I am trying to decide between a smith 642 and 638, and am wondering if one "hammer" setup is more reliable than the other? I am inclined to go with the 642, on the basis that no lint/coins/etc. can get into the action, but I recently got rid of a Taurus .357 b/c it was "light hammering" in double action mode about 50% of the time, but would still fire most of the time when fired in single action. (CCI blazer ammo, as opposed to its usual preference for winchester). nevertheless, it got me wondering if it would be better to go with the 638, so that I have the single action as a backup, I do not know much about the inner workings of revolvers, or any possible differences internally between the two. Anyone out there have an opinion or suggestion as to which model is the safer bet for ccw reliability when Mr. Murphy may be along for the ride?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Smith 642 vs. 638 reliability???
- Thread starter 701
- Start date
- Status
-
Not open for further replies.
I have the model 38 which was the precurser to the model 638 it has the shrouded hammer.
I like it and have owned it for approx. 15 years but the last time at the range when shooting single action I did notice that the trigger has changed it is a hair trigger now and I wouldn't trust it with the hammer back in a stress situation - which is why they have the 642 double action only - that said I could get the trigger adjusted, practice more or just not cock the hammer and use it DAO.
In those 15 years it has never gotten anything in the hammer slot. Of course I don't have a ton of lint in my pockets but I do store it in a borestore which is approx. 15 yrs old so its "fuzzy" and never has anythign jammed it up.
I like it and have owned it for approx. 15 years but the last time at the range when shooting single action I did notice that the trigger has changed it is a hair trigger now and I wouldn't trust it with the hammer back in a stress situation - which is why they have the 642 double action only - that said I could get the trigger adjusted, practice more or just not cock the hammer and use it DAO.
In those 15 years it has never gotten anything in the hammer slot. Of course I don't have a ton of lint in my pockets but I do store it in a borestore which is approx. 15 yrs old so its "fuzzy" and never has anythign jammed it up.
Roca
Member
Well obviously if you ever want to shoot single action, get the 638. If you plan to carry in a pocket exclusively and don't intend to clean the pocket or keep other stuff in the pocket besides the gun (bad idea) then get the 642.
I have the 642 and love it. But sometimes I would like to shoot single action.
I'd go with the one you WANT to get, they are both great guns.
I have the 642 and love it. But sometimes I would like to shoot single action.
I'd go with the one you WANT to get, they are both great guns.
biere
Member
I recomend you find some diagrams of revolvers.
My very simple and not professional understanding of revolvers is that if you have a dao trigger you have X amount of movement to cycle the cylinder and lock it in place and bring the hammer back, concealed or not there is a hammer somewhere, and then the hammer gets released to hit the firing pin.
If you are shooting it single action you simply have the exact same amount of movement above, but by cocking the hammer to single action you are rotating and locking the cylinder into place and pulling the hammer back to its rearward position. In this case a pull of the trigger simply lets the hammer fall.
So in my opinion I would wonder what exactly made your firearm not work in double action but it would work in single action?
As I said above, I am not a professional so I won't even hazard a guess.
I personally am after a 642 because I don't want an exposed hammer. I also don't want a bobbed hammer. I plan to only shoot this gun dao so it is perfect for my needs. I also like it having one less opening on it.
Basically I decided after reading about ruger sp101s and their differences for dao versions vs. normal sp101s I feel you have the exact same number of parts. It is only another notch that allows you to pull the hammer back and lock it in place for a single action shot.
Then again my 642 is a backup to a fullsize carried iwb, so I am already figuring something might fail and if I carry 2 I most likely will still have one work.
Perhaps some folks can explain revolvers better than I can, and will take the time to do so.
My very simple and not professional understanding of revolvers is that if you have a dao trigger you have X amount of movement to cycle the cylinder and lock it in place and bring the hammer back, concealed or not there is a hammer somewhere, and then the hammer gets released to hit the firing pin.
If you are shooting it single action you simply have the exact same amount of movement above, but by cocking the hammer to single action you are rotating and locking the cylinder into place and pulling the hammer back to its rearward position. In this case a pull of the trigger simply lets the hammer fall.
So in my opinion I would wonder what exactly made your firearm not work in double action but it would work in single action?
As I said above, I am not a professional so I won't even hazard a guess.
I personally am after a 642 because I don't want an exposed hammer. I also don't want a bobbed hammer. I plan to only shoot this gun dao so it is perfect for my needs. I also like it having one less opening on it.
Basically I decided after reading about ruger sp101s and their differences for dao versions vs. normal sp101s I feel you have the exact same number of parts. It is only another notch that allows you to pull the hammer back and lock it in place for a single action shot.
Then again my 642 is a backup to a fullsize carried iwb, so I am already figuring something might fail and if I carry 2 I most likely will still have one work.
Perhaps some folks can explain revolvers better than I can, and will take the time to do so.
