Any S&W .38 Airweights with high mileage out there?

C

Carmady

New member
My 642 is back at S&W for the second time, and has been fired less than 600 times. This time it has a broken hammer stud and they're replacing the whole thing, which for some reason ("paperwork") takes 2-3 months. I just danced to this tune with another company, and it just occurred to me that maybe these guns aren't meant to be fired.

Do any of you have S&W Airweights with a high round count?

I'm thinking real hard about just sticking with real steel revolvers for range toys.
 
I dont feel the need to shoot alot of rounds through my airweight, I put a few cylinders through it when at the range but mostly stick to its steel brother for regular shooting.
 
I don't own one that has had thousands and thousands of rounds through it; the one my dad gave me a few years ago has had about 400 rounds through it per year for the last four years. No issues. No idea how many my father fired through it before the gun came to me. Maybe 300? Probably less.

My buddy's brother has one that he says has more than 10,000 rounds through it, again without issues. He reloads powder puff rounds though.

Airweights are small, lightweight firearms though, and it may be that they just can't take a regular diet of full-power loads for thousands of rounds. It will be interesting to see what others' experiences have been.
 
I have a S&W 642 that has 15 rds. thru it. S&W never intended it to be a range gun.

I bought it cause of it's light-weight, easy to conceal, and it's snag-free ability.

A friend of mine has a .50 cal. AE semi-auto. I don't think I've ever known him to carry it on his person for self-defense.

Lots of firearms are activity specific. The 642 is one of them.
 
I had the same thing with the hammer stud happen to my 638. I found that I couldn't pull the hammer all the way back. At that time it had well over a thousand rounds through it. In my case, I thought dry firing without snap caps was probably the culprit.

S&W replaced my frame and I've easily got several thousand rounds through the new frame. However, I can definitely see a lot more wear than I would expect on a steel gun (my 200 grain reloads might not have helped :)). I think it's the price you pay for a gun that can be so easily carried. Mine is not a range toy.

It probably won't take as long as the factory warned to have your gun back.
 
I've fired several thousand rounds through my 342 and about the same through my 642. I don't shoot a lot of +p and most of the rounds are mild reloads. In addition, I've dry fired both thousands of times. No issues for me with the 642 but the 342 does get finicky when it's dirty. I did take the sharp edges off the cylinder with the 342 and that made a big difference in reloading, especially when dirty.
 
My 642 is back at S&W for the second time, and has been fired less than 600 times. This time it has a broken hammer stud and they're replacing the whole thing, which for some reason ("paperwork") takes 2-3 months. I just danced to this tune with another company, and it just occurred to me that maybe these guns aren't meant to be fired.

Do any of you have S&W Airweights with a high round count?

I'm thinking real hard about just sticking with real steel revolvers for range toys.
Click to expand...

How many times was it dry-fired?
Dry-fired or ammo-fired a lot very rapidly?
I never felt the 642 to be a range toy - a used Model 10 would be.
 
I am a fan of S&W airweight J-frames. I think they are very effective firearms which fill a useful niche. I also shoot them quite a bit and am in favor of shooting them. These light small guns are difficult to shoot well, and I think it is necessary to practice with them if you want to shoot them well.

I had a 642 where the hammer stud broke, but it had more than 5,000 rounds through it, which I think is more than most people would ever shoot out of these guns. Of course, I am never happy about a gun breaking in a way that puts it out of commission, but critical failures can happen with any gun. Despite the problem, I still like J-frames. Broken hammer and trigger studs do seem to be a known failure mode in airweight J-frames, but I don't think this issue is anywhere near frequent enough to be considered common.

Smith replaced my gun with the broken hammer stud, and they sent me a new one in only a few weeks. I believe the studs are not considered replaceable in the aluminum frames. If you have this issue, and there is a long delay for a replacement, you might give Smith a call. The delay may be due to them not having the correct model in stock, and needing to wait until they do the next run. If this is the case, there might be an alternate model which is on hand and which you might like equally well. Also, in my case, I asked if they would be willing to send a 642 no-lock model as a replacement for my broken gun which had a lock, and they were willing to do this. So if there is a very similar gun that you would rather have, you could ask. The worst that could happen is that they say "no."

Since I received the replacement, I have also acquired another airweight J-frame. I have over 3,000 rounds on one and 1500 rounds on the other, and I have not had any further problem. I would not subject one of these guns to thousands and thousands of rounds per year, but they can certainly be shot quite a bit, and I think they should be.
 
