5-Shot Snub: Enough Gun?

[GEM]

Old debate - nothing new. I'd bet if I had a time machine and went back to Wyatt Earp and said: I will sell you one of these two guns to replace your BP revolvers:

1. A Glock 19
2. A SW 442

with appropriate accessories to keep it running - I'm sure Wyatt would say: Gol Dang! 5 is enough!

 

[.38 Special]

If the original Model-T Ford were an option for the ambulance to rush you to the ER operating room to save your life, would you choose that over a modern vehicle specifically designed to do that exact job?

We're talking about a life and death emergency where every second matters. There are far better options available at the gun store, which are no heavier or bulkier but have better sights, better triggers, higher capacity, faster reloads, and frequently superior terminal ballistics for the recoil.

If you already own, are familiar with, and know how to shoot a 5 shot snub nosed revolver, keep on keeping on. If you're choosing a new sub compact handgun for defensive use, leave the romance behind and advance with pragmatism.

The difference between a Model T and a modern ambulance is significantly greater than the difference between a snub and a subcompact auto. A far better comparison would be a modern ambulance and one from the 70s. I'm not sure that the vehicle itself would make any difference - though I can guarantee that the training certainly would!

<edit> And I'd be interested in an auto of the same size, weight, and power as the 340PD...

 

[JimCunn]

"I have been reading about and watching videos of armed encounters for decades".

I don't bother to watch them. I've only been in one armed encounter in my life (other guy was armed; I wasn't).
My Dad was in a bunch of them - came out unscathed. They finally got him at age 86 on a day when he wasn't armed.

 

[Kleanbore]

That is certainly true, but is no more or less an argument against a snub t...:

The uncertainty and the severity of the potential consequences would suggest the advantages of an increased margin and better trigger pull..

there are some fights that we are not going to win

I doo not want to increase the probability of losing.

 

[WrongHanded]

The difference between a Model T and a modern ambulance is significantly greater than the difference between a snub and a subcompact auto. A far better comparison would be a modern ambulance and one from the 70s. I'm not sure that the vehicle itself would make any difference - though I can guarantee that the training certainly would!

<edit> And I'd be interested in an auto of the same size, weight, and power as the 340PD...

I know. It was to illustrate a point. The point being why would a person want clearly inferior technology when the stakes are life and death?

As far as the 340PD goes, perhaps shootability should factor in there somewhere, if you're interested in comparisons.

 

[.38 Special]

The uncertainty and the severity of the potential consequences would suggest the advantages of an increased margin and better trigger pull..
I doo not want to increase the probability of losing.

Then why do you carry a low capacity pistol with a relatively crummy trigger?

 

[.38 Special]

I know. It was to illustrate a point. The point being why would a person want clearly inferior technology when the stakes are life and death?

As far as the 340PD goes, perhaps shootability should factor in there somewhere, if you're interested in comparisons.

If the inferior technology is A) still perfectly acceptable for the task, and B) offers benefits over modern alternatives.

For example, I carry the 340PD in a running vest, where light weight is critical and the likelihood of extended gun battles is quite low.

 

[WrongHanded]

<edit> And I'd be interested in an auto of the same size, weight, and power as the 340PD...

Okay, now you've got me legitimately curious. What power are you getting from that snub nosed .357 magnum? What load are you carrying and have you chronographed it by chance?

 

[JimCunn]

I would expect the power he is getting is substantial.
I've reduced the weight of my 9mm conversions to 11.5 ounces (the heavy Herrett grips bring it back up to 12.5). 147gr 9mm gives me an average of 952 fps and about 292 ft-lbs. The recoil is quite painful and about all I can stand.

 

[.38 Special]

Okay, now you've got me legitimately curious. What power are you getting from that snub nosed .357 magnum? What load are you carrying and have you chronographed it by chance?

I still am experimenting. Full power anything is enormously unpleasant, so I am trying different things. The gun is primarily a security blanket against mountain lions, which have been responsible for several recent attacks in my neck of the woods. That also means that any engagements are likely to be up close and personal. If I get into a fight with a distant rifleman, I will lose. Oh well.

