Glock 22 .40 vs Ruger SP101 .357


PDA






Glockedout17
February 4, 2012, 10:47 PM
Need some help guys. I recently got a used Glock 22 Gen 3 never fired in brand new condition. I've had it for about 2 weeks now and it just sits there. I want something that can handle conceal carry and home defense duty. So I posted my Glock 22 up for trade, I got alot of good offers, but the Ruger SP101 was the only one that really caught my eye. The owner said he has only fired it about 50-100 times and it comes with two holsters and two HKS speedloaders. I've heard lots of positive feedback on the reliability and durability on the Ruger SP101, only downside is the round capacity, but i'm pretty sure that most threats won't take more than 5 rds. I just want to know is this a good trade. Help!!!

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 22 .40 vs Ruger SP101 .357" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
David E
February 4, 2012, 10:51 PM
You should do a side by side size/weight comparison before dumping the thinner Glock for 5 shots of hard to shoot magnum goodness.

If the size and weight of the G-22 is a turn off, you're not gaining much with the SP-101, unless you just really like revolvers.

ball3006
February 4, 2012, 10:55 PM
Trade it off for a Glock model 27. I have both and the 27 is the more accurate of the two.....Both Glocks are better than a SP101. Besides, you have 15 rounds in the 22, and 9 in the 27.....chris3

Captains1911
February 4, 2012, 11:14 PM
i'm pretty sure that most threats won't take more than 5 rds.

Really? How are you so sure? Do you have a crystal ball?

22-rimfire
February 4, 2012, 11:21 PM
As far as I'm concerned it is an equal trade. Both sell for about the same money new.

It is your call.

Inebriated
February 5, 2012, 06:34 AM
It's up to you... they're the same level of gun (quality, durability/reliability, accuracy, value, etc), so just decide which you want more... higher capacity and lower power auto, or lower capacity, higher power revolver. I personally do not like .40 S&W, so the SP101 is a no brainer. And full house .357 loads don't annoy me like .40 S&W... But like I said, it's up to you. You wouldn't lose on that trade either way.

303tom
February 5, 2012, 09:30 AM
Do the trade...................

Dean1818
February 5, 2012, 09:35 AM
I just bought a SP101 in 357 and plan to add it to the carry rotation.

My carry already has a M&P 45 C and a Kahr CM9 (for those days when I need something little)

The 357 performs significantly better than the 40 in a bullet to bullet comparison

Carry a speed loader, and you will be MORE than covered in 99.9% of potential bad guy situations.

AND...... the Ruger is made in America

furiousbeen
February 5, 2012, 09:45 AM
I'd go with the Ruger. That's a gun that'll be around long after humans have been washed from the face of the earth. Aliens will be fighting over the them !

ball3006
February 5, 2012, 09:50 AM
I might add....you can stick a 30 round mag in the Glock and have fun. Also, I use my Glock 40 to shoot wild pigs. I have seen how that caliber works on them and have no hesitation of using that round for my carry ammo. As I said before, look at a Glock 27.....chris3

22-rimfire
February 5, 2012, 11:45 AM
...the Ruger is made in America

So are Glocks, sort of. I understand the US made Glocks are exported and the US purchased Glocks come from Austria. Does that make any sense?

jmr40
February 5, 2012, 12:25 PM
Go to Ruger and Glocks website and compare the 2 guns ACTUAL sizes and weights. The G-22 is almost exactly the same size and weight as a 3" SP-101.

I'm not as concerned about the 5 shots vs 15, (although it is a factor to consider), as with the ACTUAL velocity you get from short barreled revolvers. You don't say what barrel length the SP has, but a 357 mag with a 2" barrel won't quite give you 9mm velocities. A 3" barreled 357 will barely beat 9mm.

soonerboomer
February 5, 2012, 12:28 PM
The 357 performs significantly better than the 40 in a bullet to bullet comparison

While true in a comparison of full sized guns, this is not true in a .357 snub nose such as the 2.25" snub nose SP101. In fact, the performance of hot .357 mag loads out of a short barrel revolver weakens to the equivalent of 9mm+P.

Check out this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqDysouNjL4

As for the OP question - I see no real advantage in the SP101 over the G22. However, I do have a snub SP101 in .357 mag and its a blast (literally) to shoot.

gunnutery
February 5, 2012, 03:55 PM
only downside is the round capacity, but i'm pretty sure that most threats won't take more than 5 rds.

