And, as a bonus, mine doesn't have the Infernal Lock™ that Smith & Wesson puts on most of its revolvers these days (and I was told by a gun shop employee recently that S&W is going to discontinue offering 642's without the lock; take that for what it's worth). A bonus is that I still have some accessories from an old 640-1 I used to own back in the early 1990's: a Milt Sparks Summer Special holster, a Thad Rybka pocket holster, and some old S&W splinter grips. I had a pair of Craig Spegel cocobolo Boot Grips, but stupidly I left those on the 640 when I sold it.
It's much, much lighter than the old 640. Yes, I know these things aren't fun to shoot because of that, but this isn't a fun gun; I have other guns for that purpose.
This revolver in the Thad Rybka pocket holster is identical in size to my Beretta 3032 Tomcat in a similar pocket holster, but packs a much greater punch than the .32ACP does.
I'm happy with my purchase.
5 comments:
Very nice! Congrats!
Looks good, and will do what it's designed to do. I have an Airweight 442 for the same reason. Not fun to shoot, but works.
Nice little pocket pistol and a damn good backup!
As for the trigger lock models- true story.
I am a range instructor in Dallas. We had a lady come in with her 642 to shoot for practice. She went on the range and about 5 minutes later reappeared asking for my help.
" My gun wont shoot".
"let's go take a look" was my reply.
The gun would not shoot for me either- it was locked up solid as a bank vault.
She had fired 6 shots through her bright shiny new 642.
The trigger lock had vibrated "on".
She wasnt carrying a key, and we didnt have one among the range tools. The gun was totally unusable until she could get home and unlock it.
Very unsettling - what would have been the result if she had been, you know, like actually using the gun?
I avoid the trigger lock guns like the plague.
Regards
GKT
It strikes me that the infernal lock revolvers was probably why Super Glue was invented - that's my story and I'm stickin' with it.....
Post a Comment