Anyone else disappointed with the S&W Governor announcement?

Status
Not open for further replies.
a few weeks ago i went into my favorite gun store and i overheard the owner telling this guy how good the judge was for self defense. i didn't want to ruin the owners sale and get kicked out but i wanted so bad to tell the guy not to buy a judge for self defense. the gun is good for two things only. shooting snakes with birshot and inaccurately shooting 45 long colt.
 
The Judge would make for a good snake gun, but a 410 load in a short-barreled firearm is not the best for self defense by a long shot.
Don't kid yourself the Judge with these 410 defense loads that are available now will do utter destruction to a human target as well as snakes. I carry this gun all the time.Fortunately I have quite a few guns to choose from,but I have no qualms about carrying the Judge for defense. It is bad news within the range it is intended for especially with a couple 45LC's mixed in. If anybody beleives a 410 will not ruin somebodys day they are sadly mistaken. 5 quick shots will convince you otherwise!
 
410 defense loads that are available now will do utter destruction to a human target

not out of that short of a barrel. In addition to the short barrel , the rifling also makes it where there is no way for a decent pattern to be held. The shot will expand like a blunderbuss.

and the penetration would be very poor.

Basically the Judge is a horrible shotgun and a very bad 45.

The Smith version is a horrible shotgun and a very bad 45...at a much higher price.

It is so bad that even Guns and Ammo, a shill for the firearm industry, admits that loading with .410 it is not a suitable defensive weapon.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/content/judging-judge


While I support anyone's right to buy and carry what they want, let us not pretend that this concept is something that it is not. It is a gimmick pure and simple.

Do not think that I am against fun guns. I have a 50 caliber muzzle loader but I do not consider it a defensive weapon.
 
You might want to read your article again.

But if you think I am giving the Judge a thumbs down as a self-defense arm hear me out. The verdict is not in yet. I think this is a uniquely useful handgun for some people and some situations. Let's not forget it shoots .45 Colt ammo, a proven manstopper, and there are self-defense situations where penetration of walls and/or injury to innocents behind the bad guy are very real concerns. The Judge gives you options no other self-defense handgun does.

Read more: http://www.gunsandammo.com/content/judging-judge?page=2#ixzz1D2w192XX
 
Certainly the 45 Long Colt is an outstanding round. The issue is that it requires a longer barrel (than the snub nose) to achieve enough velocity due to the burn rate of the powder.

I do confess that I agree with Bill Ruger who said something to the effect that "only accurate guns are interesting".

You can make the argument, and perhaps win it, that the Judge is accurate enough. After all, most gunfights happen inside of 5 feet.

My standard for me being able to carry a gun for self defense is that I can shoot it with a very good chance of hitting my target. With my daily carry, a 2.5 inch Colt Diamondback, I can consistently hit a pie plate at 15 yards with 5 shots in rapid succession. About 4 seconds. I do not view this as great shooting so I am not bragging. Some guys that post here can smoke me like a cheap cigar. (ask David E what he can do with a J-Frame)

If faced with a self defense scenario I know that my shooting will suffer and I do not want to have collateral damage.

From what I have read this is an unrealistic standard for a snub nosed Judge.

YMMV.

And BTW, if you love your Judge I am happy. Everyone should carry what they want.
 
Amazing, now we have someone polling the majority of owners of the Judge and Governor, to give us the "why" that caused them to buy it. Or, maybe we have just another Internet Commando making sweeping statements based on their own personal opinion.

If you want to carry a large bulky revolver and having made that choice to carry a bulky gun choose to have it chambered in .410 rather than something more effective your certainly welcome to do so. At least such a gun is easier to shoot than some of the tiny pocket pistols at the other end of the gun size spectrum. I do however stand by my statement that a significant portion of those who purchase a .410 revolver seem to do so because of a rather misguided perception of the capabilities and "power" of such a weapon. This opinion has been formed by listening to salesmen sell them to customers and hearing owners talk about how devastatingly powerful they are.



I personally am of the school of thought that one of the greatest assets a defensive handgun can have is great balance and the ability to point easily and naturally. The most important thing if one should be in so unfortunate a position as to need to use a gun in self defense is the ability to score rapid hits almost without thinking about it. A gun that handles well to begin with along with the muscle memory obtained through practice with it are a lot more important than caliber. I also tend to believe the best defensive pistols fire a cartridge that is "balanced" with the size and weight of the gun. For example I think a properly loaded 357 with at least a four inch barrel makes a great defensive choice in a full size 30+ ounce revolver but I feel a 357 isn't nearly as good a choice in a lightweight, roughly 15 ounce alloy J frame revolver. I think in that application a 38 special or a 32 mag would be a much better choice. Why? because in my opinion it is extremely important to look at a defensive pistol as a system where everything must be balanced out to reach optimum effectiveness. A lot of people become fixated on one aspect of a defensive pistol and in so doing sacrifice other important qualities. You don't want to disregard bulkiness, poor balance, or controllability just to get the handgun chamber in the "most effective" cartridge, nor is it really a great idea in my opinion to go with the smallest and lightest handgun possible on the grounds that you will be carrying it more than you will be shooting it.



My objection to the judge and other .410 revolvers for defensive purposes is not just based on one aspect, but rather on my perception and opinion that they are a rather poorly designed defensive system where disadvantages considerably outweigh any advantages when compared to other choices out there. First you have the fact that .410 out of a short barreled revolver tends to be relatively ineffective. I don't at all doubt it could kill but I do think it tends to be considerably behind a properly loaded 357, 45acp, 10mm, and other rounds which might produce roughly similar recoil, in reliable effectiveness. Then you have the issue that .410 can't be chambered in a normal length revolver and that revolvers chambered for it with their lengthened cylinders just don't tend to balance or carry particularly well. Now with those drawbacks what advantages does a .410 revolver provide for defensive purposes? I have only ever heard two possible advantages put forth barring the obviously inaccurate statement that the few buckshot pellets fired make it easier to hit your target than it is with just one bullet. One is reduced penetration(which could just as easily be considered another drawback) and the other is the ability to make multiple holes in a target with one shot(which again is accomplished at the expense of penetration).



Now with all that said use what ever you want and feel comfortable with. At the end of the day it is your very own personal choice what to use no matter if it be a cheap Davis derringer, a raven 25acp, a colt python 357, a taurus judge or the new smith "governor". However no matter what your choice there are going to be a few people that disagree and that goes doubly if you choose something that a lot of people have serious doubts about. .410 revolvers definitely fit in that category.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top