S&W 442 Vs. 642
- Thread starter ColtBRH
- Start date
- Status
Gunsnrovers
Member
S&W has has a sale on the 642's for a while now. I've heard it was due reduce inventory as there has been finish issues with the 642, but I have nothing to back up that statement.
If that was the case, I would get the 642 and not worry about the finish. If it does go bad, the $100 price savings could just go back into getting it hard chromed which would be more durable then either finish offered by S&W.
Even here in the PRK, I can find 642's for under $350.
If that was the case, I would get the 642 and not worry about the finish. If it does go bad, the $100 price savings could just go back into getting it hard chromed which would be more durable then either finish offered by S&W.
Even here in the PRK, I can find 642's for under $350.
SouthpawShootr
Member
The finish issues have to do with the clearcoat that S&W is applying to the 642. Some, including members of this board, have used strong cleaning solvents and have damaged the finish. Apparently S&W is trying to make the finish of the aluminum frame and the finish of the stainless cylinder and barrel match. For some reason, this has involved a clearcoat. I have a 642 and I've shot it a couple hundred times, cleaned it and have had no problems. I usually don't get the powder solvent all over the exterior finish of the gun or maybe what I'm using isn't strong enough, who knows. I like the gun and it's quickly becoming and everywhere gun for me.
the 642 is a superior CCW to everyone except someone who wants the stainless... barrel, cylinder and crane, sideplate... to match the alloy. i love my 642, especially after having it tuned, and there is no excuse for going anywhere without it
nitesite
Member
Are ya tryin' to make my 442 feel like it comes in second place? 
FWIW, my 442 has a smoother and somewhat lighter DA trigger than two 642s owned by friends. Even they agree.
Oh, and by the way... I don't care in the least if I wear the finish clean off'n my 442.
FWIW, my 442 has a smoother and somewhat lighter DA trigger than two 642s owned by friends. Even they agree.
Oh, and by the way... I don't care in the least if I wear the finish clean off'n my 442.
JNewell
Member
That may be, but if they were made at about the same time, the internal parts are the same, as is the frame. Only difference is the finish, and the carbon steel vs SS cylinder.
nitesite
Member
That's exactly right, good sir. I wan't trying to imply that the black guns as a whole are smoother than the silver ones... Although in re-reading my post, it could be interpreted that way. Ooops!
I was only saying that having 642 does not in itself guarantee a "superior" Centennial.
nitesite
I was only saying that having 642 does not in itself guarantee a "superior" Centennial.
nitesite
JNewell
Member
Certainly not...and on the plus side, I have yet to read of anyone who's melted the finish with solvents cleaning their 442! 
BTW, some of the posts do seem to take the 4xx side of the family as the poor relations. I don't think that's true. When the 342 and 342PD were both out, the 342PD was arguably the better-featured model (different, lighter-weight fluting on the cylinder, Bantam grips; lighter weight as a result).
BTW, some of the posts do seem to take the 4xx side of the family as the poor relations. I don't think that's true. When the 342 and 342PD were both out, the 342PD was arguably the better-featured model (different, lighter-weight fluting on the cylinder, Bantam grips; lighter weight as a result).
JohnBT
Member
Is the 442's finish that much better? I think so and haven't heard the first complaint about it.
"some of the posts do seem to take the 4xx side of the family as the poor relations"
They were probably made by S&W sales reps trying to unload that warehouse full of 642's they're been pushing at fire sale prices.
Yes, I own a 442 and I'm very happy with the trigger and the way it shoots at 25 yards. Maybe I'll give it a try at 50, although I may take the easy way out and shoot it off the bench with some old Federal match-grade wadcutters I have stashed away.
John
"some of the posts do seem to take the 4xx side of the family as the poor relations"
They were probably made by S&W sales reps trying to unload that warehouse full of 642's they're been pushing at fire sale prices.
Yes, I own a 442 and I'm very happy with the trigger and the way it shoots at 25 yards. Maybe I'll give it a try at 50, although I may take the easy way out and shoot it off the bench with some old Federal match-grade wadcutters I have stashed away.
John
nitesite
Member
I'm very happy with the trigger and the way it shoots at 25 yards. Maybe I'll give it a try at 50, although I may take the easy way out and shoot it off the bench with some old Federal match-grade wadcutters I have stashed away.
I couldn't agree more that 442/642 family has a pretty respectable following. Recently a LEO who carries a Model 60 as a BUG practically pleaded with me to trade 'even-up', which I declined.
I cannot imagine switching my 442 out for any other J-frame. For me, it's as perfect as can be. Accurate as heck out to the distance I train and practice from. Reliability never a question, naturally!
Now you've got me thinking about shooting it at 75-150 feet just for kicks and giggles! Heck... it's just ammo and they make more every day!
I couldn't agree more that 442/642 family has a pretty respectable following. Recently a LEO who carries a Model 60 as a BUG practically pleaded with me to trade 'even-up', which I declined.
I cannot imagine switching my 442 out for any other J-frame. For me, it's as perfect as can be. Accurate as heck out to the distance I train and practice from. Reliability never a question, naturally!
Now you've got me thinking about shooting it at 75-150 feet just for kicks and giggles! Heck... it's just ammo and they make more every day!
- Status
