Longevity of Airweights: round count anyone?

[dyl]

How many rounds has your S&W airweight lived through?

I'm currently in a toss-up between a Centennial and a Kel-tec PF9 for concealed carry.

One one hand, the Keltec is very unique and I'm fairly confident I could get one to work after a little while. The thinness of it is huge plus to me for the prospect of pocket-carrying in this warmer weather we're getting into.

On the other hand, I know someone who is a die-hard S&W fan and I have to agree the simplicity of the snubby is nice. I'm just wondering with the aluminum frame and all, are the S&W airweights meant to be "carried a lot and shot little"? Anyone care to volunteer their round counts please?

I appreciate it folks.

 

[spamanon]

Over on the S&W forums there is a guy with an air-weight with over 4000 rounds of full-house magnums. He shows little to no wear.

 

[Webleymkv]

Any gun with an aluminum frame will not last as long as a comparable gun with a steel frame. That being said, even the Airweights will last longer than most shooters will appreciate so long as you don't try to run Hiroshima bomb loadings through them all the time. If you manage to shoot enough to ever wear one out, you will probably have spent enough on ammo to pay for the gun several times over.

 

[dyl]

hey that's good news. I'd prefer steel over aluminum for longevity but that would be way too heavy for in-the-pocket carry.

I guess with a PF-9 I'd have more of a disposable attitude - if anything breaks get them to send you another part. I'm not sure why the disparity in my attitude towards a potential Airweight. Maybe the price?

 

[Balog]

Fellow over on the M&P 340 thread at THR.org has a couple thousand rounds through a 340, and claims around 18,000 through a 642. Iirc he reported the barrel cylinder gap opening a couple thousands, but no other issues. Might try a search over there, in the 642 club threads and the M&P 340 thread.

 

[Elvishead]

If you manage to shoot enough to ever wear one out, you will probably have spent enough on ammo to pay for the gun several times over.

I agree.

Not sure about 18,000 or even 4000, but I've shot about 300-400 Gold dot HP +Ps 135g, and about 300-500 130g federal FMJ out of my S&W 638 Airweight, and those might be conservative figure's on the FMJs.

Replacement for those rounds are close to the value of my gun.

TBS, it's an awesome shooter, and it's my main if not only carry gun.

ohh, yeah, it's still like new, I took the side plate off, looks like new, and it was rather clean.

 

[Kreyzhorse]

If you manage to shoot enough to ever wear one out, you will probably have spent enough on ammo to pay for the gun several times over.

I agree. They've been making Airweights for a long time and you don't ever hear any thing about any one wearing one out.

I own a 637 and while I've put less than 1,000 rounds through it, I don't see any sign that I'm starting to wear it out.

 

[carguychris]

Over on the S&W forums there is a guy with an air-weight with over 4000 rounds of full-house magnums. He shows little to no wear.

FWIW this revolver was a 60s vintage Model 12 (K frame) and the rounds in question were .38Spl+P. He sought to disprove the old saw that K frame Airweights are unable to handle more than a limited number of +P rounds.

S&W has never released a factory aluminum-frame Airweight in a Magnum caliber. (The scandium frame / titanium cylinder AirLite lineup and scandium frame / steel cylinder M&P lineup are a different story.)

From my personal research regarding Airweight revolvers, here are my personal rules:

1. Early 50s vintage gun with aluminum (non-magnetic) cylinder: DO NOT FIRE. Cylinder strength is marginal even for standard-pressure loads, and gun is too valuable as a collector's item to risk a catastrophic kB!
2. K frame Model 12 with steel cylinder, +P ammo: The gun will wear you out before you wear it out.
3. Pre-90s J frame with steel cylinder, not +P marked, +P ammo: A few rounds are OK every now and then, but constant use may crack or stretch frame. Use standard-pressure ammo for practice.
4. Mid-90s and later J frame, +P marked, +P ammo: The gun will wear you out before you wear it out.
5. Any Airweight, .38Spl+P+, .38-44, or .38Spl "Hi-Speed" ammo: DO NOT FIRE. This ammo is loaded in excess of +P pressures and may cause a catastrophic kB!

 

[j frame]

As far as I'm concerned, you answered your own question when you said you felt confident that you could get a PF9 to work.

 

[girvin02]

I guess with a PF-9 I'd have more of a disposable attitude - if anything breaks get them to send you another part. I'm not sure why the disparity in my attitude towards a potential Airweight. Maybe the price?

