9mm Snub-nose

Z

zaitcev

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2024
Messages
20
Reaction score
18
Is there an S&W equivalent of Ruger LCR 9mm? I took one to the range and I thought it was quite nice, but could stand a touch of class, better sights, and a better trigger. I looked around but it appears that they never produced a J-frame in 9mm or .380 ACP. I found Model 986 Performance Center, which looks fantastic on website, but I'm pretty sure it's larger. The cylinder has a 7 round capacity (which is great if you don't want to pocket it). It is twice as expensive as the Ruger, but it's also twice as nice. If only it was a little smaller. Am I missing something, or is this just it?

Pictured: the LCR 9mm

x05_ruger_lcr_9mm.jpg
 
Register to hide this ad
Here is a 940 chambered in 9mm.

The next one is a 360J that I had TK Customs work on so it also fires 9mm.

I also had TK convert a Model 60 cylinder, unfluted, to also fire 9mm. Had it fitted to work in a 649.

All use moon clips.
 

Attachments

  • 20200503_142455.jpg
    20200503_142455.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 1
  • 20200503_145405.jpg
    20200503_145405.jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 1
Taurus makes the 905 5 shot 9mm snub, I can't vouch for them one way or the other.
I bought one LNIB used for 249.00 for that price I couldn't leave it behind. I bought it so I had a snub for 9mm (and 380). Have not fired it yet so who knows? It won't replace my 642's
 
Model 940 with the Uncle Mikes combat grips, and 940-1 with the Crimson Trace laser grips. The -1 has a slightly heavier barrel and different firing pin setup. Both are a 5 shot J frame that use moon clips. Some have sticky extractions of fired cases and need a good cylinder honing to help.

Todd
 

Attachments

  • 940 left side.jpg
    940 left side.jpg
    788.7 KB · Views: 0
  • 940 right side.jpg
    940 right side.jpg
    731.9 KB · Views: 0
JMD999 said:
Taurus makes the 905 5 shot 9mm snub, I can't vouch for them one way or the other.
I bought one LNIB used for 249.00 for that price I couldn't leave it behind. I bought it so I had a snub for 9mm (and 380). Have not fired it yet so who knows? It won't replace my 642's
Click to expand...
I've had one for a year or so and like it very much. Handy and reliable, it's my favorite snubby right now - edging out Smiths, Colts, Charter Arms, and Ruger revolvers.
 
erikpolcrack said:
I've had one for a year or so and like it very much. Handy and reliable, it's my favorite snubby right now - edging out Smiths, Colts, Charter Arms, and Ruger revolvers.
Click to expand...
Good to hear! I have that crappy black matte finish, (i like the stainless is better) but if it shoots reliably to 5-7 yards i'll be happy!
 
Grimjaws said:
Try a Google search for a 940. These were j frames chambered in 9mm. No longer in production as they stopped making them I think in the mid to late 80's but you can find them on the auction sites.
Click to expand...
I don't know for sure when the M940 was introduced but the first I heard of them was in the early 1990's and I ordered one from my LGS immediately. I carried it as a BUG until the department shifted to .40 S&W, but I still have it. It's a good little revolver.
 
I bought one new 940 1992 or 93. It seemed like a great concept, but mine had problems locking up, presumably from heat. It seemed to handle +p+ fine, but when loaded with 147 grain subsonic bullets, that's the trouble started. I had it sent back to S&W. It came back without any explanation of what was allegedly fixed. I didnt trust it and traded for a 640. I now wish I'd kept it and worked with it more. Other than the unexplained lockup, it shot well. I can't claim I fully under stand powder chemistry, but I would have thought the +p+ would have generated more heat than the subsonic. I didn't fire those two loads during the same range session so it wouldn't have been the case of the hotter round heating up the gun before the slower round was fired. And I'd fired standard FMJ in between.

On another note, as concealment was of upmost importance, carrying a moon clip where I would have otherwise carried a speed strip or speed loader was harder to do. Add to the fact that moon clips can be bend if not carried somewhat securely could potentially bind up the gun. I wish S&W had extended the K-frame extractor to the 940s. If they were to bring back the 940, it should ideally be able to load and extract cartridges without needing a moon clip. Someone would just have to invent a speed loader or strip that would work on brass without rims.
 
The rounds got sticky in my M940 as it heated up, which made qualifying with it a little more challenging but I always figured, in the real world how likely is it you'd have to reload your BUG?
 
