Which one would you buy and why?

[kamloops67]

buy her the one YOU like, then if she doesnt like it ,you can assume ownership. take her shopping for the one she wants, creating a lasting memory with your daughter ,and you get a new piece without upsetting the wife...crafty eh? yeah im good like that. lol

 

[elkhunt]

This has been a fun and helpful thread. Thanks for your input. I will let you know what we decide.

 

[crofoot629]

I don't like either.
A 3" snubby is not a snubby.
Now for example if it were a 3" Model 60, .357 Mag with adjustable sights, it would still be a J-Frame, but in a whole different context or configuration that made a difference as to purpose.

And I don't like newer guns in general, and I definitely don't like guns with locks. Or ports for that matter.

You know your daughter, but I know plenty of women who have no problem with 13 OZ .38 Specials. Train like you fight is only as good as common sense allows. I see nothing wrong with practicing with low power target loads if she is on the edge of recoil management.

To illustrate my point, I don't like shooting a bunch of .357 Mags through a N-Frame, yet will carry a Model 27 with Double Tapp's hottest, and I think responsibly so.

As a rule I think small light guns should be just that.

I'd look for an older 642 or 442, or make the jump to a 4" K-Frame.
I'd also consider an M&P "no lock" 340 going the other direction.

It depends on how she is going to use it.
I keep a 10 OZ 43C .22 in my pocket all the time. Like in my sweat pants at night when lounging about the house, or as a 2nd gun when out and about.

As it is I see your choices are neither fish nor fowl.
I really don't mean to rain on your parade. Just my personal observations from carrying, and shooting, a lot of guns over the years.

For what it's worth I've put away no lock 442's for both my daughters.

Emory

------------------------------------------------------------------
Honest Men Fear Neither The Light Nor The Dark

 

[Hapworth]

This has been a fun and helpful thread. Thanks for your input. I will let you know what we decide.

Oh it ain't that easy buddy -- we'll still be here in this thread going back and forth long after you've made your decision and moved on.

 

[pilgrim6a]

I have a suggestion, but you're not going to like it.
Buy both. Let her decide the one she likes.
You can get you money back selling her reject in the Forum Classifieds.
The major flaw in this is that it may take her several years to make her choice.

 

[ahanes]

I'd opt for the 2" gun for ease of concealment. I have a ported 2" 442 and the flash/recoil is a non-issue, don't let it deter you.

 

[Will Carry]

Buying a handgun for a woman usually doesn't work well. Whatever pistol you get her, she's not going to like. Snubbies have a snappy recoil that a lot of people don't like (men and women). I bought my wife a snubby and she couldn't shoot it very well. If you must get her one of those two pistols, I would stay away from any ported snubby and get her the 3". I carry a 3" revolver myself but my wife prefers her Walther P-22. Go figure.

 

[blujax01]

A 3" J-frame is a wonderful revolver to shoot. I would recommend it to anyone. I CC my 3" M36 no problem.

As far as holsters, Lobo Gunleather has done right by me twice now. Prices in line with the off-the-shelf Big Box retailer only made much mo better. Delivery in 4-5 weeks and special requests (LH K Frame IWB - LH M&P 45C Avenger) are not an issue.

 

[chief63]

Airweights just suck to shoot. Based on my experience with both my girls I'm with the guys recommending steel.

 

[photoman]

Buy the 3" Model 642 and sell it to a collector. Take the profit and buy a 2" Model 642, install some Uncle Mike's combat grips, load it with Hornady 110gr standard pressure Critical Defense and call it a day.

 

[M3Stuart]

Are you suggesting that she should keep the gun locked while carrying, and have the key at the ready? Or that the key should be on hand in case the lock actuates unexpectedly? Or just so she always knows where the key is?

Negative. I was referring to various reports that the lock-guns might inexplicably become locked - thus necessitating the need for the key should it become necessary. An acquaintance of mine went hunting recently and when he got 'out there' he found that his rifle was locked (a Kimber if I recall?) anyhoo, he didn't have his key with him...he was 'out of luck' as he said.

Personally, I cannot imagine why anyone would keep their CCW locked...

 

[roger b]

sw638-3

Ammo is part of the deal? If you have a fire ball coming out of the barrel you might want to look at an effective, accurate, easy recoil, hornady 110 gr ftx critical defense.

 

[Hapworth]

Negative. I was referring to various reports that the lock-guns might inexplicably become locked - thus necessitating the need for the key should it become necessary.

Copy that -- that was my option two scenario in the earlier quote. Would be a life-or-death uh-oh. Just another reason to avoid the lock altogether.

 

[snubbyfan]

I'd get the power port. I like the idea of a front night sight. The port is inconsequential but I'd prefer the shorter barrel. As far as a holster goes, I'd just get a hunk of leather and make my own.

 

[Cruiser RN]

I share the belief of my instructor who would always say "Shoot what you carry and carry what you shoot".If it is a carry gun stay far away from the ported barrel.You have to be worried about muzzle flash momentary blindness, not good in a self defense situation.If I remember my models correctly they are both alloy light weight guns.This makes them PAINFUL to shoot,especially if you are talking self defense magnum loads.If the gun hurts to shoot then it is very likely she will not practice with it.You do not need your daughter carrying a gun she doesn't practice with.May I suggest getting a Model 640 if you want the DAO configuration.It is all steel,lends itself to comfortable shooting,and will give her the option of 38 Special, 38+P,or 357 magnum carry loads.Another choice in the snubbie neighborhood is the Model 36 Chief's Special. This gun is also all steel,and gives her the option of 38 Special or 38+P carry loads.JMHO ...Mike

 

[shawn mccarver]

I am looking to get my adult daughter a revolver, I have come across two unique choices here locally. First, a pre lock 642 with a 3" barrel. It's the one made in the early 90's, in great shape, with Uncle Mikes. I could pick it up for just under $400 from a LGS.

