[Karate]

The ultra lite S&W386 Scandium frame weapons is the recoil realy that bad...I see posts all the time where people talk about feeling like their hand or wrist was broken after firing one...I am not recoil sensitive...I have shot a lot of hot load from a Model 66 and a 629...I also shoot a 45..and have never been bothered by recoil.
I know that they are lite and that will increase recoil but I cannot imagine it beening that bad if one uses common sence with type of load that you use.

[gbelleh]

I shot quite a few rounds through a S&W 342 PD, 10.8 oz. .38 Special. The recoil was definately harsh, but not as bad as my 629 .44 Mag with 3" barrel. I'm sure the .357 models kick quite a bit harder than the .38s. The 342 was not fun, but is controllable with practice.

Recoil sensitivity seems to vary a lot from person to person. If you're not recoil sensitive, then you should be fine shooting these super light revolvers. They really do make great concealed carry guns if you can practice enough to really have control with them.

The only way to know for sure is to get ahold of one and go shoot it!

[P95Carry]

There may be several aspects to this. I use as summer carry a M85 taurus snub .. it is still quite light. .38 spl loads are well manageable but frankly I doubt .357 loads would be too comfortable, if it took em!

I have fired a scandium with .357 (factory loads, not hot ones like I reload) and it was distinctly uncomfortable. Such that if I used it for carry I might be tempted to load with +P.

However, that said .. apart from the practice side of things with recoil discomfort . the question is .. would that matter in a combat situation, where you may want the power?? Possibly not ... 2 shots may do the job. There is then tho the other downside ..... flash and noise ..... such that the follow up shot is delayed due to blinding effects if at night and ..... delayed aim recovery.

For shere weight saving I think they are great but if I had a .357 snub, I think I would be more towards an SP101 even with the weight penalty.

Just my 0.02.:)

[JCM298]

I've only shoot approximately 225 rounds throuh my 340. There were 200 rounds of my .357 re-loads, which are more or less midrange. The others were factory loads.
None of the rounds were fun and it's not a gun that will be used for plinking.
The first time out, I drew blood, even with shooting gloves on.
The second time I took 200 rounds to the range but stopped after 100.
Even though it's a "beast", it carries so easily in three different holsters, that it has replaced three other guns as an "always" gun. I am confident that I can use it if needed for its intended purpose. After a few hundred more rounds, it will be carried "always" but seldom shoot.
The ease of carry is my reason for buying it and I like it.

[dude]

Full power .357mags out of my Taurus 617T titanium snub are a bit rude.......but by no means painful. The full sized 'ribber' grip helps I guess. I practice alot with Silvertips and have no trouble blasting orange clays (not flying!) in rapid sucession @ 10 yards single action. 7 BAMS!!-7clays and it's time for another speedloader!

I do shoot mostly .38s.

[Greybeard]

A rubber grip that covers the backstrap is the ticket to taking much of the harshness out of recoil with the 11 to 13 ounce guns.

[another okie]

Get a chronograph and check out .38, .38+, and .357 out of a short barrel before deciding.

[Mannlicher]

I think we need to put a few things back into perspective. Lightweight snubbies are not intended for anything but close quarters self defence. The light weight means the owner is more likely to carry it. It also means, thanks to Newton, more felt recoil. Good grips can help, but physics dictate recoil.

Full power loads, +P or magnums, are usually necessary for any kind expansion at all, when using JHP bullets. If you are seeking the best terminal performance, this is the way to go.

Yes, these full power loads might be uncomfortable to practice with, but when the chips are down, you will not feel the recoil.

Selecting a load based on less felt recoil is akin to buying car insurance based on the lowest premium. The choice of reduced efficacy might be more comfortable , but it can really get you in a jam, if max performance is all that is going to save your butt.

[dairycreek]

During that time I have put several hundred rounds through it from 38 special wadcutters through 38 special +P, up to and including .357 ammo too. As you migght suspect the wadcutters and the +P ammo were quite controllable in the 386. While the .357 stuff produced substantial recoil it was not the hand wrenching, finger twisting, wrist bending kind of recoil about which many have written. You mention the recoil from Models 66 and 629 and I agree with the general sentiment of your statement. The 386 is a weapon that is intended to be shot a little and carried a lot. As a concealed carry piece it just cannot be beat. I must admit that I was filled with trepidation when I bought it because of the same kind of stories that you mention. I am glad that I got it. Good shooting;)

[MichaelJay]

I have a S&W 686 Combat Magnum and a 386PD. I have found the following to be helpful.

1.I shoot .38 wad-cutters for practice in both, carry .38+P in the 386PD and full .357 magnum in the 686. Maximum number of rounds per session in the 386PD is about 150 over a 2 hour session.
2.At the range I practice with the lighter gun first and then the heavy one. When I do this in reverse my hands and forearms get used to the 40+ ounce gun and the lighter one is definitely painful.
3.I have never put a .357 magnum load through the 386PD, although it is rated for it. I use in it what I carry in it – only.
4.Normal distances at the range are 7-15 yards for the 386PD. Past that I am useless with a snub nose. This is the maximum range I would be comfortable in using the gun in any situation – YMMV.

I have never found the 386PD to be a harsh recoil gun, in the above use.

Hope this helps.
Michael.

[Greybeard]

Micheal Jay -

' Noticed you numero uno post here at THR. Welcome!

[Greybeard]

Ever shot an AMT .380 "Backup"? Although not necessarily a powerful round, even the .380s out of a gun with such a small narrow grip can be rather painful. Not much surface area to distribute the impact. In my hands, about the same as 38+Ps from 11 and 12 ounce revolvers with factory grips.

[22luvr]

Hello Karate: I own and shoot .357 mag loads through my Smith and Wesson 340SC. While recoil is on the stout side, it is not as bad as I had been led to believe from other shooter's reactions.

I only shoot 20-25 of the magnum loads per session and never higher pressure +P loads (yikes)

No, it's not particularly fun to handle the 340 with .357 mag rounds but the gun is not for fun but self-defense.
.38 spcl rounds? It shoots these like a dream; much like my Smith mod 638 bodyguard.

The comfort trade-off for being able to tote a 12 oz .357 mag wheelgun in the pocket is still well worth it.

[Tamara]

Most of the "vicious recoil" talk you see about Scandium guns is referring to the magnum J-frames. I believe that the recoil on the 386, being a big ol' L-frame, won't be nearly so noticeable....

[Wes_Tulsa]

I carry a Model 37 Airweight much of the time. While the lightweight model revolvers aren't pleasant to shoot, replacing the grips with good quality wood grips, such as Eagles or Ahrends, can take that discomforting feel out caused by the factory rubber grips.

[BigG]

I think in this "age of hype" it's overblown. It's not for the beginner, but someone who is in good health and is a seasoned DA revolver shooter will have no problems. Good shooting!

[MichaelJay]

Thanks for the notice. It took me a while to find this place. I used to lurk/post over at TFL. Now that I know it's here, I'll be returning more often.

Thanks again,

[MichaelJay]

Tamara has mentioned one of the largest differences, J vs. K or L (same grip) frame. I have shot a snubnose .44 mag with a small frame (Colt I think?) and the lightening bolts of pain were from the elbow and joint to the tips of my fingers on the firing hand. However a large frame Ruger .44 with an 8” barrel and full underlug was not much different than a .357 and after getting used to the weight, 3” groups were fairly regular for most of us in the group that day.

My hands aren’t able to keep more than two fingers on the grip of a small frame. Even bracing with the off hand, those two fingers take the worst of it. So I stick with the larger frame revolvers and leave the smaller ones for anyone that can hold them.

Karate,
Best advice would be to get to a range that has rentals and try out some different ones. Ultimately, the best is what you will carry, be comfortable with and in dire need be willing to use. Past that, it is just our opinions.

Thanks,

[Karate]

Thanks Guys and Gals...your advice is as always great...I will indeed try out a 386 before I buy...but I think I see one in my future...this is really a great place...I used to hang round TFL...but now that it is gone I am glad to have this little gun haven...I really like getting everyones opinions....again let me say thanks...BTW What do you guys think of HIViz sights?

[Johnny Guest]

Wes_Tulsa, new this month, and a couple of others,
JCM298 and Karate from last month.

Welcome all - - -

Alloy frame .38s are about my limit--Colt Agent and S&W M37, with 158 LSWCHP+P, but I practice with standard power loads. I tried the early J-frame .357s with full mag loads, and they were just, uh, a bit intense for my tastes.

Johnny

[Jim March]

The 386 weighs either 17.5 or 18.5, depending on options:

http://www.smith-wesson.com/Products/Firearms/airlitesc/ (links to three variants provided)

That's not so bad, esp. when combined with better grips than a J-class can wear.

I wouldn't own one myself, mainly due to the price/performance negatives, but then again I'm on a tight budget. Even if I wasn't, spending for a GOOD holster and a steel gun makes more sense to me but that's a personal thing.

It's the "Riboflavin Js" that I do view as a Really Bad Idea(tm).

[M1911]

I have a S&W 642 -- that's a 15oz J-frame in .38. When I shoot it with 158gr +P, it hurts. Part of the pain is due to my trigger finger hitting the trigger guard on recoil. The open backstrap doesn't provide much padding either. I don't think I've ever put more than 50 rounds through it at one range visit. YMMV.

[Karate]

I agree Jim I also like steel frame weapons....but I have not been able to find a 7 or 8 shot .357 with a 3 inch barrel and HiViz sights...If such an animanal exist I would like to know...

