[Kestrel]

I was looking at a new S&W .38 Bodyguard today at a gunshop. I usually only like the older S&W revolvers with the firing pin on the hammer. I've heard the newer revolvers use MIM parts.

Is there any reason I should or shouldn't consider this gun, because it doesn't have the firing pin on the hammer?

Are the new models as durable as the older?

Thanks for any help,
Steve

[Ala Dan]

Steve,

I only know of one documented case from the new
S&W revolver line whereas the firing pin bushing
moved forward a wee bit, causing a major mishap
and locking the weapon up tightly with a fully loaded
cylinder. I own a Smith & Wesson 629-5 and a 686-5,
both with the floating firing pin, and have never, ever
experienced a problem with either! I think its safe to
say that you should be O.K. with a newer one; if that
is what you want.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[Shane]

I'd say get an older one, especially if you dislike the locking device they put on the new ones.

[NJ3]

The newer ones are +P ammo rated. Where an older Bodyguard may not hold up to a regular died of +P ammo.

I like the older Bodyguards though. I got lucky and found a M38 nickel plated in new condition. I don't and won't shoot +P ammo in it.

[DeltaElite]

I first lightweight J-Frame was an old bodyguard. Great gun.
I did trade it in to get my 342 since I desired the enclosed hammer, rust proof finish and +p rated weapon.

[Kestrel]

Thanks for the replies.

Shane,

You mean the currently shipping models have the locking device? I didn't notice it on this one, but I'll look again.

Thanks again,
Steve

[Kahr carrier]

I prefer older Smith because I dont like the keylocks on the new ones.:)

[Kahr carrier]

But the S&W Bodyguard a good choices ,I like the shrouded hammer.:D

[Shane]

You mean the currently shipping models have the locking device? I didn't notice it on this one, but I'll look again.

Yes, my understanding is that the new S&W's come with the locking device.

[ruger357]

I wouldn't worry about the new ones. I do prefer the older ones, but recently bought a new 649 and so far have had no problems with it.

[Kentucky Rifle]

My 638 is my first S&W with the locking device. It's pretty easy to ignore. I tried it out once to see if it worked properly. It did. I slipped the little key on my keyring for a just in case situation...and promptly forgot about it. The new 638 is pretty nice, but my older Smiths from the 60's and 70's are nicer. They lock up tighter. The blue looks a foot deep. They've got a few scratches, but they still look pretty good.

KR

[Kentucky Rifle]

I just took my 638 out of my holster and looked at it. I've decided that I'd better not look at that little "pock" too much or it WILL begin to bother me.
Kinda like looking at a "ding" in the paint on the door of your car that some doofus put there in a parking lot.

KR

[ruger357]

The 649 I bought was made right before they started putting the locking device on them.

[Standing Wolf]

I'll consider doing business with Smith & Wesson again when the company starts making revolvers without integral locks and breaks its agreement with the Snopes Clinton-Liar Gore régime. Older Smith & Wesson revolvers are generally of higher quality, anyway.