The second is a 642 power port 2.25", black, trijicon big dot front site, spotless with box. These were a limited run in 2007 so it has the lock. A private party purchase for $400.

The first option, has longer term value expectation being a pre lock and for some the 3" is attractive. Holsters are harder to find. The second is easier to shoot with that front site and recoil reduction, lots of debate on the muzzle blast issue in CQ situations.

My daughter is single, has been trained, has a permit, and it will most likely be a long term "hold", not trading stock.

I'd be interested in your choice? Especially if you happen to own one or the other (not a requirement to comment). Thanks

There is no choice to make, in my opinion. The 3 inch pre-lock 642 is the way to go.

I do not like holes drilled in the tops of barrels. Too much chance, if you will pardon the quote from the movie "A Christmas Story," of "putting your eye out."

Really, those barrel compensators really throw a lot of blast straight up and that is not good if you have to do a speed shot from the old "speed rock" hip position. That may seem unlikely, but on the other hand, losing your eye is not something I want to gamble with at all.

 

[Kilibreaux]

I am looking to get my adult daughter a revolver, I have come across two unique choices here locally. First, a pre lock 642 with a 3" barrel. It's the one made in the early 90's, in great shape, with Uncle Mikes. I could pick it up for just under $400 from a LGS.

The second is a 642 power port 2.25", black, trijicon big dot front site, spotless with box. These were a limited run in 2007 so it has the lock. A private party purchase for $400.

The first option, has longer term value expectation being a pre lock and for some the 3" is attractive. Holsters are harder to find. The second is easier to shoot with that front site and recoil reduction, lots of debate on the muzzle blast issue in CQ situations.

My daughter is single, has been trained, has a permit, and it will most likely be a long term "hold", not trading stock.

I'd be interested in your choice? Especially if you happen to own one or the other (not a requirement to comment). Thanks

I'd suggest the S&W M63 3" barrel .22LR. It holds more rounds and modern .22LR high performance ammo is amazingly effective. Remember John Hinkley and the attempted Reagan assassination? He used a "lowly" .22LR to put down at least four grown men! Not ONE jumped up and bragged about how ineffective the .22LR was. A J-frame .22LR makes a LOT of sense.

 

[M2MikeGolf]

If it were possible for your daughter to fire these two revolvers, or at least similar models, it might help the decision making process.

For myself, I would go with the 3", based mostly on the barrel length. I have never cared for anything less than a 3" and really prefer at least a 4" barrel on any handgun. It would take to much space to say why, but more rifling equals more velocity and stability, even if it's just a little bit. It also has effect on recoil. I've never cared for porting either, it doesn't really reduce recoil, but does help with muzzle lift, which is just not an issue for me. I've used magnum rifles with porting and hated it. It doesn't make the weapon louder, but it brings that loudness closer to the ear. Same for muzzle breaks, I've tried those extensively and think the really only belong on military grade automatic weapons.

The lock is a non-issue for me also, I would never use that as a reason to buy or not buy a S&W. I have S&Ws with both, I'm more interested in the actual revolver and it's use and won't open that argument up, but I personally have had no issues with the lock, and have intentionally tried to make one fail and could not. I have a MIM, IL L-Frame (619), and I have no plans on ever selling it. Plus, if you really wanted to, you could disable and plug a lock, though I would never recommend such a thing. Also, the sights wouldn't be that much of an issue, as long as plenty of practice is done, and you can always use some LASER grips if it's that important, they work extemely well.

Anyway, just my two cents worth, if it helps any. Will be interested to hear you and your daughter's decsion and results. In the end, I don't think you would go wrong either way.

 

[wrangler5]

Another vote for neither.

You posit a choice between two oddball 642s as a first gun. IF concealed carry is absolutely NOT a consideration, then the longer barrel probably would be more fun (and a bit easier) to shoot at a range. But I assume "she has a permit" means that concealed carry is at least one use, and for that a "stock" 642 is a better (easier to conceal in more situations, many more holster choices, and much lower risk of high velocity gas and powder particles coming at you) and cheaper choice. They can be found without locks, if that's a concern, although the self-locking problem seems to be mostly with magnum loads in super lightweight guns, not so much with "ordinary" guns.

If accuracy with the shorter barrel is a concern, get a Crimson Trace laser grip for it and prepare to be astonished at the precise shot placement it offers. The snubbies are just as inherently accurate as their larger siblings, but harder to aim consistently with the sights so close together. A laser fixes the sighting challenge.

 

[elkhunt]

Thanks for all the great input, hope you enjoyed the thread. I decided to buy neither... today I bought a 442 no lock, unfired, box papers with Crossbreed Supertuck, Don Hume IWB and Don Hume pancake holsters. 150 rounds of high quality defense ammo... $400 for the works. I think she will be pleased with the revolver, and she has shot my J frames enough to know that she will do fine with it.