Lightweight Pocket Snubbie Shootout?

[BluRidgDav]

Searching for a lightweight .38 snubbie for pocket carry, and I've narrowed my search down to the S&W 642 and the Ruger LCR:

https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-642-0

https://ruger.com/products/lcr/specSheets/5401.html

Both are aluminum framed 5-shooters, both are about the same weight & price.
The S&W is milled for moon-clips (which I like), but, it's not a deal-breaker either way.

Thanx, Dave.

[Wheelie_Fan]

If ONLY between the two you've got noted above.... I'd go with the S&W

If you haven't already... I'd say to also take a look at the Charter Arms Off Duty
it's very comfortable to carry (also aluminum framed) I've had mine for several years (6 or 7ish) without issues. I put at least a couple of cylinders through it every time I go to the range and it doesn't seem any worse for wear. Still locks up tight and goes bang every time. Accuracy has been good at self defense distances.

Hope whichever you choose is a good addition for you.

[SonOfScubaDiver]

I have an LCR in 38spcl, and I love it.

[Sequins]

13.5 vs 15oz is practically a 10% reduction in weight. If you haven't got any other dog in the race choose the lighter gun probably.

[tallball]

I prefer my LCR to my J frame. I like them both, but the LCR has a better DA trigger and is noticeably lighter.

[Viper225]

Getting the smallest and lightest weight 38 Special carry revolver is handy for pocket carry, but if you shoot your concealed carry revolver the lite weight is not such a good thing past a point.

My advice is to get the LCR in the 357 Magnum version. It will recoil less than the LCR 38 Special version, and a lot less than the 642 in my experience.

Isiac Newton (1642-1727) explained this pretty well. To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction.

For concealed carry purposes that means that the liter the revolver, the harder the recoil with a given load. This can be buffered some with the grip design. More weight really helps with recoil, along with good grips.

I shoot what I carry a lot. At this time I have 2 air weight revolvers, a Ruger LCR 22, and a K Frame S&W 315 Night Guard. If I ever buy "on purpose" another J Frame size air weight revolver in 38 Special it will be an LCR over the currently offered S&W's. Besides the recoil reduction of the LCR the pinned on front sight that can be changed to Tritium or Changed Out if the Tritium sight goes Dim is another BIG Plus. You can get a better front sight on a S&W if you check the offerings closely.

Just My 2 Cents

Bob R

[ChiefTJS]

Very happy with my 442. Have shot it a lot and carried it more with zero issues of any kind.

[FITASC]

I only pocket carry, and I use the 642. If you don't like the Hogues that come on it, the Ergo Delta- while ugly-works well also.

[BeornLS]

Tough call on this. I have both of these revolvers as well as an LCR in .357 so I can speak from experience. These are both well made revolvers and either one will suit you well I'm sure.

From my experience the 642 will carry easier in the pocket. I attribute this to the fact the factory grips on the 642 are a bit less tacky than the LCR grips as well as I think they are a bit more narrow. I can slide the 642 into a shorts pocket or my dress slacks pocket and it's no problem at all.

I can do the same with the LCR of course but it does feel just a bit more bulky and sometimes the grips on the LCR tend to want to take my pocket out with them.

When it comes to shooting them though, the LCRs have a much better trigger out of the box than the 642 and they also shoot easier with their factory grips (I believe Hogue makes them for Ruger and they are the recoil taming grips with a cushion on your hand webbing area where as the 642 has the metal backstrap in that position).

So my $.02 is if you want a better shooter, go with the LCR. If you want something easier to carry, go with the 642. YMMV.

[Cheapshooter]

Both are aluminum framed 5-shooters,

The Ruger has a polymer frame with an aluminim "chassis". If that matters to you. Also, the LCR is 2oz. Lighter. Which to me is noticeable in a pocket pistol.
I have an LCR chambered in 38 Spcl. +P. I carry it in a winter goat pocket using a DeSantis Nemesis holster, and it is virtually unnoticeable. By either myself, or others.
Try both if you can. Either one is a good choice. It may be up to if you want Tupperware, or aluminum as the frame material.

[HighValleyRanch]

I think the Smith 340 PD is even lighter at 12 oz.
But 12 oz. with full .357 loads would be tough, especially with the exposed metal backstrap!!

For looks, I much prefer the J frame where you have a better choice of grip panels.

But for shooting and a carry weapon that you can shoot full house loads, I prefer and do carry the Ruger LCR. It has a much better trigger out of the box and will handle anything you put in it. The tang grip frame with the hogue rubber grips allows use of full house loads that would be painful with the exposed metal backstrap of the J frame.

Something else that I found was that the rounded back of the LCR allows a much higher hold than on a J frame, reducing the muzzle flip considerably. Using a Jerry Miculek style hold with support thumb over my shooting hand web, I am able to reduce the flip to minimal with +P loads.

[Doyle]

Personally, I would go with the 442 over the 642. The only difference is the finish. That painted on silver finish has a tendency to flake (see Google images).

[Sniper 51]

I have both and have carried both. Once I bought the LCR the 642 became a safe queen. Shoot them both and you will know why.

[jad0110]

Can't really go wrong with either. Both are dependable and capable of excellent mechanical accuracy if the shooter can harness them. I personally prefer the x42 platform, and I am probably the 1 in 50 that prefers the x42 trigger for it's firm, positive trigger return compared to the relatively sluggish, mushy return on the LCR. Both can be very smooth, though the LCR is usually smoother out of the box. The triggers on the J frames do typically slicken up pretty well over use - say 1,000 cycles of the action.

