"mid-size" ccw revolver?

[Zoner]

not a smith but....

 

[fchretireddet]

Hi,
How about the S&W 640?
I have a 640-3 with the I/L a s I've been happy with it for the past couple of years. It's22 ounces unloaded. It's a .357, although I only carry Federal Hydro-shoks (.38+P) or Speer Gold dots (also .38+P) for S/D.
If you're opposed to the I/L, the 640 Pro doesn't have the I/L and (I think) that it comes with adjustable night sights.

 

[TAC]

If you can find one, the S&W Nightguard series sounds like it would meet your requirements. Particularly the 315NG. It's a K frame, 6-shot, .357 Magnum. With it's Scandium frame, it only weighs 23.8 oz.

More info here:

Smith & Wesson?s New Nightguard Series Revolvers

 

[gnystrom]

Wait and look at a Kimber K6s.

Soon to out into the marketplace.

 

[TAC]

Wait and look at a Kimber K6s.

Soon to out into the marketplace.

With an MSRP of $900, and well North of that, when they finally become available, I'll pass. Maybe it will be a consideration in a few years, after it's been tried, and proven, and the price comes down to earth.

 

[poordevil]

As someone said above, a Colt Police Positive Special with 4" barrel. Very danty and light.

 

[rwsmith]

Wish list.....

A revolver between a 'J' and a 'K' frame with six shots.

 

[Cal44]

As was said earlier, the M242 is and option. It's a 7 short 38 special +P and only weighs 19 oz.

 

[BB57]

My first and only recommendations are any 2" barreled K frame followed by a 2.5" barreled Model 19 or Model 66.

I have short barreled L frame guns, too, but they're no picnic to carry.

I was surprised at the relative lack of difference between my 2.5" Model 66 and my 2.5" 686+ as a concealed carry revolver.

My Model 66 weighs 36 oz fully loaded compared to 40 oz for my 686+.

The cylinder diameter on the K is 1.446" compared to 1.559" for the L, and that translates to only a .12" difference in the depth of the frame.

The frame thickness at the barrel is .820" versus .838" the frame thickness at the cylinder latch it is .656" versus .658", and the barrel diameter at the threads is .540" versus .562".

I got a 686 to save the wear and tear on my Model 66 since I shoot a lot. However, I've found the minimal extra size and 4 0z of extra weight of the 686 isn't any more of an impediment to concealment or concealed carry with a good belt and IWB hosted than a Model 66.

 

[federali]

I would also go with a 3" RB Model 65 S&W, a Colt DS if you're willing to pay a premium and the new Kimber K6, which, I think will cater to all those wishing for a return of the Colt DS to the marketplace.

 

[Lee's Landing Billy]

This. Just wish S&W would issue a new one with Scandium frame and 3" barrel:

Put me down for 2..NOW!

 

[gnystrom]

OK the Kimber K6s freaks you out (my LGS lists them at $785) so how about the.......
S&W 632 in 327 Federal. Multiple cartridge options ranging from tiny recoil 32 wadcutters to high performance magnums.

 

[BC38]

FWIW, I have an older Rossi M971 with a 2-3/4" barrel.
K-frame sized 6-shot 357, with the grip size of a square-butt J-frame. Weighs 26 ounces unloaded.

The M65 3" is just a few ounces heavier at just at tick under 30 ounces.

 

[wrangler5]

My 2" M30-1, which has been reamed to 32 H&R Mag, weighs 22 oz with 6 Buffalo Bore 100g JHP rounds and a Crimson Trace 205 laser grip (older, boot grip size in hard plastic - not a lot of fun with the BB loads, but fine with most everything else.) Those BB loads have more muzzle energy out of that gun than the Remington 38 Special 158g lead HP +P load (the "FBI Load") out of a 2" M49. They also shoot very small groups right on top of the front sight at 7 yards. It has become my daily carry gun.

In its Lobo enhanced pancake holster, the whole package is 25 oz.

