642 has a stainless cylinder/yoke, while the 442's cylinder/yoke is blued. 642 frame is clear-coated aluminum alloy. They have had issues in the past with that clear coat peeling off at wear points, which then causes the alloy to begin degrading if the gun is carried/used a lot. All of this was some years back, however… haven't heard of any recurrences. The 442's alloy frame is black-anodized.Originally Posted by NorthernHeat
.
Ref ankle carry; I've been carrying a BUG on my ankle for about 28 years now. Been in LOTS of foot pursuits and fights. Not so much now, but for quite awhile in the 1990s I consistently held the highest felony arrest rate on my department, and we were very busy. I have never had a problem with ankle carry, even when jumping fences and such. A good ankle rig is key to that being the case.
Funny anecdote…
I too carried a J frame in an ankle holster every day I spent in uniform. Not as many foot pursuits/fights as Chuck, probably (our Uniform Patrol guys mainly do traffic stuff), but enough to be confident in the technique and my chosen holster.
The only time it ever let go of the gun was during, of all places, the defensive tactics portion of an in-service class. Further funny thing about DT; they teach you all these exotic moves and techniques, but you see them a whole two times per year, so everybody ends up fighting just like they did in high school… but I digress.
One of those fancy kicks they were teaching was a sort of round-house with the shin to your opponent's common peroneal nerve. I was trying to do the technique right, secure in the knowledge that the next fight I got into would be just like the last one; grab whatever was handy for an impact weapon, or lacking same, punch/gouge/grab.
Anyway, my M-37 went skittering across the mats. There followed a great wailing and gnashing of teeth, because I had BROUGHT A LOADED GUN INTO A TRAINING SCENARIO!
Hey, I know the dangers of that, and I am not minimizing the reaction of the academy staffers present (add to that the fact that this occurred not very long after I left a long stint there as the FTU head).
My point here is two-fold:
One, my chosen ankle rig was/is so comfortable and unobtrusive that I simply forgot I had it on. I should have removed it prior to the class.
Two, I never had that happen though more than a few fights on the side of the road, several foot pursuits, more than a bit of climbing/contorting at bad wrecks with the Jaws, etc. I found it ironic that it DID happen with a defensive tactic technique.
My holster of choice is a Ken Null ANK, which is hand-molded to the specific gun out of horsehide. While it was/is superb, the moral of this story is that, for maximum security, one's ankle holster should have a retention strap.
.
You can't go wrong with a no-lock 642 or 442. I have and use both. I've carried a backup gun on the ankle, in pants and jacket pockets, and in a ballistic vest holster. For me, ankle carry worked best except when wearing a jacket.
I REALLY wanted to like the G26 as a backup to my 17/34 but couldn't take the weight on my leg or vest. In theory, the G26 was perfect but I found it too heavy to carry all day, especially on the ankle. I know a bunch of folks who ankle carry the G26, so it might work for you. The 642/442, while not near as capable as the G26, just worked better for me. A speed strip in the pocket provides an easy to carry reload.
LSP972 and I bought probably the first two new 642s (no dash) to hit Baton Rouge in 1990 (?). I used them daily as a backup until I retired in 2008. They still see use in a pocket or on an ankle and should be in every serious gun person's inventory.
While I never kicked anyone with it, I have chased and whacked a felon or three while wearing it. Like Steve, I use the Ken Null ANK. After 20+ years, I finally wore mine out and ordered a replacement last month. Ken apologized for the two week wait for a hand made masterpiece.
Chuck,which ankle rig do you prefer?...................cya retro
The Thin Blue Line is TOO Thin........Thug Life Must End
any opinions of a "lock" 642 or 442 having the lock disabled by a competent smith?
I'm not nearly articulate to explain how to do it, but here's a pretty good video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVPYgohVCNM
Removing the lock will leave a small hole in the side of the frame. I wouldn't carry an internal lock gun on duty, and I wouldn't carry one with a safety removed either.
Depends on the gun. I have had good luck over the years with Don Hume, Galco, and oddly enough Uncles Mike's, although the UM rig is modified for my needs.
I greatly prefer a physical safety feature like a thumb break be present along with a good fit, holster molding alone doesn't cut it IMHO
Last edited by Chuck Haggard; 10-26-2014 at 05:24 AM.
You will see several different ways via the DIY YouTube crowd. There are only two "correct" ways that do not have the potential for grief down the road.
In the first place, detail-stripping a J frame, while not rocket surgery, does require a bit of patience and finesse. Basically, you either alter the mechanism or remove it entirely and install The Plug.
Some of these DIY videos tell you to simply remove the "flag", or locking plate. That surely deactivates the lock, but it also leaves a 1.5mm space for the remaining mechanism to work free under recoil and jam the revolver just as surely as the lock does. I found this out the hard way.
What needs to be done is to remove that "flag", grind off the nub on it which engages the hammer, and replace the flag. Then it will run until the cows come home with no worries.
Removing the whole bloody thing and installing The Plug is the best option, IMO. But you will probably have to knock the circular tumbler mechanism out of the frame with a punch, and that should be done VERY carefully.
You can find all sorts of opinions regarding "disabling a safety device". But these revolvers managed to work safely for over a hundred years without the lock.
.
Reply With Quote