Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Are new S&W Airweights any good?

I am still considering different handguns for light weight carry. I've heard disparaging remarks about the new Smiths. What if any issues do new 38sp Airweights have? If an older model would be better, what years should I look for? Does anyone else make a better-quality light weight 38sp?

Generally, I'd recommend a pre-lock. Even better, a pre-82.

Here's my pre-82 S&W Model 38 "Airweight Bodyguard," .38 Special, wearing modern made S&W rubberized grips. Aluminum frame.

AIRWEIGHT:


or, AirLite:

Well,I don't know. Which is better?

There’s a filler commercially available for the lock:

I know, but the period that started with the lock also marked a decrease in general quality control. Just like there's nothing special about a pinned barrel, it serves as a demarcation of a new period in S&W manufacturing that also featured a slight reduction in general quality.

Depends on what you want. The AirLite is the lightest by a few ounce, due to its Titanium cylinder and aluminum barrel shroud, but shoots just fine (though it do kick some). The AIRWEIGHT feels less like a toy, but is still substantially lighter than an all steel J-Frame.

Airweight models feature aluminum alloy frames. Airlite models feature scandum alloy frames which combine lightweight with (supposedly) the strength of steel.

The AIRWEIGHT was also made with a 3” barrel. But, they are quite hard to find, and priced accordingly:
This one cost an arm, but thankfully not also a leg.

The above-shown AirLite is a Model 342 in .38SPL. More commonly seen, is the Model 340 in .357MAG, most examples having been fired very little before their previous owners quickly tired of the beating it gave them. Of course, .38SPL ammo can certainly be used in a Model 340.

The Centennials are the way to go with newer guns, though. Their actions feel much better than the newer exposed hammer S&W revolvers. While there’s not nearly as much pride in ownership of a newer S&W revolver, it’s also not as traumatizing when necessarily surrendering it to the cops after a self defense shooting.

And you can get them without the key lock.

Thank you. That's the kind of info I was wanting. I'll look into a Centennial. I have never heard of them before.

I have a whole bucket full of these jframes and have 1/2 dozen new ones. The new ones are just fine for me. You can get a 642 with no lock and a 340. The 340 is great but is in 357. Shoot standard pressure 38s or if you handload or shoot reduced 357s. I narrow the front sight on my 642s. Despite being al framed, the 642 holds up.
S.

Bought a 442-2 Airweight, trigger was stiffer than I like so installed Wolff springs and it's been a great shooter.

One distinct advantage of the Centennials, not realized by novice revolver shooters, is the ability to get the shooting hand much higher up on the backstrap than is possible with exposed hammer revolvers. This makes a huge difference in their accurate double action shootability, though single action is obviously not an option with a Centennial.

Damn flyer.

I always liked an exposed hammer fired J-frame. I had an early stainless model 60 .38 Special +P, but at 22 ounces, it was more than I wanted to carry around in a pocket. S&W made the lightest hammer fired Scandium frame pre-lock .38 Special +P back in 2000 called the model 337PD. Mine weighs 10 ounces empty and 12 ounces loaded. In 2002 they made it the 337PD-2 two more years and included the lock. My model 60 was sold and replaced by that 337PD at half the weight. It gets carried, but isn't shot very often.

Just grab a 442 or 642.

Load it up with some good full wadcutters from a reputable manufacturer, get some practice in, and carry on.

There are literally thousands and thousands of them carried every single day and problems are exceedingly rare.

If there is an issue, Smith will take care of you.

I bought a new 642 two years ago and it is well made and finished. The action is as crisp and smooth as any factory J-Frame I have ever handled from any era. The only change I made was to replace the factory grip with a Hogue Boot Grip, because the original S&W Boot Grip did not have quite enough clearance for use with HKS speedloaders.

I think the new J-Frames are just fine.

I carried one for years as my warm weather off duty. My agency changed its off duty policy about 6 years ago and revolvers were not permitted. I was one of three LEO s in my agency who still carried a revolver. That gun was so easy to hide and carry. You never knew I was armed.

What possible reason could they have to bar revolvers for off duty carry?

The long, manly trigger pull is part of what makes the 442 in my pocket safe. You do have to dry fire enough to let your finger learn to pull without moving the gun. A death grip to try and tame recoil does not help in this endeavor.

