Seems to be a great pocket carry or backup gun. But since you can't do either in nj it seems kinds useless. A bigger frame would be easier and less painfulbto shoot but that doesn't stop me from wanting a .38 +p capable j frame like the 642. So what are your experiences with them.

I've had a J frame around for nearly 40 years. They are harder to shoot for the following reasons:

 

1. small sights (the older ones are worse, the newer ones aren't bad

2. small grip (can be remedied with decent grips but don't go too bog or you might as well carry a K frame).

3. short sighting radius (nothing you can do about that)

4. light weight = more recoil

 

I am not a fan of airweights. The few ounces more a steel frame weighs makes a big difference in recoil and controllability. Alloy frame guns are not fun to shoot after 50 rds or so. Scandia frame guns are painful. Yes there are alloy frames that are +P rated but I guarantee you a steel frame gun will last longer before it needs a tuneup. There will be those that say the steel frame is too heavy to carry. All these big he men can't handle a few more ounces. I have carried steel J frames every way possible and don't feel the weight is excessive.

I have a J frame and love it. I had it a SS last night.

Check this out, if you are thinking of getting one...

 

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/22767-sw-642s-and-442s/

 

GRIZ is pretty much on point, except that J-Frames are meant to be carried a lot and shot a little (enough to be proficient). If I were carrying one on my belt - inside or out - the extra weight of the all-steel J-frame would matter little to me. But if that were the case, I'd carry something larger. When you are dealing with pocket carry or, as I did daily, ankle carry, the lighter weight can make a big difference. With rubber grips (Uncle Mike's or Hogue) they aren't too bad to shoot. My LCP and Charter Bulldog are both more painful than my 638. I wish they made a 3", steel-framed, 6-shot, .327 Federal Mag without that stupid port in front of the front sight (better than behind it I guess, but who needs the distraction?) - ideal gun for the GF.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

Bob I agree with you the compensator is unnecessary.

I really need to shoot one. But it'll be a while. Damn hand surgery

Don't know where you are located in our State, but I have several J-frames - a 3" 65-5 (.357), 1.5" 640 (.38Spl), and a 3" 60-15(.357) - if you wanted to shoot them. The 60-15 actually isn't bad at all with full loads of .357 and tame with .38 Spl +P. The 640 is very easy to carry and accuracy is just fine for up-close self-defense. I do not personally like Airweights, and feel the weight is needed in this Smith frame to help reduce the abuse and make sure you can be reliably effective if needed. I'd never shoot a day at the range with any of these, but you bet I have trained with each (I prefer revolver concealed). My favorite of the Smiths is the 65-5 as a cross-draw, but it shares time with my 2.25" Ruger SP101 (built like a tank!), for concealed carry.

...I have several J-frames - a 3" 65-5 (.357), 1.5" 640 (.38Spl), and a 3" 60-15(.357)...

 

 

Sorry to be nit-picky, but the model 65-5 is a K-Frame. It is the stainless equivalent to the model 13.

Pizza Bob, you are not at all nit-picky, but absolutely accurate! Apparantly, I had a lapse in my Smith sense! It it probably obvious now which of those Smiths don't come out too often...

When you are dealing with pocket carry or, as I did daily, ankle carry, the lighter weight can make a big difference.

 

I never found an issue with the weight with pocket or ankle carry on a daily basis. The extra few ounces didn't seem to encumber me but maybe that's just me.