They only carry five rounds of .38 Spl +P ammunition and, at 15 ounces, they weigh about the same as some autoloaders that hold more rounds. At first blush, it might seem that Smith & Wesson’s little J-frame revolvers have outlived their usefulness. So the question is, are these diminutive hideout guns still relevant?
If sales mean anything, then the answer is an unqualified “yes.” Smith & Wesson’s J-frame revolvers remain huge sellers. But why? There are a lot of good reasons to own a J-frame, because the advantages that small revolvers offer to CCW holders outweigh the disadvantages inherent in the platform.
Did you know that:
- Carson Kressley can’t limp-wrist a snubby. Not that he tried, but I’m willing to bet.
- Revolvers don’t fail to feed or fail to eject. Phrases like “won’t return to battery,” “stovepipe jam” and “this POS sucks” are from an alien language not spoken in Revolverland.
- A revolver is a superior weapon for close contact. Shoved into the ribs of a bad guy, the little J-frame conveys its message of peace, love and understanding with surprising eloquence.
- Loading a revolver is simple. Reloads are reasonably quick with speed loaders, and at least one J-frame model comes from the factory already cut for moon clips.
- People with a “dead fish” handshake may lack the grip strength to rack a slide, but they can easily press a crane latch and swing open a cylinder.
- A snubby is as easy to clean as a Rachael Ray Hard Anodized Sauté Pan. When the work is done, just wipe it down and put away. The gun, I mean. The pan could use a bit of a wash.
- J-frames aren’t picky about ammo, either, and they’ll digest whatever they’re fed. Compare that to a pistol that can jam like the Grateful Dead when it’s fed cheap ammo. Load any .38 Special cartridges, from the priciest to the cheapest, and the J-frame revolver will shoot them all.
- Revolvers aren’t sneaky. When there’s a round in the cylinder, it’s obvious.
- Staring down the muzzle of a J-frame is very intimidating. Even though the revolver is small, it doesn’t look like a toy.
- Snubbies are inexpensive to buy. The Smith & Wesson Model 642 pictured here cost $332 NIB, excluding sales tax.
- The gun hasn’t been invented that can be deployed more swiftly, or from more places, than a lightweight snub-nosed revolver. From pocket, purse or holster, ankle or waistband, stuffed into a small-of-the-back or shoulder holster, wherever it’s carried, the snubby can be presented with incredible rapidity. In fact, it needn’t be presented at all. In a pinch, it will shoot through a coat pocket, holster or carry bag with great speed and precision, ruining both the garment and the bad guy’s whole day.
- Finally, snubbies look cool in a retro kind of way. Gee, I wish I could say the same about myself.
Okay, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and the snub-nosed holster hornet I’m currently beholding is the Smith & Wesson 642 Airweight. Airweight is what S&W calls its old school lightweight pocket revolvers with aluminum frames and stainless steel cylinders, cranes and barrels – and that’s the entire barrel, not just a sleeve. Smith & Wesson also makes heavier small revolvers all in steel and lighter “Airlight” models in exotic metals. The Airweight revolvers fall someone in the middle in terms of weight, and represent a good balance between low avoirdupois and slick handling.
There are three major Airweight variants, all sold under the forgettable and confusing model numbering system foisted upon the public by Smith & Wesson in 1957. The internal hammer DAO variant of the J-frame that’s now called the Model 642 was originally released in time for S&Ws centennial in 1952. The internal hammer revolver is still referred to as the “Centennial” model, which isn’t a sexy name but still packs more marketing punch than “642.”
Smith & Wesson’s J-frame revolvers remain among the best pocket rockets ever made; the Model 642 is perhaps the best of the best. The Centennial J-frame conceals well and won’t hang up or snag in a pocket or holster. It shoots very straight notwithstanding its tiny 1.875” barrel. I like the fact that it’s not made of plastic. The all-metal 642 sports a silver and gray finish; the 442 is the same revolver, but with a handsome blued finish. Internally, they are twins and they are the archetypes of the genre.
Small snubbies are pop icons in the gun world. Bad guys and good guys, off-duty cops and on-duty thieves, detectives and detectees, hit men, hit shows and hot chicks have all featured the Centennial as their quintessential concealed carry piece. Maestro, cue the Henry Mancini Peter Gunn Theme Music.
Should everyone follow suit and pack Gunn’s gun? No, because there are disadvantages to carrying any small revolver.