White shirts... what a pain in the azz.

They, the Agency mandated the following: No external hammer, No grip safety , only, striker fired semi autos with a Minimum 6 round magazine capacity. Approved cals, 380, 9mm. 40 S&W and 45acp. They never even asked us, firearms instructors for input. After it was approved we asked about us recommending changes and were told our input was not needed. Yes, all the 1911 guys were pissed off as well as the Springfield XD crowd. Later, we found out the Admin folks just cut and pasted bits from other agencies policies and made it into a Frankenstein policy of our own. We were not happy about it, in any way, shape, or form!

In my first agency, after a good bit of training and experience, I ended up being the firearms and tactics instructor. At the time we were using a Level 1 security holster, essentially just a thumb break model. On top of that, they were worn and floppy, and several of us had our handguns pop out of the holster when chasing a suspect or in a nasty fight. I went to the Chief and laid out why the holster we were using wasn't up to modern standards and training and pointed out the very real potential for a bad guy to end up with one of our guns when in a tussle. It had happened to me. He asked me to give him a few recommendations and I set to work on that. A couple of days later I had all the information, prices, ect. pulled together to present to the Chief and when I approached him he said, "Oh I had Lt. XYZ go ahead and order us some new leather." When we got our new leather it was a Level II Don Hume holster and not nearly the quality of the Safariland rigs I wanted. I asked the LT how he came about choosing those Don Hume holsters and he said "They were the best price." Fuggen white shirts!

The downhill slide for law enforcement appeared to have its beginnings in the late ‘70s, as ‘60s Hippies aged and began to infiltrate government, demanding that auto thieves be cited and released, and significantly downgrading narcotics offenses. It only got worse after that, with officers in some nearby jurisdictions ultimately being directed not to refer cases for prosecution from robbery calls unless a firearm was used or great bodily injury resulted. My inability to tolerate such dangerous foolishness motivated me to reposition myself from road patrol officer (also on the state pistol team) to prosecuting attorney, where I could personally see to it that bad guys received the kind of attention they truly deserved. It was most satisfying for me. Judges, on the other hand, became somewhat miffed at the cases which went to trial because of the prosecution’s stubborn refusal to offer a reduced charge. But, arresting officers loved the results, and my DA thereafter got himself re-elected five times, so far (none of his predecessors had served more than two terms). Not satisfied to leave us relying solely on our abilities to make friends easily, that outstanding DA had a couple of us more aggressive (and properly qualified) DDAs carrying concealed firearms, both on and off the job with our ID cards endorsed pursuant to LEOSA. (In California, while DA investigators are specified by statute as peace officers, prosecutors are not. But, California prosecutors can be law enforcement officers under LEOSA, if it’s arranged correctly.)

I apologize for venting, off subject and on your time.

In answer to the OP's question about old versus new Smith Airweight revolvers here is my experience with a couple of them. The "old" S&W Centennial is a Model 642 no dash I purchased new in 1991. It has maybe 500 rounds or so through it and now has what what I consider a smooth trigger and has held up great showing very little wear from being carried a lot. It weighs exactly 15 ounces. Just to have a spare I bought a new one in 2022, a Model 642-1, again in 38 Special WITHOUT the lock. I haven't shot it a bunch but it had a very good trigger right out of the box. It weighs 14.5 ounces so a tad lighter than the early one. This 642-1 is on the Magnum J-frame which is about an eighth of an inch longer and also has the longer .357 Mag cylinder even though still only chambered for 38 Special. It does have the MIM internals instead of the forged internals which are possible lighter? It also has the original type one piece barrel but also has an overall coating of some type on it that seems rather easily marred and will wear quickly. It's just me but I much prefer the older one. Either way I believe that they are great. And FWIW they are now loaded with Mackay Sagebrush's standard pressure wadcutters.

That's also what makes them suck at distance and against multiple targets, aside from being slow in those applications. People like Mackay_Sagebrush and Jerry Miculek do fine because they shoot them a lot.

P.S. I have interacted with a gentleman who shot himself in the thigh pulling a J frame out of his pocket under what he considered to be life threatening conditions. No one was injured but him.

Firing a single normal factory 357 round out of a 340 will convince any normal, sane person that that's a really bad idea..........38's only, please.

I use the 340 or 442 with Houge grips a lot for pock or BUG carry............far better, IMO, than some micro semi.

JMHO, YMMV

MM

The issue with modern S&W revolvers is really bad quality control. The last modern S&W I bought (purchased new online) was a Model 442 (no lock). The forcing cone looked like it was fresh cut with a hack saw. Totally unacceptable. Completely unfinished. Someone at the factory literally forgot to trim and polish the steel there, so it was totally rough, like fresh from the cutter. You couldn't even put a patch on it or it would instantly shred from all the sharp points sticking up, and you'd have to pull patch material out with your fingers. I called S&W and they gave me a free shipping label to send it back. They took one look at it and sent me a brand new 442, no questions asked.

That sort of thing never happened back in the day.

I recently bought this 637. It has one range trip and shot great. Being a custom shop gun it has the smoothest DA I have ever felt on a J Frame. I swapped the grips shown for a set of simple rubber two finger groove S&W grips. I have been pocket carrying it. I have yet to install the plug sitting on my bench.

There're a 638 and 642 sitting about my house, both with the locks. Neither are as smooth in da as their k and n frame pre-lock contemporaries. That's not to say they're bad, just not pre-model number sweet like the old iron.

Yup. Not pleasant.

.357 Magnum is unpleasant enough for a snub nose, all steel, K-Frame. No way I'd touch one off in an Airweight J-Frame.

On a dare, I once shot 5 full-strength .357s into a fairly snug group at 7 yards from a loaner S&W 360 AirLite Ti to impress some California Division of Forestry Law Enforcement Officers, with whom I was teaching an LE seminar on the North Coast. It was maybe 25 years ago. Never even remotely considered doing THAT again!

It was done all double action, and I was holding on so tightly that I could likely have bent that Scandium-aluminum frame.

You guys are tougher or more adventurous than I.

My only baseball bat to the hand experience was five rounds rapid fire of 158 gr. .357 Federal Hydra-Shok factory ammo from a 3" Ruger SP101, which is considerably heavier than the Smiths under discussion. It convinced me to not even try anything smaller - that was 25 years ago and the memory still keeps me from buying one of those 3" steel Model 60's in .357.

This is a 637 Air Weight, one of four I did up for my wife, daughter and grand daughters to get their CWPs. The Air Weight is very light, a 2" 38 Spl +p, hammer gun, not the hammerless.
The hammer spur on these guns is rough stamped steel, it rides inside the hammer coil spring and needs to be removed and polished on all four sides. The springs can be changed out if you wish. The pictured gun has Packmeyer grips to give one more finger on the grip. With 125 JHPs it makes a decent pocket pistol. They all got their CWPs.
My wife a licensed PI from Memphis, carried a 60 for years, she loves the Air Weight 38.

I bought a brand-new 642 about 5 years ago off gunbroker. When I got it in my hands I could barely open the cylinder so it went directly back to S&W where it was repaired. Whatever jig they put it in to repair it left two significant marks/scratches underneath the topstrap about 1/8" square.

That was the second new S&W revolver in less than a 2-year period that had to go back to the factory out of the box.

I decided then that I was done paying premium prices for a sub-standard product and have not purchased any more S&W guns since.

Same here. I wouldn't buy another new S&W firearm.

There will always be some people who disparage any new(er) product because of "the good ole days". While I do indeed love my vintage S&W revolvers, and while (like everyone else) S&W does experience some QC issues, they do still make good guns. Just stay away from 38 Bodyguard.

I read that part and had to smile.

I may have popped a few bunnies in the noggin on body with a J Frame, but I am not quite in the same league as Jerry.





I did however make it a practice to shoot out to 50 yards on a standard qual target when I was carrying a gun for a living with my 442 BUG. It really was not all that hard once you master the trigger (and have younger eyes). But again, it is nothing like JM shoots. Having shot the same matches such as SOF world 3 gun way back in the day and seeing him burn down targets, I can attest, he is on a whole other level. I am human..


BTW,, if you guys want dang fine J Frame, I would absolutely suggest you put your name on the list for one of the Lipsey's and Smith & Wesson Ultimate Carry J Frames.

They are very well thought out guns.

Plus they have sights that will make longer range hits no big deal.

