642s (well, Centennial models in general) are pretty ugly IMHO. The mismatched frame and cylinder, the awkward-looking rear, the boot-shaped grips - they all deviate quite a bit from the traditional snubbies Colt and S&W put out in the glory days. 642s are hard to shoot, have limited capacity, and don't conceal as well as some of the new pocket 9mms and .380s.
If it wasn't for the 642 Club thread, I would have never considered them for pocket carry. But they are the hands-down best choices for pocket carry. I dare say even with the internal lock, they are still way more reliable than any Kel-Tec or Kahr. There's no break-in, no feedramp polishing (whatever good that does - if it can't feed with a dirty feedramp, it's not reliable enough to stake your life on), no ammo selection...just cylinder after cylinder of shots downrange.