Small Hammerless Revolver
 

I'm looking to get the wife a hammerless revolver of some sort, the only revolver I have ever owned was a S&W 38 and a Ruger .22mag. I'd like something hammerless so she can peel off a round right from her purse if necessary.

On a side note I just got a new carry weapon, it's a springfield .45 1911 Micro. Unfortunately they only had the one with light in stock, so I got stuck with the light.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Get a S&W 442.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Check out a S&W 642. I have carried mine everyday for several years. :ok:

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Agreed! I've had one for years. The only downside (at least with my revolver's vintage - not sure about modern ones) is that it's only .38 SPL, NOT +P rated. I still load it with +P, figuring that I can always replace the thing if a few rounds of high pressure stuff mucks it up after a serious social encounter.

Very light weight, easy to stash with Barami Hip Grip "grips".

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

S&W Model 38, It has served me well.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v5...an37879/SW.jpg

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

+1 on the 642 - it is rated for +P - I think the lighter 342/442 may be also but not sure. They would be a whole bunch lighter though.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

What's that big spur that sticks way out on the back of all 1911-style guns?

Part of the grip safety?

The potential for snagging would seem to rule them out for concealed carry.

As you might guess, you might want to think a moment before handing me a loaded 1911.:biggrin:

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

http://www.sightm1911.com/1911pix/pr...ked&locked.gif

Does that answer your question? :wink:

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Any new 442 is for sure good to go on +P....just looked on the S&W site.

There is some question on the older models being +P rated.....I have had mine for about 15 years....there is no marking on it anywhere that says +P...the barrel is marked 38 Spl. I have the box around here with the owners manual.....I take a look.

My #1 suggestion for any first time gun buyer for a home protection gun is the S&W 442. It is the perfect home protection gun...and can also be carried fairly easily......very light weight revolver. DAO hammerless to prevent inexperienced from cocking under stress.....only a very deliberate long trigger pull will fire the gun......short barrel and no hammer makes it difficult to take away/prevent firing. Simple and reliable.

I like small revolvers because if something outside needs your attention you can go out with the gun in hand and quickly put it in your pocket if you need to hide the pistol (police show up, neighbors/non-threat you do not want to see you are armed...). This is not possible with larger home protection pistols.... The 442 fits this function well. Also can put it in your coat pocket and go anywhere.

I prefer the Kel-Tec 380 for all other 100% go anywhere carry. The snubby revolvers do not carry as well in summer clothing as the very small Kel-Tec.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

I just double-checked my records & the manual for my 442. I bought my pistol in June of 1995. The manual shows that it's only rated for normal pressure .38 SPL stuff, not +P. Like yours, my pistol has ".38 S. & W. SPL." stamped on the barrel.

While I agree with your points re: easy concealment & carry, I'm not sure that the 442 would be the best gun for a first time buyer. Maybe if the person is already experienced with pistols (especially small frame revolvers), but the recoil/muzzle flip may tend to scare away people from practicing with it as much as they need to . Maybe with bigger grips...I dunno. A steel 4" barrel .38 is ideal for "user friendliness" due to fairly low recoil and ease of operation (not too many malfunction clearance drills to practice). When we switch to a snubby light weight pistol, hings seem to get less user friendly.

The ultimate rule re: selection of a gun for home protection is...have a gun. I'm of the belief that choices made beyond that point are lower priority than the ultimate rule.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

S&W 642 airweight

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

If she is not going to carry it on her body, I would avoid the Airweight and let her try the steel M40 or the stainless steel M640. The Airweights are easy to carry and not fun to shoot. I would let your wife shoot both and make her decision based on the shooting.

Of course, my wife is an exception. She took my AirLite M342 after I could not handle the recoil as magnum recoil does not phase her, and I went back to my M40.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

I agree with rule #1...have a gun.

My comments are directed to folks so they do not have to spend too much or get a second gun.

The alloy frame "J" frame S&W are all good to go for anyone.....yes, they have some muzzle flip....but you can reduce that a lot by using lighter projectiles.....it is conservation of momentum......Mass Bullet x Velocity Bullet = Mass Gun+hand x Velocity Gun+hand.....

I say go airweight for pocket carry ease ....they are 50% the weight of the same gun in steel.

642, 442, 640...they are all are good....I just prefer the 442 for DAO no hammer for my wife to mess around with.

There are a lot of good points by many in this thread.

Enjoy your guns!

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

I got the 642 and am very happy. I like the 642/442/640 class of revolver for all the reasons stated by ruprick. Very happy, I am.

I guess everyone realizes that the 642 and 442 are 5 shot revolvers instead of the traditional 6 shot? Well, they are.

I have on order one of these pocket holsters. They are hand made by one single guy (as far as I can tell) and he is backed up. The cops that use these speak highly of them for pocket carry. I'll give you these links so you can check them out.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...d.php?t=247939

and

http://www.frontiernet.net/~akim/

PS. Naturally if I was in any way affiliated with this guy, I would already have my dang holster. Says it should be a few weeks after Christmas. Looks like a decent product.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

These are nice pocket holsters.....I have experience with both. Better have big pockets .....they work well with Dockers and cargo shorts/pants.....but not blue jeans. I have that Desantis holster in your link and i use it everyday with my Kel-Tec 380. You can find them on Ebay pretty cheap at times.

You will be very happy with either model.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

BTW, when I was researching the 642 I came across this old thread that goes on forever and ever for years called The 642 Club on another site.

