Really who still has a snub nosed revolver? LOL!!! Get a real gun grandpa!

[silentflyer]

Some believe if you can't shoot well, shoot often, I still like my wheel guns.
Not a big fan of the short barrels, but they have their place for sure.

 

[shouldazagged]

(A) I am an old geezer, grandpa and great-grandpa.

(B) I no longer get out a lot, and almost never have occasion to go to known dicey places.

(C) I believe the odds against my ever having to use my carry gun are extremely high. I've never even had to draw it, though reaching into the pocket where it rides has caused two or three iffy-looking guys to change direction abruptly.

(D) My hands are buggered with arthritis and my grip on an autoloader might not be optimal in a DefCon 1 situation. No worries with my J-frame.

(E) It just seems to me there's a lot less to go wrong or screw up with a revolver.

And (F), see (A) above. I'm a traditionalist and a throwback.

I've owned automatics (sorry, that's what we called them when I was a kid right after the Siege of Troy) and liked them. But in my very quiet old age I'll trust my elderly bacon to my little snubby traveling companion and feel quite comfortable.

 

[Brksanman]

Nothing wrong with a sexy snubby

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Edmo]

Dont get me wrong there is many other very good carry options besides the small frame revolver so I would like to here some of the other options out there that work for you.

I am a big fan of the snubbie J-frames, however they are not my first recommendation for a new shooter.

The undeniable advantages they provide are an easy to learn manual of arms and their small size. This makes them a reliable defensive option which is easy to carry all day.

The challenges the snubbie brings to the table are heavy triggers, snappy recoil, minimalistic sights, low capacity, and slow reloads. This is why some call the J-frame the "professional's gun".

Over the last year I have found I carry my GLOCK 43 more often than one of my J-frames when leaving the house. When climate and clothing allows for me to choose a bigger option I usually take it. On the "light" days I still never feel underarmed with one of my Js or my G43.

Why the G43? I find it is very accurate and easy to shoot. It is light, thin, and provides 7+1 with quick reloads if needed... Works for me.

Edmo

 

[C J]

Here goes my 2 cents. I don't have any problem with modern "complicated" pistols. I have a S&W revolver but it's my bear gun (and yes we have plenty of black bears around). But the gun I have in the truck is a 16 shot .40 auto. I have several extra mags too. It's not complicated at all. You pick it up and pull the trigger. Not complicated. Sometimes I carry a smaller 9mm which holds 10 rounds when I carry a gun on me because it conceals easier and it's lighter. It's also not complicated at all. Neither pistol has "ever" malfunctioned. And btw it is possible for a revolver to malfunction. Not likely but neither is it likely my pistols will malfunction. This isn't 1920. Automatics aren't that bad. They aren't bad at all. Sometimes I carry my S&W revolver in the truck also. It's illegal to carry a loaded long gun in the truck so my 8 3/8" barrel 629 is my substitute for a long range weapon. And btw I've seen situations where that was a good idea. When you have a car load of loonies chasing you down the highway shooting at you from 200 yards behind you I'd like to be able to pull over and start shooting before they get right on top of me. I was about half a mile behind a car load of drunken idiots shooting at a family just like I described. I saw them pull into a grocery store after the family (who ran inside). Half the car load of idiots ran for it around the back of the store. I saw that. It does happen. If they had been shooting at my car I would have been shooting back.

I have nothing against revolvers. They are reliable and they do the job. But so do my autos. I have several that I would trust because I've tested them. One is now semi-retired because it needs some springs replaced. But it has 15,000 rounds through it. I carried that one for years and trusted it the whole time. But I bought a higher capacity pistol and used that one for target shooting a lot. With a little work I'd trust it again. I replaced the recoil spring and that fixed any problems I had with occasional FTF issues. But I'm sure other things need to be replaced with the round count it has. But it's a Sig P220 and it can be fixed I'm sure.

BTW I keep another auto under where I sleep. It has never failed to function either. It's extremely accurate at 25 yards and it packs a decent punch. It's a .45 ACP.

I don't want to argue with anyone. I just wanted to say I trust my autos and they aren't complicated at all. Actually the Sig is a little but I have lots of experience with guns. I wouldn't give it to a newbie to carry.

