Considering a 642 - have questions

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

ghh3rd

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
84
My wife surprised me recently by declaring that she would like to have a concealable handgun. This is a 180 degree turn around for her, but she says that it has become dangerous enough out there to make sense to carry one.

I think that the S&W 642 will be a good fit for her, but I have some questions, as there seems to be a few different types of 642 revolvers.

Are all of them stainless?

One I hear about is a 'no lock'. Is the lock a safety, or some sort of lock for storage purposes? Why does it seem so desireable not to have this feature on the gun, since one wouldn't have to use it if they chose not to?

Are all of the SW 642 revolvers considered "Air Weight"?

Is the recoil from this small handgun excessive for most women, or not too bad?

Although I have a Glock 27, I think that I'd like to have a 642 for myself too. It seems like a great carry gun that would be a comfortable carry.

Thanks for any comments.


Granville
 
642 is stainless. 442 is blued.

The 42 is from the old model number of the aluminum-framed snubnose, so all 642s have an aluminum frame.

The new guns have a lock because the Clinton administration forced S&W to agree to put the locks on there. Also, some state governments require it. It may be useful to some people who'd rather lock the gun than put the gun in a locked box. Most people regard the lock as either superfluous or undesirable. Also, the design of the lock may be susceptible to unexpected self-locking for very light, scandium guns firing very powerful ammo (.357 Magnum). Probably not a problem for a .38 Special Airweight, though.

Recoil is perceptible, even brisk. Whether or not this is OK for women will probably depend on the woman. Rent a gun and let her try it. She can almost certainly get used to it.

The 642 is an extremely carryable gun, but not a mousegun.
 
It seems everyone has a 642. It is a great gun, easy to carry and fits women's hands well.

I actually have a 638 and I think that is a better option than the 642 because you have the exposed hammer, but shrouded for easy cc.
 
great gun for carry, however the lightweight snubby is harder to master than semiauto pistols. They have quite a kick to them that turns off women. I wanted one for my wife, but after shooting it, she will not own one due to the recoil and we are searching for a semi auto. I would rent one and let her shoot it before buying.
 
Welcome to the Forum, ghh3rd.

It is so personal and so subjective. It doesn't matter if you're asking about a particular handgun, or rifle, or shotgun. Each person has individual likes and dislikes. Your wife may or may not like a 642.

One thing is certain, a traditional double-action revolver is simple to shoot while under stress. Once she understands the safety rules, it's easy. Teach her to grip the revolver and get a proper sight alignment and sight picture, then trigger pull. It's probably the best platform for a non-gunny to master.

The frame on the 642 is aluminum alloy. The cylinder and barrel are stainless steel.
 
The lock is one more thing that can fail, and like it goes, probably will only fail when you need to use the gun to save your life.

If your the type of person that relies on safeties, and would rather lock a loaded gun and leave it useless and accessible to children as opposed to being responsible, the lock is a great idea.

For the 99.9% of people who are not like this, the lock is a small, unsightly dot to constantly remind you that there are lawyers in this world. :)

It's a great carry gun. Five rounds is plenty to defend yourself and get to safety. I carry one daily as a BUG.
 
So many replies so soon - this is sure a robust forum! I'll have to see if my range has one to rent. And if I get one, I'll be sure to get one without the lock. I agree, the fewer parts, the better. Thanks for all of the feedback.
 
An Instructor's Experience

I myself carry a 642 with a CT laser grip. Massad Ayoob carries a 642 (as well as many other guns), and is quoted as saying it is one of the best values in small revolvers on the market. I like 642's.

That being said, as a NRA firearms instructor I have seen numerous inexperienced students, predominately women, show up in class with brand spanking new j-frame guns (e.g. 642) because some knucklehead behind the counter figured the cute little gun was just the right thing for the little lady.

I have literally seen women break into tears after firing their new gun for the first time and then refuse to shoot it again. This is not an experience you want to go through after paying money for something you can not return.

Which is not to say that the j-frame can't be mastered by anyone, including petite women. But I suggest that if your wife is a relatively inexperienced shooter, it may not be the best choice at this time.

As suggested, find a range that rents or someone willing to let your wife shoot theirs. Also, check out (http://www.corneredcat.com/TOC.aspx) especiallythe sections on "Choosing Firearms" and "For the Men".......


Good luck.
 
I have literally seen women break into tears after firing their new gun for the first time and then refuse to shoot it again. This is not an experience you want to go through after paying money for something you can not return.
Click to expand...

Perhaps those experiences refer to using +P in a lightweight J-frame?
There's no reason whatsoever to use +P's. Standard hollowpoints of standard charge work fine for self-defense.

On the other hand, a person (woman) can use a caliber that kicks less and less, but as you go further down the list, effectiveness diminishes.
A standard charge .38 Special is a good compromise for a cartridge that's easy to handly by a woman yet powerful enough to do way more than just piss off the BG.

There's a a reason that the 642/442 appears to be owned by more CCW permit holders than any other pistol.
I say "appears" because I can't claim to know. But you can't even mention the 642/442 without pretty much everyone jumping in with their personal story of the ones they own.

Me? I've got two. One with the lock and one without the lock. The one with the lock is looking for a new home.
 
Scan back through all the posts and you will find there is a 642 'club' on this web site. You can get more information from that group than you can digest, but it's the absolute best place to get a solid cross section of opinions about that fine little firearm. I'm considering one, myself.
 
ghh3rd, Have your wife check out these two forums, Cornered Cat.com, Women & Guns. com for a womans point of view of the 642. orchidhunter
 
SHOOT BEFORE YOU BUY

And +P recoil in a 642 is substantial.

I sold ours and acquired a model 36 with recoil/control being the primary motivator.

