looking for a new pocket pistol ,how does the polymer Ruger LCR stack up with S@W J-frame 442 ? how welll does the Ruger polymer hold up?and problems .Have a S@W mod 60 so 442 would be familiar , but looking for something lighter and no exposed hammer ,

I carried an S&W 642 for a few years before the LCR came out. At first I wasn't so sure it would hold up but the trigger was so good it convinced me to give it a shot. I think it's the right choice. They both fit the same holster.

Stick with the 642/442. If you want really light go with a 340PD.

The 442 would be the way to go. Extremely lightweight, and generally more problem free. I've heard of Rugers locking up due to short stroking them in double action, and that short stroking them is fairly easy. Much harder to do that with an S&W.

Huge step up in price with not a lot gained in value.

I split the difference and got the M&P340. No expensive titanium cylinder but a front night sight.

Thank you for passing along 3rd-hand bullshlt you read on a bathroom stall. If you know nothing, just keep silent.

Hell, skip both of them and go with the Taurus 856CH - concealed hammer, six shots, and light weight at 15 oz.

I’d pass on a Taurus Revolver for self defense. I like guns that actually work.

Yep! If you're going to carry a Taurus, at least get the steel frame model so that you can beat the person with it.

You have personal experience with a failed Taurus revolver? The Taurus 85 has a pretty stellar reputation.

We used to sale a fair amount of taurus, revolvers and semis. The only ones I remember ever coming back to us were the pt140 pistols, they just couldn't get the 40cal to work right in that gun. But I still wouldn't suggest owning one when you can mow a couple more lawns and get a smith or ruger.

I've purchased four Smith and Wesson revolvers in the past 7 years, two of which had to go back to the factory to correct functioning issues. So, mowing extra lawns didn't really pay off for me.

The only Smiths I am familiar with are N frames, so I can not make the comparison you are asking for. But my LCRx in 327 is flawless. The trigger is superb. And recoil is quite tolerable with 120s loaded to max with W296.

I will buy another LCRx when ever Ruger actually releases the 327 in a 3 inch.

We had a Taurus 85 come into our shop from a distributor a few years ago. They have a two piece barrel/shroud. I opened the box and 2 inches of the barrel were sticking out of the shroud. How's that for QC?
We've also had quite a few Judges that wouldn't shoot double action.

Have two LCRs in 9mm and .327 Federal. Both are excellent shooters. Also have a 642, 649 and a 640 PRO...no complaints with any of them either.

For the distances involved in most personal protection shootings not sure it is going to make any difference which you have. Get the one that hits where you point as at 5 yards and under that is what is going to count.

Bob

S&W 442/642's are functional works of art. Beautiful, accurate, capable. You might even say sexy.

Ruger LCR's? Not sure much. They look like a Glock humped a Schofield. Ugly personified. Friends don't let friends carry LCR's!

Buy the Smith and don't look back.

Sometimes the homely girl is dynamite in the kitchen and in the bedroom. (Or so I have been told)

And we are talking CONCEALED carry here. No one is supposed to see the damned thing.

It's kinda like your mama's advice to always wear clean underwear in case you're in an accident. Do you really want them finding an LCR on you after you get hit by a bus???

LOL.

Ha! Guess it does not matter too much to me. For CCW it's a choice between a 657, an LCR, a four inch SP 101, or one of several 4 5/8" Ruger single actions.

The 657 is damned purty, but not very concealable.

I wish my 340 had a trigger out of the box like the LCR, but that's the only thing better about it. It's just enough bulkier that it takes it out of the pocket gun category for me, which is where a snubby shines. I had the gunsmith at work do a trigger job on the Smith to smooth it up, so the point is moot.