Don't like airweight snubs.

[harmon rabb]

I don't think a j-frame really has a place in a world where the PM-9 and other autos that compact exist.

you gain a lot in capability with a PM-9, and gain little, if any, weight.

Apples to oranges man. Some prefer a revolver, period. Sometimes those people are very experienced shooters, and just like what they like. Sometimes they're inexperienced shooters and feel a revolver is simpler.

Doesn't matter. Both have their place.

 

[harmon rabb]

I bought a 642 about a year ago. Fired 10 rounds out of it and hated it. It was sold immediately. I know that's heresy here on THR where the 642 is the greatest carry gun ever invented. But it was just plain painful to me. And I'm not averse to recoil. Double Tap's 158gr .357mag our of my SP101 was just plain fun.
Mild .38s out of the 642 were painful, and not fun at all.

I'm just not a snubby guy. Give me my Ruger LCP over an LCR any day. The LCP points naturally for me, I am more accurate with it than with a snubby, and the recoil is not bad at all. I loved my SP101 3"bbl, but wouldnt want a shorter one. Noooo thank you.

i couldn't agree more with you. I really don't like firing any revolver smaller than my SP101.

 

[amd6547]

Funny, because I sold my 3" SP101 to buy the Bodyguard 38 Airweight I have.
However, the SP101 was really replaced by a S&W Model 19 2.5" for snub 357 mag fun.

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

Apples to oranges man.

They're both competing for the same niche. You're confusing the mechanics of the device for the purpose of the device.

 

[pintler]

I have tried it. With very different results. 5 jackets from yardsales. Albeit the gun was smaller, so it had less muzzle blast. Tomcat .32. I also think that the design of the jacket might come into play.

Thanks for the fascinating datapoint. We need to get a grant and do a study .

 

[DAdams]

No, don't agree. 13.3 ounce M&P 340 is just about right. Or a 12 ounce Seecamp .380.

 

[mavracer]

No, don't agree.

+1
It's good for a man to know his limitations, but if you can't put 5 rounds in a pie plate at 10 yards in under 4 seconds it's not the snubs fault.

 

[Jaymo]

I prefer steel framed snubs.

 

[JohnhenrySTL]

I never thought I would own some super light modern pocket gun. I realized after attempting to carry my Sig p229 for several years, that there I was better off carrying a gun I would actually carry than having a safe full of combat pistols. I came across a S&W 442 that I really liked. I picked it up less than a month ago for 419. Not only is truly an awesome carry pistol, it has been fun learning to shoot a snub nose DoubleActionOnly revolver.

All of my other pistols have become boring to shoot, I shoot them so well. Well shooting is never actually boring, I will just say that learning to put 10/10 shots in a paper plate at 30 yards with my new gun has been a very fun challenge. I am new to leaving post on the internet. I want to ask a question for people who know, I hope I will be able to track this very thread down to see peoples response. I was wondering if it is ok to shoot my S&W 442 thousands of times without wearing it out? It is a light weight gun, I think it weighs about 15 ounces. It has an aluminum frame.

 

[230therapy]

As for landing in prison...Not many states have stand-your-ground laws outside of the home. One probably has a pretty good chance getting away at 25 yards. Why get into a firefight...with a snub no less? BTW, if you can manage to hit POA at 25 yards with your heart going at 120 bpm using a snub, more power to you. I'm a little more realistic with my own skills.

Is a bad guy's bullet deadly at 25 yards? Are bullets capable of flying 25 yards? Is the good guy under threat of maiming or bodily harm?

If so, how can anyone possibly believe that distance is the primary factor in a conviction? The primary factor, unless politics are involved, is always whether or not the good guy was acting under threat of maiming/grave bodily harm or death (the actual wording for justified self-defense varies by state, but I am using my state's definition). I am not saying the first case couldn't happen (lawyers will argue anything these days), but a good shoot is easier to defend if it comes to a trial.

As for distances: if the shooter does not have confidence that he or she cannot score a hit, do not shoot. Do you know what the sight continuum is? Have you practiced it?

If you cannot shoot 4" groups or smaller on demand at 3, 5, 7, 10, 15, and 25 yards with your gun, then you have work to do. Four inches is the standard because it demonstrates proper control of the weapon and accounts for the loss of accuracy due to various factors in a fight.

It seems to me that this entire thread is really about convenience versus shooting performance. I find the attitude of "convenience is paramount in carry" contemptible. This attitude is irresponsible because the guns are more difficult to use under the harsh conditions and bullets always go somewhere. Furthermore, people who refuse to train with their weapon are not thinking through the ramifications of their laziness.

 

[harmon rabb]

They're both competing for the same niche. You're confusing the mechanics of the device for the purpose of the device.

But each has advantages and disadvantages, and it's up to an individual to choose whether they prefer the tradeoffs of a revolver, or the tradeoffs of a semi-auto.

Mind you, I carry a semi-auto 98% of the time, so on a personal level (as in what's right for ME), I'd pick a Kahr PM9 all day long and twice on sunday over a j-frame or LCR. My wife carries a LCR (with the fbi load) because she's always found revolvers to be simpler for her. Whatever, at least she's carrying.

When I do carry a revolver, it's my 3" SP101, loaded with nasty buffalo bore rounds, because I can't justify carrying a revolver without getting something to make up for the diminished capacity. With a small snub you're not getting any ballistic advantages over a small 9 really, but when you move up to something like a SP101 with a bit of barrel length, well, now, your semi-auto better be a 10mm if it wants to keep up. Also, an empty SP101 would still be a pretty nasty impact weapon.

 

[PRM]

Four inches is the standard

Whose standard? Nice size group to shoot for at 15 and 25 yards. But who set that as a standard and for what?

One of the commonly used targets for LE qualifications is the TQ 15. The five ring on this target is closer to 8X10.

Smaller groups do show a level of skill under perfect conditions. But I have never heard of a four inch group being a standard.

 

[Stainz]

When my CCW was an AMT DAO Backup in .45 ACP, it certainly was an infrequent pocket piece. Nearly nine years ago, I traded it towards a new 296 - an AirLite-Ti 5-shot .44 Special enclosed hammer 19 oz L-frame. It went with me sporting larger/more comfortable grips in an OWB pancake holster - very infrequently. Then, I got a Mika pocket holster for it. Boot grips back on, it blended into 3 of 4 of my pants' front pockets. Then - I got wise - bought an Airweight J-frame - a 642. It goes, in a similar Mika pocket holster, into any of my pants' front pockets. A store mishap taught me the utility of 24/7 carry - and it's in my pocket as I type this.

The mission for an EDC CCW is to protect your bacon. If you legally can carry - and will 24/7 - a hawg leg, more power to you. In my state, it must be a CCW. The AirLite/Airweight suffice for the mission. Are they my favorite 'snubbies'? Hardly! Put my N-frame SS 2 5/8" PC627 UDR in that role. I'd love to carry that gun - but it needs a 'real' holster and belt... and a large/long coat/jacket/vest to cover it... but what a tack driver!

I feel the Airweight/AirLite series of pocket protectors is a 'necessary evil' - to protect one from evil. I never carried 24/7 before the 642 - proof enough for me.

Stainz

 

[Coltdriver]

I like em because they are so easy to carry. If you want something to shoot at the range, get a steel one.

I don't know how many times anyone else has drawn their concealed carry weapon, my count is zero. That is way over 20 years of carry.

That means a whole lot of carry and no defensive use. Its also a lot of peace of mind and there have been many instances when I was acutely happy to have my airweight on me.

So from a practical perspective, ease of carry becomes my trump card. I have other guns to shoot at the range.

 

[Onward Allusion]

230therapy

Is a bad guy's bullet deadly at 25 yards? Are bullets capable of flying 25 yards? Is the good guy under threat of maiming or bodily harm?

All of the above are a "it depends scenario". I'm talking generalities. If a BG is 25 yards away, it would not be prudent to use 1 or more of your 5 shots at that distance. Sure, one may be able to get a pie plate at 50 yards at the range, but let me tell you it is unlikely to happen in a real world situation for most people. maybe you and AMD are the exception but most people can't when their heart is racing. Can it happen, sure, but unlikely with most shooters. If one is not under a direct threat at 25 yards, get the hell out of the situation. I've said this before and I'll say it again - snubs are not meant for those kinds of distances. If you can do it, great - but most people - myself included can't.

If so, how can anyone possibly believe that distance is the primary factor in a conviction? The primary factor, unless politics are involved, is always whether or not the good guy was acting under threat of maiming/grave bodily harm or death (the actual wording for justified self-defense varies by state, but I am using my state's definition). I am not saying the first case couldn't happen (lawyers will argue anything these days), but a good shoot is easier to defend if it comes to a trial.

We have differing opinions on this. I would not actively engage if I could get away. At 25 yards, the chances of getting away are a lot better than 7 yards.

As for distances: if the shooter does not have confidence that he or she cannot score a hit, do not shoot. Do you know what the sight continuum is? Have you practiced it?

If you cannot shoot 4" groups or smaller on demand at 3, 5, 7, 10, 15, and 25 yards with your gun, then you have work to do. Four inches is the standard because it demonstrates proper control of the weapon and accounts for the loss of accuracy due to various factors in a fight.

I now do less than 1" at 10 yards with my 5946. At 25 yards I land everything in a 4" group at POA. With my model 66 I get 1" at 25 yards. Is that good enough? At 50 yards I land all shots in the black on a B-27. Does that mean I'm going to engage at 50 yards? I don't think so and I doubt if I will engage at 25 yards if I could leave the situation. This is doubly true if carrying a snub. BTW, it took me near 10,000 rounds over the course of maybe 2 years to get to that level on my 5946.

It seems to me that this entire thread is really about convenience versus shooting performance. I find the attitude of "convenience is paramount in carry" contemptible. This attitude is irresponsible because the guns are more difficult to use under the harsh conditions and bullets always go somewhere. Furthermore, people who refuse to train with their weapon are not thinking through the ramifications of their laziness.

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it, however, what I find questionable is someone who expects everyone else to be at their same skill level, have the same values, or think in their terms, and if others do not, they are labeled as lazy and have contempt directed at them??? Real dang highroad there.

 

[Onward Allusion]

PRM
Whose standard? Nice size group to shoot for at 15 and 25 yards. But who set that as a standard and for what?

One of the commonly used targets for LE qualifications is the TQ 15. The five ring on this target is closer to 8X10.

Smaller groups do show a level of skill under perfect conditions. But I have never heard of a four inch group being a standard.

Exactly my point. Range and real-life bad situations are completely different.

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

It's always better to be more competent than you need to be than less competent than you need to be.

 

[Guillermo]

It's always better to be more competent than you need to be than less competent than you need to be

And it is amazing how little some folks practice...yet they carry.

Scary

 

[Inebriated]

They are for saving your life. Not putting 10k rounds through. If you want that, get a 686 or a 60. The entire concept behind them is to shoot them a couple times at the range with lower power rounds, be good with it's trigger, and to load up to max power and throw it in your pocket on the way out the door. For that, I think they are perfect.

 

[Warp]

I really like my 642.

And I shoot it well. I do take it ot the range and I do shoot it, including with FULL power loads buffalo bore. It is fun to shoot

 

[fastbolt]

Shooting is a perishable skill.

Imagine how much faster the degradation might occur if the original skillset foundation wasn't all that high.

Then imagine introducing a more difficult-to-shoot handgun somewhere along the line without addressing its introduction with additional and/or increased training & practice.

When you start to see language resulting from LE shootings which runs along the lines of it being a dynamic, evolving and chaotic situation ... and then look at the physical & psychological demands that can be placed upon someone when caught in an unexpected situation where they find themselves reacting to the perceived threat of imminent serious injury or death ... the idea of achieving some minimal "acceptable level of demonstrable competence" on a static course-of-fire might not be where some folks would prefer their skillset & mindset to stop developing.

 

[heeler]

Well now,let's see here.
I am a pretty responsible person and do go to the range and shoot my Pistols and rifles a fair amount.
And as of late quite a bit with the pistols.
But I do find convenience pretty important if not paramount as I want no part of lugging around some three pounds plus of steel,ammo,and leather to carry daily.
I probably speak for thousands of license holders with that statement.
Obviously not all.
No contempt here.
Carry what you want.
And I really agree with post #91 that range and real life bad situations are two different things.

 

[Warp]

I don't think a j-frame really has a place in a world where the PM-9 and other autos that compact exist.

I don't think the PM9 and other small autos have a place in a world with bet-your-life reliable J-frames

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

I don't think the PM9 and other small autos have a place in a world with bet-your-life reliable J-frames

Sure, they're more reliable in the sense that they have fewer stoppages, but they do stop working, and when they do it's never an easy fix.

They are also much harder to shoot than an auto of equivalent size, and missing the target is also a failure.

A PM9 is smaller and lighter than a steel frame J-frame, and weighs 1.5 ounces more than an airweight j-frame. With a flush fit magazine, it holds 1 more round of equivalent effectiveness, and a reload is less bulky than a speed strip (which i'm almost certain is what j-frame people carry for a reload if you have one), quicker, and has two additonal rounds. The sight radius on a PM9 is longer, and the stock sights are more easily visible than those on a fixed sight smith.

It can be shot more quickly and accurately than a j-frame, and it fits in the same space.

 

[mavracer]

Heeler,
I agree. I think the problem starts when some on here project their percieved threat level or current skill level on others.
I myself live in a place that has been named top 10 safest places to live.
I look more like Larry the cable guy than Donald Trump and drive a big old Bronco that screems redneck with a gun.
I'm nobody's boss and the only woman I sleep with's husband strongly opposes suicide.
On an average day I feel over gunned with an airweight snub.
If I was say a ADA and lived in Detroit I'd feel differently.