S&W 638, 637, or 642?

[stevekolt]

Out of these candidates, which one would you choose, and more importantly why? Please limit this discussion to these three S&W models only. I'm leaning toward the 638 with the shrouded hammer. This will be for pocket carry, and filled with shot for snakes when working in the yard.

[tranders]

I have the 642 and like it,but my next j frame will be the 638. I like the idea of being able to cock the hammer for a more precise shot.

[stevekolt]

tranders, that is the exact reason I'm leaning towards the 638...

[223 shooter]

I did choose the 642 as there is absolutely nothing to snag on when drawing out of a pocket. But for the single action option I would also go for the 638.

[tubeshooter]

I have a 642, reason being it is strictly for self defense and single action is not important to me for that particular gun. Snag free and all that.

I respect the 638 as the "best of both worlds", but often have wondered how easy/difficult it is to uncock the hammer without it slipping.



If I were buying the gun with precision aimed fire at snakes in mind, I think I would go 637 all the way out of these three. But again, the 638 kind of gives you the most overall options for all situations IMHO. YMMV.

[Carmady]

I would pick the 638, a 638-2 if you want to shoot +P.

It's also nice to buy at a store where you can check it out in person.

Buying guns online is like a box of chocolates.

[David R]

I have the 637. It works for me. Carried in an ankle holster for the last few years.

Before that was a Chiefs Special in the ankle holster. Made me walk funny.


David

[scsov509]

I bought the 642 also, again because as a pocket gun there’s nothing to snag. The 642 also takes up less space in a pocket than a 638, and I’ve found out personally that small size differences matter an awful lot when you’re talking pocket carry. The 642 is borderline too big for me for most front pants pockets as is, which makes the 638 no longer an option if pocket carry is my goal.

[pete2]

The 642 for pocket carry, it's about the largest gun I can get out of my pocket. I have of them. It does take practice to shoot them well.

[BeornLS]

I've owned and carried all three of them at various times (not all at once) and the 638 will give you the best of both worlds.

I pocket carried and ankle carried and lot and never noticed a situation where the 638 got hung up or anything, but it certainly is possible I guess in a perfect storm. I will say though in a tighter pocket the 642 did carry a bit easier lacking the hump on it.

Decocking the 638 can be a bit tricky/riskier than the 637, but nothing that you can't accomplish with practice. Just be sure to follow the rules and keep that sucker pointed someplace safe when doing so.

[T. O'Heir]

Those are basically all the same except you can't easily cock the hammer on the 638. You want that option or not?
Your pocket is not a good place to carry a firearm. Too much assorted crappola in pockets.

[Jim Watson]

I actually have an old M38. Yes, it can be cocked for a SA shot and is more snag free than a M37. But it is kind of like carrying a 1911 in Condition 2, not the most effective way to start getting lead downrange. I think Chic Gaylord, writing in 1960, was about the last advocate of single action fire with the hideout gun. Also, if you change your mind, it is even tougher to decock than a conventional hammer gun. And I know of a couple of ADs by people trying to decock a standard hammer gun.

I once saw a M60, alleged to be the NYPD policewoman's model, with the semi-bobbed hammer of the M38. I don't know how much more snag resistant it would be; not as good as a bobbed hammer or hammerless.

[scbair]

I'd select te 642 for pcket and/or ankle carry. The gap under the hammer nub of the 638 is a "lint trap." It'll fill up with debris in a hurry.

I learned to shoot revolvers double-action, so I'm pretty sure you can, too. The single-action feature is nice on a hunting or plinking revolver, but totally unnecessary on a snub.

[stevekolt]

Thanks for all the replies folks. I decided to go with the 638, which is now resting comfortably on my desk. This was bought specifically to load with shotshell rounds and pocket when I'm walking around my wooded property for any chance snake encounter. My normal carry gun is either a Kimber Ultra Crimson Carry, or a Kimber Micro 9 Eclipse.
To be honest, I may/probably will end up buying the 642 at some point also.

[shurshot]

I own a 638 and a 642 no lock. The 642, with its smooth double action, is easy to "read", to be able to judge / "stage" when it's almost ready to fire, enabling me to shoot it it almost as smooth as the 638 in single action. Both are superb guns. No infamous lock issues with the 638 either. But be advised, with +P loads, HANG ON TIGHT... they kick worse than my .44 Magnum revolvers. Seriously... be prepared.

