# Bodyguard or Centennial ?



## Queeqeg

which Smith & Wesson J Frame would you rather have ?


----------



## Baldy

I like the Bodyguard because it still gives me the opition to cock the the weapon and fire single action but I like them both.


----------



## Bob Wright

I went with the Centennial in a Model 442. It's a secondary gun for me, to pick up and stick in my hip pocket for a quick trip. The curved area over the hammer seemed more snag resistant when pulling the gun out of my pocket.

For full dress occassions, it's my Model 19 in a Don Hume holster.

Bob Wright


----------



## Bob Wright

Baldy said:


> I like the Bodyguard because it still gives me the opition to cock the the weapon and fire single action but I like them both.


Yeah, Baldy, I agree with you there. I know its highly unlikely, but knowing that I have the capability of deliberate single action shots is a comfort to me.

Bob Wright


----------



## Queeqeg

I went with a Bodyguard but now I'm almost tempted to buy a Centennial too just because I can :smt023


----------



## Baldy

Well Mr.Queeqeg if I could I would I can tell you that much. I don't think you will be disappointed with either one and both would be better. Good luck.


----------



## TxPhantom

*Centenial*

I like the Centennial style because of the anti-snag feature and the light weight, easy concealability. My wife has a 642 and I have a 442. They are strictly S.D. guns, not fun range guns.


----------



## Queeqeg

I found an old nickel plated Airweight model 38 Bodyguard..obviously I put it on layaway


----------



## J_B

Found me a nice little addition to my personal carry attire :mrgreen:


----------



## dogngun

I have had the Bodyguard and would prefer it over the Centenial, but I carry the steel frame Chief Special. I like a hammer gun, and heve never had a problem drawwing the Chief from my pocket...Just put your thumb over the hammer.
I bought my first Chief about 30 years ago, so I have had some practice with it.
I also prefer steel frame J-frames because they are easier for me to shoot well.

Mark


----------



## drummin man 627

Bodyguard, here. Anytime /everytime I am able, I would try to shoot single action. The trigger will be lighter, thus the shot placement will be more accurate. With a 5 shooter, that's an even better idea.
That's also why I prefer an exposed hammer semi-auto.


----------



## Waldo Pepper

For CCW in a revolver my choice is hammerless and I figure it will never be needed beyond about 20 feet max, but most likely less then 15 feet and here is my choice. Alloy frame, SS cyl and barrel and is only 15 oz for an excellent in the pocket gun with +P ammo.


----------



## sfmittels

+1 on the Centennial. For experienced shooters, it probably doesn't make much difference. But for people like my girlfriend who want the peace of mind but don't want to practice, the Centennial is nearly idiot-proof.


----------



## Beachcomber

*"Newbie's" opinion on the S&W 640 Centennial*

I'm a "newbie" on these forums and I just wanted to relate that my preference is with the stainless steel S&W 640 Centennial. I like the fact that the hammer is completely enclosed, reducing the risk of the hammer hanging up during a quick (shtf) draw. The double action only trigger pull is not an issue to me as I believe single action should only be used for target shooting and hunting purposes. I also prefer the weight and balance of an all steel revolver as it allows me to handle hotter loads a little easier. Both my 640 and 640-1 had decent factory trigger pulls right out of the box.


----------



## neophyte

*638*

A 638 and you are good to go. It'll not act ignorant when you jerk it out of a pocket yet give the option; single or double action.
The weight is good; size, pocket fit; and ugly; until needed.:smt023
Would I trade/sell it. NO. It works for me.


----------



## lastbidder

I sell both types, the centennial out sells the bodyguard 2-1 
642 TI is the keeper,,,, trust me John fugatefirearms.com


----------



## astrogus

I always have my 640-1 with me, loaded w/ +p's. Its the one for me.


----------



## J_B

Since I picked up my little 637, the only thing I have done to it is bob the hammer down for snag free carry. Its a go with me every where gun, and has got to be my most favorite of all.


----------



## P97

Waldo Pepper said:


> For CCW in a revolver my choice is hammerless and I figure it will never be needed beyond about 20 feet max, but most likely less then 15 feet and here is my choice. Alloy frame, SS cyl and barrel and is only 15 oz for an excellent in the pocket gun with +P ammo.


