9mm is making more sense in revolvers these days

TTv2

Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2016
Messages
4,998
Especially when the ammo costs half as much as .38 and .357 does and isn't out of stock. No, it's not as powerful as .357, but it's still decently effective in a snub and more powerful than .38. IDK how hollow points do with 9mm in a snub, I'd assume HST's will do fine, they seem to expand at low velocities.

No, I don't care for moon clips, but you don't need them to shoot 9mm, you'll just spend more time reloading, which at the range is not an issue.

My point here is that as conceal carry grows thanks in part to SCOTUS more people may start looking at revolvers as a no fuss, no muss solution to armed self defense outside their home and there's going to be more appeal for them to go with 9mm than .38 and .357 as they likely have a full size 9mm in the nightstand that they don't carry because it's a large, heavy pistol and not a small, light snub.

But without a doubt the major driving factor is going to be ammunition price and availability.

So, don't be surprised to see an explosion in popularity of 9mm revolvers in the next few years.
 
Moonclips are really the only way to go, especially with the auto rounds. Just makes loading and reloading the gun stupid simple and quick.

I had two Smith 940's when they first came out back in the 90s. Really liked them, but neither made it 200 rounds before they broke something internally and locked up. Wish they'd got them figured it out and they didnt discontinue them.
 
My 9mm SP101 goes to the range every trip now. Shooting it is decent practice for shooting my 38 snubs. Been shooting my 6.5" Blackhawk with the 9mm cylinder a lot, too. Wish I also had a mid-sized 9mm revolver.

9mm ammo is not currently worthwhile for me to order online. Academy down the road has it for basically the same price ($15 per box of 50). However, I got 38 special for $20 per box of 50 delivered, when it's $32 at Academy.

 
Last edited:
I picked up an Alfa Proj. 3" 9mm locally a while back. I'd never tried a revolver in 9mm but was curious. It was cheap enough that if I didn't like it I could move on from it with nothing lost. Gotta say it is an absolute hoot to shoot. A little snappier than a .38 and very accurate. It doesn't like performing DA with the moon clips but does well without them. SA works either way. I'd still take a K frame Smith over it any day.

Ammo isn't an issue for me since I roll my own, but I can see how it could be for others. I have to wonder though if, in a time of conflict, would the "military" ammo (9mm & 5.56/.223) disappear from the shelves faster?
 
I've been wanting for S&W to make a practical 9mm revolver. By practical, I mean reasonable bbl length, no fancy metal used in cylinder, no compensator, non-performance center nonsense. A good 7-round, 4" L-frame in stainless w/ adjustable sights, FO in the front would have me lining up with my cash in hand.
 
No, it's not as powerful as .357

It's closer than you think. All 357 mag published data is from 7-8" long barrels. But when fired from typical 3-4" revolver barrels the better +P 9mm loads will come very close (within 50 fps). And depending on the exact load will surpass some 357 mag loads. At least with 124/125 gr bullets. If you're shooting heavier bullets 9mm can't match 357.

That is from 4-4.5" semi-auto barrels which are about the same overall length as a 3" revolver. I haven't seen data from those same 9mm loads from a snub nose revolver. That would be my big concern about using 9mm in a revolver.

I have to wonder though if, in a time of conflict, would the "military" ammo (9mm & 5.56/.223) disappear from the shelves faster?

Yes, it does. But it is also the 1st ammo to be restocked. We saw this 2-3 years ago during the last ammo shortage. I still can't find 38 or 357 mag ammo locally, really any revolver ammo, and prices are more than I'd pay for what I see online. 9mm and 223 prices have gone up, but much less so and it is easily available.
 
I want a 7 round, 9mm GP100 with a 4-5 inch barrel.
I want an LCRx, 9mm, 3 inch barrel.
Come on, Ruger, these are in your wheelhouse!

I've never had any trouble finding 38/357 in all flavors on ammoseek.
 
In a sense, at least right now, the ammo makers are
FORCING shooters toward the 9mm.

Certainly the military and police buying habits have
a role in this as the 9mm is now THE handgun
cartridge.

The 9mm prices certainly have an effect of literally
killing off other handgun calibers and certainly those
for revolvers.

The answer may be that the firearms makers must
get together with the ammo makers and see that
a traditional revolver cartridge like .38 Special remains
within reasonable pricing to the 9mm.

Or maybe Bearcreek's Post #9 has the answer with a
new generation of wheelguns dedicated to the 9mm.

