smith and wesson airweights

[JimB]

I'm looking into a carry gun. someone mentioned i should look into
one of the airweights, perhaps a model 637, 638 or maybe a 340.

I was wondering if anyone here owned one or had used one..

I thought a 686 short barrel might do it but that a larager frame
gun might be a little too big and too heavy.

Anyone got some experince with the above.

JimB

 

[Lynne]

I've shot the airweights and a titanium - they aren't for me. Reason being, I practice with my carry gun. The airweights are fine as far as not being heavy to carry, but holy crap, put a couple boxes thru them for practice and my hands would go on strike. Less weight = more recoil and kick back.

FWIW

 

[M1911]

I've got a 642 -- that's a 15 oz J-frame .38. I recommend against going to the lighter weight models. If you buy one of the titanium or scandium models, all you are doing is turning $$ into recoil. My 642 hurts more than enough when I shoot it, thank you very much, and it's a lot cheaper than the ti and scandium models.

Save your money and skip the 340. For pocket carry, I'd skip the 637. I suggest you look at the 638 and 642.

Realize that none of these guns are particularly easy to shoot accurately nor fun to shoot.

 

[FPrice]

It really depends upon you and how you perceive recoil. I have a 342PD (10.8 oz.) which I use for pocket carry in warmer weather and while it kicks it's not so bad that I can't practise with it. Of course I don't put a couple of boxes through it per session. Once you get it sighted in and are sure of it's performance (say, 200 rounds) a couple of cylinders full a week or so should be fine for practise.

How do you plan on carrying this? In a pocket? In a belt holster? It can make a difference in what you can use.

 

[tele_mark]

I just bought a used 637 a week ago, primarily to use as a carry gun while doing outdoor activities like mountain biking, hiking, and XC skiing, when bringing my P99 won't be practical. It does have stout recoil, but I did do fair with it during my initial box of 50 155 gr. FMJ's this week, at least considering how I shjoot anyways. This was 2 cylinders worth into a 7 inch targety at 15 yards in single action, sort of a Weaver stance:

However, the next two cylinders I was firing at the identical target next door in double action, and I think I got about 4 hits on the paper. I know I'll get proficient with it, it'll just take a lot more boxes of ammo and dry fire work to master the DA on this. I think it's a worthwile little gun. I must admit that although I bought it with a "practical" end in mind, it was just as much to satisfy a need to just get one. Something about this little gun caught my eye, and there was no way to get out of it without buying one. Sound familiar? Plus, after a box through this thing, I immediatly shot my P99 better that I have so far, so there's a practical justification, right?!?

 

[PistolPete]

I have a 642 airweight that I carry in the warmer months of the year. I carry it in a pocket holster. It's great because it is so light and easy to conceal that you forget you are carrying it.

Sounds perfect.... but the gun is terrible to shoot. The DA trigger on this gun is HORRIBLE and the long heavy trigger pull makes shooting this gun very difficult. It isn't a gun I would want to take target shooting. The sights are bad, the trigger is horrible, but it is a great close range defensive gun that is easy to conceal.

 

[USMA-82]

Another 642 guy here.

Good balance between too light (scandium) and too heavy (stainless). I can wear it at work all day and never know it's there.

As others said, it's not a target gun. It's meant to be utterly reliable and effective at short distances - say, between nose-to-nose and 15 yards.

And a .38 Special +P round is about as stout a load as I want to deal with using a 15 oz pistol.

I know there are those who say "any caliber is fine for self-defense as long as it starts with a 4", but I say any pistol is fine for self-defense if you're willing to carry it throughout your waking hours - every day.

Strongly recommend the 642.

Ken

 

[dwarven1]

I have a 637 Airweight. It's not as light as Jay's mini monster, but still pretty lightweight. With the boot grips on it, I don't have any problem with firing .38's in it all day long... but then again, I think that shooting a .357 revolver with uh... warm loads is fun. (please note: I will NEVER AGAIN shoot a 642 loaded with .357's if I can possibly avoid it.

My only concern with the 637 is the possibility of snagging the hammer when drawing it. if I want to carry it, I might bob it.

Ross

 

[M1911]

he DA trigger on this gun is HORRIBLE

It's easily improved with a very mild spring job and a some mild polishing of the rebound spring. An hour job or so for someone like me. Gunsmith can do it for less than $100, I suspect.

With the boot grips on it, I don't have any problem with firing .38's in it all day

Problem with boot grips is then it doesn't fit in my pocket, which is the whole point of the gun. If I was going to carry it in a holster, boot grips would be fine. But if I was going to carry a gun in a holster, I could carry something much easier to shoot...

 

[dwarven1]

With the boot grips on it, I don't have any problem with firing .38's in it all day

Problem with boot grips is then it doesn't fit in my pocket, which is the whole point of the gun. If I was going to carry it in a holster, boot grips would be fine. But if I was going to carry a gun in a holster, I could carry something much easier to shoot...