 

[Muss Muggins]

An airweight hammerless J Frame has very distinct advantages over a Glock (just using the name to pick on semi's in general, because I know Glocks as well as I know revolvers, maybe better). The primary advantage of a revolver over a Glock is that Glocks are prone to FTF on the second round when fired with a loose/unsupported grip, a situation very likely to occur during a SD situation. SD incidents where everybody gets in a two handed Weaver stance and aligns the sights are as rare as the dodo bird. SD incidents are messy and full of close contact, where everybody is invading the other's personal space. In such an up close situation, the possibility of one handed fire from close to your body is very real, and unless you are very used to doing just that, the chances of a FTF after your first round from a Glock are also very real. In this regard, revolvers win. Semi's have other distinct advantages over revolvers, including concealability and higher round counts, and those have to be taken into consideration as well. The primary consideration is your skill with the chosen platform . . .

 

[T2C]

Thats very interesting and good point. I never believed in long range pistol shooting thats what a long gun is for. If you think about it ALL pistols are just mini little tiny short barrel rifles.

There is nothing wrong with stretching the legs of your carry handgun to test yourself. Attached is a 100 yard target fired with my BG38 and 135g +P GDHP.

 

[M29since14]

^^^ Good advice.

 

[rwsmith]

I've mentioned this before....

...but Hickok45 on Youtube gets a good percentage hitting a gong at 80 yards with pocket pistols.

 

[digiroc]

The one pound weight of my 360PD AirLite makes it my always carry weapon. For backup my 4040PD AirLite fills that bill adequately.

digiroc

 

[Duster340]

Not a Smith & Wesson. But I carry my little 2 1/2 inch CA bulldog pretty much all the time. Love snubbies! Heck what's not to like!?
Be well folks.

 

[fyimo]

I have one that I carry in the summer during shorts and tee shirt season.

 

[101Voodoo]

About 5 or so years ago we had a guy tried for attempted murder here....for self defense. He was found not guilty and rightly so. He was attacked by several young adults. He shot one 5 times from a snub nose 38. Guy lived and wasn't all that concerned with the 5 hoes in his chest. Problem was the guy being assaulted was out of ammo and the other guys had surrounded him and didn't care. Luckily this is a busy part of town and cops were not far away.

Multiple assailants and he puts all five into one guy? He didn't think that through.

Plus he needs to work on some Mozambique drills.

 

[NYlakesider]

At last count I have 6 snubs, 5 .38 and 1 .357. FWIW my personal definition of snub is 2 1/2 barrel or shorter, I would have one more a 3'' 547 9mm. (to me that sort of almost fits snub)

I carried a M60 back in the 70s and early 80s but have tried out a bunch of other guns.

As of now my local carry is a Bodyguard .380 but have bought a Ruger LCR .38 +P and rather like it. Trigger pull is great and does not appear to need any work by me and of course it does not have that lock nonsense on it. Been shooting it a bit and that just might replace the .380. It conceal fits in my pocket well with a holster. I also have a old Bianchi ITWB leather sack type holster from the 70s which will be reactivated for some occasions.

PS yes I'm a grandfather and bought my first revolver in 1972

 

[KSDeputy]

I bought a model 637 last year. Saving up for a model 60, which I regret ever selling. A lot of us lost fine revolvers when the semi-auto came to law enforcement. We had to sell them to afford the semi's. I will have another model 60 next year.

 

[okiegtrider]

"the dinosaurs called they want their gun back!"

I'm gonna use that one.

 

[Mister X]

In regards to the snub revolver being an "experts gun"...

The fault with that perspective is context. The assertion is usually framed around it not being suitable for a "a new shooter", but most people that buy them, only do so purely for self-defense purposes rather than for recreational or sport shooting.

1. Point: Snubs have heavy recoil so the beginner won't practice much with it.

Counterpoint: A great deal of live fire training is not needed to be capable of defending oneself. It most cases, none at all since everyday people with absolutely no training defend themselves effectively with firearms. The majority of civilian defense encounters occur at pretty much point blank range. However, if an individual is willing to practice, I would assert that learning trigger control through dry-firing, quickly accessing the weapon from various positions and getting a basic understanding of integrated unarmed, weapon retention skills combined with a modest amount of live fire practice that also incorporates movement at times would be much more effective training than routinely going to the range and practicing stand and deliver fire at static targets. The distinction must be made between sport, hobby, combat and self-defense. Regular training is usually better than not doing so, but the way most people practice is not very applicable to what they will likely encounter in an actual defense scenario.