At this time in design, the moonclip probably would
remain the best method of loading such a gun.
In which case, someone (I don't know who) might declare
"Mooclips rule!" o_Oo_Oo_O
 
Hopefully someone actually starts making short frames for 9mm Revolvers. In nearly all cases 9mm Revolver are just 357 Magnum length cylinder/frames with 9mm chambers. The only 9mm specific frame I can think of is the Korth Sky Marshal, but it did not use moonclip so it was sort of disappointing and ugly. I believe Korth quit making it or at least is not importing it into the US.
 
A little money and time… Places like tkcustom will machine your 66/686 to accept 9mm in moonclips. I’ve actually been considering sending them my 640 for the same service. It’d turn a very-little-use gun into a dual purpose range-fun-plus-backpacker. The cost of it is far less than another pistol. As long, of course, as you intend to KEEP your conversion. (Haven’t seen anyone selling one of these…)
 
I don't think .38 or .357mag are going anywhere, they represent tradition (generally important to revolver owners and shooters), and work well in revolvers. Though, I've been playing with the idea of going with a 9mm snub for years.

In a K-frame revolver with a 4" barrel, .38spl hits above its weight class IMO. Despite somewhat mediocre power ratings (ft lbs), it has a good record with the right ammo. In a 3" or 4" barrel it penetrates well, without overpenetration, and a decent hollow point will reliably expand at the velocities generated in a 4" barrel and will usually expand in a 3" barrel. I love 9mm, but it really depends on the hollow point to expand for its effectiveness. When clogged with winter clothing, not all JHPs will expand. If an old tech LSWC-HP doesn't expand, the sharp shoulders of the SWC will work better to stop the threat than an unexpanded JHP acting like a FMJ. With its lower pressure sound wave, you also have less potential for hearing damage if you have to shoot it indoors. IMO, the .38spl is one of the best cartridges for home defense for this reason.

In a 3" to 5" revolver, there may be no better all around outdoorsman round than the .357mag. Enough power to stop most North American predators (though, I'd want more in grizzly country, and against the larger grizzlies and pretty much any polar bear it may be about useless), with far less recoil than .44mag or above. You can get far quicker follow up shots than a more powerful magnum, and .357mag is quite manageable in an L-frame or larger revolver, and quite acceptable in even a K-frame. Meanwhile, in 125gr JHP or SJHP form, it has historically been one of the most effective self-defense cartridges. A 3" to 5" K-frame or L-frame isn't too hard to conceal OWB, especially open carried, and the 3" K-frame (and for some the 4") is reasonably concealable.

In a carry snub however, a 9mm may well be a good answer. In a 2" revolver, it can be tough to find a round that reliably expands in .38spl. There are a few, but not really all that many and that can become a problem when there is an ammo shortage. Traditionally, the answer has been WCs or SWCs, but then you lose any chance of expansion (I like LSWC-HP to have some chance of expansion while covering my bets if I don't get expansion). In .357mag, you get to some pretty severe recoil levels in a small framed snub which can cause quick follow up shots to be difficult. Modern 9mm loads expand pretty reliably in short barreled handguns, and will about cut the difference between .38 and .357mag in recoil, while getting closer to .357mag power levels out of a 2" revolver. Moonclips provide much faster reloads than speed strips or speed loaders, and 9mm revolvers don't need you to spend extra to have them converted to moonclips.

There are three disadvantages though. One, there aren't many options if you want a revolver in 9mm. Also, they are generally limited to 5 rounds (I have a 6 shot Taurus 856UL that is roughly the same width as the Taurus 905). Last, you can only get a steel framed snub in 9mm, if you want to go lightweight, you have to look elsewhere (Micro-9 pistols, .38spl aluminum revolvers, .357mag scandium revolvers).

For me, I've thought about it for years, and I'm starting to lean towards picking one up in the near future. I do like my .38s, but I have more confidence in 9mm. I like roughly splitting the difference in recoil between .38spl and .357mag with only a slight penalty in power (when compared to .357mag in a 2" barrel). Over the last couple years I've started to really like snubs and 9mm in a steel framed snub shouldn't be too hard for me to manage quick follow up shots. In autos, I mostly shoot 9mm (I do have, and love, guns in .45 and .40, but the only caliber I buy in fairly large quantities is 9mm). There have been times that I've wanted to bring guns in other calibers to the range and found I shot up the caliber it came in and didn't replace it yet (including several times for my .38spls and .357mags), I never run out of 9mm. That is another good reason to go with a 9mm snub generally (if you already have a lot of 9mm for your autos), and I am definitely in that camp. If I do it, it will replace my steel framed 5 shot Taurus 85, not my 6 shot and lightweight Taurus 856UL, 6 shot Colt King Cobra (new model), or lightweight and very pocketable S&W 442.
 
