Which J - Frame???

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Classified00

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2003
Messages
214
Location
DFW, TX
Hello all,

I've pretty much decided that I'm going to go with a J frame for pocket carry. The question now is, which one? I have an SP101 which shoots like a dream but carries like a brick in the pocket.

I've searched through some threads and I keep reading about finish problems on the SW 637 and 642. Also, the recoil on these sounds nasty. The SW 64 weighs almost as much as my SP.

* I "think" I fired a 637 (I was trying out several guns at the range). The recoil didn't seem to bad. Would you compare it to shooting .357 out of an SP101? (More/Less?)

* What else should I be looking at?

Decisions, decisions. I look forward to anyone's input.

Thanks,
Brent...


:scrutiny:
 
I had finish problems with my 637. I had timing and other issues with mine also. The single HD use was a success. I got rid of it though. I went to a Model 10. The recoil was equal to a 44 when loaded with +P 38s. It was light to pack all day every day. Have you looked at the 442?
 
Josey,

Other than color, how does the 442 differ from the 642?

Thanks!
Brent...
:scrutiny:

PS .... how anout non +P loads?
 
Well Brent my friend-

I don't have any finish problems with my S&W
"old model" 60 in .38 Special. You see, the 60 was the
first gun fabricated in stainless steel way back yonder
in 1965. Carried by some troops in southeast Asia, it
survived in those hot humid jungles. It was a highly
sought after piece by troops heading in that direction;
and I once heard of a story of a solider leaving South
Viet-Nam that sold his S&W model 60 "Chief's Special"
for $500 to a trooper headed in country. Suggested
retail price at that time was $85.00; but they were
hard to come by. Often times, dealers would sell all
they could get for $200 each. Mine has served me
well; with the only modification being a set of Hogue
"Bantam" grips.

Keep in mind this model 60 is built on the regular J-
frame; not the J- magnum frame of the .357 model.
You should be able to find one in todays market from
$250-$400 depending on locale.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
Thanks for the advice Ala,

I was really interested in something new.

Ya know ...... the only J frame on SW's website that really interests me is the 36LS :what:

Anyone know how much these go for?

Hmmmm ..... I wonder if people would have "questions" about me :scrutiny: :uhoh:

Thanks,
Brent...
:neener:
 
Well let's see I have a 49 Bodyguard in .38Special, a 640 in .357 and a 340SC in .357.

The recoil on the Bodyguard and the 640 isn't too bad. The shrouded hammer on the bodyguard is nice for that SA option.

Now the 340SC that's a whole different story - it definitely stings with .357, .38sp or +p isn't too bad. I'm a recoil junkie though so my idea of pleasant/unpleasant recoil may be different that yours.

If you don't mind recoil definitely go for the Scandium/Titanium option, it's much more comfortable to carry weighwise. The shrouded hammer is a great feature, but I would think that in most self-defense situations DA would be the way to go anyways.
 
I own or have owned the M342PD, the M640, and the M642-2. I now use an M642-2 as my "always" gun. It resides in my front hip pocket in a Kramer pocket holster. I used to use an M342PD until my wife decided that it would be her "always" gun. Since her workplace is entirely too close to a maximum-security state prison that has an occasional escape, I decided to support her choice. I no longer note the additional weight of the Airweight as opposed to the AirLite; however, the all-steel models are too heavy for me for pocket carry.

If you are planning on pocket carry, the Centennial revolver (M640, M642, etc.) line has a few advantages due to the internal hammer. One gun rag touted advantage that had always intrigued me (yes, I was young and stupid) was the ability to fire while still concealed in the cover garment. While it is true that one can fire a Centennial from within a pocket (and I have the scorched and perforated jacket to prove it), the resistance to pocket lint getting into the mechanism is the best feature of the Centennial. I still am sometimes amazed at how much crud gets transferred from my pocket to my revolver every day, even in the Kramer pocket holster. The more of this I keep out of the revolver, the better.

For pocket carry, light weight and fewer openings into the mechanism are nice features. Stainless steel finishes make maintenance a bit easier, but blued revolvers also work. A good pocket holster is also a must. I like the Kramer, but there are many other choices.
 
I just got my 642, but I'm very impressed with it. It's very light, fits in a pocket nicely and barks authoratively. The trigger on mine is heavy, but smooth. The fit and finish is perfect.

Wth +P loads it's got a bit of recoil, but I don't think it's as bad as folks make it out to be. It's like .357 in a full size steel framed gun IMO. You just don't have as much grip to grab onto with these little numbers.

As far as the difference between the 642 and 442, the 642 uses stainless and aluminum, where the 442 uses carbon steel and aluminum. I've only compared them at a gunshow, but other than that they look identical.

Compare them on S&W's website:

442

642
 
Classified00,


I just bought a 2 1/8" Model 60 in .357, it's a little heavier than the light models of course. I bought it because I wanted a 357 and also wanted an exposed hammer. I carry it two ways, in a suede pocket holster and also in a Renegade ankle holster.

I did however do away with the standard rubber combat grips and put on a Pachmayer Pro. It's more concealable than the combat grip and yet gives a better fit for your hand than the small J frame Bantam grip.

They look like this:


skcp.jpg



Pachmayr
 
Hmmm. The 442s I carried were nickel plated. The other specs match. I bought mine from a police supplier in Texas. I carried two in a tandem SOB rig from Bell Charter Oak. No rust or lint problems. One did peel a little from the barrel/frame mating. I simply polished it and used Flitz on it regularly. I sold them to another investigator when I was promoted. I never had any fit/function problems. I believe the LadySmith and the 442 in nickel to be the finest J frames S&W ever produced. S&W will remove the LadySmith markings if it bothers you.
 
I like the S&W 642/442. At first I didn't like the shrouded hammer J-Frames. I couldn't get used to the double action trigger. But after a lot of practice and after adding a Bantam grip I got pretty good with the gun.
 
the only finish problem, with the 642, i've ever heard of is the finish match between the alloy frame and the stainless barrel and cylinder. i rather like the look, but if i really wanted it to all match i'd judt get the whole thing done in electroless nickle. but then i'd have to worry about it affecting the action tune.

the 642, IMO, is the best J-frame on the market for BUG carry. i have the UM "bootgrips" on it now and am considering upgrading to the hogue bantam grips
 
I've been carrying a 342PD in a Don Hume pocket holster every day for 4 years. The finish still looks like new.
The gun, ammo and holster all together weighs 15oz. It's so light, you barely know it's there.
Shooting with +P ammo is very unpleasant, but for pocket carry it's a great weapon.
 
I also sometimes carry a .357 Model 60. I think it is a great gun, if you don't mind the weight. The weight makes is fun to spend time at the range with as well since it dampens recoil significantly from the light-weight material guns.

Weight also is relative. While it's heavier than other S & W J-frames, it sure is a relief to put it on after lugging my steel-framed 1911 every day.

RJ
 
Marshall-

That's a Model 66!

Jeff-

Matt Helm carried either a M38 (the M42 is a Centennial) or a Model 60 .38 snub. He first mentioned the M60 (by description, not model number) in the book where Helm went to Hawaii after the rogue operative known as Monk.
I think the title was, "The Betrayers". Of course, in the first book in the series, "Death of a Citizen", Helm had his old Colt Woodsman .22.

I miss Helm. He was egotistic and reckless, but I enjoyed the books. As a secret agent type, I preferred James Bond or Modesty Blaise.

I think what this man needs (he said that his Ruger is too heavy for pocket carry) is just the basic M38 Bodyguard or the M37 if he wants the regular style hammer. The most recent ones are even rated for use with Plus P ammo!

I have a M60 snub, but plan to add a M37 or M38 for when I carry in a pocket. All-steel guns just weigh too much for that.

Lone Star
 
Hrmmm...

In "pocketable" J-frames, I own a 37, 38, 49, and a 442. I tote the 442. The others are all slightly prettier (the 37 and 38 are nickel), and the 49 has a sweet trigger job from Clark Custom, but the 442, despite being all icky and newer (though still a pre-MIM gun) is perfectly adequate for the task. My other J's are out of the running for the job due to 3" tubes, square butts, or other disqualifiers.
 
I have the 442.....great gun...I originally wanted a 642 but couldn't pass up a like new 442 for 200 bucks....mine was hard chromed by ford's.....

aluminum_442.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
J frame for carry - all steel vs airweight?
Replies
22
Views
6K
Classified00
C
C
  • Locked
SW 637 questions
Replies
8
Views
626
rock jock
R
T
  • Locked
  • Poll
CCW J-Frame: 642, 638 or 637
2 3
Replies
65
Views
4K
chicharrones
chicharrones
M
  • Locked
Rejoining the club - 637 or 642?
Replies
14
Views
693
Mulliga
M
C
  • Locked
642 and Wolf Springs
Replies
3
Views
715
Standing Wolf
S
Back
Top