638 vs 642
Thank you,
If I may post a further question.. is that to say then that when the hammer falls from a single action shot, it does not gain any more "oomph" than it does on a DA shot? My taurus was sent back to the factory, and they "repaired" it, so, now everything locked up the way is was supposed to, but it still fired better (worked more often) SA than DA. I called up Taurus, and they told me it was probably just the fact that I was using "low quality ammo"...this is likely true, but if I am carrying a gun to defend my life with, I want it to work, and no matter how good the ammo I am carrying is, it/the gun could still give me trouble, and from my experience, it would be great to have the sa option since it seemed to help however little with the last revolver in the ignition department. This could however, just be one of those coincidences where the SA/DA ignition difference could have been arbitrary and perhaps the SA rounds just happened to be put together better than the DA bullets...very strange indeed.
This has me leaning towards the 638, though personally I like the looks and external simplicity of the 642. Does anyone know if the 638 hammer can be stopped by wrapping a hand around it? My only other concern than the lint issue which you have been so kind as to put to rest for me, is that if someone managed to get a hand on it( over the top of the shroud), whether or not it could still be fired by me. I did not think to try it at the shop.
Thank you,
If I may post a further question.. is that to say then that when the hammer falls from a single action shot, it does not gain any more "oomph" than it does on a DA shot? My taurus was sent back to the factory, and they "repaired" it, so, now everything locked up the way is was supposed to, but it still fired better (worked more often) SA than DA. I called up Taurus, and they told me it was probably just the fact that I was using "low quality ammo"...this is likely true, but if I am carrying a gun to defend my life with, I want it to work, and no matter how good the ammo I am carrying is, it/the gun could still give me trouble, and from my experience, it would be great to have the sa option since it seemed to help however little with the last revolver in the ignition department. This could however, just be one of those coincidences where the SA/DA ignition difference could have been arbitrary and perhaps the SA rounds just happened to be put together better than the DA bullets...very strange indeed.
This has me leaning towards the 638, though personally I like the looks and external simplicity of the 642. Does anyone know if the 638 hammer can be stopped by wrapping a hand around it? My only other concern than the lint issue which you have been so kind as to put to rest for me, is that if someone managed to get a hand on it( over the top of the shroud), whether or not it could still be fired by me. I did not think to try it at the shop.
biere
Member
A very light hold on the cylinder will stop it from rotating when you pull the trigger pull. I have not really tried this very hard but I was wondering a bit and did it with a ruger gp100 and my smith and wesson 686.
Basically the trigger does not give you leverage to get the cylinder to rotate if there is something dragging or slowing the cylinder down.
As far as your question on the hammer, if anything keeps the hammer from falling properly and completing its travel the round will not go off. Some movies have someone put a finger or the web of their hand under a falling hammer to keep it from going off, this is actually pretty realistic.
Someone with more knowledge can comment on why your firearm worked better single action, I wonder if it might have been a problem with the cylinder dragging or something and that affected your trigger pull?
Anyway, my understanding is that there is no greater "oomph" in how the hammer falls between double action vs. single action. But this is where some diagrams may help to some extent.
Some people like semi-autos that contain all moving parts for the first round, so that if they flick off the safety and pull the trigger the gun will go bang even if someone tries to grab the gun. The problem with a semi-auto is it is easy to move the slide backwards a bit and once out of battery the semi-auto won't fire.
A revolver has to rotate the cylinder to fire its round, so even when people write about wanting to be able to fire something from their jacket pocket you have to consider the simple fact that the pocket lining getting caught in the cylinder rotation could jam up the revolver and cause problems.
Basically the trigger does not give you leverage to get the cylinder to rotate if there is something dragging or slowing the cylinder down.
As far as your question on the hammer, if anything keeps the hammer from falling properly and completing its travel the round will not go off. Some movies have someone put a finger or the web of their hand under a falling hammer to keep it from going off, this is actually pretty realistic.
Someone with more knowledge can comment on why your firearm worked better single action, I wonder if it might have been a problem with the cylinder dragging or something and that affected your trigger pull?
Anyway, my understanding is that there is no greater "oomph" in how the hammer falls between double action vs. single action. But this is where some diagrams may help to some extent.
Some people like semi-autos that contain all moving parts for the first round, so that if they flick off the safety and pull the trigger the gun will go bang even if someone tries to grab the gun. The problem with a semi-auto is it is easy to move the slide backwards a bit and once out of battery the semi-auto won't fire.
A revolver has to rotate the cylinder to fire its round, so even when people write about wanting to be able to fire something from their jacket pocket you have to consider the simple fact that the pocket lining getting caught in the cylinder rotation could jam up the revolver and cause problems.
earplug
Member
638 642 etc
I carried a 38 and 638 for years with no problem until I got a job dealing with horses and Hay. Never had a problem shooting the 638 with hay and lint, just like the 642 better under dusty conditions.
When traveling with weapons and strangers, the only place to clean A weapon might be in a locked toilet stall. Auto's and loose springs don't work so well.
I carried a 38 and 638 for years with no problem until I got a job dealing with horses and Hay. Never had a problem shooting the 638 with hay and lint, just like the 642 better under dusty conditions.
When traveling with weapons and strangers, the only place to clean A weapon might be in a locked toilet stall. Auto's and loose springs don't work so well.
- Status
-
Not open for further replies.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 13
- Views
- 1K