Revolver calibers for self defense??

[Doug M.]

It has to be a platform with which you are proficient, and which works every time. That is non-negotiable.

You must be able to hit the desired target zone consistently (and of course, know what that is).

The J frames are generally easy to carry, but they are not generally easy to shoot. Contrary to myth, they are capable of darned good mechanical accuracy. The ergonomics are the issue. Sometimes they are the only workable choice due to the need for maximum discretion. In that case, I prefer the completely enclosed hammer of the Centennial styles (40, 42, 640, 940, 442, 642 etc). What little you might lose in being able to go single action is made up for by the snag resistance and reduced risk of lint and crud in the action.

Most people do not train enough or shoot well enough to make use of a higher powered cartridge in a small platform. Some of those range from unpleasant to darned near uncontrollable, depending on the lightness and the amount of power. It will not get better as you get older, trust me.

Heavy for caliber WC/SWC ammo at moderate velocity is a good choice in a revolver. (158+ grains in 38/357; 240+ in 44s and 45s). K frames are pushing the limit for daily carry - I like N frames, but they are heavy and are more likely to result in you not wanting to carry al the time as you must. Good gear is essential - and that includes the belt.

In a revolver for daily all purpose carry, I would be ok with my M66 loaded with standard velocity 158 grain 38 SWC. Admittedly, I stick almost exclusively with pistols for lots of reasons. As a first rate fighting pistol, the 1911 is hard to beat - the best ergonomics out there. While some will work reliably with duty ammo out of the box, it can be a risk, and service quality 1911s are not cheap. You can buy 2 Glocks or M&Ps and a few cases of ammo (both training and duty) plus a couple of good classes for the same investment.

 

[dandyrandy]

The alloy framed 642 is likely the most popular S&W carry revolver. The factory grips suck, but that is easily remedied. My personal preference is either a Colt Agent, or my 2-1/2" M66. The 66 doesn't get carried much as I have yet to find a comfortable holster for it. Gotta get to work on that. The Agent is almost the same size and weight as an alloy J frame, but carries 6 rounds. Its factory grips also suck. Mine has a hammer shroud, which makes it function much like the Bodyguard.

Is it me or does the Colt Agent look almost exactly like the new Charter Arms Undercover?

 

[dandyrandy]

It has to be a platform with which you are proficient, and which works every time. That is non-negotiable.

You must be able to hit the desired target zone consistently (and of course, know what that is).

The J frames are generally easy to carry, but they are not generally easy to shoot. Contrary to myth, they are capable of darned good mechanical accuracy. The ergonomics are the issue. Sometimes they are the only workable choice due to the need for maximum discretion. In that case, I prefer the completely enclosed hammer of the Centennial styles (40, 42, 640, 940, 442, 642 etc). What little you might lose in being able to go single action is made up for by the snag resistance and reduced risk of lint and crud in the action.

Most people do not train enough or shoot well enough to make use of a higher powered cartridge in a small platform. Some of those range from unpleasant to darned near uncontrollable, depending on the lightness and the amount of power. It will not get better as you get older, trust me.

Heavy for caliber WC/SWC ammo at moderate velocity is a good choice in a revolver. (158+ grains in 38/357; 240+ in 44s and 45s). K frames are pushing the limit for daily carry - I like N frames, but they are heavy and are more likely to result in you not wanting to carry al the time as you must. Good gear is essential - and that includes the belt.

In a revolver for daily all purpose carry, I would be ok with my M66 loaded with standard velocity 158 grain 38 SWC. Admittedly, I stick almost exclusively with pistols for lots of reasons. As a first rate fighting pistol, the 1911 is hard to beat - the best ergonomics out there. While some will work reliably with duty ammo out of the box, it can be a risk, and service quality 1911s are not cheap. You can buy 2 Glocks or M&Ps and a few cases of ammo (both training and duty) plus a couple of good classes for the same investment.

My thinking is the same on this. I would like to try all different calibers and see what I like the best.

 

[dandyrandy]

These are all very interesting points my friends. I wanted to add to this discussion that I have read a lot of history of warfare. Teddy Roosevelt liked the 38 long colt. That was the standardized pistol cartridge for the US military forces around the turn of the century. During the Philippine American War the cartridge was found to be ineffective against Philippine warriors hoped up on drugs. This in turn made the US Military switch to the .38 special and 45 acp cartridges. Most Police agencies switched to the .38 special because the criminals were just using way more firepower. These cartridges proved to be a lot better for self defense. During World War 2 German forces used the 9mm luger as the preferred standard military pistol cartridge. The US forces still used the 45 acp. It was found that there was little difference in the effectiveness of these two cartridges. Both proved to be a viable effective bullet. Later on US military forces eventually switched to the 9mm probably due to convenience and cost effectiveness.

 

[epj]

Is it me or does the Colt Agent look almost exactly like the new Charter Arms Undercover?

Well, maybe kinda sorta.

 

[Will Carry]

I often carry a 38 special. I have put hundreds of rounds through it and I know I can shoot it well. I am really thinking about going to a .357 magnum (King of one shot stops) or a 44 special (very under rated). Self defense is not about having a nice comfortable pistol to shoot. So I'm thinking about less comfort and more stopping power. Right now I want a 686 3" or a Charter Arms Bulldog.

 

[P-229]

I'm going on memory of knowledge that was imbued (was supposed to be imbued) upon my brain in an upper division Modern European History course. Officers carried handguns not for battle. They were used to execute their soldiers for cowardice and other crimes that their military officers considered death the appropriate penalty. As far as I can recall, only one country developed a modern combat handgun: the USA. Hence, the 1911A1. It was designed to kill the enemy, not American soldiers. The English did not have killing squads.

The Einsatzgruppen did a lot of bad things. One was to execute deserting Nazi soldiers. The Soviets had a similar killing squad. We captured prisoners. The Nazi and Red Army murdered them. They didn't need large caliber handguns to murder their own soldiers.

 

[P-229]

Will Carry,

I'd stick with the FBI load.

There is no such thing as king of one shot stops tactical handguns.

When I carry a .357 Mag for bipedal self-defense, it's always loaded with the FBI load. If I were to carry a .357 Mag round for self-defense, I'd go with 158 grain LSWC. But that's just me. I know that others will see it a lot differently.

I like through-and-through penetration. If one hole is good, two has to be better. Without a CNS hit, you're going to want to reduce a bad guy's blood pressure to zero.

BTW, a friend of mine center punched a very, very bad guy with 6 rounds from his .357 Mag duty weapon. It was no man stopper. In fact, it didn't faze the bad guy. My friend knew he needed a lot bigger gun. One 870 round made the bad guy property of the coroner.

 

[BigBill]

Well my very first ccw carry was a 357 magnum.
I've carried the 357mag (colt/security six) the 45acp(1911) and the 44 magnum for the most shoulder holster time. I like the ruger snubbie in 357. But the 38 special +p will be fine in the 357.

 

[Mister X]

With a proper sling and carbine weapon retention is not an issue. Like everything get good training.

The probability of getting into a struggle over control of the weapon during a disarm attempt will always be much higher with a long gun compared with a handgun.

And it's not only about retaining possession of the weapon, but also retaining the ability to use the weapon at all times, even during a disarm attempt. Even with a sling, the long gun presents major problems in this regard and I just don't see a carbine with a sling being a very practical choice for civilian home defense for reasons previously stated.

A handgun offers the ability to use the weapon efficiently one handed at any time and even while engaged in ECQ scenarios from various compressed and retention firing positions. Putting rounds into the assailant is a more effective retention technique than any other counter-measure during a close quarter struggle. A sling on a long gun simply doesn't bestow this ability no matter the individual wielding it.

Quality training is indeed very valuable in these maters, but the training most undertake doesn't address these issues very well. Properly structured and conducted ECQ(extreme close quarters) FoF(force on force) training from a qualified instructor is the key to understanding the dynamics and distinguishing what will most often work well from what isn't practical.

 

[dandyrandy]

I often carry a 38 special. I have put hundreds of rounds through it and I know I can shoot it well. I am really thinking about going to a .357 magnum (King of one shot stops) or a 44 special (very under rated). Self defense is not about having a nice comfortable pistol to shoot. So I'm thinking about less comfort and more stopping power. Right now I want a 686 3" or a Charter Arms Bulldog.

That Charter Arms Boomer looks quite ridiculous and tempting to get! lol

 

[dip]

Mod 60 with 357 ammo works for me

 

[USSR]

When I carry a .357 Mag for bipedal self-defense, it's always loaded with the FBI load.

+1.

Don

 

[shouldazagged]

I've pocket-carried a Model 640 in .38 Special--one of the early ones--daily for seventeen years. It's loaded with the FBI load, or now Buffalo Bore's standard-pressure equivalent that clocks identically.

I feel quite adequately protected. In old age and retirement I live very quietly. The little steel snubby suits me just fine and the FBI load has been working very well for several decades.

 

[Lobster Picnic]

My regular carry is a .22 Magnum revolver. The 351c is lightweight (11-oz), and holds 7 rounds. I laid in a supply of Speer Gold Dots so I can practice with the same ammo I carry.

The little gun hits pretty hard. Velocity and penetration are similar to that of a .22 rifle.

For home defense we use steel K-frames in .38 Special.

 

[petepeterson]

Teddy Roosevelt liked the 38 long colt.

Hey DandyRandy, welcome.

It's not common to see someone bowing at the "CCW altar" of Theodore Roosevelt! It's usually Mr. Cooper or Ayoob or someone else from the latter half of the 20th Century.

If you look at the rifles Roosevelt preferred, it's highly unlikely that he "liked" the .32 or .38 Long Colt. As someone else mentioned, this was more for standardization purposes. I imagine if ol' Ted had his way, the boys woulda been packing .500 S&Ws.

 

[bigwheelzip]

All my revolvers are 686+ .357's, loaded with 125gr HP Federal C357B for anti-personnel, and 180GR hardcast BB for woods walks.

 

[daddy bear]

Many years ago, a highly ranked heavyweight boxer kind of had his way with a trooper. Another trooper went to effect an arrest. The fighter, over confident about his previous success resisted again. This time he got a dose of .357 158 grain soft point in the breadbasket. It did not kill him (lots of muscle mass) but he was arrested - after he got out of the hospital. Enough damage was done that his boxing career was over.

I have a friend whose son got stupid and was center punched by a .44 magnum. Although it was touch and go, the guy lived. The bullet went in at a slight angle, just under the heart, got one lung and just missed the spine. No one calls the .44 ineffective.

TXDPS experience was that the .357 was a good fight stopper, at it's best with 125 HP. When we went to semi-autos, the Sig was chosen. Although we had a choice, the .45 was the overwhelming choice and few took 9mm. The specs for the .45 ammo was a 200 grain HP at 1000 fps. The contract was awarded to Speer. They delivered the "flying ash tray" at an average of about 1050 fps. Although this one was no better fight stopper than the .357, it was much more lethal. Thus, the .357 sig which just about duplicated the .357 magnum.

I retired just as the .357 sig was introduced. I now hear that they are going to some model of S&W in 9mm. Maybe I just don't know things, but I fail to see how a 9 mm could ever out perform a .357 Sig. They may still be killing too many folks?

Me, I still hang on to my J-frames, both light and steel, my K and N frames, and a couple of 1911s. I got careless and my Sig 220 was stolen. If it was ever recovered, our former police chief had it destroyed. We legal gun owners were a dangerous lot to him. ( They found him in CA. Enough said).

Jack

 

[bpthomsen]

I usually conceal carry my Glock 23 in 40 S&W in town, but I wouldn't hesitate to carry my model 69 loaded with 44 Special or 44 mag, which I conceal carry when archery hunting. I have my 1911 in 45 ACP under the seat of my truck in case I make a quick run somewhere and don't carry on my person. Like someone said earlier, it's like choosing underwear, however, I have several types of handguns and bullets for the different situations. I have never tried to conceal carry my 6" model 686, 357 mag. I have never tried to conceal carry my 10.5" 460XVR, not even with a back pack.

 

[gasaman]

My EDC is a S&W 325 Nightguard with 200gr Speer Gold Dots.