S&W 442 or 642-2? Which do you prefer and why?

[MilitantBEEMER]

Looking at both and want everyone’s opInion. The 442 is no lock and the 642-2 is lock model.

The lock is not a big deal to me. So other than that feature, what do you all think?

 

[HFS]

A no-lock gun (regardless of which model it is) will probably win the popularity contest by a mile.
People hate the so called "Hillary Hole" in the frame for the lock.

I don't know about the frame of the 442 but the aluminum alloy frame of the 642 has some kind of dull gray finish on it.
If a 642 is actually carried the finish will start to go missing in spots leaving the alloy frame exposed.
Some consider it unsightly.
Folks that carried the 442 a lot told me the cylinder on that model definitely needs to be wiped down if carried in a holster in the pocket or next to the body.

 

[MilitantBEEMER]

A no-lock gun (regardless of which model it is) will probably win the popularity contest by a mile.
People hate the so called "Hillary Hole" in the frame for the lock.

I don't know about the frame of the 442 but the aluminum alloy frame of the 642 has some kind of dull gray finish on it.
If a 642 is actually carried the finish will start to go missing in spots leaving the alloy frame exposed.
Some consider it unsightly.
Folks that carried the 442 a lot told me the cylinder on that model definitely needs to be wiped down if carried in a holster in the pocket or next to the body.

Good to know. Either would be a pocket holster only carry gun. The 642 is lightly used and the 442 is new. I can get the 642 for $50 less than the 442.
I am typically not a fan of the gray finish, but the wood grips look nice on it. Plus it comes with a couple boxes of ammo.
Thank you for your input.

 

[HFS]

Don't know if still available but Brownell's used to carry some homely looking boot grips for round butt J and K frames from a company called Precision Gun Specialties.
Just ugly black plastic but they were a lot cheaper than buying the big brand name "boot grips."
No help with recoil just hard plastic.

 

[zipty6]

I'd go with the 442. The finish on the 642, 638, 637, etc looks like crud after a while.

 

[alank2]

I've always liked the 442 more. It is a small thing, but I don't love the difference in the silver look between the 642's frame and the cylinder. After reading quite a bit about how the lock works there is no way I'd want one on a carry gun. The lock is not well designed imho. I was shooting my 442 just this morning and I have to say that the J-frame is a great piece. I find the best technique to shoot them accurately is to stage the trigger, aim precisely, then follow through to fire. As much as I love the snub, the Kahr PM9 series with some bike tire wrapped around the grip is a more capable weapon for pocket duty. 2 more rounds, 9mm, slightly easier trigger, better sights. Good luck!

 

[retrieverman]

I’ve got a 442 (no lock) and a 637 (no lock), and I prefer the 637 because of the hammer. I agree that the finish on the 637/642/638 looks like crap after a few years of being carried, but it is what it is and doesn’t really effect anything other than cosmetics.

 

[MilitantBEEMER]

Thank you all. I am concerned about the finish. I am also going to do some more research on the lock. Thanks again

 

[retrieverman]

Thank you all. I am concerned about the finish. I am also going to do some more research on the lock. Thanks again

The locks are easily removable, and you can get a “filler”.
Lock Delete

Here what the finish looks like after years of carrying.

 

[killerpigeon]

Get both! Then, grab an older model 36 or Chief Special.