When looking at the disadvantages, we need look no further than the 642’s trigger. Sure, it has a smooth surface and a sinuous curve that begs to be pressed. But once pressed, the shooter will know why the little gun’s trigger isn’t knurled. It would leave a permanent, pressed-in tattoo.
Frankly, the trigger of any new Airweight is as stiff as a dead carp and cries out for a power assist. Or at least a windlass. Measuring the pull weight is tough since it exceeds the limit of most truck scales, but 200 kilos sounds about right. That’s a total exaggeration of course. Would you believe more than 12 pounds?
The upside of the heavy trigger is that it’s very safe and the gun is unlikely to go off accidentally. In fact, during the first range session, a new shooter may begin to wonder if it will go off intentionally. Not to worry. The revolver will fire every time.
There are two “cures” for what ails the trigger. A lot of dry fire will break in the revolver and soften the springs substantially, although even a well-used 642 trigger will never rival that of a top-notch DA pistol. Until the trigger is well broken in, use the crease of the distal joint, called the “power crease” of the trigger finger. It will save a lot of unnecessary wear and tear on tendons and ligaments.
The second cure, and one that requires no surgery except upon the gun, is a good trigger job from a competent gunsmith. The price is usually very reasonable and elevates the trigger from ridiculous to nearly sublime, enhancing accuracy and comfort without sacrificing function or safety. Some owners have swapped out the springs for something softer. I haven’t tried doing so, preferring to let a ‘smith have at it with his collection of little files.
Then there are the sights. Successfully using these snag-free pimples requires a bit of practice. Okay, a lot of practice. The two stunted organelles consist of a ramped front sight that’s fairly conventional in appearance but small.
The vestigial rear sight is an abortion. The rear sight seems like an afterthought; it’s as if one of the engineers suddenly smacked himself on the forehead one day because he forgot to sketch a rear sight onto the shop drawings.
The working part of the rear sight is squared-off U-notch that resides at the end of a trough running the length of the top strap. We all know what a good sight picture should look like, with the front sight in crystal clarity and the rear sight and target blurred. We all know the mantra “equal height, equal light.” We all know these things, but the rear sight on the 642 does us in when we try to apply them.
A dab of sight paint on the sights fore and aft can make them marginally more useful, but that’s as far as it goes. And if the rear sights don’t get the sight picture all flummoxed up, the short 4 5/8 inch sight radius will.
As to the recoil, .38 Specials don’t typically kick hard, even in +P. Loaded into a full-sized revolver with a four or six-inch barrel, .38s will have average shooters punctuating targets with the lethal efficiency of Jesse James or Annie Oakley. Accurate double-taps will be banged out faster than Tommy Lee paradiddles.
Loading the same rounds into a J-frame changes everything. With its two-finger stock and light weight, every press of a 642’s switch will make the gun jump like a frog with a hot poker up its heinie. Fortunately, while the recoil takes the gun off-target right away, the snubby comes back to point naturally and effortlessly in the blink of an eye. Although the J-frame is the definitive last ditch contact weapon, it was born to rapid fire.
Shooting standard pressure or +P ammo, the J-frame’s comfort isn’t compromised by its low mass. The Uncle Mike’s boot grips that are standard on the 642 insulate the shooter’s hand from any harshness. Even after a long range session, a shooter’s palm will be none the worse for wear. There are grips that look better or cost more, but none that I’ve tried work better than the 642’s standard grips. Kudos to Smith & Wesson for an inspired choice.
Kudos also to Smith for wringing the last bit of accuracy from this peashooter. Pictured is a two inch, five-shot group that I rapid-fired offhand at 5 yards with Fiocchi range ammo.
Results were similar with Hornady Critical Defense, Remington, Winchester White Box, Brown Bear and everything else I fed the 642. Groups opened up to about four inches at ten yards. At 25 yards, still shooting offhand, I was on paper but would hardly refer to the shotgun clusters I was shooting as “groups.”
Given my “ancient eye syndrome,” I was pleased with minute of bad guy accuracy at 25 yards, which is well past legitimate self-defense distance in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Really good shooters with their original eyes untouched by cataracts, astigmatism or farsightedness can replicate my 10-yard results at 25 yards all day long, without sandbags or other rests. The 642 is just as accurate as it needs to be, and maybe a little bit more.
