View Full Version : 642 as ONLY deep concealment carry option?
My main carry gun is a gen 3 G19, but i carry a Kahr PM9 or SW 642 when deep concealment is needed. Recently, ive been contemplating selling a few guns and consolidate to the glock 9mm platform. I definitely would like to pick up a LAV G19 when they become available (i like the RTF) but was debating if i should get a 43. The PM9 has been very reliable, but had a couple high angle FTF's that just never sat well with me.
My question is, should i get a 43 for the times the 19 is too big, or can i just roll with a 642? I love the reliability of the small revolver, but its tough to shoot, slow to reload, and a bitch to get a ton of rounds through. It is a great "close range one bad guy" type situation, but a 43 is a little more shootable with quicker reloads.
I owned a Glock 43 for a while and I felt it was not as easy to hide as a J Frame or Glock 42. I would find a Glock 43 I could rent at a range and fire it before spending the money on one.
I just picked up another Glock 42 to use as a church gun. It is lightweight and easy to conceal. The round is somewhat anemic compared to a 9mm, but stacking a half dozen shots on a 7 yard target in less than 2 seconds is a lot easier with a Glock 42 than with a Glock 43. It requires a great deal more work with the Glock 43.
A J Frame is a great weapon and is easily concealable. A major downside is reloading quickly.
I owned a Glock 43 for a while and I felt it was not as easy to hide as a J Frame or Glock 42. I would find a Glock 43 I could rent at a range and fire it before spending the money on one.
I just picked up another Glock 42 to use as a church gun. It is lightweight and easy to conceal. The round is somewhat anemic compared to a 9mm, but stacking a half dozen shots on a 7 yard target in less than 2 seconds is a lot easier with a Glock 42 than with a Glock 43. It requires a great deal more work with the Glock 43.
A J Frame is a great weapon and is easily concealable. A major downside is reloading quickly.
Thats a good point. I held one in the shop and it felt good, but i didnt shoot one. My PM9 is definitely smaller (more like a 42), but the 43 felt good. That said, i shot a 26 and HATED it. Hump hits my hand in a bad spot.
I can shoot the 642 well, but it takes practice and isnt much fun. I can dump five rounds in the "A" zone as fast as i can pull the trigger at 7 yards, but it doesnt invoke confidence for some reason.
The Dumb Gun Collector
09-12-16, 20:52
I am a BIG fan of the J-frame. I basically carry all day (with a few courts that are funny as an exception) and I have found no more practical gun than the J-frame. Totally reliable, VERY safe to carry, and it had an organic shape that is easy to conceal. Slap some laser grips (which add zero bulk) and you have a low-light advantage that most folks can't match. Love em!
I've various handguns all of which I seem to find a use and occasion for them.
I've not owned a Kahr, but the PM9's specs seem to be similar to the G43, which I do own. If you want to replace or augment the PM9 with a Glock 43, I'd do it. Four thousand rounds and my G43 works fine. Just be sure the top round in the mag is all the way to the rear when chambering the first round or it fails to feed.
My G19gen3 works fine as does my G19gen4. I've not seen a Vickers G19 in person, or any other RTF2 Glock, but I understand the texture is similar to a Gen4's texture.
I recently replaced my S&W 642 with the G43 for my work backup gun, but will still carry the 642 off-duty. It fits & draws a bit easier than the G43 from a pocket and carries well on the ankle, as an alternative.
What all this means is get the G43 and another G19 (whatever variation). If you've lost confidence in the PM9, trade it, sell it, or give it away. The only person who you'll be justifying your decisions to is yourself.
If I were contemplating buying another weapon or carrying the S&W 642, I would be tempted to spend the money on .38 Special ammunition and practicing with the 642.
Go handle a Ruger LCR.
IMO it does everything a S&W J-frame does only it has a drastically better trigger and considerably less recoil due the frame design and Hogue Tamer grip. (Comes with most models) Front sight is easy to change, if you wish.
The LCR .38 special is 13.5 oz unloaded, the LCR .357 mag is 17.2 oz unloaded. My wife is no fan of recoil but she can put 50 rounds of 125 gr +p through her LCR 357 in 20 minutes with no pain. Try that with an alluminum J-frame...wear a glove.
The Glock 42 .380 is on the large side for a pocket gun, as are the snub revolvers. But the Glock 43 is even bigger. Too big for me to pocket comfortable with good concealment anyway.
If you really want a pistol smaller and lighter than your J-frame consider a true pocket pistol. .25, .32, .380. Thats what I carry when I don't want to carry the LCR as a 2nd gun.
I toted a Baby Browning here and there. Total last ditch. I also used an old Model 36. Absolute last ditch guns.
642 is geat especially if you had to drive a barrel into someone who got on top of you.
A 642 fits real nice into a vest holster. As does a 36.
Go handle a Ruger LCR.
IMO it does everything a S&W J-frame does only it has a drastically better trigger and considerably less recoil due the frame design and Hogue Tamer grip. (Comes with most models) Front sight is easy to change, if you wish.
The LCR .38 special is 13.5 oz unloaded, the LCR .357 mag is 17.2 oz unloaded. My wife is no fan of recoil but she can put 50 rounds of 125 gr +p through her LCR 357 in 20 minutes with no pain. Try that with an alluminum J-frame...wear a glove.
The Glock 42 .380 is on the large side for a pocket gun, as are the snub revolvers. But the Glock 43 is even bigger. Too big for me to pocket comfortable with good concealment anyway.
If you really want a pistol smaller and lighter than your J-frame consider a true pocket pistol. .25, .32, .380. Thats what I carry when I don't want to carry the LCR as a 2nd gun.
The thing about the LCR is the rattle it makes. I think it's the ejector being a two piece assembly vs the single piece on S&W. It might not be an issue when carried but any gun that makes noise when shaken lightly seems to defeat the purpose od CCW IMHO.
wildcard600
09-13-16, 09:58
The thing about the LCR is the rattle it makes. I think it's the ejector being a two piece assembly vs the single piece on S&W. It might not be an issue when carried but any gun that makes noise when shaken lightly seems to defeat the purpose od CCW IMHO.
True, but I've got enough stuff in my pockets that rattles already (keys, change, phone) that the LCR noise is a non-issue, for me anyway.
True, but I've got enough stuff in my pockets that rattles already (keys, change, phone) that the LCR noise is a non-issue, for me anyway.
That's been my experience. It's the transfer bar. It's so quiet that it blends in with other sounds of movement or the environment. You'd have to be in a library and move it side to side for anyone to hear it and even then they wouldn't know what it was. Might as well be two pennies in your pocket.
buckshot1220
09-13-16, 17:54
I owned a PM9 for several years, sold it off and eventually got a G43 about a year ago to replace that missing size in the stable. I also own a J-frame (640), BG380 (no laser) and a host of other compact/full size Glocks.
I can say that without a doubt the G43 sees more carry than any other gun, even the .380. It's big enough and packs a duty caliber to make you feel very confident in the gun, yet small enough to be worn with a pair of basketball shorts and a t-shirt. I feel it is a great balance that probably won't leave my rotation anytime soon, if ever.
Are your FTEs in the PM9 happening with carry ammo or plinking stuff? I remember mine was sprung pretty heavy, so it preferred hot stuff - though outside 2-3 FTEs in the first 500rds mine was solid. Missed it till I got the 43.
I have shot the G42 and the 43 I like the 42 better ,faster for multiple shots on target but over all I carry a pair of model 36s when I have to go deep concealment.
My main carry gun is a gen 3 G19, but i carry a Kahr PM9 or SW 642 when deep concealment is needed. Recently, ive been contemplating selling a few guns and consolidate to the glock 9mm platform. I definitely would like to pick up a LAV G19 when they become available (i like the RTF) but was debating if i should get a 43. The PM9 has been very reliable, but had a couple high angle FTF's that just never sat well with me.
My question is, should i get a 43 for the times the 19 is too big, or can i just roll with a 642? I love the reliability of the small revolver, but its tough to shoot, slow to reload, and a bitch to get a ton of rounds through. It is a great "close range one bad guy" type situation, but a 43 is a little more shootable with quicker reloads.
