Replace my S&W 642 with LCP???

[TrailWolf]

Have been having a lot of questions lately as I try to tailor my carry options and figure out the best way to meet my needs, so I just wanted to thank this community in advance for all the help, guidance and patience!

Anyway, have been carrying my no lock S&W 642 for a while now when I couldn't get away with my Glock 26 and needed more discretion.

I can't deny that on numerous occasions I've wished my 642 was even smaller.

Seen so many great reviews on the Ruger LCP and held it today and WOW is it small!!!!

I was thinking that it may make sense to replace my 642 with an LCP, but not sure how I feel about downgrading to the .380...

With that said, hoping you all can kindly provide some guidance based on similar experiences and help me decide if the LCP is worth replacing my 642...

What do you guys think? Replace my 642 with the LCP or not?

I cannot own both.

Thanks!
-Harry
.

 

[KNOCKDOWN]

"... What do you guys think? Replace my 642 with the LCP or not?"



Not !!!

In my opinion you will be losing in two ways. First the 642 is a better firearm IMHO.
That's not to say it won't work...but it's an "apples and oranges" type thing. To me you would be taking a step backwards from the 642.

And I also feel that the .380 is an "anemic" under-powered round for self defense.

Second, you will probably lose a bit of coin in the trade-in for a lesser gun. My two cents for what its worth.

 

[mossy424]

I wouldn't. I like the 38 over the 380. You could always carry both.

 

[buckeye8]

I own an LCP and a 340PD. I like both, but the 340PD spends a lot more time with me than the LCP. There are very few occasions on which I step down to the LCP. I can't bring myself to sell the LCP, however. I guess I just like having a variety of carry options.

Since your question was "either/or", I take it that keeping the J-frame and buying an LCP is cost-prohibitive. In that case, I think there is a decent argument for the LCP. It sounds like you're thinking of leaving the J-frame at home instead of carrying it, and that is not a good thing. At least the LCP will be on you when you need it.

Another option that isn't terribly far from your price range is the Kahr CM9. Heavier than the LCP, but less bulky than the J-frame, and you wouldn't have to settle for .380. They are often sold used for under $400. It's worth handling one, at least, to see if it's something you might be interested in.

 

[fxstchewy]

No. I would not.

 

[jad0110]

I wouldn't sell the 642, I'd just save up longer to get the LCP if at all possible.

The LCP and other micro .380s are extremely easy to conceal. However, there are downsides (for me) with such tiny guns:

My hands are pretty big, and whereas the standard boot grips on an x42 are just large enough to grip adequately, the little .380s are just too small for my hands. Granted, I did shoot an LCP recently and it felt better in my hand than other .380s that I remember, but still not as good as my x42. The .380s shift in my hands rather significantly with each shot, such that I have to readjust me grip every time. Also, most micro .380s have rather unpleasant recoil impulse to me, though there again the LCP didn't feel as bad to me as say, the Kel-Tec P3AT. Maybe the LCP's grip frame is shaped or contoured better for my hand? I dunno.

The tiny size also makes drawing from the pocket a little more difficult. The x42's more generous grip frame makes finding and grasping it easier (again, for me).

Personally, the only real problem that I have with the caliber is that ammo is expensive enough in my area that I'd want to reload it, but it is a brass puker, and that gets very old after a while. As for performance, I would not feel underarmed. However, to ensure sufficient penetration, I wouldn't rule out carrying FMJ over a JHP.

 

[guyfromohio]

I wouldn't do it. Rent one and then shoot side by side. You will have your definitive answer and won't second-guess the decision.

 

[Fishman777]

I'd take an LCR over a 642, not a LCP

Sorry. I voted for LCP thinking that you meant LCR. I'd take the LCR over the 642, but NOT an LCP over the 642. I read the poll question incorrectly.

 

[Remllez]

Guyfromohio has the best answer to your question. While being easy to conceal these little " brass puckers " LOL aren't for everyone. I find them hard to shoot well. It sounds like you may be ready for a Supertuck style IWB holster. Your 642 will all but disappear in that style holster.

 

[2wheels]

I'd go with both IF you can afford it. I prefer my 442 for most of my "can't carry a 1911" days, I only carry my P238 if I really need something tiny to hide.

