Alternative to .38 Special Recoil

brians356 said:
Not according to Chris Baker (LuckyGunner). Inadequate penetration from 4-in barrel, and (ironically) slightly better (but not reliably) from a 2-in barrel, owing to less expansion. But as the saying goes "better than nothing".

View attachment 772806

Compare to the next step up, Hornady 110-gr FTX Critical Defense:

View attachment 772808
-
Click to expand...

I really like the Lucky Gunner videos but there is a problem with depending on these and many other YouTube videos in making a weapon or ammunition choice. Whenever you see an unusual disparity between say a 2" revolver and a 4" revolver you have to also measure the cylinder gap. Barrel wear and brand also comes into play here.

A underperformed 4" might have a huge cylinder gap compared to a new and tight high-end 2". I've seen this sort of result on any number of bullet test videos. Different gaps, makes, barrels and barrel wear makes these comparisons pretty much worthless.

Comparisons between bullet brands or weights through the same weapon on the same day and weather conditions is a reasonable test. As soon as you see a different weapon/ barrel being used it all goes out the window.
 
Tabby Lynn said:
Being polite and kind does draw attention, especially from those who think that because you are being nice, you are a pushover. Over the years I have shrunk from 5'11" down to 5' 7" and there are a few that thought they could assert themselves, only to find that while a somewhat wizened older lady, I haven't forgotten how to put a 6 footer on the ground on his nose. Old Soldierettes don't die, we slowly shrink away. :LOL::LOL::LOL:
Click to expand...
As the old saying goes... "Don't confuse my kindness for weakness!"
 
DRankin said:
Ok. I don't want to start (or continue) a urination olympics here, I just want to inject a little reason.

Last I checked there has never been a court case that turned bad over the reload issue, but it makes sense to me to use factory stuff and that's what I do.

And I agree it is stupid to have skulls and doomsday crap adorning any of your guns.

Where I draw the line is the notion that fitting the gun to the shooter can generate some sort of legal liability.

Some folks here seem to insinuate that installing aftermarket grips to accommodate my 2xl mitts or taking the burrs off the internal parts to smooth the trigger pull is going to cause some sort of jeopardy.

The simple fact is that my if I expect my 75 Year old wife to operate a J frame revolver to protect herself (or me!) she simply cannot operate it with factory springs or gritty sloppy internal parts.

Maybe I am misreading the folks who say your CCW has to be box stock and totally unaltered right down to the finish and the low-bid factory grips to be legally safe.

I have been reading gun rags and shooting guns since 1962 so I am not easily swayed.

BUT.......I don't what the new shooters that populate this forum getting the notion that they can't make reasonable changes to accommodate hand size/strength or finish preference without exposing themselves to legal problems.

BTW.... I have had a case go before the State Supreme Court (and won) but I never testified there. Every other court downstream from that has had me on the witness stand multiple times. Even did a Army Court Martial once. So, yes I have that if it validates my thinking to someone.

Just sayn'
Click to expand...
Yeah. I used to read (and sometimes even repeat) the notion that a gun that has been modified should not be used for self-defense, because a "good lawyer" will make you look like a "gunslinger". Well, now that I'm almost 77, I have added to my home defense Glock 19, a Zaffirri Precision compensated slide with an optic cut for my Holosun red dot. Yes, it looks "pretty cool", but now I get less recoil and with the RDS I can shoot with much more accuracy. So, my question in a self-defense courtroom for that "good lawyer" would be "Would you rather I keep my gun stock and accidentally shoot an innocent neighbor or improve it so that I can successfully hit my intended target?
 
JBan said:
Yeah. I used to read (and sometimes even repeat) the notion that a gun that has been modified should not be used for self-defense, because a "good lawyer" will make you look like a "gunslinger". Well, now that I'm almost 77, I have added to my home defense Glock 19, a Zaffirri Precision compensated slide with an optic cut for my Holosun red dot. Yes, it looks "pretty cool", but now I get less recoil and with the RDS I can shoot with much more accuracy. So, my question in a self-defense courtroom for that "good lawyer" would be "Would you rather I keep my gun stock and accidentally shoot an innocent neighbor or improve it so that I can successfully hit my intended target?
Click to expand...
Well that of course is sort of a nonsensical question. Under no circumstances do you want to injure an innocent person. As it has been said many times, do what you have to do, and ask for forgiveness later. I don't know the law in your area, but if someone thinks that not shooting an innocent bystander is acceptable because you have an unmodified firearm, that person needs to get into another line of work.
 