I've had a love affair with the 642. It's an awesome little gun. I carried a 642 or a 340PD for 15 years. I don't own one anymore. I miss it at times. Very light gun but five rounds sucks. You don't get to choose only one bad guy. I carried a speed strip on my belt and two in the pocket. 20 rounds was respectable. I carry a S&W Shield in 9mm now. It a little bugger but fits my hand better.
notorious_ar15
09-13-16, 19:56
If the PM9 fits you well, can it be sent back for Kahr to attempt to fix the issue(s)?
I saw a link for a company that makes replacement followers for the 9mm mags on the Kahr talk forum, which may help:
https://lakelinellc.com/shop/metal-magazine-follower-for-9mm-kahr/
johnnywitt
10-13-16, 22:39
Can't beat a J Frame Ti Model, or a G42 too.
An overlooked BUG in an overlooked caliber is a Kel Tec P32 stoked with S&B 73gr 7.65 Browning: 8rds and about 8oz. I have two and they are both hard chromed. They are very accurate at 7rds and with negligible recoil. I don't use underpowered American .32acp, only the Euro Spec 73gr 7.65 Browning. Easy take down and cleaning as well. IMO a 7.65 will kill just as good as a .380 with good hits and is way easier to rapidly make those hit with because of the lack of recoil. Similiar to what other posters are saying with regard to the G43 to 43.
556BlackRifle
10-14-16, 01:58
I love my Model 60 J-frame. Great for pocket carry in warm weather. The J-frame Smiths are great shooters too. I recently picked up a G43 and so far I like it. It's been 100% reliable with everything It's been fed so far. (500 rounds.) Best accuracy so far is about 3.5 inches at 30 ft with Win Ranger 124gr +P.
Eurodriver
10-14-16, 05:41
I have shot the G42 and the 43 I like the 42 better ,faster for multiple shots on target but over all I carry a pair of model 36s when I have to go deep concealment.
Simultaneously? For deep concealment?
Damn_yankee
10-14-16, 11:10
I'm in this same boat right now. I have a G19 I carry daily but I'm in the market for something smaller for deeper concealment, when needed.. I'm currently trying to decide between a j-frame, LCP, and the G43. Decisions, decisions.
As much as I hate anything glock not chambered in 10mm, I must say my 642 stays in deep concealment 24/7/365....in my safe. Why? because my Shield took it's place...and my LCP fills any pocket carry need I have.
i have carried a J-frame of one flavor or another off and on for the past 40 years. I never viewed it as a primary gun, only as a BUG. When the Detonics .45 came out, that became my go-to, all-around off-duty pistol - either in an ankle holster as a BUG to my Swenson Ltwt Commander or Hoag Govt. Model. When SA autos became verboten, I was forced to go back to a J-frame BUG. That changed when the G26 & G27 came out. Carried one of those in an ankle holster, then was given a really nice Andrews pocket holster that made the pistola disappear in a front pants pocket. Carried that as a BUG to my G23 or an issue G26 with the issued G19 and never felt undergunned with those.
Now that I am retired, my EDC pocket pistol is a G43 or a Walther PPS. I never feel undergunned carrying either as a primary. Ditch the Kahr for a G43 or a Walther PPS.
HighDesert
10-15-16, 08:27
Tool for the job dude - I carry a 17, 19, 26, 642, lcp depending on my wardrobe and how discreet I need to be.
I would keep your 642 and pick up an lcp for when you really need a tiny gun.
Now that the lcp 2 is out, the lcp 1s should drop even more in price - at under 200 bucks it should be a no brainer.
The lcp really is significantly smaller than the jframe or 43/42.
And the 642 is close enough in size to the 43.
So... Pick up an lcp and load it with hard cast flat nose and rock on.
PatrioticDisorder
10-15-16, 12:52
Tool for the job dude - I carry a 17, 19, 26, 642, lcp depending on my wardrobe and how discreet I need to be.
I would keep your 642 and pick up an lcp for when you really need a tiny gun.
Now that the lcp 2 is out, the lcp 1s should drop even more in price - at under 200 bucks it should be a no brainer.
The lcp really is significantly smaller than the jframe or 43/42.
And the 642 is close enough in size to the 43.
So... Pick up an lcp and load it with hard cast flat nose and rock on.