I own and carry both the G22 and SP101. The G22 is for duty use and the SP 3" is my off duty weapon. I love the .357 and revolvers and I've carried my SP for seven years.However, I'm eventually going to switch to a G27 from the SP101 due to the fact that there are lots of stories lately of multiple threats because bad guys seem to be using force in numbers. I too would like force in numbers in the name of capaicity and much quicker reloads. Also by switching to the G27 I could easily switch to 9mm for practice or 357 sig.

Actually seven years ago I switched from a G26 to the SP because I wanted a more powerful cartridge. I have come back around to feeling the need for more rounds and feel that the 9mm would be more than efficiant in a time of need (I've always thought that but the .357 mag had more appeal to me).

Buzz9mm
February 5, 2012, 04:54 PM
If you have other semi autos then I would go for it if you don't already have a 357 Magnum. If that's your only one then I would suggest keeping it. If you've never shot a .40 it can be a handful but 15 rounds of that will beat 6 rounds of 357 any day, and that's coming from a big 357 fan. As far as concealed carry they both aren't ideal but I would go with the Glock, it has a lighter trigger and more capacity. You could also just sell it and buy whatever the hell you want with the money(unless your a felon...). Personally I don't like to do trades because I know that unless I'm really, really familiar with that gun I could easily get burned.

EDIT: I wouldn't recommend the Glock 27. Like I said, the .40 can be a handful and mines a full size. In a pistol that small, though I've never shot it, it would probably be downright unpleasant. If your that inclined to get a tiny gun for concealed carry I would just get a snub nose .38 Special or a 1911. You'd be surprised how easy relatively big pistols are to hide.

MachIVshooter
February 5, 2012, 05:44 PM
I don't care for Glocks or the .40 S&W cartridge, and I do like revolvers. But I'd still take a G22 over an SP-101 for almost any purpose. If I'm only getting 5 shots, it needs to be either a bigger bullet or a smaller revolver. Even the short barrel loads don't do all that well in >2" guns, barely better than .38+P, which can be had in revolvers a bit smaller and half the weight of the SP-101. For that matter, if you're really sold on .357, the S&W M&P 340 or 340 PD are significantly less encumbering than an SP-101. They're also not fun to fire, though.

My suggestion? Decide whether you really want an auto or revolver, then decide if it's mostly for carry or HD/range use. If it is for CCW, and you do decide on a revolver, I have two suggestions over the SP-101:

In .38 or .357, S&W J-frame or the butt-ugly Ruger LCR; They're much better for carry.

If SP-101 size doesn't bother you, why not go for something with just as much oomph, but a bigger bullet and less muzzle blast? That'd be the Charter Bulldog Pug .44 Special. THe cylinder is 1/10" wider than an SP-101, but they're also lighter than an SP-101 by about 3 ounces. My carry load is a 210 gr. SJHP that leaves the little Bulldog's barrel at 985 FPS. Pretty healthy.

I have an SP-101 in .32 Mag. I NEVER carry it. I carry my Charter .44 regularly.

Here's a size comparison (SP-101, CA .44, S&W 686):

http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n117/Hunter2506/101_1117.jpg

And another (Ruger Super Redhawk, S&W 629, S&W 686, S&W 65, Ruger SP-101, S&W 37)

http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n117/Hunter2506/SANY0025.jpg

As you can see, the SP-101 is MUCH larger than a J-frame

The_Armed_Therapist
February 5, 2012, 08:21 PM
With all due respect... The Ruger SP101, even the shortest barrel is NOT that much smaller than a full-sized Glock... It's thinner and (in my experience) easier to conceal. It's a common assumption that is false.

If you want to go with a revolver, you're going to want one of those TINY revolvers. If you stick with .357, it will SUCK to shoot and the stubby barrel will limit the effectiveness of the .357. If you go with a tiny .38spl, you'll be downgrading quite a bit from the .40sw.

Stick with the Glock 22 for now.

Glockedout17
February 5, 2012, 09:02 PM
All I have is full sized pistols. I wanted something that could handle both conceal carry and home defense. I've looked at the Glock 27 and like it. But i'm curious what else is out there that I can out right trade for? What are some good reliable handguns in the same trade value range of my Glock 22. I just need something smaller to carry. I also have $300 bucks that I can blow on a carry handgun and just keep my Glock 22. What are some good new or used carry guns in that price range?

