S&W J frame vs. Glock 42

I have always liked J-Frame snub revolvers the best. most often I carry two J-Frames. If I felt I needed more I added a Glock 26 or a Springfield XDM. Today I ordered a Taurus 817 38 Special 7 shot Revolver. I’ll probably be carrying the 7 Shooter in my waist and a lightweight 5 shot J in my pocket. Here is a website picture of the 817IMG_0491.jpeg
 
For me, the 42 seemed like a good alternative. It was light, flat, and the recoil was manageable. The 42 is on the cusp of reliability compared to a 9mm, especially if you have hand strength issues, plus it’s more difficult to rack due to the small size.

I’m just not as confident carrying a 42 as I am carrying a J frame.
And justly so. J frame much easier to handle and if you check the ballistics between the 380 and 38 special that will add even more justification.
 
Around where I live( very small towns) carry 640 with 158 grn JHPs. When I go out of town, JAX or N. I carry Colt LW Commander in 45 ACP. nuf sed.
 
As far as effectiveness of .38 special and .380acp I personally think it’s a toss up with appropriate loads.

What do you guys think of this?
Just from cop perspective and in Los Angeles a lot of people get shot. So the 380 ACP wounds people usually unless it was an execution. It is not a stopper but criminals will flee from an armed person.

Even if you use the classic 38 Special load of 158 grain LRN you are better off.

158 > 95 basic math. 158 grains is greater than 95 grains. JMHO
 
Just from cop perspective and in Los Angeles a lot of people get shot. So the 380 ACP wounds people usually unless it was an execution. It is not a stopper but criminals will flee from an armed person.

Even if you use the classic 38 Special load of 158 grain LRN you are better off.

158 > 95 basic math. 158 grains is greater than 95 grains. JMHO

From the streets of NE New Jersey .38's are way better than .380 and especially. 32 auto. Sadly I started in the days of 158gr. LRN. pretty poor load trying to get through a '60's era auto. Wadcutters seemed to work pretty well and now five plus decades later I'm running 148 or 150gr. Hardcast wads. The only thing thing they're poor at is reloading. That's why SWC were invented for the reload on a speed strip. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Plus no hollow points in Jersey when you retire. I'll skip the commentary on that one.
 
I realize I could find myself in a situation involving multiple assailants, and be wishing I had a Glock 17 and a spare 33rd mag, but given my habits and AO, it's pretty unlikely.
I'll bet you won't be wishing anything. I'm betting you will be too "in the moment" to think about anything else.;)
Everybody remember you can talk about your sigs, glocks, 442s etc. but humpbacks are way cooler than anything else;)
C33BA03C-8196-44AB-A58B-7161302D7C0D.webp
 
The last couple of pages of this thread would make one think that it is a binary choice between a J-frame and a Glock. Both are great guns and suitable for most purposes that we carry guns for. I still carry a 1911. It is thin, so it conceals well, it has 8 rather than six rounds, hits make a big hole, overpenetration danger is reduced, it is quick to reload, it is a reliable as the sunrise, and if you find yourself needing to pistol-whip someone it works well for that too. People whine that the guns are heavy, I don't see that as a negative; the heft comes in handy with quick follow-up shots. I have a pile of more "modern" pistols and revolvers to choose from, but I always come back to the the 1911 for self protection.
 
Full Disclosure I own neither handgun and never will unless someone gives one to me.

Of the two it would be a hard decision because I'd prefer the .38 with the possibility of .357 but I'd also prefer a magazine fed weapon for the ease of reloading.

I do own a 43 but I rarely carry it because if I can conceal a 43 I can conceal a 26.

I think I'd pass on both.

I think I would have to be in a position where I had no gun whatsoever and had to choose between one of the two before I would know which I picked
 
I can’t believe people and their excuses not to carry a striker fire gun. It’s a load of BS as usual.

Millions of people around the world carry them.

And if there is an accident, it means someone didn’t follow basic safety rules. It’s not the guns fault.

You folks need to remember that anti gunners frequent gun forum’s. Stop feeding them lies and misinformation to be used against us.
 
I can’t believe people and their excuses not to carry a striker fire gun. It’s a load of BS as usual.

Millions of people around the world carry them.

And if there is an accident, it means someone didn’t follow basic safety rules. It’s not the guns fault.

You folks need to remember that anti gunners frequent gun forum’s. Stop feeding them lies and misinformation to be used against us.
Carry what you like, striker fired or hammer fired. What are the lies and misinformation?
 
the small increase from 5 rounds of .38 to 8 rounds of 380 aren't enough to make me switch from the revolver. Even though it's shooting from a reliable Glock, I have had a lot of trouble with 380 reliably cycling pistols (others may have other experience).

Going to Glock 26 or SIG P365 would be, to me, reasonable. Those 9mm guns are very reliable and give you even more capacity.
I agree, but I went between the 5 and 8 and carry a 6 shot 32 H&R. I had a Glock 42 and it was a fine gun, but just preferred other guns. I still have a Glock 26 and Sig P365, but mainly pocket carry and find the j frame easier to conceal and draw from most of my pockets.
 
Back
Top