Best S&W Revolver for a "Bug Out Bag"....

[AlHunt]

Received an interesting gift for Christmas this year - a big military grade back pack chick full of all the requisite survival goodies you'd want to have in one. If one back pack was all you were running with, for your life. Only thing it's lacking is a dedicated handgun, and in my preference it would be a stainless steel revolver of some caliber and frame size. Personally, I'm feeling either a 10 shot 617 or 66 would be on the short list. It should not be assumed that I would NOT be carrying something else, but entirely possible I wouldn't be. If the bag was serving it's true "oh s--t! Gotta run!" Purpose. Weight would be a factor in decision making. As well as weight vs amount of ammunition too, obviously. Most people say 22 long, 9mm, and 38/357 would be the easiest calibers to obtain in a sky-is-falling scenario. So what say you? What one gun goes in the bug-out bag?

Just about any J-frame and as much ammo as you can reasonably carry. If you're going to limit it to 1 gun and it must be a S&W revolver.

Me? Limited to 1 gun, it's going to be something 9mm and polymer framed for weight.

ETA: By the way, I have no need of a bug out bag. I've already bugged out to the rural north of New England. Where I already am is where I'll make any required "last stand" ...

 

[3rdgeargrndrr]

A 66 and the 617 are correct.
I have the 66 for self preservation and 617 for anyone/everything else.
I have 20rounds of 357 and 1000 of 22 in foodsaver packs in my bug out gear. If you need anything else,
Well. Stockpile and bug in.

 

[dwever]

Why would someone need to resort to hunting for survival in a short duration scenario? If someone is preparing for such events, they should have a few days food immediately on hand. If the op has a cabin in the woods or whatever was mentioned, he could easily store weeks or months of food there.

And why would you need extended range capability in a Katrina type situation? I can't see a likely need for pistol sniping, but would think a Glock 19/17 would be very much capable of wherever came up.

Revolvers in general simply do not tolerate harsh conditions very well. That's actually a big reason why militaries went to autos early on. Moonclips are exceedingly fragile. Most of the folks stranded during Katrina were impoverished. Just about everyone on this forum has resources and would have been long gone. If not, it's a case of bugging in. Something like a Glock would(and did) tolerate such conditions much better than other handguns.

I think the point is that you don't know the crisis in advance, and so the more broadly capable your weapon is, the more likely it is to serve you well whether in a natural weather disaster, stranded in mountains, or widespread civil unrest be it three days or sixty.

I don't think this thread is that serious and therefore not that important. However, to say "Revolvers in general simply do not tolerate harsh conditions well" is frankly ignorant and was unrelated to the military's switch over in the beginning of the 20th Century; to say otherwise as you did is also historically ignorant.

When the U.S. Army fought the Moro Tribesman in the late 1800's they had Double Action .38 caliber revolvers that had an unnerving lack of stopping power on the tribesman who often fought lit up on opiates. After testing, the U.S. military decided on, and I quote, "…that a bullet, which will have the shock effect and stopping effect at short ranges necessary for a military pistol or revolver, should have a caliber not less than .45." So the switch was called for by the military due to caliber NOT platform. The .45 ACP was admired for it's stopping power, but moon clips were just being invented, and the auto cartridge was selected for an auto platform.

Moonclips are "exceedingly fragile."? Really? The modern moon clip was devised shortly before World War I around 1908 for guess who? THE MILITARY, and they went to war in large numbers. They were created in order to chamber military issued .45 ammo in Revolvers made for the war effort by both S&W and Colt. As a result, moonclips' use was widespread during the First World War as the relatively new M1911 semi-automatic pistol could not be manufactured fast enough for the needs of the war. Made of carbon steel, they were robust and reliable as they are today.

Having been around revolvers, 1911's, and Glocks professionally, any are capable of serving the user well in the harshest conditions. 1911's are more prone to parts replacement down the road, and Glocks will need work as the round count moves in to the tens of thousands that simply is not as likely with a quality revolver. If I could only have one firearm it would be a S&W 327 TRR8 - but again, that's moot as most people on this thread have multiple firearms.

 

[gnystrom]

Sorry guys. I know it is blasphemy but I would choose a Ruger convertible .357/38 with the included 9mm cylinder. Accurate, reliable, ammo versatile, powerful (if needed), and simple in operation.
Mine was a joy to shoot and equally accurate with either 9MM, 38sp, or 357 ammo.

