My understanding from Darryl Bolke is that the .38 models are regulated for the Gold Dot Hollow Point 38+P Short Barrel load. As it turned out, Federal wadcutter equivalent loads also hit to or very close to the same POI. The .32 models were regulated for the Federal Personal Defense 85 grain load, but shot the Lost River wadcutters to the same or very close POI.

In my experience, revolvers are more sensitive to individual load than many semi auto pistols. For example, I have different front sights (taller) on my 329 revolvers set up for the Garrett Defender load than my .44 special loads which require a shorter front to regulate with the S&W adjustable rear. It is not realistic that a fixed sight J frame will be regulated for the entire spectrum of .38 loads. The great news is there is a pinned front sight and windage driftable rear sight, so you can tune to your load of choice.

I have another 150 or so rounds through the gun now, and am getting more used to the sights.

It did a weird thing the other day where it advanced the cylinder but didn't engage the hammer when I pulled the trigger. Without taking it apart to look I have to assume the double-action sear was somehow hanging up in the retracted position and not contacting the trigger. I was prepared to open it up and investigate, but it started working again, and has been fine for the past 130 or so rounds, and probably double or triple that dry fire, so I'm pretty confident it was a piece of grit or something that was binding it up and worked itself out. It did it about 10 times in a row, and then never did it again. The day will come when I open it up, clean it out, and probably polish a few things just because, but it doesn't really need it and I'm wanting to run it as-is for a while first.

I still haven't been able to find any factory Speer 135gr Gold Dots, but I did shoot some of my reloads that use that same projectile and are chronographed about the equivalent of the factory load. I was happy with the performance, and they hit to point of aim.

Shooting primarily 150gr wadcutters at around 750FPS, the recoil is much less punishing than my 950fps load, so I've got the rubber boot grips back on the gun. I put about 50 rounds through it today with zero discomfort. I don't think they help my shooting any compared to the VZs (don't hurt it, either), but they're smaller, lighter, and let me stick to the grip that I'm used to with all my other J-Frames. Nowhere near as pretty as the VZs, though.

My FIL tried the gun tonight, and it really hurt his hand, even with the 750fps load. He got through two rounds and handed it back. I kind of wish I'd left the bigger grips on it for him to try. He's got the beginnings or arthritis, and has big hands that don't fit the little guns well. He'd be a good candidate for the .32 version, I think, especially with those bigger VZ grips.

I was going 5/5 consistently on the plate rack at 15 yards this afternoon, and feel like I'm getting well acclimated to the sights. I'm shooting a lot of wadcutters, and am loving the chamfered charge holes in the cylinder that seem to just guide the rounds right in. I haven't carried it yet because I still need to qualify with it to use it as a backup for work, but I'm thinking the weight savings will be very noticeable compared to my 640.

Still liking it, still glad I bought it.

quote:

Originally posted by RichardC:
*cough, ahem*

( )

Yeah, see, this is what I don't get. Why doesn't Smith & Wesson make a rubber grip that is flush with the bottom of the frame, but wraps around the backstrap.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
My FIL tried the gun tonight, and it really hurt his hand, even with the 750fps load. He got through two rounds and handed it back. I kind of wish I'd left the bigger grips on it for him to try. He's got the beginnings or arthritis, and has big hands that don't fit the little guns well. He'd be a good candidate for the .32 version, I think, especially with those bigger VZ grips.

Yeah, see, I wrap-around rubber grip would be perfect.

quote:

Yeah, see, I wrap-around rubber grip would be perfect.

I agree, they should offer one. While they're at it make a better one for the N-Frame, too, because I'm less than thrilled with the Pachmayr on my 329PD, but can't find a better option to fit my needs. My hands fit the exposed-backstrap boot grips well, though, and I'm still young enough that I can tolerate the recoil. That may change in the next 20-30 years...if that's the case I'll be buying a lot of J-frame grips, lol.

I am interested in the 442UC but I am waiting to see the .32mag model out in the wild getting reviews.

Yep, my little Scandium frame revolver has those Crimson trace grips on it, much less punishing (almost enjoyable) to shoot.

quote:

I am interested in the 442UC but I am waiting to see the .32mag model out in the wild getting reviews.

GJM AK, who has been posting in this thread, might be able to give you some first-hand knowledge on that one!

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
I am interested in the 442UC but I am waiting to see the .32mag model out in the wild getting reviews.

Yep, my little Scandium frame revolver has those Crimson trace grips on it, much less punishing (almost enjoyable) to shoot.

My 638, 642 and M&P 340 all have those same CT grips. For me, they’re the best option on the market for a J frame.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:

quote:

I am interested in the 442UC but I am waiting to see the .32mag model out in the wild getting reviews.

GJM AK, who has been posting in this thread, might be able to give you some first-hand knowledge on that one!

