LarryC213
Member
Hello everyone. My wish is for a 9 mm j-frame revolver like the model 940. Offer it with a 2.5 inch barrel in stainless steel. And I really wish they would make a model 625 revolver in .45 ACP with a five inch barrel.
A 9 mm j-frame
- Thread starter LarryC213
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Ralph G. Briscoe
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2010
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 84
Great ideas.
I also think Smith is missing the boat by not offering a J frame in .380...shorten the cylinder to make it more concealable. With modern high performance ammo the .380 isn't a bad defense round.
I also think Smith is missing the boat by not offering a J frame in .380...shorten the cylinder to make it more concealable. With modern high performance ammo the .380 isn't a bad defense round.
Glenn E. Meyer
Member
Sc frame and 547 type extractor - probably cost a pretty penny.
Young Disciple
Member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2005
- Messages
- 8
- Reaction score
- 0
I would buy one in a heartbeat! IMHO, a lightweight hammerless "no lock" 9mm J-frame would be the ultimate CCW.
Steve in Vermont
Member
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2011
- Messages
- 1,969
- Reaction score
- 1,379
You're reading my mind. A J Frame 9mm. I wonder, could it retain the size of say a 640 while being lighter and perhaps 7 rounds? Just wishing out loud.
Steve,
S&W did make the 940 which is very similar to the 640. Put the two side by side and it is difficult to tell them apart. The 940 chambers five rounds, so a seven round cylinder would be considerably larger and result in a larger frame.
S&W did make a lightweight 942 for Wiley Clapp and Mr. Clapp said the recoil was very snappy. Several members of this forum put 940 cylinders in 642 frames with good results. You can do a search and you will find some interesting reading.
S&W did make the 940 which is very similar to the 640. Put the two side by side and it is difficult to tell them apart. The 940 chambers five rounds, so a seven round cylinder would be considerably larger and result in a larger frame.
S&W did make a lightweight 942 for Wiley Clapp and Mr. Clapp said the recoil was very snappy. Several members of this forum put 940 cylinders in 642 frames with good results. You can do a search and you will find some interesting reading.
Why? Just extend the Bbl. further into the cyl. window. Presto, shorter overall lengh with the same Bbl. lengh. Although I personaly would rather see a "I" frame model.
Gatofeo
Member
A 9mm snubnose would be popular with combat troops, I'm sure. It could be carried inside their trousers, in a groin holster.
You access it by lowering your fly.
Don't laugh!
Most people, when they search a prisoner, are reluctant to really search the groin. An American soldier taken prisoner might still be so armed after a bad search by an insurgent.
He can indicate the need to urinate, moments after capture. Most captors will allow that much of prisoners, not wanting to endure the stench if they don't.
If the soldier is lucky enough to have only a couple of insurgents guarding him, they'll be off-guard while he turns away and lowers his fly. Come up with a 9mm snub, shoot the captors, grab their rifle and attempt to escape.
The chances of escape lessen with each minute after capture. In the first few minutes, you're still close enough to your lines to fellow Soldiers.
I knew an Air Force survival instructor years ago who told me of a pilot who carried a Colt .25 in such a way. He was never shot down, but it might have allowed him to escape if he were.
A revolver is absolutely reliable. If it fails to go bang, it's almost always the fault of the ammo. Today's revolvers are even more reliable, owing to coil springs and advanced design and metallurgy.
A 9mm snub would be handy in a thigh pocket, as a last-ditch gun. In very close quarters, such as in a vehicle, foxhole or when an enemy is physically clutching you, a snubnosed revolver can be a lifesaver.
My father told me that during the Battle of the Bulge, sidearms were at a premium by the troops who sat in foxholes. Wielding a rifle in a foxhole against an enemy who just jumped in next to you is nearly impossible.
A 9mm snub would be nice to have, and no problems getting ammo like with the .38 Special.
Make it stainless steel, with a shorter cylinder and the barrel coming back through the frame to the cylinder, and a 2-inch barrel. This would give you a total of about 3 inches of barrel, which would help velocity.
A 9mm snub would be a best-seller among service members.
