Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Can *&*s 442 handle +P

Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by Glock Glockler, Jan 8, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Glock Glockler

    Glock Glockler Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,279
    Location:
    Southern NH
    I was thinking about one for an ankle carry gun, used of course, and I would load it with +P ammo, but is the gun strong enough for it?

    Thanks
     
  2. Sodbuster

    Sodbuster Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Gallatin Co. MT
    According to S&W, yes.

    Edited to remove bogus S&W product website url. If you go to smith&wesson website and do a search by model for the 442, you will see that it is rated .38 special +P.
     
  3. dairycreek

    dairycreek Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,459
    Location:
    North Plains, Oregon
    I've had a 442 for some time now..........

    and the information that comes with it says that +p ammo can be used in it. Good shooting:)
     
  4. Randy63

    Randy63 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    199
    Location:
    N.E. PA
    If I couldn't bring myself to speak the company's name I surely wouldn't want to carry their product.

    K22
     
  5. 38Mike

    38Mike Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    144
    Location:
    Kansas
    Yes; mine works well with Win. 158 gr. LSWCHP..+P, very accurate at 7 yds. with this load....

    :cool:
     
  6. JohnBT

    JohnBT Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    13,232
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    According to 2 factory reps, the 442 isn't and the 442-1 is.

    John
     
  7. Kentucky Rifle

    Kentucky Rifle Member In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    1,416
    Location:
    Louisville, Ky.
    No disrespect intended...

    442's seem to be very popular. People who I know carry and love them. I've just never asked this question before, so this is just a "question". So, why do you prefer the carbon steel cylinder of the 442 when you can get a stainless cylinder in a 642?

    Thanks, (I only wondered.)
    KR
     
  8. 38Mike

    38Mike Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    144
    Location:
    Kansas
    K.R.

    I had a 642 a couple years ago that I got rid of :rolleyes:

    I've got a 442-1 that doesn't have the lock, but has the newer
    cylinder release. I snarfed it up as soon as I saw it; airweights are
    kinda rare around here. The thing about my 442 that I like is the finish; it's not blue, but flat black....sharp lookin'..

    Haven't had any problems with the carbon steel, other than some
    finish wear on edge of cylinder...

    Mike
     
  9. dairycreek

    dairycreek Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,459
    Location:
    North Plains, Oregon
    The 442 is an elegant revolver.

    It is light, concealable (I have a Barami Hip Grip on mine) and really good looking little gun. Why did I get mine? A guy I know bought one NIB and two weeks later offered it to me for a $100.00. He hadn't even filled out the warranty papers yet. What's not to love? Good shooting
     
  10. JohnBT

    JohnBT Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    13,232
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    Because my sweat isn't corrosive and it was like new, maybe 6 months old, and saved me over $100 compared to a new 442 (that I wouldn't have bought anyway.) And I couldn't find a used 642.

    And it had a perfect action for a stock S&W. (This was confirmed by the Performance Center gunsmith the last time he was working on guns at the local shop - they do this S&W sale weekend thing and bring a gunsmith. Nice guy. I'm trying to get him to retire and open a shop here.)

    And it was 5 minutes til 4 on Sunday and the gun show was over and I still had enough money to get it.

    John
     
  11. Dienekes

    Dienekes Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,905
    Location:
    Wyoming
    Yes.

    As someone said, an elegant little gun and one of the most sensible products S&W ever made--everything you need and nothing you don't. Came with a good DA and probably the only revolver I never felt a need to pull the sideplate on.

    Hard to believe that the company actually dropped the original M40 for all those years before reintroducing it.
     
  12. Kahr carrier

    Kahr carrier Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    2,060
    Location:
    WESTSIDE
    I would get it they make a nice ankle gun or even in the pocket holster is cool.:)
     
  13. Tony Z

    Tony Z Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    92
    Location:
    Washington State
    S & W

    Sellout and Wessel:fire:
     
  14. Kentucky Rifle

    Kentucky Rifle Member In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    1,416
    Location:
    Louisville, Ky.
    Thank you for the kind explanations guy's...

    Sometmes a simple question is misconstrued as a slur against a particular weapon. On thing that I forgot to mention is that the carbon steel cylinders of my older S&W's (say late 60's and early 70's models) still lock-up better than my newer models. I'd always wondered if the carbon steel cylinders had something to do with that.
    I did notice a little wear on the cylinder stop on one the other night, but not enough to effect the perfect lock-up.

    KR
     
  15. Marko Kloos

    Marko Kloos Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,587
    Location:
    Enfield, NH
    The 442 and 642 are excellent little revolvers, just about the ideal civilian CCW piece. I do prefer the look of the 642, and stainless is easier to refinish than blued steel. And yes, they do hold up to +P loads.

    [​IMG]
     
  16. M1911

    M1911 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,050
    The key is whether it says 642-1 or 442-1 rather than 642 or 442. The intial versions (442 and 642) can not take +P. The first revision2 (642-1 and 442-1) can take +P.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page