s&w 36 vs. 642/442

[OrangePwrx9]

The consensus here seems to be that the s&w 642/442 is the ideal concealed carry revolver. The aluminum frame gives me pause. I'd probably have to shoot the piece a lot to be reasonably good with it.

For that, I'd prefer steel. How does the 36 stack up to the 642/442 for carry? Anyone tried the 36 and switched back to the 642/442?

 

[Iggy]

I carried 36 as an off duty gun for years. Later I bought a 442 and tried it out. Easy to carry but I din't like shooting it much. Sold it. Still got the 36.

 

[jimbo555]

For pocket carry the exposed hammer model 36 can be a problem but it is softer recoiling and stronger being all steel.

 

[GRIZ22]

I prefer the steel J frames. You can get the shrouded or concealed hammer versions if you want. I had a 649 issued which covers all bases AFAIC. The few more ounces of weight makes it much easier to shoot. I realize the Airweights are big sellers but if the extra weight trobules you, you probably aren't strong enough to shoot any gun well.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I have both the M442 and the M36 and like both. While the M36 is more comfortable to shoot a lot of ammo through the M442 is much easier to carry. I carry the M442 daily.

Put 100 rounds or so through the M36 to practice shooting a short barrel revolver and then shoot 10 or 15 rounds through the Airweight before you leave the range.

 

[vba]

I much prefer the 36 for the reasons stated. With rubber wrap around grips it is a pleasure to shoot at the range.

For pocket carry simply put your thumb over the hammer, when you grab it and there is no snagging.

 

[camsdaddy]

I just went through this last week. I have had a 642 for quite a while. I had thought about getting a steel J frame thinking I may like it a little better. Last week I picked up a mint 1968-1969 M36 no dash J frame. At first I debated keeping it because it was too nice too carry. I then decided that I was going to shoot it and if I liked it I was going to not only shoot it but carry it. Sunday I took it to the range. I shot it with the stock grips and then I changed to the Uncle Mikes from my 642. I then shot my 642 with the UM grips and with the stock wood grips from the 36. I can say that sunday afternoon I sold the 36 and today I ordered a set of S&W wooden grips for my 642. I know that I am suppose to like the steel gun. The weight didnt bother me even in my pocket. What it came down to for me is I shoot the 642 better than I did the 36. I realize the 642 has been shot more. I realize the 36 is tight because its new. When its all said and done the 642 is just the right J frame for me. I have tried a M38 bodyguard and now a M36. My 642 is here to stay

 

[9mmepiphany]

I started with a M36 and went through a couple of M60s before settling on the M642. To my thinking, if I had to carry the extra weight of the steel framed J-frame, I'd just as soon have a K-frame which is so much easier to shoot well.

I usually practiced my trigger stroke using wadcutters and would finish off with a couple of cylinders full of the P+ loads I carried just to insure I knew where that load would strike.

If I were starting out again, I'd look seriously at the Ruger LCR. The trigger stroke is better than the last 3 J-frame I've handled and the better proportioned grips really help manage the recoil of P+ loads

 

[YJake]

I settled on the 442, it is just that much easier to carry and like 9mm said, if I was going to carry a steel J frame I would just move up to a K-frame gun and reap the benefits from that platform.

-Jake

 

[OrangePwrx9]

"I have both the M442 and the M36 and like both. While the M36 is more comfortable to shoot a lot of ammo through the M442 is much easier to carry. I carry the M442 daily.

Put 100 rounds or so through the M36 to practice shooting a short barrel revolver and then shoot 10 or 15 rounds through the Airweight before you leave the range. "

If the past is any indication, Archangel, that's probably what I'll end up doing...buying both. One to shoot, the other to carry. Would like to get out of the rut of buying both when I can't decide what's best..

Thanks for the Ruger LCR tip. Rugers have always worked well for me. Will factor in the LCR while considering the options.

 

[Hondo 60]

I had a 36, which I liked, but sold it for a Model 38.
A 38 is an airweight J-frame with a shrouded hammer.
It makes for much easier pocket carry.

 

[ColtPythonElite]

I'd rather have a nice used 36 in blue or nickel than a brand new 642/442 with a finish that is little more than rattle can paint.

 

[JERRY]

if pocket carry is NOT the mode, then the 36 would be better as it will allow you to shoot more comfortably for extended range trips.

 

[NYGlock]

My father has a 36 and I have a 642. The 36 is nicer - better grips, less recoil, option to shoot SA. Of course it is $$ more. I think the 642 is what I would rather be defending myself against in court though - nobody would believe that a 642could go off unintentionally.

 

[zoom6zoom]

For pocket carry the exposed hammer model 36 can be a problem but it is softer recoiling and stronger being all steel.

So like Hondo said, split the difference and go with a Model 38.

 

[OrangePwrx9]

The more I research the LCR, the better I like it...especially the steel .357 version. It's lighter than the 36 and certainly looks good on paper. Would probably never shoot full-power .357s in it...mostly +P 38s and 38 wadcutters, but the option would be there. I've reloaded for .357 forever and have components; wouldn't be hard to cook up a low-end load on .357 brass.

But at this point, I haven't laid hands on any of the options and I expect that'll be the determining factor. Sure like the looks of the 36, but it's not cheap. For minimum investment, the 442/642 is the way to go and might be the best for pocket carry. Some of the other steel guns mentioned, though attractive, are nearly as heavy as my SP101...which is too much.

Thanks to all for the input. Keep it coming; I enjoy hearing your experiences..

 

[YJake]

If you are seriously considering pocket carry the 442/642 models are the best option period. The M37 is heavy with an exposed hammer and the LCR .357 is heavier with larger stocks that stick to clothing.

The X42 models come with okay stocks but S&W wooden magna stocks can be had for the ultimate in concealment and snag-free draw. (Not to mention classy )
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_764770_-1_758004_757843_757837_ProductDisplayErrorView_N


Want finger grooves and more to hold on to? Order a set of Secret Service stocks.
http://www.eaglegrips.com/guns/Secret-Service-Rosewood-SW-J-Frame-Round-Butt-Grips-Smooth.html


Want the best value in a handmade pocket holster? Mika is your man.
http://www.frontiernet.net/~akim/

I hope this helps.

-Jake

 

[sixgunner455]

642 for pocket carry - weight and enclosed hammer. I have packed mine around for 8 years, and it's in my pocket right now.

 

[LTR shooter]

I handled a 642 at a gun show early this year and was really impressed by the light weight and compact size. I thought it would be the perfect pocket revolver. I ended up finding a new 642-1 non-lock model and it goes with me all the time now! It is light but not a beast to shoot as some make it out to be.