Any disadvantage to the 638 compared to the 642?

[samtechlan]

Hi I'm a new member here. I've been reading the "642 club" thread and the enthusiasm there for the Centennial is certainly infectious.

I just got my CCW and was seriously looking at the 638 Airweight until I started reading the above thread. I'm sure this has been discussed before but is there really a disadvantage to the 638 as opposed to the 642?

I know the overwhelming majority of the time this type of gun will be/should be used in DA mode but I could easily imagine instances where the single action capability might be useful. For example, a takeover of a restaurant or other enclosed public place by a killer intent on mass murder where escape is not really an alternative but also where the killer is not on top of you at the moment. I think a restaurant in Texas was taken over is such fashion a number of years ago. A single action shot just might be the answer in such cases.

Am I missing something in thinking that the 638 has all the advantages of the 642 plus? Thanks for all your help.

 

[SouthpawShootr]

The only disadvantage I can think of is that the 642 has a completely enclosed hammer while the 638 has a small channel where the hammer travels through its arc. Now, theoretically, something (lint for instance) can get in that channel and, when you fire the gun, can slip down into the inside of the gun. Eventually accumulated debris could affect the functionality of the gun. There is the remote possibility that something small could jam in the channel and tie up the gun when you needed it. Both of these stretches of the imagination are would be largely limited to pocket carry and both are alleviated with the 642. I, personally, don't think the "disadvantages" are significant, but I make sure that when I pocket carry, the only thing in that pocket is the gun. I even turn the pocket out before putting the gun in to make sure there's no lint or anything like that in it.

 

[cslinger]

I have a 638 as I prefer having the ability to shoot single action if I desire. That being said the only real "disadvantages" to this system are the fact that an obstruction could, in theory cause hammer travel to be stopped and that I guess a prosecutor could argue that the gun was in single action blah blah blah etc.

I personally think the 638 is the best of all worlds.

Chris

 

[SouthpawShootr]

Yes, but a prosecutor would have an easier time proving that I once turned lead into gold than proving that I cocked the gun prior to firing. I certainly wouldn't admit it and no eye witness could testify to it. This whole line of thought relies on the logic that it is easier to accidentally pull a trigger through a single action travel than with double action. I doubt a prosecutor would even try this route absent any implicating statements made by the shooter.

 

[MCgunner]

I never worry about legal BS. Either the shooting is justified or it isn't. *** does it matter whether I fired like Jerry Miculeck or Matt Dillon???? I, too, like the 638 and the ability to fire single action. As stated, make sure it's the only thing in your pocket, carry in a decent pocket holster, and clean it routinely. Sometimes I wonder if anyone ever cleans a firearm anymore. Sheesh! You can just blow the dust bunnies out if it collects any. In a decent pocket holster it should be pretty well protected from that.

I don't dislike the 642, but the trigger on the ones I've tried have been less than great. If you had to take a 15 or 20 yard shot at a BGs head and thread the needle past innocents or something to save someones life, wouldn't you rather fire single action? I really don't worry a lot about that sort of thing, I just like to use the gun on small game, plinking, and stuff and like to fire single action when shooting at a rabbit at 20 yards. Don't be mistaken, the little J frames are fully capable of accuracy enough for short range hunting situations. One of their strengths is their accuracy compared to most of the pocket autos. You can take full advantage of that potential if you can fire single action. Just seems goofy to limit yourself.

All JMHO of course.

 

[R. W. Simms]

The 638 is uglier. That's the primary disadvantage. Otherwise, the 638 is superior in that it offers a single-action option. Both significantly restrict hoster options. I wobbled on the fence for a while before I fell onto the 638 side. In all reality, anyone would be well-armed with either.

-Bob

 

[Master Blaster]

The disadvantage of the 638 is that it has a hammer thats exposed so the 642 with the enclosed hammer is a better choice if you plan to carry it concealed under garments or in a pocket.
I stopped carrying my 36 when i bought my 642, its just a much better concealed pistol due to its snag free design.
In a ccw encounter you will not need to cock the hammer

 

[Marshall]

For those that don't know, and so it's easier to see the differences, here are the two guns..........

Personally I would buy the 638. It does not have an exposed hammer and has the advantage of firing single action, which is huge in my book.

638

642

 

[symr00]

Both guns are ugly SOBs. Buy what works for you. Either way you can't go wrong.

 

[cslinger]

Both guns are ugly SOBs.

Ummm maybe so but compared to say a Glock 26 they are the prom queen and Miss America.

 

[Huddog]

I have a 642 bc that is what I wanted at the time. Prior to that I owned only one snub. A S&W Mdl 49, the all steel version of the 638. If a 638 had been available rather than a 642 I would have bought it and not been the least bit disappointed in the decision I made. I still have plans to buy one at some point. So go with what you like. By the way, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder and neither the 642 nor the 638 are hard on my eyes.

 

[samtechlan]

Thank you for all the replies. It seems to me so far that the only disadvantage to the 638 would be the possible collection of lint, etc. behind the hammer. I guess the ocassional q-tip with clp would take care of that easily enough. I think I'll go with my original leanings and buy the 638.

 

[vynx]

I have the model 38 (alloy airweight before +P) otherwise almost same as 638 and in 15 yars nothing ever got caught in that little hammer slot!

It is a beast with hot ammo. and the model 38 is not rated +P

In 7 more days I will be able to pick up a model 649 a stainless version of the 638 that I bought (10 day wait in Cal.) it was an undercover officers gun and was converted to double action only.

Go with the 638 you can have your double action and single action too!

And I think we should be allowed in the 642 club - enlarge it to all shrouded hammers - what do you guys think?

 

[Essex County]

The 638 I had was beautiful...........Essex