S&W 642-1 v. Ruger LCR trigger

B

bds32

New member
A friend of mine picked up a 642-1 Airweight with Crimson Trace grips for his wife who is in her late 60's. I noted that the CT grips were not sighted in correctly so I happily took it the range to square it away. I was disappointed in how stiff the trigger was on this brand new revolver. The LCR (.357) that I own has a couple of hundred rounds through it now but the trigger is much smoother and lighter than this S&W. I have no way to actually check the trigger pull in lbs but hands down, my LCR has a better trigger than this S&W revolver. This is a little bit of a role reversal compared to my previous experiences between the two companies. I had an SP 101 with a deplorable trigger out of the box.

I also noted that the LCR is easier on the hand than the 642 (using practice .38 special 132 grain). Although both are snappy and muzzle flip is about the same (due to similar weight), the S&W is not as pleasant to shoot. The cylinder release seems to smack the inside of the thumb near the knuckle and felt recoil is mildly uncomfortable, particularly the more shots fired. However, it is better than the old model 60's I have shot which just tear my thumb up.

On a positive note, I was very impressed with the accuracy of the 642. Using the CT grips, I could keep the group at about the size of a quarter at 7 yards. At 15 yards, the group was very acceptable also. This was my very first experience with CT grips. I have no plans to personally use them but I do not denounce them. It was fun to shoot them.

All in all, I suspect my friend's wife will be unhappy since she has little experience with shooting handguns and in my opinion, they mistakenly bought this firearm without having shot it or a similar design. She will probably decry the heavy trigger and snappy recoil. But, we shall see. I have been wrong many times before.
 
From what I understand, the LCR trigger really won't break-in in the traditional sense. The cam system is what it is, so things like wear or professional polishing will do little or nothing to smooth out the system.

That being said, it doesn't really need it. I've handled dozen of LCRs and the trigger is pretty good. It does have a "tactical" feel, like a Glock. It reminds me much more of a striker-fired semi than a revolver. So for most, it won't need break-in or polishing.

J-Frame S&Ws do have a heavy trigger, but I've found that once broken-in, they have that essential S&W quality: smoothness. No stacking, no hiccups, just a straight and even pull back with a clean, sharp break at the end.

I'm currently in the market for a small revolver. I always buy used. I'm torn between the LCR, a J-Frame and a few other options. I have a feeling that I'll land on a J-Frame.

And from what I've felt and heard, don't bother with S&W's Bodyguard, poly revolver. What Ruger did right was to design the pistol around the material, instead of molding materials into an old design. The LCR is not an SP, the Bodyguard is essentially a J-Frame.
 
My old 638 had a very good trigger for a J Frame. I moved it, and replaced it with a 442 Pro Moonclip. The trigger is stiffer on the new 442 Pro. I will probably end up putting a Spring Kit in it.
I also have an LCR-22 and an LCR-357. The triggers are really nice on both of them for a small J Frame size handgun.

Out of the box the LCR has a very good reputation for a good trigger.
The J Frames normally can stand a little attention.

Bob
 
New versus new, the LCR does have the softer, smoother trigger. But that's not to say the S&W j-frames don't smooth out with shooting/dry firing. They do.
Both my 642 and 442 are very smooth and have all original parts.
 
All in all, I suspect my friend's wife will be unhappy since she has little experience with shooting handguns and in my opinion, they mistakenly bought this firearm without having shot it or a similar design. She will probably decry the heavy trigger and snappy recoil.
Click to expand...

Probably so. The 642 does not seem like a good choice for the novice to me. I've shot and owned various handguns since the late 1980s and I know the 642 would not have been a good one for me to start with.

Now recently I bought a 642-1 and I'm really pleased with it. I wanted something very lightweight and easily carried in a pocket. There is a fair amount of felt recoil in the 15 oz 642. But the accuracy is good and the trigger does not seem to be the bear it was initially.
 
642-1 Trigger

I find that the trigger on my pre lock copy that came from a gun show is about perfect for a gun of this size. I will say that it was lightly used so I suppose it could have been smoothed out prior to my ownership.

Who knows which is better as trigger goes. These snub nose revolvers are not meant for accuracy anyway.

Regards, Vermonter
 
A lot of people who aren't familiar with guns assume that a smaller revolver will have a lighter trigger and will generally be easier to shoot. I've encountered this misconception several times, and a friend of mine who owns a gun shop has noticed the same.

From what he's told me, the typical case is a couple wanting an HD gun and asking for a snubbie right off the bat. Then when he starts asking questions, it turns out that they want the snubbie because they're concerned that she won't be able to handle a larger pistol because of the weight and trigger pull. So at least they're trying to make an appropriate choice, but they don't know enough to make an informed choice.
 
A lot of great points. I'm thinking this 642 is not going to get a lot of dry firing time to smooth it out.
 
I have both the LCR and a 642. According to the guy I bought the LCR from (it has a very nice trigger) he bought another one and the trigger sucked. A third had a good trigger, so let the buyer beware. I prefer the 642 for aesthetic reasons. After a couple years of dry-firing the trigger got smoother, but still wasn't as good as the LCR. I found this video and couple months ago....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4GtXq2XXOI....followed it with the exception of replacing the springs (I clipped 1 1/2 coils from the main and trigger return springs instead). I'm no gunsmith by any stretch of the imagination, but had no problems and it took less than an hour and smoothed the pull tremendously as well as reducing it from 14 1/2 to 11 1/2 pounds. It now beats the Ruger trigger hands-down.
 
I like the LCR because the grip is a perfect fit for my larger hands, but is still small enough that it isn't a problem to carry in the front of a pair of pleated dockers. I don't own one, but have tried. Want one!
 
Probably so. The 642 does not seem like a good choice for the novice to me. I've shot and owned various handguns since the late 1980s and I know the 642 would not have been a good one for me to start with.
Click to expand...
True. But no snubnose is a good novice choice. They don't call them an expert's gun for nothing.:)

As for the triggers, I have seen a couple mediocre LCR triggers, but they are the exception to the rule. Most are fantastic and much better than current production 642 triggers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top