I have never been in a gunfight and hope never to find myself in one, so perhaps my opinions deserve to be discounted. But I have thought a bit about such a situation and it seems to me that:

(1) Adjustable sights are a waste of time and a potential source of delay in producing a handgun quickly. Combat occurs at social distances anyway, which I take to be not more than 30 feet and often less than 20, at which distances adjustable sights have no advantage and even fixed sights are unnecessary for people who have trained adequately with their handguns. A target-sighted K, L or N-frame could be properly configured with a set of cylinder & slide fixed sights if personal preference is for something on top of the gun.

(2) Four inch barrels are at the the outer limit of appropriate barrel lengths for close handgun combat. Three inch barrels are better, and if the caliber is small enough (.38, .357) two or two-and-a-half inch barrels might be better yet. My 24-3, 625-3, or Blood Work .357 are all potentially fine combat revolvers.

(3) If a hotloaded .38 Special round was good enough for the FBI, it ought to be good enough for just about anybody. A gun that handles .38 +P or +P+ loads is effective enough. Larger calibers with roughly equal energy cargoes are certainly acceptable, but guns that shoot rounds that almost guarantee overpenetration are ill advised. .45 Super, sure. .460 Rowland in a converted 625, maybe not. And .44 Magnum? Never, I think, unless you use hand-rolled low power loads in it that are not much more powerful than the hottest off-the-shelf .44 Special loads.

(4) Unless you have huge hands and forearms that contribute their own mass-damping effect to your gun's recoil picture, I think that heavy guns are better than alloy guns. Steel's the word. My 296 is almost a perfect combat revolver as it comes from the factory, but it is just too darn light. Whey didn't they make that one in stainless as well?

I think stocks represent a major variable that must be designed and custom shaped on an individual basis. Hands come in different sizes and proportions. If your finger length is longer than your palm length, you need one kind of stock design. If the opposite is true, another. Assembly-line combat stocks usually don't work for me because the one-size-fits-all grooves just aren't correctly spaced for the diameters of the third segment of my fingers. I have experimented with different grip designs, and the semiauto-like straight stocks produced for revolvers by Fuzzy Farrant come closest to being right. I have designed some K and N frame stocks for short-barrel, high recoil revolvers that actually feel pretty good but look ridiculous. If I ever get my courage up I will post pics.

__________________
David Wilson

Here's a couple of my "combat" revolvers. Top is my 67, with it's Hoyt duty holster. Yeah, adjustable sights aren't necessary, but it sure makes qualification more fun. Middle and bottom is my old off-duty gun, a 10-8 3", slicked up by the Armory. Holster is an old Bianchi. Both guns are .38s...it's what I HAD to carry. And I didn't feel too sorry for myself, actually.
Bob

Joe we really need to see some more images of that wonderful 581 you have concocted.

I'm a newbie to the forum, but have been a life-long fan of Smith and Wesson revolvers. I own and love to shoot any of the models in .38 special. In particular, the model 10,14,15 and 64.They are all accurate, reliable, and will get the job done. In a "combat" situation, I lean more toward the .357 for it's excellent record of one-shot stops, and would have to go with a model 19, or 66. Not to say I don't love the Smiths in .41 or .44 and .45 calibers, I do. But my favorites are the "k" models. Here are a couple of models that get my vote as a "best combat magnum". In the first pic is top to bottom: my 686, 64, and 66. Second pic is model 15,66,and 64.

Attached Images

	DSC00512.JPG (128.0 KB, 87 views)
	DSC00514.JPG (132.3 KB, 68 views)

Some beautiful revolvers in this thread, probably all of them qualify as the "best" combat revolver.

Back in the day - like 30 years - I thought this was a pretty good choice - and never really felt "undergunned" carrying it. Our load was the Remington 125 grain +P.

First are we talking concealed or open carry or dont care if its occasionaly accidently seen? In open carry or dont care, we usualy will go a little bigger than CC. In uniform we never OC a snub. I ride atv a lot and carry a bigger revolver in the boonies than I do in my pocket on the road. Most everything in life is a compromise. If I knew I might get in a gunfight I wouldnt be there to start with. Its first for me what can be packed comfortably. That means light and packable. Of course the caliber has to be big enough to do the job. I agree, fixed sights, 3" barrel and at least .38 special in a revolver. 2" is the shortest, 4" the longest. I have a number of adjustable sighted revolvers and that doesnt stop me from carrying them.
On the quad where I pack the most, I can take any gun I wish as I have a bag or box that will accomidate every gun I own. If I am traveling and staying in cheap motels I want a concealable snub in my pocket. I think we need to really define the situation you are usualy in to be accurate here.

