New S&W snub

[Buzz]

I picked up my new carry gun tonight. I'm happy to have found a 642 without the internal lock. It is new production and the frame is marked 642-1.

Put a box through it right after I signed the papers. Shooting an Airweight snub is not exactly my most enjoyable range experience, but that isn't why I bought it. (Now I just need to find a good holster.)

I'm not really wild about the stock 642 grips. I will probably look into something smoother for carry to keep it from printing as easily.

The new 642 joins the stable along with my longtime companion, a stainless Model 60. I put a few rounds through it tonight just for good measure.

[cknight8]

sweet, its hard to beat a S&W snub for a carry gun. i have a 37 Airweight that rides along with me quite often. a 642 with no lock is on my "To Get" list for sure. nice find!

[Guest Major Pain]

Very nice pistol, hard to beat. I carried a 642 for last few years. Maybe not as high a round count as an auto, but never had a FTF or FTE so far.--MP

[Guest Grout]

I have one just like it.Personally I like the rubber grips,they make the gun more controllable during rapid fire and I have not noticed them printing.I also have a strip of stair tread tape covering the backstrap.I find that combo to work very well controlling +P ammo.

[Jasongar8]

Just wondering why did u decide on the one without a lock? These are new to me, ive never seen one. How long have they been out? I havent heard of any problems on the 642's with the locks, are there? What advantages are there to the "lockless" 642. Im in the market for a 340pd so just trying to learn a little about Smiths little snubs.

-Jason G

[DaveTN]

Just wondering why did u decide on the one without a lock? These are new to me, ive never seen one. How long have they been out? I havent heard of any problems on the 642's with the locks, are there? What advantages are there to the "lockless" 642. Im in the market for a 340pd so just trying to learn a little about Smiths little snubs.

-Jason G

The pre-locks or without a lock are more desirable if you decided to sell. Many see the locks as “lawyer Guns”.

I have only heard of one case where there was a problem with the lock (from a person I thought to be reputable). He dropped a J-frame (I think it was) and it locked.

S&W is offering M&P’s with or without locks and their 1911’s don’t have locks. So I don’t know why they haven’t dropped the locks on revolvers yet. I expect they will. This is the first I have heard of a new production revolver being offered without the lock (other than those for overseas shipment).

I’m looking at buying a new Smith & Wesson revolver right now, and probably as soon as I buy it they will drop the locks. Oh well, it’s just a range gun.

[Guest grimel]

The pre-locks or without a lock are more desirable if you decided to sell. Many see the locks as “lawyer Gunsâ€.

I have only heard of one case where there was a problem with the lock (from a person I thought to be reputable). He dropped a J-frame (I think it was) and it locked.

One of my trainers to be does a snubby only class. During his class he has had numerous 342's lock up under recoil. Some of which are nearly impossible to unlock and then only by removing the side plate. IIRC, it's a heavy bullet in the ultra light guns (135 or greater). I seem to recall him having ONE incident with 158gr in the airweights.

[I_Like_Pie]

Where/How did you get one without the lock!?!?!

[Buzz]

Just wondering why did u decide on the one without a lock? These are new to me, ive never seen one. How long have they been out? I havent heard of any problems on the 642's with the locks, are there? What advantages are there to the "lockless" 642. Im in the market for a 340pd so just trying to learn a little about Smiths little snubs.

-Jason G

I bought this specifically to be a carry gun.

The lock can and does fail. Lock failure is rare, but a failure makes the gun inoperable. I can accept the limitations of 5 rounds of .38+P, but I want it to be absolutely, positively reliable.

The story I heard was that these 642s were built out of old parts and are limited to stock on hand. It is marked 642-1, so maybe that is true. I'm not aware of any of the .357 models which are being released without the lock.

After shooting a box of +Ps out of this gun, I would NOT look forward to shooting full load .357s out of an even lighter gun. As a practical matter, I even question whether .357s would offer any advantage in a defensive situation.

