can everyone help me weighing out the pros and cons of thies j frames i know 642 is lighter but at 23 oz its not like the 640 would be a brick in my pocket and the 640 can shoot 357 but from what ive read 357 out of a short barrel is just about the same as a 38 just more recoil. any info for help on this would be great ...also does anyone have a 60 pro or handled one?
help. s&w 640 or 642
- Thread starter gunnar187
- Start date
- Status
phoglund
Member
Personally I'd recommend the .38 rather than the .357. A J-Frame shooting .38+P isn't all that much fun in truth and I don't think you get much more velocity out of a snub barrel to make going to the .357 any real benefit. I'm partial to the 638 myself.
I think you will find folks who land on both sides of this issue, but for me, .38 special is plenty of juice for these small revolvers.
btw, Welcome to THR!
I think you will find folks who land on both sides of this issue, but for me, .38 special is plenty of juice for these small revolvers.
btw, Welcome to THR!
orchidhunter
member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2008
- Messages
- 237
gunnar187, Welcome to the forum. One of the cons of the 640 is the price. Go with the 642, it is made for pocket carry. I think of the 640 mag as a holster gun. No help on the 60 Pro. orchidhunter
Claude Clay
Member
welcome to THR
642 cause with good 38 ammo (silvertips) it is very controlable vrs hot rounds less accurate follow-up shots. also the 642 is a conceled hammer that makes the gun a pure double action and about as laywer proof as you can get.
even standard 38 SPL will beat up the palm of your hand, so it is not really a fun gun to learn to shoot. but once you are compentant with it--it is light , easy to carry & concel and therefore easy to keep with you.
642 cause with good 38 ammo (silvertips) it is very controlable vrs hot rounds less accurate follow-up shots. also the 642 is a conceled hammer that makes the gun a pure double action and about as laywer proof as you can get.
even standard 38 SPL will beat up the palm of your hand, so it is not really a fun gun to learn to shoot. but once you are compentant with it--it is light , easy to carry & concel and therefore easy to keep with you.
Wolfeye
Member
I own an Sp101, which is only about 2 oz heavier than a 640. I can tell you it IS a brick in my pocket. I've handled a 642 in the gunshop and felt envy for its lightness, but I didn't like how small its grips were. An easy fix...
Also speaking from Sp101 experience, magnums "feel" considerably more powerful than +p's. I don't have a chronograph and haven't tested firsthand as to how much more powerful they are out of that little 2" barrel, but there are plenty of such experiments found online. I only load it with mangums if I'm going for a walk in the woods, just in case a coyote or something tries to mug me. Normally I'd choose +p's for daily carry.
Another thing to consider is that .38's are sometimes less accurate when fired from a gun chambered for .357 magnum; the bullet has more distance to travel before getting to the forcing cone. I know I get tighter groupings with magnums than .38's out of my gun.
If I did it over again, I'd go with something light in .38 spl for daily carry, then have something larger in .357 to pack in the woods. The 642 is probably a good choice.
Also speaking from Sp101 experience, magnums "feel" considerably more powerful than +p's. I don't have a chronograph and haven't tested firsthand as to how much more powerful they are out of that little 2" barrel, but there are plenty of such experiments found online. I only load it with mangums if I'm going for a walk in the woods, just in case a coyote or something tries to mug me. Normally I'd choose +p's for daily carry.
Another thing to consider is that .38's are sometimes less accurate when fired from a gun chambered for .357 magnum; the bullet has more distance to travel before getting to the forcing cone. I know I get tighter groupings with magnums than .38's out of my gun.
If I did it over again, I'd go with something light in .38 spl for daily carry, then have something larger in .357 to pack in the woods. The 642 is probably a good choice.
indiandave
Member
If you pocket carry, a half a pound does make a difference. I own a 642 and a Model 60. the 60 is easier to shoot. The 642 is easier to carry.If you add grips that cover the backstrap the felt recoil on the 642 improves. I like both guns. If you are new to revolvers I would go with heavier gun. You can always buy a lighter gun in the future. .357's are punishing with any J frame.
ChristopherG
Member
The difference in weight between a 640 and a 642 will be bigger in your pocket than you imagine. In a good belt holster, the 640 rocks; but the 642 wins as a pocket gun, hands down. And pocket carry (with a pocket holster) is a wonderful option to have for concealed carry.
Not to be contentious, but this:
is not something to factor in. If you do some research on the forum archives, you'll find it's been discussed at length. Not trying to contradict Wolf's experience--just saying there's almost certainly some other reason for the accuracy difference he's experienced.
