Smith & Wesson 642 vs 638 - Page 2

Smith & Wesson 642 vs 638

This is a discussion on Smith & Wesson 642 vs 638 within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by semperfi.45 With practice the Airweight's trigger can be staged to a single action shot. This^^^^ I can shoot my j frames slow ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 42
  1. #16
    Member Array roadrash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    319
    Quote Originally Posted by semperfi.45 View Post
    With practice the Airweight's trigger can be staged to a single action shot.

    This^^^^

    I can shoot my j frames slow fire ,more accurately double action than I can single action !


  2. #17
    Distinguished Member Array pirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Eastern NC / Pirate Country
    Posts
    1,820
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackeagle View Post
    For self defense, cocking a revolver is generally a bad idea. The fact that the 442 can't be cocked is a benefit, since it makes it impossible for a prosecutor to argue that you cocked the gun and then accidentally shot someone (self defense is not available as a legal defense if you are charged with negligently shooting someone).

    Back when police departments still issued revolvers, some issued double action only guns for just this reason.
    Everybody is entitled to their opinion and I respect yours, but I see a lot of this type of rationale here on this site where someone attempts to look into a "crystal ball" and determine the mind set of prosecutors and lawyers after a hypothetical shooting and determine what potential mistakes have been made by the shooter when there are so many variables and circumstances to consider that its really useless and absurd to attempt to do it.

    You could go to trial in different states or even counties or cities within a state and get several different verdict depending on where the trial was held, make up of the jury at the time, and most importantly who the prosecutor is (liberal and anti gun, or conservative and pro gun) and how good your attorney is a doing his job, so again its really useless to surmise on outcomes for the most part, and a J Frame with a hammer ( cocked or not) is no more likely or less likely to get you convicted of a criminal shooting unless it was a “bad shooting” anyway.
    Last edited by pirate; May 27th, 2009 at 09:21 PM.
    When I leave the home port:
    S&W 642 Airweight, Ruger SP 101, Colt Detective Spec., CZ RAMI, Kahr PM9, Kahr CW40, S&W Model 10-7, Glock 30, 19, and 26, Browning Hi Power, CZ82, Colt Commander, Dan Wesson PM7, Ruger LCP

  3. #18
    VIP Member Array Blackeagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    2,147
    Quote Originally Posted by retsupt99 View Post
    I don't buy this arguement for a moment. An 'accidental' shoot is an accidental shoot...period.
    If you are properly defending yourself because of a threat, you have no worries about whether or not you cocked your hammer first.
    It's happened before. Look up the Luis Alvarez case (it's in the Ayoob Files book). He was a Miami police officer who was falsely alleged to have cocked his revolver before shooting a suspect. If it was intentional, it would have been a good shoot, but the DA (Janet Reno) accused him of negligently shooting the suspect and put him on trial for manslaughter. He was eventually acquitted, but he was suspended for fourteen months and an had to go through an eight week trial. There are several other examples of criminal charges involving false accusations of an accidental shooting in a self defense situation, not to mention countless civil suits.

    There was recently a good discussion of this on the Pro Arms podcast, where Massad Ayoob does quite a good job of explaining why prosecutors and plaintiff's lawyers pursue this sort of theory in an effort to get convictions and civil judgments.

  4. #19
    Senior Member Array mr surveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas, South of the Sabine
    Posts
    1,149
    ditto what Wormy said. I love my SA/DA 637 and carry it daily "in the field"


    surv

  5. #20
    Senior Member Array redbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Murfreesboro, TN
    Posts
    649
    642 keeps the lint and critters out when you pocket carry or even waist carry.