[gwpercle]

delete post

[smee78]

Of the 3 I would choose the 638, I made the same choice years ago and was lucky enough to find a pre lock 638 and it is a favorite of mine. I liked it so much I traded off my 642. The ability to go single action for me was the deciding factor.

[FrankenMauser]

If I wanted a 'pocket' gun, or something snag-free, I'd go for the 642.
Mine worked well in that regard, and the lack of SA capability is really a non-issue. The sights are not suitable for precision use - even at 7 yards - and the triggers are decent enough to not be a handicap (especially with a trigger job).

If I was dead-set on SA capability, I'd go for the 637.
If I wanted a hammer, I'd get a real one, rather than a 'button' that comes with a bulbous lump on the back of the firearm.

[JMag1]

While the 642 is great, I prefer the 638 for reasons previously posted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[youngridge]

I have a 638, dual action, light, concealable, and bobbed hammer is why I went with it over the 642. Both great firearms, but if it is even a question in your mind go with the 638.

Edit: I carry mine in a Uncle Mike’s pocket holster, no issues at all with snagging. Carry it in the front right pocket or coat pocket.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pukindog12]

After firing my wife's 642 a while back I decided I wanted a J frame also. Although I liked hers with a good trigger (thanks from the apex trigger kit) I looked at getting a 638. I liked the option of SA operation if needed or wanted.

What I ended up with is a 438 previosly owned. It is basically an all black 638 which has been discontinued by S&W. I am glad I got it. So far it seems to be a good CCW with a good albeit heavy trigger. It should be a great trigger after I install a Wilson Combat Tuned Spring kit (for J frames) next week.

[handlebar]

I have the 642 and love it. I changed the springs to the 13 lb. rebound spring and put in an 8 lb. hammer spring...it makes a world of difference in the trigger pull, yet it is completely within the bounds of reliability.

[rodfac]

My wife has a 637, carries it in her purse or on a belt holster (OWB) and has never had a problem or hang up while drawing. She's been to Front Sight's 4-Day Defensive Handgun Course twice so she is experienced. That said, when either of us practices with it, we have learned to guard the hammer during the draw so that it does not hang up. It's a training thing..and a must do if you plan to carry it.

We both shoot it exclusively DA so there's no real need to have the hammer for SA shooting...and either of us can hold the cranial area from the ten yard line with it...DA. Practice is the key...it's a defensive gun, made and designed for that role...for carry tho, I'd recommend the hammerless model just to keep it simple and to force one to practice DA shooting as is needed in any defensive encounter.

JMHO, Rod

[jfruser]

FYI:
I own a 638 rated for .38spl+P and the Taurus copy in total titanium chambered in .357mag.

637 vs 638 vs 642

I obviously chose 638. I do pocket, ankle, and belt carry with my 638. I went with 638 because of the single action option. I like to do some longer-range shooting with the 638 and the SA option makes that more productive. Like out to 100 yards, Seyfried-style. Yeah, a bit of a stunt/lark, but fun and confidence-inspiring. Never had a problem de-cocking.

The downside to the 638 is the Thrice-Danged Lock (TDL). I removed mine and replaced it with a plug. While I was at it, I did a spring job and a very mild smoothing of hammer & sear contact points. Noticeable, but not revolutionary improvement trigger-wise.

If SA fire is not in the cards, the 642 can be had out of the box with no TDL and in various flavor of improvement from S&W's custom shop: trigger work, moonclips, etc.

637 was never really in the running for me.

[405FileFound]

The 638 is the way to go. It seems like its being recommended by many on this post. The 637 has a handy, big hammer... that can get snagged. The 642 is sleek and has the best concealability... but SA is not available. I have the 438 that I had a my G-smith add an XS Big Dot sight, part # SW-0020N-3, and I now have a $400 gun + $100 in part/labor for less than what you'd pay for a AirLight Sc M&P340 with an XS (about $800). A 638 combines the best of the 37 and 42 (it's what everyone on the thread is saying), and I recommend my XS mod.