Why did office staff choose M36 over Airweights?
- Thread starter Jackal11
- Start date
Ingramite
Member
I carried my model 10 service revolver with a 4" barrel while off duty for quite a while.
My dream gun was the new stainless model 60 but waits were long and prices were higher than a cat's back.
I passed up a couple of deals holding out for the model 60 that took me 20 to finally get my hands on.
I settled for a new model 36 and was glad to get it.
Stories of cracked frames below the forcing cones had haunted Lightweight J frames. I never saw one with my own eyes. But then I never knew anyone personally who had one either. The "tribal knowledge" of the day prevented anyone from making the mistake of buying one.
Years later I owned a couple without issues. I always heeded the warning against hot ammo and had no problem.
I knew a guy who loaded up 148gr wadcutters upside down in the cases. These were affectionately called "dum-dums". They were much easier to shoot with a lower recoil than issued service rounds. Their reputation for being man stoppers probably far exceeded their actual performance though.
My dream gun was the new stainless model 60 but waits were long and prices were higher than a cat's back.
I passed up a couple of deals holding out for the model 60 that took me 20 to finally get my hands on.
I settled for a new model 36 and was glad to get it.
Stories of cracked frames below the forcing cones had haunted Lightweight J frames. I never saw one with my own eyes. But then I never knew anyone personally who had one either. The "tribal knowledge" of the day prevented anyone from making the mistake of buying one.
Years later I owned a couple without issues. I always heeded the warning against hot ammo and had no problem.
I knew a guy who loaded up 148gr wadcutters upside down in the cases. These were affectionately called "dum-dums". They were much easier to shoot with a lower recoil than issued service rounds. Their reputation for being man stoppers probably far exceeded their actual performance though.
max503
Member
Aren't Airweights harder to come by that 36's? If so, couldn't that be a factor?
I think Airweights had a bad reputation for being weak.
I think Airweights had a bad reputation for being weak.
Last edited:
cowboy4evr
Member
I will share my secret for shooting J-frame alu guns -- 442 / 642 etc . Before I start shooting I go out to the truck and open the door , placing my right hand on the door frame itself . Then I slam the door , hard . Now my right hand is hurting so much that shooting my airweight with my left hand ( i'm a lefty ) I don't even think about it . Anyway that's my story , Regards Paul
Interesting thread.
I appreciate the insight of the LEOs.
I've seen a few of the cracked "paperweights" Sure made me wonder why anyone would trust their life to one of those.
Four Airweights without model numbers reside among my hoard, but I've hauled none of them to the range and likely won't for fear of cracking them and turning them into paperweights.
I appreciate the insight of the LEOs.
I've seen a few of the cracked "paperweights" Sure made me wonder why anyone would trust their life to one of those.
Four Airweights without model numbers reside among my hoard, but I've hauled none of them to the range and likely won't for fear of cracking them and turning them into paperweights.
Rushing1
Member
I usually qualified twice a year with a Sig 220, a Colt Commander, a Glock 23 car gun, and a S&W 642.
I would shoot expert with everything but the 642. I barely qualified. I think the range officer would cut me a break once in awhile.
I began to blame the snub barrel for its poor accuracy, but when a detective stopped in to qualify next to me, he shot a perfect score with a 642. With admiration, I watched him do it .
When I asked his secret, he replied, "Lots of practice, like your life depended on it!" And then he proceeded to take out his Bar-Sto barrel Commander and shot one 4 inch ragged hole in the 60 shot qualification
I immediately sent my Commander out to Irv Stone who made and installed his barrel in mine. ( correctly installed custom barrels DO make a difference).
I believe the 642, even with Craig Spegal boot grips, kicked much harder than all of my other pistols.
I would shoot expert with everything but the 642. I barely qualified. I think the range officer would cut me a break once in awhile.
I began to blame the snub barrel for its poor accuracy, but when a detective stopped in to qualify next to me, he shot a perfect score with a 642. With admiration, I watched him do it .
When I asked his secret, he replied, "Lots of practice, like your life depended on it!" And then he proceeded to take out his Bar-Sto barrel Commander and shot one 4 inch ragged hole in the 60 shot qualification
I immediately sent my Commander out to Irv Stone who made and installed his barrel in mine. ( correctly installed custom barrels DO make a difference).
I believe the 642, even with Craig Spegal boot grips, kicked much harder than all of my other pistols.
mscampbell2734
Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2012
- Messages
- 796
- Reaction score
- 881
Absolutely
I started with a 49 as a backup/off duty gun. 5-6 years later when Smith rated the airweights for +P my Department authorized them.