 

[BB57]

.../

/.... I have a model 60 and a 4" model 10 and that is what I have been carrying. They work ok for me, but I keep wishing to find something in between in size. ...//...

The OP didn't mention the barrel length of his model 20 but it makes a difference in terms of terminal ballistics. I get an average velocity of 1250 fps with my .357 Mag self defense load in my 3" Model 20, but only 1180 fps in my 2.125" Model 60.

It doesn't make a difference however in conceal-ability or carry comfort, so the 3" is a much better choice than the 2.125".

.../

/...Your best choice would be--is the M-60 in .357 Magnum, but with such a short barrel, and only 5 shots it really offers nothing "over" the G-36 save for reduction in technocomplexity...basically you can load it and leave it without ever worrying about pumping one up the pipe, checking, or clearing, etc.

Your specified parameters indicate the G-36 was the ideal choice to begin with, though the G-30 would have given you a 40% boost in capacity for the cost of virtually nothing other than marketing hype to sell you an almost imperceptibly "slimmer" handgun holding very close to HALF as many rounds.

Please consider that for all this you could just as easily be carrying the G-29 10+1 stoked with 700 fpe rounds, AND stuff it with 15 round mags for 16+1 in a package not really any more difficult to conceal than the M-60.

Your post brings up a great point - one that you seemed to have missed in one of my earlier posts, or perhaps you just don;t get what I said.

If we look at the dimensions and weight of these handguns we'll form some conclusions that are just not correct.

Model 60 3" = 5" x 7.7" x 1.3", and 26 oz (loaded)
Glock 29 = 4.4" x 6.9" x 1.3", and 33 oz (loaded)
Model 66 2 1/2" = 5" x 7.7" x 1.4", and 36 oz (loaded)


This would give the impression that the G 29 is no harder to conceal than the Model 60 as it is 3/4" shorter in length than a 3" and only slightly longer than a 2.125", a half inch shorter in height, the same width, and only 7 oz heavier.

However, the Model 60 only has the 1.3" width at the cylinder while the G 29 is more or less that thick through the entire slide and grip, giving it much more volume, which makes it much harder to conceal. It is also 7 oz heavier, and 7 oz can be noticeable in all day carry. That 7 oz however does help tame the recoil.

Now let's make the same comparison between the 2 1/2" Model 66 and the G29. The Model 66 is again 3/4" longer, a half inch taller and only .1" wider. And again the width of the Model 66 is only in the cylinder - the grip, frame and barrel are all substantially thinner, giving it much less volume. Finally, the Model 66 is only 3 oz heavier.

I can't give you a first person comparison of the Model 66 and the Glock 29 as I've never carried the Glock 29, but I can give you a real person comparison of the Model 66 and the CZ 75 P01


The CZ 75 P01 is 7" x 5" x 1.3", and 34 oz (loaded with 15 rounds). It is the same length as the Glock, is once again .5" taller, and only 1 oz heavier.

I've found the Model 66 to be much more comfortable to carry than the CZ 75 P01 in all day IWB carry and I've found it easer to effectively conceal due to the smaller over all volume.


For self defense purposes, I also prefer 6 rounds of .357 Magnum that can be accurately and effectively delivered from a K-frame sized pistol to the 15 rounds of 9mm para in my CZ 75, despite the superb reliability of the CZ 75.

.../ was hoping to find at least a 6 shot, around 25 oz with a 2-3 inch ...//...

That's probably not going to happen, and if you found it, you've still got a 25 oz .357 Magnum that is a bit much to shoot effectively and will have an alloy frame that won't stand up to extensive practice with full power rounds.

You can however accept another 10 oz or 14 oz of weight and get a six round 2 1/2" Model 66 or a seven round 2 1/2" Model 686 Plus that can be very effectively shot with full power .357 Magnum loads. It will also still be easier to carry and conceal than a compact model Glock (and without the other issues of carrying a Glock concealed).