Ruger LCR vs S&W 642

I like the 642. Plastic is for barbie dolls and toy trains. Guns are made of wood and metal. Seriously, I have had zero problems with the 642 I own and after seeing all the recalls from Ruger I dont trust any of their new guns. I have several Rugers products and the only Ruger I would buy is an SP101. If you want a J frame size gun get the any of the S&W's or the SP101.
 
My only complaint about the LCR (other than its looks, I know...) is the thin crane. It may not be an issue at all, but I'll wait until the LCR has about a year under its belt before making a decision.

Good triggers, and they seem to handle recoil well.
 
The Smith got the nod

This is an interesting discussion, and here's my opinion on why I chose the 642 over the LCR.

I will concede that the Ruger has the better trigger pull, is lighter (but I couldn't perceive the difference when handling these revolvers). The Ruger was 30 bucks cheaper than the S&W, and the Hogue grips on the LCR undoubtedly make that gun more comfortable to shoot. So with all that, why would I choose the 642, especially since I sauntered into my local Academy Sports with the intention of buying the Ruger?

1. Conceal ability and suitability for conceal carry: The Smith's smaller, harder grip makes for better concealment and is less likely to snag when drawn.

2. Time proven design: I've been recently snake-bit with a newer design (Taurus PT709 Slim I'm looking at you!) and I like the fact that the 642 has stood the test of time.

3. The Brand: Smith & Wesson has a better reputation in my experience.

4. Aftermarket grips and whatnot.

5. The workmanship: Compared to the Ruger, the Airweight seems to be better made, better crafted. The Ruger seemed chintzy along side the Smith.

6. Looks: The 642 is more appealing.



Practically speaking, both revolvers are excellent in their own way and either are excellent choices.

Gg
 
Last edited:
642

I sold my 37 to buy a 642, the reason was I am selling my blued guns and getting SS. I liked the hammer on my 37 but started to think that if I used it why would you cock a snub 38? The hidden hammer is much easier to use as it would not snag and or the hammer get caught up in the clothing. I over ruled my sence of this is the way is should be and went with the 642. I must admit if there was a 60 avial. at a good price I would have jumped on it. There was a Charter Arms undercover that a store wanted to blow out at 325 new. I love the gun, and don't get me wrong I think for the money it is a great buy, but upon inspcetion I opened the cyl. to find a very rough casting inside that was not emeryed or even just ground down and the cyl stop was a thin piece of metal. I went with the 642 and think I did OK and S&W had a new 50$ rebate with will bring it to about 20$ more than the charter.

I looked at the Ruger and this is just one ugly dog. I don't hate it but I just could not get used to it looking like a toy I used to have as a kid. I kept thinking that it should have a red end in the bbl. I don't like a plastic revolver and am only now getting used to plastic pistols. The smith fit and finish was very good as I expected.
 
Electronic fuel injection, that will never work
Radial tires, that will never work.
Electronic ignition, that will never work.
Automatic transmissions, that will never work.
Power brakes , power steering, electric windshield wipers, vacuum windshield wipers, all steel car bodies, all steel wheels, pneumatic tires, electric lights, electric starter, a car with a roof, that will never work.

A "plastic" gun with a ceramic barrel, that will never work.
A plastic gun with a steel barrel, a scandium frame revolver, a aluminum frame revolver, a titanium cylinder , a aluminum cylinder , a plastic grip peg / fire control, rubber grips , a cylinder that swings out , a top break revolver, a gun you load by inserting a brass device that holds the bullet / powder and prepackaged single use "flint".

The frame of a LCR 38 is aluminum with a stainless steel barrel insert, the cylinder is stainless steel. If this upper aluminum frame section ( with cylinder/ crane ) was clamped in a vice and a pin punch used to strike the primer, the gun would fire without any failures. Same goes for the new LCR 357 which uses a stainless steel frame and cylinder.

The polymer portion of the gun is limited to the fire control housing / grip peg. With the frame and FCH / GP fitting together so well, only 1 screw is really needed for the gun to work ( This also acts as a crane pivot ). The screw just below the rear sight is , according to a Ruger press release, is a bit of overengineering just to be sure.

The fire control housing contains the trigger , hammer , spring, transfer bar and the other various bits needed to rotate the cylinder and strike the primer. This lower section could be made from steel, but the machining cost would be large. Calling it a " plastic gun " ( the inference is that the whole thing is plastic ) isn't accurate.

I've had a LCR for nearly a year and it is just fine. The only issue I have is the grip needs to be longer front to rear. When I squeeze the trigger my hand makes the gun torque upwards slightly.
 
I own both and there really is no comparison. The LCR beats the 642 in every place that it counts.

The trigger on the LCR is just on a different plain altogether. It is light, smooth and non-stacking. It lends itself better to staging than any snubby I have ever shot. Being able to consistently stage the trigger allows for the best shooting I've ever done with any 2" barreled gun.