2. Point: Snubs have minimal sights and are relatively difficult to shoot accurately at the range from longer distances.

Counterpoint: The fact that civilian defense encounters occur at extremely close range again comes into play. At such such close distances, sights are not needed. Your visual focus should be on the threat, not on your sights. These are close-quarter reactive scenarios not proactive ones. The modern technique does not apply.

3. Point: The trigger pull is too heavy
Counterpoint: That's actually a good thing on a self-defense weapon.

Other counterpoints: Most untrained people(and even most gun guys) have not trained in weapon retention skills. The snub inherently offers the greatest weapon retention capabilty and will usually retein operability in ECQC environments. There are no concerns with limp-wristing(actually true with all revolvers) which can be an issue with beginners(especially women) and those that have not trained and tested the reliability of their auto when shooting rapid fire one handed, while moving and from ackward and unstable positions. An enclosed hammer snub can effectively be fired from inside a jacket pocket or purse(this is actually a very viable tactic in urban areas). A snub is extremely effective and easy to use inside the car such against a car jacking attempt or any outward physical violence(driving through a protesting crowd). Statically speaking, 5 rounds have proven adequate for nearly all civilian defense shootings. There are exceptions, but that is true with any capacity. When the and various trade-offs are considered, the snub is a formidable and sensible choice. The snub revolvers advantages go far beyond simply just being easy to carry. They offer key benefits specific to civilian self-defense that are unmatched by any other firearm.

 

[K Frame Keith]

When a statement starts with "Not trying to be preachy" or "I don't want to make you mad," or "I know this is none of my business," I know that the next statement most likely will be preachy or make me mad, and is definitely none of their business . . .

Gentlemen, I agree and disagree. No one wants to be preached to but in the interest of learning something important for the safety of our children we might have to make an exception. Doctors do believe that loud sound May in fact cause hearing damage in a developing fetus.
When I was range officer a pregnant officer produced a doctors note indicating she should not participate in qualifications due to the pregnancy. A quick internet search and I was on board.
My agency had my hearing checked frequently and we mandated hearing protection on the range but I for one never thought of this issue because I had no experience with it.
Time for a suppressor, air gun or some CB ammo for a few months!

 

[Mister X]

An airweight hammerless J Frame has very distinct advantages over a Glock (just using the name to pick on semi's in general, because I know Glocks as well as I know revolvers, maybe better). The primary advantage of a revolver over a Glock is that Glocks are prone to FTF on the second round when fired with a loose/unsupported grip, a situation very likely to occur during a SD situation. SD incidents where everybody gets in a two handed Weaver stance and aligns the sights are as rare as the dodo bird. SD incidents are messy and full of close contact, where everybody is invading the other's personal space. In such an up close situation, the possibility of one handed fire from close to your body is very real, and unless you are very used to doing just that, the chances of a FTF after your first round from a Glock are also very real. In this regard, revolvers win. Semi's have other distinct advantages over revolvers, including concealability and higher round counts, and those have to be taken into consideration as well. The primary consideration is your skill with the chosen platform . . .

Excellent post.

 

[dandyrandy]

An airweight hammerless J Frame has very distinct advantages over a Glock (just using the name to pick on semi's in general, because I know Glocks as well as I know revolvers, maybe better). The primary advantage of a revolver over a Glock is that Glocks are prone to FTF on the second round when fired with a loose/unsupported grip, a situation very likely to occur during a SD situation. SD incidents where everybody gets in a two handed Weaver stance and aligns the sights are as rare as the dodo bird. SD incidents are messy and full of close contact, where everybody is invading the other's personal space. In such an up close situation, the possibility of one handed fire from close to your body is very real, and unless you are very used to doing just that, the chances of a FTF after your first round from a Glock are also very real. In this regard, revolvers win. Semi's have other distinct advantages over revolvers, including concealability and higher round counts, and those have to be taken into consideration as well. The primary consideration is your skill with the chosen platform . . .

This is an interesting point that I never thought about. If your attacker grabs any part of your auto pistol it will more than likely fail to fire/load the next round. This would be a highly likely thing in close encounters of the bad kind. 9 out of 10 civilian robberies/ assaults will be up close and personal. The likelihood that an attacker would stop the function of a revolver is very minimal and also you can press the barrel of the revolver to the body of an attacker and it will not fail to fire but an auto pistol will. Also another good point of the small frame revolver is that they can be easily fired in the coat pocket but I wouldnt try that with a small auto pistol. I guess what I am trying to say is the revolver is way more forgiving than anything else. The many good points outway the bad points of the small frame revolver so that why I think it reigns supreme for civilian carry.