LCP 2 is a big upgrade from the original LCP, I bought one last week and so far so good. I'd go with Hornady XTP (12" penetration bare gel and denim), not a bad deep concealment option.
HighDesert
10-15-16, 14:01
LCP 2 is a big upgrade from the original LCP, I bought one last week and so far so good. I'd go with Hornady XTP (12" penetration bare gel and denim), not a bad deep concealment option.
I see a gun like the lcp as a gun you carry when nothing else will work for you - for me that translates into less than 5% of the year I will need to carry it. With that being the case, I personally couldn't justify spending any more than needed on this type of gun.
Now if I were to carry the lcp a decent amount of the time, I could see spending the additional cash for the lcp 2, but in my case it wouldn't be worth it. Ymmv of course.
I still think having an lcp as a regular carry is not the best idea.
PatrioticDisorder
10-15-16, 14:19
I see a gun like the lcp as a gun you carry when nothing else will work for you - for me that translates into less than 5% of the year I will need to carry it. With that being the case, I personally couldn't justify spending any more than needed on this type of gun.
Now if I were to carry the lcp a decent amount of the time, I could see spending the additional cash for the lcp 2, but in my case it wouldn't be worth it. Ymmv of course.
I still think having an lcp as a regular carry is not the best idea.
I fully agree with you, OP was asking about deep concealment. I hate the fact that I have no other options at times, but it's Bette than nothing. That said, the G43 has made me very lazy and on my free time when I could carry a larger gun, I generally only carry a G43 with extra mag, G26 & 19 rarely get touched.
HighDesert
10-15-16, 18:44
I fully agree with you, OP was asking about deep concealment. I hate the fact that I have no other options at times, but it's Bette than nothing. That said, the G43 has made me very lazy and on my free time when I could carry a larger gun, I generally only carry a G43 with extra mag, G26 & 19 rarely get touched.
I have put off checking out the G43 just for this reason - worried how convenient it will be and the capacity is definitely acceptable. I just keep telling myself my G26 isn't much harder to carry... I do carry it in my pocket w no issues.
Sorry to derail the thread...
For me the J Frame and one reload is easier to conceal than a G43. For deep concealment, I believe a J Frame and a good knife is sufficient.
For me the J Frame and one reload is easier to conceal than a G43.
Say more?
sevenhelmet
10-16-16, 14:01
I'm one of the few that don't own Glock. Nothing against them, just never bought one, so I've built my gear around other firearms.
IMO, there's nothing quite like the convenience of a J-frame or other snub revolver in a decent pocket holster. I can almost forget it's there, unlike any IWB rig (especially in warm or hot weather). Works in everything from pants, to jackets, to cargo pockets (heresy!). You could go pocket-rocket, but I'm not sold on the .380ACP as a round yet, so a subcompact 9mm seems to be the best alternative. I have both, but the snubbie conceals better for "deep" concealment or when I'm lightly dressed.
Threat level, climate, and preference all play into it. Your mileage WILL vary.
A j-frame 640 is a great bug. I carry one, or a Rohrbaugh R9
Say more?
I am 5'10"/180 lbs. and I've tried hiding a Kahr 9mm pistol, a Walther PPK, S&W 3913, a small 1911 and J Frames. I always seem to go back to the J Frame for deep concealment. I had a Seecamp .32 Automatic for a while, but I did not have a lot of faith in the ammunition. Lint and perspiration affected my Model 60 less than everything else I carried. When you fired the first shot out of the J Frame, it looked like a small vacuum cleaner bag blew up, but it always worked.
The spare magazine for my Glock 43 is bigger than a speed strip loaded with 5 rounds. I find it easier for me to hide the J Frame low inside a pair of baggy pants. The rounded edges of the J Frame are less likely to print than the straight lines of a semi-automatic pistol and rounded edges chafe less than slide stop levers, sharp edges, etc.
When deep concealment is needed, I carry spare rounds for the J Frame in a speed strip. The J Frame rides low in an Uncle Mikes inside the pants holster that is designed for a larger handgun. The plastic belt clip is removed and the top of the holster is safety pinned or stitched near the top inside of my pants at the 1 O'clock position. The safety pins or stitching are hidden by the belt. The grip of the J Frame rides behind the watch pocket.