50 rounds of the Winchester 130gr FMJ 38spl in a S&W Centennial resulted in my trigger figure bleeding.

The gun torqued in my hand. Rear edge of the trigger eventually dug through my skin.

I suspect the 357 version would be carry lots , shoot little.

To the original question …yes

The updated sights look awesome. I would love to shoot one. But ,the updated price does not. Theses days the QC of S&W is a pot luck dinner, read that as all over the place and not in a good way!

My 2 inch airlite will last a lifetime because after 5 rounds I am done shooting it. It replaced an air weight whose frame cracked under the barrel sent back to smith and they offered and upgrade and charged me for the difference. If I can shoot 7 rounds of .380 into a 4 inch circle at 10 ft, why carry a hand bruiser that shoots 5 and is uncomfortable to practice with? To top it off I am not as accurate with it. Get a Glock 380 or a Kahr 380.

JFC not this BS again, the usual cast of geriatric Fudds lamenting some passed along tale of woe or single astronomically rare experience of poor QC that was dealt with post haste at no expense to said Fudd in regards to "newer" 'Smiths. Buy with confidence, they're great guns, probably aren't but a handful of guys here that could ever wear one out. Pre 1982 is never coming back, deal with it.

Exactly what I'm talking about in this and the N frame QC thread, Fudd when being honest has to admit that his prized OLDER 'Smith's (just like anything else) are equally capable of breaking, and that in what's left of his lifetime will never come close to wearing one out much less go through a box of shells. JFC....
Second example in this thread alone of Smith standing behind their product with excellent customer service and replacing without fuss a piece that had issues. Buy one and shoot it, you can't lose.

I recently bought a NIB 637. I've only put 37 rounds through it so far (testing different loads) and dry fired it (on snap caps) a couple of hundred times. So far so good.
I'm going to carry it with a handloaded 125 gr JHP at 948 fps. Shoots to POA at 7 yds.

Do I qualify as a geriatric Fudd at 71?

You've disqualified yourself from Fudd status, you've (gasp) bought a post 1982 S&W revolver and fired more than 5 rounds though it, refraining from steering someone away from a purchase based on nothing more than your thirst for nostalgia, or rumors of poor QC that you've "heard" about, giving results based on first hand knowledge. You're in the clear.

My oldest 642 has an unbelievable number of 148 wadcutters and 158 gr LRN & SWC at 650-750 through it. Not counted recently but it’s long broke 10k I’ve not run a lot of +p through it but I always thought it’d break before or around 10k. I go through 38 reloads like potato chips. That particular one a bent a pin on it long ago… I fudded it up. S&W fixed it lickity split. I really find all this talk about new Smiths not being any good as hilarious. For one, S&W sells a a ton of revolvers. I’ve bought 2 dozen new revolvers not a one had had a problem. I had a Ruger SP101 that was a steaming pile of $hit though. If there is something wrong with your S & W, they will certainly fix it.
S.

They're still good, still got attitude...

Great book!

The only "advantage" of 3" barrel on .38 Special is extra challenge in finding a holster one really wants. Alternative to light weight S&W are LCR/LCRx from Ruger.

Not really

Well Rugers are cheaper, in every sense of the word.
As far as recoil goes, I load my own. My 629 shoots full factory fine. I prefer higher mid-range loads.
For super light revolvers I load hard cast and not full case of H110.
The 380 ammo is the highest priced stuff out there. If you shoot much it will hurt your pocket book.
I went to the local gun shop and picked up a 380 for my daughter-in-law as a gift. I picked up a box of ammo while I was at it. The pistol was cheaper, but with only one box of ammo the price was higher than the similar 9mm with one box of ammo. Besides my son has a 9mm too.
She will not be burning up lots of ammo.
If you don’t reload, you can buy low recoil 38 ammo, I’d lean towards the 357 and shot 38 in it if recoil was an issue and if you don’t reload.

Go to a dealer with a range to rent a revolver or two along with ammo.

For me, no question at all - S&W all the way.

The best period guns to look for are those with magnum J-frame ca. 1997 or later. The internal lock came about 2002 if that bothers you. This is good if you plan shooting lot of .38 +P out of gun. The advantage to .38 with +p compatibility stamped on barrel is less cost over gun chambered for .357 magnum.

Oh hell, that was funny!