I have read numerous books and interviews that mention, in general, many police in the 1950's to 1980's who "had to wear some sort of gun" such as around the office or labs would choose the easy to carry model 36... but there is very little mention given to police choosing the J-airweights until the late 80's or early nineties as a service pistol backup. Does anyone know the history why the airweight was not the default easy-carry choice for the police office staff and lab technicians from the 1950's onwards? Thanks for any insight!

I think anyone who’s actually shot an airweight would choose a 36

Beat me to it ...

As a backup gun, I would not want to add any more weight than necessary to my duty rig.

As a primary gun, definitely needs to have more mass than an Airweight

For a belt gun the M-36 is very light and soaks up the recoil better than the airweights. In the old days there were no rubber after-market grips and not many people added custom wood grips so the tiny service grips were a bit hard to hang on to when firing fast with the alloy framed guns.

My guess, in addition to the above, there was also probably a perception that the Aluminum frame guns just wouldn't hold up to much shooting or have an acceptable life for the money spent.

Probably this, to a large extent. Remember, if you're "licensed to carry" on a department you have to qualify at least once a year, if not more often. I don't know what the round count of a typical qualification course is, or how rapid the firing is, but I do remember the one time I tried to shoot an IDPA match with a heavy barrel Model 10 with magna grips (to show off my BK grip adapter to the assembled crowd) I had to stop after the second stage and switch to a cushioned rubber grip. That would have been after two, 12-18 round stages of fairly rapid fire with moderate level 38 Special loads, using a steel, heavy barrel, K frame - and I just didn't want to put up with the pain any more.

I have shot J frames in BUG gun matches, but back when I did it they were limited to 5-shot stages. But even then, I shot steel frames if I had the choice.

As others have noted, the difference on the belt between a holstered airweight or steel J frame, both loaded with five 158 grain rounds, really isn't that much. And if word got around about the (dis)comfort of shooting the lightweights in qualification, I can easily see that being a significant factor in what an officer chose.

Many of these guys were not gun people to begin with and may not have even known about frames that were lighter in weight. They did know that they wanted a small, snubnosed .38 Special "Chief" or Detective Special, like their co-workers carried. These guns were immensely popular some years ago for on duty use by plainclothes personnel and off duty carry by just about everyone. They still work well for such purposes if the carrier is skilled in their use.

We qualified twice a year w/service & back up guns. I always carried a steel frame J b/c it was easier to handle than any of the alloy models available at the time. It was a 50 round course, pretty fast combat shooting and my hand was pretty sore afterward. My retirement EDC is a 340PD which is brutal, even w/+P ammo.

__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)

Very common for the departments to have vendors meet them at a range for some testing which probably quickly eliminated the air weights. The administration guys are not usually gun guys and will quickly go for what kicks and costs less.

__________________
S&W factory revolver armorer

In addition to what's been mentioned above, the 36 makes a better paper weight than the air weight.

Airweight 14.4oz vs M39 at 19.5oz. Recoil is MUCH easier to handle with the heavier gun and more pleasant to shoot. JMO

Be SAFE and Shoot Often !

I shoot both regularly and don't know if there is really that much difference in felt recoil. I've always though they both had substantial recoil, even with standard pressure loads.

I'm not a holster guy. The difference in weight is quite noticeable if you're carrying without a holster; advantage certainly goes to the alloy-framed guns. If using a holster, the weight difference is probably insignificant at best.

It's important to remember we're talking about a different era here. The guys that carried snubnosed .38s were likely required to be armed at all times, on and off-duty and they had one gun for that. They weren't gadgeteers, daily rotators, or concealed carry hobbyists/guntoters. Stocks were almost always the ones that came on the guns. Seldom did you see T-grip adapters, trigger alterations, sight changes, etc. and nothing needed batteries. The officers were required to qualify with these revolvers which often included firing at 25 yard targets. No one complained. Again, a different time.

To me there is a lot more recoil with a 642 vs a 36, the 36 is pleasant compared to the 642. I carry a 642(works in a pocket).

We had a few detectives and inside guys issued Model 37s-this ended in 90-91, when everyone went to Glock 19s.

This pretty much sums it up.
No snubbie is "fun" to shoot, at least for me. I have a Model 38 air weight and a Model 36, both with stock grips, the 36 is easier to shoot and not that much heavier to carry. I think this holds true for any small, lite-weight gun.
Don't hold it against me but I also own a couple of Detective Specials a Taurus 85 and a Ruger SP 101. Strangely the Ruger with oversized Hogue grips and almost twice the weight of the Model 38 is easier and more pleasant to shoot.
The Model 38 with the original wood grips is much easier to carry and works great for pocket carry in pants or a jacket and even sweats for a quick errand. Add on a couple of speed strips and I feel prepared for what my small town might offer.

YA THINK???!!!

__________________
Come and take it!!

Some 'jobs' specified steel-frame revolvers...

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

And a truer statement was never made. Even with aftermarket grips. If you can tolerate recoil and some pain, you won't mind using it, but PRACTICING with it is no fun at all.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

And it is extremely rare to see an all steel J frame that has a cracked frame.
Pretty common to see airweights with that condition.

__________________
LEX ET ORDO

Airweights are no fun to shoot. I've tried several of them over the years; too punishing to enjoy.

__________________
John

Recent convert from 637 to 60 here... a little heavier in the pocket, but way way more fun at the range.

I carried my model 10 service revolver with a 4" barrel while off duty for quite a while.
My dream gun was the new stainless model 60 but waits were long and prices were higher than a cat's back.

I passed up a couple of deals holding out for the model 60 that took me 20 to finally get my hands on.

I settled for a new model 36 and was glad to get it.

Stories of cracked frames below the forcing cones had haunted Lightweight J frames. I never saw one with my own eyes. But then I never knew anyone personally who had one either. The "tribal knowledge" of the day prevented anyone from making the mistake of buying one.

Years later I owned a couple without issues. I always heeded the warning against hot ammo and had no problem.

I knew a guy who loaded up 148gr wadcutters upside down in the cases. These were affectionately called "dum-dums". They were much easier to shoot with a lower recoil than issued service rounds. Their reputation for being man stoppers probably far exceeded their actual performance though.

Aren't Airweights harder to come by that 36's? If so, couldn't that be a factor?
I think Airweights had a bad reputation for being weak.

I will share my secret for shooting J-frame alu guns -- 442 / 642 etc . Before I start shooting I go out to the truck and open the door , placing my right hand on the door frame itself . Then I slam the door , hard . Now my right hand is hurting so much that shooting my airweight with my left hand ( i'm a lefty ) I don't even think about it . Anyway that's my story , Regards Paul

Interesting thread.

I appreciate the insight of the LEOs.

I've seen a few of the cracked "paperweights" Sure made me wonder why anyone would trust their life to one of those.

Four Airweights without model numbers reside among my hoard, but I've hauled none of them to the range and likely won't for fear of cracking them and turning them into paperweights.

__________________
Wrangler of stray Chiefs
Bob

I usually qualified twice a year with a Sig 220, a Colt Commander, a Glock 23 car gun, and a S&W 642.

I would shoot expert with everything but the 642. I barely qualified. I think the range officer would cut me a break once in awhile.

I began to blame the snub barrel for its poor accuracy, but when a detective stopped in to qualify next to me, he shot a perfect score with a 642. With admiration, I watched him do it .

When I asked his secret, he replied, "Lots of practice, like your life depended on it!" And then he proceeded to take out his Bar-Sto barrel Commander and shot one 4 inch ragged hole in the 60 shot qualification

I immediately sent my Commander out to Irv Stone who made and installed his barrel in mine. ( correctly installed custom barrels DO make a difference).
I believe the 642, even with Craig Spegal boot grips, kicked much harder than all of my other pistols.

Absolutely

I started with a 49 as a backup/off duty gun. 5-6 years later when Smith rated the airweights for +P my Department authorized them.

I sold the 49 and went to a 442. I could easily qual and shoot the 49 but the 442 is a huge struggle.

5-6 ounces makes a big difference in shootability.

Yes the BarSto barrel installed by a master gunsmith (also a close friend and now departed) in my 70 Series Gold Cup made a world of difference even in my non-expert hands......Ben

Everyone is right, steel over aluminum. I didn’t see it mentioned above, the US Air Force soured pretty fast on all-aluminum Smiths in the 1950s, especially the aluminum cylinders. The M13 for Aircrewmen is consequently hard to find today. I will defer to others to more accurately relate that story.

I am fond of the K Frame aluminum Model 12 however (steel cylinder). It had a following as an easy-on-the-belt but more shootable gun for the desk sergeants and such.

First time I shot one, it was with splinter grips on a 2” snub. OUCH! Even standard .38 Special felt effectively the same as shooting in J Frame - a decent smack from a ball peen hammer to the palm. However, the K Frame does give you more opportunities for good grips, which I have found to make the Model 12s more tolerable than even steel J Frames. YMMV.

Another downer afflicting the Airweights is apparently you can't use Hoppes No. 9 on them. Or at least it's not recommended.

That's wrong; Hoppe's #9 is fine for cleaning and will do no harm to alloy-framed guns, just as it will do no harm to nickel-finished guns. What is the source of this information?

Maybe the old Hoppe’s #9, but the new stuff is different. I clean my wife’s Smith Air Weight all the time with it.

As far as recoil of an AirWeight, I’ve shot my wife’s quite a few times (38 special factory loads) and it’s not bad at all. It could be the good grip design S&W chose for this gun, but it’s comfortable to shoot. I also love the laser integrated into the grip.

Very true. The FBI authorized steel frames only. You could have a Model
36 but not a 37. Other agencies may have followed suit.

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

One qualification I used a S&W Model 642 on the 60 round course. NEVER AGAIN !

I'd qualify the S&W Airweight like the model 38 as a good choice for deep concealment either in pocket or ankle holster due to minimal size and weight. Will kick like a mule but the design was never intended to fire hundreds of rounds from it all day at the range.

I find my 342Ti to be comfy to shoot. A 642 is a gem. I find my Model 36 to be a pig.

Chicago pd had a reg that all revolvers had to take +P ammo airweight back then didn`t
But when airweights were rated for +p there were tons of trade in 36`s office staff and backups all switched

THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION:
Hoppes Number Nine-Curse or Salvation

Your post could not have been timed better, rockquarry.

Anything from Hoppe's or a reputable source ?

Dang, I don't get it. I carried a 36 for a few years until I tried the 442. I'm not a big guy and the 442 was easy to shoot even with +P, which the 36 wouldn't take. I'm giving instruction to my step daughter for her CCW and let her try both. she chose the 442 and still liked it after 50 rounds.

__________________
Time wounds all heels

I have carried the S&W Model 36, Model 38, Model 042, Model 637, Model 640. I have found the all steel guns easier to shoot. The Airweight guns easier to carry. But for all around use a Model 36 or a all steel colt D frame gun. Just my humble opinion.

I don't know about the shooting part.... if things are going south, I'd grab anything with bullets in it.
The bigger issue where I was, was availability and price. Choices at a good price were limited unless you were a good horse trader, so most folks I knew went down to the Gart Bros. Sports Castle down on Broadway in Denver to see what they had. Then, as now, there were only certain brands, models and calibers approved (anything you want, as long as it was .38 special), which the bigger dealers tried to keep in stock or at least on order. I don't recall prices or what we were paid back then, but suffice to say there weren't many custom off-duty or backup guns among patrolmen, even among the more gun-savvy. Even so, those were the "golden days" of firearms, before polymer and hidden metal "chassis" turned it from developing a real "connection" with your duty gun to the cold, clinical, "cookie-cutter" sameness they have now....

Money ... I would bet a bucket of bananas the model 36 was cheaper than any of the light weights... Cost plays a big part in decision making ... Ain't much changed since the 80's , Money , money , money... these were office cops ...they didn't shoot a whole lot .
Most likely the Office Staff didn't get to choose anything ... the bean counters choose the cheapest revolver and issued them.
Look for the obvious answers .
Gary

__________________
Certified Cajun
NRA Member

Thanks for sharing your perspective. Several of my pre-'70 Chiefs belonged to patrolmen. Your thoughts add an extra appreciation for the revolvers and the folks who carried them.

__________________
Wrangler of stray Chiefs
Bob

You may want to look at the "American Cop" magazine article "When the Cops Carried Revolvers" from some years ago. It should be available online, or maybe an abbreviated version of it.

I shot my 340pd to qualify for my ccw.

30 rounds, 38 Special.

It wasn't too bad, but just as I finished the instructor said.

"Do you know you are bleeding?"

Sure enough, I somehow smashed my trigger finger.

Wouldn't have mattered, though, if someone had been shooting back.

Same thing happens to me. I'll get nicked up when practicing with the thing.

As you point out, it is not something that would stop me in a defensive encounter.

The 340PD is my EDC and I do limited range time w/it, usually around 50 rounds. For anything more extensive, 100 + rounds, my Model 60 gets the call. They both shoot to the same POA.

__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)

My old department issued our S&W Model 10, 4 inch revolvers . There were also some Colts thrown into the mix. We could only carry what was issued. A snub nose Model 10 or Model 36 were issued to officers in administrative assignments. Those officers could carry a 4 inch Model 10 if they wanted. Backup guns were not authorized for carry. However on the squad level, it was a don't ask don't tell in most precincts.

We may have served on the same department. I graduated from the academy in ‘68 and was assigned to the old Second Precinct, Fifth &the NY NE.

__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)