Same here. I just ordered one.


----------



## DCWilson

*Bodyguard*

A couple of weeks ago I voted on this question with my wallet. I went into the store knowing that I wanted a short barrel in-home defense gun and with a bias for S&W. I looked at the three models -- unshrouded hammer, shrouded hammer, and hammerless. In seconds I knew I did not want the fully exposed hammer, so it was either the bodyguard or centennial. I checked out the specific guns available and the bodyguard won. In either model there was some minor rotational play in the cylinder in the resting position, but when I cocked the bodyguard the cylinder locked up tight -- no slop at all. A flashlight beam down the barrel and across the face of the cylinder revealed no obvious timing problems in cocked position. I liked the feel and told the guy behind the counter to write it up.

My judgment on the centennial may have been colored a bit when I pinched some skin behind the trigger during operation. (Yes, I was courteous and asked the counter man's permission to dry fire it.) Couldn't the factory round off those sharp edges? Admittedly I might have had the same experience with the bodyguard if I had put that one through its paces first, but I was operating the centennial and the impression, however faint, was made. In some other store, comparing two different examples of the same models, I might have leaned the other way on the cylinder and trigger issues. But on that day the bodyguard won out.

Even without the hands-on comparison, I suspect I would have favored the bodyguard. As others have pointed out the capability for single-action has value even if you're going to use it only on the first shot out of five. Why give up an option you have the power to preserve, even if it's not something you plan on using? Even if it is as little as one percent, an edge is still an edge.

My 649 is the 23-ounce "heavy" version, not the airweight or special metal model.


----------



## libertyrules

> Even without the hands-on comparison, I suspect I would have favored the bodyguard. As others have pointed out the capability for single-action has value even if you're going to use it only on the first shot out of five. Why give up an option you have the power to preserve, even if it's not something you plan on using? Even if it is as little as one percent, an edge is still an edge.
> 
> My 649 is the 23-ounce "heavy" version, not the airweight or special metal model.


Same here. And when I fire the .357 mag rounds, I like the 'heaviness' of the SS Bodyguard. On single-action mode, the trigger is 2.5 lbs. On da, it's 15 lbs., so I'm very careful firing from sa. I haven't decided whether or not to lighten the trigger. 15 lbs _is_ heavy, but it also gives me comfort, knowing I have to _want _to fire the gun - little chance of pulling this trigger accidently. Maybe when I'm more experienced, I'll have it lightened. I like the Bodyguard.


----------



## milquetoast

Centennial.

The assumption is that we would be more accurate shooting single action than double. I know I always assumed that. Then I spent a half day at the range shooting all my revolvers both single and double action, and comparing targets. To my amazement, there was no difference in accuracy! Not even with the Model 29 .44 Magnum. Since then, I sold the M38 and bought a 642, and later a 342. When I shoot my other revolvers, .357 and .44, I shoot double action at all distances.

Look at the PPC guys, and the Bianchi Cup guys. Granted, they have super trigger jobs, but if a super SA trigger job was more accurate than a super DA trigger job, don't you think they would be thumb-cocking their revolvers at the long ranges? Don't just assume you will shoot more accurately single action than double. Try it first.

Being there is no difference in accuracy (not for me, anyway), I would just as soon eliminate any possibility of some prosecutor or plaintiff's attorney accusing me of shooting accidentally, because of the "hair trigger."


----------



## TxPhantom

*Trigger control*

Milkquetoast:
I much prefer the harder trigger on my carry gun. My wife has a 642 and I have a 442. Great carry guns and considerably safer than a gun with a much lighter trigger. 
But as a range gun, for fun and accuracy, (which snubbies aren't), I would much prefer a lighter trigger with DA and SA option. A lot has to do with good trigger control. Two of our favorite range guns are our S & W,TRR8 and our S & W, 686PP, both in 357 magnum. Most of the time we fire them in SA using 38 special ammo for fun on the range. The TRR8 has a very nice trigger in either SA or DA and the 686 has a very nice trigger in SA mode. 
While at the range last Friday evening the TRR8 was having light strikes on two of every eight bullets fired. I called S & W and a very nice service rep. talked me through correcting the problem by tightening the screw inside the front of the grip that regulates tension on the trigger spring. You gunsmith types probably know what I'm trying to say. It took about five minutes. I'll know if it worked next time we go to the range.


