stick with steel or go light with airweight?

[airborne_zim]

I have another question for your consideration:

I've always liked to carry my S&W snubbie when I'm hiking. However, it is a bit heavy in the pocket and that's always made me lust after a real lightweight snub.

What has kept me from buying one is that shooting my 649 is a handful even with regular .38 spl ammo.

Is the trade-off in weight offset by a marked increase in recoil?

Is an airweight snub harder to handle, e.g. for a follow-up shot than the heavier steel models?

I'm not looking to start a flame war, just trying to see if I should move up to something lighter.

S&W 649-2.01.JPG

 

[airborne_zim]

I have another question for your consideration:

I've always liked to carry my S&W snubbie when I'm hiking. However, it is a bit heavy in the pocket and that's always made me lust after a real lightweight snub.

What has kept me from buying one is that shooting my 649 is a handful even with regular .38 spl ammo.

Is the trade-off in weight offset by a marked increase in recoil?

Is an airweight snub harder to handle, e.g. for a follow-up shot than the heavier steel models?

I'm not looking to start a flame war, just trying to see if I should move up to something lighter.

S&W 649-2.01.JPG

 

[Ron H.]

Sir, yes and yes. Whether those trade-offs are worthwhile is something that only you can answer.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

What Ron H. said. Also, grips are everything when it comes to recoil. My square-butt M37 with stock Magnas and a Tyler is no worse than a round-butt steel gun with a Tyler, and perhaps better than one without. For my hand, this setup is better than most of the Goodyears, including Pachmayr and Hogue, who both make some terrific grips for K- & N-frame guns. There is one cheap synthetic, (Eagle?) Secret Service grips, which are both concealable in a pocket and usable in my hand. All of this, however, is dependent on YOUR hand size, so you have to try the grips out yourself.

It IS possible to get grips that will make the lighter gun very usable, but I can't guarantee that the search for them will be short. If you really don't care for the weight, the search may be worth it. I have found it so, and often carry aluminum guns.

 

[rburg]

There are many facets to the debate. Always keep in mind that the gun you have with you is infinitely better than the dozen you have at home.
If the weight of a steel or stainless steel even makes you consider not to carry it, then its a poor choice.

My view is you should figure out why you own the gun. Its really a pretty simple decision. If you're buying it to shoot, buy the one that you can shoot best, normally that will be the heavier gun. If you're buying it to protect yourself, and don't plan on shooting it much at all, buy the Airweight or Airlite version of the same gun. If you're so financially stressed you can't afford both (the best answer), buy the one that suits you.

I'm not a big fan of only owning one gun. More is better, too many just right.

I like my guns. But my carry gun is a 337. It carries very well. I use a Galco SOB, and sometimes I think the holster weighs nearly as much as the gun. But carried in that position I never even feel it. I know its there, but its so light its not a problem. You feel the nearly double weight of a M60 if substituted. Yes, I shoot the M60 better.

Another question that so many people miss is by asking how the gun groups. I'd suggest a different test. Go to the range, sandbank, or other favorite shooting spot. Put out your target at a reasonable self defense range, say 10 feet, or even 6 feet. Pull the gun out and fire it at your target one time. Just for fun, give it a followup shot. Did you hit the man sized target in a vital place? If you didn't, you need a lot more practice.

But at that range, one where almost everybody will believe self defense, we almost always hit what we aim at. No, you can't pick off a dirtbag at 50 yards with either gun, but thats not self defense range, its extreme drive-by range.

Almost everybody will do as well with the first shot using either weight handgun. Its the follow up shots and maybe recoil sensitivity we're really talking about. Yes, the heavier gun is better for grouping 5 or 10 shots.

 

[moxie]

If shooting a 649 is a "handful" with regular .38s, the lighter guns will be really hateful. You might want to try a good pocket holster that will help distribute the weight evenly in your pocket and keep the gun from moving around as much. Here's one:
http://www.opticsplanet.net/bianchi-4501-pocket-change-...ter-black-23884.html

 

[vito]

Only you can really make the decision, as others before have stated. I just don't like the feel of the lightweights. I have a 640 that I consider the perfect carry gun for self defense. Simple, absolutely reliable and it feels "solid" in my hand. But clearly the 640 is not for everyone, as it rarely is even mentioned in this forum.

 

[ENH]

The weight diference between these two is remarkable and I am of the lighter the better for carry group. The 340PD is really not that bad to shoot with 38 SPL of 125 to 158 gr bullets. A good option - carry the light weight , shoot the steel.

 

[patentmike]

I am a fan of the Airweights. Your grip can make a huge difference. If you are not doing it like Jerry, try it. The J frame is about 1 minute in.

http://www.myoutdoortv.com/pdk/web/smith.html?feedPID=0...K0GbWemanhJ0KNWQYqM4

 

[OKFC05]

A good option - carry the light weight , shoot the steel.

Oh heck yes!
I carry a 442 in the pocket but get out the 60 for extended shooting.

 

[M29since14]

I'd suggest getting a 2" RB K-frame with a good quality strong side holster.

I don't know if you need the K-frame, but when hiking, a good belt holster is much to be preferred vs. pocket carry, whether you use a pocket holster or not. With a good 1-1/4 or 1-1/2 inch belt and a well made holster, you won't even notice your 649.

If by hiking you mean out in the boonies, where concealing is not a concern, you can use any stocks you want on your 649, to aid in recoil control. And you can shoot the lightest .38 Special you can find (wadcutters), if you are just practicing. Keep your gun loaded with heavier loads of your choice. If you're just plinking, you'll have plenty of time to change out shells. If you need the extra power on short notice, you'll have it.

I am not a big, tough guy, but I do not usually even notice the weight of a revolver, short of an N-frame, when I am out tromping around. My favorite trail guns have been a Model 34, a Model 19, or a Commander, for as long as I can recall. Any one of these probably weighs more than your 649. The belt and holster make the difference.

I also agree with Dick Burg in that there is just no reason not to have both steel and lightweight guns!

 

[airborne_zim]

Thanks for the thoughtful replies.

Unfortunately because of your answers my marriage will now crumble

I was possibly going to sell the 649 and buy an airweight -- you see, my wife doesn't discern between the different handguns in my collection, just the total number of shooting irons!

But now I see the wisdom of owning both the stainless 649 AND an airweight.

Are there any differences between the airweights? Are they all the same frame material? The cylinders/barrels steel?

Thanks. [IMG:left]

[/IMG]

 

[NFrameFred]

Originally posted by airborne_zim:
-- you see, my wife doesn't discern between the different handguns in my collection, just the total number of shooting irons!
.

There's your problem . . . tell her it's unlucky to count them and you don't really know what the total number is . . . .

 

[johngalt]

I have a 642-2 (Airweight, 15 oz) and so far I haven't found a factory load that was too much to handle. I've used 125 gr +P Speer Gold Dot, Federal 158 gr .+P LSWC (FBI Load), Hornady 158gr XTP (standard pressure), Federal 110 gr +p Hydroshok, Remington UMC 130 gr (standard pressure). Haven't tried Buffalo Bore, some of their loads look interesting.

I swapped out the factory Uncle Mike boot grips with Hogue Bantum, which much improved the handling. I also had trouble using speed loaders with UM grips, but with Hogue it is ok.

I'd still like to find a steel J frame, preferably a 36.

 

[robotoid]

I have 4 J frames, in various configurations/weights. 640-1, 640, 637, 340. I usually end up carrying the middle of the road one for weight, the 637. However, if tomorrow I could keep only one, it would be the 640-1 for its overall versatility.

 

[airborne_zim]

You're all talking me into it!

Is there any difference in durability between the aluminum frames and the scandium frames?

Titanium cylinders vs. stainless?

Oh what to pick, what to pick

 

[Wheelgunner840]

I just can't wrap my mind around a steel J-Frame being too heavy to carry. Granted I am a fairly large guy, but the only time I remember that I have a 640-1 in the front pocket (either shorts in the summer, or cargo pants in the winter) is when I reach for some cash, and quickly remember that on these days, the cash is in the left hand pocket.

I guess each person perceives weight differently, but if follow-up shots or pointability becomes an issue with the lighter guns, I would say just get used to a little extra weight. It really aint that much to get used to.

In a good belt holster, there is no perceivable difference between the two, at least to me, and I have carried a 317 airweight as well. (sold it because there was a hole in the side of the frame

)

JMHO,

WG840

 

[M29since14]

Is there any difference in durability between the aluminum frames and the scandium frames?

Titanium cylinders vs. stainless?

Odds should favor the frame with the Scandium alloy. In cylinders, I think it is a slam-dunk for stainless, but have no data to prove it. That doesn't mean I would avoid a Titanium cylinder altogether, however.

You might need an M&P340.

Well, maybe not. For a trail gun, maybe a 37/337 would be better, since you can shoot it single action.

Or, maybe a M60 with the 3-inch full-lug barrel and adjustable sights, if the folks at S&W still make it anymore, without the silly hi-viz sights? That one makes a dandy lightweight trail gun, even though it does have a stainless frame.

 

[Speedo2]

Originally posted by M29since14:

Or, maybe a M60 with the 3-inch full-lug barrel and adjustable sights, if the folks at S&W still make it anymore, without the silly hi-viz sights? That one makes a dandy lightweight trail gun, even though it does have a stainless frame.

+1000. If you're constrained to only 1 j-frame, then that's is the one to get:

From my modest j-frame collection, I really like the M60-4 the best and the M37 rb-3" the least. The M37 with stag grips is a major pain to shoot even with mild 38 wc's

I agree with the others that the little bit of extra weight is well worth it regarding shootability; I'd much rather be carrying something that I've got a lot of confidence in. Anyways, that's my $0.02.

 

[tom turner]

Hi,

If you are a deer hunter, you will know EXACTLY what I mean when I say this:

IF YOU EVER NEED TO USE YOUR AIRWEIGHT DURING AN ATTACK BY A BAD GUY . . . you will NOT even feel the gun kick, or hardly even hear it go off!

Just as another poster said, I too once owned just a steel J-frame and thought it was absolutely no trouble to carry it.

HOWEVER . . . when I got the same model gun in an Airweight . . . my oh my!

The Airweights are so light that you'll almost forget you are carrying it . . . and that is wonderful. Mines in my pocket right now . . . and my steel Model 36 is back in the safe.

DOES IT HURT TO SHOOT?

Yes . . . and NO! Yes, with original wood grips and a low, limp hold it will sting ya a bunch. HOWEVER, with the right grips and a nice firm "high hold" (the way we are SUPPOSED to hold and shoot 'em . . . it is NOT a problem, IMHO.

Mine's currently sporting original grips (ouch) BUT the Tyler T-grip I just put on it changed EVERYTHING!

Now I can take it to the range and shoot it as long as I would like!!!

GET AN AIRWEIGHT! For self defense there's nothing like it!

T.