Tabby Lynn said:
I do not profess to be an expert witness, and I try to stay out of any legal proceedings. Have I testified in court? Yes, several times, it was for the prosecution in a non firearm related issues. I can probably say that you would not want me testifying in court since my training and viewpoints are very conservative and differ from most of the members here.

In addition to basic rifle, pistol and muzzle loading, I teach concealed carry. Unlike other instructors, I require the people seeking a concealed carry permit to demonstrate proficiency with their chosen handgun and ammo. I also consider the applicant's attitude. Those with cocky know it all attitudes do not receive the state's required certificate of training from me. I do not to certify problems waiting to happen.
Click to expand...
Sgt. Buzzard is leaning in the right direction. Modifications to "standard" ammo or firearms had been and will continue to be viewed negatively for any self-defenseforearm, exceptthise of immediate opportunity. Those who posted saying that they could convince a jury that their franken-gun and "custom" ammo are necessary for additional performance are wrong and may be found liable for preparing themselves with a pre-determined bias or predisposition against the person (s)- type they used deadly force against. And for the few who said, "What does it matter since deadly force is deadly force"....it matters greatly. Mr. Squib-load, it matters....murder is the use of deadly force and by no means justified. Whereas, homicide under law is not murder and yet is justified. (and yes, I have testified is state and superior court more times than all the posters on this topic combined). You cannot purchase nor reload skills. You're either good enough to defend yourself and others, or you're not. Wise preparation will only benefit you. Stop riding your emotions and live by facts.
 
Bottom line, if you are in a shooting, and the circs and outcome are clearly in your favor, the reloaded ammo and the minor mods to your weapon won’t be much of an issue. If your shooting is questionable, the reloads and the mods just make it a little bit tougher for your defense team. If you look at the professionals that go into harms way often, they’re not carrying fully customized guns and ammo. There’s a reason for that.

The LE agency I worked for had a rule about our weapons; no modifications to the weapon unless the manufacturers’ armorer/custom shop/performance center did the work.
 
Last edited:
JBan said:
Yeah. I used to read (and sometimes even repeat) the notion that a gun that has been modified should not be used for self-defense, because a "good lawyer" will make you look like a "gunslinger". Well, now that I'm almost 77, I have added to my home defense Glock 19, a Zaffirri Precision compensated slide with an optic cut for my Holosun red dot. Yes, it looks "pretty cool", but now I get less recoil and with the RDS I can shoot with much more accuracy. So, my question in a self-defense courtroom for that "good lawyer" would be "Would you rather I keep my gun stock and accidentally shoot an innocent neighbor or improve it so that I can successfully hit my intended target?
Click to expand...
Having been in the “lawin’ bidness” for a good number of years since having left the CHP, I’ve come to realize that it’s just 90% of lawyers who give the rest a bad name. So, I believe that instead of “good lawyer,” you really meant to say, “ethically challenged lawyer.”

We Should All Demand Federal Tort Reform, to Make Equal Justice Equal for Everyone Again. Changed Laws Have Made Plaintiffs Unjustifiably Stronger Than Defendants. The Resulting Flood Of Expensive Bogus Lawsuits Only Enriches The Ethically Challenged Few Who File Them For Profit Without Factual Basis.
 
Last edited:
Sgt. Buzzard said:
I really like the Lucky Gunner videos but there is a problem with depending on these and many other YouTube videos in making a weapon or ammunition choice. Whenever you see an unusual disparity between say a 2" revolver and a 4" revolver you have to also measure the cylinder gap. Barrel wear and brand also comes into play here.

