S&W Aluminum alloy frame vs. Stainless Steel Frame - XDTalk Forums - Your HS2000/SA-XD Information Source!

ncaabbfan · 07-10-2008, 11:45 AM

I am seriously considering getting a snub nose for concealed or pocket carry. I am trying to decide between the S&W 640, the S&W 642 and the Ruger SP101. I understand the S&W 640 is a stainless steel frame and is about 8 ounces heavier than the S&W 642 (aluminum alloy frame) while the Ruger SP101 is a stainless steel frame, but even heavier than the S&W 640. I currently plan to use .38 spcl or .38+p. I do not see a need for .357 in such lightweight guns.

1. How reliable is the aluminum alloy frame for the S&W 642? I guess I cannot imagine the aluminum alloy frame having a very long life, but maybe I am wrong. So what is your knowledge or experience with the reliability and longevity of the aluminum alloy frame on the S&W 642?

2. Is there any significant difference in recoil with the S&W 640 vs. the S&W 642 vs. the Ruger SP101 using .38 spcl or .38 +p?

3. Does the greater weight of the Ruger SP101 adversely impact it being a good pocket carry gun?

4. How does the reliability compare for the S&W 640; the S&W 642 and the Ruger SP101?

Any other thoughts/comments concerning any of these that I should take into consideration before buying my concealed carry/pocket gun?

Thank you very much.

jherrick · 07-10-2008, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ncaabbfan

I am seriously considering getting a snub nose for concealed or pocket carry. I am trying to decide between the S&W 640, the S&W 642 and the Ruger SP101. I understand the S&W 640 is a stainless steel frame and is about 8 ounces heavier than the S&W 642 (aluminum alloy frame) while the Ruger SP101 is a stainless steel frame, but even heavier than the S&W 640. I currently plan to use .38 spcl or .38+p. I do not see a need for .357 in such lightweight guns.

1. How reliable is the aluminum alloy frame for the S&W 642? I guess I cannot imagine the aluminum alloy frame having a very long life, but maybe I am wrong. So what is your knowledge or experience with the reliability and longevity of the aluminum alloy frame on the S&W 642?

2. Is there any significant difference in recoil with the S&W 640 vs. the S&W 642 vs. the Ruger SP101 using .38 spcl or .38 +p?

3. Does the greater weight of the Ruger SP101 adversely impact it being a good pocket carry gun?

4. How does the reliability compare for the S&W 640; the S&W 642 and the Ruger SP101?

Any other thoughts/comments concerning any of these that I should take into consideration before buying my concealed carry/pocket gun?

Thank you very much.

I can only say that I owned the 642. It is rated for +P (even stamped on the barrel) so it should be a tough frame. It's impressively light and easy to carry. I practiced with .38 spl and occasional +P. I'm not a snubbie guy I guess (didn't commit to continuous practice) and so I never got it to pass my pocket carry criteria (kill zone at 15yds) so I sold it.
I carried it with standard pressure ammo as it was a bit more controllable.
I have used a SP101 snubbie and to me it was just big/heavy enough to rule it out for pocket carry.

AZXD40 · 07-10-2008, 02:36 PM

1.) thousand of them out there should be a good indicator, Don't own a 642 so simply I dontknow
2.) Yes there is a difference in recoil between .38spl/.38spl+P and the .357 mag
3.)Yes it does not make the best pocket carry option but the increased weight makes it easier to manage the recoil, and hell its a .357

4.) all the mention revolvers are excellent in quality and I would trust my life with any of them..

If pocket carry is the goal I would go airweight 642. But pocket carry aside I would go and have gone Sp101, I pocket carry its little second cousin LCP

Good luck with you decision

Super Trucker · 07-10-2008, 05:35 PM

I went from a 642 to a 649 to the current 340. I got rid of the 642 only because I wanted a .357mag. The 649 was too heavy for pocket carry but shot much better than the current 340. The recoil on the 340 is rough so the second shot takes slightly longer, but I run a cylinder or 2 through it every other week so i am comfortable with it.
I would recommend the 642 if all you want is .38spl. The lighter guns are easier to maintain also, sweat on both and you will see what I mean.
The 642 or 340 etc. are not the guns you would want to put thousands of rounds through, but the are warrantied for life.
I have never owned a ruger so I can't offer an opinion on them.