Velocities, of course, are pretty low. Top end 125s go about 1150 fps. 158 cast swcs are right around 1000 fps. Both are godawful in terms of recoil, flash, and report. I'm not sure if that matters with a big cat trying to disembowel me, but will continue to think and experiment.

 

[JimCunn]

I used to live in South Fork, Colorado (before it became a tourist trap).
I still remember mornings with mountain lion tracks in the snow.
Gave me the creeps.

 

[WrongHanded]

I still am experimenting. Full power anything is enormously unpleasant, so I am trying different things. The gun is primarily a security blanket against mountain lions, which have been responsible for several recent attacks in my neck of the woods. That also means that any engagements are likely to be up close and personal. If I get into a fight with a distant rifleman, I will lose. Oh well.

Velocities, of course, are pretty low. Top end 125s go about 1150 fps. 158 cast swcs are right around 1000 fps. Both are godawful in terms of recoil, flash, and report. I'm not sure if that matters with a big cat trying to disembowel me, but will continue to think and experiment.

I understand your need for a task-specific carry gun for running. I know how unpleasant carrying the wrong gun in the wrong location can be for running. So I get it.

However, a sub compact 9mm can push a 124gr HST to around 1150 fps, and +p 124gr Gold Dots to about the same. So whilst I understand that the revolver may provide some benefits over a semi-auto when a mountain lions jumps on your back during a run in the hills, for most people in more general self defense situations, I don't think those benefits apply.

 

[.38 Special]

I understand your need for a task-specific carry gun for running. I know how unpleasant carrying the wrong gun in the wrong location can be for running. So I get it.

However, a sub compact 9mm can push a 124gr HST to around 1150 fps, and +p 124gr Gold Dots to about the same. So whilst I understand that the revolver may provide some benefits over a semi-auto when a mountain lions jumps on your back during a run in the hills, for most people in more general self defense situations, I don't think those benefits apply.

Sure. But the extra velocity comes from a longer barrel. And the guns themselves are bigger and heavier in just about every way. Trade-offs...

 

[trackskippy]

"I have been reading about and watching videos of armed encounters for decades".

I don't bother to watch them. I've only been in one armed encounter in my life (other guy was armed; I wasn't).
My Dad was in a bunch of them - came out unscathed. They finally got him at age 86 on a day when he wasn't armed.

Youre missing out here, doing yourself a disservice not watching them. Lots to be learned and understood there.

I would expect the power he is getting is substantial.
I've reduced the weight of my 9mm conversions to 11.5 ounces (the heavy Herrett grips bring it back up to 12.5). 147gr 9mm gives me an average of 952 fps and about 292 ft-lbs. The recoil is quite painful and about all I can stand.

And my Glock 26 is about the same size as one of my snubbies, carries double, and as much as three times the ammo, great sights, and is very pleasant and easy to shoot well with. Hmmm, theres actually a decision to make here?

 

[.38 Special]

Youre missing out here, doing yourself a disservice not watching them. Lots to be learned and understood there.


And my Glock 26 is about the same size as one of my snubbies, carries double, and as much as three times the ammo, great sights, and is very pleasant and easy to shoot well with. Hmmm, theres actually a decision to make here?

A fully loaded G26 is about twice the weight Jim claims for his snub. At any rate, both of you seem to have been perfectly served by your choices, as you both apparently are still alive!

 

[JimCunn]

"Youre missing out here, doing yourself a disservice not watching them. Lots to be learned and understood there"

I'm 81. I spend my time doing things that are more important to me. For example messing about in antique taildragger airplanes.

Evenings I spend working on the flapping flight mechanics and biomechanics of azdharchid pterosaurs.

 

[JimCunn]

"Hmmm, theres actually a decision to make here? "

Nope.

 

[trackskippy]

A fully loaded G26 is about twice the weight Jim claims for his snub. At any rate, both of you seem to have been perfectly served by your choices, as you both apparently are still alive!

I really dont give size and weight much thought, except when Im shooting the lighter guns, and then its more vocal than thought.