[usnavymasterchief]

I had a S&W Mod 360 PD Airweight Scandium .357/.38spl. It is without a doubt the most miserable firearm I have ever had the misfortune of owning. The recoil and muzzle flip when firing hot loads like Cor-Bon .357 Magnum 125gr JHP's is really bad. I'm a large strong man and after 20 or so rounds it makes my forearm and wrist ache. I replaced the terrible Bantom grips with some Eagle finger groove grips made for a standard J-frame, they look a little out of place but helped a little to control the little bugger.
Honestly, after taxes and misc fees, I paid $722 for it. After I learned to hate it, I decided to sell or trade it at a local gun show. Guess what, almost every exhibitor there had 340's and 360's that they couldn't get rid of. I wound up trading it and $75 for a new Glock Mod 33, lost my shirt on it but was glad to see it go, IMHO that is S&W's biggest failure, it's way too light and the trigger action is stiff and grainy, the bbl is too short, the black PD finish scratches easily, the laser print writing all over the piece looks terrible and lastly that huge atom or whatever it is on the side plate really looks bad. Worst handgun S&W ever made. Again that's just my opinion for what it's worth.

[Jim March]

Karate: why worry about a factory high-vis? All the newer S&Ws used pinned-in front sights, easily replacable. By the time you've bought a steel gun, a GOOD holster *plus* a really good TRITIUM front sight from Ashley or similar, you've still spent way less than on a Riboflavin gun alone.

And Tritium beats fiber-optic by a mile in the dark. With Ashley's white enamel surrounding the dot, they're almost as good in daylight as a fiber optic.

For defense, more crap happens in the dark than by day.

[M1911]

the trigger action is stiff and grainyThat's easily fixed for cheap money.

[Karate]

Jim

I will look into what you mentioned...what is your opinion of the SW 65...I found out that it come with a 3inch barrel...

[Jim March]

The 65 is a K-frame 357 sixgun. It was designed to be a fast-handling fighter. Bill Jordan was the original proponent of the concept, and it's a good one.

3" is a good barrel length, too. Basically, you pick ammo that's known to work well out of a 2", and you can be close to certain it'll function at 3".

It's *the* basic fighting revolver.

There's one little thing though: the frame size was originally meant for 38Spl. Once beefed up to 357, it works well but it's possible to shoot it loose with a steady diet of the "big boomers".

Most owners shoot mostly 38, with enough practice in 357 to keep in touch with it, then load defensive 357s for street or bedside.

It's also a bit light a gun to feel good with "real 357s". See, back in 1937, "357" meant a 158grain load doing over 1,500fps from a 6" barrel. Those are what made the caliber's original "engine block splitting" reputation. That's actually more raw power than you need for for personal defense, so we started to see 125s at 1,400ish and those work great on the street.

But if you're headed into the woods to hunt deer or boar, or want to be able to defend against black bear, it's time to go to the few vendors left selling "original formula strength" stuff, like the Georgia Arms "Deerstoppers" or the Cor-Bon heavy hunting loads.

That's when a K-frame isn't enough gun. L-Frame S&W with a heavy barrel of 4" or more, GP100 (ditto) or an N-Frame makes more sense.

If you're NOT looking for a gun that can be pressed into "woods defense use", the 3" K-Frame is a great "streetfighter", exactly as it was intended back in the 50's :).

[usnavymasterchief]

Hi M1911, I agree, the stiff and grainy trigger can be fixed inexpensively. I sent off for a shooter's pack of springs from Wolff but I got rid of the gun before I could install the springs. My point is simply this, for the price charged for a new 360PD, the trigger should not have to be "fixed". It should be good right out of the black leatherette, red felt lined presentation case the piece came in. Maybe S&W should have put the money that the fancy case cost into the gun and sent the product out in a card board box instead, might have been a better product for just a few bucks more.

[Karate]

Jim
Do you think a 686Plus with a 2-1/2 inch barrel would be a better all around choice than the 65....I really like the 3inch barrel...is there that much difference balistically between a 2-1/2 and 3 inch...but I also like the heavier frame of the 686 and the extra round is nice in the plus...this will be a general purpose gun...carried some...House Gun and used on camping trips etc...I am kind of hung up on only have one weapon and really knowing it well...I have heard that a good Gunsmith can cut a 4inch barrel down to 3 pretty easily.

[Jim March]

No, actually, I think the K-frame (65, 66) with a 3" barrel is a more useful piece than the L-frame with a 2.5", 3" or possibly even 4".

Right, here's the situation: the L-frame's real advantage is that you can control the "real serious 357 woods loads", 158grain at 1,500+fps or the Cor-Bon 180 and 200 grainers. BUT you won't get enough speed with those to reliably stop a black bear until you run at least a 4" tube, 6" even better.

Follow? The only thing a 2.5"/3" L-frame gives you over a K is the ability to shoot nothing but full-house magnums without breaking the gun. Which became important to cops when they adopted a doctrine of "shoot nothing except duty loads, ever" replacing the previous K-frame-era doctrine of "shoot mostly 38s in practice, carry Magnums".

Well I'm not personally sure the original doctrine was so nuts. Others disagree! You may too. Cool. Make your own choices.

But a steel K-frame 3" will be easier to conceal and still control "street defense magnums" well enough (as opposed to "woods defense magnums"!).

This is just my opinion. But I'd take a 3" K over a 2.5" L any day of the week. (Mind you, I might seek out Ruger's now-discontinued "K-class" Service/Security Six series used...)

And if I wanted L-class performance with a 4" or more barrel, I'd very seriously consider a GP100 as it's basically a "super-strength L-class".