 

[BC38]

Sorry guys. I know it is blasphemy but I would choose a Ruger convertible .357/38 with the included 9mm cylinder. Accurate, reliable, ammo versatile, powerful (if needed), and simple in operation.
Mine was a joy to shoot and equally accurate with either 9MM, 38sp, or 357 ammo.

That actually sounds like a good idea. All the benefits of the 38/357 with the added versatility of being able to shoot 9mm too.

So I'd like to add a moon-clipped 9mm cylinder to the M65

 

[Mister X]

I think the point is that you don't know the crisis in advance, and so the more broadly capable your weapon is, the more likely it is to serve you well whether in a natural weather disaster, stranded in mountains, or widespread civil unrest be it three days or sixty.

I don't think this thread is that serious and therefore not that important. However, to say "Revolvers in general simply do not tolerate harsh conditions well" is frankly ignorant and was unrelated to the military's switch over in the beginning of the 20th Century; to say otherwise as you did is also historically ignorant.

When the U.S. Army fought the Moro Tribesman in the late 1800's they had Double Action .38 caliber revolvers that had an unnerving lack of stopping power on the tribesman who often fought lit up on opiates. After testing, the U.S. military decided on, and I quote, "…that a bullet, which will have the shock effect and stopping effect at short ranges necessary for a military pistol or revolver, should have a caliber not less than .45." So the switch was called for by the military due to caliber NOT platform. The .45 ACP was admired for it's stopping power, but moon clips were just being invented, and the auto cartridge was selected for an auto platform.

Moonclips are "exceedingly fragile."? Really? The modern moon clip was devised shortly before World War I around 1908 for guess who? THE MILITARY, and they went to war in large numbers. They were created in order to chamber military issued .45 ammo in Revolvers made for the war effort by both S&W and Colt. As a result, moonclips' use was widespread during the First World War as the relatively new M1911 semi-automatic pistol could not be manufactured fast enough for the needs of the war. Made of carbon steel, they were robust and reliable as they are today.

Having been around revolvers, 1911's, and Glocks professionally, any are capable of serving the user well in the harshest conditions. 1911's are more prone to parts replacement down the road, and Glocks will need work as the round count moves in to the tens of thousands that simply is not as likely with a quality revolver. If I could only have one firearm it would be a S&W 327 TRR8 - but again, that's moot as most people on this thread have multiple firearms.

To me, a lightweight, high capacity 9mm like a Glock has broader applications than any revolver in these types of scenarios and especially the ones you specially mentioned(natural weather disater, stranded in the mountains, widespread civil unrest). And FWIW, I carry a revolver on a daily basis.

I haven't studied the reasons why the switch to auto's by the military nor really cared all that much. I had always assumed it was simply for greater firepower and ease of reloading, but came across a quote from Massad Ayoob that made sense.

"Abuse resistance was a big factor in the early adoption of the autopistol by the military powers of the world, and while less important on the street than on the battlefield, was still a consid-eration. A finely fitted double-action revolver, if dropped in the thick mud of a World War I trench or in a mucky ditch alongside a modern American roadway, might be out of action for the duration. Most "mil-spec" service autos would continue to fire after such abuse, their slide mechanisms literally chewing up the dirt and spitting it out."

History aside, I agree with the idea that an auto will tolerate harsh environmental conditions and abuse(being dropped, submerged in water, mud etc.) much better than a revolver. I remember reading Jeff Cooper citing experiences where this was true. I've seen Chuck Haggard, Tom Givens and Dr. Gary Roberts and many others share their experiences which mirrored Coopers. I think it's pretty much common sense just looking at and comparing the design of each.

I have relatively little personal experience with moonclips, but when men like Massad Ayoob, Grant Cunningham, Michael de Bethencourt and countless others all tell me they are very fragile, easily bent and recommend avoiding their use on a defense weapon, I tend to listen. A quick google search turns up endless complaints and examples of problems such as bending from just being dropped, while loading/unloading or carrying as well as ignition and extraction issues.

 

[jughed440]

don't plan on leaving...but if it ever came to where i had to, i would go with a 4" 610-2, or a 627

 

[rwt1405]

Evening Peak53

Not a pistol or revolver made to go up against an AR
or a AK & those are probably going to very prevalent
in a real (need for weapon) emergency.

It looks to me that if I would have a need for revolver
in .357 all I would need to do is quietly sit in the
shadows & wait for someone carrying a backpack to wander by.

I don't want to look inviting so no backpack or
rifle hanging over my shoulder.

Stealth is going to be my survival friend in a REAL
emergency requiring a weapon for survival.

You make a lot of assumptions, and what might be prevalent in your neck of the woods, may not be in someone else's.

And I certainly hope that you are as GOOD as you THINK you are, I know many folks who's ego's were similar to yours and have been VERY let down.

In a true Emergency situation, anything that CAN go wrong, will; of THIS you can be sure!

 

[Mehutch]

You make a lot of assumptions, and what might be prevalent in your neck of the woods, may not be in someone else's.

And I certainly hope that you are as GOOD as you THINK you are, I know many folks who's ego's were similar to yours and have been VERY let down.

In a true Emergency situation, anything that CAN go wrong, will; of THIS you can be sure!

Originally Posted by wolverine View Post
Evening Peak53

"all I would need to do is quietly sit in the
shadows & wait for someone carrying a backpack to wander by."

Wow... we will be watching for you... in your shadows.

 

[wolverine]

You make a lot of assumptions, and what might be prevalent in your neck of the woods, may not be in someone else's.

And I certainly hope that you are as GOOD as you THINK you are, I know many folks who's ego's were similar to yours and have been VERY let down.

In a true Emergency situation, anything that CAN go wrong, will; of THIS you can be sure!

Afternoon rwt1405

I can assure you that I AM a lot better than you think
I am so that definitely tilts any contact in my favor already.

What I think has no bearing on anything, what I know does.

In a true Emergency situation, anything
that CAN go wrong--this is very true & is the reason
that I train continually (including night vision & IR assisted)
& shoot daily all weather.

But, unless my property becomes so uninhabitable that I would
have to leave it I'm not going anywhere as I would rather defend
a known area than wander into someone else's heavily defended
camp.

 

[31FordA]

Although I would probably dig in and stay put, it's fun to play what if sometimes. Out of all the S&W revolvers I currently have I would probably take my 1950 .357 with 3.5" barrel. It's incredibly accurate, and I get the option of .38 and/or .357 ammo. Plus it's heavy enough that when I run out of ammo it still makes a good club.

My ideal S&W would probably be a 3" Model 66, but I don't have one of those (yet).

 

[S.B.]

Ok if SS is the requirement then my M63 and a brick of .22 hp

I concur, at 68 I'm not likely to want too much weight on my back plus I like to eat. Bigger guns tear up too much meat.
Mine:

Steve

 

[S.B.]

I disagree with semi autos for survival, sure if Walmart is still running but, if not what if you can't find and buy the ammo your semi auto likes or shoots? Besides what if you come up against a snake will the semi auto shoot shot cartridges reliably? What if by chance the only ammo available after you run out is shorts or ones that your pistol jams on?
Steve

 

[wolverine]

I disagree with semi autos for survival, sure if Walmart is still running but, if not what if you can't find and buy the ammo your semi auto likes or shoots? Besides what if you come up against a snake will the semi auto shoot shot cartridges reliably? What if by chance the only ammo available after you run out is shorts or ones that your pistol jams on?
Steve

Morning Steve

All good points but those can be viewed as just the
opposite by a semi-auto packer.

What if you can't find or buy the ammo your revolver
likes or shoots?--or put another way (more likely) --
what if you can't find any ammo at all?

What if you come up against a human/animal threat?
will a revolver with snake shot handle those threats
reliably. (a snake is easily handled with a stick if need
be as they don't carry guns or knives)

What if by chance the only ammo available is 9mm,
how will that work in your revolver?

Or what if you shoot 6 shots & still haven't stopped
the multiple threats. Seems like 17 shot semi-auto
might be a BIG plus over a revolver in this area.

They both have the pluses & minuses so pick the one
that you feel best suits YOUR intended needs. For
me (personally) snakes will be the least of my worries.

 

[Mr.Harry]

Morning Steve

All good points but those can be viewed as just the
opposite by a semi-auto packer.

What if you can't find or buy the ammo your revolver
likes or shoots?--or put another way (more likely) --
what if you can't find any ammo at all?

What if you come up against a human/animal threat?
will a revolver with snake shot handle those threats
reliably. (a snake is easily handled with a stick if need
be as they don't carry guns or knives)

What if by chance the only ammo available is 9mm,
how will that work in your revolver?

Or what if you shoot 6 shots & still haven't stopped
the multiple threats. Seems like 17 shot semi-auto
might be a BIG plus over a revolver in this area.

They both have the pluses & minuses so pick the one
that you feel best suits YOUR intended needs. For
me (personally) snakes will be the least of my worries.

I kind of had a feeling this could turn into an auto loader vs. revolver debate when I posted the thread, but that was not my intention. I understand the advantages/disadvantages of both. I understand entirely the preference many would have for a semi in the posed scenario. For me, in my bag, I happen to want a revolver. That's all.

 

[wolverine]

I kind of had a feeling this could turn into an auto loader vs. revolver debate when I posted the thread, but that was not my intention. I understand the advantages/disadvantages of both. I understand entirely the preference many would have for a semi in the posed scenario. For me, in my bag, I happen to want a revolver. That's all.

Morning Mr. Harry

Then simply refer to the bottom paragraph in the
post above.

They both have the pluses & minuses so
pick the one that you feel best suits YOUR intended needs.
For me (personally) snakes will be the least of my worries.

 

[jtcarm]

Much as I love my revos, ammo for any rimmed cartridge besides a .22 gets pricier and harder to find. So, I'd have to learn to love that ugly glock 17.

Figuring on massive civil unrest (most likely scenario), the first gun to go in my BGB would be an AR15 carbine w lots of mags.

The best use of a fighting handgun is to fight your way to a long gun.

 

[jtcarm]

Best S&W Revolver for a "Bug Out Bag"....

Sorry to get into the revo v auto, I just realized the question was specifically about an S&W revolver.

A 4" .22 kit gun or 4" K or L-frame .357. Stainless finish.

A scandium K-frame sure would be nice.

 

[UNCLE PAULY]

Personally I would take a 1911 in 45 ACP, but a revolver would be 4-5" S&W 686+ 7 shot.

 

[C J]

If you are wandering onto my property during an apocalypse
your revolver better be able to reach out to over 600 yards
as I won't let you get any closer without putting you down.

I couldn't agree more. People drive through the country and see a lot of empty space and think "hey I can bug out there if I need to". That's a really bad idea. People own that property. They have fought to keep it (taxes are a pain) and they won't just give up the access to game to everyone who thinks the country is just empty space waiting to be taken over. Heck we have people moving in our farm setting up tree stands every 50 yards thinking they can harvest our game. Wrong. We have quite a collection of tree stands behind the barn. And if people think they can come on my property that I've lived on and walked every inch of without me knowing they're there and without me being able to draw a bead on them without them ever seeing me they aren't very smart. I don't want to be harsh but we lived through a depression (my parents and grandparents) on that farm and people will invade your farm and try to take the food you worked to raise or the game or whatever. Much worse really. We learned to protect our own because the law was a long way off and there were no phones on that remote farm in those days. Heck I grew up without a phone for much of my childhood.

BTW I also lived through an ice storm with the same set of problems mentioned in another post. And no one bothered anyone where I lived either. That's likely because they know that 99% of the people living there are ready to protect themselves. The gangsters could have tried to take advantage but they would have had a hard time getting to my house anyway. I certainly did. Still it's best to be ready just in case.

If I was taking just one revolver with me in a true bug out situation where I was heading for the real mountains with the equipment I need for living off the land I'd want a large caliber, long barrel .44 magnum. Not only would I be able to bring down whitetail deer or elk at 175 yards or so I could fend off the hungry black bears (which there are many of now). I've had them come right into my camp looking for food with me in a pup tent not more than few feet away and my crazy wife telling me to open the tent to see what was there. Yeah right. It was either a bear or a skunk. I didn't want to greet either from that position.

But likely I would be carrying a rifle for bringing down game. I would want like a .243 or so. I don't have one of those but I do have the revolver I described. And I think it's a perfect bug out revolver. You don't have many problems with anything when you have a .44 magnum. Ammo is heavy and the gun is heavy but you don't have to carry all that ammo all the time. Just take enough to last and store it somewhere except for what you need to carry. There are many other things I'd want in that bag. Deciding just what wouldn't be easy.