So I am going to get my conceal carry permit and have decided on going with a lightweight compact revolver. The 637 seems to be top dog for my taste and I would like to know what I might be missing out on. I like the Ruger sp101 but it's considerably heavier and larger. I like the new Ruger d/a revolver the lcp I think it's called. However I want a revolver that's s/a d/a. The Taurus and Charter arms offerings semm like nice little guns. I noticed that the machining is not as fine as the Smith and the cylinders are not a stight. So why shouldn't I but a 637? Please exclude, bobbed hammer arguments, and the lack of .38 special to stop a charging bear from your arguments.
Talk me out of buying a Smith 637
- Thread starter Dambugg
- Start date
- Status
gbw
Member
One opinion, find a good condition older M37, from before all of the changes. Somewhat smaller, no locks, from what I've seen manufacturing was held to closer tolerances, just generally nicer, should be able to find one in excellent condition for same or less money. I have both and like the older J-frame models much more.
No reason not to buy it. The J frame .38's have been doing this duty for almost 60 years; something must be right.
Only reason I'd recommend not to is if you are going to shoot it a fair amount. If so, check out the model 36 or 60. Case in point: Last month or so I sold a Model 36 to a local detective. He told me it was not to use as a back-up gun, but rather to practice with at the range since repeated firings of his back-up 637 were too unpleasant to continue with. Now maybe he also found it a partial excuse to just buy another gun, but the fact is that extended firing of the lightweights is not pleasant. If you plan on lots of range trips or even plinking with the gun, consider a steel framed one. The extra few ounces are not THAT big a deal, and also less of a difference once you consider the loaded weight of the gun instead of the empty weight listed in the specs. Really now, who carries around an empty gun?
The choices in .38 carry or "self defense" loads have never been better or broader. There is nothing wrong with a .38 for carry, home defense, and some hunting applications.
Only reason I'd recommend not to is if you are going to shoot it a fair amount. If so, check out the model 36 or 60. Case in point: Last month or so I sold a Model 36 to a local detective. He told me it was not to use as a back-up gun, but rather to practice with at the range since repeated firings of his back-up 637 were too unpleasant to continue with. Now maybe he also found it a partial excuse to just buy another gun, but the fact is that extended firing of the lightweights is not pleasant. If you plan on lots of range trips or even plinking with the gun, consider a steel framed one. The extra few ounces are not THAT big a deal, and also less of a difference once you consider the loaded weight of the gun instead of the empty weight listed in the specs. Really now, who carries around an empty gun?
The choices in .38 carry or "self defense" loads have never been better or broader. There is nothing wrong with a .38 for carry, home defense, and some hunting applications.
After about 50 rounds through my j-frame I set it down and shoot something else. Hogue grips might help that but I have not tried. No big deal though for me as I bring lots of toys with me when I go shooting and I always go back to the j-frame later for practice. For pocket carry you can't beat a j-frame and you will forget its there on a belt hoster. For a steel gun I would go sp101 but I cant pocket carry that comfortably. Sp101 belongs in a iwb holster for me.
So get an sp101 for iwb and a 637 for your pocket. If you want this to be your go-to gun at the range the sp101 may be a better all around gun just because its more fun to shoot. Same as the several other steel 5 shot revolvers of that size, the sp101 being my favorite.
So get an sp101 for iwb and a 637 for your pocket. If you want this to be your go-to gun at the range the sp101 may be a better all around gun just because its more fun to shoot. Same as the several other steel 5 shot revolvers of that size, the sp101 being my favorite.
Stainz
Member
I prefer pocket carry, so the DAO 642 is my choice. I can think of no reason to SA shoot a defensive firearm - and that hammer can catch on too may items of clothing. Also, a J-frame .38 Airweight is not the proper platform for plinking - which most folks realize all too soon after getting one. Great for a CCW, of course. I'd look for a 4" 10 or 64 trade-in from a security company for a better plinker that can do double duty as a house/car gun. Good luck.
Stainz
Stainz
I am not looking to plink with it by any means. It would strictly be for ccw.
I like the hammer because I like it. If I am in to big of a hurry to pull it out of my pocket without covering the hammer with my thumb to avoid snags. Than I am in to big of a hurry to be shoooting at anything IMO.
I like the hammer because I like it. If I am in to big of a hurry to pull it out of my pocket without covering the hammer with my thumb to avoid snags. Than I am in to big of a hurry to be shoooting at anything IMO.
Guillermo
member
heavier guns are easier to shoot accurately
new Smiths have the lock which is dangerous, ugly and is a reminder of their wearing a blue dress for Bill Clinton.
older revolvers are better in virtually every way including tolerances, no MIN parts and often no paperwork.
