S&W Model 638 or 642?

This is a discussion on S&W Model 638 or 642? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Hello. It appears to me that the Model 642 is probably the most popular snub that Smith & Wesson has produced in recent years. I ...

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 55
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: S&W Model 638 or 642?

  1. #1
    1951 - 2011
    Array Stephen A. Camp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Southwest
    Posts
    496

    S&W Model 638 or 642?

    Hello. It appears to me that the Model 642 is probably the most popular snub that Smith & Wesson has produced in recent years. I remember that before this version of their J-frame .38 Special was reborn, I routinely carried a Model 37 with the hammer spur removed as a back up gun when in police service. When these covered hammer snubs hit the market I purchased a Model 042 and eventually a few more...including a Model 638.

    In the past on some other sites I've seen folks vigorously proclaiming the virtues of one over the other and in some cases, sadly, the discussion degenerated into a virtual shouting match...which is both rude and in my view, stupid.

    Let's just take a brief unemotional look at these revolvers and see if any conclusions can be drawn.


    Both the 642 and 638 are intended to be snag free and for pocket or concealed carry. Both of these have aluminum alloy frames with the barrel and cylinder of stainless steel. Some parts are of hardchromed steel such as the triggers. Both are the same size and have round butt grip profiles. Obviously the primary difference is that the "hammerless" 642 does not allow single-action shooting while the 638 does offer that option.


    This photograph better shows the differences between the internally hammered Model 642 vs. the shrouded Model 638. It's interesting to note that an "add on" part to shroud the hammer against snagging was once made for the Colt snubs that competed against the Model 638, so it would appear that concerns over hammer spurs snagging on clothing has been both widespread and long term.

    One gun writer wrote that he has never been able to get any version of the shrouded J-frame snub to shoot as tightly as the others. Perhaps, but that has not proven true in my own experiences with both. I cannot shoot one better than the other in double-action. It seems to me that smoothness of the individual revolver's double-action might well be the determining factor should a fellow see much difference in the performance of two similar snubs from the same maker.


    With the Model 638 the hammer can be cocked for a light, single-action shot if desired. To some the idea of being able to make a more precise shot, perhaps at distance, is an option that they like having. Others suggest that such is not at all likely and that the single-action option leaves one open to suggestions during a civil suit that they cocked the revolver and then unintentionally and negligently shot the poor scum that was trying rape, rob, murder, (take your pick) them. I
    suggest that the buyer/owner/shooter make his decision on which to get based on his own perceptions of what is important.



    Lowering the hammer on the Model 638 is done with less thumb contact on the exposed portion of the hammer spur. I have never had a problem with it and I do not think that it invokes any major difficulties over lowering a non-shrouded hammer, but I don't think that it is quite as "sure" on the Model 638.

    Some years ago I read that if carrying the Model 38 or any version of the shrouded snub to be sure and not have any loose change in your pocket or a dime could become wedged between the hammer spur and the frame and tie up the gun. Unless S&W has altered some dimensions on the hammer or frame, I found this to be impossible to do. A dime simply will not fit between the side of this revolver's hammer and frame. I guess a paperclip or an object of the right size might could do this, but a pocket holster goes a long way in preventing such. I also carry only the holstered revolver in my pocket and I'll bet most other folks using this method of carry do the same. I have found
    the area behind the hammer on the 638 to be a "lint & crud magnet." Pocket carry is simply dirtier than most expect and after toting the Model 638 for ten days as I normally do my well-worn Model 642, I was surprised at the amount of crud that it had picked up. At the same time, the gun worked fine and the trigger pull was not affected.

    For me, the Model 642 is the favorite.

    The primary reason is the lack of another opening for grit and lint to build up. That is my "primary reason", but it is not much of one if we simply clean and maintain our personal carry guns at least once every week or so. Being an old revolver guy for years, I shoot primarily double-action with most six and five-guns and do not find the single-action capability on a revolver of this size to be that much of an advantage. (I definitely do prefer having a single-action option on K, L, and N-frames.)

    In the end I simply cannot find much difference between these revolvers in practical terms. One may have a bit of an advantage in some aspects while the other offers what
    might be a plus for some people.

    "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and is subjective, but I find the 642 more pleasing to the eye. Some will agree. Some will not and others won't care one way or the other, but it is my opinion that either of these little guns will serve about as well as the other and that the potential buyer/user should go with the one he/she prefers.

    I just don't see much difference between these two revolvers and were I in the market for such a snub, I'd probably go with the one having the best price or action.

    Best.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Member Array MillCreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Snohomish County, Washington USA
    Posts
    40
    I once owned a pre-lock 642 that worked pretty well, but I ended up trading it. Interestingly enough, last year I bought the Taurus 650 (Centennial equivalent) and 651 (Bodyguard equivalent). The 651 is in titanium, and it is now my favorite pocket carry revolver. I am a big fan of the S&W or Taurus concealed hammer and shrouded hammer models.
    ___________________

    Regards,

    MillCreek
    Snohomish County, Washington USA

  4. #3
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,064

    Thumbs up Yet Another Great Forum Thread By Stephen A. Camp

    I guess it boils down to how much value you personally place on being able to take a first careful single action cocked hammer shot.

    I honestly love both revolvers and both are equally as snag free.

    I have it on very good authority that the DAO 642 can be given a smoother double action trigger job than the 638. (due to the hammer of the 642...lacking the single cock hammer notch)

    I never did have any problems AT ALL safely lowering the shrouded hammer.