This particular 642 came with the controversial internal lock that most serious shooters despise. Rumors about guns jamming because of these “lawyer locks” have proven to be absolutely true. Shooters are all individualists and may choose their own path when dealing with the lock. I note only that removing the lock mechanism does not leave a hole in the frame, because only the guts need to be removed. It’s a DIY job, or can be performed in ten minutes by a gunsmith when he does the obligatory trigger job on this revolver. I’d put up a video, but then you’d blame me.
The main argument against any snubby is its five-round capacity. Some people are uncomfortable with the notion of resolving serious self-defense issues with so few shots before needing a reload. Personally, I’m not planning on needing more than one shot delivered with pinpoint accuracy to the right spot. Thus, one bad guy versus five rounds of FU seems like an overlay to me. However, it’s the things that aren’t planned that get people killed. Like a second bad guy. And if I’m ever attacked by angry triplets, five rounds aren’t going to cut it.
So I adore snubbies, but not as my EDC if I’m only carrying one. In Massachusetts, we are limited to ten round magazines by virtue of an “assault weapons” ban that’s among the stupidest laws ever written. Since even a ten-round mag offers twice the ammo of my snubby, I tend to carry a pistol more often than the J-frame. There are situations, though, where the J-frame revolver is my best or only option. A gun is only a tool, after all, and using the right tool for the job is critical.
When I ride my bicycle or wear dress clothes, for example, the 642 carries and hides much better and more comfortably than any pistol that I’ve tried. That includes some diminutive .380s and 9mms. I carry my 642 around my home, too, where I have fast access to other guns to finish the fight if my snubby doesn’t. I never saw a reason for carrying a back-up gun, but if I did, the 642 would be my first and only choice. It’s the definitive BUG. And try carrying a Beretta 96 or a 1911 in an ankle rig.
Another word of warning to those who may be considering the purchase of a J-frame for a new shooter: don’t. A J-frame would not be a proper choice for noobs, especially women. Just ask Alicia Keyes.
Yes, it‘s cute. Yes, it fits small hands. Yes, it’s light. I’m referring to the gun, not Ms. Keyes, although I’m sure that she’s all of the above. That doesn’t mean it’s the “right” gun for everyone. The snub nosed Airweight is most suitable for experienced and enthusiastic shooters, not for people still searching for their handgun métier or a new Safe Queen. On the other hand, no experienced shooter should be without a J-frame, and my pick of the litter is the Model 642. Not only is it a great little belly gun, but the color goes well with any ensemble.
SPECIFICATIONS
Model: Smith & Wesson Model 642
Caliber: .38 Special +P
Cylinder capacity: 5 rounds
Materials: Aluminum frame, stainless steel cylinder, crane and barrel
Weight empty: 15 ounces
Barrel Length: 1.875″
Overall length: 6.31″
Sights: Integral front, fixed rear
Action: Double action only
Finish: Matte silver
Price: $449 MSRP
RATINGS (out of five stars)
Style * * * * *
A style icon for sixty years, carried by every hard-boiled TV cop and few crooks, too. Revolver purists may think that the Chief’s Special looks better than the Centennial or the ugly-duckling Bodyguard. Maybe, but a hammer spur will hang on fabric or leather, precluding pocket carry.
Ergonomics (carry) * * * * *
Fits in your pocket like small change. To protect the trigger (to say nothing of the owner’s privates), all pocket pieces should be holstered. Lots of good pocket holsters are available for J-frames, and they all work just fine.
Ergonomics (firing) * * * 1/2
Barely a two-finger grip, but that’s all anyone should need. Aftermarket grips are available for an all-finger grip. The recoil may scare newbies but is easily mastered through practice. The front sight is okay; the rear sight sucks like gravity.
Reliability * * * * *
There will be peace in the Middle East before this revolver has a misfire. Expect “five for sure” for another sixty years or more.
Customize This * * *
There’s a vibrant aftermarket for grips, including longer ones that enable a full handhold at the expense of concealment. Crimson Trace, LaserMax, LaserLyte, Laser Schmayzer (I made that up) and others provide enough laser choices to keep Goldfinger happy. There’s no rails on this revolver, so that’s it.
OVERALL RATING * * * * 1/2
With a high “power to weight” ratio and a street price well under $400, snubbies are deadly accurate, effective and supremely “carryable” self-defense revolvers. New shooters should avoid them. These are expert guns that shine in the hands of experienced pistoleros.
