Why internal over shrouded (J-frame)?

[Filbird]

It occurred to me today that while I see many discussions about the Centennial J-frames (internal hammer, like the 442), and many photographs of members' Centennials, I see far less in here about the Bodyguard (shrouded hammer, or 438) models.

Since both keep the hammer from interfering with the draw, I'm curious as to why the shrouded models are less popular. I would think the Bodyguard would be more popular, since it enables SA fire without having the snag-ability of the standard chief's special. Whenever people talk about the ideal snubbie, it's usually the 442, not the 438... or am I wrong?

 

[otis24]

For me, its all about asthetics. Primarily, I am a traditionalist. Used to be, I would never look at a hammerless revolver. The Centennial's have grown on me. I just picked up a Model
640-1 and it will be my primary CCW revolver. I still think the shrouded models are butt ugly.

 

[Katy]

This is just hypothetical/Murphy's Law stuff, but one can fire either gun while it's still in a coat pocket. The Bodyguard, although the hammer is shrouded, can still have it's hammer blocked from moving rearward by something jammed in the slot and prevent firing.

Yes, you can fire the Bodyguard in SA mode, but when it hits the fan you don't have time for that.

As for the beauty contest the 442 looks better.

Just my .02 cents

 

[smith revolver cop]

Yes, you can fire the Bodyguard in SA mode, but when it hits the fan you don't have time for that.

+1! I can't think of many realistic scenarios where I would be firing my J-frame single action. I've had the 640 and 442, and been quite satisfied. Also, I would think the shroud on the Bodyguards might make holster selection/use more difficult, primarily in terms of 'traditional' thumbsnap or strap holsters. (For my Centennial-style revolvers, I use the Bianchi that snaps behind the trigger guard, which would also work well for a Bodyguard.)

 

[pred]

Some folks find the Bodyguard an ugly gun, Personally I find them the most comfortable to carry IWB.
Personal preferance.

Peter

 

[bill2000]

The Model 38 "butt ugly"? In my opinion my '72 Airweight is a thing of beauty and rides happily every day in a Mika Pocket holster or with a Barami Hip Grip.

 

[Seven For Sure]

Originally posted by pred:

Peter

Honest wear but obviously not abused, nice looking gun you have there.

 

[cobra44]

I would not trade my 638

 

[Dennis The B]

Here's my 49. Produced 1986. Very nice gun to carry.

 

[Frizzman]

Between the two, I would consider the Centenial design to be a bit better for a pocket revolver for the reasons already mentioned. I like the Bodyguards because they are rather different looking. They are anachronistic looking creatures from the era of my distant past heydays. Because of that, they have a good bit of "cool factor" as opposed to the Centenial for my tastes. From a practical viewpoint though, I see no need for a SA mode on any revolver carried for self defense.

 

[SmithNut]

As Forrest Gump would say - "Ugly is as Ugly does", or something like that.

The Bodyguard - The Thinking Man's J-Frame

 

[foolproofoak]

the humpbacks are less popular because smithnut has them all

 

[shawn mccarver]

Originally posted by Filbird:
It occurred to me today that while I see many discussions about the Centennial J-frames (internal hammer, like the 442), and many photographs of members' Centennials, I see far less in here about the Bodyguard (shrouded hammer, or 438) models.

Since both keep the hammer from interfering with the draw, I'm curious as to why the shrouded models are less popular. I would think the Bodyguard would be more popular, since it enables SA fire without having the snag-ability of the standard chief's special. Whenever people talk about the ideal snubbie, it's usually the 442, not the 438... or am I wrong?

I agree with you: the Bodyguard seems to have an advantage over the Centennial because it is both snag-free and still capable of single action firing.

However, I think most people have come to the conclusion that SA firing is not very important on this type of revolver.

In addition, the Bodyguard has the "decocking problem," which is, quite frankly, that most people cannot seem to understand that there is a right way to decock an S&W revolver so that a negligent discahrge will not happen if the hammer slips, and there is a wrong way which guarantees a discharge if the hammer slips. In addition, the Bodyguard's frame both prevents getting your finger in front of the hammer at the beginning of the decocking procedure and lessens the "purchase" the shooter has on the hammer during decocking.

For people not intimately familiar with revolvers and for those who are not willing to practice to hone those skills, the decocking is the most dangerous part. Agencies, of course, for the most part, have alot of gun-toting folks are not "gun folks," and the problem can be solved by just making the revolver incapable of SA cocking, as both NYPD and LAPD did when they still authorized revolvers for new officers.

 

[Dot_mdb]

I think the Centennial and the Bodyguard are about equal in their advantages and disadvantages. I carry a Centennial and for me I think it is the best choice. The Bodyguard does have one advantage in that the design allows for a "function" test. The finger is kept off the trigger and the hammer is drawn back enough to release the cylinder and then the cylinder is revolved to make sure that all cartridges can clear the recoil shield. I credit "Yellowstone" for teaching me that through a posting he made on this forum many years ago.

Bill

 

[NFrameFred]

The Bodyguard - The Thinking Man's J-Frame

Yep, looks like that means Smithnut is thinking about where he can find another one . . .

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

This is why I like the bodyguard series. If it's good enough for the General, it's good enough for me.

 

[Filbird]

Originally posted by SmithNut:
As Forrest Gump would say - "Ugly is as Ugly does", or something like that.

The Bodyguard - The Thinking Man's J-Frame

Dude... just how many pockets do you have in your average pair of pants?!

 

[feralmerril]

This one got stolen from me along with my truck, replaced it with a old model 40. But for me, a snubbed hammer model 60 was my all time best pocket gun.

 

[glypnir]

Originally posted by otis24:
For me, its all about asthetics. Primarily, I am a traditionalist. Used to be, I would never look at a hammerless revolver. The Centennial's have grown on me. I just picked up a Model
640-1 and it will be my primary CCW revolver. I still think the shrouded models are butt ugly.

And I thought that hammerless revolvers were traditional. S&W's been making them since before hand ejectors. 1882, I believe.

I have my 640-3 for the reasons already mentioned - it's even harder for something to get in the way of the hammer. I don't really care about looks. And so far, I'm equally inaccurate in double and single action modes.

 

[BillA]

I carry a 340PD concealed, but have owned a number of Bodyguards over the years. The main reason I like the internal hammer for everyday carry,is that in today's lawsuit crazy world, some unscrupulous attornies will attempt to convince a jury that you shot the bad guy by accident, because you had the gun "cocked", thereby creatng a "hair trigger" condition. I have seen this happen in court myself during my years in the news media. With the internal hammer gun, there's NO way this could become an issue, since double action is the only way the gun can be fired. I like a body guard for carry in the woods, because a single action shot is usually more accurate. But for every day carry, give the me double action only gun.