I'm glad I didn't spend the extra dough to get a 340PD.

[Buzz]

Where/How did you get one without the lock!?!?!

I don't know how many S&W is making like this. Somewhere, I read a number of 4000 but have no way of confirming that.

RSR is a Smith & Wesson distributor. They got a bunch of the no lock 642s. I called them and found out who their dealers are in my area, then called those dealers. One of the dealers I called had one coming in.

You can find their contact info at: http://www.rsrgroup.com/

[cknight8]

mind if i ask what the price on it was?

[Jasongar8]

After shooting a box of +Ps out of this gun, I would NOT look forward to shooting full load .357s out of an even lighter gun. As a practical matter, I even question whether .357s would offer any advantage in a defensive situation.

I'm glad I didn't spend the extra dough to get a 340PD.

Yea i dont want the 340PD cause it is .357, i like it cause it is so light. I have a few buddies that have shot .357's threw their 340PD's and they said it hurt like hell. The 642 is a great gun but i think saving the extra weight is worth the money to me.

-Jason G

[Guest grimel]

Where/How did you get one without the lock!?!?!

Buy one you like then grind the tab off.

[Magiccarpetrides]

Grab a Desantis Nemesis pocket holster for it...absolutely great for concealed carry and works amazingly well unlike the Uncle Mikes or Leather ones. Plus its pretty cheap at ~$14.00

[John Wall]

Apparently, these models have been built for export. They are available on a limited basis stateside.

The -1 indicates an older model that is rated for +P ammo.

Edited July 28, 2008 by John Wall

[Buzz]

Yea i dont want the 340PD cause it is .357, i like it cause it is so light. I have a few buddies that have shot .357's threw their 340PD's and they said it hurt like hell. The 642 is a great gun but i think saving the extra weight is worth the money to me.

-Jason G

Do what you want, but look at the specs before you decide. The difference between between a 340PD and a 642 is only 1.7 oz unloaded weight. I think the difference is insignificant when you compare the two fully loaded. The price difference is in the neighborhood of 50% more.

That's a lot of change for minimal/insignificant weight savings. The only reason to spend the extra bucks is if you really want the .357 capability.

[Buzz]

mind if i ask what the price on it was?

I saw one at the RK show this past weekend for $399. I paid $409+ tax and background check at Guns & Leather.

The main thing is that I got exactly what I wanted.

[Buzz]

Buy one you like then grind the tab off.

That is definitely a good option if you already have one with an exposed hammer. It does solve the main problem of snagging clothing on the draw. Even without the hammer spur, the exposed hammer can still catch up on something if you wanted to fire it from inside a pocket or if someone had their hand clamped on the pistol.

Given a choice on a new revolver, I would prefer a 642 or 638 but having a ground off spur would work.

[Guest grimel]

That is definitely a good option if you already have one with an exposed hammer. It does solve the main problem of snagging clothing on the draw. Even without the hammer spur, the exposed hammer can still catch up on something if you wanted to fire it from inside a pocket or if someone had their hand clamped on the pistol.

Given a choice on a new revolver, I would prefer a 642 or 638 but having a ground off spur would work.

I didn't say spur, I said tab. I said that in response to a question about the lock. The tab is part of the lock that does the locking.

[I_Like_Pie]

I didn't say spur, I said tab. I said that in response to a question about the lock. The tab is part of the lock that does the locking.

Yeah this could be done, but it just doesn't seem right...kinda like having fake hood scoops on a car.

[fizik]

nice 642. i had a 638 for a bit, and i hope you like it somewhere near as much as i liked the 638. i liked the option of having it s/a.

and +1 on the nemesis holster as well

[Guest grimel]

Yeah this could be done, but it just doesn't seem right...kinda like having fake hood scoops on a car.

Putting that lock on a S&W revolver wasn't right. They are even putting it on their retro guns.