642 Club @ TFL - Page 3

Playboypenguin · April 28, 2007, 02:19 PM

Quote:

For those of you who own now a 642 I am wondering what grain round you carry and shoot, and if you use a +p?

I use Winchester 110gr. Silvertip HP ammo.

ohioleadslinger · April 28, 2007, 04:12 PM

Quote:

hey guys,

I'm looking to get an airweight J frame, either the 642, or the bodyguard, the one with the SA capability. Is the latter the 649? How does it compare with the 642 as far as weight is concerned, is it also essentially 15 oz uloaded?

Vlad Look here click on each one then technical specs the 649 is 23 oz unloaded its a stainless not air weight. The 638 is the airweight model with the same shrouded hammer SA capability 15 oz unloaded but its only chambered for the .38 , my 649 is also .38 only but it was made before they offered it in .357. You can shoot +p in the 638 though so it would be a good choice. Now my buddy just bought 340PD thats the scandium 12 oz'r he says its painfull to shoot even with 38 +p he didn't even try .357.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/w...category=15703

Godbless...

ohioleadslinger · April 28, 2007, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Rusty grip screw

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

642 here, bought it a few months ago, love it. I pocket carry it mainly, and I was wondering - does anyone else have a problem with the grip screw rusting up? I'm a lefty, which causes the slot end of the screw to face my leg. Does anyone know of a source for a stainless grip screw

?

Get a Horse Hide pocket holster its much more water resistant. Or if you like straight in the pocket..Take and clean the screw up then take a candle and drip a few drops of wax on the scew head down in the grip this should keep the sweat off it and still let you remove the screw later for cleaning.

JRG · April 28, 2007, 06:41 PM

I went to the DFW Gun Show today and almost bought the 642 with laser grips for $509. Is that a good price? I can always go back tomorrow and get it.

Joe

ohioleadslinger · April 28, 2007, 08:20 PM

Quote:

I went to the DFW Gun Show today and almost bought the 642 with laser grips for $509. Is that a good price? I can always go back tomorrow and get it.

Joe

S&W has a suggested retail price on it at $727 but most dealers would get that for alot less then mark it up 20 to 25%. Look at the price difference between the Crimson trace grip model MSRP $727 and regular grip model $498

What are you going to use it for? Concealed carry or a homegun or just a shooter for fun?

If your considering it for carry, in my opinion you don't need the laser grips. In a close up gun fight you wont have time to look for a little red dot the size of a pencil lead.

Godbless....

chadwimc · April 28, 2007, 09:32 PM

You'd be pleasantly suprised by how much "fight" that red dot dancing on a poor, misunnerstood, yoot's chest can end...

ohioleadslinger · April 28, 2007, 10:20 PM

Then for that money difference buy a $5 laser pointer cat teaser at the pet store and pocket the difference in cash and the 642 with standard grips....

Godbless....:

vox rationis · April 28, 2007, 11:43 PM

ohio lead slinger,

Thanks a lot for the info. The S&W site lists the 638 as being +P rated and the same weight as the 642.

You mention the 340PD, and I was considering it, but then I rented the 642 and the recoil with regular 38 special convinced me that I'd never shoot .357's out of an even lighter gun

that I'd have to pay almost double for. If I went Scandium, I'd probably go for the new M&P 340, 13.3 oz .357 mag, it looks the business, and a store quoted me a price of $650 so it is cheaper.

I loved that 642 I shot at the range though, and will either get a 638 or a 642.

oh and I forgot, I'm just wondering, I don't really care about the finish wearing away much, but are there re-finishes one can get aftermarket for the 642/638..I'm actually surprised that S&W wouldn't provide a more durable finish for a gun that is meant to be crammed into all sort of places as it is concealment arm..

thanks

V-fib · April 29, 2007, 12:06 AM

642 with CT grips. 158gr swc's Holster with either a Fist Kydex IWB or Smartcarry.

ohioleadslinger · April 29, 2007, 07:55 AM

Quote:

oh and I forgot, I'm just wondering, I don't really care about the finish wearing away much, but are there re-finishes one can get aftermarket for the 642/638..I'm actually surprised that S&W wouldn't provide a more durable finish for a gun that is meant to be crammed into all sort of places as it is concealment arm..

thanks

Not sure about that one. The Aluminum frame while light has its problems material wise with anodized finish over it. The bonding process is done under heat and I bet there is no aftermarket replacement. Maybe S&W can answer that one they have a toll free number I believe. They may have even overcome the problem with the newer guns. Give em a call.
Not tooting my own horn but thats why I like my stainless just polish it with some Flitz and looks new. But 10 oz or so more may lead you to not worry about a little wear.
As far as the Titanium or Scandium models go I'm not sure about the finishes on them either. My buddy hasn't had his long enough to put the wear and tear on it to show any finish problems...Maybe someone out there can add to this thread?

This is a very in depth article on snubbies take a look..
http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/S...at%20Snubs.htm
Godbless....

Tony C · April 29, 2007, 06:21 PM

Quote:

I went to the DFW Gun Show today and almost bought the 642 with laser grips for $509. Is that a good price? I can always go back tomorrow and get it.

I purchased a 642 from my dealer Friday. He had the 642 for $389 and the 642 w/CT grips for $569. The price you quoted was a good one. (I bought the 642CT.

Good luck.
Tony C

UH1-D Rotorhead · April 29, 2007, 06:38 PM

There were some QC issues on earlier aluminum J frames, but that has apparently been corrected, since I have yet to see the so-called peeling of the anodized finish on my always on me everywhere I go in the pocket 642.

vox rationis · April 29, 2007, 09:32 PM

Thanks for the info guys..

Now I just have to decide between the 642 and the 638...for some reason I'm racking my brains over the decision and I can't seem to easily make it.

Maybe you guys can help me out.

Why should I join the 642 club vs the 638 club (which seems distinctly smaller than the 642 club I must say!)? I essentially want the 638 for the SA capability in case I need to make a stealthy, accurate, [head] shot, at 25 yards against a heavily armed nut job killer that might even be wearing body armor. Or is that just me being silly. Overall I like the 642 better since I don't have to worry about lint getting into the hammer assembly, and it just plain looks cooler.

ohioleadslinger · April 29, 2007, 10:15 PM

I would put em all center mass. A single action head shot would be a tasty morsel to the attorney for the thug's family or even the DA to go for broke on a unjustified shoot. If he is a armored up nut job let one hit high in the throat and call it a flyer. Never say I aimed for the brain bucket. Even though, a single action capable gun is nice and that would be my choice also. Lint being a factor? I doubt it. Unless you got lint the size of a cotton ball mixed with used chewing gum and maybe a paper clip or two in to boot... <grin>

Godbless...

vox rationis · April 30, 2007, 06:36 PM

Head shot errr ahh
I would put em all center mass. A single action head shot would be a tasty morsel to the attorney for the thug's family or even the DA to go for broke on a unjustified shoot. If he is a armored up nut job let one hit high in the throat and call it a flyer. Never say I aimed for the brain bucket. Even though, a single action capable gun is nice and that would be my choice also. Lint being a factor? I doubt it. Unless you got lint the size of a cotton ball mixed with used chewing gum and maybe a paper clip or two in to boot... <grin>
--------

Great response, I love the one about "the flyer". Good point, I would of course "shoot center of mass" and the neck/nogging shot would obviously be an "unintended consequence". By the way the scenario I was thinking about is more like having to shoot across a big store from a fairly concealed positon, maybe even prone, at a mass murderer type at some distance from me. That's when I think SA is a great capability to have. Of course the likelyhood of this scenario is extremely slim; still better to have and not need than to need and not have..I think I'm starting to lean toward the 638, especially since the cotton ball chewing gum and paper clips would not be a factor with me (I keep that stuff in the other pocket

)

Maybe I need a 642 as a primary and the 638 as my "reload"

Playboypenguin · April 30, 2007, 06:45 PM

I do not think you would regret either purchase.

If the truth be told, I think the 638 is actually the best of both worlds. Like the 642, it is protected from hammer obstructions if it ever needs to be pocket fired. It also can be cocked (hehe..I said cocked

) and used SA, like the 637.

The only reason I did not choose it when I bought the 642 was because I already had the 637 and I thought the 642 was prettier. Great reason to choose a, SD firearm, huh?

UH1-D Rotorhead · April 30, 2007, 06:50 PM

It is prettier Playboy....admit it. It's OK (attach wink here).

Haterade · April 30, 2007, 09:05 PM

Here is my vanilla 642.

I think I carry it more often than any other handgun. Fantastic piece. Very accurate to 7 yards... after that it gets sketchy fast, but not horribly so. I'm convinced that 5 rounds of .38spl's is enough. Right now I'm carrying SXT's in it. Ridiculously easy to conceal. With smaller firearms I wonder about reliability issues but this little revolver is solid and I trust it 100%. Concealed hammer is great for pocket carry because if you own one you'll find it in your pocket often. You won't likely take SA shots with a snubby. It's a belly gun, pure and simple. I'm sure some guys get some amazing results but in real-life I think the lack of a potential snag is worth much more than the SA option. My .02.

vox rationis · April 30, 2007, 11:06 PM

the 642 is a lot cooler looking, I agree, the 638 looks sort of bizzare and ungainly

but I am still leaning toward the 638 right now..but maybe I will get both, after all I was planning on getting the 340PD and for the price of one of those, I could almost get both the 642 and the 638..the rationalization can be that one can be for my wife when she gets her CCW

Thanks guys

AZGunLover · April 30, 2007, 11:08 PM

My old model 60 rides in an ankle holster with me every day.

UH1-D Rotorhead · May 1, 2007, 05:56 AM

This is nice...70 posts...slow grind to the top...speaking of old Model 60"s...I brought my newly gifted 60 with me while on vacation in Southeast Asia in '67...wonder why no one picked up on that during baggage check in? Crappy security, I guess (attach wink here). I still have that gun..still shoot it, and have plans to have a total refurb job done on her one day.

don't shoot it's me · May 4, 2007, 10:36 PM

Nothing cooler than Bullitt and a centennial....mine is actually a hard chromed 442...

fomalley · May 5, 2007, 04:06 PM

Recently got a 642. Wanted something that felt really reliable to carry in my pocket. I wasn't sure that I would like the DAO. But, now I'm feeling that there's an advantage to it for concealed carry. You have to practice and get good at DA shooting. The 642 has a nice, clean snappy trigger. And, when the shot goes off, it just goes off. You don't find yourself watching the hammer and waiting for its release. I have other external hammer revolvers (686, DS-II), but I like the 642 in my pocket.

don't shoot it's me · May 6, 2007, 03:15 AM

Anyone try the new LG105s for the j-frame? They look very compact like the bantams and are priced lower than the overmolded models...

UH1-D Rotorhead · May 6, 2007, 04:21 AM

That hardchroming on your 442 don't is real nice...perfect solution to re-furbing a beat up revolver.

April 28, 2007, 10:20 PM	#57
ohioleadslinger Senior Member Join Date: April 26, 2007 Location: Ohio Posts: 175	Red dot Then for that money difference buy a $5 laser pointer cat teaser at the pet store and pocket the difference in cash and the 642 with standard grips.... Godbless....: __________________ Why do I carry a gun? The cop I was carrying was causing me back problems! *Piing contests are boring, and quite often you get your feet wet and make them stink!* Fat people are harder to kidnap! Life Member NRA , OFCC Member**

April 29, 2007, 12:06 AM	#59
V-fib Senior Member Join Date: June 26, 2002 Location: Michigan Posts: 253	642 with CT grips. 158gr swc's Holster with either a Fist Kydex IWB or Smartcarry. __________________ Livin in the woods...feelin mighty good.

April 29, 2007, 10:15 PM	#64
ohioleadslinger Senior Member Join Date: April 26, 2007 Location: Ohio Posts: 175	Head shot errr ahh I would put em all center mass. A single action head shot would be a tasty morsel to the attorney for the thug's family or even the DA to go for broke on a unjustified shoot. If he is a armored up nut job let one hit high in the throat and call it a flyer. Never say I aimed for the brain bucket. Even though, a single action capable gun is nice and that would be my choice also. Lint being a factor? I doubt it. Unless you got lint the size of a cotton ball mixed with used chewing gum and maybe a paper clip or two in to boot... <grin> Godbless... __________________ Why do I carry a gun? The cop I was carrying was causing me back problems! *Piing contests are boring, and quite often you get your feet wet and make them stink!* Fat people are harder to kidnap! Life Member NRA , OFCC Member**

April 30, 2007, 09:05 PM	#68
Haterade Senior Member Join Date: December 11, 2006 Posts: 191	Here is my vanilla 642. I think I carry it more often than any other handgun. Fantastic piece. Very accurate to 7 yards... after that it gets sketchy fast, but not horribly so. I'm convinced that 5 rounds of .38spl's is enough. Right now I'm carrying SXT's in it. Ridiculously easy to conceal. With smaller firearms I wonder about reliability issues but this little revolver is solid and I trust it 100%. Concealed hammer is great for pocket carry because if you own one you'll find it in your pocket often. You won't likely take SA shots with a snubby. It's a belly gun, pure and simple. I'm sure some guys get some amazing results but in real-life I think the lack of a potential snag is worth much more than the SA option. My .02. __________________ Sledge Hammer: You've never played target practice? Soviet Scientist: In Russia, we practice by shooting dissidents. Sledge Hammer: Here we call them liberals.

May 5, 2007, 04:06 PM	#73
fomalley Senior Member Join Date: February 14, 2006 Location: Texas Posts: 111	Internal hammer Recently got a 642. Wanted something that felt really reliable to carry in my pocket. I wasn't sure that I would like the DAO. But, now I'm feeling that there's an advantage to it for concealed carry. You have to practice and get good at DA shooting. The 642 has a nice, clean snappy trigger. And, when the shot goes off, it just goes off. You don't find yourself watching the hammer and waiting for its release. I have other external hammer revolvers (686, DS-II), but I like the 642 in my pocket.

April 28, 2007, 06:41 PM	#54
JRG Junior Member Join Date: October 11, 2006 Posts: 14	I went to the DFW Gun Show today and almost bought the 642 with laser grips for $509. Is that a good price? I can always go back tomorrow and get it. Joe

April 28, 2007, 09:32 PM	#56
chadwimc Senior Member Join Date: July 15, 2005 Posts: 155	You'd be pleasantly suprised by how much "fight" that red dot dancing on a poor, misunnerstood, yoot's chest can end...

April 28, 2007, 11:43 PM	#58
vox rationis Senior Member Join Date: April 15, 2007 Posts: 1,855	ohio lead slinger, Thanks a lot for the info. The S&W site lists the 638 as being +P rated and the same weight as the 642. You mention the 340PD, and I was considering it, but then I rented the 642 and the recoil with regular 38 special convinced me that I'd never shoot .357's out of an even lighter gun that I'd have to pay almost double for. If I went Scandium, I'd probably go for the new M&P 340, 13.3 oz .357 mag, it looks the business, and a store quoted me a price of $650 so it is cheaper. I loved that 642 I shot at the range though, and will either get a 638 or a 642. oh and I forgot, I'm just wondering, I don't really care about the finish wearing away much, but are there re-finishes one can get aftermarket for the 642/638..I'm actually surprised that S&W wouldn't provide a more durable finish for a gun that is meant to be crammed into all sort of places as it is concealment arm.. thanks

April 29, 2007, 06:38 PM	#62
UH1-D Rotorhead Junior member Join Date: March 15, 2006 Posts: 576	There were some QC issues on earlier aluminum J frames, but that has apparently been corrected, since I have yet to see the so-called peeling of the anodized finish on my always on me everywhere I go in the pocket 642.

April 29, 2007, 09:32 PM	#63
vox rationis Senior Member Join Date: April 15, 2007 Posts: 1,855	Thanks for the info guys.. Now I just have to decide between the 642 and the 638...for some reason I'm racking my brains over the decision and I can't seem to easily make it. Maybe you guys can help me out. Why should I join the 642 club vs the 638 club (which seems distinctly smaller than the 642 club I must say!)? I essentially want the 638 for the SA capability in case I need to make a stealthy, accurate, [head] shot, at 25 yards against a heavily armed nut job killer that might even be wearing body armor. Or is that just me being silly. Overall I like the 642 better since I don't have to worry about lint getting into the hammer assembly, and it just plain looks cooler.

April 30, 2007, 06:36 PM	#65
vox rationis Senior Member Join Date: April 15, 2007 Posts: 1,855	Head shot errr ahh I would put em all center mass. A single action head shot would be a tasty morsel to the attorney for the thug's family or even the DA to go for broke on a unjustified shoot. If he is a armored up nut job let one hit high in the throat and call it a flyer. Never say I aimed for the brain bucket. Even though, a single action capable gun is nice and that would be my choice also. Lint being a factor? I doubt it. Unless you got lint the size of a cotton ball mixed with used chewing gum and maybe a paper clip or two in to boot... <grin> -------- Great response, I love the one about "the flyer". Good point, I would of course "shoot center of mass" and the neck/nogging shot would obviously be an "unintended consequence". By the way the scenario I was thinking about is more like having to shoot across a big store from a fairly concealed positon, maybe even prone, at a mass murderer type at some distance from me. That's when I think SA is a great capability to have. Of course the likelyhood of this scenario is extremely slim; still better to have and not need than to need and not have..I think I'm starting to lean toward the 638, especially since the cotton ball chewing gum and paper clips would not be a factor with me (I keep that stuff in the other pocket ) Maybe I need a 642 as a primary and the 638 as my "reload"

April 30, 2007, 06:45 PM	#66
Playboypenguin Junior member Join Date: February 27, 2006 Location: Great Pacific Northwest Posts: 11,515	I do not think you would regret either purchase. If the truth be told, I think the 638 is actually the best of both worlds. Like the 642, it is protected from hammer obstructions if it ever needs to be pocket fired. It also can be cocked (hehe..I said cocked ) and used SA, like the 637. The only reason I did not choose it when I bought the 642 was because I already had the 637 and I thought the 642 was prettier. Great reason to choose a, SD firearm, huh?

April 30, 2007, 06:50 PM	#67
UH1-D Rotorhead Junior member Join Date: March 15, 2006 Posts: 576	It is prettier Playboy....admit it. It's OK (attach wink here).

April 30, 2007, 11:06 PM	#69
vox rationis Senior Member Join Date: April 15, 2007 Posts: 1,855	the 642 is a lot cooler looking, I agree, the 638 looks sort of bizzare and ungainly but I am still leaning toward the 638 right now..but maybe I will get both, after all I was planning on getting the 340PD and for the price of one of those, I could almost get both the 642 and the 638..the rationalization can be that one can be for my wife when she gets her CCW Thanks guys

April 30, 2007, 11:08 PM	#70
AZGunLover Senior Member Join Date: August 17, 2006 Location: AZ Posts: 281	My old model 60 rides in an ankle holster with me every day.

May 1, 2007, 05:56 AM	#71
UH1-D Rotorhead Junior member Join Date: March 15, 2006 Posts: 576	This is nice...70 posts...slow grind to the top...speaking of old Model 60"s...I brought my newly gifted 60 with me while on vacation in Southeast Asia in '67...wonder why no one picked up on that during baggage check in? Crappy security, I guess (attach wink here). I still have that gun..still shoot it, and have plans to have a total refurb job done on her one day.

May 4, 2007, 10:36 PM	#72
don't shoot it's me Senior Member Join Date: March 29, 2001 Location: NY first/LA second Posts: 1,537	Nothing cooler than Bullitt and a centennial....mine is actually a hard chromed 442...

May 6, 2007, 03:15 AM	#74
don't shoot it's me Senior Member Join Date: March 29, 2001 Location: NY first/LA second Posts: 1,537	Anyone try the new LG105s for the j-frame? They look very compact like the bantams and are priced lower than the overmolded models...

May 6, 2007, 04:21 AM	#75
UH1-D Rotorhead Junior member Join Date: March 15, 2006 Posts: 576	That hardchroming on your 442 don't is real nice...perfect solution to re-furbing a beat up revolver.