 

[larryh1108]

I've carried an LCP in a wallet holster since they came out. As nice as the revolever is, the LCP is even better except for the bullet size. I don't feel underarmed like so many here do with a .380. I've put 1500+ rounds thru it and I can put it where I want to if needed up to 25' or so. The recoil is brisk but I find a .38 Special out of a J-Frame to be brisker. You will always carry the LCP. Will you always carry your 642?

 

[punkndisorderly]

I don't have more than a "hey would you like to shoot mine" passing experience with the two. If I were going to make the decision, here are some questions I'd try to answer.

"Do I need the smaller size"- Are you having problems concealing the revolver? If so, do you have a good quality holster? Have you tried more than one? I've found even the full size guns carry and conceal well if you invest in a good belt and holster and are willing to dress around the gun.

"Can you shoot the lcp well?"- the smaller the gun, the harder it will be to shoot (all other things being equal). Smaller grip, smaller sights, smaller controls, etc. The smaller the gun, the slower it will generally be to get out and into action. Both from the smaller grip to reach for and the way they often get carried (jeans or coat pocket rather than a belt holster)

-"Are you willing to devote the time and expense to ensure it's reliable?"- I've read two 380 roundup reviews in reputable magazines where they test the current crop of pocket 380's. They had reliability issues with almost all of them. Are you willing to spend the cash to run 100 rounds of carry ammo through it to ensure reliability. Are you willing to endure a possible break in period of possibly a few hundred rounds before it becomes reliable?

"Do you carry a reload?"- The lcp will be quicker to reload than the revolver. Even more so if you carry loose rounds or speed strips rather than a speed loader.

"Do you carry in a coat pocket or purse?"- A revolver will be more likely to function if fired through a pocket. An auto is more likely to get one shot off, then jam.

"How important is terminal performance for you?"- The 38 is slightly more powerful than the 380. People tend to fall all along the spectrum as to how important this is. Some are happy with a .22 and claim shot placement is the only thing that matters, others won't carry anything less than whatever their favored caliber is. Does the 38 offer enough of an advantage to offset it's larger size?

 

[Phil W]

Consider the LC9, I either carry that or a M&P 340.

 

[Haywood]

I would not get rid of the 442. If you can't conceal the 442 that's another story. I don't like the 380 cartridge or small semi-autos but, if that's all you can conceal, you do what you have to.

 

[Dr_2_B]

642 beats LCP in my book.

 

[DAdams]

I would keep the 642 and save up for a LCP if you think you would like it that much. You can get them for under $300.

A no lock 642 stoked with SGDFSB in plus P 135 grain in a Mika Roundcut pocket holster will pocket carry nicely and is a more potent up close and personal defense item than a .380 in 102 gr Golden Sabers.

The LCP is nice weight wise for those times when you don't want to carry a gun but should have one anyway.

 

[jon86]

I think the 642 is a superior weapon for carry, for many of the reasons already listed. I think you should save up, and get the LCP. Carry the LCP when you can't carry the 642, and carry both when you can. Honestly, I see no need to ever go smaller then an airweight j frame.

 

[sixgunner455]

Keep the 642. Save for anything else you decide you want to get. Trading isn't a good idea.

 

[Dr_2_B]

Pretty rare to get responses this unified. There's a lot of love for the 642/442 'round these parts. For that matter, there's a lot of love for the LCP as well, but it seems most agree the revolver bests it.

 

[bannockburn]

Definitely keep the 642; get the LCP when you've got the money saved up for it.

 

[RetDep310]

I have both a LCP and a M&P 340, and absolutely love both. Don't know why, but I find myself carrying the LCP more. Do yearly LEOSA quals, along with my Glock 19, with both weapons. Each are a little tough at 25 yards, but it can be done, but not pretty!! Easy for me to say save up and buy the LCP, but if you can only have one, the 642 is it.

 

[KenW.]

One cannot just replace a full-powered .38 special with a weakling .380 ACP.

 

[Psa1m144]

If you are willing to consider the LCP you might as well get the LC9.

 

[BADUNAME37]

I have both and I carry them both about the same length of time. They both hide just as well in my Robert Mika pocket holsters he made for each gun.

My LCP has the Crimson Trace laser underneath the front and in front of the trigger guard.

Even with that, I still like my 642 as I know the 38 Special has more power than the 380 Auto, however the .380 has more shots - especially if one were to carry an extra magazine (or two, or three).

 

[iblong]

Keep the 642 its not worth taking a hit to get the lcp.
Just get the lcp when you can,I very rarely carry my 380.
But they do come in handy once in a while.