First, this is a great review Ralph. I need to bookmark this one. When you said, “A J-frame would not be a proper choice for noobs, especially women”, which handgun do you suggest for them? And are you referring to learning to shoot or as a first time carry gun?
Oh and I just loved that Peter Gunn show.
I’m not Ralph but I think the best suggestion for a new shooter’s first gun is one they have actually fired for themselves at a range that has rental guns. There’s nothing like hands on experience to aid in that difficult and sometimes pricey decision.
Agreed. But which gun(s) should they first fire is the question.
As a rental junkie:
a) A 22 autoloader, preferably a Browning Buckmark, but a Ruger MK III will do.
then
b) A striker fired polymer 9mm autoloader: Glock, M&P9, Springfield XD/XDm, Ruger SR9. Pick the one most comfortable.
When someone is starting out, its a lot better for them when they can hit the target well.
A revolver may be “more reliable”, but in the hands of an average person, a single-action (ok, “Marketing Dual Action”) striker fired 9mm is going to shoot the best at the range.
DonWorsham, the best way for a newbie to find out what she or he likes is to go to a range with some rentals and try out a couple. A lot of guys love shooting a Smith & Wesson 686. It’s a very impressive gun. A Glock 17 would be a pretty good choice, too, if the blocky stock doesn’t seem too offputting to the shooter.
Many women seem to prefer a lighter handgun, and I’ve had good success with the Walther PK380 because the slide is easy to rack and the recoil is well-damped. But in the end, everyone is different and all shooters, new or experienced, will have their favorites. Some women prefer a 1911, and some men a S&W Bodyguard 380.
Personally, I’ve gone through many pistols, but I keep coming back to the wonderful J-frame.
I start folks off with a semi-auto .22 then the Glock 19/17 as well as the M&P Compact. S&W Model 10 then the 642. Depending on the individual this can happen in one session or over several.
Very nice writeup…well done!
As to the recoil, .38 Specials don’t typically kick hard, even in +P
My 442 with full powered loads rolls back sharply into the web of my thumb. Probably this is a size of the hand thing. Fatter grips might help; I have the standard sized CT grips. Ten of those shots is about all I care to endure. Hand loaded down 20% or so in power factor however makes a practice round that I can shoot for a while.
Well written review. Very comprehensive.
While the DA S&W trigger pull is heavy, it’s smooth as butter. I can shoot my own S&W 642 better than some autos with a lot more grip surface.
One doesn’t really aim a snubby, more like point. So sights aren’t a priority. After all, it’s a self defense gun not a target pistol.
You’re absolutely correct. In fact, this revolver works even better when the muzzle is pressed against the BG’s ribs or in his armpit. The contact shot is an important weapon in the snubby’s arsenal. However, I do like to shoot targets and it takes time to achieve real accuracy at the range with a J-frame’s sights. Not only is accurate shooting fun, but it also builds confidence.
I carry a 442 every day. It tucks well in my waistband and with a pocket clip grip on it, is easily accessible.
“The Smith & Wesson Model 642 pictured here cost $332 NIB, excluding sales tax.”
That’s very close (withing $10) to what I paid for my Taurus 605 3 years ago. Where can the 642 be found for this price?
Four Seasons Firearms in Woburn, MA. See http://www.fsguns.com/fsg_new_hg.html
and scroll down. Take another 2% off the price shown if you pay by check, cash or debit.
Interesting. I sense “a disturbance in the force”, as if my collection were going to shift.
Ah, the Force is strong with this one.
S&W reduced the MSRP for all of their handguns recently…the 442 and 642 were selling for $450 or so are now more around $350.
Not sure if it was a response to the competition or the fact that they were somewhat overpriced, but they are priced very nicely right now.
At $350 they should be the go-to HCP firearm. Add a pocket holster and you have the perfect summer carry gun.
This is a great review.
However, there is one point I have to disagree with you on. I think that this the perfect carry gun for inexperienced shooters. My wife does not come join me at the range that often, so I wanted her to get carry something that was extremely easy to use and safe (without sacrificing simplicity). No manual safeties. That is just one more thing to remember to do when the stuff hits the fan. No failure-to-feed/extract. If the round doesn’t go off, squeeze again and go to the next one. And for someone that doesn’t practice much, those are the kinds of things you want to eliminate. Reloading is a little more time consuming, but doable with a speed loader. I agree that the trigger pull is very safe and heavy. I do not expect my wife to be defending herself at 10 – 25 yds. More like 3 – 5 yds, so the heavier the better. Since this is something she would carry in her purse, I have the extended grips so she can get all three fingers on the grip.
