[az_ccw]

I am looking for a lightweight snubbie for carry. I have narrowed it down to a S&W 642 (Alum/SS @ 15 oz) or the 342 (Alum/Tit @ 12 oz).

The 642 is about 3 oz heavier than the 342. I will be carrying +P rounds. Does the extra 3 oz help in felt recoil when shooting hot loads?? Does one gun clean up better than the other?? Which gun will last the longest (wear slower)??

Any help would be appreciated.:rolleyes:

[VictorLouis]

Had all 3 weight classes of J-frame. The Airweight will be more comfortable to shoot than the Ti, while being only marginally heavier in the pocket. The stainless cylinder can be cleaned as with any other gun. You can even use Flitz or polish on it(occasionally) to remove all of the carbon stains. Not so the Ti! They even caution you against using anyting other than bronze brushes.

The only advantage I see in the Ti gun is an easily changed, pinned front sight. I wish that S&W would standardize that across the J-frame line.

[DeltaElite]

I have a 640, a 342 and had a 642. The weight does matter and as VictorLouis said, the interchangable front sight in the 342 is cool.
In fact, my 640 has the same option, since the front sight is pinned.
Save money by getting the 642. You two will be very happy together.:D

[concerned citizen]

Yes...

I also like the pinned site of the Ti* series, but the 3 oz weight savings is much more felt in recoil/controlability than it is in the pocket.

I carry a mod.442.

[10-Ring]

You get to a point where you have to strike a balance between weight savings & shootability...go w/ the 642 and maintain the higher level of functionality.

[az_ccw]

Thanks all for the replies. A S&W 642 is now on my shopping list. :p

[M1911]

I concur -- save your money and get the 642. Any lighter than that and all you're doing is converting dollars to recoil.

[VictorLouis]

converting dollars to recoil. LOL:p

[M1911]

VictorLouis: Wish I could say that I came up with that, but I didn't. I stole it from a comment someone else made on the same subject, I think on TFL.