Any questions about the 642 will sooner or later be answered if you read this thread long enough.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=138658

It went on so long they closed this thread and started The 642 Club part II. LOL.

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=314422

:rose:

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Yes. Should slip right out.

By far the best view I've had of a 1911.

I can even see the firing pin. (I think.)

Thanks.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

My 442-2 is less than 2 months old. On the barrel it says---- .38 S&W spl. +P

New ones are +P

E-A

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Yea she is going to keep it in her purse, so a little weight isnt going to be a killer. Is weight the only difference between the 442 and the 642?

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

642 = Stainless.
442 = Aluminum (steel cylinder)

The S&W site is incorrect and had both at the same weight of 15 oz empty....I know this is incorrect.....as I recall the 15 oz is correct for 442...and I'd guess about 21 oz for stainless.

I just checked the model 40.....same as 640 but in blue steel.....and yes, 21 oz.

All are good choices for pocket or purse carry.....in a purse...15 or 21 oz is of little consequence.....and not much of a big deal in a pocket.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

642 has only stainless barrel and stainless cylinder. The frame is aluminum alloy which is why it is so light.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Smit and Wesson Revolvers tell you what they are made of in the model #

3 series---386, 342,326 ect are Scadinum frame and cylinders

4 series -----442, ect are Aluminum frames typically steel cylinders

6 series----642,686,629 ect are all Stainless Steel

I hope this helps

E-A

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

OK - just took a good look a S&W site.....there is very little difference between a 642 and a 442.....both Aluminumm frames....642 has stainless cylinder......if I were buying new today i'd get the 642. This was not an option 15 years ago when i bought the 442.

642 = 442 = 15 oz.

The 640 is 100% stainless and tips the scale at 23 oz.

I just learned that not all 6XX are 100% stainless steel.....that would have cost me a drink in a bar!!!!

Now I have it all straight. Please factor this in to my above posts....did not realize 642 and 442 were pretty much identical in construction....

My 442 is a very limited production (did not know at the time...bought it the first year it was offered....) Mine is in a matte nickle finish....kind of a golden/silver color.....looks nice ....they only had that for a short period of time.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Mine has the exactly same finish. Small world!

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

I know she's gonna want that 1911 Micro I just bought, but I think the hammerless revolver would be best for her purse.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

I have a model 40 38 special I purchased for my wife years ago. What is the opinion of it and any faults or pluses? Also do you know what year one in the 6000 range of serial numbers would be?

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Model 40 is a fine pistol. Fits my basic requirements of a snubby of reasonably light weight ....and hammerless = DAO.....perfect...deadly simple.

I think that 40 has some type of a grip safety....like a 1911....no big deal as it is passive to the operator....but I never could understand why a DAO revolver would naad this added feature?

Any small snubby is a great gun. If you have one with an exposed hammer.....you can get the hammer spur bobbed for next to nothing by a gunsmith.....I have done them myself....remove, hacksaw, file, polish, install.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

S&W 642 with Crimson Trace. The pointability of snubbies can be a little tricky... Especially under stressful conditions. The laser helps to address this.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

I second the 642, but not the laser. I love my 642 and wouldn't mind getting another. Real easy to carry and small enough to conceal easily. I originally bought it to keep at home for the wife to be able to shoot it if need be. She likes the Glocks, but wouldn't know what to do if it didn't fire on first pull. With the 642 she has nothing to worry about(unless she misses 5 times)
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e2...2/DSCN2627.jpg
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e2...2/DSCN2629.jpg

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

I think I will get this revolver for myself for my CCW,more opinions please ,pro and cons ???

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/w...egory_rn=15704Or maybe this




these are two I 'm seriously considering,don't have to much experience ,advice very welcome

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Andy,

FWIW, I really LOVE .357 magnum, BUT:

1) in this small (light-weight) of a gun it is not going to be comfortable to fire in .357,
2) the price difference between the two is too high to make the scandium .357 worth it,
3) with .38 +P ammo you should do just fine.

Overall, there is not enough difference between the two to make spending the extra money worth it. As ruprick recently pointed out, for a night time experience, the extra muzzle flash created by the .357 will be a deficit as it will actually blind you. (Imagine it is pitch dark, and suddenly a very bright light appears before your eyes and then disappears. You will be "blinded" by the light and lose your eyes' natural night vision capabilities for a period of time.)

I look forward to others' comments, but I would go hands down with the 642 or 442 over the .357 scandium.

Google both guns and listen to what experienced people are saying about both of them on gun forums. That is what I did, and I found that to be extremely useful.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

Agree, agree, agree.....get the S&W 642.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

thank you so much

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

I paid $420 out the door for mine locally with a LE discount in 2006(the most popular gun sale that year was this gun). I believe they have went up in price since I bought mine around here. If you get one, look for one without the internal lock, as some believe they are more of a possability of problems. I have shot mine numerous times and recently actually qualified with mine for work, and actually scored better with this gun than my duty Glock 22(hate to admit that, bu it's the truth). I couldn't believe how well I shot it when I had to pull off rounds with time stress working against me. I seriously consider this to be one of my favorite guns and will keep it even when I sell of/trade of other handguns. If I can get another used one for under $375 one day I will buy it no questions asked.

Re: Small Hammerless Revolver
 

+1 on looking for one without the internal lock. I picked up a new one a few months back when they were first avaiable for a backup/spare. I almost paid $600 + for a pre-lock on Gunbroker before S&W decided to offer a limited number without the lock.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/w...-1&isFirearm=Y