New SW 442 .38 "airweight" ammo question?

You don't have to use the same ammo for carry and home defense, it takes no time at all to reload your gun. This way your wife can have something more managable and you can go for all the power you want. Just be sure you know which one is in your gun at any one time.

You and your wife and each use different loads in the gun. It takes no time at all to reload with the other ammo. This way your wife can have something more manageable and you can carry as hot as you want. Great gun by the way, I don't own it but I've put about 400 rounds through by aunts.

Thanks, inspector for addressing orange magnum's comments.

orange magnum: Weaker is better is a curious statement. Was your 642 a 'no-dash', a '-1', or a '-2'? 642's are now made on the j-magnum model (take a look at the strip of metal extending below the cylinder on the frame, above the trigger). And I'd have no reservations about firing +P .38 special, if the barrel is stamped as such. The 'jacketed bullets only' issue is with "airlites" (scandium frame) and titanium cylinders.

Smith and Wesson is keen on the liability issues, they've been making aluminum-framed j's for well over 50 years. You obviously prefer the tauri, but please take note of the title of the post.

Inspector, It was Orange Magnum that said that in your quote from orchidhunter.

If the idea was to provide self protection for your wife indoors I think the model 442 is a very, very bad choice, maybe the worst.

The snubby (all snubbies) is very loud, disorienting your wife and making her scared. The damage done to an intruder by a slow motion bullet is very small. She will likely not hit the intruder between the eyes, ensuring his death. Plus, the recoil is fierce being that the weight of the handgun is so small, making it impossible for her to hit anything. The sight radius will also make sure she misses whatever it is she wants to hit. There is no long barrel to help her aim the gun in the right direction. Further, the ammunition capacity is very small. Five shots goes off before the intruder is in the same room as her, and then what?

The minimum is a 6-shooter revolver with a 4" barrel in 38 special, but 6" is better. Heavy steel is best. Ruger GP100 comes to mind. Tauruses are cheaper. The longer the barrel the less noisy gun and the easier it is to aim it under stress. Because you think she will not reload during an attack you should consider giving her a high capacity 9mm semi-automatic and teach her how to undo the safety, keeping the gun stored with a round chambered. Any used Beretta 92fs, Taurus 92pt or CZ 75B will do.

The snubby exist because it fits in a pocket. That's all it's good for, it fits in a pocket. It's strengths stop there. Your wife will not keep it in her pocket, will she?

I know I sound negative and accusatory, but I'm only trying to help you and others in the same situation. If you are not selling the snubby you must buy a speedloader and teach her how to use it. Never practice with +p. Your wife will be scared and grow negative feelings for the gun, plus it's not built for +p.

I would not use a J frame revolver as a bedroom gun either. I have a 12 gauge in the closet with OO buckshot and a Glock 30 in the bedside stand with an extra mag. 20 rounds of .45 ACP should stop just about anything or give me time to get to my closet for the 12 gauge. I think a 442/642 is one of the best choices for ccw pocket carry, but not for in the home unless it is the closest/only gun around.

BTW I carry a sig 239 in .357 in the winter and a Glock 36 during warm weather.

I keep an 8" 6-shooter with hot 38 Special +p, with two full speedloaders next to, also 38 special +p, all next to the bed. Maybe not ideal, but better than nothing.

arizonaguide: I'd suggest you check out the 642 Club Part Deux, please, and save yourself from some of the misinformation presented (quite vociferously) in this thread.

With practice/training and the proper accessories, women and men, young and old, may become proficient with the j-frame snubby (grips to fit the hand proper to size and recoil tolerance, lasers, snap-caps, painting the ramp-sight, hand-strength exercises, etc.) The info there is applicable to all/most j-frame series weapons. Some may call the j-frame an 'expert's gun only'; I'm no expert, yet, I remain confident in my ability to deploy it, with results.

This thread's going sideways and skewed, and regardless of post count, I may start to call someone out on being a troll. I'm not going to waste more time debunking some of the nonsense being blathered here.

Good luck! The 442 is a solid weapon, by the way.

Orange_Magnum said:

If the idea was to provide self protection for your wife indoors I think the model 442 is a very, very bad choice, maybe the worst.

Click to expand...

Well... Each of us is entitled to his own opinion -- no matter how wrong it is -- but let's be clear on one thing. Two inch snubby is a classical choice of a personal defensive firearm and it has been highly recommended for this purpose by ALL recognized experts on the subject. So, at the very least, it is worth a serious consideration.

Mike

Sorry

for the mixup with usernames, I fixed that.

I was beginning to think "Who's on First?!"

I find it interesting that a Taurus owner slams a Smith. Kinda like me saying Tiger Woods is a lousy golfer. I gave up a little bit of concealment by putting Uncle Mikes combat grips on my 442. The boot grips just don't work well for me. Recoil with WWB target loads is a breeze. +p's are a handful but not at all unpleasent. My wife would have no problem with them. Although I think all the J's could take a steady diet of +p's why would you do that? I blast away with target loads and my reloads but shoot just enough +p's to stay comfortable with them. I only carry factory +p's for carry due to the potential legal issues. I don't reload them.

Yes Arizonaguide. The 340 is the same design, but only weighs in at 11.4 ozs.

I use Blackhills 125g +P for carry and WWB target at the range.

Is there a similar Steel Frame (J-size) with a centennial hammer enclosure?

Click to expand...

Sure, it's S&W 640. The gun weights 24 oz. and most people think of it as a belt - not a pocket gun. Extra weight comes in handy though if you want to shoot full power magnums. You may also want to consider Ruger SP101 with bobbed hammer.

