Trail gun: I need some input!
- Thread starter DatGuy
- Start date
A 386XL 7 shooter with a 6" barrel, Scandium frame, light weight. or a J frame 60-18 with 5" barrel. The longer barrel gets a little more out of a 357
and easier to hit your target. My other two are 60-10 3" and a 657 Mt. gun
41 mag.
and easier to hit your target. My other two are 60-10 3" and a 657 Mt. gun
41 mag.
CaptRon956
Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2014
- Messages
- 646
- Reaction score
- 548
I want a new trail/woods gun and I cant make up my mind.
I'm looking for a more lightweight and easier to carry revolver that can shoot hot and heavy loaded .357 Magnum to replace the big and heavy S&W 627 Pro I have now. I don't live near moose or brown/grizzly bears so my main concern is big cats, wolves/coyotes, black bears, and trail thugs/hobos.
The S&W 327 PC Carry is a thick revolver and only has a 2 inch barrel. The price is high too. But it has 8 rounds and weighs the least.
The Ruger SP101 3 inch is smaller and cheaper, but it only has 5 rounds and it still weighs in at 2 lbs.
What do you all think? Here's a picture that sums up my dilemma:
Not on the list but hey If it was me, I'd choose a S&W model 686 .357 4" or 6" barrel.
629shooter
Member
You could try and find a 386PD. If, you want a "lightweight."
Great choice....cheap, reliable, why i bought one. I also have a 4" 610-2, and a 1006 but they are very hard to find and too valuable (to me) to take along when hiking or camping.
oneflycowboy
Member
"try and find" Yep, and be prepared to pay big $$$ if and when you find one.....
Bozz10mm
US Veteran
I was going to suggest a Glock 20 or 29 with some high power ammo from Underwood.
Seems like the perfect trail gun. (Fairly) Light weight, powerful, and high capacity.
Seems like the perfect trail gun. (Fairly) Light weight, powerful, and high capacity.
akjaeger
Member
I try to stay away from 357's as trail guns, that nasty crack is hard on my ears when fired without earplugs. Trail guns will be fired without earplugs.
I've gone to 44 special and 45 Colt for "packin' pistols", literally half the chamber pressure of the 357.
The only thing they give to the 357 is trajectory past about 75 yards.
I've gone to 44 special and 45 Colt for "packin' pistols", literally half the chamber pressure of the 357.
The only thing they give to the 357 is trajectory past about 75 yards.
ColbyBruce
Member
This S&W 58 was the first handgun I bought to use around the mountain house. I bought it for my F-I-L back in 2008 but he passed away a few months later. I still carry it around up there, though my S&W 65's are lighter.
JeepinSoldier
Member
The 3" heavy barrel, round butt K frames, like my S&W 65-3 here, work well as a trail gunAfter asking a lot of questions and then carrying sever different guns in the mountains, I have settled on the same gun.
My primary concerns are bad people, followed by mtn lions (Have seen two and one was run over right where 70/470 and 6 meet), and distantly black bear. I know its marginal for bear but I'm sure its better than nothing and this gun gets carried and not left in the safe like the huge, heavy N Frames do.
The 3" 65 is relatively light but powerful. Stainless for all weather durability, fixed sights that are less prone to damage, and simple operation. Versatile in that if I bring .38's and .357's I can hand it to almost anyone and they can shoot it well with minimal instruction.
I normally load it with either Speer 135 grain .357 Short Barrel, or Cor Bon 140 Grain DPX. Either should be fine for lions. I bring some 158 grain ammo if bears seem to be about. Here is my favorite carry 65-2:
Also have a 65-5 which comes along sometimes in my son's holster.
ColbyBruce
Member
I also have a S&W 65-5 that gets carried around in the mountains.
Revolver vs Pistol
I have several of each to choose from. Even so, it seems that a revolver is my first choice for a stroll in the woods. Last time out, it was a four-inch 686. I've done some hiking, where I only carried a model 36 with snake shot in the first three holes. In the mountains, I take this old 29-2. It's ported, and reliable. It can handle a wide variety of SPL and Magnum loads nicely. A simply rugged chest rig, if I'm out and about. (There's Ruger Scout rifle in the Jeep if needed...) A lot of weight, for sure - can't deny that. It seems that for me, pistols have been more of urban application. Just the way it has worked out so far...
I have several of each to choose from. Even so, it seems that a revolver is my first choice for a stroll in the woods. Last time out, it was a four-inch 686. I've done some hiking, where I only carried a model 36 with snake shot in the first three holes. In the mountains, I take this old 29-2. It's ported, and reliable. It can handle a wide variety of SPL and Magnum loads nicely. A simply rugged chest rig, if I'm out and about. (There's Ruger Scout rifle in the Jeep if needed...) A lot of weight, for sure - can't deny that. It seems that for me, pistols have been more of urban application. Just the way it has worked out so far...
Attachments
Glock 29 Gen4. Compact. 10+1 rounds of 10mm. A caliber that can handle a wide range of expected encounters with a wide range of ammo choices. Don't get me wrong, I'd feel fine with many of the S&W revolvers mentioned in this thread, but when I'm bumming around, might get sweaty or wet, I always seem to fall back to the 29.
Only thing it lacks is ability to handle snake shot ammo.
Only thing it lacks is ability to handle snake shot ammo.
BigBill
Absent Comrade
I carried a ruger security six in 357mag when hiking in the wilds with the kids. They never seen me carry it so I didn't want them to worry. I taught my kids to be safe in the wilds and to be alert of your surroundings. They understand they can be put in a survival situation in a heart beat if there not paying attention.
To me the 357mag is the smallest I would carry. I've probably carried the 44mag more while hunting or scouting.
Elmer Keith and those guys have killed every north American game with the 357, 41,& 44mag.
The cats you mention are bobcat or mountainlions?
I seen a guy shoot a mountain lion five shots from a rifle to get it off another hunter. Carrying a 357 I carry stout loads in any caliber Magnum. Six shots is ok just place them correctly.
To me the 357mag is the smallest I would carry. I've probably carried the 44mag more while hunting or scouting.
Elmer Keith and those guys have killed every north American game with the 357, 41,& 44mag.
The cats you mention are bobcat or mountainlions?
I seen a guy shoot a mountain lion five shots from a rifle to get it off another hunter. Carrying a 357 I carry stout loads in any caliber Magnum. Six shots is ok just place them correctly.
Last edited:
Amp
Member
640 works for me. But of your choices, the ruger would do.
diggler1833
Member
I have a 4" 686 that probably sees more use than anything else. I find it to be the perfect balance between size/weight/power.
XAVMECH...... raised a good point.... a rifle.
If I'm out on the RZR or a 4-wheeler...... a Ruger 77/.357 or Winchester Trapper in .357 are often along to augment/back up the "small" revolver on my belt.
Many have commented that a .357 out of a 16 inch barrel is "close" to a 30-30.
Extra ammo works in either gun!
If I'm out on the RZR or a 4-wheeler...... a Ruger 77/.357 or Winchester Trapper in .357 are often along to augment/back up the "small" revolver on my belt.
Many have commented that a .357 out of a 16 inch barrel is "close" to a 30-30.
Extra ammo works in either gun!
Last edited:
not a Smith
not a Smith and Wesson but based on your criteria my mutant Ruger would do the job....round butted(by me) 2 3/4" 357 Service Six. Six for sure, would work good for finishing a wounded animal, enough for black bear or North American cats, and enough for any two legged critters up to no good
not a Smith and Wesson but based on your criteria my mutant Ruger would do the job....round butted(by me) 2 3/4" 357 Service Six. Six for sure, would work good for finishing a wounded animal, enough for black bear or North American cats, and enough for any two legged critters up to no good
Attachments
wheelgunguy
Member
If I were to limit myself to the two choices you posted. I would go with the 327. Your current trail gun (627) is approximately 40% longer and 87 % heavier. If what you want is smaller these numbers are substantial. The width would be my smallest consideration especially since you mention nothing about the ability to conceal it and I wouldn't look at a little more grip as necessarily a bad thing when dropping that much weight.
I have actually owned that particular model of Ruger. It now lives at my sister's house as her HD gun. So I have no bias against it. Of the three on your chart I do believe it is the best value. For half the money and it still meets your needs, I certainly see it's attraction. Since you put it's weight as a con and the width again I see as the least important. For me it just doesn't have enough pluses to pick it over the 327. Budget would be the only reason I would choose it. Only you can decide on your budget. It's easy for me to spend your money.
If someone told me that they were going to get a 686 or a GP100 as a trail gun I would tell them "I think they are both excellent choices". But from your post I don't think either one would be right for you. Just because I don't think they would be a big enough reduction in weight to satisfy you. Obviously they both are going to tip the scales at more than 2 pounds loaded.
One last thought, if I were asked "Of the 5 guns I mentioned in this post which one would you want as a trail gun?". I would pick the 627. But hey that's just me.
Good luck and let us know what you decide.
I have actually owned that particular model of Ruger. It now lives at my sister's house as her HD gun. So I have no bias against it. Of the three on your chart I do believe it is the best value. For half the money and it still meets your needs, I certainly see it's attraction. Since you put it's weight as a con and the width again I see as the least important. For me it just doesn't have enough pluses to pick it over the 327. Budget would be the only reason I would choose it. Only you can decide on your budget. It's easy for me to spend your money.
If someone told me that they were going to get a 686 or a GP100 as a trail gun I would tell them "I think they are both excellent choices". But from your post I don't think either one would be right for you. Just because I don't think they would be a big enough reduction in weight to satisfy you. Obviously they both are going to tip the scales at more than 2 pounds loaded.
One last thought, if I were asked "Of the 5 guns I mentioned in this post which one would you want as a trail gun?". I would pick the 627. But hey that's just me.
Good luck and let us know what you decide.
Similar threads
