S&W 442,642
On my search to find a revolver for CC these 2 DAO guns have gotten my attention.
My concern is that both are priced well below most SWs.
Are they of lesser quality than most other smiths?
I feel SW has done this with thier sigma semis to compete with companies like Taurus.
Can someone tell me how well their 442s or 642s have held up after firing lots of rounds through them?
Thank you.
My concern is that both are priced well below most SWs.
Are they of lesser quality than most other smiths?
I feel SW has done this with thier sigma semis to compete with companies like Taurus.
Can someone tell me how well their 442s or 642s have held up after firing lots of rounds through them?
Thank you.
0
-
S&W has changed the format of their website (& printed catalog) many times, & I can see how it can be confusing when you try to figure out the differences between their many models.
In order to keep their guns affordable, S&W has made changes throughout their line, primarily using modern MIM & CNC methods, rather than the more costly forging method. But, this change has had little effect on the reliability of their guns.
If S&W worries about any of their competition, it would be Glock, Beretta, & Sig Sauer, not Taurus.
The S&W's you are looking at are reasonably priced because they are the "basic" models, with steel cylinders & aluminum frame. They will do fine for most folks, but the aluminum frame means that a steady diet of high power loads will eventually cause problems that require repair or replacement. If you plan to fire tens of thousands of rounds through your CC revolver, you want to select an all steel model, or one with titanium &/or scandium. (My CC gun is a Model 60 in .38 special, which is smaller & lighter than the current .357 mag version of the Model 60.)
Neal0 -
They are both alloy frame guns. The S&W quality is there. I've had a 442 since they came out. It doesn't get shot as much as my 640 because of thr frame. Like anyones alloy frame, a steady diet of full kouse ammo will loosen them up.
The more expencive Smiths have scandium frames, if you check closer.0 -
I have a 442 and have nothing but praise for this inexpensive (notice I didn't say cheap) firearm. I can honestly say that I have put over 10,000 rounds through it and not had any repairs. You just need to clean and lube it once in a while. It is our plinking weapon at deer and turkey camp, and has killed hundreds of cans. 0 -
If you can still find one, I would recommend the 642 Powerport model, has a longer ejector rod to make clearing your empties more reliable. The ported barrel really does reduce muzzle jump.
Here is one for sale on the auction side (not my auction):
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=2734962990 -
I've had a 642 for 4 yrs and put about 600 hundred rounds through it without a problem. It's rated for +P but I never tried them on the advice of a friend. The one thing I don't like about it once it's fired the back end of the cylinder seems to get darkened(stained from the powder) and never looks the same as the rest of the gun. However it's a great pocket carry gun and I especially like that it does'nt have a hammer. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by tone59
My concern is that both are priced well below most SWs.
I don't think that's true. They may be a "little" below, but not "well" below.
I believe these are actually Smith's most popular production revolvers, and there are a lot of them floating around out there, partially explaining a slightly reduced price. I've these for around $400 new. Do you know of a source much cheaper than that? (If so I'll probably buy one!).
quote:Are they of lesser quality than most other smiths?
They're built in the same factory with the same tooling out of the same parts by the same workers as all the other alloy frame small revolvers. So far as I know and can tell, they're not any worse (or better) than the others.
quote:
Can someone tell me how well their 442s or 642s have held up after firing lots of rounds through them?
Thank you.
Well, my 637-2 (which is identical to the 642, but with hammer) is doing just fine with at least 500 rounds through it, including several of .38+P. I trust this as my main carry gun (and I have many others I could use), so I guess that's the best endorsement I can give it.
I haven't personally done it, but these guns have been "torture tested" with literally thousands of rounds of .38+P ammo, and UNLIKE the older alloy frame guns from the 1970s and before, the current Smith offerings will stand up to lots of high pressure ammo, effectively more than you'll probably ever "need" to shoot through one.0 -
BTS: Lots of both 642 and 442 under 400 skins on the sales board, a local LE supplier here has 342 for $499, 442 for $349, and 642 for $355.
These are great guns for pocket/back up stuff. I carried a 640 Centennial for years, and only got rid of it because I traded it for a M-19 2.5" and 100 bucks.
The only issue I know of (first hand) is a friend of mine wore off the little projection on the left side of the frame that stops the cylinder from moving forward when unloading. (This was after thousands of uses) Because it was unrepairable, he sent it back to S&W, and they sent him an entirely new gun. IMO you can't go wrong with these for a .38 special CCW.0 -
Thank you all for the advice.
I am also considering the Ruger LCR and would appreciate any comments on this model.0 -
We've been discussing the LCR on this forum for a few years. I suggest that you do a search on the forum archives.
Neal0 -
nmyers...It seems to me the SW MP guns are in competition with Glock,Springfield XD,and other middle of the road semis.
The quality and price of the Sigmas seem to be more in line with the Taurus.
Can someone please tell me how to do a search of the archives?
Thank you.0 -
You will be the best judge of what you want.............. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
11 comments