S&W 442, 642 or ruger 327

[bobed]

I am thinking about purchasing a small revolver for self defense but I do not know much about them. These are the ones that I liked that were available at the gun shop I went to. I believe that the 2 S&W's had locks. I have heard people say these locks were an issue. Any advice on these guns would be great.
I have looked at Taurus revolvers before but have only heard bad things about them.

I have also heard about bullets jumping crimp? Is this a common thing?

 

[Glocktogo]

I am thinking about purchasing a small revolver for self defense but I do not know much about them. These are the ones that I liked that were available at the gun shop I went to. I believe that the 2 S&W's had locks. I have heard people say these locks were an issue. Any advice on these guns would be great.
I have looked at Taurus revolvers before but have only heard bad things about them.

I have also heard about bullets jumping crimp? Is this a common thing?

Not common on the bolded part. For defense I'd buy a used no-lock 442 or 642 before I'd buy a new one with a lock (even at identical pricing). Good luck finding ammo for the .327 Mag and snubbies are shot best if you practice regularly. I'd consider a Ruger LCR, particularly for the sweet trigger pull. Probably the first time a DA Ruger ever had a better trigger out of the box than a comparable Smith DA.

 

[Dbltap]

442 and 642 are the same gun just different finishes. I have a 642 with the lock. Love it! Lock has given me no problems so far. Had it for 6 years or so and about 500 rounds.

 

[Adam]

I have a 642 also. It's a great gun. I highly recommend crimson trace laser grips. I have 'em, and love 'em. I like revolvers for pocket guns. Less worry about "printing". They don't look like a gun once it's in your pocket.

 

[dlbleak]

the gp100 in 327 has my attention right now. you have the ability to fire 4 different calibers in the same gun 32 s&w,32 s&w long,32 h&r mag and of course 327 mag. and you get 7 shots in the gp100.

 

[TonyT]

I have a S&W 642 which I have carried and shot for several years. No problem with the lock - I do not believe it is a real issue.

 

[jej]

The super light alloy guns carry well and shoot badly with hot ammo. Shooting super light guns with .357 mag ammo is punishing. If you want to carry a very light gun, stick to .38 special. Maybe stick to non +p ammo. The right load is plenty for SD. Maybe Federal Nyclad.

Jumping the crimp is, supposedly, a risk only with very hot loads, light bullets, and the lightest guns.

For shooting, I like the all steel S&W J frame and Ruger SP101. First shot is more accurate for me. Second shot recovery is faster for me. They carry fine in the right holster. I carry OWB with a cover shirt most of the time.

For pocket carry, you can buy new Smith 442 with no lock. I think you can get 642 new with no lock, not sure. You can get older Smiths with no lock all day long. I think that the Ruger LCR may make the grade, too. For pocket carry, I'd want hammerless. Its just me, but for holster carry, I like a hammer.

cg says above that 442 and 642 are the same gun with different finishes - really? I thought 642 was stainless and 442 carbon steel.

I won't own a gun with a lock. Too many stories of failure for me. One story would have been too many for me.

I don't much like speed loaders for J frames. I like speed strips for my ammo. When conditions permit, a second J frame is the fastest reload for me.

I don't know anything about Taurus.

Small revolvers take plenty of practice to get good with them. For me, that is especially true of shooting with my left hand, double action. Lots of dry fire, lots of live fire needed for that.

YMMV.

jej

 

[JTA]

cg says above that 442 and 642 are the same gun with different finishes - really? I thought 642 was stainless and 442 carbon steel.

Yes, these are the same gun with different finishes. Neither frames are carbon or stainless steel. The guns are made from an aluminum frame, and the colors (black on the 442 or silver on the 642) are only asthetic differences due to differences in the colors added during the anodizing process.

 

[cowboydoc]

I have a S&W 642, no-lock, that I bought new. There are some no-lock ones still out there. I bought mine at Sports World in Tulsa. It was the same price, or close to it, for a no-lock or one with a lock. As stated before, the 442 is the same gun, just with a black finish.

It is very easy to carry just about any way you want- IWB, OWB, pocket. It is harder to shoot well than a bigger, heavier gun. But with practice, you should be able to get decent groups. I shoot mostly non +P for practice, but shoot some of my carry ammo (Hornady Critical Defense +P) at each range session. The +P is louder and has more muzzle flash, but actual recoil doesn't seem much more to me. It is not a gun to shoot all day for fun, I usually do 50 to 100 rounds at most.

As far as bullets jumping crimp, I have only read about that happening with the scandium .357mag models shooting lightweight bullets.

 

[alank2]

Hi bobed,

You didn't mention the Ruger LCR, not sure if that is on your consider list or not, but it competes directly with the S&W 642/442. I've never shot one, but I wanted to mention it since it is an option. I hear they usually have a nice workable trigger out of the box.

I am not a fan of the internal lock on any S&W model. I am against it in principal because internal locks are an "antigun" invention. But even moreso with the S&W implementation because it is badly designed and prone to fail. Sure, some people have had it for a long time and never had an issue with it, but there are plenty of documented cases where it did fail. When I first took my original 442 with the lock apart, I was truly shocked at its poor design. First, it is NOT a lock in the sense that a key is required to operate it. There is no mechanism that holds it in the locked or unlocked position for a proper key. You can grab it with small pliers and turn it to lock or unlock. It is kept in position by spring tension. Sometimes recoil can overcome this tension and partially lock it. Also, it works like this - when "locked" it FORCES the gun locked. When "unlocked" it only removes that force. At that point a very tiny and flimsy spring pushes the part that locks it out of the way. Any failure of that spring = locked up gun. Needless to say I consider the lock completely unacceptable on a self defense weapon. For a range gun I wouldn't care... If I had a S&W with the lock and I needed it for self defense, I would just remove the lock. Not too hard to do with instructions over at the S&W forum.

I have a no lock 442 which is nice and smooth now, but J-frames are usually quite trigger heavy from the factory. I took mine apart and smoothed it and put in a lighter rebound spring so the trigger would be workable. I say workable, because many J-frame triggers are what I consider so heavy they make any sort of accurate shooting difficult.

It may sound like I am talking you out of a S&W, but that really isn't the case. They are just more work IMHO to get "ideal", but I think they are nicer once you've gone through the work. First, I'd try to find a no lock version so you don't have to remove the lock. I think S&W is still making some runs of no-lock 442's. Second, plan on spending the money for a good gunsmith to smooth the trigger pull to something reasonable. IMPORTANT - make sure they are capable of doing this WITHOUT lightening the hammer spring. You need all the primer detonation power you can get.

If I couldn't get a no-lock model, or didn't know how to smooth out the trigger, the Ruger LCR would be very tempting...

Good luck,

Alan