Read the original post again by Joe ... don't overthink it ... what is the best combat revolver?
Take into account anything you want to and pick one gun.

The correct answer, however, is the 686 + Mountain Gun

I know, I know ... the real correct answer is "the one you have with you" ...

I used to think I knew the answer to this question, now I'm just confused. For me, I think the .357 gives the best combination of utility, power, portability, accuracy and so on. So, I picked a 4" GP-100 for a while. My favorite BUG is a no-lock 342 Ti. Love the little thing, and actually shoot it pretty well.

Then I got a 586 L-Comp from the Performance Center and thought I had found perfection. Pretty darn close too.

But, now I am leaning to my 627 Pro-Series. 8-shots of N-frame goodness cut for moonclips! I think my search is over. Backed up with the 342 Ti, I may look "obsolete" carrying a revolver, but they are dead reliable, accurate, and powerful. Simple manual of arms too.

__________________
I hope I copied that right

For me, a "combat" handgun would need to have fixed sights.
23 years in combat units and never fired a shot in anger.
Anyhow, either one of these should be suitable if the SHTF:

or:

__________________
-jwk-
US Army '72-'95

Yeah - I have an M&P R8 - it has a 5" barrel and a rail for a light if needed. I like that gun a lot - if I had to bug out with just one revolver and concealment isn't an issue then it is probably that one. But if I had a pre-lock 686+ Mtn Gun I would pick it over my R8.

If it was a combat pistol I would probably take my XD 45 Tactical.

Truth is, I own probley about at least a dozzen if not 16 or so revolvers that various people here would no doubt vote each one as a probable favorite for various reasons. It was eveidently a hobby of mine to acquire so many. And I honestly belive were I to get into a fight for my life, whatever the outcome was, it would be the very same outcome, me dead, alive or wounded, no matter which one of the 16 was in my hand!

686 4" for sure

__________________
John

Another vote for the 3 inch K-frame in 357. Everything you need. Nothing you don't. Regards 18DAI

__________________
7 +1 Rounds of hope & change

Anyone of these?

Not even if you know the noon day train will bring Frank Miller...?

I should have posted this view of the sights on Joe's 19P. As I recall, there is a story from S&W about the vertical painted stripe, but Joe may not feel authorized to tell it.

Two more from my picture files on some of Joe's revolvers.
Not .357's but I think they fit here.

M-58 .41 Magnum


Colt New Service .45 Colt

That new service reminds me of one I had years ago that I almost forgot about. Mine was also .45 colt but the barrel was 4 or 4 1/2"s. I had three nice new services and have a lot of respect for them.

That 58 is something to behold.

Now I'm anxious to see the Fitz Special.

__________________
I'm with the banned ...

P.S. The DS looks good, but doesn't letter as a Fitz Special.

In addition to be'in my Professional Picture Take'r, SG-688 is the guy who "slicks up" all of my usin' handguns. I should mention that he has put a hell of alot of time enforcen' the law and is one of my best buddies. His thoughts on combat and defensive handguns come from carrying and using for real. Also as many of you know from his posts he is a heck of a good guns and gun related history source.

I also agree that a 3 inch K Frame in .357 makes a dandy combat revolver. So much so that the one I've chosen to carry is a model 65.