A underperformed 4" might have a huge cylinder gap compared to a new and tight high-end 2". I've seen this sort of result on any number of bullet test videos. Different gaps, makes, barrels and barrel wear makes these comparisons pretty much worthless.
Click to expand...
WRT Chris and L.G. I have a hunch the test guns are evaluated to avoid such disparities. Every case of a 2" barrel penetrating deeper than a 4" that I've noticed was due to the greater bullet expansion from the longer barrel's higher velocity.
-
 
KWW said:
If you look at the professionals that go into harms way often, they’re not carrying fully customized guns and ammo. There’s a reason for that.
Click to expand...
Yes, indeed there is. Such guns are subjected to much abuse, which unavoidably comes with the rough and tumble of the profession. And, if necessarily employed for their intended purpose, they will disappear into evidence, perhaps never to be seen in the same condition again.
 
Rust E. Badge said:
Sgt. Buzzard is leaning in the right direction. Modifications to "standard" ammo or firearms had been and will continue to be viewed negatively for any self-defenseforearm, exceptthise of immediate opportunity. Those who posted saying that they could convince a jury that their franken-gun and "custom" ammo are necessary for additional performance are wrong and may be found liable for preparing themselves with a pre-determined bias or predisposition against the person (s)- type they used deadly force against. And for the few who said, "What does it matter since deadly force is deadly force"....it matters greatly. Mr. Squib-load, it matters....murder is the use of deadly force and by no means justified. Whereas, homicide under law is not murder and yet is justified. (and yes, I have testified is state and superior court more times than all the posters on this topic combined). You cannot purchase nor reload skills. You're either good enough to defend yourself and others, or you're not. Wise preparation will only benefit you. Stop riding your emotions and live by facts.
Click to expand...
All in all, this forum is getting boring. Instead of dealing with facts, the pros and cons of individual firearms. It seems that everyone here is dealing with their own personal opinion and if the facts, or laws for that matter do not agree with their opinion then they say the heck with the laws, first they have to catch me??? If one persists with attitudes like that, they, whomever they may be will find and catch you and when blatantly not in compliance you will be punished to the full extent of whatever law it is you broke. When that happens don't cry about how unfair things are. Keep in mind, you were the one who knowingly broke the law.

This it the Smith & Wesson Forum, it seems that the talk is about any and everything besides Smith & Wesson. Let's get back to what the purpose of this forum is about, Smith & Wesson Firearms. Feel free to compare, but don't bemoan the fact that you think that the M9 is a much superior firearm to the M17/18. It is the new military firearm, live with it. You don't have to like it. If you don't like it, don't buy it and don't carry or shoot it. Do feel free to discuss the facts that you think that a specific S&W firearm is either superior or inferior to the M17/18 and state your reasons why. Intelligent discussion is interesting, personal interests and opinions are not.
 
SGT ROCK 11B said:
At my LGS that would be a Special Order.
Click to expand...
That is so true. Honestly, I didn’t know they were compatible till a couple years ago. I’m 69 and have some ligament damage to both hands. Right now I can shoot 38 special in a light weight revolver but as my hands age I will either need a heavier gun or a lighter load. SGAmmo or Outdoor Unlimited had both rounds and both offer free shipping for orders over $200. So, if the need arises, I have alternatives.

Currently, when I carry a revolver, it is an LCR in 32 magnum. A good many ammo options and there is always the 32 longs.
 
Last edited:
The Model 631 and 631 Lady Smith (both all steel) and the Model 632 Airweight Centennial (alloy frame, steel barrel and cylinder) are 6 shot revolvers chambered in .32 H&R Magnum. They were only manufactured for a couple of years in the early 1990's, so they are scarce and usually command a fairly high price.
 

Attachments

  • AAAJ32s (2).JPG
    AAAJ32s (2).JPG
    173.8 KB · Views: 0
  • 632AmmoC (5).JPG
    632AmmoC (5).JPG
    156.9 KB · Views: 0
Tabby Lynn said:
This it the Smith & Wesson Forum, it seems that the talk is about any and everything besides Smith & Wesson. Let's get back to what the purpose of this forum is about, Smith & Wesson Firearms. Feel free to compare, but don't bemoan the fact that you think that the M9 is a much superior firearm to the M17/18. It is the new military firearm, live with it. You don't have to like it. If you don't like it, don't buy it and don't carry or shoot it. Do feel free to discuss the facts that you think that a specific S&W firearm is either superior or inferior to the M17/18 and state your reasons why. Intelligent discussion is interesting, personal interests and opinions are not.
Click to expand...
My opinion is we all have reason to care about the dangers of the M17/18 program.