YMMV

DebRange.jpg
 
I too have considered owning a "42" and have fired my friends 642 on occasion. I currently carry a Model 36 and do prefer the recoil control from the additional weight. It is surprising what a difference 5 or 6 ounces can make in that regard. It also makes a difference in how it carries in your pocket. So it is a trade-off between carry weight and recoil.

If a few ounces doesn't make much difference to you or your wife as far as carrying goes, I would recomend one of the heavier (21 oz) older style j-frames. In addition to the Model 36, S&W also makes the Centennial Model 40 which is a replica of the popular "Lemon Squeezer." This is a hammerless j-frame with a squeeze safety on the backstrap (and no internal safety).

If you get one of the older style models with wood stocks, be sure and add a Tyler T-Grip to increase comfort and handling.
 
I guess just getting my wife to the range is a good start. I think that I'll start her off with my Walther P22 - basically no recoil, and not too hard to hit something so that may encourage her.

I like the idea of finding a compromise in the .38 round so that it doesn't have as much recoil for her, but still has enough power to stop a BG. She can adjust power to her comfort level.

I have a Glock 27 .40 cal, but still like the idea of the small S&W 642. I read about something I think called speed strips that would seem to be a good thing to carry along with a 642. Has anyone used them vs. a speed loader?

I finally made it to the forensic building where I live and had my fingerprints digitally scanned. I'll be sending the application and check in the mail tomorrow, and with any luck should have my concealed carry permit within a couple of months.

Granville
 
My wife wanted a 442 so bad and I got her one against my advise. They dont have a lot of recoil, meaning the thing wont jump out of your hand. BUT, especially with the stock grips, it is rather painful on the palms.

My wife fired one cylinder through it and gave the pistol to me. I decided I was going to carry it as a back up to my duty weapon but was unable to qualify with it due to the double action trigger. The gun was plenty accurate for the task but I couldnt get good COM hits on the target past 10 yards.

I ended up selling it and getting a Ruger SP101. I would buy another airweight J frame but this time with a hammer for the longer 15 and 25 yard shots.

Definitely have your wife try it before she buys it. Also look into the heavier steel J frames. An aftermarket grip that covers the metal backstrap of the 642/442 does help out tremendously with the painful snap to the palm.
 
My wife got a 642 about a month ago and shot about 10 rounds and decided the recoil was a bit much with the factory Uncle Mike's boot grips. (She actually said, "I think I bought the wrong gun".)

Ordered her a set of Pachmayr Compac grips and now she is happy. :)

The covered backstrap definitly helps. Also, the grip has a place for the pinky finger to rest and more to grab onto. The grip does add a little to the size of the gun but worth it for my wife. It all goes back to grip strength.

If your wife does rent one to shoot with the factory grips, she is probably going to experience the same as my wife. Most likely won't want to shoot it again as orygunmike said. Like I said with my wife, the grips made the gun work for her.

If you end up getting one, keep the ammo light until she is comfortable with the gun and definitly get her the Pachmayr Compac grips. (Some use Hogue Bantam's, but the backstrap is exposed.)

David
 
Recoil management

One of the cool thing about revolvers is that you can start with light loads and work your way up.

Everyone likes the +P loads for self defense loads, understandably, but y'know what? Plain ol' 158gr wadcutters will ruin a bg's day just fine.

When you go rent one, start with wadcutters, then work your way up thru the +P loads. Also keep in mind you can put on aftermarket grips that will help with recoil.
 
I own both the 442 and 642. I love them and think they shoot great. I really don't have a problem with recoil and neither does my wife. She is a CX runner and weighs in at 105 lbs. My skinny 90 lb daughter has shot it and shoots it well. I guess recoil is in the hands of the holder. Trying before buying is a good suggestion.

Both of mine are pre-lock and I have no experience with the lock version but I can't stand the way they look. The Bodyguard versions are great too.
 
RE: Speed Strips

580_l.jpg

http://www.bianchi-intl.com/product/Prod.php?TxtModelID=580
Bianchi Speed Strips are a good way to carry extra ammo for a .38/.357. Two rounds at a time are usually loaded into a cylinder and the rounds are already correctly oriented vs. picking loose rounds out of a pocket and loading one at a time.

I'll often carry a Speed Strip instead of a speed loader due to the flat profile when in a pocket.
 
+1 on the people who advised you to have your wife try before you buy. I've got a pre-lock and one with a lock, personally, I don't see the problem, it's a TOOL, not a piece of art, get over it. Start her out with light loads and then work up, there's no reason to get her scared of the firearm for no reason. BTW, my personal carry is an IL 642 with Crimson trace, can't say enough good about it.
 
If you get a 642/442 you might consider a set of Hogue Bantam grips. They have the same footprint as the stock grips but they are a bit softer and have a slight swell at the palm. I find they make the little J Frame much more controllable. If you want something that's truly stainless (the 642 is silver colored but not stainless) then the model 640 is an option. It's more like a hammerless model 60.
 
I bought one a few weeks ago. I love it, but I can see my lady-friend having problems with it at first. She's a fairly inexperienced shooter and the trigger pull is a little high for what she's used to (or what I prefer, to be honest). I have been told that it smooths out, but I can see a person who isn't 100% percent confident in their abilities flinching and missing. If it's in their gut of the BG, never mind :D.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Are all SW 642's 'Lady Smiths'
Replies
7
Views
1K
machinisttx
M
B
  • Locked
642 questions
Replies
2
Views
566
sixgunner455
S
P
  • Locked
S&W 642-1 No-Lock vs. 642-2 With Lock
Replies
7
Views
4K
Matt-J2
M
K
  • Locked
Crimson Trace 305 or 405 on SW 642
Replies
11
Views
1K
bhk
B
Buckeye63
  • Locked
S&W 642
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
129
Views
7K
Buckeye63
Buckeye63
Back
Top