My 642-1 only has ~2350 rounds through it.

I did have a similar, and recent, 442-1 which broke a stud (unknown if it was a hammer stud or one of the others inside) and S&W replaced the entire gun. I no longer have round-count notes on this gun. I estimate I shot ~500-1,000 rounds through it when it broke. I had it ~5 months when it broke.

I owned it between 7/2015 and 12/2015. I received the replacement 442-1 in 2/2016 (but immediately sold it to a friend who wanted it more than me).
 
Many airweight S&Ws have a crack in the frame, under the barrel with the cylinder open. This is the thinnest part of the frame.
The crack possibly occurs when the barrel is installed in the frame, but it could crack later, too.
Check yours.
 
Smith and Wesson airweights are some of the first "carry a lot shoot a little" revolvers.
Sadly, it appears that the quality of Smith and Wesson's products is not what it once was.
 
Thanks for all the replies. I'm glad to hear the success stories in addition to those similar to mine.

I'm undecided on what I'll do with the new one, but I'll probably sell it. I've had the gun about 1 1/2 years, but just started trying to shoot it often 19 weeks ago, around Feb. 1. Out of those 19 weeks S&W has had it for 11 or 12 weeks, and still counting.

I have not abused it. It's always been dry fired with snap caps. It hasn't been machine gunned. Ammo was mostly 158gr LSWC reloads guesstimated at 850fps, maybe 50-75 +P reloads.
 
Bill DeShivs said:
Many airweight S&Ws have a crack in the frame, under the barrel with the cylinder open. This is the thinnest part of the frame.
The crack possibly occurs when the barrel is installed in the frame, but it could crack later, too.
Check yours.
Click to expand...

I believe this problem is far less common in the current generation of airweights. The crack under the barrel was a known issue with the original airweights like the model 37. These early airweights were not rated for +P ammo, and they may not have been terribly strong.

Cracking under the barrel is a very rare issue with the modern airweights like the 637, 642, 442, etc. These guns are rated for +P ammo and seem to do OK with it. I have heard of rare incidents of frame cracking with these guns, but it is believed to be due to over torquing the barrel during installation, not due to stress from firing +P rounds. Of course, it never hurts to check this area, but I would be most concerned about it with the older guns.


In my own experience, the most likely thing to wear out from firing +P rounds in modern airweights is the shooter's hand.
 
I'm thinking real hard about just sticking with real steel revolvers for range toys.
Click to expand...

I don't know if the problems with the OP's revolver are because it's an airweight, but in general you shouldn't get an airweight anything unless you plan on carrying it regularly and are willing to trade off some longevity for lighter weight.
 
old bear said:
Smith and Wesson airweights are some of the first "carry a lot shoot a little" revolvers.
Sadly, it appears that the quality of Smith and Wesson's products is not what it once was.
Click to expand...

S&W has their classic line, which includes the .38 Chiefs Special, IIRC. Is the Chief Special .38 made better than their lightweight J-frame models other than it being regular steel instead of aluminum?

Link for Chief Special below:

https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-36-classics
 
I checked the S&W website. They claim their J-frames are good to go for continuous +P loads.

In light of these breakages, an idea is to get two. One for all the practice you want, and the other for carry. When the one for practice breaks, send it back for a new one.
 
It seems I have two (or more!) of everything that I like or need.
I'm sure there are airweight revolvers happily shooting away with the frame crack. I doubt it is dangerous, but is a liability and S&W will take care of it.
 
My 642 (2003 serial) made it to, IIRC, 97 rounds before I considered it unsafe to shoot, because it was shaking itself loose and stopped locking up on two chambers. Apparently, that's a "high" round count for a 642...

However, my uncle has a 360 (AirLite) in .357 that has had at least 600 rounds fired in my presence (or by me); and, if my uncle's talk of working up and testing loads, and occasional function verification is to be considered valid, there's been at least another 600+ put through it 'at the range' (more often desert than actual firing range).
And he bought it "lightly used". So there were some rounds under its belt already.
 
Ammo was mostly 158gr LSWC reloads guesstimated at 850fps
Click to expand...

If you are getting 850 fps with 158 LSWC out of that 1 7/8 inch barrel, I would wonder if you are still at standard pressure. That sounds pretty warm for that stubby barrel. Commercial 158 +P is mostly spec'd at 890 fps from a four inch barrel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top