Not to be contentious, but this:
is not something to factor in. If you do some research on the forum archives, you'll find it's been discussed at length. Not trying to contradict Wolf's experience--just saying there's almost certainly some other reason for the accuracy difference he's experienced.
fireman
Member
Between the 2 go with 642 but add the crimson trace grips with the wrap around grips, http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...angId=-1&parent_category_rn=15704&isFirearm=Y this gives you a place for your pinky to help in your grip.
Or the 637 which gives you single action control. Just my 2 cents worth
fireman
Or the 637 which gives you single action control. Just my 2 cents worth
fireman
ArchAngelCD
Member.
I own both the M640 and M642 and I can tell you, the added weight is very noticeable. When I carry my M640 it's either on my belt or in a coat pocket but not in a pants pocket. I actually like my M638 better than both! LOL
Welcome to the forum...
Welcome to the forum...
johnnylaw53
Member
I was face with the same thing awhile ago have a 642 was thinking of going to a 640 for the added recoil control ArchangleCD was very helpful at that time (thanks Arch) I ended up staying with the 642 I don't like pockect carry or ankle/boot carry and mostly carry in an IWB or OWB but there are times I carry in the pocket or on the ankle or in the boot. If you just going to carry iwb/otw the 640 would be the way to go but i fell it would be too much weight for pokect and really too much for boot/ankel. Also as mention the price for the 640 is quite a bit more then the 642 you can use the money you save for a couple of holsters and some ammo even light mid range wad cutters will do the job if need be if you place your shots right and as you imporve you can move to some of the more powerful rounds offer in .38 spl.
Be safe
Be safe
I have a 642 I originally purchased for my wife and it is an absolute delight to carry. In fact, it is my main carry gun now.
The recoil with the .38+P ammunition is heavy - it seems greater than my .44mag. In fact, my 642 manual recommends loading the cylinder with (5) new rounds, only fire (4), and remove the unfired 5th round and compare it to a new one from the box to determine if the slug is backing out due to the recoil. The Federal +P's I shot appeared to have backed out. However, I did not use a micrometer to determine an exact amount. I decided to switch to the Federal low recoil 38's.
The recoil with the .38+P ammunition is heavy - it seems greater than my .44mag. In fact, my 642 manual recommends loading the cylinder with (5) new rounds, only fire (4), and remove the unfired 5th round and compare it to a new one from the box to determine if the slug is backing out due to the recoil. The Federal +P's I shot appeared to have backed out. However, I did not use a micrometer to determine an exact amount. I decided to switch to the Federal low recoil 38's.
johnnylaw53
Member
bddeuce, I may be mistaken but when I got my 642 several years ago i went ahead and read the manual and I remember reading that section but i thought they were talking about doing that with the airlites, those that are make lighter then the 642. I do remember there being some problems with them with non jacketed rounds I don't think s&w recommends shooting all lead bullets in those but I don't think that recommendation pass on to the 642,638 and 637 but I may be wrong.
Be safe
Be safe
I have used both, and prefer the 640. With mild .357 loads it is not bad at all. I use Winchester 110g .357's. If an inexpierenced shooter uses it, I load 158g +P lead SWHP. Remingtons are what I like best, but I have some WW and Federal.
The 640 is a little heavier carried in the pocket. My aluminum 642 cracked at the frame. With the all steel 640, I dont worry about cracked frames.
The same holsters work for both.
I suppose if I still had a 642, I would use it. I sold the new replacment 642 S&W sent me, because of the lock. Now that the no-lock is available, if I found one at the right price? Maybe.
One thing you need to remember, what other people think is not as important as your own personel experience. It doesnt matter what I or anyone else says, you must do what is right for yourself. Either gun is a good choice. The 642 without a lock is probably easier to find than a 640 without a lock. If locks dont matter to you, dont sweat the small stuff.
The 640 is a little heavier carried in the pocket. My aluminum 642 cracked at the frame. With the all steel 640, I dont worry about cracked frames.
The same holsters work for both.
I suppose if I still had a 642, I would use it. I sold the new replacment 642 S&W sent me, because of the lock. Now that the no-lock is available, if I found one at the right price? Maybe.
One thing you need to remember, what other people think is not as important as your own personel experience. It doesnt matter what I or anyone else says, you must do what is right for yourself. Either gun is a good choice. The 642 without a lock is probably easier to find than a 640 without a lock. If locks dont matter to you, dont sweat the small stuff.
mbott
Member
I came home yesterday with a 642 - one without a lock. I know I make good use of this pocket revolver.