New S&W's come with a lifetime warranty. If you wear out or break a new Airweight, from normal usage, they will fix or replace it for free.

 

[dyl]

Thanks for your input everyone, it was very helpful.

IIRC, My interest about them was piqued again because I was watching a youtube video about J-frames made by a tall retired LE agent. He said, "I just can't resist the 80 yard targets" and then dinged the steel target with the snubby revolver!

 

[Chesster]

I had an old Smith 37 bought used in the late 70s. Put a couple thousand standard vel. + a box of +P through it over a 25 year period. Gave it to a relative last year and other than some shiney spots on the finish, action was good as new.

 

[Brandy]

There are different AirWeights so

you need to be specific. Mine is 40 years old, 38 Special 2", is not +P rated and the workmanship makes the current S&Ws look like a Tarus. It will never see more than 300 rounds, mostly wadcutters, so it should well outlast me.
CT laser grips were an excellent addition.

 

[jaydubya]

Since I bought my 637 eight years ago, I have fired over 4,000 rounds with it. And even though most were standard pressure range loads, I loved none of them. Twenty is my limit.

Cordially, Jack

 

[CapnDub]

I've put about 3000 rounds through my Model 442. The cylinder gap has increased about .002; aside from that, the only sign of wear is that the trigger pull has become smoother.

 

[Stainz]

As a public range part-time RO several years ago, I had a number of poor results with KelTec .32's and .380's. Failure to feed after one fired and ftf the first time were the too frequent in older units for me to ever depend on one. Over seven years ago, I had ftf problems with my two AMT DAO .45 ACP Backups one day at the range. They were traded in for both a new 696 and new 296 before the day was out. The 296 rode in an OWB holster - infrequently - until R. Mika made me a pocket holster, in which it fits 3/4 of my pants front pockets. Over three years ago, I added a 642 - and another Mika pocket holster. It rides in any of my pants front pockets - and is my 24/7 carry now.

The 296 has a round count over 2,300 now - over 1k of CCI Blazer 200gr Gold Dots. I quit using them years ago due one splitting in my 696. I switched to homebrews in Starline brass with the same Speer bullets - then to Georgia Arms similar loadings in brass, which I still enjoy using today. The 642 carries Remington R38S12 158gr LHPSWC +P's - and I shot many from it before discovering GA Arms similar reloads. It's seen many hundreds of them over the years - and anything else in a .38 Special case, wimpy to +P. I even shot the SPC plates - many times - with it and my wimpy 125gr JHP plate pingers. It was fun... until I had an epiphany...

These lite-weights, both the 642 Airweight and the the 296 AirLite Ti, are highly capable of more range time than I have given them. Neither is 'fun' to shoot - their low mass and small grips, carry assignment requirements, make shooting them not so much fun. I have a 4" 64, bought at a great price as a security guard trade-in to be a house gun, that is really fun to plink with whether fed with wimpy or +P rounds. The epiphany? The lite weights are for carry! Sure, I'll continue to shoot them - aperiodically. I'll likely cycle their ammo through other guns, occasionally, to keep 'fresh' ammo - but regular plinking is over for these guys. The 642 gets the nod for 24/7 carry - and has some edge wear apparent now. The 296 is a bedside gun now - and still looks new. Both are broken-in - but tight.

Sure, you probably could never shoot a 642 'to pieces'. I have a LEO friend who carries what I thought was a 642 on his ankle as a BUG. I was wrong... it's a very well-worn 442 - the finish is gone. He knows that S&W would likely refinish it gratis - he just can't do without it for the two weeks that might take. It is still tight, too... just ugly as sin! Remember, that lifetime warranty S&W has - it's real - and an 800# call will get you a pre-paid FEDEX label to return it, too.

My advice has, for years, been to make a 442/642 your first revolver - followed quickly by a used 10 or 64 for a house/car/plinker. Your carry piece must be a 'convenient' carry - sitting at home does you no good when Mr. BG accosts you in the grocery store's parking lot. Sure, the home defender can share the same +P .38 ammo with the carry gun when in defender mode - but can launch the cheapest .38s you can find for fun. Once a bottom-feeder type, I am now 'all revolvers'. My bias is heavy towards the revolver... what do you expect - it's a revolver forum! YMMV.

Stainz

 

[EdInk]

The S&W j-frame is the gold standard for snubbies. The Airweights are probably the most reliable <1lb guns every made. If you can only have one handgun IMHO it should be a .38 S&W revolver.