__________________
- Change it back -

To me the old colt trooper and the s&w model 19 were very close competitors in the same league. I have both. You will hear a supposedly flaw of each, but you cant prove it by me. First they say the model 19 is prone to forceing cone cracks. With the colt you will hear they are prone to going out of time and also that there isnt many gunsmiths that know how to work on them. You will hear diehard fans from each camp proclaim their brand has the best trigger DA pull and the other brand is caca.
I like them both and own both. I seldom shoot DA anyway but of course had to when I requaled on my job. I still doubt that ones life course would be changed by picking one over the other.
I still like day dreaming of haveing each company engaged in makeing a couple up just for me by my specks of useing old parts from various models they made through the years.
In my experiance I will say colt pythons with the tapered bore will give slightly better accuracy than a smith if shot out of a ransom rest or off a solid bench by a good shot. But I dont belive it would show up just shooting without a rest. When I used to reload and experiment off the bench years ago I noticed if through sloppy reloading a cartridge wouldnt fit in my colt it usualy would fit in my smith. If I had a slightly high primer it wouldnt fit in the smith but might in the colt.
For service grips on each I find the smith will fit my hand slightly better than a colt will, but as most of us use after market grips that factor isnt much of a factor.
Here is how I would have colt build my custom revolver: I like the older colt trooper or original "357" in a 4" barrel over the python barrel because I dont like the enclosed ejector houseing any longer than it needs to be like it is on the 6" barrel. Still, I like a enclosed ejector houseing and the trooper doesnt have one. So lets basicly go with a blue python but put a 3 3/4" barrel on it but trim off the ejector houseing just past the end of the ejector rod. Lets go with a cased trigger and hammer like the older smiths. Lets put a gold inlay in the front sight. I want grips of my own design. They would be smooth dark red wood. I want inlays of turqoise and silver done by david yellowhorse.
To finish her off I want alphonso to make the belt and holster, two toned floral dark brown and light tan like his dad made up for my 2 1/2" nickle python back in 1971. I also need matching suspenders to hold the 50" belt up!
Maybe tomorrow night or so I might write how I would commision s&w to make me up one of theirs. All I need is money!

This knife is a buck but david yellowhorse did the scales. I would like similar grips for my custom.

That's the spirit feralmerril, I want to hear your thoughts on design and why. I always enjoy your posts and never tire of looking at our forum members hardware. All my very best, Joe.

Lets do the smith. First, I debated what caliber, my old favorite the .44 special or the .45 colt. I am going with the .45 colt because I already have a snag of .44 specials. The .45 colt has a lot going for it. A huge case that doesnt need as much pressure to push a 250 grain pill at fairly respectable speed as compared to the special or the other mags. In the past what held it back for me the companys couldnt get the bore and chambers right. It was a hit or miss thing in the 25-2 and even in colt single actions. I have a model 25-5 and now they have it right. If you read john limbaughs write up on why he loves the .45 colt in the smith it probley will make you a beliver.
I dont belive we need a .44 mag in a defense handgun. Yes, you can load it down but unless you have it in a mountain gun you still are stuck with a heavier gun than the shorter clyinder and pencil barreled model 24-3. Of course if you dont want to do a custom its hard to beat either the 24-3 in a 4" or a mountain gun.
So lets go with a N frame trplelock. Put a model 27-2 type barrel in .45 colt in a 4 1/2" barrel on it to be completly different on it plus what I think should be the perfect balance. I belive louisanna joe and his brother charlie sherrill have one apiece in the model 26 that is a commemrative for the georgia HP. I want one.
I want adjustable sights with the same gold inlay on the front sight along with elmers cross gold lines figured for elevation.
Of course this also gets the same belt and holster treatment from alphonso`s as the custom python. Well, we can save on the belt as we already have one.
Lets review. A .45 colt in a 4 1/2" triplelock with a checked top strap pencil barrel like the 27-2 with deep rich wood done by keith brown with ivory inlays. A gold inlay front sight with the king miorror, and king cock eyed hammer. This will float my boat!

By the way, lets make it a convertable 45 ACP and .45 colt. I had one done 45 years ago that worked well. I had a nice 1917. I found a .455 clyinder for it along with a new crane. I had Dan King jr, Dan kings son, bore it to .45 colt. He adjusted it to the new crane. It worked perfect and you could change clyinders and crane in less than a minuete with just looseing the one screw. I also had him mill and install a new smith rear adjustable sight. He done up a ramp on the front that looked exactly like a old colt trooper. I also had him build up the hammer spur width and checker it. When he got through with it, it looked like the factory had done it. I stupidly traded the gun back to a old friend that I orginaly got the 1917 from. He died long ago and I dont even have a picture of it.

I was very happy carrying my 4" Highway Patrolman and really could use it to good effect. You can't go wrong with it as a fighting revolver. That said, it is big and a tad heavy. What I always thought would work very well for me was the 3" model 13. Compact and more concealable with just about the same punch. Nice.

Just one last thought, that M28 has a really nice smooth action and the double action is so controllable as to almost be able to use it like a two stage pull, turn and lock the cylinder then let off the shot. Now, I wonder whether that can be done with a K-frame?