--
Mike
--
Mike
Johnnylaw53 - You might be right? My manual references any TI, Sc, PD, and reduced weight revolvers. I consider the 642 "reduced weight", but I'm not a expert.
What's the benefit of the "lock" vs. no "lock"? I am not versed in the pros and cons of the "lock."
What's the benefit of the "lock" vs. no "lock"? I am not versed in the pros and cons of the "lock."
mbott
Member
Poor choice by me to add that to the topic. Nevermind.
--
Mike
johnnylaw53
Member
bddeuce, my understanding is they have made the "airweight" for a long time I belive the Mod 37 was the first samething as the mod 36 but with an alumina frame and steel barrel and cylinder. I think what s&w called reduce weight is in comparison to those type of weapons. I also am no expert but I consider archangelcd to be one or at least he will do for one until one come along maybe he will be kind and explain this to us.
Be safe
Be safe
wjh2657
Member
gunnar 187
"does anyone use a clip draw would that make the 640 better to carry?"
I keep my 640 slick for holster wear but I do have a Clip Draw on my model 60 and use that for my dedicated "jeans"gun" ( I have had no luck in pocket carrying or IWB w/holster with jeans. I just slip clip on wasteband and wear inside pants) I don't see why it wouldn't work for 640 too, but it does limit holster use unless you keep switching clip on or off. Clip tends to wear on holsters.
"does anyone use a clip draw would that make the 640 better to carry?"
I keep my 640 slick for holster wear but I do have a Clip Draw on my model 60 and use that for my dedicated "jeans"gun" ( I have had no luck in pocket carrying or IWB w/holster with jeans. I just slip clip on wasteband and wear inside pants) I don't see why it wouldn't work for 640 too, but it does limit holster use unless you keep switching clip on or off. Clip tends to wear on holsters.
madcratebuilder
Member
I'm not a fan of alloy frame revolvers. I have carried this 640 for a long time. It allows my to target practice with 38spl or +P's and carry with 357 if I desire.
smilin-buddha
Member
Just got my 642 today. I really like the gun, but want to change the grip. I could really feel it with the exposed metal. I think I made the right choice. Todd
indiandave
Member
smilin-buddha try Uncle Mike's combat grips. they cover the backstrap and reduce the felt recoil. You can buy them on the S&W website.
Gary in Pennsylvania
Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2003
- Messages
- 683
bddeuce said:
Is the BOLD true???!!!! If so....You've GOT to be F'ing KIDDING me!
Granted, the gun is 'working as designed'.....but why would ANY manufacturer make available a 5-shot revolver and then recommend using 4 & check the 5th????
Doesn't sound like a very viable self-defense revolver!
I envy the light weight of these outer-space materials - but it's just GOTTA work!
I live in Pennsylvania and I open carry (either my GP-100 or my XD45 Tactical) so I don't worry about 'deep concealment'. But I AM planning to purchase a small, concealable firearm for coat carry or untucked IWB carry.
I'm hemming and hawing between a small revolver and a PM9 type firearm.....and the auto is just making more sense to me.
Granted, I have another thread asking about this - but I was misleading in the thread title......I'm not looking for a second-carry BUG.....but a PRIMARY firearm for those social situations where a big azz OC'd firearms would be discouraged.
I like .357 and I like .45acp. These little revolvers don't seem to have a place within my criteria.
Is the BOLD true???!!!! If so....You've GOT to be F'ing KIDDING me!
Granted, the gun is 'working as designed'.....but why would ANY manufacturer make available a 5-shot revolver and then recommend using 4 & check the 5th????
Doesn't sound like a very viable self-defense revolver!
I envy the light weight of these outer-space materials - but it's just GOTTA work!
I live in Pennsylvania and I open carry (either my GP-100 or my XD45 Tactical) so I don't worry about 'deep concealment'. But I AM planning to purchase a small, concealable firearm for coat carry or untucked IWB carry.
I'm hemming and hawing between a small revolver and a PM9 type firearm.....and the auto is just making more sense to me.
Granted, I have another thread asking about this - but I was misleading in the thread title......I'm not looking for a second-carry BUG.....but a PRIMARY firearm for those social situations where a big azz OC'd firearms would be discouraged.
I like .357 and I like .45acp. These little revolvers don't seem to have a place within my criteria.
ChristopherG
Member
It's not recommended all the time; it's recommended as a way to test a given type of ammo to see if the sharp recoil of the light revolver is going to pull the bullet out of the case. You do it once or twice to determine that the ammunition is a going to work in the gun. It's fundamentally no different from shooting XXX number of rounds through a semi to determine that it's a reliable self-defense ammo.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