She has fired it at the range several times, and feels completely comfortable with it. The first time I had her fire it was by drawing from a purse and rapid fire at a silhouette at 5 yds. Everything was center mass in an 8 inch group. For the first time firing this gun, not bad. The idea is to hit the attacker center mass and she accomplished that. By the end of the session, her accuracy had greatly improved. Even with the +P loads, she didn’t complain about the recoil and she is a small girl.
Yes, shooting this gun with precision accuracy takes time, training, and experience. However, for an inexperienced shooter needing something to defend themselves at a 3-5 yd range, you can’t get any better. It is light weight, easy to conceal, and very easy to use. Point and pull the trigger. At three yards, even my wife doesn’t need to use the sights if it came to that. No worries about jamming and malfunctions (controversial lock removed). The only downside is the small round capacity and the slow reload time. But that is outweighed by other factors. With the short barrels and heavier loads (especially +p), the muzzle flash and discharge report have a certain clearing the room effect. Only the most determined attacker would stick around, hit or not.
I’d like to correct you on this point “The first time I had her fire it was by drawing from a purse and rapid fire at a silhouette at 5 yds. Everything was center mass in an 8 inch group. For the first time firing this gun, not bad.”
That my friend is “not bad” anytime, first time, every time. Good for her!
Agreed. Having seen far too many failures-to-fire on the range due to new shooters forgetting how to manipulate a more complex semi-automatic, I believe the first priority is getting a bang. Revolvers accomplish this. A hard-kicking little beast like a J-frame is not going to be fun for target shooting, but lots of people who own guns are never going to be recreational target shooters. At the very least, the lightweight J-frame will ensure that they have a gun, and 5 guaranteed shots. And they’ll remember how to use it even if they haven’t been to the range in years. Those interested in target shooting can always buy a similar S&W with a steel frame or in .22 for long afternoons of fun on the range that will also translate to proficiency with the carry weapon.
Charles5, we are all different. My ex-gf also carried a snubby (a Model 638 with the shrouded hammer, formerly called the “Bodyguard” before S&W appropriated the name for its current plastic revolver). Equipped with a laser, she shot the 638 like Annie Oakley shot her rifle. However, most of the newbies that I’ve trained don’t handle a J-frame very well, and that includes men as well as women.
I agree that the J-Frame is not the easiest thing to shoot. Despite the fact that she does not shoot very often, my wife has quite a knack for it, which probably gives her an edge over other newbies. She holds her own with my Sig P226. To each his own.
Hey, that looks familiar!
I love mine. I’ve had it for years. It’s always shot pretty well and it seems to shoot better every time I take it out. It is my EDC weapon unless I’m in the woods. I don’t feel limited by the ammo count as a civilian.
A 342PD with Karl Nill boot grips is my constant companion. It is possibly the ultimate J-frame: chambered in .38+P (and therefore lighter weight than models built to handle .357 magnum, which I don’t shoot out of snubbies anyway), scandium frame (lighter!), titanium cylinder (lighter!!) orange ramp front sight (high visibility) and no lock.
A sweet revolver, that model is no longer made by S&W. They now offer the 340PD chambered for .357. It’s only 11.4 oz. and shoots .38 SPLs very well, but the MSRP is $1,019.00.
Nor do they make the 342Ti which sits in my pocket as I type this.
the 442 is the one i carry very dependable for sure added a pair of crimson trace handles for fast aiming…one small can of woop a$$
There are grips that look better or cost more, but none that I’ve tried work better than the 642’s standard grips.
Try the Crimson Trace LG-405 grips. Same profile as the stock boot grips but with better padding (air pocket) over the top of the backstrap and under the fingers, which makes a huge difference in controllability. Plus, they include a laser to aid in aiming and trigger control practice, and I can’t think of any handgun that benefits more from one.
http://www.crimsontrace.com/Home/Products/SmithWesson/tabid/199/Default.aspx
My 642 was small in my hands and difficult to hold well. I bought some Babolet tennis grip tape and slightly built the grip up. Fits my hands better and reduced the felt recoil. A much better gun for me to shoot.
Sections cut from a bicycle tire inner tube work well too.
Interesting read. We are getting rid of the 642 I bought for the wife several years ago because it is just too difficult for her to shoot. The small size is both a blessing and a curse. For my big hands, it’s waaay too small. We replaced it with a K-frame that is much more to her liking. Review to follow.
these are great , nice review. for beginners start them out with the anemic 38 s& w round. it works fine in thes guns lots less recoil.
I used to carry Model 60 SW but with only 5 rounds it is a limitation. Why? Well in our city there are gangs, flash mobs, and more than 1 or 2 assailants all too frequently. A cop had a shootout last May with 1 assailant. Of course accuracy is the premier so 5 hits can be btter than 13 rounds out of a Glock 23 with all misses. That happened in our city last May in a shootout with a cop stopping a bike rider with no lights at 1am in the morning. The bike rider pulled out a Detective Special and fired six rounds at the cop striking him 6 times and killing him. He had a protective vest on. The cop fired back 12 times with his Glock 23 but on had 2 strikes to the assailants arms. Assialant up for muder 1.
Great review.
The 640, which is a more expensive steel framed version of the 642, is a much better gun, mainly because the additional weight makes the gun much easier to shoot. If the gun is easier to shoot, you’ll practice with it more, and have better odds of getting good hits when it counts. To the “I can’t carry a heavy gun” wusses – my 66 year old, 5’2″ mother in law carries a 640 every day. She found the 640 recoil tolerable and the 642 recoil painful. I’ve lost count of the number of women students we’ve had who were initially “turned off” to shooting by men who made their first shooting experience firing a balsawood snub and a 12 ga pump shotgun loaded with buckshot.
Been shooting for a while, Consider myself a gun nut, like revolvers but never owned a snubbie. Picked up a 442 pro series a couple months ago (no lock from factory, moon clips, hammerless, factory CT laser) and now it’s my carry gun quite a bit.
SUPER LIGHT, man you forget it’s there.
a little practice (you have to change your hold, the thumbs over the top works great) and it’s remarkably accurate. Especially good point shooter. All of a sudden I have like 3 J frames and the itch to get more.
Everyone I show it to likes it.
The first rule of a gunfight: Have a gun.
It’s light, easy to carry, easy manual of arms (pull trigger).
One of the things that was mentioned in the review, but needs to be mentioned again.
This gun can be shot while still in a jacket pocket and while still in the holster. No draw time is a HUUUUUUUUUGE advantage if you are in a SD situation. Repeat….this is a H-U-G-E advantage that is replicated by no other S.D. gun type and strongly sways the odds in your favor.
In my opinion this is the trump move for this gun.
The 642 remains one of the most popular self defense and police back-up guns in the U.S. Due to police and citizen demand, S&W now makes the 642 in a NO-Lock version. If you need to lock the mechanisim of a double action revolver, put a real padlock behind the trigger. Do not buy the INTERNAL LOCK version!
The best investment in your 642 that you can make is to send it to S&W for its “J-frame enhancement package”. For $80 they polish the rebound spring, hammer stud, and yoke barrel bosses; detail the lockwork surfaces; and stone the hammer and trigger contact surfaces. It will make the trigger pull feel significantly lighter even though the springs aren’t changed. Best of all, it won’t affect the warranty.
I’ve really enjoyed this review & associated comments. I would like to offer a couple of observations as a 642 owner with CT lasergrips. The trigger pull is quite firm, but has a very distinct “stop” at which it predictably breaks with minimal pressure. This is very useful for accuracy at a greater distance with slow controlled fire. Also, as stated by others, the 642 can be rapidly fired as well for max hits at short distance.
The other observation, partially addressed, is the poor rear sight. The 642 will shoot very low if using a traditional “top of front sight on horizontal plane with rear sight notch”. Literally, the front sight needs to have 1/2 of its height sighted above the rear sight notch to shoot proper elevation. I have never shot another firearm that has a similar sight picture.
However, I think the 642 is the best concealed carry option for me. With a Uncle Mike’s #3 pocket holster or Fobus ankle holster, I hardly know it’s there & no one else does, either. It goes everywhere with me just like my wallet & keys!
Good review, after 50 years of shooting I have come to realize this is one of many good CC guns.
Pingback: Why I’m choosing a Smith & Wesson wheel gun for summer carry
Pingback: Why I’m choosing a Smith & Wesson wheel gun for summer carry | SLVE - Safety Holsters for Glock, Beretta, Browning HiPower, Smith and Wesson, SIG Sauer, Colt, Springfield XD
I a little while back bought a 642-2 power port pro version and I sincerely love the little guy. Light, comfortable, well made and easy to conceal and carry. The only thing I did to it was have a gunsmith do a trigger job on it, and Wow, its even better now. Help me out with a leather pocket holster, as I have a Betz belt slide, but really want a good leather pocket holster.
Love this great little Smith !!!!
Donald, Mika’s pocket holsters are fantastic custom made by a former LAPD Officer currently in Wisconsin. I received mine 3 weeks ago. Quality, comfortable. Can’t even tell my 642 is in my pocket.
A link to his pocket holster;
http://www.frontiernet.net/~akim/pocket.htm
Pingback: Smith wesson642 | Attackonhold
I loved the review and for the most part agree. My wife (an inexperienced shooter) bought one and loves it. She does have a bit of a time pulling the trigger but I have shown her how as per the article to use the distal joint area to help. She also has the Crimson Trace laser which really helps target engagement once it was adjusted properly. I routinely use a revolver over auto loaders as I enjoy the reliability per the article. My 1911 is my true love but for carry it can get heavy. In any event the article was well written and I enjoyed it.
I love this little airweight revolver! Very easy to conceal and the fact that there’s no hammer to snag on your clothing, makes it a perfect weapon for concealed carry!
why do you state that this gun isn’t for women to carry? what would you recommend for them. my ccw is a .380 sig 238. i think my wife should carry a revolver and thought 642 would be a good choice but now i’m not so sure.
Mike,
The only problem for female concealed carry with a J frame is the trigger pull which is very firm & very long. My wife & 2 adult daughters do not like my 642 for this reason only. A trigger job could likely resolve this issue.
I am a woman and I’m 5 feet tall and weigh less than 100 pounds and I love the 642. Yes, the trigger is hard to pull and it actually cut my hand in the beginning. However, the longer I used it, the easier it got (and using a pair of gloves while practicing helped also). As a woman, though, I don’t want to necessarily go for an “easier” gun. Let you woman decide for herself—that’s what my husband did and it worked out well for us.
I really favor the small-frame S&W revolvers for concealed carry. As per the article, they are extremely reliable and easy to use. I resommend the hammerless Model 642 since the long trigger pull is also a safety feature in that you won’t experience an accidental discharge – if it goes “bang” it will be intentional. Some folks want to point a revolver at a potential assailant and then cock it to show they are “serious.” By so dong, they are holding a revolver with a hair-trigger that will dischage at the slightest movement on the shooter’s part. If the potential assailant decides not to proceed with the assault and turns away, and the intended victim shoots him/her in the back, then it’s a whole new ball game. As far as the stiff trigger is concerned, I had one worked-over by a pistolsmith and it was smooth as silk when he finished. I recommend the Model 642 for novice as well as experienced shooters.
“In Massachusetts, we are limited to ten round magazines by virtue of an “assault weapons…”
You can legally own magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds if they were manufactured prior to the AWB date in 1994 in MA. Only newer production pistols are affected by this since they don’t have any magazines in existence prior to ’94.
Other than that, very nice review. I plan on getting one of these soon for summer carry. But in the colder weather I stick with my Glock 19 since the extra layers make it easy to conceal.
im not rellylooking for any thing except an answer to a certin ? here it is. Are there any guns that take a small silver key? im asking because my mom collected guns befor she died and we found a small silver key that has a strong smell of gun powder.If you hav an answer email me at songsword02@gmail.com
i still like all the wepons. but i do have to say that i’d like more verity of wepons.Don’t you agree?
i dont mean to be rude but i’ve seen this gun in 125 muder invesagations so its a bit old.and i don’t get why butiful wepons have to be used to kill people.
“Carson Kressley can’t limp-wrist a snubby.” — Not a bad review, but what’s with the homophobic comment? If I were you, I’d would just stick to reviews and keep your personal prejudices to yourself. No one needs to know you’re a bigoted POS.
I agree. There’s no need for homophobic comments. I don’t like the condescending remarks about women either: “A J-frame would not be a proper choice for noobs, especially women. Just ask Alicia Keyes.” Stick to reviewing guns.
Pingback: The right to bear arms shall not be determined by the wrong gun
I loved this article and all the pro and con arguments. I carried a J frame for years and only once wished for more ammo in the cylinder. It is an accurate point and shoot gun. When I needed more firepower I’d use my Kimber .45 , which, of course, is not a very concealable. But, oh what stopping power.
I enjoyed your article. I just went to the range today to try out my new S&W 642. It behaved nicely, and I don’t mind the firm trigger. If and when it really matters I don’t think it will be a problem. It’s very reliable and especially easy to clean. Great as an everyday concealed weapon. And I’m using the pink grips; what more could a woman ask for?!
Just read over this article today. My wife saw this in the store with the pink grips and had to have it. It is a nice little piece and will be in a gun vault by her night stand.
took posession of a 642 new in the box exactly one week ago. second time on the range today FTF after 7 rounds. sending it in for repair and then probably will sell it. so much for reliable revolvers… i am mad as hell especially since i talked my wife into one as well.
Tim,
Was the FTF only once or continual? Did the firing pin dent the primer? Have you tried the pencil eraser test for firing pin function? Condition of ammo? Could you provide more info?
Pingback: Smith & Wesson’s 642 Centennial Pocket Gun is a Best Seller « outlawbidder
Thanks so much for this review. I purchased my very own 642 today, which will replace a borrowed .38 revolver that is slightly larger and heavier. For a girl:), I shoot the larger handgun pretty well so I am excited to take this one to a range for a little practice. I am certainly not an “experienced” shooter; however, after handling several revolvers, I am comfortable with my choice. I am anxious about the trigger issues, so thanks for the additional comments.
I currently own a S&W642 38 spl. I purchased several HK and Bianchi speed loaders. Upon using either speed loader I notice that the top of the grip hinders the loader by rubbing. Does anyone know how I can remedy this problem?
Ralph, I have the 642 snub model also, and loved the review, dead on accurate. Hey, chill out “Rob”! (from May26 post)…the man is a reveiwer who’s entitled to exercise his free speech rights. As much as you’d like to silence anyone who doesn’t see it, or do it, your way…he has a full set of rights to say whatever, and write whatever he pleases. Besides, I strongly suspect the reviewer is hardly phobic/fearful of anyone, or their lifestyle choice. ‘Look inward, go the point of your pain.
Yes, the reviewer is entitled to his opinions, but when he makes bigoted comments, we are entitled to call him on it. And you need to look inward at your ignorant comments. Just saying. . .
Hey fruitloop, again… “free speech trumps all”. Learn it, leave it preach it! You’re the ingnorant ass!
Pingback: In the meantime… | Bollinger Arms
Pingback: Free website traffic hits | www.freewebtraffichits.com
I use a J frame for EDC. I practise with it a lot and shoot it competently. I don’t think it’s a good beginner gun at all. The recoil is very snappy making it unpleasant to practice with. (I use half powered rounds ). The sight picture and radius are a struggle even with experience. Most important, trigger control is tough enough for newbies, DA is hard to learn even if you invest in a trigger job. I agree the 5 round capacity is not an issue if you can hit with it and it is awful cute
A most entertaining and informative review. It’s such a pleasure to read someone who can inform with humor and who writes beautifully. Marty
My brother gave me a Smith & Wesson .38 special Model 67-1 and I notice that although this is a double-action revolver, the hammer will not lock into position when pulled back. I can pull the trigger and the revolver seems to work properly. Is there a problem with the hammer or trigger mechanism?
Yes, there’s a problem. This can be caused by the hammer spring retaining screw having been backed off. People sometimes do this to lighten the pull. Look for a small set screw in the bottom of the front strap and tighten it all the way. You may have to remove your grips.
Pingback: Babbs in the Woods: Why I like my snubby -- a Smith & Wesson Airweight 642 - Hunting, shooting, fishing and adventure for women by women
I used to carry my 442 as a back up. I picked up a Taurus snub .357 for that and gave my wife the 442. She loves it and handles the pull well. I just found Hogue makes a bigger rubber grip and am ordering one today from Brownells. We shall see if it makes the gun even better.
Pingback: Bloody Shirt Waver Gets Up Close and Personal with NH Sen. Kelly Ayotte | The Truth About GunsThe Truth About Guns
Hi there would you mind letting me know which web host you’re using? I’ve loaded your blog in 3
completely different web browsers and I must say this blog loads a lot quicker then most.
Can you recommend a good web hosting provider at a
fair price? Many thanks, I appreciate it!