----------



## Baldy

Hi TX. If you turned that screw any at all I'll bet a dollar to a doughnut she'll fire every time now. Sometimes they don't get tighten up all the way at the factory. Good luck and let us know if it works.


----------



## TxPhantom

Baldy said:


> Hi TX. If you turned that screw any at all I'll bet a dollar to a doughnut she'll fire every time now. Sometimes they don't get tighten up all the way at the factory. Good luck and let us know if it works.


Baldy; The TRR8 worked fine after the adjustment. No light strikes at all. We also got to try out our Crimson Trace Laser Grips I bought for our two snubbies. What a great product! I was amazed at how I could hold my 442 waist high and accurately hit the target using the laser. Now I've got to get one for my MP 9mm compact ccw. The C.T. Lasers are worth every penny!:smt023


----------



## jimg11

*Bodyguard / Centennial*

I like the double action trigger of my pre 40 2" Centennial. It is easier for me to shoot than any of my other J frames. All of my serious revolvers are fired Double action. I don't think of using single action on any revolvers with less than 4" barrels Jim


----------



## Wyatt

DCWilson said:


> ...I went into the store knowing that I wanted a short barrel in-home defense gun and with a bias for S&W....
> 
> ...As others have pointed out the capability for single-action has value even if you're going to use it only on the first shot out of five. Why give up an option you have the power to preserve, even if it's not something you plan on using? Even if it is as little as one percent, an edge is still an edge...


I agree, for defense of my home I want the ability to operate the gun in single action. However, my use for a J frame would be for pocket carry, and in an emergency the ability to get from pocket to presentation w/o out a snag or hang-up is a higher priority so I voted for the enclosed hammer.


----------



## forestranger

No experience with Centennial, but bought a Model 38 in 1970 and since then carried probably more than all my other handguns combined. The SA option did come in handy at times when carrying in woods. Either one would be fine for normal SD carry. U do have to watch dust, lint build up inside hammer shroud though but never had a misfire from it.


----------



## Ang Rita

jimg11 said:


> I like the double action trigger of my pre 40 2" Centennial. It is easier for me to shoot than any of my other J frames. All of my serious revolvers are fired Double action. I don't think of using single action on any revolvers with less than 4" barrels Jim


I understand S&W is bringing back the old model 40 with the grip safety. Anybody know anything about this? It's a looker. :smt1099


----------



## Wyatt

This one (thumbnail, click to enlarge):



is on the website. It's part of their classic series. And it is nice looking. Did the original have the grip safety? I really like it in the blued.


----------



## Ang Rita

IIRC, a magazine showed a photo of a pretty beat up old timer, so yes, I think they must have originally had the grip safety. :smt023


----------



## va browning man

By the time a guy with a hammer gun takes the time to pull it back i have already fired two rounds in the kill zone with my 340 M&P 357 Centenial. I second the CT grips wow what a difference it makes for quick target shooting. I probably will get CT grips for my para 45.


----------



## Baldy

Wyatt said:


> This one (thumbnail, click to enlarge):
> 
> 
> 
> is on the website. It's part of their classic series. And it is nice looking. Did the original have the grip safety? I really like it in the blued.


It had the grip safty and they were nicknamed the Lemon squeezer because of it. They are a great little pocket gun.:smt023


----------



## aryfrosty

I'm like the man who said, "either or". I ave owned 3 Body Gaurds and traded them looking to find "something. Well I found it with my Centennials. I bought one of thsoe nutty ones with the "Atomic" sign on the sideplated and can't stand it. I bought a 642 for meyself and then bought the youngest son one lkie it when was promoteds to Cpl, USMC.Thet seem ilke peas in a pod..."always ready, steady and able". Then my late Father decided he liked them to and there went the last one.I came upon a 442 in the shop the other day and fell all ovrt mydelf for that black finish. Regards; Al Yates :gib:


----------



## hideit

i would rather have the model 637


----------



## Joeywhat

I love my 649 bodyguard. I like being able to choose SA, and I don't find any snagging problems with the exposed hammer. Even if it did snag, the trigger would still have to be pulled for it to fire anyways, so I'm not worried.