You access it by lowering your fly.
Don't laugh!
Most people, when they search a prisoner, are reluctant to really search the groin. An American soldier taken prisoner might still be so armed after a bad search by an insurgent.
He can indicate the need to urinate, moments after capture. Most captors will allow that much of prisoners, not wanting to endure the stench if they don't.
If the soldier is lucky enough to have only a couple of insurgents guarding him, they'll be off-guard while he turns away and lowers his fly. Come up with a 9mm snub, shoot the captors, grab their rifle and attempt to escape.
The chances of escape lessen with each minute after capture. In the first few minutes, you're still close enough to your lines to fellow Soldiers.
I knew an Air Force survival instructor years ago who told me of a pilot who carried a Colt .25 in such a way. He was never shot down, but it might have allowed him to escape if he were.
A revolver is absolutely reliable. If it fails to go bang, it's almost always the fault of the ammo. Today's revolvers are even more reliable, owing to coil springs and advanced design and metallurgy.
A 9mm snub would be handy in a thigh pocket, as a last-ditch gun. In very close quarters, such as in a vehicle, foxhole or when an enemy is physically clutching you, a snubnosed revolver can be a lifesaver.
My father told me that during the Battle of the Bulge, sidearms were at a premium by the troops who sat in foxholes. Wielding a rifle in a foxhole against an enemy who just jumped in next to you is nearly impossible.
A 9mm snub would be nice to have, and no problems getting ammo like with the .38 Special.
Make it stainless steel, with a shorter cylinder and the barrel coming back through the frame to the cylinder, and a 2-inch barrel. This would give you a total of about 3 inches of barrel, which would help velocity.
A 9mm snub would be a best-seller among service members.
Sebago Son
Member
Might it look a little like this?
3" 940.
By the way, the 625 WAS made in .45 ACP with a 5" Barrel... it's the "Model of 1988" and "Model of 1989".
3" 940.
By the way, the 625 WAS made in .45 ACP with a 5" Barrel... it's the "Model of 1988" and "Model of 1989".
seagill
US Veteran
I read a rumor that S&W actually does have plans to produce the Bodyguard revolver in 9mm.
I've heard the same rumor.
Massad Ayoob, mentioned on another forum that he, too had heard the same rumor. Then he said that it was at this point, simply a rumor. And I might be imagining this, but I believe he also said that it was rumored to be built on the same frame as S&W's new polymer framed .38. I would be standing in line to buy one of those. And just in case the good folks at S&W ever read these forums... Please bring back the 5" model 625 in .45ACP and .45AR. A blued steel frame wouldn't hurt anything either! Not everybody wants a model 625 as a games gun where it has to fit inside a certain box. The 5" model 625 is a damn fine revolver and it deserves to be made again. This was a real working gun... not just an IDPA toy! The 5" barrel gave it a fine balance and the 4" just doesn't cut it for some of us. Those folks over at IDPA have no right to dictate what type of guns the rest of us should have. There, I hope that makes my position very clear.
Massad Ayoob, mentioned on another forum that he, too had heard the same rumor. Then he said that it was at this point, simply a rumor. And I might be imagining this, but I believe he also said that it was rumored to be built on the same frame as S&W's new polymer framed .38. I would be standing in line to buy one of those. And just in case the good folks at S&W ever read these forums... Please bring back the 5" model 625 in .45ACP and .45AR. A blued steel frame wouldn't hurt anything either! Not everybody wants a model 625 as a games gun where it has to fit inside a certain box. The 5" model 625 is a damn fine revolver and it deserves to be made again. This was a real working gun... not just an IDPA toy! The 5" barrel gave it a fine balance and the 4" just doesn't cut it for some of us. Those folks over at IDPA have no right to dictate what type of guns the rest of us should have. There, I hope that makes my position very clear.
Last edited:
mtheo
Member
Not only more concealable...but easier on the hands of those w/ weak hands (arthritis, carpal tunnel, peripheral neuropathy, etc.)
All I can say is prepare to be flamed by the "nothing less than .40 crowd."
Last edited:
