5-Shot Snub: Enough Gun?

[JimCunn]

"Try some Tueller exercises. You will be lucky to draw and fire once".

Don't have to do them to know that is true.
In my younger days I could react, draw, and fire an SAA in a little under 0.3 seconds, but not a J-frame from the pocket. And probably can't do it with an SAA anymore.

I've not done any realistic defensive training and neither has my Dad, but my Dad used my J-frame to successfully prevent over a dozen unsuccessful armed robbery attempts at his store (he was finally killed at age 86 on a day when he wasn't carrying).
Me, I've only been in one gunfight. I wasn't armed, but the other guy was too close to me when he pulled his, so I took it away from him and put it in my pocket.

Do any of those count as realistic defensive training?

 

[Kleanbore]

What - specifically - do you consider "realistic"?

That is an excellent question!

Starting with the minima, it would involve surprises from unexpected directions and and unexpected distances, unlike range practice; drawing from concealment; and speed and rapidity of fire. Defenders would learn quickly to turn and move off line.

If the facility allows it, we would use cover and concealment.

Moving up a bit, we would add moving targets that think. That means FoF training.

What we cannot do is add the uncertainty of which hits are effective.

 

[.38 Special]

That is an excellent question!

Starting with the minima, it would involve surprises from unexpected directions and and unexpected distances, unlike range practice; drawing from concealment; and speed and rapidity of fire. Defenders would learn quickly to turn and move off line.

If the facility allows it, we would use cover and concealment.

Moving up a bit, we would add moving targets that think. That means FoF training.

What we cannot do is add the uncertainty of which hits are effective.

At last a thing upon which we agree completely!

The catch, though, is that a revolver (even a snub, if distances are kept to within seven yards) would still perform well in such training. Only when round count goes up (to unrealistic numbers, I argue) does the auto take over.

 

[Kleanbore]

The catch, though, is that a revolver (even a snub, if distances are kept to within seven yards) would still perform well in such training.

Foe me, the short sight radius and long, heavy DA trigger pull make if difficult to put shots on target with sufficient rapidity.

Only when round count goes up (to unrealistic numbers, I argue) does the auto take over.

I cannot say what is realistic, but for a timely physical stop, only shots that happen to hit the right parts of the anatomy will suffice, and that's a matter of chance. Add a second attacker, and....

 

[OrangePwrx9]

I dunno. Is it? Guess it depends on you, JCooperFan.

If you frequent Walmart, Target, Tractor supply, church, the gymn, maybe the library or other equivalent places and you restrict your travels to the day/early evening in a reasonably good part of town; then a 5-shot snub is more than adequate.

If OTOH you travel late at night visiting places where alcohol is consumed in large quantities, women wear very little clothing, illicit substances may be exchanged for cash, and fights and/or mayhem may occur at any moment; then a 5-shot snub is not enough

Using these general guidelines and a knowledge of your habits will help you answer your question. Really, it depends on you.

 

[shafter]

Keep in mind that for very much more than 99.9% of your days on this earth, you will not need any bullets - nor a gun, for that matter. A 5-shot snubby is an infinite improvement over what suffices in the life of the average person - no matter what your occupation, pastime, or general proclivities.

It's no improvement at all if you never need it. It's just extra weight. If you do need it it may or may not do the job. Only time will tell which it is.

 

[Kleanbore]

I dunno. Is it? Guess it depends on you, JCooperFan.

If you frequent Walmart, Target, Tractor supply, church, the gymn, maybe the library or other equivalent places and you restrict your travels to the day/early evening in a reasonably good part of town; then a 5-shot snub is more than adequate.

If OTOH you travel late at night visiting places where alcohol is consumed in large quantities, women wear very little clothing, illicit substances may be exchanged for cash, and fights and/or mayhem may occur at any moment; then a 5-shot snub is not enough

Using these general guidelines and a knowledge of your habits will help you answer your question. Really, it depends on you.

That analysis assumes that what one might need to defend against may vary according to where one might be.

I cannot see why one would expect that. One may be accosted by a single attacker, or by two, at Tractor Supply or outside the gym. Why would it make a difference?

Perhaps the poster is considering that the likelihood of an attack may be greater in one place or at one time a day than another. That is not really pertinent to the question at hand. In the event. what it will take to defend oneself is not a function of that what the likelihood that the need would materialize was thought to be before the event.