Mike

Scandium is lighter, and stronger, than aluminum. The problems, as I've read, are not with the strength of the frame, but with light bullets losing crimp (disengaging from the cartridge) at high pressures in a titanium cylinder (the 4th and 5th bullet in the cylinder are susceptible after the severe recoil from the first several may shake them loose).

340 PD (centennial frame, enclosed hammer) : Scandium frame, titanium cylinder, 11 oz. and change. Must shoot bullets greater than 120 grains, may need to shoot jacketed bullets, which is the case with the 342 PD.

340 M&P (centennial frame, enclosed hammer) : Scandium frame, steel cylinder 13 oz. and change. No bullet weight limitations, lead bullets ok. Check out the 340 M&P Club thread for more information.

Aftermarket covered-backstrap, e.g., Hogue monogrip, Crimson Trace LG-305/405, Pachmayr.

Steel frame j's will have no problems with all manner of .357 (models 60/640/649, be sure they are the .38/.357 j-magnum frame)

Someone with more experience than I have in matches relevant to SD shooting advises otherwise:

Click to expand...

I'm not sure how relevent this is, I'm not into carrying my 40+oz pin gun for CCW.

For me, the 642 is light enough, and I wouldn't want to shoot anything more powerful than a mid-range wadcutter in a scandium version.

Click to expand...

For me I found little difference between the recoil of my 442 and my M&P 340 with the same loads, and have no problem controling mid-range 357s
(I currently use Rem Golden Sabers).
although if I was shooting pins I'd use wadcutters they take the pins off the table better.

thesecond has it right.

Strictly speaking the M&P340, with its steel cylinder and scandium frame, is the equivalent of the 442.

FWIW--I've shot about 20,000 rounds in j-frames in the last twenty months. Most of these are reloads, but built to replicate popular carry rounds--e.g., the 38+P "FBI load" (158-gr, 800+FPS), the GDSB 135-gr. 38+P load (140 gr LTC at 860-900 fps), the GDSB 135-gr. 357 Mag load (140 gr. LTC at 970-1000 fps), and 357 Mag loads on up to 158-gr. at 1100+FPS. These ballistics are all for (nominally) 2" barrels.

Approximately 14,000 have been shot in a 640; 1800 in an M&P340, 2500 in a M60/3", perhaps 500 in a 442 (which recently was upgraded to the M360 (scandium frame, 38+P), and perhaps 200 in the 360 so far. Based on my experience to date, I consider the scandium j-frames are as strong as the steel ones, but I don't care for the titanium cylinder; there's been too many issues with them from what I've read.

I have CT-405 laser sight grips on the carry gun(s), and I would not be without them. All of my shooting is now basically point shooting, from the hip or at "low" eye level. I use the CT for aiming only if I am trying to reduce my group size at ten yards or further. Essentially, the CT grip is the ideal device for learning to point shoot, IMO.

I consider my hand well-conditioned now, and my standard defense drill is to shoot a "quad five"--that is five shots at five yards in a five-inch group in five seconds.

Overall, I have found that best gun to pocket carry is a lightweight--period. I've also found that 38+P loads are the ones that work well for rapid shooting with small groups--e.g., the "FBI load" or the GDSB 38+P 135-gr. load. In the M&P 340, I can shoot "super FBI loads"--e.g., a 158-gr. LSWC-HP running at 900 fps, but that's about the max I want to shoot and still consider reloading.

Now, if the ammo manufacturers would only market a round like that, I'd be happy. However, I am quite content to build my own for practice and carry the Buffalo Bore 20A load--that's a 158-gr. running at 1000 fps, but only if I don't want to worry about reloading.

For the winter, I carry the Rem 38S12--e.g., a 158LSWC-HP running 800+ fps. The reduced recoil of that round will provide faster recovery and greater accuracy, AFAICT, and probably provide better penetration with winter clothing.

I wouldn't hesitate to use a j-frame as a bedside gun--but why bother, save for cost issues. The bedside gun is now a 686 / 4"--stoked with FBI loads, I might add.

No matter which frame size or weight, the 2" barrel revolver demands practice, and given its constraints, I strongly recommend lots of practice. Reloading is the way to be able to practice economically. The rounds I build, whether in 38 Special or 357 cases, basically cost about 12-13 cents each--and that includes amortization for a case life of ten reloads.

Your needs may differ, but nothing can beat working up a "replica reload", then reducing the charge for less recoil while acclimating and developing the skills--or for another, less-experienced / trained shooter.

Jim H.

Hey Jim, I'm only passing on info. I got from you and a few others like DAdams, on the 340 club thread. JFH is one of a handful of THR resident ballistics specialists in the revolver arena. His experience, among that of a few others, is well worth noting.
BTW, your contributions convinced me to pick up a 340 M&P. DLC coating, steel cylinder, big-dot trijicon sights, just beautiful. I use the CT-405's for the recoil-reduction, but with the tritium, I may not have to keep the laser 'always-on'. Can't wait to get it to the range.

For $300,

It would be more worth it to save that gun, add it to your collection and go and buy what you want outright without a trade.

The guy behind the counter may just pay the $300 and take your gun home with him after the transaction and "laugh all the way to the bank."

That's why I never trade or sell my guns anymore. After getting taken too many times, I learned the hard way -- because I needed cash to pay bills or I just HAD to have something else.

I don't have many guns, but the ones I do have, I really like and plan on keeping -- to some day pass down to family and/or friends.