The 642 club

[JLaw]

I never bought into the MagSafe ammo either, I'll try to find out why the author recommends it later on.

The book is okay. Somewhat informative on some things, but full of very good stories of the snubby being put into use. He expains why he picks the snubby over the autoloader, explains that there's many choices of grips, explains that it's all about front sight & trigger control, gives a brief discussion of concealing the snubby, etc. It's an okay book, I enjoyed reading it but can't say I learned anything new by it. I would recommend it however.

JLaw

 

[loplop]

On pp. 97, Lovette says:
"If you are carrying a snub-nose 38 special... and they are not stuffed with MagSafe, 'You got some splainin' to do.'"

He recommends the MagSafe load primarily because of:
1, The Strasbourg tests (tests on live French Alipine Goats)
2, the "look" of devastation in ordinance gelatin
3, lack of perceived recoil

The only other load he recommends is the previously discussed "FBI load." He pleads ignorance about all other ammo (JHPs). The quote above indicates, though, that he strongly prefers MagSafe.

I would recommend the book, but it's not a comprehensive look at the snub's history, a tactical book, or really anything comprehensive at all. It's a collection of brief articles that does have some interest to someone who is interested in the snubby. As with ANY book, read it and take from it what you want.

I am not a knife person, but the TDI Knife mentioned in the book was interesting, and I will look into it. I did like the discussion of "why a snubby?" that is brought up again and again in the book. It gave me some things to think about (I carry autoloaders more often than my snub)

I still won't carry MagSafe

 

[DAdams]

I'm expecting a range bag also soon. For those who purchased a new S&W between Oct 1, 2006 and March 31, 2007 you all qualify.

The coupon I printed was from www.shotingusa.com/LATEST_UPDATES/GUN_A_MONTH/GAME

or call 1-800-331-0852

Bag looks decent in the photos and I have seen persons with multiple bags selling them for $25 on the S&W Forum site.

I like the looks of the 442 also, I may have been tempted but the day I made the buy the LGS was out. Stainless is probably better for carry in FL anyway.

Magsafe....I don't know about that stuff. I bought some in a weak moment for the .380 and .357 in .38 spl 65gr. never fired. Think I'll keep it around for snakes, miscreants and zombie fests.





And of course MagTech great for EOWS!!

 

[Dgreno]

Tritium

Is it possible to get a tritium sight for the 442? Maybe the front sight could be milled out enough to accept just a vial... Any thoughts?
Dave

 

[fastbolt]

Is it possible to get a tritium sight for the 442?

I think I remember Gunsite offering a similar service.

Also, the (pending) new M&P 340 Centennial (with the sleeved barrel) is going to be offered with a XS tritium front sight. Perhaps this will eventually become an option on some of the other J-frames at some point. Dunno.

 

[loplop]

LOL DAdams

I read about someone putting an XS Big Dot Tritium on their 442, not sure what 'smith did it. A night site would be a nice addition.

 

[DAdams]

Speaking of Bags

This is a pretty good deal for S&W logo wear.

Bag, hat, eyes and ears for $45.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...&langId=-1&parent_category_rn=16230&training=

 

[HuntAndFish]

Hunt, I think I know what most of those are
('specially that big one in the middle ),
but could you name them for us, please,
clockwise from top left?

I added that information to my post (#1986).

 

[AStone]

Thanks, Hunt.

Very interesting that,
given all those choices,
the 642 is your EDC.

 

[Brassman]

After a reccomendation from my local gun shop, I tried a few Federal non +p 110g hydra shocks. I may have to change my carry load! At 21 ft. they were very, very accurate from my 642. 5 inside a quarter's diameter slow fired. I have been carrying Rem. 158g LSWCHP and there sure is a big difference in recoil. The report is every bit as loud or louder, but the push backwards is nowhere near as painful. Needless to say, I like'd um. There are 5 in my cylinder right now. I'd like to hear about any tests anyone has done with this ammo.

 

[AStone]

...the push backwards is nowhere near as painful. Needless to say, I like'd um. There are 5 in my cylinder right now. I'd like to hear about any tests anyone has done with this ammo.

Me, too.

That is an interesting report.

I'd very much like less recoil
(and faster recovery time)
with the little mule.
__________

By the by, I put up
a new thread on J v. K-frames
for primary carry when one wants
something larger than our beloved 642
if anyone is interested.

 

[ugaarguy]

S&W To Reintroduce Original Centennial

Since the 642 is the decendent of the Model 40 Centennial I figured this would be the place to post the info.

According to the March 19, 2007 issue of The Shotgun News

...it was neat to see the return of the actual Model 40 Centennial with the "Lemon Squeezer" grip safety. The cool thing here was the absence of the controversial frame mounted internal lock mechanism that many Smith & Wesson revolver purists condemn.

It even had the correct flat cylinder latch button on the gun shown in the picture accompanying the article. Maybe S&W is finally listening. It's refreshing to see a classic revolver reintroduced more closely to it original design than previous classic line guns.

 

[glockman19]

I carry the Federal 110 grain Hydra Shocks in my 642 Also. Less recoil than the 125 grain CCI Blazer Brass or the 158 grain CCI Blazer or Speer Lawman +p. I generally shoot the 158 grain out of my S&W 686.

 

[AStone]

I had the following in the studio:

* Federal 110 gr.
* Speer 135 gr. (Normal carry)
* Magtech 158 gr.

After reading the last few posts,
I've replaced the Speers with the 110s.

Why?

1. Less mass, less recoil.
Less recoil, faster recovery.
Less mass, faster acceleration.
Newton's laws 1 and 2.

2. Intuition.

I'll keep reading ...

