Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns 642 Airweight Centennial

For a carry everywhere weapon? Looking to replace my P3AT.

I'm fairly ignorant about what's out there in the little wheelgun market so any advice is welcome.

Maybe they've gone and changed all the names on me, but I thought the Centennials (640/642) were the ones with the internal hammer, the 649 was a steel framed gun with a shrouded, external hammer, and the 638 was the airweight version of the 649. I much prefer the true Centennials, the steel framed 640 or airweight 642, for pocket and ankle carry. I worry about stuff getting caught in the shroud of the 649/638, thereby tying up the gun, especially when it's carried in those two applications. You give up the single action capacity, but these guns aren't really for shooting beyond 25 yards.

The little Ruger LCR is also a viable option and no infernal locking deal. Also the new S&W Bodyguard revolver.

I am running the 642 which is the airweight. I love the little gun.

They are great little guns. I am still carrying this antique.

i carry either a smith model 38 airweight bodyguard or a smith 342pd ti. the ti is my on duty backup gun

both carry so well.

blue i would look for a older bodyguard or 642. im not fond of smith's newer models.

why the change? policy?

That would be an improvement, I think, in terms of terminal effect, but they are not particularly shootable. Require a lot of practice due to heavy recoil, and practice with that gun isn't fun. If you could step up to an all steel Centennial or Bodyguard, you'd be significantly better off in the shootability department and not that much worse off in the totabilty department.

I am looking at this .357 revolver

http://chiappafirearms.com/

the first really NEW revolver design in ...100 years!?

Check it out

Even the steel Centennials are not that easy to shoot well. We used to own one. I found that the little gun torqued heavily with USA 38 loads. If I fired a whole box, the trigger would blister the side of my finger.

It ain't a Casull. I gotta admit, for full house .357, I like my SP101, but my steel 640 was no trouble with +P+ .38s.

Could get an Armscor Model 206 snub, they're pretty small and comfortable but they only come in .38sp. They can easily handle +P rounds though so they're nothing to laugh at. If you feel like you gotta have the .357 you can go with the EAA Windicator, they're heavier, they're uglier, and they cost a bit more too but they're still well below most other .357 revolvers in price.

You can usually get either of them for much less than $300.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=198321238

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=198663847

Very interesting. I like the low barrel idea. Should reduce flip a lot.

Been carrying a S&W Mdl.342 5shot 38+P for over ten years now, as a BUG or whenever wpn. S&W no longer makes this Mdl. it was the first Ti cylinder, alum. frame, i believe they produced. If you get a J-frame, recommend the Speer Gold-Dot short barrel 38spl. +P ammo.

Sorry guys, I was talking about the 642 Airweight. I can get one for $339 after the factory rebate. That low cost was the main reason I was considering it over other models.



Yep. New boss, new rules.

Kel-Tecs, anything Ruger, any non-S&W wheelgun, and all .380s are out.

So I'm looking at a small Glock or the 642 Airweight. I've done the Glock 27 thing and it just wasn't working for me. When I was off I'd just as soon carry my 22 as the 27 and I sold it off.

Bluedreaux I have packed a 642 for the last 5 or 6 years. I carried a glock 27 for the first 6 years or so and think the 642 is a much better backup gun to hide. Since it is light weight you will never want to leave it in car. Just be warned that they wear a little.. I finally give up on keeping the rust off the grip screw.

[img:center]http://[/img]
[img:center]http://[/img]