S&W 642 is lead free

C

Carmady

New member
I'm happy to say that S&W did resolve the leading issue that my 642 had.

The original cylinder had undersized throats which would not allow a .356" diameter lead .380 bullet to pass through. They replaced that with a new cylinder that would pass the .358" .38 lead bullets, but not the .356" lead .380 bullets, and they also repaired the yoke.

Last week I shot 76 reloads through it, and today another 70. No lead in the rifling, and just a little in the forcing cone. The barrel cleaned up with patches and 3-part Ed's Red. I did brush out the forcing cone a little.

Lately I've been saying bad things about S&W's repair department, but I wanted to set the record straight. They did fix the leading problem.
 
Last edited:
I am curious about the accuracy you were getting with the lead bullets? The S&W "six" series of guns have EDM cut rifling that while noted as being accurate with jacketed bullets is also noted as not being all thay great for lead bullets. What range were you shooting and what groups were you getting?

I gave my son a 637 and a bunch of jacketed rounds because I was thinking they would serve him better. It would be cheaper for him to practice if he could use lead bullets.

Have a look here.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/196389-whats-up-barrels-642s.html
 
Last edited:
I am curious about the accuracy you were getting with the lead bullets? The S&W "six" series of guns have EDM cut rifling that while noted as being accurate with jacketed bullets is also noted as not being all thay great for lead bullets. What range were you shooting and what groups were you getting?
Click to expand...

I wasn't getting any accuracy, and thanks for the excuse. Earlier this year I started shooting the 642 and a LCR on the same range trips, to compare them. The first time I started off shooting at targets 7 yards away. Even shooting from a rest the 642 would shoot all over the place. Nothing close to a group. Back home during the clean up I discovered both had a lot of lead in their barrels. At that point I became more concerned about the leading and pretty much disregarded accuracy. These were all reloads with Missouri Bullet Co's 158gr LSWC.

On the following range trips I didn't bother with targets, and just shot at dirt clods on the 50 yard berm. I was more interested in finding the cause of the leading, thinking (incorrectly) that the culprit was a powder/bullet combination. As far as accuracy, the LCR constantly outshot the 642 by a wide margin. I figured it was largely because of the LCR's trigger, and my lack of good shooting skills. The 642 would get close sometimes, but would also put some several feet off-target at 50+ yards. I wasn't hitting the clods with the LCR, but they were nervous.

Thanks for that thread from the S&W forum. That's the first I ever heard of that.
 
Glad I could help. One poster here name Wil Terry stated he could write his name with a 642 it was so accurate. But I don't remember if he even said what bullets he was using. A few here know who he really is, a retired gunwriter and one of my favorite authors. We used to trade emails but I haven't heard from him in close to a year. Maybe he isn't feeling so well these days. I haven't seen any post from him either.

Found it. Post #10 using WC ammo so I guess lead works for him. And I trust his reporting.

https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6343505#post6343505
 
If I read that thread right, Wil shot a 638, so he might have shot SA...not that that would change the lead bullets in the new barrel deal.

I'm going to try again, and concentrate on POI vs POA, and might even spring for some cardboard.

I've tried three snubs this year, and the 642 has taken last place every time. The LCR did the best, followed by a 12oz Charter Arms. The Smith was nowhere close to those, but I'm not blaming the gun because I'm not a very good shot. I've put a 13# rebound spring in it, and a set of Uncle Mike's custom/combat grips. The 642 has been back to S&W three times this year, and had the cylinder replaced the first time, the frame replaced the second time, and "No Repair Required" the third time. Iow, it's always had the same barrel...hmmm.
 
Try both lead and jacketed bullets. see if there is a big difference. You may let someone who is a know good shot try your gun. It may just be you. Snubs are hard to shoot. I gave my son a 637 and can't wait to see how he does. I bet he is surprised by how hard those guns are to shoot with any accuracy.
 
I checked my records, and I started shooting the 642 and LCR this past February. I remember setting up targets at 25 yards to see where different loads hit. Printer paper with a cross made with blue painter's tape. I was sitting down at a bench using two hands, and trying to be precise. The LCR kept them on the paper, but the 642 put them all over the place. So I moved it up to 7 yards. Things looked the same, but not as exaggerated. After another range trip, and about 250 rounds through each gun, I started trying to solve the leading problem, and finding things wrong with both guns. The 642 never did shoot worth a hoot. I'm sure many others could get much better results, but I'm also convinced that that gun has accuracy issues whether they are lead related or not. I tried, and I'm done with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top