I sold the 49 and went to a 442. I could easily qual and shoot the 49 but the 442 is a huge struggle.
5-6 ounces makes a big difference in shootability.
Yes the BarSto barrel installed by a master gunsmith (also a close friend and now departed) in my 70 Series Gold Cup made a world of difference even in my non-expert hands...
...Ben
HardToHandle
Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2016
- Messages
- 624
- Reaction score
- 886
Everyone is right, steel over aluminum. I didn't see it mentioned above, the US Air Force soured pretty fast on all-aluminum Smiths in the 1950s, especially the aluminum cylinders. The M13 for Aircrewmen is consequently hard to find today. I will defer to others to more accurately relate that story.
I am fond of the K Frame aluminum Model 12 however (steel cylinder). It had a following as an easy-on-the-belt but more shootable gun for the desk sergeants and such.
First time I shot one, it was with splinter grips on a 2" snub. OUCH! Even standard .38 Special felt effectively the same as shooting in J Frame - a decent smack from a ball peen hammer to the palm. However, the K Frame does give you more opportunities for good grips, which I have found to make the Model 12s more tolerable than even steel J Frames. YMMV.
I am fond of the K Frame aluminum Model 12 however (steel cylinder). It had a following as an easy-on-the-belt but more shootable gun for the desk sergeants and such.
First time I shot one, it was with splinter grips on a 2" snub. OUCH! Even standard .38 Special felt effectively the same as shooting in J Frame - a decent smack from a ball peen hammer to the palm. However, the K Frame does give you more opportunities for good grips, which I have found to make the Model 12s more tolerable than even steel J Frames. YMMV.
message_board_expert
Member
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2020
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction score
- 29
Another downer afflicting the Airweights is apparently you can't use Hoppes No. 9 on them. Or at least it's not recommended.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,265
- Reaction score
- 11,494
Another downer afflicting the Airweights is apparently you can't use Hoppes No. 9 on them. Or at least it's not recommended.
That's wrong; Hoppe's #9 is fine for cleaning and will do no harm to alloy-framed guns, just as it will do no harm to nickel-finished guns. What is the source of this information?
Scott_HM1000X
Member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2020
- Messages
- 20
- Reaction score
- 7
Maybe the old Hoppe's #9, but the new stuff is different. I clean my wife's Smith Air Weight all the time with it.
As far as recoil of an AirWeight, I've shot my wife's quite a few times (38 special factory loads) and it's not bad at all. It could be the good grip design S&W chose for this gun, but it's comfortable to shoot. I also love the laser integrated into the grip.
As far as recoil of an AirWeight, I've shot my wife's quite a few times (38 special factory loads) and it's not bad at all. It could be the good grip design S&W chose for this gun, but it's comfortable to shoot. I also love the laser integrated into the grip.
sigp220.45
US Veteran
Very true. The FBI authorized steel frames only. You could have a Model
36 but not a 37. Other agencies may have followed suit.
One qualification I used a S&W Model 642 on the 60 round course. NEVER AGAIN !
I'd qualify the S&W Airweight like the model 38 as a good choice for deep concealment either in pocket or ankle holster due to minimal size and weight. Will kick like a mule but the design was never intended to fire hundreds of rounds from it all day at the range.
Miami_JBT
US Veteran
I find my 342Ti to be comfy to shoot. A 642 is a gem. I find my Model 36 to be a pig.
jerry52
Member
Chicago pd had a reg that all revolvers had to take +P ammo airweight back then didn`t
But when airweights were rated for +p there were tons of trade in 36`s office staff and backups all switched
But when airweights were rated for +p there were tons of trade in 36`s office staff and backups all switched
message_board_expert
Member
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2020
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction score
- 29
THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION:
Hoppes Number Nine-Curse or Salvation
Your post could not have been timed better, rockquarry.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,265
- Reaction score
- 11,494
THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION:
Hoppes Number Nine-Curse or Salvation
Your post could not have been timed better, rockquarry.
Anything from Hoppe's or a reputable source ?
78bagger
US Veteran
Dang, I don't get it. I carried a 36 for a few years until I tried the 442. I'm not a big guy and the 442 was easy to shoot even with +P, which the 36 wouldn't take. I'm giving instruction to my step daughter for her CCW and let her try both. she chose the 442 and still liked it after 50 rounds.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