If you want to see the difference in ballistics of the short barrel guns look here Speer Ammo - Ballistics Tables.
Click the .38 and the .357mag and you may be surprised

Caribou · 07-11-2008, 08:52 AM

I scrolled down on that site and looked at the Short Barrel Personal Protection ammo, and the .38 and the .357 were a lot closer in muzzle energy. With a snubbie, I don't think the .357 will give you much of an advantage, since there isn't enough barrel to expand/expend all that powder.

Still, I'd love to get a 642! It's on my short list of guns to get next.

ETA: Okay, I took a closer look, and it's ~33% more with the .357 (294 ft-lbs vs. 222 in the .38 +P), so I'm wrong. But, it's still nowhere near the 584 ft-lbs in the .357 with a 4" barrel.

Super Trucker · 07-12-2008, 02:33 PM

Caribou,
I didn't mean to knock the .38. If that is all you want it is OK.
I just prefer the little extra from the .357 since it is no harder to carry than a .38.

shark52 · 07-13-2008, 10:57 AM

Go with the 642. You will appreciate the lighter weight if you pocket carry. You'll probably never shoot it enough to come close to wearing it out. The J-frame snubbie isn't a target or recreational firearm and most people don't shoot them a whole lot. Btw I own an older all steel Model 36

arizona98tj · 07-13-2008, 12:06 PM

I have a 637 that I pocket carry a lot. At a 15 ounce empty weight, I wouldn't want a heavier revolver in my pocket. I carry a Hornady +P round and practice with a lighter target reload....however, it doesn't see the amount of range use as does the XDs and other handguns. I'm not worried about "wearing it out".

UncleBuck · 07-13-2008, 01:09 PM

I looked at the Smiths, Taurus and Ruger.

I bought the SP101 in 357.

It is a little heavier than the 640 but not by much. I also placed them side by side to see the size difference which was hardly noticeable.

There are some claims to the Smiths having the internal locks jam. The Taurus was not built very well.

I have shot both the 38+p and 357 magnum through the SP101. The 38's were very easy to shoot and control. The 357's took some getting use to but now I am putting them in the circle.

The Ruger does not have a friendly trigger and being a DAO it took some practice. I have been using a set of snap caps which drastically improved my skills.

Conversely, the Ruger is built tough and will eat up all kinds of heavy loads. There are no silly locks to worry about and the design and function are excellent quality.

I pocket carry it nearly every day.

sldghmr · 07-13-2008, 01:15 PM

I have a 642 and love it, I gave my Dad my 637 (both airweights) and I really miss it, like the single action trigger alot. I will tell you that my 642 is back at S&W right now because the coating on the aluminium frame was flaking off. I'm not sure why, I use Hoppes 9 to clean it, and it should not be that aggressive to peal the coating. That aside, I can't wait to get it back.

I also installed the CT laser grips, nice addition for point and shoot situations.

07-10-2008, 11:45 AM	#1
ncaabbfan XDTalk Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 43	S&W Aluminum alloy frame vs. Stainless Steel Frame I am seriously considering getting a snub nose for concealed or pocket carry. I am trying to decide between the S&W 640, the S&W 642 and the Ruger SP101. I understand the S&W 640 is a stainless steel frame and is about 8 ounces heavier than the S&W 642 (aluminum alloy frame) while the Ruger SP101 is a stainless steel frame, but even heavier than the S&W 640. I currently plan to use .38 spcl or .38+p. I do not see a need for .357 in such lightweight guns. 1. How reliable is the aluminum alloy frame for the S&W 642? I guess I cannot imagine the aluminum alloy frame having a very long life, but maybe I am wrong. So what is your knowledge or experience with the reliability and longevity of the aluminum alloy frame on the S&W 642? 2. Is there any significant difference in recoil with the S&W 640 vs. the S&W 642 vs. the Ruger SP101 using .38 spcl or .38 +p? 3. Does the greater weight of the Ruger SP101 adversely impact it being a good pocket carry gun? 4. How does the reliability compare for the S&W 640; the S&W 642 and the Ruger SP101? Any other thoughts/comments concerning any of these that I should take into consideration before buying my concealed carry/pocket gun? Thank you very much. Last edited by ncaabbfan; 07-10-2008 at 11:53 AM.

07-10-2008, 02:36 PM	#3
AZXD40 XDTalk 500 Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Phoenix Arizona Posts: 714	1.) thousand of them out there should be a good indicator, Don't own a 642 so simply I dontknow 2.) Yes there is a difference in recoil between .38spl/.38spl+P and the .357 mag 3.)Yes it does not make the best pocket carry option but the increased weight makes it easier to manage the recoil, and hell its a .357 4.) all the mention revolvers are excellent in quality and I would trust my life with any of them.. If pocket carry is the goal I would go airweight 642. But pocket carry aside I would go and have gone Sp101, I pocket carry its little second cousin LCP Good luck with you decision __________________ John F. Kennedy: "Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom."

