which J frame 642 or 638

[camsdaddy]

I know this has been beaten to death I am sure. I am debating between the 642 and the 638 or heck a 36. I cant decide if the sa option of the the 638 will out weigh the posibility of stuff around the shroud. I will pocket carry and iwb this pistol. I will use it for ccw and the posibility of shooting a couple of rounds of shot during the summer while fishing and in the woods. I grew up in a smith family and am currently carrying a P32 just thinking of making a change. In time I will be adding a j frame and then down the road adding CT grips. For those who have owned both or had the same dilema please give me your findings and opinions.

 

[deercop]

I prefer the 642, due to the "sealed" hammer area, the smoother profile, the better DA trigger (something about the geometry), and yes, I admit I think the Centennial just looks better than the Bodyguard.

Also, in certain modes of carry, the hammer on a 36 or hammer nub on a 38 can irritate certain parts of my anatomy.

 

[BryanP]

Whereas I prefer the 638 for the added versatility of a being able to use single action as needed. I don't notice a real difference in the DA trigger myself, but that's me. I'll admit the ol' humpback isn't the prettiest thing in the world, but J frames are specialty tools. Function is the name of the game.

Whichever you choose I highly recommend you get a set of Crimson Trace laser grips for it. J frames and CT grips are a great CCW combination.

 

[deercop]

RE: my comments about the trigger

http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/822bc116dc3ccb2a895e8046dd3e1444-117.html

Battle of the "J" frames?
Wednesday, December 20, 2006 Filed in: Revolvers, Personal opinions
The internet forums sporadically ignite with a common debate: what "J" frame is the best?

The disagreement seems to center around the fans of the exposed hammer models (who hold out the dream of needing to make a "precise, long range" single action shot) and those of the enclosed hammer Centennial models (who opine that the lack of entry points for dirt outweighs ever needing single action capability.)

I'm not qualified to talk about tactics, but there is one salient point that is missed in the crossfire: the Centennial models simply have better actions!

The enclosed hammer Centennial models have slightly different sear geometry than do the exposed hammer models, which gives them a pull that is more even - more linear - than the models with hammer spurs. For the savvy shooter it's a noticeable difference, making the Centennial a bit easier to shoot well.

The Centennials also have one less part than the other models: since they have no exposed hammer, they don't have (nor do they need) the hammer-block safety common to all other "J" frames. That part, which is quite long and rides in a close-fitting slot machined into the sideplate, is difficult to make perfectly smooth. Even in the best-case scenario, it will always add just a bit of friction to the action. Not having the part to begin with gives the Centennial a "leg up" in action feel.

(In fact, at one point in time a common part of an "action job" was to remove this safety, in the same way that some "gunsmiths" would remove the firing pin block on a Colt Series 80 autopistol. Today we know better!)

So, if your criteria is action quality, the choice is clear: the enclosed hammer Centennial series is your best bet!

-=[ Grant ]=-

 

[Down South]

I went through the same dilemma on whether to get a D/A only or an exposed hammer version revolver. I like S/A ability for target shooting. But heck, I didn’t buy this revolver for target shooting. After much research I settled on the 642 for obvious reasons if you are planning on CCW with it. I bought my 642 for CCW and I love it. It does have a long trigger pull that takes some getting used to. I wouldn’t think you would want a hammer spur that could snag on clothing or an exposed hammer that might get caught on clothing if fired from a jacket pocket. A CCW gun is for PD and I think all measures should be taken to make sure it functions correctly in any situation you might imagine. I originally wanted a pre-lock M60 and was going to bob the hammer. That’s still a good idea but the 642 is so light you don’t even realize it’s in your pocket.
BTW, I have the CT grips on my 642 and love them.

 

[8830]

I've been there and done that here. I had a 638 which I liked but got tired of cleaning lint and dirt out of the hammer area. I got a model 60 and bobbed the hammer and it worked well until I tried shooting it from inside a jacket pocket and the firing pin caught on the inside and failed to fire. I then got a 642 and have none of the problems I had with the others. It's a defensive weapon so single action shots will not even be thought of if it has to come out of the pocket. I also thought the 638 had more recoil than all of them.

 

[SDG]

I've got the 637 and am pleased with my selection. However, I don't pocket carry (I carry appendix) partially because of the hammer. It can and will snag - especially if you try to draw quickly.

I am reasonably happy with my gun but if I had to do it over again, I would probably get a 642.

 

[camsdaddy]

yeah I have been leaning toward the 642 one reson is the amazing following here and elsewhere. I guess in a SD situation SA wont come into play I carry a DA keltec now and have never wished I could cock it. hmmmm man I guess I need to start scraping up some nickles and see what I can work out.

 

[Camjr]

I picked up a 642 last night. It disappears into a pocket and weighs nothing.

 

[AdamSean]

I have owned a 638 before and loved it. I prefer to have the option of single action if I need it. And the shrouded hammer makes it good for pocket carry so it won't snag on clothing. Ask the guy if you can put it in your pocket to try it out.

 

[Green Lantern]

I'm a snub newbie myself - when I buy mine, I think I'll go with a 642 or equivalent "hammerless" model. I'm NOT a newb to pocket carry with my P3AT, and I'd imagine you aren't either with your P32. I dunno about you, but a LOT of lint and stuff manages to accumulate in my pockets.

Plus, when practicing with a self-defense arm, I'd rather spend time practicing in the mode in which I'll be USING it in in self-defense. IE, double action.

 

[camsdaddy]

I previously wore the P32 IWB and have just started pocket carry this month. I have a new job and the little clip may signal unwanted attention. I have found that gunk does like to accmalate and so I guess the 642 or 442 will prob be the direction I lean. I like the 642 and will prob go that route but the motorhead in my just likes saying I have a 442 in my pocket and would be less noticeable if someone caught a glimpse. I have never had a rust issue with my P32. Sorry for babbling.

 

[Sistema1927]

642 here. If you ever need to fire a J-frame in anger you will do it double action.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I wonder what I would choose??

 

[silverking]

No doubt about it-----642.

 

[Neophyte1]

value 638

638 does a good ride in either the front or rear pockets. My value; ability to either single action; or double.