Smith & Wesson 642

[Chuck Haggard]

To clarify, I meant 642s did not chamber/shoot .357mag ammo, not that they weren't .38 +P compatible.

[LSP972]

Well, the early 642s were NOT rated for +P ammunition. That changed when the "magnum" J frame was adopted for all models, post-1995.

Since we're picking nits, here...

.

[KeeFus]

I see two issues with this.

First; if a J frame is the ONLY gun you can carry for defensive purposes, for whatever reasons, then this modification makes all kinds of sense. Otherwise... lipstick on a pig. And that big, blocky rear sight WILL increase the odds of a snag on a pocket draw.

Second, and more important IMO; those alloy (both "regular" aluminum- AirWeight- and scandium- AirLite) frames are clear-coated to prevent oxidation over time. If that clear coat is breached- as in, machining pieces/parts away- bad things will follow if the revolver is carried extensively. Some years back, S&W had a batch of 642s get out of the plant with improperly-applied or improperly-formulated clear coats, and those frames began eating themselves. They replaced a lot of guns over it. The ad copy does not address this. I dunno, maybe they have some method for sealing the machined edges, etc.

No, just a back-up at work and a pocket pistol when I cant carry otherwise.

It was a passing thought but your comments have persuaded me to keep it like it is. Thanks!