I carry a 17, something like the 26 or 642, etc, would be a BUG. BUG's are not primary guns.

If I carried my 642, it would likely be in the same type holster I normally carry my 26 in, and both are comfortable, and a lot easier to get to than from in a pocket. And there is no hesitation in choice here as to what I carry. I havent carried the 642 in years now.

Im just kind of surprised his Airweight is holding up with 9mm. I had two 940's back when they first came out and neither lasted 200 rounds before they had to go back. The second was a replacement for the first, and the thrid one I told them I didnt want it back in 9mm, and they gave me a 640.

The 940 wasnt real fun to shoot in 9mm, Im sure the Airweight is no fun at all.

 

[Blue Jays]

I love all my semi-automatics in all sizes. I only purchase top-shelf models and they are all terrific handguns.
At the same time, a hammerless J-frame (in a pocket holster) is a superb gun for walking the dog after dinner.
Unlike my semi-automatics the hammerless revolver smoothly goes into and draws from an overcoat pocket.

 

[WrongHanded]

Sure. But the extra velocity comes from a longer barrel. And the guns themselves are bigger and heavier in just about every way. Trade-offs...

A longer barrel in a semi-auto doesn't mean the gun is longer than you 340PD. Those velocities are from a 9mm with a 3.5" barrel. You're right about the weight, but does everyone need the lightest possible gun at under 12oz empty? I think plenty of people could handle 6-8oz more and be okay.

It seems like you're arguing about a generalized concept based on your specific leisure-time circumstances. Not everyone is running in the hills (the OP stated home and walks), so the tiny difference in weight just isn't a factor for most people. Yet the reduced capacity, increased recoil for the same ballistics, shorter sight radius, heavier longer trigger pull, and slower reload, may be significant factors.

 

[.38 Special]

A longer barrel in a semi-auto doesn't mean the gun is longer than you 340PD. Those velocities are from a 9mm with a 3.5" barrel. You're right about the weight, but does everyone need the lightest possible gun at under 12oz empty? I think plenty of people could handle 6-8oz more and be okay.

It seems like you're arguing about a generalized concept based on your specific leisure-time circumstances. Not everyone is running in the hills (the OP stated home and walks), so the tiny difference in weight just isn't a factor for most people. Yet the reduced capacity, increased recoil for the same ballistics, shorter sight radius, heavier longer trigger pull, and slower reload, may be significant factors.

I'd say that those arguments all make perfect sense for you. It is only if you expect them to apply to everyone else that we get ourselves into trouble.

Moreover, the same reasoning holds true for guns larger than the subcompact. For just a little more size and weight, we gain ever more capacity and shootability...

 

[Kleanbore]

Then why do you carry a low capacity pistol with a relatively crummy trigger?

I carry a pistol with 60% more rounds than a J-frame, a much better trigger, and bigger sights.

Capacity is a funny thing in defensive shooting. You have to assume that a fair number of rounds will not connect with critical tissue. Make an assumption on that and do the math. You will find that 6 rounds will yield surprisingly better expected results than 5, that 7 is better, and so on.

Of course the law of diminishing returns, to borrow a phrase, comes into play at some point.

 

[JimCunn]

"Im just kind of surprised his Airweight is holding up with 9mm".

I have three of them. So far, so good.
But I do consider them to be consumables. If a frame should crack, it's time to buy another one, convert it, and truck on.

I have eleven semi-autos in various calibers. I love shooting them - but for carry, I want something trustworthy, capable of single action fire, and with an exceptional trigger. The 637 fills that niche.

 

[JimCunn]

"You will find that 6 rounds will yield surprisingly better expected results than 5, that 7 is better, and so on".

My Dad's favorite gun was the Quad .50 (four .50 machine guns mounted in parallel). They were great for taking down Jap Zeros, but didn't do well for concealed carry. I don't know how many rounds they held, but they would sure dispose of them in a hurry.

 

[.38 Special]

I carry a pistol with 60% more rounds than a J-frame, a much better trigger, and bigger sights.

You carry a low capacity pistol with a crummy trigger. That is your choice and I fully support it, but it completely undermines your arguments.