Hemming and hawing, LCR vs. S&W 442

L

lee n. field

New member
Threads I'm seeing on this are a bit old, so I thought I'd start a new one.

I've sold off my Charter Undercover. It shot well, but the transfer bar broke 3 times. I don't trust it for the long term. The proceeds of that sale are going to be spent on a replacement. The niche to be filled is "lightweight pocket .38".

What my local gun-monger of choice has on hand is, a S&W 442, at $355, and a Ruger LCR at $415. Both are basic 2" models, with no options.

The LCR fits my hand better, and the sight picture is better. (The dealer actually has one with a green fiber front sight, which I am not considering.) I do not have a belt holster that would fit this.

The S&W seems a bit smaller. It's less expensive, but I would want want to replace the boot grip with something larger. I would need to deal with the lock. I have a belt holster already that would fit this.

Triggers on both are quite acceptable. I perceive the LCR's as lighter.

Which would be your choice, and why?
 
T

testuser79

New member
My preference is for the Smith, but I tend to short stroke the LCR during rapid fire.

One quick point, both revolvers have internal locks. Ruger has been building them into their revolvers for years, including the GP100 and the Vaquero. The Ruger just hides the lock underneath the grips.
 
2

22-rimfire

New member
I have had the 442 for a couple years as a pocket gun and I like it. I have the LCR in 22LR and was looking at buying the 38spl with the exposed hammer which I think I may like better. The grips are more comfortable on the Ruger, but harder to conceal in a pocket situation. My answer to this appears to be get both. But I would get the 442 first pesonally but I would keep smooth grips on it.
 
L

lee n. field

New member
One quick point, both revolvers have internal locks. Ruger has been building them into their revolvers for years, including the GP100 and the Vaquero. The Ruger just hides the lock underneath the grips.
Click to expand...

I am aware of that. I've never heard of Ruger's lock being a problem, and wouldn't be worried about it.
 
C

CajunBass

New member
I was recently in the same position. I couldn't get past the fact that the Ruger was plastic. And as ugly as a mud fence IMHO.

Game, set, match...Smith & Wesson.



Got my wife a 642 also.



The 442 is no lock, the 642 has one. I don't worry about it either way.
 
K

Kreyzhorse

New member
I didn't like the feel of the Ruger. Didn't fit my hand and felt odd to me. Couldn't get used to it.

That said, the Airweight feels better and shoots well for me.

The lock on mine has never been an issue. I've never engaged it and never had an issue with it.

Either way, pick the one you are more comfortable with. Both are well made from companies that back their product.
 
A

AK103K

New member
I have a couple of 642's, and they have never been a problem. Not really a Ruger fan, so cant help you there.

Both my current 642's have the lock, and its never been an issue. Ive never used it, and have never even really noticed it was there.

I too removed the boot grips, but went a different direction, as I prefer the old service style wood grips with a T grip. Makes the gun smaller, and is just as comfortable to shoot.

One downside Ive seen with the 442's is the finish. My buddy has one, and the black finish hasnt held up very well with use. That black finish shows the wear much more readily. There is a stark contrast between the black finish, and the aluminium underneath. My 642's have similar wear, but the colors are similar, so you really dont notice it near as much. His 442 really looks beat up. The finish on the Smiths, is really about the only thing about them I dont like. Well, that and they beat your hand up when you shoot them with real world loads.
 
B

BarryLee

New member
I’ve had a S&W 442 for a few years and like it a lot. It carries pretty easily in a pocket holster and I find the performance very good for its intended purpose. I know a lot of folks hate the lock from a philosophical standpoint, but never seen any data to indicate they create any real problem.
 
G

Grant D

New member
I say get the 442.
I have four J frames and carry them quite often.
You already have a holster for the 442, so the $60.00 difference in price, and the price of a good holster, your saving around $100.00
 
B

Bill Siegle

New member
I owned both for a short time but the Ruger was the one I kept. I liked the sight picture and grip better. Both had nice triggers for snubs but I shot the LCR better so it stayed.
 
T

twobit

New member
Both are very good revolvers. My wife carries a LCR in .38 and I enjoy shooting it. She likes the lite weight for carry, the good trigger, and the soft recoil, which to her, makes the gun fun to shoot.

I have several S&W revolvers and have several decades experience with them, mostly model 10, model 66, model 686. I don't currently have a J frame. I do have a old Rossi 68 which is a clone of a J frame. When I bought my wife the LCR it was almost a dead even toss-up to a J frame as to what to get. I guess the LCR trigger won the toss.

I carry a 2.25" DAO Ruger SP101. I prefer a .357 round vs. a .38 because I have feral hogs on my ranch and wanted a small .357 for that. It weighs twice what a .357 LCR weighs, but I wanted that weight for the recoil. I know LCR comes in .357, but to me it does not weigh enough to manage .357 recoil (me manage it, not the gun). I have shot hogs with .357 and it works great on them.

For holsters, I highly recommend Simply Rugged Holsters. Their Silver Dollar Pancake line is wonderful for LCR's, J frames, and SP101's. I put the add-on laser on my wife's LCR and they even have a holster for LCR with laser.

I would not hesitate to own both the LCR and the J frame at the same time.
If you dont mind the extra weight, give the SP101 a try. Same size as a J frame, will shoot .357's, and is a great looking gun built like a tank.
 
L

lee n. field

New member
You already have a holster for the 442, so the $60.00 difference in price, and the price of a good holster, your saving around $100.00
Click to expand...

Pretty much my reasoning. I went back and bought the S&W this morning.

I'll deal with the lock and the little boot grip in the future, if they turn out to be problems.

downside Ive seen with the 442's is the finish.
Click to expand...

I mis-spoke. It's actually a 642 I was looking at, and bought. Stainless and plain aluminium. (Or light color anodized.)

I carry a 2.25" DAO Ruger SP101.
Click to expand...

I'd asked about the SP101 as well. His distributor was out of stock on them.
 
R

redrick

New member
You can get the 442/642 without the lock . I have a non lock 642 . I like my nephews LCR better because it has a better trigger and front sight .

It doesn't sound like you are going to pocket carry , but if I were I would get the 442/642 if not the LCR .
 
S

Smokin'Joe

New member
I bought an LCR in .38 spl. last year. I got the DAO model. I like it and plan on keeping it. BTW, it does not have an internal lock. Roger discontinued that feature.
 
J

Joe_Pike

New member
BTW, it does not have an internal lock. Roger discontinued that feature.
Click to expand...

Does Ruger know that Roger did that?:D


I've carried a 642 for almost eight years. I can't seem to get away from it even if I buy something different to try. I've handled (not shot) an LCR and find them just enough bigger than the 642 that I don't want to buy one. I've also got a 442 that I may start carrying as a New York reload. Both are without locks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top