I would not own a 637
new Smiths have the lock which is dangerous, ugly and is a reminder of their wearing a blue dress for Bill Clinton.
older revolvers are better in virtually every way including tolerances, no MIN parts and often no paperwork.
I would not own a 637
ArchAngelCD
Member.
DO NOT BUY A S&W M637 (buy a M638 instead...) 
Was that any help??
Was that any help??
johnnylaw53
Member
I don't think they make the 637 without the lock if the lock is any concern to you, to many it is a deal breaker. I perfer the 642 mine happens to have a lock which after many hours of debate I decided it really the lease of my worries in a s.d. situration. My wife want to move to a snub nose from her small auto and the 637 is what she thinking about she feel revolvers should have expose hammers. IMO snub .38's should not be the first weapon for self protection anyone buys. Harder to master then bigger weapons but it should be everyone choice for the 2nd weapon they buy since it is so easy to have with you all the time.
be safe
be safe
Hawk
Member
You're in the wrong place to get talked out of buying a firearm.
I'm back and it appears the voice of dissent has not been missed. Nevertheless: The older ones are cosmetically superior. The post-CNC models, on average, display more uniform charge holes and are functionally superior to their forbears "straight out of the box".
Examples of superior machining on earlier models and better finished later models exist - I'm talking "on average".
Equating the lock to "blue dresses" or "Hillary" is unsubstantiated internet backchatter. It is opinion masquerading as fact. The timeline doesn't work and the lock is non-compliant with the HUD agreement. We're not due for another contentious lock thread or thread veer so I'll simply link this for the arguments:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=377751
There's not much that can be said that hasn't been said hundreds, if not thousands, of times and nobody is going to change anybody else's mind. Most humans have grown justifiably bored with the topic.
A 637 is a good choice regardless of pedigree. Snag one that appeals to you -whether it's hand polished with walrus hide or born of CNC machines, it'll serve. The boo birds act as they must - it's for that reason God invented salt grains. On a more practical level, the 637 is alloy - you'll go blind finding one old enough to have the long action.
I'm back and it appears the voice of dissent has not been missed. Nevertheless: The older ones are cosmetically superior. The post-CNC models, on average, display more uniform charge holes and are functionally superior to their forbears "straight out of the box".
Examples of superior machining on earlier models and better finished later models exist - I'm talking "on average".
Equating the lock to "blue dresses" or "Hillary" is unsubstantiated internet backchatter. It is opinion masquerading as fact. The timeline doesn't work and the lock is non-compliant with the HUD agreement. We're not due for another contentious lock thread or thread veer so I'll simply link this for the arguments:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=377751
There's not much that can be said that hasn't been said hundreds, if not thousands, of times and nobody is going to change anybody else's mind. Most humans have grown justifiably bored with the topic.
A 637 is a good choice regardless of pedigree. Snag one that appeals to you -whether it's hand polished with walrus hide or born of CNC machines, it'll serve. The boo birds act as they must - it's for that reason God invented salt grains. On a more practical level, the 637 is alloy - you'll go blind finding one old enough to have the long action.
Stainz
Member
Most of my S&W revolvers, and that's all I own for handguns, include the IL - including my 642-2 pocket protector. I got accustomed to carrying it's bigger sibling, an L-frame 5-shot hammerless .44 Special - the 296, before I ever bought the 642. There was no question in my mind which would be my pocket .38 - my 2" 10, besides the obvious extra heft, would catch it's hammer regularly when I carried it in a coat pocket.
I doubt I'd remember to ever cover a hammer with a thumb to retrieve it - especially 'in the heat of battle'. The 637 is 'cute' - very much so, in a traditional vein. My last evil-bottom-feeders, a pair of AMT DAO 'Backups' in .45 ACP, were cleaned and traded-in on that 296 (and a 696 - both new closeouts) the same day I last shot them - almost seven years ago. One came right from my pocket - and had a ftf - cleared - then a stovepipe. The second one, all but unused, stovepiped. UMC ball ammo - I had polished their ramps too well, while the first one's ftf was pocket lint under the semi-exposed hammer. Sadly, the 296 and available pocket holsters proved too big to pocket. I had to belt carry it - infrequently. A Robert Mika pocket holster remedied that several years ago, but fit only 2/3 of my britches front pockets - the 642 came along and fits all of them.
Over half of my S&W revolvers have the IL - it is a non issue here. MIM parts are more consistent and quite strong - also not a problem here. I thought the then 'new' SS was a Godsend on the S&W 60. Yeah, I am an odd old geezer. I'm glad someone likes the 637 - it is 'cute' and needs a following.
