Model 12 vs. Model 627

[Bhfromme]

I don't carry very often but I love snubbies. But I also hate them because of my lack of accuracy shooting them beyond the 10 yard line. Seems my sweet spot is 3" barrels.

I'm reading that the 2" Model 12s defy the logic of snubbies being useless over 10 yards. But I'm also loving the weight and quality of the newer 627s. Does anyone have experience shooting these side by side? If anyone can report decent 25 yard accuracy with the 627 that'll be my next purchase but if not I'll keep looking for an old 2" Model 12. Thoughts? Opinions?

 

[smithman]

I’ve yet to see these inaccurate snub S&Ws folks speak of.

 

[ACORN]

I don't carry very often but I love snubbies. But I also hate them because of their lack of accuracy beyond 10 yards. Seems my sweet spot is 3" barrels. But again, I love snubbies and can't resist them so I continue my search for an accurate revolver with a barrel in the 2" to 2.5" ballpark.

I'm reading that the 2" Model 12s defy the logic of snubbies being useless over 10 yards. But I'm also loving the weight and quality of the newer 627s. Does anyone have experience shooting these size by side? If I can be accurate with a 627 that'll be my next purchase but if not I'll keep looking for an old 2" Model 12. Thoughts? Opinions?

Shhhhh, don't tell Jerry Miculek!

[ame]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HIwVK_FxGZk[/ame]

Unless your supposed to shoot one handed, with your pinky finger, upside down.
The man is amazing!

 

[RGNewell]

I don't carry very often but I love snubbies. But I also hate them because of their lack of accuracy beyond 10 yards. Seems my sweet spot is 3" barrels. But again, I love snubbies and can't resist them so I continue my search for an accurate revolver with a barrel in the 2" to 2.5" ballpark.

I'm reading that the 2" Model 12s defy the logic of snubbies being useless over 10 yards. But I'm also loving the weight and quality of the newer 627s. Does anyone have experience shooting these size by side? If I can be accurate with a 627 that'll be my next purchase but if not I'll keep looking for an old 2" Model 12. Thoughts? Opinions?

I'm more accurate with a 2" J frame than anyone is with a 6" knife.
Just sayin'

 

[Bhfromme]

I’ve yet to see these inaccurate snub S&Ws folks speak of.

Okay full confession. I've never owned a Smith snubbie. Had a CA Pitbull. Couldn't hit a barn door with it so I sold it. Have a Taurus 905 that is better than the Pitbull but not by much but because it's 9mm I'll probably keep it around for awhile.

Very small sample size but I've had less than good luck finding a snubbie that shoots decent groups at 15 to 25 yards. Reading the old 2" Model 12s are good shooters but I can't stop drooling over the 627s. Which brings me here to ask if anyone has experience shooting both. Is one a better shooter than the other?

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

I don't shoot either of my 2" Model 12 revolvers as well as I do my 2" Model 15. I suspect that weight is the main difference, but grips or even possibly sights may be bigger influences. Possibly they all count.

 

[Rubone]

Taking a defensive firearms course my wife out shot everyone else (including me) using a 2" model 60 for over 500 rounds (everyone else shot 8 round strings, she had to shoot 10 due to the revolver) all double action. She had the only revolver in the class. She was ringing steel torso size plates from behind cover at 50 yds.
There was my XD40, a Beretta 92, a couple Glocks, an M&P 9, and a Taurus 9 of some sort. She spanked them all at ranges from 3yds on...and finally complained that she though she was getting a blister on her finger....

 

[colt_saa]

Smith & Wesson snubbies are not inaccurate, most users just can not make good use of the fixed sights

I started carrying a 2" Chiefs Special Target when they became available in stainless back in 1985. I have no problem making head shots on a B27 target at 25 yards with the little J-frames.

The red ramp insert was added to the Model 60 CST that used to live in my ankle holster. It brought the sight picture into my line of vision faster than the all stainless front sight

The only thing that has made me move away from carrying the Model 60 CSTs is the J-Magnum revolvers introduction in the late 1990s. So far Smith and Wesson has not released a 357 Magnum version of the Model 60 Chiefs Special Target or I would be carrying it

I have never owned a Model 12 but I do have it's predecessor, a 1953 manufactured Airweight 38 M&P with the aluminium cylinder

If you can not shoot a 2" Model 10 well, then you will have the same problem with the 2" Model 12. As Model520Fan mentions, the Model 15s will shoot very well. Again this is due to the better sight picture and not some difference in the revolvers design.

Most all 2" Smith & Wesson revolvers will shoot superb groups from a ransom rest. The issue is not the revolver it is the sights that we as humans just can not get a good enough picture from.

The Model 27/327/627 family of revolvers are all very fine choices. I am guessing that you are referring to the 2 5/8" Model 627 Ultimate Defense Revolver hat was introduced in 1999

I changed the factory supplied grips to a nice set of Factory round butt combats.

If you still want a lightweight solution, there is the 2 1/2" 327 Nightguard. While the Cylinder and slide supplied Extreme Duty sights provide a better picture than a groove milled down the top of a frame, they are not as precise as factory adjustable sights.

The good news is that a Factory adjustable sight can easily be swapped in on a Nightguard

 

[murphydog]

You are discussing two very different guns but both lightweight (presuming you mean the true 2", the 327) with a short sight radius. It may be either or both of those factors (or not enough practice?) that may be keeping you from shooting them well.

If you are looking for a 2" barrel revolver that by reputation shoots like one with a longer barrel, a 2" model 15 may be the gun for you.

 

[BC38]

Okay full confession I've never owned a Smith snubbie. Had a CA Pitbull. Couldn't hit a barn door with it so I sold it. Have a Taurus 905 that is better than the Pitbull but not by much but because it's 9mm I'll probably keep it around for awhile.

Very small sample size but I've had less than good luck finding a snubbie that shoots decent groups at 15 to 25 yards. Reading the old 2" Model 12s are good shooters but I can't stop drooling over the 627s. Which brings me here to ask if anyone has experience shooting both. Is one a better shooter than the other?

Forgive my saying so, and absolutely no offense intended, but I think the issue is less the firearm than the operator.

I've seen numerous accuracy tests conducted with a shooting vice that showed the 2" revolvers are every bit as accurate as the longer barrels.

The issue is that the fixed sights, and short sight radius, and particularly with the small grips on the little J-frames, make shooting them accurately much more challenging.

Shooting them well takes a lot more practice, and since they are often less than pleasant to shoot, a lot of people never really shoot them enough to get really good with them.

 

[Bhfromme]

Forgive my saying so, and absolutely no offense intended, but I think the issue is less the firearm than the operator.

I've seen numerous accuracy tests conducted with a shooting vice that showed the 2" revolvers are every bit as accurate as the longer barrels.

The issue is that the fixed sights, and short sight radius, and particularly with the small grips on the little J-frames, make shooting them accurately much more challenging.

Shooting them well takes a lot more practice, and since they are often less than pleasant to shoot, a lot of people never really shoot them enough to get really good with them.

Very well said. And no offense taken. All I'm really asking here is for some input on the differences between the modern PC 627 and an older 2" Model 12.

 

[rich5674]

The shooter not the gun

I’ve yet to see these inaccurate snub S&Ws folks speak of.

The people blame the gun. They are harder to shoot well. Light weight, short barrel. Small grips. It takes practice to shoot them well. I don’t hold them to the same standard as my bullseye guns. Center mass with a full cylinder or mag (LC9S) rapid fire at max HD distance (10yds)

 

[BC38]

Very well said. And no offense taken. All I'm really asking here is for some input on the differences between the modern PC 627 and an older 2" Model 12.

Well, right off the bat the Model 12 is a 6-shot airweight K-frame (medium frame) 38 special, and the PC 627 is an 8-shot stainless steel N-frame (large frame) 357 magnum.

Being an all steel larger N-frame with the 8-shot cylinder the PC627 is going to be substantially heavier and will absorb recoil much better than the smaller aluminum framed model 12. In fact the 627 shooting 357 magnums will probably have less perceived recoil than the model 12 shooting standard 38 specials, because the 627 probably weighs nearly twice as much as the 12.

It is also going to be larger in every dimension - length, height, width. So the model 12 will be much better for carrying and concealing on your person.

 

[Darkenfast]

Ross Seyfried (who was a world champion during the early days of IPSC and a well-known big game hunter), once wrote in one of the gun magazines that the 2 1/2 inch Combat Magnum was a good long-range gun, but that he had to really focus on the basics to get it to perform at distance (I believe we're talking 100 yard-type shots). I'm going from a vague memory, but I think he felt it was a good gun to really force yourself to get the basics of revolver shooting right.

Sorry I can't remember which magazine or when (80s?).

 

[mod34]

Shhhhh, don't tell Jerry Miculek!

IMPOSSIBLE 200 yard snub nose revolver shot- upside down, one handed, with pinky finger - YouTube

Unless your supposed to shoot one handed, with your pinky finger, upside down.
The man is amazing!

So THAT is what I've been doing wrong!!!

 

[PeteC]

So THAT is what I've been doing wrong!!!

I know, right? Like I always tell myself when I walk up to the green (err... I mean the line... yeah that), "Self, remember the grip, it is all in the grip!"

edit: And don't forget to put your support hand firmly in your pocket, like Jerry!

 

[gfors]

Some range days, I shoot my best groups with a 2 1/2" Model 19-5, usually at 25 yards, one handed, mostly with 158 grain, .357's. My theory is that the shorter barrel=shorter recoil moment=less vertical stringing. As others have noted, the inherent accuracy of snubbies is amazing. The practical aspects of shorter sight sight radius and small grips are the real challenge. I've got "special" shooting glasses, that let these old eyes see a sharp front sight, against a blurry but still defined bullseye. They help a lot. I also find that a round butt fits my hand a little better than a square butt. And I get best results, with factory PC magna grips, plus a Tyler, compared to PC's alone, or targets, or rubbers. YMMV.

 

[stansdds]

Barrel length has no significant impact on mechanical accuracy.
Sight radius has a big impact on practical accuracy.

 

[Bhfromme]

Some range days, I shoot my best groups with a 2 1/2" Model 19-5, usually at 25 yards, one handed, mostly with 158 grain, .357's. My theory is that the shorter barrel=shorter recoil moment=less vertical stringing. As others have noted, the inherent accuracy of snubbies is amazing. The practical aspects of shorter sight sight radius and small grips are the real challenge. I've got "special" shooting glasses, that let these old eyes see a sharp front sight, against a blurry but still defined bullseye. They help a lot. I also find that a round butt fits my hand a little better than a square butt. And I get best results, with factory PC magna grips, plus a Tyler, compared to PC's alone, or targets, or rubbers. YMMV.

Wise words indeed. My accuracy trouble with shorter barrels is most definitely more about these old eyes failing to get a sharp, unblurred look at my front sight than it is about the guns themselves.

I'll start researching these shooter's glasses you mention. Thanks very much for weighing in gfors.

 

[Jim Watson]

Dean Grennell wrote of having several Chiefs, each tagged with the load and range it shot to point of aim with. He could pick the one suited to the demonstration of snub accuracy he was making.