I have two 432 revolvers from the first batch, and they are everything I hoped for.

Does anyone know if VZ will make those grips available for purchase separately?

They are exactly what I have been looking for.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmon:
Does anyone know if VZ will make those grips available for purchase separately?

They are exactly what I have been looking for.

Were I VZ, I certainly would, even if required contract negotiations to make it happen. There are a ton of J-Frames out there that would benefit from the upgrade, and I'd imagine they'll sell a ton of them. I've gotta say too that the quality and fit and finish on both sets that I handled was superb.

My only real gripe with them is the weight, but that's a very minor gripe specific to my application and just the nature of G10 in general. You couldn't have the shape and slim high-horn backstrap coverage without the G10.

I've got a coule of hundred more rounds through the gun now and am confident that it's reliable and I'm keeping this one. I decided it was time to make it my own.

Particularly becasuse of that weird incident where the cylinder was advancing when the trigger was pulled, but not engaging the hammer, I wanted to take a look inside. My theory was that somehow grit or burrs had somehow hung up the double-action sear on the hammer, then eventually fell out and allowed it to start working properly again. Based on what I found inside, I'm pretty sure I was correct.



There was quite a bit of machining debris inside the gun. Lots of shiny little flakes and dust, and even a couple of large slivers (one is visible in the photo on the cylinder catch...sorry for the poor focus). I cleaned all that out, lightly stoned the metal on metal surfaces, dealt with a couple of small burrs, and put it all back together. The trigger is now excellent, and I'm pretty confident I've eliminated the possibility of the DA sear getting interfered with again.



I also dressed down the top edge of the rear sight to keep the sharp edges from getting hung up in my pocket holster on the draw. The unique sight picture with these sights actually made this really easy as you're sinking the dot to the bottom of the notch and you don't have to worry about the height of the "posts". I didn't have to change them much, anyway, just round them off a bit and eliminate some of the upper seerations, and it now draws cleanly from the holster.



Now to get it to a range day and qualify on it so I can start carrying it at work.

I took the 642 with me on a family trip to Florida last week. I did daily morning runs with the dog in the park next to my in-law's house, followed by long walks through the neighborhood. I couldn't get away with running with the 642 in a gym-shorts pocket...it bounced around too much...but on walks it worked just fine.

We also did a hike through a marshy area out to a beach one day in Alabama. It was said there were gators, but we didn't see any. The 642 carried just fine in swim trunks pocket on the way out, but I was soaked in saltwater for the hike back, so it stayed in the backpack.

I did finally get around to qualifying on it today, so it'll be doing a lot more carry duty going forward.

I hope S&W makes this a regular item and submits it our DOJ here in California.

quote:

Originally posted by bcjwriter:
I hope S&W makes this a regular item and submits it our DOJ here in California.

I hope CA dumps that stupid law altogether, or the courts smack it down. The whole roster concept is utterly moronic at it's very core, and only serves to limit individual access to firearms by law-abiding citizens.

I think they need to update the entire Airweight J-Frame line. Use the frame with pin bosses and upgraded pins as well as the shrouded two-piece barrel from the UC as the base platform. We've already been told that the two-piece barrel makes for simpler manufacturing and cuts costs, and standardizing the entire line around a single process could further improve that.

Then offer a variety of sight and grip options to meet different price points. The XS sights and VZ grips are both very nice (and IMO VZ will make a killing if they offer those grips as a standalone option), but not everybody wants or needs them. If you put a basic set of sights and cheap rubber grips on the gun I imagine you could get the MSRP down under $600, while still retaining a lot of the benefits of the design.

quote:

Interesting. Looks like S&W finally addressed (just) one of the half dozen or more reasons why I hated my 642.

Im curious why you hated the 642. I bought one for my wife and she hates it as well. I love it as a carry gun or a put it in the console gun. I do not enjoy shooting it at the range though.

quote:

I do not enjoy shooting it at the range though.

What specifically do you not enjoy about shooting it? I'm not challenging your view, I'm legitimately curious what your complaints are. Small revolvers definitely have their downsides, and are kind of an acquired taste. Some of the issues can be mitigated, others you have to either learn to live with or work around.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:

quote:

Originally posted by bcjwriter:
I hope S&W makes this a regular item and submits it our DOJ here in California.

I hope CA dumps that stupid law altogether, or the courts smack it down. The whole roster concept is utterly moronic at it's very core, and only serves to limit individual access to firearms by law-abiding citizens.

While I get and totally support the sentiment, this is the deepest of blue states, so that will not likely happen.

For those of us who just cant get up and leave, we really get tired of hearing this. Hopefully the court will kill the microstamping, LCI, and mag disconnect...but thats all up in the air.

Sorry for the rant.