S&W J frames
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
G
Guest
·S&W J Frame Centenial 442
Hey Micheal!!
How's it going!!
Well My newly aquired S&W 442 Centenial has become my favorite carry piece mostly because of it's weight & stealthy appearance..
I've been carring it in my front jeans pocket & coat pocket on colder days, It goes with me everywere..
It's loaded with the 135gr Spear Gold Dot +P 38 Spl.
I don't think there's a better carry gun made IMO..
My Walther PPK/S sure is getting Jelouse :-D
![]()
Hey Micheal!!
How's it going!!
Well My newly aquired S&W 442 Centenial has become my favorite carry piece mostly because of it's weight & stealthy appearance..
I've been carring it in my front jeans pocket & coat pocket on colder days, It goes with me everywere..
It's loaded with the 135gr Spear Gold Dot +P 38 Spl.
I don't think there's a better carry gun made IMO..
My Walther PPK/S sure is getting Jelouse :-D
Micheal it's Me Beretta92.. From The Walther Forum..
I haden't logged in an it let me post as a guest??
[email protected]
I haden't logged in an it let me post as a guest??
[email protected]
Joined
·
336 Posts
I have a 642 that I will carry in my front pocket when just knocking around. I also have a bellyband that I like to use that works great with the 642.
Joined
·
6 Posts
I'm working on getting a 642 myself. I've heard much about them, and all seem to be great reviews. I'll post a report when I get it, and a range report shortly thereafter.Vom Kriege said:
Joined
·
336 Posts
I have been very pleased with mine. I'd like to ditch the key lock when possible, but I really like the revolver. I have carried it a good bit since I bought it. I hesitated for a long time because I thought that the money for five shots wasn't a great buy, but I am very happy that I did finally buy one.Jade Falcon said:
Joined
·
107 Posts
Faithful Revolvers...
Hello. On 04.07.93, I bought a revolver primarily as a BUG for duty use as a peace officer. It was a NIB S&W Model 042. The anodizing on this gun was originally shinier than on current Model 442's and it is on the smaller "non-magnum" J-frame and with the thinner front sight. Like all of the .38 J-frame snubs, it holds but 5 shots. There is no +P designation on it anywhere, but it has digested more than a few.
This gun was never used as a primary on anything and never drawn against another person...unlike the belt gun it was quietly backing up, but it went with me on narcotics raids, routine patrol, a couple of barricaded persons situations and other police activity and was often what I carried off-duty as a BUG and sometimes a primary.
When I retired from policing in '98, it didn't, and was my 24/7 revolver for a few more years.
![]()
This one may be a bit worn, but it has been a faithful servant though one that required regular practice so that I could do my part in seeing that it did its. I believe the snub Airweight to be a really decent BUG, but do NOT think it is the best choice at all for new shooters, be they male or female.
On 06.25.02, I replaced the faithful 042 with a common, run-of-the-mill Model 642. The reason was simple. I carry the snub primarily via a pocket holster and 24/7. Summers are hot in Texas and even daily cleaning was still not always enough to keep rust spots from popping up. I don't mind honest 'battle scars" or signs of use, but cannot abide rust.
Now the Model 642 is showing signs of constant carry, but it is much easier to maintain corrosion free.
![]()
This Model 642 continues to serve well and while I "like" and trust it, the ol' 042 remains my favorite between the two. I'm not sure why unless it is that I actually prefer blue/dark guns.
![]()
Both the 642 and 042 are loaded with the same ammunition: Remington's 158-gr. LSWCHP +P. I've tried others but in this caliber, I still prefer this "old techology" cartridge. (Federal's version seems to work about as well as the Remington FWIW.)
If you are considering a compact, but reasonably potent BUG, I suggest taking a look at the Airweight line. I personally prefer the older versions w/o the lock...to the point that I will not own one with it. These aluminum-framed revolvers are plenty light to carry, but heavy enough that one doesn't have to be concerned with bullets unseating themselves during recoil. I've never had it happen nor has anyone I'm familiar with.
These do require practice in order for their users to be able to get the shots where they need to go and their payload doesn't leave much room for error in terms of either power or number of immediately available shots, and reloading is not nearly so quick as with an automatic.
Still, they offer what I consider "adequate" power...in practiced hands. These guns are convenient to carry and usually reliable in the extreme assuming at least a minimal amount of care.
The Model 042 and 642 follow a fairly long line of Airweights I've carried over the years and for me, they remain a top choice. Others will disagree and that's fine, but IF you are looking for a compact little gun to be with you 24/7 and you are willing to practice with it, I think this type revolver is tough to beat.
I guess I'm not alone as they've been around in this role for decades.
Best.
Hello. On 04.07.93, I bought a revolver primarily as a BUG for duty use as a peace officer. It was a NIB S&W Model 042. The anodizing on this gun was originally shinier than on current Model 442's and it is on the smaller "non-magnum" J-frame and with the thinner front sight. Like all of the .38 J-frame snubs, it holds but 5 shots. There is no +P designation on it anywhere, but it has digested more than a few.
This gun was never used as a primary on anything and never drawn against another person...unlike the belt gun it was quietly backing up, but it went with me on narcotics raids, routine patrol, a couple of barricaded persons situations and other police activity and was often what I carried off-duty as a BUG and sometimes a primary.
When I retired from policing in '98, it didn't, and was my 24/7 revolver for a few more years.
This one may be a bit worn, but it has been a faithful servant though one that required regular practice so that I could do my part in seeing that it did its. I believe the snub Airweight to be a really decent BUG, but do NOT think it is the best choice at all for new shooters, be they male or female.
On 06.25.02, I replaced the faithful 042 with a common, run-of-the-mill Model 642. The reason was simple. I carry the snub primarily via a pocket holster and 24/7. Summers are hot in Texas and even daily cleaning was still not always enough to keep rust spots from popping up. I don't mind honest 'battle scars" or signs of use, but cannot abide rust.
Now the Model 642 is showing signs of constant carry, but it is much easier to maintain corrosion free.
This Model 642 continues to serve well and while I "like" and trust it, the ol' 042 remains my favorite between the two. I'm not sure why unless it is that I actually prefer blue/dark guns.
Both the 642 and 042 are loaded with the same ammunition: Remington's 158-gr. LSWCHP +P. I've tried others but in this caliber, I still prefer this "old techology" cartridge. (Federal's version seems to work about as well as the Remington FWIW.)
If you are considering a compact, but reasonably potent BUG, I suggest taking a look at the Airweight line. I personally prefer the older versions w/o the lock...to the point that I will not own one with it. These aluminum-framed revolvers are plenty light to carry, but heavy enough that one doesn't have to be concerned with bullets unseating themselves during recoil. I've never had it happen nor has anyone I'm familiar with.
These do require practice in order for their users to be able to get the shots where they need to go and their payload doesn't leave much room for error in terms of either power or number of immediately available shots, and reloading is not nearly so quick as with an automatic.
Still, they offer what I consider "adequate" power...in practiced hands. These guns are convenient to carry and usually reliable in the extreme assuming at least a minimal amount of care.
The Model 042 and 642 follow a fairly long line of Airweights I've carried over the years and for me, they remain a top choice. Others will disagree and that's fine, but IF you are looking for a compact little gun to be with you 24/7 and you are willing to practice with it, I think this type revolver is tough to beat.
I guess I'm not alone as they've been around in this role for decades.
Best.
Joined
·
2 Posts
042 Smith Wesson
I think the 042 Smith Wesson J frames are fairly rare. I know were one is NIB and it's pricey.
I think the 042 Smith Wesson J frames are fairly rare. I know were one is NIB and it's pricey.
Joined
·
36 Posts
My old model 36
![]()
What makes the 340PD so much more expensive than the S&W 442? The only things I notice right off the bat are the different grips, 3 oz. of weight and the titanium cylinder. If those are the only things, how does that equate to the 340PD being over $400 more than the 442?Tifosi said:
Just a question from a revolver newbie.
Steve, actually on the open market the price differential is about $200. The 340 is a .357 magnum round the 442 is a .38 special the frame on the 442 is aluminum and the 340 is Scandium. 3oz difference is 20% difference in weight. Some people have bigger pockets and some people have heavier pockets, I guess it all a matter of preference.
J frames
I have had a Love afair with J frame S&W since I bought my first one in 1963. My one experience with the Aluminum ones was not great thus I have stayed with the steel / stainless models My first one looked like this.[img:640:480:60315887be]http://www.fototime.com/B6E3B7DF7CEE08D/standard.jpg[/img:60315887be]
I do like the 3" rather than the 2" but I have to admit to owning several of each. I bought a new S&W model 42 in 1968 and found that it was not as accurate as I wanted. I shot over 1000 rounds through it but could not get them to group like the steel 36 3" I turned it in for a model 60 2" and found the extra weight did wonders for me. I have left the alum. models alone since then. I sometimes think that a Scandia .357 might be nice to try but haven't gotten to do it yet. :smt023
I have had a Love afair with J frame S&W since I bought my first one in 1963. My one experience with the Aluminum ones was not great thus I have stayed with the steel / stainless models My first one looked like this.[img:640:480:60315887be]http://www.fototime.com/B6E3B7DF7CEE08D/standard.jpg[/img:60315887be]
I do like the 3" rather than the 2" but I have to admit to owning several of each. I bought a new S&W model 42 in 1968 and found that it was not as accurate as I wanted. I shot over 1000 rounds through it but could not get them to group like the steel 36 3" I turned it in for a model 60 2" and found the extra weight did wonders for me. I have left the alum. models alone since then. I sometimes think that a Scandia .357 might be nice to try but haven't gotten to do it yet. :smt023
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
