642/442 vs. 640

This is a discussion on 642/442 vs. 640 within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by soIcouldSee Anyone who had/has both care to weigh in? Is the 640 that much bigger and heavier (half a pound according to ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 18 of 18
Like Tree6Likes

Thread: 642/442 vs. 640

  1. #16
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    9,514
    Quote Originally Posted by soIcouldSee View Post
    Anyone who had/has both care to weigh in? Is the 640 that much bigger and heavier (half a pound according to S&W's website) to make it a real pain to pocket carry in comparison to the 642/442?

    I like the lightness of the 642/442 for carrying, but for shooting I know that the 640 would be easier (assuming the tiggers are the same on both models?), follow up shots would likely be faster, and so on. So I'm not sure which one to choose.
    My first snub was all steel, about 21 ounces empty, and while I knew it was in my pocket, it wasn't obtrusive. After 6 or 7 years, I picked up an alloy-framed snub, about 16 ounces, and the lighter weight just makes it more convenient to carry. If this will be your first snub, the extra few ounces will help you control recoil and muzzle flip a bit more easily then the lightweight option, but it's really not a huge difference. I will say that with the steel gun, 50 rounds of practice is no big deal, but after the same round count with the alloy gun I'm ready for something more relaxing, like a .45.
    Smitty
    NRA Endowment Member

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member
    Array PEF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,071
    I have both. When I carry a revolver, I tend to carry the 640 either IWB in a Galco Royal Guard or OWB in a Galco Concealable Belt holster. The 640 is very comfortable for IWB/OWB. For pocket carry, I go with the 642 in either a WRB or Uncle Mike's pocket holster. The 640 is just too heavy (for me) for pocket carry. It flops around and feels like....well, a big gun in my pocket.

    The 640 has a slightly longer and larger barrel (full underlug), and comes with a tactical (pinky) grip. But you can put on a boot grip and it's as concealable as the 642. And if you buy a holster for a 640 the 642 will fit just fine.

    Neither are good "range guns." That's not what they are designed for. Shooting .38's in the 640 is more comfortable, but .38's in the 642 are very manageable.

    If I could only have one, I would probably go with the 642, because of the pocket carry option. If I did not pocket carry at all, then I would go with the 640.

  4. #18
    Senior Member Array camsdaddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    701
    I have a 642 and an sp101 which is steel. I carry both in my pocket. I'm considering buying a 640 because I find the little extra size and not the weight that I would like to be smaller.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

442 vs 640
,

442 vs 642

,

640 vs 642

,

642 vs 442

,
model 640 vs 442
,
s&w 442 vs 640
,

s&w 442 vs 642

,

s&w 640 vs 642

,
smith and wesson 442 vs 640
,

smith and wesson 640 vs 442

,
whichisbetter640or642
,
whichisbetter640or642gun
Click on a term to search for related topics.