Stainz
I doubt I'd remember to ever cover a hammer with a thumb to retrieve it - especially 'in the heat of battle'. The 637 is 'cute' - very much so, in a traditional vein. My last evil-bottom-feeders, a pair of AMT DAO 'Backups' in .45 ACP, were cleaned and traded-in on that 296 (and a 696 - both new closeouts) the same day I last shot them - almost seven years ago. One came right from my pocket - and had a ftf - cleared - then a stovepipe. The second one, all but unused, stovepiped. UMC ball ammo - I had polished their ramps too well, while the first one's ftf was pocket lint under the semi-exposed hammer. Sadly, the 296 and available pocket holsters proved too big to pocket. I had to belt carry it - infrequently. A Robert Mika pocket holster remedied that several years ago, but fit only 2/3 of my britches front pockets - the 642 came along and fits all of them.
Over half of my S&W revolvers have the IL - it is a non issue here. MIM parts are more consistent and quite strong - also not a problem here. I thought the then 'new' SS was a Godsend on the S&W 60. Yeah, I am an odd old geezer. I'm glad someone likes the 637 - it is 'cute' and needs a following.
Stainz
snooperman
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,143
Good carry gun
However, I just shot another Ruger LCR and am very much impressed with it. It has the best trigger and feel of all the carry snubby revolvers I have ever shot. I have the old Colt detective that I have carried in the pants holster for years but am thinking of going pocket carry with the LCR.
However, I just shot another Ruger LCR and am very much impressed with it. It has the best trigger and feel of all the carry snubby revolvers I have ever shot. I have the old Colt detective that I have carried in the pants holster for years but am thinking of going pocket carry with the LCR.
fourdollarbill
Member
The 637 is a very nice gun for carry. I certainly would suggest it. Nice trigger, smooth double action, smooth single action. I prefer the small rubber grip versus the crimson trace and I have big hands.
***NOTE*** may i suggest a good inspection of the barrel to cylinder gap before you buy it! I have purchased 3 Airwieght J frames in two years and one of them had to go back to get a new barrel because the B/C gap was not even top to bottom. And the second one is questionable but I'll live with it. The third one is perfect.
Check out this picture of my 642 I had to send back. See anything wrong with the BC gap?
***NOTE*** may i suggest a good inspection of the barrel to cylinder gap before you buy it! I have purchased 3 Airwieght J frames in two years and one of them had to go back to get a new barrel because the B/C gap was not even top to bottom. And the second one is questionable but I'll live with it. The third one is perfect.
Check out this picture of my 642 I had to send back. See anything wrong with the BC gap?
Attachments
Zeke/PA
Member
My daily carry is a S&W 638 that fits nicely in the front pocket of my jeans.
I prefer the simplicity of the 5 shot revolver verses the high mag capacity and the complexity of the autos.
As we speak, the piece resides next to my computer loaded with some Speer +P Hollow points.
My practice load is a 158 Grain Semi- Wadcutter from Missouri Bullets in front of 2.5 Grains of Bullseye.
I just LOVE the venerable old .38 Special to boot.
I prefer the simplicity of the 5 shot revolver verses the high mag capacity and the complexity of the autos.
As we speak, the piece resides next to my computer loaded with some Speer +P Hollow points.
My practice load is a 158 Grain Semi- Wadcutter from Missouri Bullets in front of 2.5 Grains of Bullseye.
I just LOVE the venerable old .38 Special to boot.
aHFo3
Member
The only objection I have is the front site. I found a Bud's gun shop model 360 in 38 special only that is essentially identical to the 637. It has the scandium frame, steel cylinder, steel barrel sleeve and pinned front site! I haven't yet, but I'm going to go the big dot route for the front site.
Colton White
Member
Buy it now
Also check out a 638 (hammer in a shroud) and 642 (aka hammerless). I bought a 642 but ended up getting a 638 and carrying that more than the 642.
Both are great guns like the 637, but you have more pocket carry and fire from the pocket capability.
Before buying the 642 I bought a taurus 605. Don't make that mistake, you'll notice a big difference in trigger pull.
Both are great guns like the 637, but you have more pocket carry and fire from the pocket capability.
Before buying the 642 I bought a taurus 605. Don't make that mistake, you'll notice a big difference in trigger pull.
Guillermo
member
Hawk is wrong about the capitulation.
Here is a place to read about it.
It is not my intention to hijack so I will post this and say no more but I cannot allow the untruths to go unchallenged.
http://gunowners.org/a032100.htm
Here is a place to read about it.
It is not my intention to hijack so I will post this and say no more but I cannot allow the untruths to go unchallenged.
http://gunowners.org/a032100.htm
easyg
Member
Exactly!
Buy the 637.
Trust me, you will not regret it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked