I recently bought a 856. The thing that made me choose Taurus with exposed hammer was that people always talk how good S&W service is, so i thought service would probably be needed with 642. I'm going to find out first hand if the Taurus holds up. Thanks for video. 👍
Thanks for watching! I am considering putting the Apex Spring Kit in mine. Since it’s a used gun, there’s no telling the condition the current springs are in.
I've had the 856UL for quite some time. The main purpose for me is a trail gun when I go hiking. Carry three snake shot and three 158 HP, in case I come across something that needs a little more power. I carry it IWB and really do not know it's there while hiking. I live in the south and not concerned with bears. Also, carry a speed loader with regular loads just in case.
I have both of these. I carried the 642 for a while, and then got a T856, and decided I liked shooting the 856 more than the 642. The 642 was slightly easier to conceal, but not by much, really. I liked that sixth round in the Taurus, and having a hammer vs not having one was no big deal. I did change out the stock grips for laser grips on the 856, so concealment required more thought, but it's still good, and the extra real estate on the grips made handling the recoil easier. FYI, the S&W also has laser grips, but it seems that the Taurus grips feel better. Some hate on Taurus quality, but I have no complaints. Both good guns, but I prefer the Taurus for now.
Thanks for watching! Good points. I neglected to mention the 6th round makes the cylinder a little wider. But as you mentioned, not by much. I’ve never been a fan of laser grips, but that’s definitely an option.
Had, (key word: HAD) a 642 but it was pitiful. Did a complete action job on it, and it was a great improvement, at least in the action department. But it still sprayed bullets everywhere. Soon traded it for a used S&W Mod 10-14 4". It eats the X and 10 ring all day long. Last week I bought a new Taurus 856UL 38Spl with the Amriglow tritium front sight in 3". The Taurus 856UL 3" shoots nearly as well as the M10. Impressive. So I'm carrying the 856 3". Over the past 62 years I've been shooting, I have a hard and fast rule. I will not own any weapon that I cannot shoot well. Period. That's why there's no Tupperware pistols in my safe. The only autoloader there is a 1911A1 in 45ACP.
@@anangryranger I’d agree that snubbed are more difficult to shoot. I have a Smith & Wesson Model 65 that, like your Model 10, I can shoot the x out of the target with, no problem. It also has larger grips than the J-frame size guns, and it has a 4” barrel.
@@llosttprophett I got the grips from the Taurus website. They're from Viridian, but they have the Taurus logo on them. I don't care for the size of the laser adjustment screws (too small) but once it's tuned you're good. I have mine ranged out to about ten yards, I think. Some people complain they can't keep zero, but I've been good, so far.
i have a taurus 85 and 856, and a s&w 37 and 642. the only attribute of the t856 that i dislike is the difficulty in changing its pinned grip. a screwed grip is way preferable.
I really like the older 642 grips. The texture is aggressive. Keeping a good grip. The pinky tucks in very well. Like it was a bigger grip. I haven't gotten to hold the newer style Taurus grip.
I just picked up the taurus 856 3" barrel and I'm waiting for the new taurus 605defender with the cerakote finish Altamont wood grips to come into my Dealer!! The best is the taurus revoler!!!👍🏿👍🏿
Thanks for watching! Nice. I’ve been debating the 3” model. Looks good, especially with the VZ grips on it, night sight, and there’s a double action only model. But I also want to check out the new Executive model if I can find one.
You had 4 rounds fly out of the 642, where as only 1 of the 856 rounds was a flier. Your analysis that you are a better shot with the 642 is riddiculous. The 642 has 5 rounds available and you miss nearly 20% of the time, whereas the 856 has 6 rounds and you missed only 4% of the time. The 856 in your hands is far more deadly.
Thanks for watching! Those are valid arguments if you look at individual rounds. However, I was looking at the overall grouping. The 856 grouping was much larger; the rounds were spread further apart. That translates to a consistency issue. Whereas the 642 had a much tighter group, the 4 fliers being outliers. That’s the whole point of shooting a group rather than just one round. In other words, the 856 consistently hit all over the place. The 642 consistently hit in the same place.
I've had a S&W 442 for about 10 years or so (the 442 is black vs. the 642 "stainless" look). In autos, I like capacity, and I feel more comfortable with a 6 shot revolver over a 5 shot revolver so four years ago I "replaced it" with a Taurus 856UL. The 856 is noticeably wider in the cylinder, and enough so that in the role I intend my lightweight aluminum snubs (pocket or ankle carry as either a deep concealment gun or a BUG) the 442 is better. I tried it for a few months, but I now only use it IWB. So, I'll likely replace it with the steel version, IWB I find a steel framed snub is more than light enough, and the extra weight makes for faster follow up shots and more pleasant range practice (which means more range practice). As for quality, I have been happy with my 856 (and my older 85CH). The trigger on my 856 is a bit heavier than I'd like, though it does smooth out a bit with use. I've shot hundreds of rounds through it, and thousands of dry fires and while better than when new, it is still heavy. When I replace it with the 856CH (and also with the 3" 856 Defender I'm likely replacing my 3" Colt King Cobra with), I will be investing in a lighter weight Wolff spring kit.
i owned a S&W 642. bought it for a pocket carry gun. after shooting over 500 rounds thru it i was never happy with the accuracy i was able to get. traded it in for a Kahr CM9
I own both a 642 centennial airweight and a 11 oz titanium cylinder Smith 342 air light neither of these guns have any key holeling . Elongated holes on the paper.. I would try different ammo I also get fantastic groups with both my 642 and 342 up to 30-35 ft I can get good shots also at 50 ft if I take my time I would change and try different ammo I have never got any rounds key holding with these guns
About the trigger pull difference, could the fact that the S&W is having to move a smaller cylinder than the Taurus when in DA mode make a difference in how heavy the trigger pull is?
I was going to buy a S&W revolver new and the cylinder kept locking up on the forcing cone and the crane was rubbing on the frame. I don't know what happened to the quality control with some companies anymore
You put a lot of stock in a gun’s ability to shoot a tight group. I’ve been in a gunfight and the only important thing is to get hits. You’ll be panic shooting and your adversary will be moving and hiding behind stuff while shooting back at you. Some of your rounds will go into what he/she is hiding behind. Good comparison, seems like a draw to me.
I own a 642 and a 3" 856. When I carry a snubby revolver, I carry an aluminum frame 16oz (loaded) Charter Arms 5 shot Undercover. Why? I like the low weight of the 642, but wanted the option of single action shooting. My Undercover has a better DA trigger than the S&W or 856. It's SA trigger is outstanding. It's been reliable and easy to shoot even with the short grip option. I like the strength of the solid frame. It's +P rated as well. All are excellent revolvers. However, the Charter Arms alloy frame Undercover better suits my wants and needs.
Thanks for watching! No, it’s standard. I’m going to get some revolver training later this year to find out more about shooting these little snubbies. I don’t have that issue with larger revolvers.
Nice detailed comparison. Either will work just fine for its intended purpose - bad breath distance defense. If the budget is tight, look for a Taurus. They have come a long way in quality, though their QC does seem to be a little spotty. For quality and overall "shootability", the nod goes to Smith. And self defense is ONLY a double-action affair, so single-action capability is a non-issue. Also, I just scrolled through all 608 Taurus 856 on Gunbroker, and not a purple one to be found.
Thanks for watching! I agree with you on the double action point. Didn’t know the purple ones (I think it’s technically violet) were so rare. Did they have any of the other colors?
love Smith & Wesson, great guns with an incredible reputation for durability, serviceability and excellent finishes but I think Im with you on this, that extra round, the quality of the stock grips and unbeatable price makes it a clear winner in my books. great review!
A "hammerless" revolver wouldnt fire. I have read a few comments that the 642/442 wear out if you shoot it a lot and are not repairable.That is a good reason not to buy a used one! The newer 856 have a pinned exchangable front sight. The extra round is also good. I think the 856 offer more.
The trigger pull on that Taurus in single action is probably about two or three pounds so it would absolutely beat the Smith & Wesson hands down if you check it that way it doesn't matter how heavy the trigger pull on a revolver is as long as the action and the trigger pull is smooth
856 is a better full time carry. The Smith is better for deep cover or tertiary. I don't have any small tauruses, and all my 5-6 shot guns are part time. I'm usually carrying a L or N frame Smith. Too big for most people.
Shoot ability is in the shooter own the Taurus ultra light in Matt stainless and that gun's amazingly accurate I can hit a 5 inch plate at 10 yards with no problem thanks for your video I never cared for the hammerless revolvers but that's just me
Taurus kicked but on the 856 but those air weight guns are not a smart option. Taurus also has model 605 in 357 in 6 shot. I say stay with stainless steel versions or black alloy steel.
@@gregb6469 Ultralight/Airweight (Smith & Wesson) models are more difficult to shoot because they are lighter weight, and they tend to have more felt recoil. An all-steel version of the same size gun will have less felt recoil. That being said, if you practice with it and become comfortable and proficient with it, it can work well. But you should do that with any gun you choose to carry.
Well I do like Smiths but not a double action only with no single action for taking more precise longer shots and I really don't like the safety lock on the 642. Whether a close range revolver or not I still want that single action ability to make a better shot. So my pick is the 856 but I got the three inch Defender model all stainless in matte black. Conceals the same just with an extra inch of barrel for longer sight radius, Tritium day/night front sight, and better muzzle velocity and energy. A little heavier than the UL also but better for recoil and more durable than the aluminum frame. Mine has Hogue grips that are bigger but again better for recoil. A standard white dot front sight and the standard Taurus small grips came with it extra. The extra sixth round is not so important to me even if it was a five shot like a model 85 or the 642 that would be fine. My 856 is +P dedicated and that is unusual since most are just rated for +P. Triggers are not as good on Taurus revolvers but they do wear in with use. Thanks for sharing. On quality control a gun no matter the brand whether new or used should be inspected before buying so there are no defects or damage but Smith lately has had some stinkers from the videos I have been seeing. Taurus can also have some stinkers so bottom line is check the gun over before buying no matter which one. I have been hearing the same about poor Smith customer service lately on videos and folks talk about bad Taurus customer service but my personal experience with Taurus customer service has been good. But my experience was not about the 856 but a lost part on another gun that was taken care of under warranty.
Thanks for watching! The 856 Defender is definitely a better shooter because of the longer barrel (increased sight radius and better ballistics) and the bigger grips (more to hold onto = better control of recoil). I would carry that gun as a primary IWB and carry one of the two guns in this video as a backup or deep concealment (pocket, jacket, ankle, etc.). As to customer service, Taurus has improved over the years. Some people probably still have bad impressions from years past, but they’ve had a new president for the past few years and he’s made changing their reputation a priority. Smith & Wesson on the other hand, I’m not sure what their excuse is.
You need to practice your double action more. Except for extreme precision, SA shouldn't be much better at all with proper technique. Headshots at 25 yards should be fairly accurate in DA.
@@ghostwalker152 Thanks for watching! Not really. They’re both readily available, easily concealable snubnose revolvers in the same caliber. And they’re both very popular guns. Comparing these two guns is no different than comparing a Glock 19 to a Sig Sauer P320. Or a Sig Sauer P365XL to a Springfield Armory Hellcat Pro. It’s a logical (and even necessary) comparison. Now if I said Glock 19 or Smith & Wesson J-Frame, THAT would be apples and oranges.
Buying a used revolver is taking a risk, so anyone doing so needs to know how to inspect a revolver for function, damage, etc. There is a reason a used gun is available at the gun store or pawn shop, and sometimes the reason is that the gun is junk.
Charter arms is manufacturing revolvers in different colors now but I don't believe the charter arms revolvers are as close to being as good as a Taurus they just don't look that reliable
You didn't mention that the Smith has that very stupid (and ugly) exposed ejector rod, which could bend the rod and make the gun unusable if it was hit in the wrong place hard enough. The 856's rod is covered as it should be.
The taurus would be my choice. One thought on the trigger pull test. Do you think the table was binding the rotation of the cylinder? May have added the wieght to the pull. Great video, you cant beat a snubby.
