Difference between Smith 642 & 442?

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Snorkel Bob

Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2003
Messages
90
Location
California
Ive been looking at the Smith 642 revolver but I just notice the 442 All the specs look the same, so why is the 442 more expensive? Is it worth the extra change?
 
S&W doesn't have prices on their website, but the 642 should be more money than the 442. The 642 is either stainless or stainless/aluminum while the 442 is carbon steel, and S&W's normal method the stainless model is higher.
 
642 is alum frame w/ SS cylinder
442 is alum frame w/ carbon steel cylinder

The reason you see the 642 for less is, I believe, that S&W has been running a sale on the 642 and the exposed hammer 637.
 
JNewell is right: 642 is listed for $315 on CDNN. Two months ago I bought a new 442 for $399. It had a tag on it for $549. The 642 sitting next to it was around $419. I told the shop owner I prefered the 442, but the 642's price was too attactive. I know the guy well and he told me he was stuck with the 442 as he had paid a lot for it from the distributer, earlier in the year and everyone prefered the now cheaper 642. So he sold me the 442 for not much more than he paid for it for $399. He gave me the oppertunity to take either the 642 or the 442 for $399. I prefer blue or black, and Ive already got a .38 640.
 
Go to the website & order their catalog as they don't list firearms on the site, paper catalog gun listings only. Well worth it.
 
Hate to beat a dead horse...

...but, the only difference is the finish? Forget cost. Is the only difference the color? If so, which wears better? Primarily will be in a pocket...
 
The finish cannot wear off of stainless, so it is "better" by default based upon that alone. I just picked up my 642 from CDNN yesterday and you even get a free Fobus holster for $315!!! Don't hesitate!
 
They charge a flat rate of $9.99 for shipping, which is WAY lower than what most places charge ($25 or more), and they ship USPS Priority mail. I ordered on Tuesday and went to my FFL to fill out the paperwork. The three day wait was up on Friday at 11am and the gun got there at noon. The FFL charged my $24 to receive the gun for me (even though he had one on the shelf for $389) and I walked out the door under $350. If you read their website I believe it says they have a three day inspection period, but mine was pristine (they are NIB, so no worries there). The only complaint I had was that I wanted to order some grips at the same time, but they have "an arrangement" with the post office that they won't ship accessories with the firearms, so now I'll have to pay another $10 shipping for my $10 grips.
 
Just for clarity, the only stainless part among the 442 and the 642 is the 642's cylinder.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the crane/yoke assembly & barrel ... ;)

I dislike bluing wear and oxidation ... I'm lazy, I admit it ... so I went with the stainless 642. A friend likes blued/black guns, so he went with the 442.

They're both fine revolvers.

If there was a significant difference in cost, and cost was an important factor, I'd go with the less expensive gun ...
 
The 442 will show more scratches over time. If your going to practice much, then the 642 is a better gun IMHO. Put a few thousand rounds through mine and it looked brand new - except for the cylinder ring. Like a dope, I traded it.

Elliot
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
S&W 642 vs. 442
Replies
19
Views
9K
mavracer
mavracer
D
  • Locked
642 vs 442
Replies
18
Views
1K
content
C
F
  • Locked
642's stainless cylinder - big reason to buy 642 over 442?
Replies
2
Views
616
EddieCoyle
E
F
  • Locked
Is a new S&W 442 worth $100 more than a new 642?
Replies
7
Views
868
Ala Dan
A
R
  • Locked
Whats The major difference in the Smith 442 and 642
Replies
10
Views
847
ArchAngelCD
ArchAngelCD
Back
Top