Love Centennials, and tracked down a 940. Mine has always run well enough, and the forged/flashchromed internals responded well to a slicking/spring replacement. The trigger is great.
With ordinary 115 FMJs (my reloads and Blazer Brass both do around 1100 in an auto), the recoil was surprisingly rappy. Not 'magnums in a 340' rappy, but sharper than expected. Found that subsonic 9s (140gr) put the recoil in the '.38Spl in a 640' category, not surprisingly, as ballistics are similar.
Not sure what led Smith to abandon the idea. The 986 is much larger, had a 5" that's since departed. Chiappa makes an interesting 9mm revo; mine is a 4", but they likely make a snub. The low bore axis/smooth DA trigger makes it an easy shooter.
Chiappa is mighty proud of their stuff, though. Local shop gave me an amazing deal on mine, but they can be spendy.
Moon
 
My 940 doesn't tie up with any ammo, function is always normal. But I've learned that anything warmer than standard pressure will likely yield sticky extraction. The chambers are finished smooth as glass from the factory, so I've not attempted to ream them any further. On the other hand, my little Rugers allow easy extraction of anything and everything without issue.

As to the snappy recoil of the little 9mm revolvers; True. Many apparently assume that 9mm ballistics from the 2" and 3" revolvers must be terribly wimpy compared to semi-autos with 4" and longer barrels. Just out of ballistic curiosity, I've chronographed a fair amount of factory ammo in little 2" and 3" revolvers. The 2" will usually approximate 4" semi-auto velocities. The 3" revolvers will usually equal or exceed 4"-5" semi-auto velocities. For instance, a well thought of 9mm load that many are familiar with, is the Federal 124 grain HST +P. This load is listed as 1200 FPS by the manufacturer, and averages 1236 FPS in my Dan Wesson semi-auto with 5" barrel. Other's results would likely vary, but in my 2" 940 this load averaged 1195 FPS. In my 3" LCRx it averaged 1190 FPS. In the 3" SP101 1291 FPS...
9MM 5-Shooters - Copy.JPG
 
Rock185 said:
As to the snappy recoil of the little 9mm revolvers; True.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Rock185. I have chronoed 9s in the 940, but was simply too lazy to go look in my records. (Hey, I'm on the porch, on a really nice day...). Your data makes sense, especially since there's no movement of the action to mitigate recoil.
As noted, heavier 9mm bullets are an improvement.
Moon
 
I have a 940. The first time I fired it I went to eject the rounds and couldn't - I almost whacked the ejector rod like I do on my short rod J-frame .38s or .357s but though better so I jammed it down on my wooden shooting bench - it stuck the ejector rod 1/2" into the wood! It would have made a heck of a hole in my hand.

S&W 940 9mm - compressed.JPG

That was with Winchester USA 115 gr. ball, it sticks with about every duty load. Very odd but the only load that will eject is the Winchester Ranger 127 gr. +P+!

One of these days I'm going to work on polishing the chambers.

Riposte
 
halfmoonclip said:
Thanks, Rock185. I have chronoed 9s in the 940, but was simply too lazy to go look in my records. (Hey, I'm on the porch, on a really nice day...). Your data makes sense, especially since there's no movement of the action to mitigate recoil.
As noted, heavier 9mm bullets are an improvement.
Moon
Click to expand...
An additional approach to obtaining a 9mm S&W snub-nose is to fit a 940 cylinder to a suitable J frame. Rechambering a J,K or L frame cylinder to 9mm is also an option.
I have converted Model 60 S&W snub-noses to 9mm by fitting Model 940 cylinders.
I currently have both converted Model 60 S&W and Taurus 905 snub-nose revolvers. The S&W J frames have less bulk and weight than the Taurus. The difference can be noticed if using an ankle holster!
The picture accompanying the original post shows use at the range with an auto loader. You should consider seeing if your revolver can reliably fire 9mm without moon clips. Additional practice items can include charging/loading the revolver cylinder form a auto loader magazine. Fired cartridge cases or loaded rounds can be used as improvised tool to extract fired cases.
Charter Arms 9mm revolvers also feature an extractor system for 9mm and could be considered.
Have a "snappy" with your 9mm revolver.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Looking for pocket carry gun under $500
3 4 5
Replies
97
Views
6K
otis24
O
creeksidewilly
Bought a Police Department M&P .45
Replies
11
Views
597
creeksidewilly
creeksidewilly
.38SuperMan
There’s just something about snub nose revolvers!
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
Hilldweller
H
Echo40
.380 ACP: Flat-Point FMJ vs JHP
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
2K
Phenix
P
R
Snub nose revolver for self defense 9mm or 38sp
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
6K
David Sinko
D

Latest posts

Back
Top