 

[TacticalJanitor]

It would also be interesting to see what people are basing their skills with them on, and how they actually shoot in practice and how they do with them at anything beyond slow fire target shooting at a bullseye target.

Since you asked, I shoot the same drill set with snubbies that I shoot with any other pistol (50 round "course" of 15 drills with two staggered targets). The drill includes shooting on the move, Bill Drills, one handed (both hands), and shots both timed and untimed from 7 to 25 yards with singles, pairs, and a triple or two. I shoot steel, so being closer then 7 yards is...not a good idea. Every drill is from concealment, as carried every day, in the clothes I really wear.

With any type of pistol, I shoot it a few times with a .22 version of that model. That is my par time/score. The goal is to get to that time/score with the centerfire pistol. Glock 44 par is a score of ~40. A S&W 43C score is ~42.

After a year of Glock time, the Glock 19 score is typically ~42 on a good week. For comparison, I'm struggling to get lower than a score of 52 with my M&P 340 with .38 WC (800 fps-ish). To be fair, I've only been shooting these drills with the 340 for 8 weeks or so.

I don't know (and honestly don't care) if I'm faster or more accurate than anyone else. All I can do is try to be faster and more accurate than I was last week with any given pistol. I think that's the best anyone can do.

So, for me, there is a very real (and undeniable) penalty in accuracy, speed, and delivered ft/lbs when shooting a J frame.

I still carry it though. I like the light weight, comfort, and safety that a 12-lbs. trigger provides.

Maybe someone will find these numbers interesting.

 

[pbearperry]

I believe if you are proficient,aware of your surroundings,and stay away from bad areas, you will be well served.If the climate in your area gets worse, maybe not.

 

[pbearperry]

Is your confidence based on your having used it suceessfully in realistic defensive training?

Yes, I even shot Combat Matches with a snubby and won a few awards.Five hits is better than a few hits with lots of misses.

 

[JohnKSa]

Five hits is better than a few hits with lots of misses.

That's true, but it's sort of an odd comment in this context given that small revolvers are harder to shoot than larger revolvers or autopistols that are roughly comparable in terms of "carryability".

The implication of the statement is that carrying a 5 shot snubby makes 5 hits more likely and lots of misses less likely than carrying a larger revolver or an autopistol. In reality, just the opposite is true.

 

[JimCunn]

"(even a snub, if distances are kept to within seven yards)".

Why the distance limitation?

 

[crstrode]

And who cares about the "average person"?

Some say that the average person is stupid. Statistically, half of the total population is even stupider than that.
Similarly, there are two types of people in the world. It is a prudent policy to avoid both types.

 

[JimCunn]

"My point is that reloading is usually of little use in lawful civilian self defense".

I actually agree with that .

 

[JimCunn]

"On THR the assumption is that we will have multiple, highly trained attackers who can soak up bullets and keep coming".

I think there is a greater chance I will be hit by a random meteor strike.

 

[trackskippy]

Probably better odds it will be from someone who bought a gun, never practices, and thinks they can shoot. And to add insult to injury, you werent even their intended target.

 

[Kleanbore]

I think there is a greater chance I will be hit by a random meteor strike

Your chances of being attacked by a criminal on any one day are less than than remote, but they do vary with circumstance. With increased exposure over time, the likelihood becomes much higher.

 

[JohnKSa]

On THR the assumption is that we will have multiple, highly trained attackers who can soak up bullets and keep coming.

Hyperbole/humor aside, it's not so much about assuming that there will be multiple motivated attackers as acknowledging the reality that criminals do often have accomplices, that not all violent criminals will immediately run at the sight of a gun, and that it often takes more than one shot (sometimes even more than one hit) to stop an attacker.

Just as it's incorrect to assume that all violent crime involves multiple determined attackers, it's incorrect to assume that all criminals operate alone and will give up at the first sign of resistance.

The problem with this topic is that most people can't be satisfied with making this true statement: "Realistically, this weapon combined with my skillset mean that I can effectively respond to only <this> specific subset of the spectrum of violent crime. I realize that, and am comfortable with it."