I would never even think of taking my 642 for a fun day at the range, but I relish the idea of taking the LCR. It is pretty cool to see heads turn when they see such tight groups coming from such a small handgun.
 
I second gglass on this. I own both and just put 100 rounds through my LCR on Friday- more than I have ever done at one time with the 642. No comparison whatsoever.
 
My LCR has simply crushed my "need" of a .22 kit style gun. It weighs less, packs more of a wallop, and the snake shot loads have more spread/shot.

Short of TEOTWAWKI or going out into the big critter country, I can't find a single situation where my LCR has not met or exceeded my needs. The trigger is fantastic and only seems to get better with use. I'll never shoot a tight group with it, but for what it's for, it'll run a bad guy/beasts day.

I really can't believe its a sub $400 gun. I've only gone a few days without it on my hip/in my pocket, and those were sad, sad days;)
 
I have the 340 PD, basically the blued .357 magnum version of the 642. I do not own the LCR but I have spent a lot of time investigating it and I have handled them at gun shops. Actually, I have had several dates with one particular LCR. I have to say that the LCR trigger is amazing. It almost reminds me of the Para LDA trigger. On the other hand, the 642 has better finish. Here is the comparative analysis from my point of view.

Pros of 642
  1. Better looking, has that classic S&W appeal
  2. Smith & Wesson warranty and support
  3. Proven design over many, many years
  4. Lots of available accessories, lasers, sights, grips, etc.
  5. Slightly smaller, easier to conceal, compact grips
  6. Better fit and finish
  7. Heavier trigger could be a desirable asset
  8. Higher resale value
  9. Many gunsmiths know how to tune a Smith & Wesson
  10. Lots of available holster styles and manufacturers
  11. +P Rated

Pros of LCR
  1. Costs slightly less
  2. Smoother, lighter trigger
  3. Fewer frame screws
  4. No internal lock
  5. +P Rated

Cons of 642
  1. It has the darned internal lock.
  2. More frame screws to check
  3. Costs slightly more

Cons of LCR
  1. Ugly, takes some getting used to
  2. Design is new, not yet field proven
  3. Ruger does not offer a written warranty but their support is generally good.
  4. Fewer after market accessories, grips and parts available
  5. Lighter trigger could be a liability
  6. Fewer holsters available
  7. Ruger has a history of recalling new gun designs
 
I just purchased the 709 and 642, I sold several guns and am updating them to SS. The 709 is a great gun, fits my medium hands well. The 642 also a great gun, but I sold an older 37 so its just an update and loss of a hammer. I also sold a S&W 6904 and got a sigma ss, I had a problme with one mag and S&W sent me two, and I am still getting the 50 rebate so all in 250 for a new gun. Trigger is a bit strong but its not an olympic pistol.

For that kind of money I could keep one locked in the car. I also picked up a Taurus TCP, great little gun and with the holster and extra mag, its a great way to carry. I don't worry about the holster showing, it looks like a PDA or phone. I don't even know its there, and thats important. How many times I have left a gun home because I don't want a big old Beretta hanging off my belt. For me SS is the only answer. It is maint. free for the most part.

I did a test call in to see if Ruger would fix a problem that was boarderline warr. They refused. Taurus on the other hand did not even hesitate to jump on it and take care of it. I am not so taken with Ruger these days.
 
Ruger vs SW

Yesterday my wife decided to buy herself a revolver after receiving her CWP. After researching all makes and models I suggested she get a SW 638 because it had a shrouded hammer and it could be cocked for single action target shooting -- best of both worlds. I took her to three gun shops. First visit they hand her the 638. She can not cock it with her thumb. She tried switching thumbs, still couldn't cock it. OK. No SW 638. Salesman hands her a SW 642. She takes the proper stance and the salesman notices her shaking slightly trying to pull back the double action trigger. My wife says this is really hard to fire. The salesman hands her a Ruger LCR. My wife dry fires it like butter. She says the Ruger is nice and it feels better to her. We move on and went to another store. (I'm shopping too, for a Sig) She tells the salesman she hasn't decided on which revolver she wants. She tells the salesman what she has been looking at and her concerns with recoil. Salesman takes out SW 642 and shows her it has grips on each side with metal backstrap on frame. Ruger LCR has cushioned grips all the way around. He gives numerous reasons to get Ruger and not SW. At the third store, same story. I handled both guns and the Ruger trigger is way better. Smooth as silk. My desire for her to get an all metal pistol is no longer valid. She's getting the Ruger LCR.
 
This thread is four years old. At any rate.

The LCR is a nice gun for sure, and they have Smith beat on the trigger.. But buying it because of grips seems silly. You can buy any grips you want for the Smith.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top