[Super Sneaky Steve]

I have both and I'd say the LCR is better.

[glockman55]

They will have a good recoil, but it's not a range gun so... I ended up going a little heavier with the Ruger SP 101 , 2.25".. I actually like shooting it..lol

[Laz]

I’ve always been attracted to the LCR but find the stock grip to large and the optional boot grip too small. Mainly, I have long had a soft spot for Airweight J-frames and have several. I just have never sprung for the LCR because my J-frames work so well. And I’m a big Ruger Revolver fan, mostly SAs, Truth to tell. Honestly, I don’t think you can go wrong with either. None of my J-frames have the internal lock, though. I don’t like it at all. Never have. Probably never will.

[Carmady]

I tried a 12 oz CA Undercover Lite .38 SPL, about 100-150 rounds. It chewed my trigger finger. It might have been different if I'd put on a band-aid before shooting. I sold it.

[Screwball]

Originally Posted by Cheapshooter

Also, the LCR is 2oz. Lighter.

To add on to this, that is only true with the .38 model (and the .22). The .357, .327, and 9mm models use a stainless steel frame. While it is more obvious to go with a .38 to .38 comparison, some people forget that note and end up with a heavier gun... since you can shoot both rounds out of a .357.

I’ve been shooting a 642-1 since 2009. Few years back, I got tired of the .38... and wanted to move to the 9mm. Came down to two options; buy a 9mm LCR or convert my 642-1 to 9mm. My father had a .357 LCR, so brought it to the range to try out...

Wasn’t a little heavier, but A LOT heavier. Trigger, which to be honest, is identical to the 642 in design (DAO). Very different in function. But if you are used to the J-frame DAO, you aren’t going to like the LCR trigger. Going to have to really put a lot of training on it, which is a requirement for small revolvers like these. I opted to convert my 642-1, being I’d lose a lot of gear (holsters, etc), money (gun was refinished in NP3... would never make that back), and most importantly, years behind the gun. I like the lighter 642 over a 9mm LCR (pretty much the same weight as the revolver I was comparing), but not transitioning to a much different platform was my main reason.

Now, if the 9mm LCRx was out when I was making the decision... I’d probably have gone with that. Getting SA, with an exposed hammer, would have been a nice option. And would have been one that I would have justified the change.

While looking at technical specs is important, you really need to get the two guns in hand and try them each out. At least dry fire the two (models you want) to get an idea on the triggers, and consider you are going to be putting some rounds through either to train. Try not to pick one based on initial impressions, but where you think you’d be after getting used to it. The LCR trigger... either you are going to like it or hate it. Is it lighter? Yes, but with a lot of distraction through the pull. I personally prefer S&W triggers over it. If you find a range that rents, you’ll likely find a .357 version of the LCR... and probably an all steel J-frame (640, probably in .357). I’d try to see if anyone local has a .38 LCR. Any traditional 642 would give you an idea on performance.

[old bear]

Both are excellent revolvers and you can't miss, (pun intended) with either. The Ruger being lighter is a plus, but I know several seniors who have recoil problems their Rugers.

I am a diehard S&W fan, so go with the Smith.

Best of luck with your final choice.

[lee n. field]

Originally Posted by BeornLS

Tough call on this. I have both of these revolvers as well as an LCR in .357 so I can speak from experience. These are both well made revolvers and either one will suit you well I'm sure.

From my experience the 642 will carry easier in the pocket. I attribute this to the fact the factory grips on the 642 are a bit less tacky than the LCR grips as well as I think they are a bit more narrow. I can slide the 642 into a shorts pocket or my dress slacks pocket and it's no problem at all.

I quite dislike the (current) factory grips that came with my 642. They look like an Uncle Mike's boot grip, but aren't.

I'm picky about revolver grips. I don't much care for the soft rubber Hogues either, though if I can't find something more to my liking I will use them.

[FITASC]

I quite dislike the (current) factory grips that came with my 642. They look like an Uncle Mike's boot grip, but aren't.

If I remember correctly, they are Hogue grips

[BluRidgDav]

Thanx for all of the responses Guys!

Most of the preferences seem to "revolve" (pun intended) around the trigger and/or grips.

About the triggers:
- the LCR has a good reputation for smoothness out of the box.
- while S&W makes a few different versions of their 642.
This particular PC 642 has this: https://youtu.be/9KpsZMLZd-w

As for the grips:
I may replace either original set with a Crimson Trace Lasergrips.
The LCR is actually offered as a Talo Exclusive with CT's already installed:
https://ruger.com/products/lcr/specSheets/5424.html

Decisions . . . . decisions . . . . .

[Nakanokalronin]

The LCR is actually 13.1 ounces. They never updated the weight once they got rid of the lock under the grip. I've owned plenty of both and I say the LCR with the Hogue boot grip that makes it even lighter.

[Laz]

I quite dislike the (current) factory grips that came with my 642. They look like an Uncle Mike's boot grip, but aren't.

Me, too. I like how they feel OK but HKS speedloaders have a tendency to hang up on them because they are not relieved enough. I replaced them with Hogue Bantams which are pretty good. The old Uncle Mikes rubber copies of Spegel boot grips were the best.