  6. #21
    VIP Member
    Array Saber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona
    Posts
    2,591
    Well, shrouded vs. hammerless, I prefer the latter. The 638 has a pleasant feel to it although the design has always left me feeling somewhat perplexed. I never felt comfortable pulling the hammer back with the skimpy pad of my thumb. Likewise, I feel the shroud makes cleaning more difficult. As a LEO when revolvers were standard issue, I can shoot DA or SA without much compromise. As for CC, I prefer DAO.
    Regards,
    “Monsters are real and so are ghosts. They live inside of us, and sometimes they win.”
    ~ Stephen King

  7. #22
    Member Array PackN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    128
    I totally agree with the lint-goobers that would get into the hammer channel from your pocket. I got a 642 and love it.
    Change We Can Believe In 01.20.13 Gun Control is Being Able to Hit Your Target.

  8. #23
    Distinguished Member Array coffeecup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Cadiz,Ky
    Posts
    1,246
    DUst Bunnies arent an issue with my stainless 638, it lives in my tacklebox. Even tho I think it is ugly as home made soap, I still like them better than the hammerless models.

  9. #24
    Member Array Invisible Swordsman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massillon, OH
    Posts
    26
    I have both, but carry my 638. the reason is that i seem to shoot it better than the 642. There's a slight difference in the feel of the grip that seems to give me more control. Others will have different results.

  10. #25
    New Member Array latexan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Houston, Tx
    Posts
    14
    i agree no time to cock a hammer when your being approached by a potential attacker. i have a 442 and find the heavy trigger good, prevents "accidental" discharge.

  11. #26
    Senior Member Array kahrcarrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    IN
    Posts
    616
    I went for the 638 over the 642.

    I like the single action option, even if I never use it.

    As a side note, I did go back to put the 642 on layaway a few days after buying the 638, but the little guy was sold.

    My dealer rarely has S&W snubs on his shelves, and they don't last long when he snags a couple. [small shop]

  12. #27
    Senior Member Array adaman04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Show Me State
    Posts
    809
    The 638 allowing the gun to be cocked in to SA has little place for CCW in my opinion. Also it is pretty hard to lower the hammer on those guns, especially under duress.

  13. #28
    Senior Member Array mr surveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas, South of the Sabine
    Posts
    1,149
    Some of us use our firearms as CCW's for more than just "bad guys" of the two legged variety. Having the option to thumb the hammer back to make a more precise shot than the typical com shot on a "bad guy" (of the two legged variety) is very important. Your experiences may vary

    surv

  14. #29
    Member Array Wlkrbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackeagle View Post
    For self defense, cocking a revolver is generally a bad idea. The fact that the 442 can't be cocked is a benefit, since it makes it impossible for a prosecutor to argue that you cocked the gun and then accidentally shot someone (self defense is not available as a legal defense if you are charged with negligently shooting someone).

    Back when police departments still issued revolvers, some issued double action only guns for just this reason.
    I agree EXCELLENT point!!!
    - Bob

    NRA Member

  15. #30
    Senior Member Array AZ Desertrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    671
    I have and use both DAO and SA/DA.....I can use either equally well...and as long
    as you are careful not to get junk in the action, you should be ok.
    I like the idea of being able to cock and use SA if I want to....of course
    one has to know that in an emergency situation, it is unlikely that you will
    have time to make an "aimed" single action shot.
    "The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people; it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government--lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." --Patrick Henry

    USCG Veteran
    NRA Life Member

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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. Smith and Wesson 669...
    By jwarren in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: December 21st, 2010, 11:31 AM
  2. Smith and Wesson 442 and 642
    By G19inLV in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: January 25th, 2010, 12:30 PM
  3. Smith & Wesson 469
    By arby238 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 30th, 2009, 09:29 PM
  4. Smith & Wesson CS9
    By gwlammers in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: August 29th, 2008, 05:28 PM
  5. smith and wesson
    By cnc_marine in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: February 8th, 2006, 12:09 PM

Search tags for this page

638 vs 642

,
642 vs 638
,
s&w 442 vs 638
,

s&w 638 vs 642

,

s&w 642 vs 638

,
smith & wesson 638 vs 642
,
smith 638
,
smith 638 vs 642
,
smith 642 vs 638
,
smith and wesson 638
,

smith and wesson 638 vs 642

,

smith and wesson 642 vs 638

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors