Snubby Curiosity

Status
Not open for further replies.

KodeFore

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
459
I'm pretty much a semi auto Glock fan, I carry a g23 for work and when i'm not on the clock I usually have a g42/43/27/30S on me, usually in a pocket. Recently I have grown curious about little snub nose pocket revolvers like the J frame and LCR.

My only experience actually shooting snubs was a full power 357 in a buddies lcr and 38 in an old j frame of some sort I think he inherited. I liked shooting the LCR but i liked the classic looks of the Smith & Wesson. I do own a 6" GP100 and a 4" Iver Johnson safety hammer-less in 38 S&W that I haven't shot in years.

Here are my questions: I know a snub nose revolver has the advantages of being able to shoot through a pocket, simpler manual of arms, baring a high primer more inherent reliability and easier to keep track of spent cases. Are there any other reasons that might make a 5 shot snub revolver a better choice than say a G43?

I have noticed that snubbies in 357 cost considerably more than 38+p versions and I fail see any real advantage of 357 in such a small gun. 357 is too small for defense against things like bears and seems like overkill for social work. It's harder to shoot than 38 and with modern munitions 38+p seems like enough gun for personal defense. Am I missing something with this logic?

I've done some window shopping and this is what I have come up with. I can get a basic 642 for around 350, i can get the performance center version for around 500 or or a basic version with a laser grip installed for about the same price as the performance center version. Lots of choices out there. I am looking at the 442 and 642 and LCR.

I have decided that what I would really like if I got a snub just doesn't exit. That would be a performance center all blue 442 with a night sight front sight and a green boot grip size ct laser grip.

Whats the fuss with the locks of the j frames? Some people seem to hate that feature so much SW sells them either with or without that feature. Is it just a matter of looks or is there some kind of performance drawback to having one with a lock on it?

What about the clip grip option? Since I would most likely pocket carry if i got one that looks that would be hard to clean or could get hung up?

Any questions I should be asking I'm leaving out here?

TIA
 
Last edited:
I’ll try to address some of your questions, but be warned, I’m a fan of older Smith & Wesson revolvers.

Are there any other reasons that might make a 5 shot snub revolver a better choice than say a G43? – I really don’t know since I have never even touched a Glock of any kind/size. For what it’s worth, all I carry are S&W snub nose models 36 or 37 (5 shot J frame) or 10, 12 or 19 (6 shot K frame).

A snubby in 357 is not really material since you can still use 38/38+P. Also, most of the modern 38 J models are the same size frame as the 357 versions. The main advantage of the 357 models is more options for ammunition.

Lots of choices out there. I am looking at the 442 and 642 and LCR. – Just personal preference. All are excellent choices. A lot of people seem to like the snag resistance of the 442/642. I prefer the exposed hammer and single action option of the exposed hammer. I pocket carry most of the time and have never had the hammer snag on any clothing.

What’s the fuss with the locks of the j frames? – A lot of people, including myself, don’t like the internal locks (ILs) for a number of reasons, including the fear of the lock engaging at an inopportune time. For me, it’s because they are unnecessary and ugly. They don’t seem to be a problem on J frame revolvers, but there are some [reports] of them engaging on the larger heavy caliber guns.

Laser grips are available for just about every S&W or Ruger revolver and there are some models that have them already installed from the factory. Now the green, that a different snake in the grass. I think either Taurus or Charter have models with green grips, but I’m not going to go there.
 
I hope the OP meant he wants boot grips with a green CT laser..

Personally, I can't think of any advantage of a snub .38 over a single-stack, similarly-sized 9mm autoloader. I carry the latter, one with a hybrid-DAO trigger, not a Glock. It's certainly easier to pack than any of my snub revolvers. Ammo versatility is probably the only area in which the revolver holds any real advantage anymore, as it will run any bullet type or profile, even shot loads, and still move on to the next round afterwards.

That being said, I do like the small "steel wheels", and have three of them, all Charter Arms Undercover models, the last one being made in 1987 (bought the day I was sworn in onto "the job".) The other two date from 1985 (a rare stainless one from then) and from 1966 (this one was my dad's.) I also have two other five-shooting .38s, a Rossi M68 with a 2.75 inch barrel, and a stainless Taurus 85 with a three-inch barrel. I don't consider them "snubs", but some people do.
 
Have you handled a sp101 snubby yet? I was boucing back and forth between lcrX, j-frames, and the sp101.after handling them ,I went with the sp101. I like the option to shoot .357 even if its only seldom, I like that gun is more classic than the lcr. I also like the fact it had an exposed hammer,SA shooting is a nice option. It was also about 100 bucks cheaper than the SW.
 
I carry a LCR 357 Magnum with Crimson Trace Laser Grip. Practice with 38Special+P and 38 Special. All shoot to the same POA. I use a Desantis Nemesis Super Fly Pocket Holster The thing I like the most about it is the Crimson Trace grip. You can hit your target at defensive ranges easily with either hand and from just about any shooting position including laying on the ground. I couldn't do that with regular grips. This combination works well for me.
 
The SP101 is pretty confidence inspiring. Though a little heavy compared to the other options. I used to pocket carry one though, and didn't find it bad.

Between a 5 shot .38 special and a single stack 9mm, I'd say go with the one you're more comfortable with. That sounds like the auto. Though it's worth mentioning that the right .357 through a 2" barrel, bring much more power than a .38 +p. That would be where the SP101 shines a little brighter.
 
Two other advantages of a snub nose over an auto loader:

If you were attacked and had to fire a contact shot there is no worry about the slide being forced out of battery and not firing.

If you were injured and didn't have a solid firing grip there is no chance of a limp wrist.
 
Here are my questions: I know a snub nose revolver has the advantages of being able to shoot through a pocket, simpler manual of arms, baring a high primer more inherent reliability and easier to keep track of spent cases. Are there any other reasons that might make a 5 shot snub revolver a better choice than say a G43?
IMO, no.

In my current Carry Rotation I have P3AT, PF9, 3.3"XDs.45, G19, G30s ... and 2 Bulldog .44s.

While the Bulldogs are not snubbies (they have 2½" barrels), during the winter I will sometimes carry one in the pocket of a heavy coat. O'course, part of the confidence that I feel carrying the Bulldogs is in the caliber. ;)

I have only used a J-frame once. In the late '70s I brought a city-born/bred buddy with me on holiday to the ancestral family farm (where I have lived for the past quarter+ century) ... along with a lot of guns & ammo. :)

He had a ball learning about & shooting the guns.

One of the handguns was a sad-looking Mod.36 that my BIL handed-off to me for the adventure. I had setup a number of "targets" on the far side of the pond, ~100yds away. I was surprised to find that I would be able to reliably hit a man at that distance with that little 36 ... assuming, of course, no adrenaline dump and the target was not shooting back. ;)

FWIW, I would feel adequately armed with only a J-frame revolver since my primary interest is not in engaging in a gun fight but, rather, to "have a say" if forced into a corner.
 
My experience is autos win out if you anticipate a prolonged "gunfight" type scenario. They are also pretty popular among people who have to carry for work(makes sense to have something that works like what you are used to). Snubbies are more for the people who carry a gun "just to have one". The people who carry one and don't plan on ever needing one, but feel more comfortable having it as an option. Lot of older cops like them, too, cause they started off with revolvers. There's advantages and disadvantages to both platforms, but it boils down to why are you carrying. Do you anticipate the need for more shots and faster reloads, or do you just want a few rounds to have "just in case".
 
Spend enough time on here and you’ll find a lot of folks prefer a semi-auto, but they also carry a backup magazine just in case the main mag fails. That’ll never happen with a revolver. Personally I think 5 shots are enough, my mindset is if you need more than that what you really should be carrying is a rifle.

I carry a single stack 9mm on my belt, but when I don’t want to put on a holster I pocket carry a 442. While my P938 does fit in my pocket, it’s pretty hard to get out when my hand is wrapped around the grip so I never pocket carry it. I bet my 442 gets carried twice as often as m P938, just because it’s easier to put on for quick trips. I had a j-frame with an external hammer first, and while I never had an issue snagging the hammer, the 442 is definitely more sleek and snag proof. With practice, I’m not giving up much in accuracy either my losing the ability to shoot single action. I’m not sure what the Performance Center model adds, but I was fine with a base model. I just dry-fired it about 400 times to smooth out the trigger (which did wonders) and put some orange finger nail polish on the front sight.
 
I've carried plastic mouseguns, an LCP, Kahr CM9, and compacts like the Shield. I just like revolvers better, it's an irrational emotional thing.

I owned two SP101s, the 2" and the 3" and sold both of them after settling on the S&W 640 (all steel). I rented an airweight J frame, an LCR, and a 640, and shooting .38 in the airweight was too brutal to do on a regular basis. I want to be able to shoot 100 rounds and have it be enjoyable, no pain afterwards. That ruled out the LCR too, it's a nice gun with a great trigger but NOT fun to shoot. The 640 was perfect so I bought one and haven't looked back.
 
I've carried plastic mouseguns, an LCP, Kahr CM9, and compacts like the Shield. I just like revolvers better, it's an irrational emotional thing.

I owned two SP101s, the 2" and the 3" and sold both of them after settling on the S&W 640 (all steel). I rented an airweight J frame, an LCR, and a 640, and shooting .38 in the airweight was too brutal to do on a regular basis. I want to be able to shoot 100 rounds and have it be enjoyable, no pain afterwards. That ruled out the LCR too, it's a nice gun with a great trigger but NOT fun to shoot. The 640 was perfect so I bought one and haven't looked back.
What did you like about the 640 vs the SP101?
 
A few thoughts:

Striker-fired autos do not exit pockets as consistently smoothly as a spur-less-hammer revolver.

Striker-fired autos do not conceal as well in ankle holsters as spur-less-hammer recolvers. The protruding rear of the slide prints against the fabric.

If drawing from an ankle rig, a spur-less-hammer revolver has nothing that can snag upon the hem of the pants' leg. The rear of an autopistol slide CAN snag.

This is purely personal, but the G43 does not fit me, whereas J-Frames and SP101 snub-guns do fit me. If we expand this to other Glocks, well, the G26 and G42 fit my hands well enough; the G43 is an unhappy medium. I do not yet own a G42, but own and use a G26 as a "back-up" gun while at work.

My favored snub-gun is the SP101. I do have a J-Snub, too, a ported Performance Center weapon that started life as a 642, but was given a different designation back in the day when S&W did that for every little variant.
 
Regarding a performance center j frame vs base model; the performance center will likely have a few aesthetic flourishes such as polished cylinder flutes, thumbpiece, and side plate screws, chromed trigger that's polished and smoother on the edges, and also an enhanced action due to lighter main spring and rebound spring, and some polished internals. The result is a lighter and smoother trigger pull, at the expense of a slightly lighter trigger reset. I own several PC j frames and sent a base model 642 in for the same enhancement package.

Regarding a 642 vs a 442, I prefer a 442 for one simple reason. A front sight painted orange or green seems to pop more against the black of the rear sight groove than the silver of a 642, at least to my eyes. You can still find some of the Chattanooga 442 PC j frames, which I think look great with the contrast of the stainless cylinder and thumbpiece combined with the black finish. Very unique.
 
I got a 442 Smith .38 a while back for about the same price the OP mentioned. I don't think you can go wrong at that price. Some people complain about the modern Smith J frames being so light that the recoil is a problem, so keep that in mind if a small woman or person with a weaker grip is going to fire or use the gun. The Sp101 Ruger would be a heavier gun that wouldn't have the snappy recoil with .38, but you'd need to get replacement target grips, as the factory grips are useless (if they're still using the type I had on my gun.)

IMO, there are two main advantages of a snubby for defense:
1) A revolver is a bit more intuitive than many semi-autos. Maybe a plus in a defensive situation. All DA revolvers basically work the same.
2) Better when encountering most malfunctions in a defensive scenario. You're instincts want to keep pulling the trigger, and that's what a revo will let you do to get to the next round, leaving the light strike or whatever behind.

Some semi-autos can also be rather intuitive, like my Walther PPX, but that particular pistol wouldn't be a good defensive gun for several reasons. The low capacity of a revolver is a problem, though. Semi-autos have their own advantages. But, as SteadyD already said,revovlers can't be pushed out of battery by an attacker.

The locks on the frames of modern S&W's generally aren't a problem, but some people say that they can make the gun lock up unintentionally during use. Pretty rare occurrence, and I think the locks can be removed, if a person doesn't like the feature. I personally see the lock debate as somewhere between urban myth and sincere safety concern...I only know I've never had an issue.
 
I have both LCR in .38 (factory Hogue grip) and .357 (Eagle wood grip)...I keep the .38 in my wife's car stoked with 158gr LSWCHP+P. I carry the .357 LCR stoked with 158gr LSWCHP+P in my Wranglers right front pocket. The difference? The .357 is just a little heavier so will absorb recoil .38+P a little better with my pocket-friendly wood grips. I also have a S&W Model 36...I love it. A little heavier than the LCRs, a little smaller than the LCRs. I have a Tyler T-Grip on it to tame and control the smaller stock grip. The 36 is much prettier, much more nostalgic, but MUCH more susceptible to surface rust...so, out of pure "I-need-to-clean-and-oil-the-old-girl-every-time-I-carry-her" laziness, I carry the LCR more often.
The 442/642 are fine revolvers, too, but the LCR trigger is much nicer.
My vote is for LCRs and/or Model 36 (or Model 60 stainless).
Why a revolver over a pistol?
100% reliability > 99.9 % reliability...and I want 100% reliability. No safety, no jams, no FTF, no FTE...Inside the pocket, outside the pocket, in rain, mud, sleet or snow.
 
Last edited:
All my J frames have boot grips. Except for the Magna/grip adapter combo, what would you suggest that is smaller and better than a boot grip?
The short, two finger grips that are on the 442 and 642 are easy for pocket carry. I usually associate boot grip to indicate a three finger grip like that which is standard on a model 60. Maybe I am incorrect in referring to a 3 finger grip as a boot grip?
 
I find that the full weight, full stroke DA trigger on a wheelgun is far safer in the pocket than the short travel, lite weight release on most poly-strikers (Glock included). It just takes that one time for something unintended to act on the trigger and your life can be changed forever. Still possible with a revolver, but over an order of magnitude less likely.
 
The short, two finger grips that are on the 442 and 642 are easy for pocket carry. I usually associate boot grip to indicate a three finger grip like that which is standard on a model 60. Maybe I am incorrect in referring to a 3 finger grip as a boot grip?

The banana shaped 3 finger grip is commonly called a "combat" grip. The 2 finger is a boot grip, since it's small enough to fit in a boot, eh?
 
I don't feel that the Airweight J frames are "snappy" just for women or weaklings. If I'm going to carry for SD, I want to practice a lot. If it's not enjoyable to shoot 100 rounds in one range session, I don't want it. Light J-frames are not enjoyable to shoot.

But if you don't care about that, and plan to only pull it out when a bad guy gets close enough that you can't miss, an Airweight is your gun.
 
My Department conducted a Active Shooter Training Exercise for some employees at a Medical Clinic.

It only takes about three seconds to shoot all five rounds and it sucks to be holding a empty gun when the shooter comes to you with his loaded semi-auto.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top