One is my tax dollars. Or more accurately, the tax dollars my great grandchildren will be paying back for the P320 that was initially too unsafe for the Army, so they gave SIG a do-over and then ended the planned test earlier than announced.

#2 is the real important one - an Airman is dead. Dead because their set their holstered pistol - an M17/18 - down on a table. That’s not normal, that’s not safe, that’s simply unacceptable.

I really give a hoot about these repeated uncommanded discharges. I have got out of Ford and Chevy patrol cars hundreds of times - which may get you shot by a P320. I have rested my hand on the hood of an SLS holster - which may get you shot by a P320. I have lifted or carried a bag with a pistol in it more than a few times- which may get you shot by a P320.

One last opinion - Do I worry much about my 1961 vintage Smith .38 shooting me…? No, they don’t have the history of uncommanded discharges that the P320 does.
 
KWW said:
Bottom line, if you are in a shooting, and the circs and outcome are clearly in your favor, the reloaded ammo and the minor mods to your weapon won’t be much of an issue. If your shooting is questionable, the reloads and the mods just make it a little bit tougher for your defense team. If you look at the professionals that go into harms way often, they’re not carrying fully customized guns and ammo. There’s a reason for that.

The LE agency I worked for had a rule about our weapons; no modifications to the weapon unless the manufacturers’ armorer/custom shop/performance center did the work.
Click to expand...
I've always wondered how someone could even tell that fired ammo had been reloaded by the user.🤷‍♂️
If they could tell, that doesn't mean that it wasn't purchased by a manufacturer of reloaded ammo.
 
HardToHandle said:
My opinion is we all have reason to care about the dangers of the M17/18 program.

One is my tax dollars. Or more accurately, the tax dollars my great grandchildren will be paying back for the P320 that was initially too unsafe for the Army, so they gave SIG a do-over and then ended the planned test earlier than announced.

#2 is the real important one - an Airman is dead. Dead because their set their holstered pistol - an M17/18 - down on a table. That’s not normal, that’s not safe, that’s simply unacceptable.

I really give a hoot about these repeated uncommanded discharges. I have got out of Ford and Chevy patrol cars hundreds of times - which may get you shot by a P320. I have rested my hand on the hood of an SLS holster - which may get you shot by a P320. I have lifted or carried a bag with a pistol in it more than a few times- which may get you shot by a P320.

One last opinion - Do I worry much about my 1961 vintage Smith .38 shooting me…? No, they don’t have the history of uncommanded discharges that the P320 does.
Click to expand...
Again, someone with an ax to grind. This does nothing to try to solve the dilemma. Here is a video from, yes Sig explaining why this cannot happen unless there are extenuating circumstances. This is not a short video but it is well presented. There is one thing that seems to be common to all of these un-commanded discharges. Each and every one of them happened when the pistol was in a holster. From what I can tell from all the reading I have done, there were no un-commanded discharges from any P320/M17-M18 outside of a holster. My blonde brain is trying to tell me that there is something with the firearm being holstered that is causing the issue since they only happen from within a holster. Is it the design of the holster, or perhaps how people are using or abusing the holster that is causing the issue? Of course ,tossing a loaded firearm around, as has happened from time to time during these incidents is not exactly acceptable firearms handling.

Before you respond, stop and think about these issues don't just follow the leader and condemn the pistol, ponder the issue and see if you can come up with any thoughts other than the P320 is dangerous. Perhaps it's the P320 operators who are dangerous?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NY-1
Taurus 817 - 7-Shot 38 Special Carry Gun
Replies
6
Views
229
STORMINORMAN
S
J
Lipsey version of the LCR Ruger
Replies
8
Views
602
BrBa
B
R
.38 Special or .357 for EDC
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
3K
daveboy
D
F
Terrier purpose vs .38 special
2
Replies
22
Views
1K
Truckman
Truckman
45NUTT
38 Special use in early HE's
Replies
14
Views
1K
BMur
B

Latest posts

Back
Top