Thanks for watching! Someone else mentioned the cylinder rotation factor as well. It would be interesting to test it again, maybe in a vise or something.
I did ended up putting the Hogue Monogrip on the 642. It made a world of difference in shooting it comfortably. I hated shooting that gun with the original grips on it. No place for the pinky and the metal backstrap is against your hand. The Monogrip fixed all that, like a new gun, imho. The 856UL's stock grips were fine out of the box and it has that extra round. Both great guns...@@AffordableArmory
The gun does not shoot to the left, you shoot to the left.
Thanks for watching! Yep. I need to work on my phrasing I guess, because that’s what I meant. I shoot left with that particular gun.
I recently bought a 856. The thing that made me choose Taurus with exposed hammer was that people always talk how good S&W service is, so i thought service would probably be needed with 642.
I'm going to find out first hand if the Taurus holds up.
Thanks for video. 👍
Thanks for watching!
I have carried first generation 856 for years put a wolf spring kit in and it is smooth as butter it has never failed me and is my EDC.
Thanks for watching! I am considering putting the Apex Spring Kit in mine. Since it’s a used gun, there’s no telling the condition the current springs are in.
I own two taurus's, an M85 & 856. I also own a S&W 637. all 3 are dependable PDW's. my S&W 637 is my fave.
Thanks for watching! The 637 is definitely more comparable to the 856, but unfortunately I don’t have one so I used the 642.
I've had the 856UL for quite some time. The main purpose for me is a trail gun when I go hiking. Carry three snake shot and three 158 HP, in case I come across something that needs a little more power. I carry it IWB and really do not know it's there while hiking. I live in the south and not concerned with bears. Also, carry a speed loader with regular loads just in case.
Thanks for watching! It would make a good snake gun on the trail. I hadn’t thought of that.
I have both of these. I carried the 642 for a while, and then got a T856, and decided I liked shooting the 856 more than the 642. The 642 was slightly easier to conceal, but not by much, really. I liked that sixth round in the Taurus, and having a hammer vs not having one was no big deal. I did change out the stock grips for laser grips on the 856, so concealment required more thought, but it's still good, and the extra real estate on the grips made handling the recoil easier. FYI, the S&W also has laser grips, but it seems that the Taurus grips feel better. Some hate on Taurus quality, but I have no complaints. Both good guns, but I prefer the Taurus for now.
Thanks for watching! Good points. I neglected to mention the 6th round makes the cylinder a little wider. But as you mentioned, not by much. I’ve never been a fan of laser grips, but that’s definitely an option.
Had, (key word: HAD) a 642 but it was pitiful. Did a complete action job on it, and it was a great improvement, at least in the action department. But it still sprayed bullets everywhere. Soon traded it for a used S&W Mod 10-14 4". It eats the X and 10 ring all day long.
Last week I bought a new Taurus 856UL 38Spl with the Amriglow tritium front sight in 3". The Taurus 856UL 3" shoots nearly as well as the M10. Impressive. So I'm carrying the 856 3".
Over the past 62 years I've been shooting, I have a hard and fast rule. I will not own any weapon that I cannot shoot well. Period. That's why there's no Tupperware pistols in my safe. The only autoloader there is a 1911A1 in 45ACP.
@@anangryranger I’d agree that snubbed are more difficult to shoot. I have a Smith & Wesson Model 65 that, like your Model 10, I can shoot the x out of the target with, no problem. It also has larger grips than the J-frame size guns, and it has a 4” barrel.
Where did you buy the laser grips for the Taurus 856?
@@llosttprophett I got the grips from the Taurus website. They're from Viridian, but they have the Taurus logo on them. I don't care for the size of the laser adjustment screws (too small) but once it's tuned you're good. I have mine ranged out to about ten yards, I think. Some people complain they can't keep zero, but I've been good, so far.
i have a taurus 85 and 856, and a s&w 37 and 642. the only attribute of the t856 that i dislike is the difficulty in changing its pinned grip. a screwed grip is way preferable.
Thanks for watching! I haven’t tried changing the grips on my 856, but good to know.
I went with the Taurus 856 personally. I like that it's 6 rounds and single and double action. The factory grip is comfortable also.
Thanks for watching! I hope you like it.
I really like the older 642 grips. The texture is aggressive. Keeping a good grip. The pinky tucks in very well. Like it was a bigger grip. I haven't gotten to hold the newer style Taurus grip.
Thanks for watching!
I just picked up the taurus 856 3" barrel and I'm waiting for the new taurus 605defender with the cerakote finish Altamont wood grips to come into my Dealer!! The best is the taurus revoler!!!👍🏿👍🏿
Thanks for watching! Nice. I’ve been debating the 3” model. Looks good, especially with the VZ grips on it, night sight, and there’s a double action only model. But I also want to check out the new Executive model if I can find one.
You had 4 rounds fly out of the 642, where as only 1 of the 856 rounds was a flier. Your analysis that you are a better shot with the 642 is riddiculous. The 642 has 5 rounds available and you miss nearly 20% of the time, whereas the 856 has 6 rounds and you missed only 4% of the time. The 856 in your hands is far more deadly.
Thanks for watching! Those are valid arguments if you look at individual rounds. However, I was looking at the overall grouping. The 856 grouping was much larger; the rounds were spread further apart. That translates to a consistency issue. Whereas the 642 had a much tighter group, the 4 fliers being outliers. That’s the whole point of shooting a group rather than just one round. In other words, the 856 consistently hit all over the place. The 642 consistently hit in the same place.
@@AffordableArmory ...my opinion. Ultralight has more of a kick. That could have affected your accuracy.
I've had a S&W 442 for about 10 years or so (the 442 is black vs. the 642 "stainless" look). In autos, I like capacity, and I feel more comfortable with a 6 shot revolver over a 5 shot revolver so four years ago I "replaced it" with a Taurus 856UL. The 856 is noticeably wider in the cylinder, and enough so that in the role I intend my lightweight aluminum snubs (pocket or ankle carry as either a deep concealment gun or a BUG) the 442 is better. I tried it for a few months, but I now only use it IWB. So, I'll likely replace it with the steel version, IWB I find a steel framed snub is more than light enough, and the extra weight makes for faster follow up shots and more pleasant range practice (which means more range practice).
As for quality, I have been happy with my 856 (and my older 85CH). The trigger on my 856 is a bit heavier than I'd like, though it does smooth out a bit with use. I've shot hundreds of rounds through it, and thousands of dry fires and while better than when new, it is still heavy. When I replace it with the 856CH (and also with the 3" 856 Defender I'm likely replacing my 3" Colt King Cobra with), I will be investing in a lighter weight Wolff spring kit.
Thanks for watching! I agree about the 856 being wider and defeating the purpose as a pocket/ankle gun. Solid points there.
i owned a S&W 642. bought it for a pocket carry gun. after shooting over 500 rounds thru it i was never happy with the accuracy i was able to get. traded it in for a Kahr CM9
Thanks for watching! They’re not easy to shoot, that’s for sure.
I own both a 642 centennial airweight and a 11 oz titanium cylinder Smith 342 air light neither of these guns have any key holeling . Elongated holes on the paper.. I would try different ammo I also get fantastic groups with both my 642 and 342 up to 30-35 ft I can get good shots also at 50 ft if I take my time I would change and try different ammo I have never got any rounds key holding with these guns
Thanks for watching! I’m definitely going to do an update video.
About the trigger pull difference, could the fact that the S&W is having to move a smaller cylinder than the Taurus when in DA mode make a difference in how heavy the trigger pull is?
Thanks for watching! It could be. I’ve also had people comment on how I measured it. I’m no expert in that regard. It’s just a tool to gather data.
I was going to buy a S&W revolver new and the cylinder kept locking up on the forcing cone and the crane was rubbing on the frame. I don't know what happened to the quality control with some companies anymore
Thanks for watching! Interesting. I haven’t heard of any qc issues with Smith and Wesson.
i have the 856 and just bought a 3 inch 856. i also have a 605 but typically carry the 856 instead.
Nice. Thanks for watching!
What ammo were you using, I’ve never experienced keyholing from a j frame smith.
Thanks for watching! If I remember right, it was Magtec 158 gr.
You put a lot of stock in a gun’s ability to shoot a tight group. I’ve been in a gunfight and the only important thing is to get hits. You’ll be panic shooting and your adversary will be moving and hiding behind stuff while shooting back at you. Some of your rounds will go into what he/she is hiding behind. Good comparison, seems like a draw to me.
Thanks for watching!
I don't remember when or why I bought my 642, but I still like it. I did choose it over the Ruger sp101
Thanks for watching! It’s definitely still a great gun.
I own a 642 and a 3" 856. When I carry a snubby revolver, I carry an aluminum frame 16oz (loaded) Charter Arms 5 shot Undercover. Why? I like the low weight of the 642, but wanted the option of single action shooting. My Undercover has a better DA trigger than the S&W or 856. It's SA trigger is outstanding. It's been reliable and easy to shoot even with the short grip option. I like the strength of the solid frame. It's +P rated as well. All are excellent revolvers. However, the Charter Arms alloy frame Undercover better suits my wants and needs.
Thanks for watching! I haven’t tried a Charter Arms.
The 637 is the da sa version of the 642
We’re you shooting +P in the shooting portion? That looked like a lot of recoil.
Thanks for watching! No, it’s standard. I’m going to get some revolver training later this year to find out more about shooting these little snubbies. I don’t have that issue with larger revolvers.
Nice detailed comparison. Either will work just fine for its intended purpose - bad breath distance defense. If the budget is tight, look for a Taurus. They have come a long way in quality, though their QC does seem to be a little spotty. For quality and overall "shootability", the nod goes to Smith. And self defense is ONLY a double-action affair, so single-action capability is a non-issue. Also, I just scrolled through all 608 Taurus 856 on Gunbroker, and not a purple one to be found.
Thanks for watching! I agree with you on the double action point. Didn’t know the purple ones (I think it’s technically violet) were so rare. Did they have any of the other colors?
They only made the colored ones the first year or 2.
love Smith & Wesson, great guns with an incredible reputation for durability, serviceability and excellent finishes but I think Im with you on this, that extra round, the quality of the stock grips and unbeatable price makes it a clear winner in my books. great review!
Thanks for watching!
A "hammerless" revolver wouldnt fire. I have read a few comments that the 642/442 wear out if you shoot it a lot and are not repairable.That is a good reason not to buy a used one! The newer 856 have a pinned exchangable front sight. The extra round is also good. I think the 856 offer more.
@@Gieszkanne Thanks for watching!
The trigger pull on that Taurus in single action is probably about two or three pounds so it would absolutely beat the Smith & Wesson hands down if you check it that way it doesn't matter how heavy the trigger pull on a revolver is as long as the action and the trigger pull is smooth
Thanks for watching! Agreed, but since the Smith is double action only, I didn’t want to unfairly compare it that way.
I own the 856 Taurus ul and it’s a fantastic fantastic revolver it gets the job done indeed
Thanks for watching!
@@AffordableArmory I should be thanking you for the unbelievable support and knowledge you have given me indeed
@@jessicagrecco5813 😊 That made my day.
856 is a better full time carry. The Smith is better for deep cover or tertiary.
I don't have any small tauruses, and all my 5-6 shot guns are part time. I'm usually carrying a L or N frame Smith. Too big for most people.
Thanks for watching!
Shoot ability is in the shooter own the Taurus ultra light in Matt stainless and that gun's amazingly accurate I can hit a 5 inch plate at 10 yards with no problem thanks for your video I never cared for the hammerless revolvers but that's just me
Thanks for watching!
I like the pink one too.. very cute
@@sheepdog-kp9hb Thanks for watching!
@@AffordableArmory I'm just trying to be funny.. God be with you
Vedder doesn't make a holster for the Taurus 856. Wish they would.
Thanks for watching! Me too!
The 642 has had spring wrk done they are about 11 to 12 lbs trigger pull
Thanks for watching! Or it’s a well broken in used gun that I got a good deal on and possibly needs the springs replaced.
There. Perfect now leave well enough alone
642 is perfect for a back-up ankle holster firearm or pocket carry.
Thanks for watching!
Based on my experience renting a 642 I'd take the Taurus. Trigger was gritty & felt about 14 pounds.
Thanks for watching!
On the website of my favorite gun store both guns are available. The S&W will set you back by about $180 more than the Taurus.
Thanks for watching! Yes, generally the Smith & Wesson will be more expensive.
Snubbies are pretty difficult to master. But they absolutely are capable of very respectable accuracy.
@@BeingWellRegulated Thanks for watching! I agree.
Taurus kicked but on the 856 but those air weight guns are not a smart option. Taurus also has model 605 in 357 in 6 shot. I say stay with stainless steel versions or black alloy steel.
Thanks for watching!
Why is the Ultra Light not a smart option? Being lighter they are easier to carry.
@@gregb6469 Ultralight/Airweight (Smith & Wesson) models are more difficult to shoot because they are lighter weight, and they tend to have more felt recoil. An all-steel version of the same size gun will have less felt recoil. That being said, if you practice with it and become comfortable and proficient with it, it can work well. But you should do that with any gun you choose to carry.
What ammo were you firing?
Thanks for watching! Mag tech 158gr.
Well I do like Smiths but not a double action only with no single action for taking more precise longer shots and I really don't like the safety lock on the 642. Whether a close range revolver or not I still want that single action ability to make a better shot. So my pick is the 856 but I got the three inch Defender model all stainless in matte black. Conceals the same just with an extra inch of barrel for longer sight radius, Tritium day/night front sight, and better muzzle velocity and energy. A little heavier than the UL also but better for recoil and more durable than the aluminum frame. Mine has Hogue grips that are bigger but again better for recoil. A standard white dot front sight and the standard Taurus small grips came with it extra. The extra sixth round is not so important to me even if it was a five shot like a model 85 or the 642 that would be fine. My 856 is +P dedicated and that is unusual since most are just rated for +P. Triggers are not as good on Taurus revolvers but they do wear in with use. Thanks for sharing.
On quality control a gun no matter the brand whether new or used should be inspected before buying so there are no defects or damage but Smith lately has had some stinkers from the videos I have been seeing. Taurus can also have some stinkers so bottom line is check the gun over before buying no matter which one. I have been hearing the same about poor Smith customer service lately on videos and folks talk about bad Taurus customer service but my personal experience with Taurus customer service has been good. But my experience was not about the 856 but a lost part on another gun that was taken care of under warranty.
Thanks for watching! The 856 Defender is definitely a better shooter because of the longer barrel (increased sight radius and better ballistics) and the bigger grips (more to hold onto = better control of recoil). I would carry that gun as a primary IWB and carry one of the two guns in this video as a backup or deep concealment (pocket, jacket, ankle, etc.). As to customer service, Taurus has improved over the years. Some people probably still have bad impressions from years past, but they’ve had a new president for the past few years and he’s made changing their reputation a priority. Smith & Wesson on the other hand, I’m not sure what their excuse is.
You need to practice your double action more. Except for extreme precision, SA shouldn't be much better at all with proper technique. Headshots at 25 yards should be fairly accurate in DA.
Best part is the 856 front sights aren't canted like all the newer j frames I have lol
Thanks for watching!
The 856 is great, it is quite a bit bigger and harder to conceal.
Thanks for watching!
Dude don’t blame the gun for the accuracy. It’s all on you. Practice using revolvers.
Thanks for watching! Well if the shots were all over the place, yes. But they weren’t. They were consistent.
With all the differences and variables between these two pistols, don't you think it's a bit silly comparing them.
Apples 🍎 and 🍊 oranges
@@ghostwalker152 Thanks for watching! Not really. They’re both readily available, easily concealable snubnose revolvers in the same caliber. And they’re both very popular guns. Comparing these two guns is no different than comparing a Glock 19 to a Sig Sauer P320. Or a Sig Sauer P365XL to a Springfield Armory Hellcat Pro. It’s a logical (and even necessary) comparison. Now if I said Glock 19 or Smith & Wesson J-Frame, THAT would be apples and oranges.
