Thoughts on trading a 442 and Glock 26 for 340PD

[jimmyj]

TRADE--NO!

You have now a excellent carry package:
1. Glock M26 9mm for primary
2. S&W M442 for Backup

 

[alexrex20]

So many experts on these scandium .357 Js... That probably never put a whole cylinder through a scandium .357 J, much less put in any actual effort to be proficient with one.

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

 

[Stopsign32v]

I'm not telling anyone what to carry, but I'll stray for a second to collect my position.

Again, practicality depends on the .357 Magnum platform and ammo selected. Out of a 12 ounce air weight I'd tend to agree that .357 Magnum is hard to understand.

However, out of a 37 ounce L or N Frame, and appropriate .357 ammo made for Short Barrels with reduced flash, report, and recoil, then it's a different discussion because out of a 2.5 inch snub such a Buffalo Bore load is making 413 ft. pounds of energy, and doesn't sound like a detonating bomb; and, is easily managed for follow up shots with a 35-37 ounce platform. And if you do tend towards the perfectly fine defensive .38+P in Short Barrel, then recoil is downright gentle in the heavier steel short barrels, and accuracy and control are excellent.

There is a tendency to discuss snubs in the super light weight materials, and the limitations that are borne from launching ca. 375 ft. lbs. of energy out of a 12 ounce platform. I would suggest that moving a heavier snub to one's belt is less convenient that your pocket, but a small price to pay for what that gives in recoil control, and the resulting speed and accuracy - especially if you actually need it in an incident.

I've only had one incident where shots were fired, I was on duty at the time. That did not make me move away from revolvers towards semi-autos, I still use both. It did make me fully averse to anything bantam weight for primary a weapon, they have their place as BUG's in my estimation. The lightest revolver I own is a TRR8 at 35 ounces.

The heavier steel L and N short barrels are a piece of cake to OWB carry (2.3 lbs. is almost less than a man's body weight varies in a day), provides 7 or 8 shot capacity, and the L frame is very capable IWB.

Finally, as part of a larger training regimen at different distances, 25 yard practice in DA can make good sense. Distance magnifies how your pulling or pushing, and if your follow up shots in particular are striking lower from a lack of smooth user cycling. And, if at 25 yards your putting twelve rounds (8 Shot) inside an 18" group in twelve to fifteen seconds with one reload, then 8 rounds in 4 seconds at five yards within 12" is pretty easy. Also why all of my carry revolvers have had defensive action jobs.

"The revolver is more than an equal for any other defensive handgun." Clint Smith, Thunder Ranch

I don't consider a 2.5" a snub nose. Maybe I'm wrong, not saying that I'm not. But I would have no problem running .357 out of a 2.5" K or L frame. J frame?...nope. Not unless we are just talking about at the range.

 

[Stopsign32v]

So many experts on these scandium .357 Js... That probably never put a whole cylinder through a scandium .357 J, much less put in any actual effort to be proficient with one.

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

No need...I've touched off plenty of Underwood 125gr .38 Special +P which are close to the low standards of .357 Mag. THOSE are more than enough for me in an airweight!!! No need to increase the flash,bang, and recoil. In the end, out of a 2" barrel there is nothing a 357 can do a 38 can't to the bad guy.

 

[alexrex20]

That is your opinion. But .357 has proven to be faster than .38spl out of any barrel length. I can handle the recoil just fine. The "extra flash" thing is a myth because even at night my flame-throwing 10mm's don't blind me, and the mild flash from a snub .357 is almost imperceptible for that split second. Just because you choose to avoid a lightweight .357 because it scares you, doesn't mean others can't be proficient with it.

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

 

[HorizontalMike]

IMO, just KEEP thinking and/but do not act on those thoughts... Just an opinion.

 

[dwever]

I don't consider a 2.5" a snub nose. Maybe I'm wrong, not saying that I'm not. But I would have no problem running .357 out of a 2.5" K or L frame. J frame?...nope. Not unless we are just talking about at the range.

3" or less barrel length is commonly and historically understood with respect to a revolver being a snub. It is common for people to think 2" because so many snubs are. Still others like Chuck Hawks web site will define snubbies not based on barrel length but on the overall length of the gun - such as up to 7.0" inches. In that case the 327 Pug would make it, but the 627 UDR would miss by 0.625". However barrel length being less than or equal to 3" is the accepted norm.

"A snubnosed revolver has a barrel length of 3 inches (76.2 mm) or less . . ." (Gun Digest Book of Ruger Pistols and Revolvers. Gun Digest. p. 178. ISBN 978-0-89689-472-3).

There is an article titled, "Model 629 Snubnose" at the snub nose files website (Heavy Metal: the Model 629 Snubnose .44 Caliber Combat Magnum), the particular 629 snub nose reviewed at that snub nose web site has a 3" barrel as they mention and photograph.

Lucky Gunner has an article, "Ruger SP 101, The Shooter's Snub Nose". And in the article it extolls the praises of both the 2.25" Barrel and the 3.0" Barrel versions of the 101 (http://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/ruger-sp-101-the-shooters-snub-nose/)

Here are 2.625", 3.0", and 2.5" barreled Performance Center Snubs from S&W.