Excellent point!

My Charter Arms was much more concealable with wood grips on it, but much more controllable with the Pachmayrs on it.

Aw, hell... maybe I'll just move to VA and open-carry my Ruger P90. [roll]

 

[joe6486]

I'm another 642 fan. They do have a fair kick to them, which prevents them from being a "fun gun", but they're very light, reliable, and cheap. Don't go any lighter than this one. Waste of money, and your hand will appreciate it.

I think FS might still have these on sale for around $350.

 

[Pilgrim]

I agree that the 'j' is much better in the pocket with wood grips.

My atomic gun:

 

[Jay G]

I have a 637 Airweight. It's not as light as Jay's mini monster, but still pretty lightweight. With the boot grips on it, I don't have any problem with firing .38's in it all day long... but then again, I think that shooting a .357 revolver with uh... warm loads is fun. (please note: I will NEVER AGAIN shoot a 642 loaded with .357's if I can possibly avoid it.

My only concern with the 637 is the possibility of snagging the hammer when drawing it. if I want to carry it, I might bob it.

Ross

Heh heh heh...

Just remember, Ross... I only had reloads for my "mini monster"...

(BTW, this is the beast in question:

Cute, ain't it?)

I opted for the extra $$$ not so much for the lighter weight, which wasn't as much of a factor - the 360 weighs 12 ounces, the 637 weighs 15, but for the extra ruggedness of a gun rated for .357 Magnum loads over .38 special +P.

I've found that the Federal .38 special +P+ make excellent rounds for this gun - enough oomph to hurt the bad guy, not so much on the web of your hand...

Oh, and Ross?

please note: I will NEVER AGAIN shoot a 642 loaded with .357's if I can possibly avoid it.

Seeing as how a 642 is a .38 special gun, if you did manage to shoot .357s in it you'd only get ONE chance anyways...

Also, one last suggestion: Get the hammerless. Train yourself to shoot DAO. My one regret is that I didn't listen to the good people at Four Seasons and get the 340 rather than the 360... Single-action shooting is great for my Ruger Security Six with 6" barrel. The 360 I shoot almost exclusively DAO...

 

[second]

I have a 637 and a 642 with the crimson trace laser grip in 38 special.
I dont shoot them all day long but I dont find 50 to 100 rds to be too painfull.

Then again maybe I am just wierd?

 

[Homer]

I carry my 642 as my "can't conceal my glock or Para LTC" gun or as a backup to one of those two. It rides in either a uncle mikes pocket holster or a Fobus ankle rig. The light weight is great , it shoots well and the recoil is not too bad and I load it with 158 Grain LSWCHP +P (the FBI load)
Can't reccomend this type of gun enough, and if DA shooting proves too be too hard the triggers do "stack" nicely with enough practice for a more controlled shot.

Jer

 

[Optimistic Paranoid]

I've shot the airweights and a titanium - they aren't for me. Reason being, I practice with my carry gun. The airweights are fine as far as not being heavy to carry, but holy crap, put a couple boxes thru them for practice and my hands would go on strike. Less weight = more recoil and kick back.

FWIW

Lynne, you raise an interesting point here. I'm going to start a thread over in training techniques called "Training vs Shooting" and reply to your quote there.

Regards
John

 

[Optimistic Paranoid]

I have a 642 airweight that I carry in the warmer months of the year. I carry it in a pocket holster. It's great because it is so light and easy to conceal that you forget you are carrying it.

Sounds perfect.... but the gun is terrible to shoot. The DA trigger on this gun is HORRIBLE and the long heavy trigger pull makes shooting this gun very difficult. It isn't a gun I would want to take target shooting. The sights are bad, the trigger is horrible, but it is a great close range defensive gun that is easy to conceal.

Hmmn. In the old days - which I define as any time that was before MY time - Colt and S&W revolvers all received a LOT of meticulous hand fitting and hand polishing during assembly. The old guns were renowned for how smooth and nice their actions were.

Alas, those days are long gone. Modern guns are just assemblies of machined parts put together with no such TLC.

I only own a few guns, all of them carefully chosen after much careful thought and research - some would say after OBSESSIVE thought and research - and almost all of them are then sent off to a good custom smith for the TLC that the factory no longer provides.

My Ruger Security Six got an action job from the late Fred Sadowski - in his day, nationally recognized as one of the best revolversmiths around.

My Kahr K-40 made the trip out to the Gunsite Gunsmithy when Ted Yost was still running it.

And my new Glock 35 has just recently come back from Bowie Tactical Concepts.

In short, ANY new gun is just raw material for a good smith to work magic on.

(Disclaimer: I refer of course, to guns of sound design and good materials. Pieces of crap like Lorcins and such will remain pieces of crap no matter what a gunsmith does to them - and a good gunsmith won't even touch one of them.)

As for the sights, I've had cataract surgery, and have issues with most stock sights.

I'm VERY impressed with the Hi Viz sights S&W is putting on some of their revolvers - that red dot just jumps out at you.