    BTW: Your fantastic added pics are always so much appreciated.

  5. #4
    Member Array kastiron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    216
    Thanks for the excellent comparison and review. I was faced with exactly this decision a few months ago when looking for a more compact carry gun. I ended up going with the 642. Turned out, it was about 2 boxes of shells and a holster less expensive than the 638.

    Too bad it came down to that in my comparison, but found the 642 to offer the best bang for the buck. Sorry for the bad pun.

  6. #5
    Assistant Administrator
    Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South West PA
    Posts
    25,482
    Steve - thanks for another beautifully presented ''article''.

    My vote would be for the 642 - not that I dislike hammers actually and neither do I subscribe to legal ramifications over the single action deal.

    Thing is - defensive revo shooting must almost by default be DA and training reflect that. Were I to want a shrouder hammer gun then it would be 642 much as anything because it will only see DA use. Second to that - practiced DA shooting can allow the shooter to take up all slack such that final release can still be close to SA if time allows.

    Yep - 642 has it.
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."


    http://www.rkba-2a.com/ - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

  7. #6
    Senior Member Array TonyW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    791
    Those both look like very nice guns. Thanks for the great pictures and review.

    Here's a newbie question for you. How do you decock the 642?
    <a target="_top" href="http://www.cybernations.net/default.asp?Referrer=TonyW"><img src="http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd188/18932471/imgad2-1.png" border="0"></a>

  8. #7
    Assistant Administrator
    Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South West PA
    Posts
    25,482
    Tony - the 642 is DAO - it will not stay cocked!

    Pull trigger all way - bang! No half measures - and I suspect there is no SA provision within either for a cocked status to be possible, even with no hammer accessible.
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."


    http://www.rkba-2a.com/ - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

  9. #8
    1951 - 2011
    Array Stephen A. Camp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Southwest
    Posts
    496
    Hello. The 638 is decocked the same as one would for an exposed hammer revolver. For me, I am not able to get quite as much thumb "wrapped around" the hammer spur, but have had no problems decocking the shrouded Model 638.

    Best.

  10. #9
    VIP Member
    Array srfl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    6,870
    Another great Camp article!

    For as much as I like the 638, I'd go with a 642 for no other reason that it's DAO mechanism defeats the most scummy ambulance-chasing attorney salivating at the thought that he could cash in by accusing a good guy of using a revolver with a "hair-trigger."
    USAF: Loving Our Obscene Amenities Since 1947

  11. #10
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,064

    P95....Correct

    There is no possible way to take a single action shot with the 642.

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array Euclidean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,213
    For whatever it's worth, the double action only 642 does not have the same internal configuration as the 638 or 637. Lacking the capability to fire single action, its internals lack the corresponding lockwork.

    If you can find a gunsmith to do an action job, the double action pull on the 642 can be made smoother than the double action pull on the 637 or 638 at least in theory.

  13. #12
    Member Array Snowshoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    next door
    Posts
    104
    I'd rather have the 638
    "You have enemies ? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life" Winston Churchill

    "I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forgo their use" Galileo Galilei

  14. #13
    Member Array BigBore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    73
    I was looking at both as a BUG but went
    with the 642-2 because of price.For
    some reason it was 30 dollars less than
    the 638.Also having the option of a S/A
    trigger wasn't enought for me to spend
    the extra money.I carry a 3" 65-3 daily
    and can not remember the last time i
    shot it S/A.

  15. #14
    Member Array 1man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    StL, MO
    Posts
    156
    I personnaly like the 638 over the 642. I have an 649 38special and I like it better than the new school 638(alloy frame). I'm in the process of acquiring a 640 38special because the PD I'm applying for only approves of DAO revolvers.

    I had to send my 638(new school) back to S&W because it keeps locking up on me when practicing with snap caps. It never happened shooting live ammo but I wasn't going to take the chance having it lock up when I would need it on the street, so I sent it to S&W to check it out.
    Train how you Fight
    Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast!
    "Anything you do can get you killed, including nothing." Murphy's Combat Law

  16. #15
    Senior Member
    Array sojourner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,054
    I have a 642. The Centennial frame (fully enclosed hammer). From S&W website:

    "They are available in three distinct hammer styles the "Chiefs Special" with exposed hammer, the "Centennial" frame with fully enclosed hammer and the "Bodyguard" frame (.38 S&W Special +P only) shrouded hammer. Three styles with one idea...perfect personal protection. "

    In addition to fully enclosed hammer, sounds like they have shrouded and fully exposed hammer. Never saw them, just reading from what is on the website.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Win Model 70 or Savage Model 16
    By chains1240 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 24th, 2009, 12:15 PM
  2. Are S&W model 10 and model 64 +P rated
    By searcher 45 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: November 20th, 2009, 08:46 PM
  3. Size of S&W Model 60 (357) vs Model 36 (38spl) & Ruger SP101
    By batpot in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: February 13th, 2009, 09:12 PM
  4. S&W Model 65
    By roadsiderob in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: March 7th, 2008, 07:48 PM
  5. Advantages of s&w model 625 over model 1917
    By pmaenner in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: July 5th, 2006, 03:13 PM

Search tags for this page

638 vs 642
,
m638 vs m642
,

model 638

,

model 638 review

,
s&w model 638
,

s&w 638

,

s&w 638 vs 642

,

s&w model 638

,

s&w model 638 review

,
smith and wesson 638 review
,

smith and wesson model 638

,
smith and wesson model 638 review
Click on a term to search for related topics.