Instead, they want to do one or more of the following:

• Inflate the capability of the weapon
  
• Inflate their skill set
• Exaggerate the likelihood of "easily won" violent encounters
• Downplay the likelihood of "difficult" violent encounters
• Question the sanity of those who choose a different level of preparation whether it's above or below the level they choose.

When I am carrying my "deep concealment" carry pistol, there's no question that I'm limiting the overall capability of the "system" that is the combination of my skillset and my carry weapon. It would be foolish for me to think that I have the same capability as when I have more flexibility in my mode of dress and am therefore carrying a gun that's much larger, has much better sights, more ammunition on board, a better trigger and that is much more easily accessible. With the latter, I can make my first hit on target much faster, make followup shots much faster and more accurately, get good hits on targets farther away from me and keep shooting longer. That doesn't mean I'll need all those things just because that's the gun I have on hand, just as it doesn't mean I won't need them if I'm carrying my little "deep concealment" handgun.

 

[Old Dog]

If you frequent Walmart, Target, Tractor supply, church, the gymn, maybe the library or other equivalent places and you restrict your travels to the day/early evening in a reasonably good part of town; then a 5-shot snub is more than adequate.

Yikes! General rule of thumb when shopping most Wal-Marts in the greater Pugetropolis is to pack your big gun with at least two spare mags. We've had some high-profile shootings in a few pf our Wal-Marts in the region, and no disrespect intended to any of our esteemed THR membership that might be employed by WM, or those (including me) who shop there, but some of our stores attract some disreputable types (no doubt attracted by the low prices and the fact that carts are always available).

Seriously, though, as @JohnKSa notes above, it does seem that many folks that carry a firearm operate under some assumptions. The five points he made are very well articulated and I hope everyone gives due consideration to his his comments in one of the best posts on the topic I've seen on any forum.

Don't prepare for the gunfight or the scenario you believe to be most likely -- prepare and train for the worst possible situation. And for most of us, that involves considering that we may have family members or friends with us when something bad occurs, so having a plan other than your J-frame in a pocket might be indicated.

When I posted about how many robberies, carjackings and home invasions we've had locally in recent weeks, I mentioned that in multiple cases there were two, three or four armed assailants. And not always involving "bad parts of town" or "bad neighborhoods." Fortunately, in a couple cases, armed citizens prevailed and in a couple others, drove off the assailants.

 

[TacticalJanitor]

With the latter, I can make my first hit on target much faster

I'm not trying to be argumentative, just playing devil's advocate here...

Do you find that you have a speed advantage on the first shot with a larger pistol than a smaller one? It's about the same for me with either...but maybe I'm just slow with both? I'm assuming we are talking about 10 yards or less. More than that, then a longer sight radius is certainly better.

 

[mavracer]

I cannot see why one would expect that. One may be accosted by a single attacker, or by two, at Tractor Supply or outside the gym. Why would it make a difference?

LOL Tractor Supply and Atwoods near me are a bad choice for criminals way too many armed citizens.

 

[JohnKSa]

Do you find that you have a speed advantage on the first shot with a larger pistol than a smaller one?

It depends on the pistol, I suppose.

The comparison I wrote about was more than just about size, it was about the whole system. That's important, because everything in the system could potentially play into the outcome depending on the scenario.

When I am carrying my "deep concealment" carry pistol, there's no question that I'm limiting the overall capability of the "system" that is the combination of my skillset and my carry weapon. It would be foolish for me to think that I have the same capability as when I have more flexibility in my mode of dress and am therefore carrying a gun that's much larger, has much better sights, more ammunition on board, a better trigger and that is much more easily accessible. With the latter, I can make my first hit on target much faster, make followup shots much faster and more accurately, get good hits on targets farther away from me and keep shooting longer.

 

[TacticalJanitor]

It depends on the pistol, I suppose.

The comparison I wrote about was more than just about size, it was about the whole system. That's important, because everything in the system could potentially play into the outcome depending on the scenario.

Ok. Makes complete sense.

Thanks.

 

[.38 Special]

"(even a snub, if distances are kept to within seven yards)".

Why the distance limitation?

Because snubs are quite a bit more difficult to hit with.

 

[nickshave]

f OTOH you travel late at night visiting places where alcohol is consumed in large quantities, women wear very little clothing, illicit substances may be exchanged for cash, and fights and/or mayhem may occur at any moment; then a 5-shot snub is not enough

Sounds like my college days.