 

[ugaarguy]

http://www.brassfetcher.com/38 Special.html

Guys take a look at the above link. Other than the 110 gr. DPX loaded by Cor Bon and the 125 gr. GDHP loaded to +P levels by Buffalo Bore the light loads don't penetrate well. Expansion doesn't matter if the round can't penetrate to the vitals.

For the safety of you folks here, Lord forbid any of you actually need to use your piece for defense, I must encourage y'all to use heavier slugs. The comments on the 148 gr Federal Gold Match wadcutter bear strong consideration.

Also a hat tip to THR member JE223 who owns and runs the brass fetcher site, and does the testing at - all at his own expense. Thanks for the great data friend.

 

[AStone]

OK, for now, I put the Speers back in.

I'll keep reading ...

 

[jt1]

Holster Report

I have been using this holster daily for the last two months and can report that I am very happy with it. It is a speed classic from blackhawk. It is available only for the j-frame, right or left, black only. There are several things I really like about it. It is a passive retention design using two layers of high quality elastic in the front to hold the trigger guard in the boned pocket and is very secure, the gun will not come out until you take it out. The elastic also makes this the fastest holster I have used. You pull the grip forward and the gun clears the holster easily with no hangup and you do not have to lift it out of the holster. At first I was concerned if the elastic would hold up, but after many, many draws it seems to be ok. The rear paddle type belt loop pulls the gun butt tight into your body, it is about as concealable as you can expect with an OWB design and when worn in the 3:30 position it works well for me. It fits a 1 1/4" belt well and might fit a 1 1/2" if you work at it. the leather is high quality and a bit thinner than most of the custom makers I have used, but it is holding up well and is very light. Overall this holster has met my expectations.......... As I am new to this club I hope this is an appropriate post.

As Always

JT

 

[jt1]

Holster Report +1

One more pic.

As Always

JT

 

[fiVe]

jt1: Your post is perfect. Thanks for the report. (and welcome to the club.)

 

[AStone]

Page 83.

OK, for now, I put the Speers back in.

But then, I thought:

What's the trade off here?

Penetration v. recoil (recovery).

Penetration is good.
I have no beef with that.
(Or maybe that's
I have no penetration
into the beef with that.)

But if the second shot
is significantly slowed down
by the recoil from that heavily penetrating rnd,
then ...

I understand that penetration is important.

But I put more importance
on the first "p":
Placement.

So I offer this question:
which is more important:
penetration or placement?

Of course, in the best of all worlds,
one would have both.

But they are not correlated in my experience.

Deeper penetration is not necessarily
conducive to proper placement
(at least with that second rnd).

Discuss.

 

[ugaarguy]

Nem how bad is the recoil on the 135 gr. Speers? (I haven't been able to find them locally to try.) I mean compared to something like a 158 gr +P it isn't that bad is it? My advocacy of penetration is that most research (Fackler, FBI reports) indicates that a round must penetrate to the vitals to most reliably incapacitate an assailant. This is why the FBI likes at least 14 to inches of penetration.

In light of that I think good placment with a round known to penetrate well is the best idea. Subsequent shot recovery is also important. This is a tough one. For now I'd stay with the Speers and make the first round count until you find an alternate light recoil load with good penetration.

Further, I'll note that even light bullet weights of .38 FMJ are repoted to penetrate well. I guess what I'm getting at is don't take a gain in expansion at the loss of penetration. Again I'm glad that JE223 has graciously given us the test data to consider.

 

[AStone]

Nem how bad is the recoil on the 135 gr. Speers?

Uga, I think that's the question of the night, week, year...

I hear you on the penetration issue.
I agree: penetration is important.
I don't dispute that for a second.

What I question is the following:
Penetration is important in hitting vitals.
(Heart, lung, aorta, brain, spinal cord...)

But if one can't hit vitals with the first rnd,
and must double tap while the perp continues to advance
(because his vitals weren't hit with the first rnd),
then if the first rnd caused this little 15 oz airweight
to bounce up high such that the double tap
is also off target, then does penetration really matter as much?

That's where low recoil comes into play.

If the first rnd missed a vital due to lack of penetration,
wouldn't it be better to shoot a 110 gr into the face quickly,
made possible by quick recoil recovery because the first 110 had low recoil?

I'm betting a 110 to the face as a 2nd shot-
made possible because the recoil was manageable -
will stop a large perp better than a 135 gr to COM on a first rnd.

Just thinking out loud here.
No truth implied.
Just trying to frame the question.

 

[jt1]

Range Bag/ammo choice

Thanks for the range bag info, will be sending for mine Monday.

On the ammo question, IMHO it doesn't matter if you are talking about BB's or B52's, placement is #1..... For what it is worth it occurs to me we are not limited to five rds of the same ammo per cylinder. We could load the first two rds for placement and the next three for penetration or any combination we desire.

As Always

JT

 

[ugaarguy]

Old Fuff has recounted that Bill Jordan wished for a small and light 22 Mag revolver has a back up / deep concealment gun in the 50s or 60s when such pieces weren't available. He also noted the pistolero carrying such a piece must be able to place shots to the eyes since COM hits likely wouldn't work with the low penetration a 22 mag would have from a snubby. Considering that Bill Jordan literally wrote the book on the fighting revolver - No Second Place Winner - I'd say you're thinking right Nem.

 

[JMFred]

Tritium Sights

If you're really in to better sights for these little gems than here is the way to go. It will cost you the equivalent of a second gun but man it looks like a sweet set up. Look at the bottom of the page (SW04)...

http://www.bowenclassicarms.com/NEW/SWpackages.htm

The PDF file has a lot more info in it.