So I’m going to get my first J frame. It will primarily be a backup, or run quick to the grocery store type carry for me and will mostly ride in a pocket holster.
I was thinking about going with a 642/442 but then wondered if I was missing out on something by not going with the 638.
With the hump on the 638, is it harder to conceal in the pocket?
I also wondered if maybe having the option of single action might be worth it.
Is there a downside to picking the 638 over a 642/442?
Frame fully enclosed on 442/642. 638 can pick up lint, other debris. Not sure how important in practice vs theory. You can also grip higher on the 442/642 as you don't have to worry about interfering with hammer movement. Unless you need occasional capability to fire single action, I cannot think of a plus for the old bodyguard style, but keep one more from nostalgia than practicality.Originally Posted by Vista461
The bodyguard isn't really harder to conceal. The hammer slot is though a channel to collect debris. Because it has a single action sear it probably will not smooth up as clean a double action pull as the 442. Shooting wise at distance (say 25 yards) I find I shoot my Model 38 better in DA than SA anyways. SA interrupts my rhythm and grip. An oddity with the Model 38 is the sights are partially obscured with the hammer down. As the hammer comes back your sight picture is altering. I can't remember if the 638 is the same but likely is. I do like being able to cover the hammer with my thumb when holstering the Bodyguard. Being able to cock and lower the hammer for function checking the firing pin, lockup, etc is nice. If you want to go up in price there are upgraded versions of the hammerless J's that aren't available in the humpbacks.
Overall advantage is probably to the hammerless J's. I own examples of both families though and wouldn't turn my nose up at either.
Last edited by Half Moon; 04-13-2020 at 08:22 PM.
Regarding single-action on a DA/SA revolver.
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....nterview/page7
https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/d...nly-revolvers/
https://dailycaller.com/2013/04/23/m...ammer-or-less/
In case you didn’t see a dogpile forming:
Bodyguard for the party, Centennial for the business.
Humpbacks are ugly-handsome, but you can’t beat an enclosed hammer and DAO with boot grips for a pocket gun.
Well, you may be a man. You may be a leprechaun. Only one thing’s for sure… you’re in the wrong basement.
Thanks guy. Sounds like 642 it is.
Just wanted to make sure I wasn’t missing something about the 638.
Whichever you pick, spend the extra $ for the model specific Spegel custom grips.
You’ll thank me later.
I currently own both models. You miss nothing by selecting the hammerless J. When asked, I recommend the 442 if one has neither. If he has a 638, then I tell the person he has a fine revolver and urge him or her to keep and use it. Over the years I have owned numerous versions of each J model. They all do the same thing. I shoot these revolvers more accurately double action than single action. A giant negative is that regardless of activity, serious or not, when the shooter cocks a revolver and does not fire, then he must lower the hammer on a live round. As stated, the 442's design
allow internals to stay cleaner longer.
J frames smooth up with use. Avoid tinkering with it. If you insist on a action job, save money and pay Smith to do it. Otherwise you will sacrifice warranty. At the range keep an old tooth brush handy to clean under extractor star to remove crud from firing. One small bit will retard action because star is pushed toward firewall. Hold barrel straight up when ejecting empties. Buy box of wadcutter ammo for defense.
The only advantage to the Bodyguard is that you can thumb the hammer while you holster. That is a feature and an advantage. But the slick rear frame of the Centennial 642/640 I find superior in carry and deployment, whether from pocket, belt, ankle, or Smartcarry. My 642 has been on my ankle all day. I carry it loaded with Federal wadcutters. It’s been my go-to for very discreet carry for 16 years, and looks it, but I wouldn’t trade it.
I don't know if 642 is available with no lock, but 442 definitely is (or was in the past and will be again - hard to say what is available right now). Definitely worth a little extra work to get the no lock version.
I also +1 on the Centennial frame due to the ability to grip higher up on the back strap.
.
-----------------------------------------
Not another dime.
Reply With Quote