[Green Lantern]

Like it says ^^^^ Looking for my first snubby here for my next purchase "eventually!"

I was quite sure I wanted a hammerless revolver for pocket carry, as less chance for lint and stuff to get inside, as well as less stuff to snag the pocket.

I handled a Taurus CIA (hammerless) at the gun store Sunday...nice, but a little heavier than expected. 'Course, a P3AT is my main pocket gun by comparison (8-some ounces plus the weight of 6 or 7 .380 rounds!)

Next, handled another Taurus model with a shrouded hammer. Felt quite a bit lighter than the hammerless model. Now, I don't know the specifics, maybe it was a lighter-weight gun by metals used. But could it be that shrouded hammer models are inherently less heavy than the hammerless ones?

[ArchAngelCD]

I own and carry a S&W M638 so you know which I voted for...
All are great carry revolvers, it's just a matter of preference.
Even an exposed hammer isn't a problem if you draw it correctly.

[Sistema1927]

6
4
2

The only three numbers you need to know.

[PotatoJudge]

Shrouded hammer for the best of all worlds (except they're ugly), but there are ways to draw a pistol with a hammer without snagging so that's not so big a deal. Bobbed hammer would be my choice with checkering on what's left of the hammer. There may be legal reasons DAO is better in a carry gun, but who knows if that'll ever matter. I like SA shooting for some things, so I'd prefer to keep the capability.

And so far as I know there is little to no weight difference between the hammer types.

[mavracer]

I have a M&P 340 in my pocket right now.

[Phydeaux642]

I own a S&W 442 and carry the 642 so I guess I vote for the enclosed hammer (or hammerless, I suppose). Never have snagged it and if, God forbid, that I ever have to use it in a SD situation I understand that it would be better for me in a legal sense if I used a DAO firearm.

_______________

"Phydeaux, bad dog....no biscuit!"

[keyboard commando]

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q274/pistola_photo/SW009.jpg;)

[ArchAngelCD]

that I ever have to use it in a SD situation I understand that it would be better for me in a legal sense if I used a DAO firearm.
And what in the world would make that so? How can using a DAO revolver reduce your legal liability?

[mavracer]

And what in the world would make that so? How can using a DAO revolver reduce your legal liability?
it's not so much that it's DAO,as much as increasing your liability for making a SA shot.

[Green Lantern]

The only snub I've ever shot was this one - dunno what model :o - it's my aunt's. Her son bought it for her, she wanted to come over and shoot it at the house. (Took a quick shot of it for use in a Marvel Comics "Civil War" banner parody):

http://fc03.deviantart.com/fs12/i/2006/295/b/8/CW___I__m_with_SMITH_AND_WESSON_by_LonelyImmortal.jpg

I liked, I liked a lot! Only got "latch-bit" once before I got the clue to mind my GRIP! ;)

(and yeah, I obviously didn't have the whole "antialias text" thing down...)

[Phydeaux642]

it's not so much that it's DAO,as much as increasing your liability for making a SA shot.


Exactly. Massad Ayoob mentions this point in several articles that I have read and he states that prosecuters will use anything they can against you. So, I just take the SA out of the equation.

________________

"Phydeaux, bad dog....no biscuit!"

[PotatoJudge]

From Grant Cunningham's site:

http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/the_case_for_dao.html

[Ala Dan]

Certainly, the hammerless as there is nothing to snag on the inner lining of
the pocket~! :eek:;)

[The Lone Haranguer]

The one type that will absolutely, positively come out of the pocket with no chance of snagging is the hammerless. (A misnomer, actually, since there is indeed a hammer swinging back and forth in there.) The shrouded hammer is a very close second (their "humpbacked" profile can bind on a tight pocket), and even an exposed hammer can still be drawn with a good pocket holster and proper technique.

Something else to consider is that the "hammerless" design allows a higher hold on the backstrap of the grip, which will help your control of the recoil. And the hammer slot of the shrouded or exposed hammer can get dirt, lint or other debris inside much more easily -- another reason to recommend all such guns be carried in a pocket holster.

[DawgFvr]

...Hamerless of course

...Recommend 6 4 2

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e61/DawgFvr/642/LG1.jpg

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e61/DawgFvr/SandW/Tylergrip1.jpg

[fiVe]

Another vote for hammerless and the 642.

[glockman19]

6 4
4 4
2 2

The only (three) six numbers you need to know.

[ArchAngelCD]

I like my M638 because I have the option to fire SA when testing ammo I reload.

[Gustav]

I voted shrouded hammer for me its the best choice.

The model 60 S&W I had was a jewel it was compact and light and carried well but it always seemed to snag from inside the pocket thats one reason I sold it years ago.
I could not fire all five rounds 100% reliably from inside the pocket without catching on clothing either between the hammer and frame or on the hammer spur (cheap thrift store coats make great practice for pocket shooting).:evil:

The hammerless models work OK for me for up close and personal but at ranges past 7 yards or for for occasional plinking and field use I like being able to SEE and use a hammer either as a double action or a single action for a lighter shorter trigger pull.

The shrouded DA/SA hammer offers the best of all the options with none of the vices IMHO.:D

[Raspu10]

OMG I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE.... I NEED 6..4..2.. Not .. Enough ... CASH!!!!!!!!! NEEED JOB!!!!:mad::fire::cuss::banghead:


Will Someone Higher Me Lol:D

[jt1]

642/Mika Pocket Holster - It doesn't get any better.


http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u152/jt1jt1/P6260013.jpg

[Raspu10]

:cuss: You dare taunt me with your sexy 642

GREAT REVIEW BELOW:cool:

http://www.snubnose.info/docs/m642.htm

[Neophyte1]

638: best of both; single action double action:)

[Raspu10]

I don't remember what 638 looks like.:what:

[mjrodney]

Mine is a 638 with shrouded hammer; but as a defensive weapon and not a range or house gun, I don't think about using it in single action mode.

It's an up close and in your face defensive weapon that is more apt to be pointed, rather than carefully aimed as it likely would be in single action.

Learning how to shoot one at a distance, double action and using the minimalist sights is good fun.....(steady now, hold that sight picture, sqquueeeze that trigger)..... but when the "Tueller Drill" is in full swing and you have a second and a half or less to react....

And if the "Tueller Drill" wasn't about to happen, and although my hand might be wrapped around the little bugger, the 638 would not be out of my pocket.

It will only come out when it's needed, and only when it's needed now.

[SAG0282]

The shrouded hammer 638 is my definite preference.

[StrikeEagle]

I started with a Chief's Special... and that hammer is like a fish-hook. Fine with 'proper technique' as folks are pointing out. But will you have proper technique when your life is suddenly in the balance as you're called on to fight for it with no notice or warning?

For 'Close Encounters of The Worst Kind' I want something that's fumble free.

Next I went to the Smith Bodyguard. The humpback deal with the shroud. Problem for me was that it has a huge cranny back there and mine would get pocket crudballs in it. I had an airweight, and for some reason, after a few years the shroud started to bind. As though I'd been sitting on the piece constantly. Who knows, maybe I had been. But that's a weak link, for sure.

Finally, about 15 years ago, I moved to the 642. Airweight. Stainless. No hammer to catch. No pouches for crud to collect. No shroud to bind. It lives in my pocket no matter what else I'm carrying.

642... look no further. ;)

[lanternlad1]

Did Smith make a snub in 9mm? I prefer 9mm to .38. I know i can get a Taurus in 9mm, but I'd rather have a Smith.

[BillinNH]

I have a m38 and think it is the best choice. It has no danger of snagging the hammer and worries about getting lint and debris in the gun are really not an issue in real life. It's easy to regard as DAO when carrying.

When I check the end play on a revolver I cock it and lower the hammer slowly while keeping the trigger pulled, then check the end play in that condition. How do you do that with a true DAO?


Single action is useful at the range for checking accuracy.

So for me the Bodyguard style is the best choice. But I'd still like to own a 442 as well.

Bill

[mavracer]

Did Smith make a snub in 9mm? I prefer 9mm to .38. I know i can get a Taurus in 9mm, but I'd rather have a Smith
yes its a model 940 they go for a pretty penny when you find them.you could rework a .38/357 to shoot 9mm.I've seen reference to an 642 with a conversion cyl.

[22luvr]

I have owned both a Mod 638 Bodyguard and a 340SC Scandium. Good practice for me is to make it as real-life as possible. That means drawing/acquiring/firing. Since I pocket-carry, I draw/acquire/fire as quickly as possible and my target is short-range, inside of 5 yards. How quickly can you empty your hammerless snubby in DA only into a 9" paper plate at 5 yards or less? Getting proficient at DA shooting has made all of my shooting better.

[ronto]

I think you mean spurless, every revolver has a hammer.
I picked spurless because Ruger doesn't make a shrouded model.

[DrBoomBoom]

A buddy of mine made an interesting comment about hammerless guns like my wife's 642. He said in extreme close combat, someone grabbing for your gun could possibly stop a hammer from cocking, preventing you from firing. That wouldn't happen with a hammerless.

[ranger58]

the 642 S&W, plain and simple.:)


R58

[ArchAngelCD]

I don't remember what 638 looks like.:what:
http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o26/ArchAngelCD/DSCN2082.jpg

http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o26/ArchAngelCD/DSCN2083.jpg

[Green Lantern]

Mmmmm...gun pr0n!!! :D

Hey, I forgot about the advantage of being able to shoot through a jacket pocket (more than once!) with a hammerless - or "concealed hammer" I guess really is a more accurate term - model. Or the notion of the hammer getting caught on something...

My CCW gun is a Glock 19, and my backup/'deep cover' gun is a P3AT...so I don't think I'd "miss" being able to shoot single-action. ;)

So, knowing that it must have been the materials rather than the design that made the shrouded-hammer gun lighter than the concealed hammer - I think that'll probably be the way I go.

And it'll be .357, for three reasons:

1) .357 > .38
2) Even if I find that the Magnum is too much for me in a snubby, It'll be a comforting thought that the gun I'm shooting .38s out of is designed to handle MUCH hotter loads!
3) In my pre-September ammo buying kick, I went ahead and got some .38s AND .357s in anticipation of eventually owning one :o

Looks like a LOT of love for S&W. I'm not in much of a rush, and this may be fodder for a different topic, but do you think I'd be a LOT better off to save my $$$ for a Smith rather than get a Taurus CIA?

[jaydubya]

I OWN a 637, bought four years ago. If I had known then what I now know, I would have bought a 642 instead. I practice my 637 double action because that is how I would use it for HD/SD. I don't even bother to practice single action anymore. Hurts enough that I don't want to "overpractice" with it.
Cordially, Jack

[Cannonball888]

Hammerless?
I think you mean spurless, every revolver has a hammer.
Yep. No such thing as a hammerless revolver. What people think is hammerless is just an enclosed hammer.

[springmom]

My snubbie (S&W m37, no lock) has a regular hammer, and that was my choice. I have arthritis, and there are times that the DA trigger is just too hard. A good friend on another board suggested a regular hammer, telling me that the "snag on the pants" issue is really a non-issue and that the hammer might be important for me to have.

He was right on both points.

I've carried that snubbie a great deal since I got it, and it has never once caught on my belt loop, my shirt, a pocket, or anything else. The hammer gives you an option for SA shooting, one which, say, if you have to shoot weak hand unexpectedly, might become important.

Get one with a real hammer.

Springmom

[MCgunner]

Shrouded hammer for me. I wanna be able to shoot any revolver I own single action if I wanna. I do clean my guns and shoot 'em occasionally, too, so I ain't worried about lint in the action. And the gun rides in a front pocket, so I ain't worried about sitting on it.

[jamz]

I'm pretty sure there is a huge, gigantic thread about this in the revolvers forum....

[sdj]

+1 on the 442 / 642.

[Snubby 38]

:)I love the look of my model 649 and model 38. Call them ugly humpbacks, but I wouldn't part with either one!

[libertyrules]

I just ordered a S&W 649. Seemed like a good choice. I like the look and heft of it. I figure my range will be 3-4 feet, if I use it for why I bought it. Pull and shoot. Yeah.

[Erik]

The hammerless, actually internal hammer, revolvers have a slightly smaller demensions in the rear than their shrouded counterparts. As such, I give them the nod for "best" pocket design.

I'm awfully fond of those hump backs, though.

And carry a bobbed revolver in the pocket. (You left that off the poll.)

[ArchAngelCD]

I figure my range will be 3-4 feet, if I use it for why I bought it. Pull and shoot. Yeah.
You do know that a snub nose revolver is much more that a "belly gun", right? I can shoot my snub nose accurately from 25 yards out and there are some "old timers" that can shoot well from 50 yards out. Do your drills from 7 yds, 10 yds, 15 yds and then 25 yds and you will see the results.

[Bilt4Comfort]

I'll be redundant and say 642.

[Brassman]

Ditto on ArchAngel's last post. A snubbie cast reach out and touch if the toucher has done his/her homework.