If I were given the choice between the two (same price, etc.) there's a chance I would take the centennial...maybe.


----------



## Wyatt

In regard to the possibility of snagging the hammer, let me clarify that I wasn't referring to a possible ND, but rather to the possibility that an exposed hammer could "catch" and interefere with a fast, smooth draw from a pocket when you really need it. Obviously it would be a less of an issue from a holster.

I agree that SA is nice, but for me it is not something I require in a pocket carry CCW snubbie. Yes on my S&W L frame 686, for a CCW snub not so much.


----------



## Beachcomber

*Centennial*

I'm definitely partial to the S&W Centennial revolvers as I own both a 640 (.38 +P+) and a 640-1 (.38/.357).

It's my opinion that in the majority of all self defense situations where a 2" revolver will be forced into play... the shooter will be quickly drawing their snubnose from a concealed holster or pocket, obtaining a quick sight picture (not aiming) and squeezing the trigger as many times as necessary to stop the threat. In this scenario, I do not think the shooter will be taking the time to cock the revolver's hammer for a precise shot?

Shoot Straight & Stay Safe! :smt023


----------



## Deltaboy1984

sfmittels said:


> +1 on the Centennial. For experienced shooters, it probably doesn't make much difference. But for people like my girlfriend who want the peace of mind but don't want to practice, the Centennial is nearly idiot-proof.


me too:smt1099


----------



## ImCrazy

*model 642 for me please*

I really like my 642 (centennial) I just picked it up over the weekend and I love it, I don't have my ccw yet but ive been carrying it around the house to get used to it and its super comfortable in my nemesis pocket holster. I will never ever concider getting rid of the .38 snub nose because its such a concealable versitle and yet powerful enough to get the job done gun. With my golddot hallow points im confident I will get the job done with the little .38. :smt1099

-Aaron.


----------



## revolvers&w

The 642 is my choice.


----------



## rman

I've had both and liked them both. Right now I have a 642 and a 296. I've done a lot of double action shooting over the years and don't really miss the hammer. If you like to shoot single action the bodyguard is for you. If you are worried about lint and dirt getting in the action the centennial is your gun. My vote is for the centennial, but if anyone wants to give me their bodyguard, I would graciously accept it!:smt082


----------



## wjh2657

HCP holder and I do EDC. S&W 642 and 640 are my carry guns. Which one depends on what clothes I am wearing. Slacks with just shirt means 642 in pocket holster. Cooler weather with outer garment means 640 in either IWB or OWB. The Centennial series are pure function and simplicity, easy to conceal too!


----------



## Blackmagic14

I have a 340 I havnt gotten to carry it yet cause I just got it, but I like the idea of the centennial but DAMN!! this things has some recoil with 357 loads. I have been practicing a lot and I am curious is it safe to dry fire a revolver??


----------



## forestranger

I'd get some 38 snap caps just to be safe?


----------



## TxPhantom

Blackmagic14 said:


> I have a 340 I havnt gotten to carry it yet cause I just got it, but I like the idea of the centennial but DAMN!! this things has some recoil with 357 loads. I have been practicing a lot and I am curious is it safe to dry fire a revolver??


Snubbies were never intended to be fun range guns especially loaded with 357 magnum. 38 +P's are much easier to shoot and almost as effective. Or just practice with 38 Special rounds.
I have never had any problem dry firing any of my center fire revolvers or pistols but it wouldn't hurt to get some snap caps. I wouldn't dry fire rim fire guns at all though.
As a carry pistol, snubbies can't be beat. I carry my S & W, 442 often just because it's so easy to stick in a pocket, especially in the warmer season with lighter clothing. I also carry a speed stick loader for back up ammo.


----------



## BigNic

When I purchased my Centennial, the deciding factor was the enclosed hammer. The big advantage with a small snubbie is fast access from pocket carry... however, the Bodyguard is prone to interference with everything from dimes and paperclips, to lint.


----------



## PX

FWIW:

I had an original Centennial (model 40), and while it was a neat little snubby, I didn't care for the narrow serrated trigger, and the grip safety (for me) was pretty much worthless.

I HAVE a 638 Airweight Bodyguard, and it came with a very nice "Target trigger" which is wider and smoother than the trigger on any of my D frame Colts (Detective Special/Cobra's) or my Centennial or model 49 Bodyguard.

In fact the 638 has a wonderfully light trigger, and it's vastly superior to any snubby I've had previously. The addition of Crimson Trace Lasergrips change the snubby from accurate to a tack driver at any reasonable distance.

I don't know which modern J frames come with the wide, smooth target trigger, but I assure you it's a big deal, and if you ever have the chance to shot one you'll see what I mean.

Just personal opinion, YMMV.

Jesse


----------



## DanP_from_AZ

*Forum Newbie voted with his wallet today*

I finally got around to getting a CCW again since it's now a one day, one time deal in AZ.
I have four revolvers. None worth a darn for real carry.
A replica 1858 Remington Navy cap & ball, an Italian single-action .45 LC, and a Beretta 92 Centurion (nice BIG AND BULKY duty gun).
And, the Beretta .32 Auto Tomcat "mouse". World's worst DA trigger. It would be a good deep-sea fishing weight, though.

So, I got tired of reading articles, and looking at pictures, and surfing the net. Time to go "feel the real". 
I didn't like the Taurus or Ruger "equivalent" snubbies "feel". 
And, I finally quit fondling that Ruger Alaskan in .454 Casull with porting and night sights. NO ! ! !
Hey, I tell myself, it shoots .45 Long Colt too ! NO, NO, NO ! ! !

I wanted something to abuse, and hopefully never use.
Just something nice to carry, or throw in the console, and also to use on my long hikes. 
That .45 Long Colt with a belt full of Silvetips gets HEAVY after a few miles uphill.
I see a LOT of lion and black bear tracks. But, the few I've spotted just run away.

I feel perfectly "safe", but a gun is sorta nice. My dog kinda looks like "a meal".
And 15 ounces sounds and feels really good. I don't want or need .357 Mag in that size.

For hiking I'll use two "snake" shotshells and three +P's. I leave the snakes alone. Unless . . . 
And, we have been having a rash of rabid animals attacking people this spring. 
Mostly foxes going for people working outside or hiking. I think .38 Spl is enough.

All that just to say my S & W Centennial Airweight 642-2 is a pretty nice little piece. 
Actually, just a personal preference, but I like its "style" better than the Bodyguard.


----------



## nailer

How easy or difficult is it to conceal a 340, 360, or 642 in a pocket holster? I have a 60 that is just too heavy and long in the grip to do so.


----------



## sigophile

I have a 640 with Uncle Mike's combat grips and a 642 with Uncle Mike's boot grips. I love them both. They are great little guns. You can shove one in your coat pocket on the way out the door to the corner store and not have to worry about having anything hanging up if you need to draw it quickly or fire it through your coat pocket (I usually carry the 640 in an IWB holster with the 642 in an ankle rig and 2 Bianchi speed strips in my front pocket. All loaded with .38+P Speer Gold Dot short barrel.)(However, usually it's the Sig 220 in a paddle, but that for another topic.) 

To me, the extra hump (shroud) on the Bodyguard is just a crevice waiting to collect pocket crap. Also, I have good-sized hands and my thumb can't get a good purchase on the spurless hammer. At least not enough to feel comfortable with in a self-defense situation. 

These revolvers are "belly guns" not target pistols. Just Draw, Point, Shoot.

That is why I prefer the Centennial.

Just my .02

Sigo


----------



## SigZagger

sigophile said:


> These revolvers are "belly guns" not target pistols. Just Draw, Point, Shoot.
> 
> That is why I prefer the Centennial.
> 
> Just my .02
> 
> Sigo


Well stated, to the point and accurate. I like that, and that's why I carry a 640-1. :smt023


----------