PS I neglected to mention I just can't get my head around a wheelgun having a capacity of more than six. If a want more than six I'm happy to revert to a decent 9mmP like a Sig P229. That said, my Glock 19 hasn't missed a beat and it's capacity and compact dimensions make for a great carry package. Yeah, I'd fancy a Sig.

Many years ago when I started accumilateing guns in the 1960s and 70s I had many fine guns pass through my hands. I was single, had a fair paying job and had some very knowlegable gun men as close friends and guns wasnt a fraction of what they cost now. Also there were good gunsmiths that didnt charge a arm, leg, kidney and liver.
I am disgusted with myself for some that I didnt hang on to. My main intrest was always revolvers over autos but some fine autos passed through my hands too. I had several rare lugers, browning high powers and once a unfired radom with the holster, tools and extra clip my uncle gave me that he brought back from the war and some more brownings and walthers too. Also some various 1911s. I have never had or even shot a plastic glock or whatever. Maybe I am missing something.
I once read a article where the writer tested I belive two speed sixs in 3". One was in 9mm and the other in .357. He used all kinds of loads, a crony etc. He claimed the results in the short barrels were close to the same! That was a little hard for me to swallow. I lost the magazine and no longer quite sure which one it was, but it was about in the 1990s. I also had several s&w model 39s. I bought my first model 39, took some surplus ammo and the first time I attempted to shoot it got a fail to fire. Someone told me the ammo probley was surplus machine gun ammo with hard primers. That experiance didnt enthrall me with autos any. About the same time frame I had a close friend on the burbank PD. He had a close friend on his department that was lured into a trap and was shot with a .45 acp I belive several rounds of hardball. It didnt kill him. My best friends brother was on LAPD and emptied a magazine into a crazed druggie on PCP that was trying to kill him and I belive I heard he lived! I will stick to revolvers.

Back around 1987 or so, our friend Mas Ayoob did an article about an N-frame that was converted to 45 ACP and had a 4 inch barrel and fixed sights. I believe that the term ideal combat revolver was used. Made sense then; just as applicable today IMHO.

Customiseing probley has been around as long as production guns. This s&w american was made in 1871. They had about a 8" barrel. This one was cut back and found in a barn being tore down in montanna at a old stage coach stop.

I believe that the best combat revolver is the one YOU shoot best and can have with you when needed. If you aren't sure, then a four-inch barrel Model 10 made anytime in the last 60 years or so would be hard to argue with. 158 gr LHP +P will complete the package.

Add up cost of the gun plus all these mods and you could have bought a nice 1911 in .45ACP.

__________________
'Merica!

G-Mac, of course you are right. I just hope your New York politicians will still "let"you. In the very beginning of the thread I acknowledged that the very best "Combat handgun was an autoloader" But the enjoyable part of this wonderful forum is cussing and discussing things that we enjoy, and remember we are all friends. All My Best, Joe.

Beautiful Collection!

Let's take another look at this thread and see and hear from some more forum members.

.............pretty smart when it came to combat revolver procurement.

__________________
LEX ET ORDO

My 4" 19-3 would be my choice of the ones I own. If I had to pick one word to describe it, it would be "quick." Or maybe "smooth." It just feels right, and kinda self-points. Fantastic DA trigger.

I suppose if I could pick any revolver to fight with, it would be a 3" Model 13. I agree that fixed sights are the ticket for handgun fighting ranges.

__________________
Because of the metric system?

Of all the guns I have I have to narrow them down by that I might actually have with me. While I might prefer having an N frame I'd likely be carrying a K or L. Of those I own I'd have to pick my 686+ with 2 1/2 inch barrel.
I like the extra round and why I choose it over my 2 1/2 inch 66.
I just hope I never find myself in such a situation where I might need to use it is all.

So, I have to take out a mortgage to get a decent combat revolver?

__________________
'Merica!

Well, I still have all the guns I had on this old thread. I have did a couple changes but the guns are more mundane. First, in just the last three weeks I have started carrying a Sig Sauer P-238. Its a .380 pea shooter. Got it on a heck of a fathers day sale at Ace hardware, a couple hundred off. Its super small and very light. Something I am more apt to have along with me they my bigger stuff.
Second, with the same thinking, I have started packing a nice old 3" pencil barrel model 36. Its like this: In the hand it "feels" about half the weight of my lew horton 66-3 3" with all the bells and whistles. Fact is the few times I carried my 2 1/2" python or the 66, I carried it with hot 38 special loads rather than the .357`s. Okay, same ammo, same barrel length and half the weight. In a gun that cost`s less than a 1/3 rd as much. Thats the real world. I still like rolling around on the floor watching TV with my expensive old collector guns if the wife aint home.
Two more I have that are about ideal is a 24-3 4" and a 25-5 4", but the little 36 3" is far eaisier to pack and therefore actualy more apt to be carried if the unlikely ever does happen. I am talking about out in public, not riding the trails on our atv where I can carry anything.
The model 36 3" is the one in the middle between the model 40 and 34. Also shown with the original grips, but I carry it with the firestones.

For a holster gun. a 4 inch M624 with C&S fixed sights. 250 gr WFNGC at around 850 fps if I had my druthers. Buffalo Bore ammo if I didnt. Elmer's load for hunting.

For CCW, a 696 with an IWB holster with the same sights and ammo.

Second best: 4 inch K frame 357 Magnum. C&S sights.

You can smooth up the action but dont mess with the springs. It must go bang with any ammo. JMHO.

Hard to beat a 66, this one belonged to a Memphis Police officer. Being a policeman in Memphis involves combat.......even back in the 70s

Attached Images

	SW 66 holstered.jpg (81.9 KB, 29 views)
	Modell 66 no dash w stainless sights.jpg (112.0 KB, 35 views)

__________________
LIVE FROM THE DAWGHOUSE

I have always thought the best/perfect combat revolvers were the 1917s. Taking it a step further, I'd say the Colt is a bit ungainly and the trigger pull is a bit stiff, so I'd say the S & W 1917. However, unless you have a supply of auto rim or clips, reloading is slow. Since this is "combat" and not "self defense", reloading is important (My handgun instructor always said, by the time you fire six, somebody is gonna be dead). So, I'd prefer a 45 lc (or 44 spl). The most accurate revolver I've owned is a model 25, so I'd go with a 4 or 6", Model 25 in 45 lc. However, in combat, we assume a generous or at least accurate supply system, so I'm back to a S & W 1917.

Since in combat, a handgun is back-up, last ditch, I'd want stopping power (at short range), relatively low recoil (for follow-ups), decent accuracy and decent weight (or it'll get left behind). So, again, back to the S & W 1917.

I don't understand the fascination with the 3" barreled guns. I prefer the 4" barreled revolvers as they have a long sight radius and the bullet gets a smidge more velocity than the 3"ers. The 4"ers carry and conceal just as easily as the 3"ers, but have the advantages listed above. What's not to love about the 4" barreled revolver.

I have to agree with S. Hammer about the Ruger Six Series of revolvers. I like and have some of the Security Six versions, however, I would go with the Service or Speed Six at an appropriate "Combat/Self Defense" revolver, of course with the 4" barrel. I carried a M-13 for quite awhile as a "duty" gun, and it was great, but I have changed my thinking as I've gotten older and for that work, I'd prefer the Ruger.....but that's just me.......

Model 58 for me

__________________
Cheers, Charles
SWCA #2442

I'll admit that I did not read every post so I may be repeating some or all of this. The following are my opinions. What I say holds true for me and others may disagree.

1. A fighting pistol must be carried. It will carried far more than it will be fired in anger. AFAIAC that eliminates the big bore calibers because they require a large frame revolver and the large frame revolver is out as too heavy to carry comfortably (I don't care if you carry a 29 all day, talking about me, remember?).

2. I agree that the 357 Magnum is a great cartridge. Maybe the superlative medium caliber. But I bet very few guys can control the 357 in rapid DA fire and stay on target. I know that I sure can't. I want to be able to lay down all six rounds quickly and put them in the kill zone, not string them over the target's head as recoil takes over. But I want something powerful enough to instill confidence.

3. A combat revolver would have to be simple, reliable, and robust. I want fixed sites to avoid catching a bulky site on clothing or holster during a fast draw. Adjustable sites also become one more thing to malfunction.

So, my choice based on the listed criteria would be a medium frame 38 Special with a 4" barrel. The S&W Military & Police would be ideal and I could also live with a Colt Police Positive Special. I would use my 125 JHP @ 1150 FPS load and feel well armed.

This would work. The nickel finish would not be my first choice on a fighting pistol but it would work.

__________________
No life story has happy end.

Great photos of fine revolvers, mine was a SW 66 4inch. Leather had dump pouches instead of speed loader pouches. The SW 15 4inch was another I've never let go.

I would feel comfortable with either one...