Imma go with the 642, but I’m biased, I have one😎
Thanks for watching! Not a bad choice.
I bought a vedder holster. It came very loosely fit. I messaged their customer service twice. Never got a response. Won't buy again.
@@montv291 Thanks for watching! Sorry to hear that. I haven’t heard of having that issue before.
Buying a used revolver is taking a risk, so anyone doing so needs to know how to inspect a revolver for function, damage, etc. There is a reason a used gun is available at the gun store or pawn shop, and sometimes the reason is that the gun is junk.
Thanks for watching! Very true.
More likely used S&W will cost more then a new taurus. my Taurus 856 wins!
Thanks for watching! The possibly, but in this case the Smith and Wesson was cheaper.
I love my 637 , I have two Smiths and a Taurus, Smith is definitely a better gun and a better trigger, but you pay for it
Thanks for watching!
6 rounds or 5 rounds ...hmmm...not hard to choose.
@@mattjean2652 Thanks for watching! Well if you’re only choosing based on capacity, sure.
@@AffordableArmory Not only on capacity. Everything else is so close, that's the tie breaker in my book.
Charter arms is manufacturing revolvers in different colors now but I don't believe the charter arms revolvers are as close to being as good as a Taurus they just don't look that reliable
Thanks for watching! No, the Charter Arms guns are not really in the same category as these.
You didn't mention that the Smith has that very stupid (and ugly) exposed ejector rod, which could bend the rod and make the gun unusable if it was hit in the wrong place hard enough. The 856's rod is covered as it should be.
Thanks for watching!
The taurus would be my choice. One thought on the trigger pull test. Do you think the table was binding the rotation of the cylinder? May have added the wieght to the pull. Great video, you cant beat a snubby.
Thanks for watching! Someone else mentioned the cylinder rotation factor as well. It would be interesting to test it again, maybe in a vise or something.
i like 340 pd. 38 +p+.
Thanks for watching! That’s a lightweight gun with a lot of recoil. But to each his own.
The Taurus 856 has a heavy trigger so take it to a gunsmith and smooth up the action
Thanks for watching! I may do that, but I prefer to get used to the gun first.
Taurus looks way hetter in my opinion 💪
Thanks for watching!
I have one of each...
Thanks for watching! Me too.
I did ended up putting the Hogue Monogrip on the 642. It made a world of difference in shooting it comfortably. I hated shooting that gun with the original grips on it. No place for the pinky and the metal backstrap is against your hand. The Monogrip fixed all that, like a new gun, imho. The 856UL's stock grips were fine out of the box and it has that extra round. Both great guns...@@AffordableArmory
The Smith is light years ahead of ANY Taurus product
Thanks for watching!
The 642 really doesn't compare with a raging bull.
@@bobjohnson1633 Nope. Those guns would definitely be in different categories.
You have a purple gun. Turn in your Man Card immediately!
😂🤣😂 Thanks for watching!
6 shots over 5 shots any day
Thanks for watching!
Thank you for this video. You really tipped me to not want either of these. Appreciated.
😂 Thanks for watching! 🤷🏻♂️
It's "SPURless." NOT "hammerless." Come on, bro.
Thanks for watching! What do you call a Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless then? It’s literally in the name and both guns do have a hammer. Come on, bro. 😂
@@AffordableArmory It was misleading then for marketing purposes, but today, it's said out of ignorance.
@@filoIII I suppose you probably freak out when someone calls it a .45 automatic then too?
@@AffordableArmory The cartridge?
@@filoIII The gun.
Taurus is junk save for a smith
Thanks for watching! Based on what?
@@AffordableArmory based on my biased opinion 😂 ( taurus is not junk) i just prefer a smith
I paid $289 each for two 642 revolvers right before gunpocalypse happened. Online of course.
Thanks for watching! That’s a great deal. Lucky you!
@@AffordableArmory My FFL thought they were used when he saw the invoice!