# Help Me Decide



## madman4049 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hello all I am torn between the S&W 442 and the 642. I like the 442 for it's less shiny aspects but is it more susceptable to corrosion than the 642. I only ask cause it looks anodized not blued? But isn't it made of an alloy? And is it anodized or some kind of dull blueing?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## milquetoast (Nov 25, 2006)

The biggest difference is the weight, most noticeable if you ever try to carry in your pocket, or on your ankle.
The weight will also be noticeable when you shoot +P ammo. Heavier guns are easier to shoot than light guns. Both guns will be much easier to shoot with rubber grips that cover the metal backstrap. (Metal against thumb bone hurts.) That's another trade-off. Easier to shoot = harder to conceal. Life is full of compromises.
The 442 barrel and cylinder are stainless, just like the 642. It's the frame that's aluminum alloy. Unless you live on a houseboat on the ocean, corrosion is not likely to be an issue. Wipe it off with a Kleenex every once in a while.


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

If you are shooting and cleaning your guns often you will not have any problem with rust. Both guns weight and sell for the same weight/price. One's brushed and the other is what they call blued/blacked scandium. The .38+P is manageable but it takes some practice to get good with them. Good luck.:smt033


----------



## neophyte (Aug 13, 2007)

*choice*

madman4049: Sir; decisions decisions:smt033 One over the other;= personal choice.
Having like many blue, stainless, scandium, along with some rusty, all require some maintenance.

I personally choose the tool that I believe will give me the best service and then accept cleaning as a part of normal ownership.


----------



## madman4049 (Mar 7, 2008)

Thanks for input from all. Both guns are the same weight. This is going to be my new primary carry for hot weather. I have carried my SW99 full frame for years but am tired of lugging it around if you know what I mean. And I clean every other week regardless of whether I shoot or not. More wondering about whether it was traditional blueing or not. And Recoil really doesn't bother me unless it is outrageous. Thanks again too all.


----------



## madman4049 (Mar 7, 2008)

Well I went with the 442. I don't like flashy guns and with the way I take care of my firearms I figure I won't have any problems either way. Also the wife found one she likes so all went well.


----------



## neophyte (Aug 13, 2007)

*pictures*

madman4049: Sir; congratulations; and to the 'Miss'ess'madman4049'
when you get time do a range report with pictures. Thanks


----------



## madman4049 (Mar 7, 2008)

I most definetly will neophyte. Thanks to all yet again. I am new to this forum but I have a feeling I am going to like it here.


----------



## milquetoast (Nov 25, 2006)

madman4049 said:


> Thanks for input from all. Both guns are the same weight. This is going to be my new primary carry for hot weather. I have carried my SW99 full frame for years but am tired of lugging it around if you know what I mean. And I clean every other week regardless of whether I shoot or not. More wondering about whether it was traditional blueing or not. And Recoil really doesn't bother me unless it is outrageous. Thanks again too all.


I was wrong. I saw the "6" and thought stainless steel. The bizarre thing is, I have a 642, so I should know it's aluminum! Doh!


----------



## madman4049 (Mar 7, 2008)

No biggie. How do you like the 642?


----------



## milquetoast (Nov 25, 2006)

I love the 642. It's the "Ladysmith" model, so I figure in a courtroom, at least I won't get hung for carrying a pistol named the "Assassin" or "Avenger" or "Terminator"!

I put Barami hip grips on it, and a Tyler T-Grip adapter. I carry it under a T-shirt without a holster, or sometimes in a Renegade ankle holster.

I keep it loaded with Federal 158 LSWC +P. With the exposed backstrap, it is brutal to shoot (metal on bone), but I have practiced enough with it to expect and put up with the pain.

However, since the 342 came out (titanium), that's what I carry mostly these days. Same setup, Barami/Tyler. Too painful (for me) to shoot with the 158+P, so it's loaded with some of my last remaining Nyclads


----------



## madman4049 (Mar 7, 2008)

Glad to hear. I definetly agree. I avoid all-together buying firearms with names to them. I really liked the Taurus 4510 but being that it has the name of THE JUDGE. That just made it nothing more than a snake/bear gun in my opinion, which I may still get one with the 6 1/2" barrel for that purpose. You mentioned the Barami hip grips. How do you like them? Do they fit in the hand fairly well?


----------



## milquetoast (Nov 25, 2006)

The Barami Hip Grips fit the hand poorly, IMO. That is, they fit the hand the same as the standard S&W small wood grips. I use a Tyler T-Grip to fill in the gap behind the trigger guard. I wish Pachmayr or Uncle Mike's or somebody would make a rubber grip with the "belt hook" of the Barami, and a little padding on the backstrap.


----------



## madman4049 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yeah I know what you mean. I have been looking at the hip grip but it doesn't look like it's too friendly to hold on to. I really want the CTC 405 grips but they are expensive as all get out. I think with the sheer quantity of grips and holsters for the J-Frames the likelyhood of this happening is kinda nil. That being said Hogue would be a great candidate. If they molded in a hardened clip into one of their grips and overcoated with rubber. I bet they would be a big seller.


----------