Drawing the J Frame from this location is slow. The speed strip is buried low in the holster underneath the J Frame and requires some effort to reach it.
A person with a stockier build would no doubt be better able to conceal a semi-automatic pistol than me.
I am 5'10"/180 lbs. and I've tried hiding a Kahr 9mm pistol, a Walther PPK, S&W 3913, a small 1911 and J Frames. I always seem to go back to the J Frame for deep concealment. I had a Seecamp .32 Automatic for a while, but I did not have a lot of faith in the ammunition. Lint and perspiration affected my Model 60 less than everything else I carried. When you fired the first shot out of the J Frame, it looked like a small vacuum cleaner bag blew up, but it always worked.
The spare magazine for my Glock 43 is bigger than a speed strip loaded with 5 rounds. I find it easier for me to hide the J Frame low inside a pair of baggy pants. The rounded edges of the J Frame are less likely to print than the straight lines of a semi-automatic pistol and rounded edges chafe less than slide stop levers, sharp edges, etc.
When deep concealment is needed, I carry spare rounds for the J Frame in a speed strip. The J Frame rides low in an Uncle Mikes inside the pants holster that is designed for a larger handgun. The plastic belt clip is removed and the top of the holster is safety pinned or stitched near the top inside of my pants at the 1 O'clock position. The safety pins or stitching are hidden by the belt. The grip of the J Frame rides behind the watch pocket.
Drawing the J Frame from this location is slow. The speed strip is buried low in the holster underneath the J Frame and requires some effort to reach it.
A person with a stockier build would no doubt be better able to conceal a semi-automatic pistol than me.
Okay thanks.
The old timers called them a belly gun for close up contact shooting there is nothing better! All the advantages of a semi are true. how many people have you all been shooting lately? How far away to you shoot at the robbers?
I once knew an FBI agent who carried a S&W M60 on his person in an ankle holster with 6 spare rounds in a pouch and his Bu-issue and more ammo in his briefcase 'cause it was too heavy/inconvenient to carry. He thought he was going to make a routine meet and was a setup. He was in a gunfight on the waterfront. Had left the briefcase in the car... Was a long while before the cavalry arrived. He had 2 rounds left. Nobody hit and the BGs got away.
The J-frame is a great BUG, but a man's gotta know his limitations... If you're going to stake your life on one as a Primary, you had better practice with it - A Lot.
brushy bill
10-16-16, 22:11
If you're going to stake your life on one as a Primary, you had better practice with it - A Lot. Which means you need several, because the aluminum frames are known to break at the frame just below the barrel.
Which means you need several, because the aluminum frames are known to break at the frame just below the barrel.
I am closing in on 8,000 rounds through my BG38. Maybe the newer alloys are tougher than those used on the old Airweights.
Which means you need several, because the aluminum frames are known to break at the frame just below the barrel.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?113852-Project-Break-my-J-frame
The Dumb Gun Collector
10-17-16, 20:55
I am not saying you can't. But I have owned several VERY high count J-frames and they just keep on chugging. You are more likely to bust your hand than the gun. I stopped doing public logs of my shooting (other than interesting guns) but I will go add up my current J. It is a LOT and would be more if .38 wasn't so pricey these days.
I am not saying you can't. But I have owned several VERY high count J-frames and they just keep on chugging. You are more likely to bust your hand than the gun. I stopped doing public logs of my shooting (other than interesting guns) but I will go add up my current J. It is a LOT and would be more if .38 wasn't so pricey these days.
I hit the range with my BG38 today. I fired 150 reloads and the total round count is 8,100. Cylinder to barrel end gap is 0.010" at rest and cylinder end shake is 0.005". It's time for some shims, but I don't see any stress marks on the top strap.
I very briefly, twice, tried out the J Frame as a backup and/or only carry gun for deep concealment situations.
I have since moved onto the M&P Shield to fill all of these roles, and am very happy.
If I were a Glock guy, I would own both the 42 and 43 to do the same thing.
Revolvers are just too bulky, hard to aim, low capacity, and slow to reload for my taste.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.