Glockedout17
February 5, 2012, 09:03 PM
Oh sorry guys, thanks for the advice. Both are good handguns, but I might hold on to my Glock until soemthing else good comes along.

ColtPythonElite
February 5, 2012, 10:07 PM
I own one of each. I carry the 22 as a duty weapon, but never, ever carry it as a CCW piece. I carry the SP101 more often than not. If I could only own one of the two for CCW, it would be the Ruger.

Deaf Smith
February 5, 2012, 11:25 PM
Need some help guys. I recently got a used Glock 22 Gen 3 never fired in brand new condition. I've had it for about 2 weeks now and it just sits there. I want something that can handle conceal carry and home defense duty. So I posted my Glock 22 up for trade, I got alot of good offers, but the Ruger SP101 was the only one that really caught my eye. The owner said he has only fired it about 50-100 times and it comes with two holsters and two HKS speedloaders. I've heard lots of positive feedback on the reliability and durability on the Ruger SP101, only downside is the round capacity, but i'm pretty sure that most threats won't take more than 5 rds. I just want to know is this a good trade. Help!!!
I've owed quite a few snubies and Gocks (still do for that matter.)

The Glock 22 is a full sized gun used by many a PD for regular duty and is best for outside belt wear. It is an excellent home defense weapon or car gun, and yes, with right cloths it can be concealed. I have the Glock 17, 9mm version, and it works very well.

The SP101 is a true concealment snub. I have one with the 2.25 inch barrel, DAO, and Secret Service stocks as well as the S&W 640-1, also DAO.

Both are excellent IWB concealment guns that work in hot weather and t-shirts. Both are best with heavier bullets, say 158gr LSWHPs.

Swap for the SP101? If you need a all year round CCW gun, one that you can practice a real lot and not wear the gun out, the SP101 will do that. It is very sturdy and quite accurate. But I do suggest, since the SP101,, like most Rugers, are oversprung, get a Wolf spring kit and use the highest poundage springs that are still below factory ones. Much helps the trigger pull, DA or SA.

Both Glock 22 and SP101 cost about the same so again, if your needs run a year round CCW piece, get it.

Deaf

MachIVshooter
February 5, 2012, 11:26 PM
I also have $300 bucks that I can blow on a carry handgun and just keep my Glock 22.

Kel-Tec PF-9. They're a super-thin 13 ounce 7+1 9mm that can be had for about $270 brand new. Made in USA, lifetime warranty, darn good gun.

bruzer
February 6, 2012, 02:53 AM
I carry the G22 all day everyday. IWB with a PJ Holster ( http://pjholster.com/ ) and a Galco re-inforced instructor's belt. Have you ever been to an IDPA match? Watch the guys with a revolver. Then say to yourself, "How fast could I really reload my revolver?". Not to mention if you miss the target 6 rounds goes really quick. I'm not that fast on reloads with the G22 but I can tell there is no way if I had a revolver I could reload fast enough under pressure. I am no expert and this is only my observation.
Good luck and stay safe,
Mike

ugaarguy
February 6, 2012, 03:26 AM
I just need something smaller to carry. I also have $300 bucks that I can blow on a carry handgun and just keep my Glock 22. What are some good new or used carry guns in that price range?
Have you considered trading the Glock 22 and a little bit of cash for a new Glock 23 or Glock 19, or similar medium size pistol? Use the rest of that money for a quality holster, ammo, and range time for the new gun. When you have a little more spare cash get a good light to mount on the mid sized pistol's rail for HD duty.
I recently got a used Glock 22 Gen 3 never fired in brand new condition. I've had it for about 2 weeks now and it just sits there. I want something that can handle conceal carry and home defense duty
Let me preface this by stating that I don't even like Glocks. However, those few sentences just scream Glock 19 or 23. Despite my personal aversion to Glocks, I still respect them for the very capable tools they are. The G19 / G23 are simply two of the best multi-role pistols made. They give up little to their full size (17/22) counterparts in terms of service pistol capability (they even keep the standard light rail) which makes them great for HD. They're slightly larger than their subcompact counter parts (26/27), but only give up ankle carry & similar very deep concealment capability to the baby Glocks. Most folks can easily conceal & carry a Glock 19 or 23 with a good holster.

The_Armed_Therapist
February 6, 2012, 08:22 AM
You could trade for a Kahr PM or CW series (9mm, .40, or .45). Those are considerably smaller than your Glock and/or the Ruger SP101. The PM is almost pocketable. The CWs are around $400-$450 in stores, but it's easy to get deals on those. My CW40 was $299 new. The PMs are more expensive... $550-$650 or so, but a trade for a Glock could probably be worked out. Actually, just about any Kahr would be what you're looking for.

M-Cameron
February 6, 2012, 08:43 AM
just remember.....when you guys are comparing weight....be sure to take into account the weight of the rounds....

sure the two guns may weight the same....unloaded.

but with the glock youve got to add the weight of 15 .40SW rounds vs. 5 .357Mag.....

personally i carry the 2.5" sp101........with a decent holster, weight is virtually a non-issue, and with some nice badger grips she aint hard on the eyes either...

Glockedout17
February 6, 2012, 12:49 PM
Kahr is a good brand, but I'm not familiar with their firearms. I've also looked at the Kel Tec PF9, and I was really considering it until I came across a lot of negative comments and reviews. I have also heard and read that Kel Tec has since fixed these issues with the pf 9 (is this true? ). I just want a handgun that I can trust and practice with. I know revolvers are my best bet in the reliability department, I just want the higher capacity incase its needed. Like bruzer, I don't think I can reload a revolver as fast as a magazine fed pistol.

NG VI
February 6, 2012, 03:00 PM
In a pistol that small, though I've never shot it, it would probably be downright unpleasant. If your that inclined to get a tiny gun for concealed carry

The subcompact Glocks aren't all that different from the fullsized ones as far as shooting characteristics. I do think that the 26 might be a better option than the 27, though I love the 27 and carried it for some time.

The subcompact Glocks are unbelievably easy to carry IWB,

MachIVshooter
February 6, 2012, 03:33 PM
I was really considering it until I came across a lot of negative comments and reviews. I have also heard and read that Kel Tec has since fixed these issues with the pf 9 (is this true? )

The PF-9 has been refined, yes. That said, mine was one of the first and has always been a performer. I prefer to carry my S&W CS-45 or CA .44 Spl., but sometimes I can't. The PF-9 is so much thinner and lighter than those two, it can be carried under almost any attire. On the rare occasion it can't be, I have a P3AT.

The big issue with the PF-9 was the mag catch wearing down and mags dropping during firing. KT went to a steel catch, and will retrofit all earlier PF-9s for free. My plastic catch was OK, but I contacted them for the metal one anyway. They sent it free of charge, got it in 3 days and swapped it myself.

They're a great company. I once lost the ejector in my P3 when I was blowing lint out of the frame with compressed air. They sent me a new one, along with two spare recoil springs, for free.

KT makes good products, and their customer service really is second to none.

Glockedout17
February 6, 2012, 04:20 PM
I am going to check the PF9 out. I really like the design and the fact the it shoots 9mm. What is the durability like on the PF9? What are some good loads that can be fired out of it and still be easy on the frame?

NG VI
February 6, 2012, 06:06 PM
I don't know what everyone else shoots out of them, but personally I'd probably go with a standard pressure 147 grain, though to keep recoil light as possible in the light gun you may want to try out some lighter weight JHPs as well. The 147s are more likely to still be in their designed velocity window, which means they will behave closer to the way they are supposed to more of the time.

460Kodiak
February 6, 2012, 06:22 PM
I'd trade. I'm a revolver guy though and I hate Glocks personally, so I'd trade for sure. I carry an SP101 all winter in the waist band. Wonderful gun. I did just pick up a S&W 642 for pocket carry in summer though. SP101's are not light guns. I love mine. TRADE IT UP!!!!

MachIVshooter
February 7, 2012, 01:46 AM
What is the durability like on the PF9?

Good. KT has OK'd limited use of +P ammo, as well

If you ever do wear one out, KT will repair/replace it for free anyway.

What are some good loads that can be fired out of it and still be easy on the frame?

Well, I stoke mine with 115 gr. Remington JHP's. Why? Because they're cheap enough that they can be used every range trip, and that is comforting in the reliability department. They also performed pretty well in ballistic clay.

I have shot everything from WWB to my own 147 gr. +P+. The gun can take it, but I did have issues with those hot 147 grainers; The firing pin was wiping chunks of brass from the primer and I got light strikes on occasion. This problem did not present with standard pressure loads or +P loads with lighter bullets. Mind you, that 147 gr. load clocks over 1,200 FPS from my 4.7" Baby Eagle; It's hot by any standard.

Glockedout17
February 7, 2012, 08:58 PM
I got a good deal on a PF9 today for $229.99 +tax. I'm going to pick it up on friday when I get paid.... But I'm still thinking about trading my Glock 22 though. I think I really would like a .357 magnum with a 3" barrel and with a revolver in my collection, my dad will attend the range with me more often. The original Ruger SP101 that I was going to trade for had the 2.25 inch barrel. What are some good .357 magnums with a 3" barrel that's of equal value to my Glock? Remember my Glock is in brand new condition.

Elm Creek Smith
February 7, 2012, 09:09 PM
I carry a Glock 22 as a duty weapon. Off duty I carry a 3 inch S&W Model 13-3 .357 Mag or a tapered 4 inch S&W Model 10-5 .38 Spl and a S&W Model 37 .38 Spl with both concealed. (I don't do IWB.) Size and weight aside, the Glock doesn't conceal as well as a revolver due to the angular shape, at least on my lumpy old body. (I carry Buffalo Bore Standard Pressure 158 grain LSWC-HPs in both the .38s.)

My boss just bought a Ruger LC9 for concealed carry off duty because the Glock just won't conceal on him either.

YMMV.

ECS

stolivar
February 7, 2012, 09:59 PM
It's up to you... they're the same level of gun (quality, durability/reliability, accuracy, value, etc), so just decide which you want more... higher capacity and lower power auto, or lower capacity, higher power revolver. I personally do not like .40 S&W, so the SP101 is a no brainer. And full house .357 loads don't annoy me like .40 S&W... But like I said, it's up to you. You wouldn't lose on that trade either way.

I will take the sp101 over the glock anytime. I hate the 40 calibur


steve

Waywatcher
February 7, 2012, 10:24 PM
I hate the 40 calibur

How did you come to your enlightened conclusion?

For what it is, the .40 is quite respectable. In its original loading, it launches a bullet with the sectional density of a 230 grain .45 slug, with the velocity of a 185 grain 45 slug. It can also be fit into guns that normally would be offered in 9mm, which makes it more accessible than .45 ACP.

The recoil on a .40 is nothing if you can handle the recoil of .357 out of a SP101.

harmon rabb
February 7, 2012, 10:35 PM
Out of all advice on here aside, and plenty of it good, I don't see that the true strength of the sp101 has been pointed out -- it's a real 357. that means you can shoot the super nasty overpressure 125gr 357 rounds without fear. no 40s&w, no 44spl, can touch the ballistics you can get out of a sp101 loaded with the right stuff.

if you want a revolver and don't care to use the super nasty stuff, then, yeah, i can agree, go with a k-frame or j-frame/lcr.

Dan Bear
February 7, 2012, 11:03 PM
You can shoot .357+P out of the pd jframe and it only weighs 12oz. Super small and super expensive.

MachIVshooter
February 8, 2012, 12:13 AM
I got a good deal on a PF9 today for $229.99 +tax.

Congrats, that's a good price.

What are some good .357 magnums with a 3" barrel that's of equal value to my Glock? Remember my Glock is in brand new condition.

Well, if you try to trade at a gun shop, you're gonna take a pretty good hit on your Glock. Most gun shops will give you 60-70% of what they think they can sell it for. Since it's new condition but not new, they'd probably put it out for $489 or so (New Glock .40 cals are ~$540 most places). Which means they're apt to offer you something in the neighborhood of $300-325.

As for good .357's? Since you have your carry gun squared away, I'd look at K and L frame size 6 (and 7) shot guns, instead of SP-101 and J-frame. S&W model 13, 19, 65, 66 (K frames) 586/686 (L frames), GP-100, Colt I/J/V frame (Python/Trooper/King Cobra).

Also, 4" barrels are more common across the board in medium frame guns, so you're more apt to find a deal on one. Might consider it.

You can shoot .357+P out of the pd jframe and it only weighs 12oz. Super small and super expensive.

And super unpleasant with magnum loads. I wouldn't want to put a BB heavy .357 load through a 340/360 PD. They're nasty enough with regular mag loads.

David E
February 8, 2012, 02:35 PM
... no 40s&w, no 44spl, can touch the ballistics you can get out of a sp101 loaded with the right stuff.


Oh?

What ballistics do you think you're getting?

At "Ballistics by the Inch," the best .357 load is the Cor-Bon 125 grain JHP, and it's doing 1050 fps from a 2" barrel and 1271 fps from a 3"

The 135 grain .40 load from Cor-Bon load load easily surpasses it.

Where are you getting your information?

Glockedout17
February 8, 2012, 08:22 PM
I can't seem to find anyone with a .357 mag 3"barrel that's willing to trade. I know the longer the barrel, the better the performance of the .357 magnum. Most of these .357's that I see have 2 inch barrels. What are the benefits of the 2 1/4 inch barrel and what are the benefits of the 3 1/8 inch barrel?

Deaf Smith
February 8, 2012, 08:37 PM
The shorter barrels are much easier to holster and the barrel won't stick in your rear end or car seat or intimate portions (that is if you carry in the appendix position.)

I have snubs in 2, 2 1/4, 2 1/2, 2 3/4, and 3 inch. The shorter ones you can easily carry in the appendix position.

My S&Ws 642, 60, 640, and even SP101 with 2 1/4 inch tube are quite easy to carry in an IWB in ANY position.

The 2 3/4 (Speed Six) and 3 inch (686 CS-1 and GP-100) are better for belt carry.

Oh, and as for ballistics, I have personally chronoed Buffalo Bore 158gr LSWHPs out at 1000 fps from a 2 inch 64, and 1100 from my 2 2/4 inch Speed Six. It's an EXCELLENT round but airweight Js might be very hard to control with it.

I also caution readers on this. Tom Givens, of Rangematers, has pointed out more and more robbery teams are 2 and 3 men and a 5 shot J .38 is a very thin reed to sake ones life on in such situations. So I tell people if you do pack a revolver, pack a second one (or even a Kel-Tec P32!) They are just so slow at reloading and just 5 or 6 shots, pack a second one.

Deaf

oldcelt
February 9, 2012, 04:37 PM
Often I will carry my Ruger sp 101 3" .327 fed mag. It's a little hevier than the Glock 19 but in an iwb holster it is easy to conceal. Ballistically not too far from the .357 and a 6 round capacity. C.T. laser grips also, one speedloader, I hope will be enough.

Afterthought: Federal, american eagle ammo 100gr sp 1500fps muzzle 500 ft/lbs energy 3 inch bbl.

Glockedout17
February 9, 2012, 07:18 PM
Quick question guys, how is the Taurus Tracker 627 4" barrel .357 in the reliability department? I might pick one of these up for home defense and sometime conceal carry, just need a good holster. I want some thoughts on these first before I make a move on one. Does anyone have any experience or heard anything about these? Also I am eyeing a Rossi .357 mag with a 3" barrel, how are Rossi revolvers? I know that Taurus makes Rossi, but I have heard good things about both. I still would like to hear from you guys first before I make up my mind.

David E
February 11, 2012, 06:20 PM
That should be the start of another thread...

IBEWBULL
February 13, 2012, 12:15 AM
I didn't read all of the post but felt compelled to add my 2 cents.
Are 5 rounds enough? Well could be. Is one gun enough?
I got a fish eyed look when I told someone I packed two guns on more than one occasion.
Both wheel guns. A 640 with some nice Grasshorns in an R9 shoulder rig. Then a 66, 2.5 inch which will soon ride in a Simply Rugged OWB.
Over the years I have found packing an auto and extra mag was more uncomfortable than two revolvers. Maybe my body style or what ever.
Any how, I still have a G 27,30 and 36. They are some ugly tools but work fine in a Milt Sparks or Andrews IWB.
If I ever end up in a pinch without an armed friend to back me up I can pass my BUG to him or her. Handing my speed loader of extra mag is not going to hack it. This happened once. I happened to have my G 27 and passed the 640 to my wife. Nothing happened thank God but going through a parking lot with several pit bulls and drunken owners was not fun.
If I ever think I will need 15 rounds , well I am not getting evolved with a hand gun. Pop the trunk or grab the 12 gauge from the wall. But first think of why the instinct was ignored . You shouldn't be there in the first place.
I will be keeping both the wheel guns and the Glocks. Variety can be the spice of life. You choose your own spice.

Quick reply, Tarus, you gt what you pay for. buy American if you can.

gp911
February 13, 2012, 10:26 AM
One thing nobody mentioned is the loooong DA trigger pull on the SP101. I had a DAO 2.25" model for carry and when I compared it to my G23 I could post follow-up shots with the Glock in about half the time between the trigger, recoil, and muzzle blast. Combine that with 5 rounds capacity vs 13 and I sold the little tank. It was a great gun, but for defensive purposes there are better options. If you want a good revolver in general though, they're well built and fun to shoot.

FMF Doc
February 13, 2012, 10:28 PM
I would want the SP101 for carry, and used to use just that myself. But for HD, I want something with more rounds and the ability to mount a light on. So that means the G22. You can CCW the G22, it'll take a little work, but I know guys who do.

Manco
February 14, 2012, 01:23 PM
i'm pretty sure that most threats won't take more than 5 rds.

Really? How are you so sure? Do you have a crystal ball?

I think that when taken literally, Glockedout17's statement is true--most, as in the majority of, threats require five rounds or less. In fact, some require no rounds fired, and you could usually send even multiple threats scurrying away with one or two shots fired, whether they hit any of the bad guys or not (as most people prefer to not get shot). Some threats require more than five rounds, and others may even require dozens of rounds, but most (i.e. 50+%) do not.

Now, the subject of how many rounds you'd be comfortable with is different. Despite having said the above, I personally prefer to have more rounds because a simple "most" is not good enough for my comfort, even though it's very likely factually true. I don't have a "crystal ball," as you put it, so I don't know whether the threat that I may have to face in the future will be like most threats, therefore I try to take additional threat levels into account with additional rounds of ammo capacity. On the other hand, others may be comfortable with five rounds, which actually provides some margin over a simple majority of threats, I believe (at least from my extensive reading of defensive shooting incidents). It's still not enough for me, but it may be for some people, and I wouldn't fault them for it.

David E
February 14, 2012, 02:53 PM
I think that when taken literally, Glockedout17's statement is true--most, as in the majority of, threats require five rounds or less. In fact, some require no rounds fired, and you could usually send even multiple threats scurrying away with one or two shots fired, whether they hit any of the bad guys or not (as most people prefer to not get shot). Some threats require more than five rounds, and others may even require dozens of rounds, but most (i.e. 50+%) do not.

Cite your source, please.

Now, the subject of how many rounds you'd be comfortable with is different. ... others may be comfortable with five rounds.... , and I wouldn't fault them for it.

I would. For example, I don't care how "comfortable" someone feels packing a 5-shot NAA, it's still not a good choice for defense. Is it better than nothing? Maybe....perhaps even probably, but only if the user fully understands the limitations of such a choice. But those that DO fully understand choose something else.

Manco
February 14, 2012, 06:54 PM
Cite your source, please.

I did--most of the defensive shootings I've read about over the years required no more than one or two rounds, so it's anecdotal. I never intended for it to be more of a formal proof than that, as the OP wasn't trying to strictly prove anything, either. My point was really that a response to the OP's casual suggestion appeared to be addressing a somewhat different (but definitely related) issue.

I would. For example, I don't care how "comfortable" someone feels packing a 5-shot NAA, it's still not a good choice for defense.

It's not the best choice for every situation, but as for whether it's a good choice overall, that depends on how you define "good," and it's certainly a lot better than nothing. You don't consider it a good choice, and that's just your opinion--I don't either, but that's just my opinion. These are merely opinions rather than fact because even an NAA can kill or scare away bad guys, let alone a .38/.357 revolver like the SP101--we're not talking about spit wads and a straw here.

Is it better than nothing? Maybe....perhaps even probably, but only if the user fully understands the limitations of such a choice.

Probably is all that is required to handle most threats, and nothing you could propose (that is practical) can handle ALL threats anyway, so naturally the issue of ammo capacity comes down to a matter of degree and individual preferences.

But those that DO fully understand choose something else.

I think that a full understanding of defensive handgun use includes the knowledge that the differences in effectiveness between handguns is not nearly as great as many people believe. Sometimes even a small advantage can mean the difference between life and death, which is a point that I've brought up myself on a number of occasions, but in the big picture the difference is still small (even when including the NAA mini-revolvers). That is why there is such an emphasis on shot placement on this forum, for example. Also of great importance and practicality is choosing a gun that you can carry all the time (in the case of CCW), and one that you're good at shooting, even if that means resorting to .22 LR for some folks--proficiency and confidence are more important than caliber, in my opinion, although like ammo capacity, caliber still counts as a secondary consideration, with load selection being more critical than the actual type of cartridge.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 22 .40 vs Ruger SP101 .357" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!