Regards
John

 

[dwarven1]

Seeing as how a 642 is a .38 special gun, if you did manage to shoot .357s in it you'd only get ONE chance anyways...

My bad, Jay... sounds like I got the wrong model number. So let me rephrase... I'll NEVER AGAIN shoot that thing with .357s in it! Seriously, I don't know why, but it bites my trigger finger on the outside of the finger... somehow the trigger guard comes smashing into it. I don't have a problem with it pounding the web of my hand... or maybe I'm just distracted by the pain in my trigger finger! [roll]

I still prefer my COP .357, but even that gun I won't put a whole box of .357 through at one time. THAT gun just smashes into the web of the hand between the thumb and forefinger. Eight rounds is enough to make me wince.

 

[C-pher]

Seeing as how a 642 is a .38 special gun, if you did manage to shoot .357s in it you'd only get ONE chance anyways...

My bad, Jay... sounds like I got the wrong model number. So let me rephrase... I'll NEVER AGAIN shoot that thing with .357s in it! Seriously, I don't know why, but it bites my trigger finger on the outside of the finger... somehow the trigger guard comes smashing into it. I don't have a problem with it pounding the web of my hand... or maybe I'm just distracted by the pain in my trigger finger! [roll]

I still prefer my COP .357, but even that gun I won't put a whole box of .357 through at one time. THAT gun just smashes into the web of the hand between the thumb and forefinger. Eight rounds is enough to make me wince.

[shock] [shock]

Ross, one of two things happened then. Because I don't think that Jay's was as bad as that cop. I didn't mind shooting his at all.

Now, maybe it was just that my hand was numb from shooting your COP, but I'll take Jay's gun anytime.

 

[dwarven1]

Now, maybe it was just that my hand was numb from shooting your COP, but I'll take Jay's gun anytime.

And that's why there are different models of gun on the market! G-d, I love capitalism. [lol]

 

[PistolPete]

The problem with doing trigger work on a carry gun is if you ever use that gun for selfdefense the money grubbing defense attorney will rip you apart for doing trigger work. It's just not worth the risk.

 

[SiameseRat]

Just have to address the 686 option you'd mentioned. I've got one with a 4" barrel. It's my favorite handgun to shoot but I'd never even consider it for CCW. It's huge and heavy. Too impractical.

 

[M1911]

The problem with doing trigger work on a carry gun is if you ever use that gun for selfdefense the money grubbing defense attorney will rip you apart for doing trigger work. It's just not worth the risk.

I disagree. First, you would be worrying about the prosecutor, not your own defense attorney

Second, the prosecutor is unlikely to know about it. Neither he nor the police are likely to take the sideplate off of your revolver to inspect the spring and rebound slide. And if they did, they wouldn't know what they were looking at.

Third, if they did measure the trigger pull, as long as the trigger pull is reasonable, then I think you have a pretty good defense. If you are carrying a 1911 with a 1.5 lb trigger that's a whole different thing then reducing your 642 from a rough 12 lb pull to a smooth 8 lb pull.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I agree with M1911.

There is a big difference between having the action and trigger smoothed out and setting a "hair trigger" on a gun.

In the former case (even if the 12-15# trigger pull is lightened some to a "recognizable level"), you shouldn't have any problem. If you set a 2-3# trigger in a defense gun, you WILL likely have legal issues to jump over.

Some examples: Glocks sold to civilians in NY (and briefly in MA) may well have had a higher trigger pull than is commonly sold to LE. If one changes it for the typical LE trigger pull, you shouldn't have any problem in court with it.

 

[RKG]

Remington makes a .38 +P load with 95 gr. SJHP slugs. Since recoil is a function of the first order of bullet velocity, while energy is a function of bullet velocity squared, this is a reasonable alternative for a light .38 or .357.

In an "airweight," these are still going to smack, but they are better than 150-160 gr. slugs.

 

[Optimistic Paranoid]

Remington makes a .38 +P load with 95 gr. SJHP slugs. Since recoil is a function of the first order of bullet velocity, while energy is a function of bullet velocity squared, this is a reasonable alternative for a light .38 or .357.

In an "airweight," these are still going to smack, but they are better than 150-160 gr. slugs.

I believe some of the ultra light guns come with warnings about not using cartridges with bullets of less than 125 grains weight.

Something to do with recoil causing the bullets to come loose in the case and move forward, preventing cylinder rotation and locking up the gun.

At least, I THINK I remember reading something about that . . .

Regards
John

 

[JimB]

Siamese Rat: I have to agrre with your comment on the 686,
one with a 2 1/2" barrel weighs 35 oz., a 4" barrel comes in at 40 oz.
Plus it has an exposed hammer.

My original concern was recoil, but if you ever needed it you probably
won't get off more than a few shots anyway. (this comment is without
first hand knowledge and is purely a guess)

Probably need to contact smiht and wesson and discuss my concerns.

JimB