07-11-2008, 08:52 AM	#5
Caribou XDTalk 100 Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: S. E. Michigan Posts: 367	I scrolled down on that site and looked at the Short Barrel Personal Protection ammo, and the .38 and the .357 were a lot closer in muzzle energy. With a snubbie, I don't think the .357 will give you much of an advantage, since there isn't enough barrel to expand/expend all that powder. Still, I'd love to get a 642! It's on my short list of guns to get next. ETA: Okay, I took a closer look, and it's ~33% more with the .357 (294 ft-lbs vs. 222 in the .38 +P), so I'm wrong. But, it's still nowhere near the 584 ft-lbs in the .357 with a 4" barrel. __________________ CARIBOU “The federal government has taken too much tax money from the people, too much authority from the states, and too much liberty with the Constitution.” —Ronald Reagan Last edited by Caribou; 07-11-2008 at 09:00 AM. Reason: Correcting my doofus-ness

07-12-2008, 02:33 PM	#6
Super Trucker XDTalk 100 Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Michigan Posts: 425	Caribou, I didn't mean to knock the .38. If that is all you want it is OK. I just prefer the little extra from the .357 since it is no harder to carry than a .38. Last edited by Super Trucker; 07-12-2008 at 02:36 PM.

07-13-2008, 12:06 PM	#8
arizona98tj XDTalk 100 Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 267	I have a 637 that I pocket carry a lot. At a 15 ounce empty weight, I wouldn't want a heavier revolver in my pocket. I carry a Hornady +P round and practice with a lighter target reload....however, it doesn't see the amount of range use as does the XDs and other handguns. I'm not worried about "wearing it out". __________________ "You must actually shoot what you intend to shoot. The more the better..." Bree www.stu-offroad.com

07-10-2008, 05:35 PM	#4
Super Trucker XDTalk 100 Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Michigan Posts: 425	I went from a 642 to a 649 to the current 340. I got rid of the 642 only because I wanted a .357mag. The 649 was too heavy for pocket carry but shot much better than the current 340. The recoil on the 340 is rough so the second shot takes slightly longer, but I run a cylinder or 2 through it every other week so i am comfortable with it. I would recommend the 642 if all you want is .38spl. The lighter guns are easier to maintain also, sweat on both and you will see what I mean. The 642 or 340 etc. are not the guns you would want to put thousands of rounds through, but the are warrantied for life. I have never owned a ruger so I can't offer an opinion on them. If you want to see the difference in ballistics of the short barrel guns look here Speer Ammo - Ballistics Tables. Click the .38 and the .357mag and you may be surprised

07-13-2008, 10:57 AM	#7
shark52 XDTalk Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 71	Go with the 642. You will appreciate the lighter weight if you pocket carry. You'll probably never shoot it enough to come close to wearing it out. The J-frame snubbie isn't a target or recreational firearm and most people don't shoot them a whole lot. Btw I own an older all steel Model 36

07-13-2008, 01:09 PM	#9
UncleBuck XDTalk 1K Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 1,412	I looked at the Smiths, Taurus and Ruger. I bought the SP101 in 357. It is a little heavier than the 640 but not by much. I also placed them side by side to see the size difference which was hardly noticeable. There are some claims to the Smiths having the internal locks jam. The Taurus was not built very well. I have shot both the 38+p and 357 magnum through the SP101. The 38's were very easy to shoot and control. The 357's took some getting use to but now I am putting them in the circle. The Ruger does not have a friendly trigger and being a DAO it took some practice. I have been using a set of snap caps which drastically improved my skills. Conversely, the Ruger is built tough and will eat up all kinds of heavy loads. There are no silly locks to worry about and the design and function are excellent quality. I pocket carry it nearly every day. __________________ "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves" ~ Abraham Lincoln NObama 08' You *should* read this...http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm

07-13-2008, 01:15 PM	#10
sldghmr XDTalk Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Springboro, Ohio Posts: 92	I have a 642 and love it, I gave my Dad my 637 (both airweights) and I really miss it, like the single action trigger alot. I will tell you that my 642 is back at S&W right now because the coating on the aluminium frame was flaking off. I'm not sure why, I use Hoppes 9 to clean it, and it should not be that aggressive to peal the coating. That aside, I can't wait to get it back. I also installed the CT laser grips, nice addition for point and shoot situations.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode