if charged or sued after a self-defense shooting. The Centennials are relatively lawyer-proof. I did say "relatively".

One old guy's opinion, of course.

 

[Badkarma 1]

Although I cherish an older model 60, I can say without reservation the. 642 would be my pick of the current litter of Fightin J's.
Dale

 

[snubbyfan]

442 all day everyday either in my pocket or on my belt in one of my home made leather holsters.

 

[eveled]

The 442. is the pick of the litter imho. Hammerless snag free, and black conceals better than silver.


If money is no object, the 340pd would be the ultimate choice for me. Everything I love about the 442, plus it is lighter, the option of .357, and the fiber optic sight.

Just not sure it is worth the extra money to me. The 442 is light enough, plus P is more than enough, and the sights on a snub nose are not as important as on a full size gun. Also I figured 2 442's, would be better than 1 340pd.

 

[BobR1]

I have the 442 Pro Moon Clip. I like it a great deal. I had a 638 before that. Not all that impressed on how the clear coat finish was wearing on the Silver Gun.

I am not sure if all the 442's have the same finish, but the one I have has had no wear issues at all.

The 638 will be my last silver finished airweight, unless some other finish is used in the future.

IF you would like to upgrade the front sight at some point the 340 M&P comes with a pinned on 24/7 Tritium Night Sight. The LCR38 and LCR357 Rugers both come with a pinned on front sight also. So changing to a Fiber Optic or Night Sight is as easy as punching out the sight pin, installing the new sight, and reinstalling the pin. The LCR357 has a Stainless Steel frame around the cylinder area, while the LCR38 is aluminum. The added weight of the LCR357 soaks up some additional recoil, as does the Hogue Tamer Grip. The added weight of the LCR357 is enough to notice however. It takes the weight up about half way between an airweight J Frame, and a Steel J Frame.

Just My 2 Cents

Bob

 

[Protected One]

642.. all day long.

 

[Hapworth]

Of the ones OP specifically names: 442. No snag. Lightweight. Likely a better wearing finish. Available with no lock.

And for $20 upgrade to the Moon Clip; you don't have to use 'em, but it's great having the capability.

 

[shutupdata113]

I sold my 637 because the silver paint was chipping and flaking off after less than a year of pocket carry. I know it is a carry piece and wear is normal but after less than a year....so I got a 442 and haven't looked back

 

[vito]

I have a 640, and its a great gun other than the 23 oz. weight. I never shoot 357mag with it; its just too much for me. And if I am shooting 38+p I am thinking of getting a lighter snubbie for easier carrying. I'm leaning toward the 642 but wonder if the 638 offers a better option. With the bobbed hammer it should still be an easy, snag free gun to draw from a holster, yet give the option of firing SA if needed. I could envision being in a situation where the bad guy does not see or know I am there, and I have the chance to get off one shot from a distance. It is much easier to aim true with single action than with the long pull of double action only.

Why not have the option of SA which still allows for DA in fast moving situations?

 

[eveled]

Why not have the option of SA which still allows for DA in fast moving situations?

Go back and read shouldazagged's post above, I think he is spot on. Ed

 

[Jaysq]

I could envision being in a situation where the bad guy does not see or know I am there, and I have the chance to get off one shot from a distance.

I would be very careful about firing under a situation like this unless this is taking place in your home and you feel life threaten. He doesn't see you, he doesn't know you are there and he is at a distance.....

 

[vito]

I agree that the likelihood of needing SA is small, but it still seems to be advantageous to have that ability. I don't see how an accidental discharge is any more likely that with a DAO since the trigger pull is only lighter when you pull back on the bobbed hammer. If you don't consciously cock the gun, it seems you are using it just like a DAO revolver. Am I missing something here?

 

[shouldazagged]

My point about DAO revolvers being relatively lawyer-proof is that it's not possible for them to claim that you cocked the weapon and rendered it "hair-triggered". Likely you wouldn't have, but being unable to removes some ugly variables.

A shot taken at a range requiring single-action fire to hit an assailant is quite possibly a shot fired from a distance that would allow the possibility to maneuver, take cover or escape outright.

Since it's long been known that fine motor skills go to hell when adrenalin is squirting out your ears, it's altogether possible that a single-action shot could be fired prematurely before a good sight picture is obtained, possibly taking out a bystander.

I know: train, train, train. But when push comes to thug no two situations will be exactly identical, and very few if any people can predict with 100% accuracy how they'll react.

I'm a percentage player. Anything I can do to reduce factors that might trip me up seems like a good idea. Hence, a DAO J-frame EDC.

 

[Steve in Vermont]

I've had a M36 that I bought new in 1970 and it still works fine. Several years ago I bought a 640-1 and thats become my cc. I practice with 158 gr LRN and can shoot those all day. My carry load is .38 +P which it handles comfortably. The 23 oz weight is not a problem for me, in fact I find it adds to the comfort of shooting. To each his own but in my opinion whatever you get, in a J Frame, ditch the hammer. You won't use it in an emergency and it just seems to want to snag on something at the most inconvenient time.

 

[eveled]

You jinxed me, but in a good way. Writing my reply above made me realize it was time to buy that second 442 I had promised myself. When I got to my LGS, there was a dirty little used 340pd calling my name. It looks like it was shot very little and cleaned even less. Why don't people clean their guns before trading them in? Anyway here is a comparison shot, of my two favorite j frames.

I like the way the ejector is fully shrouded on the 340pd, and also was surprised to see the provisions to attach a lanyard. Also I was surprised at the difference in weight, you can feel the difference. All in all I still think the 442 is the better bargain, but when you hold them both and compare them, the 340pd is the one you want.

For what it is worth the sight on the 340 is pinned, but the 442 is part of the barrel, and cannot be swapped out easily. Ed

 

[sac-gunslinger]

642. Enclosed hammer, light weight. I also have a 640, just a little heavier. Need look no further.

I shoot standard pressure loads in both guns for optimum controllability.

 

[BaaBaa]

Not experienced but I love my 640. I like the heavier weight, not bad to carry at all and it shoots comfortable with 357 for me at least up to about 40 rounds at a time. Then I switch back to 38 spl. I like the DAO and no hammer to get caught on things.

I now also have a M&P40 and I find it's really easy to shoot but darned hard to carry/conceal.

 

[TucsonMTB]

I have had several M-36's over the years and a M-37 with the exposed hammers. I still have a 36 I bought new in 1983. About 3 years ago I bought a 642-1 (no lock) and have to admit I think it is the best hide out snubby going. The enclosed hammer allows you to get a good high grip on it.

+1

 

[Kiteman72]

I was recently looking at J frames for CCW and was considering many of the models you have listed.

Then I found a brand new 36-10 and it was love at first sight. Classic blued steel and walnut, perfect heft.

My 2nd choice was the Wyatt Deep Cover special 637 from the performance center, and I just might end up w one of those too. The trigger on the one I looked at was fantastic.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Am considering a j frame for pocket carry but can't decide which one 638, 442, 642 there are many choices and I would appreciate input from some of you experienced j framers.

Plain old Chief Special, all steel, for me. Plenty light for all day carry on the hip, yet that extra weight makes shooting it less unpleasant by a good bit vs aluminum. I like an exposed hammer, too. Then get yourself some Hogue grips for it.

For pocket carry, you're more likely going to prefer something lighter (aluminum frame) and with a shrouded hammer.

 

[pawncop]

Have carried a model 37 as backup/off duty years ago. Also a model 60 (Chief's Special 38 caliber) have a model 36 and 49. I will qualify with the 36 this year as I wish to upgrade from a .380. No experience with the newer models. Hope you find this helpful.

 

[Old cop]

My 442 has been my EDC for awhile. I prefer the dark finish for tactical reasons.

 

[baldboy]

Thanks for everyone's input I greatly appreciate it. I just purchased a 642 w/ no lock that is cut for moon clips. My next purchase will be a 638 hopefully with no lock as well. Can any one tell me about their experience with an airweight with moon clips?

 

[Hapworth]

Thanks for everyone's input I greatly appreciate it. I just purchased a 642 w/ no lock that is cut for moon clips. My next purchase will be a 638 hopefully with no lock as well. Can any one tell me about their experience with an airweight with moon clips?

Congrats on your 642 Moon Clip -- it's an excellent personal defense revolver.

No 638s without the lock, unfortunately.

I love moon clips. I carry 'em in my pocket and have had no issues. Some brass fit the factory moon clips better than others and you either want to experiment or buy more moon clips specifically cut to your round of choice. Loading and unloading rounds into the moon clips by hand is terrible; strongly suggest a BMT Mooner or Deluxe Moon Clip Tool.

I've had no issues using and not using moon clips in a 442, in regards to function and ignition. I regularly run it both ways at the range.

 

[Kadonny]

The 442. is the pick of the litter imho. Hammerless snag free, and black conceals better than silver.

A little off topic, but how does black conceal better? I don't see it. If you want to argue it's harder to spot when drawn, I'll buy that, but how can a color be easier to conceal. Concealed is concealed, no one is supposed to see it no matter what color it is.

Ultimately though I agree with the gun choice, 442 OR 642, which ever finish you want.

 

[Road Rat]

I have a 640, and its a great gun other than the 23 oz. weight. I never shoot 357mag with it; its just too much for me.

What? I really like shooting my 640-1 in .357 at the range. It clears out those close to you!!! Try it at dusk and you will light up the place...................get a good grip on it and let'r rip!!

I occasionally carry mine in the right side rear pocket of a pair of jeans. I also have a semi-shoulder rig for it. Carries just right!

 

[sac-gunslinger]

I could envision being in a situation where the bad guy does not see or know I am there, and I have the chance to get off one shot from a distance.

Then what is your justification for using deadly force? If the BG is not directly attacking you, your burden of proof, that you fired in self defense, skyrockets. Even more so if "he doesn't see you." You cannot, as a civilian, take out a perp on the anticipation that he will attack you when he sees you. In this case, you best course of action is to vacate the area.

Oh, I see, you are protecting other people that the perp is attacking. How do you know that it is a real attack? It is a common trick for kids to play like they are attacking someone. This has led to some very unfortunate outcomes over the years.

 

[Kaptainkoolz]

Then what is your justification for using deadly force? If the BG is not directly attacking you, your burden of proof, that you fired in self defense, skyrockets. Even more so if "he doesn't see you." You cannot, as a civilian, take out a perp on the anticipation that he will attack you when he sees you. In this case, you best course of action is to vacate the area.

Oh, I see, you are protecting other people that the perp is attacking. How do you know that it is a real attack? It is a common trick for kids to play like they are attacking someone. This has led to some very unfortunate outcomes over the years.

If an active shooter is popping folks in a mall, I think having the ability to thumb the hammer back for an accurate single action shot could be advantageous.