Last edited:
Having owned several, I'm in that minority that actually likes 9MM revolvers. I still have a couple. FWIW, actual chronographed 9mm ballistics in the little 2" and 3" revolvers may not be as wimpy as some may think. The popular Federal 124 grain HST +P factory load averaged 1190+ FPS in a 2" revolver, 1290+ FPS in a 3" revolver. Since even the little 2" revolver approximated the factory advertised 1200 FPS for this load, I doubt expansion would be an issue. Ballistics with this and other 9mm ammo exceeded that of any major manufacturer .38+P ammo I've tested in 2", or even 4" revolvers. I agree, 9MM is no .357. But 9MM ballistics in the 3" and shorter revolvers is closer to .357 than .38+P in the testing I've done...YMMV
Ruger, Smith  9s  - Copy - Copy.JPG
 
I have a Smith & Wesson 642 and I purchased a cylinder for a Smith & Wesson 940 and had it fitted to the 642 effectively making what Smith & Wesson called a 942. According to the big catalog book of Smith & Wesson made two 942s. One was sent to Wiley Clap and the other one is lost to posterity. I think a reason why it was not produced was because it smacked your hand pretty hard. I really like the concept it works well, it fires well, it handles easily, Smith and Wesson Moon clips aren't the greatest but Ruger ones work. I later took that cylinder and stuck it in a Smith & Wesson 60-4 and it fit, the cylinders lined up, it locked up tight and it shoots very well. If I had my druthers I would have a 60-4 built with an aluminum frame or scandium and in 9 mm the adjustable sights and the three inch barrel are sweet. The round grip makes it very concealable. It probably would be on the short list for a one and only gun. With a swap cylinder set up with both 9mm and 38 special cylinders it would be quite handy. The reason I like the Ruger Moon clips better is the ring is on the outside yet there's enough that goes into the middle for the extractor to work. Because of the outer ring it seemed that the cartridges were held more securely with less wobble allowing a quicker reload.

Having fired a Smith & Wesson 340 PD or whatever it was in 357 and scandium that was much more of a handful than the 9mm in the 642. 9 mm having a little bit more umph than 38 makes it an ideal round where 357 has almost too much.

The only other thing I would look for would be if I could have found a 3-in barrel for a Smith & Wesson 940 and had that put on the 642 that extra inch in the 940 was great. The problem with the 3-in barrel and the 940 being stainless steel it was heavy for a 9 mm round but a 3-in barrel and an aluminum or scandium frame in 9 mm would be sweet.
 
Last edited:
Especially when the ammo costs half as much as .38 and .357 does and isn't out of stock. No, it's not as powerful as .357, but it's still decently effective in a snub and more powerful than .38. IDK how hollow points do with 9mm in a snub, I'd assume HST's will do fine, they seem to expand at low velocities.

No, I don't care for moon clips, but you don't need them to shoot 9mm, you'll just spend more time reloading, which at the range is not an issue.

My point here is that as conceal carry grows thanks in part to SCOTUS more people may start looking at revolvers as a no fuss, no muss solution to armed self defense outside their home and there's going to be more appeal for them to go with 9mm than .38 and .357 as they likely have a full size 9mm in the nightstand that they don't carry because it's a large, heavy pistol and not a small, light snub.

But without a doubt the major driving factor is going to be ammunition price and availability.

So, don't be surprised to see an explosion in popularity of 9mm revolvers in the next few years.

Although not my cup of tea, I agree with your thoughts and reasoning especially for those that don’t reload, which would be the majority of gun owners .
 
Although not my cup of tea, I agree with your thoughts and reasoning especially for those that don’t reload, which would be the majority of gun owners .
Considering the cost of primers now people, unless they use cast lead they got for free, would be spending more to reload 9mm than to buy factory ammo.

No thanks, I'll save my small pistol primers for .32 and .45 ACP.
 
I agree ^^. I am more referring to shooters that enjoy/want a wheel but don’t want to spend the money on the standard, rimmed factory ammo and like you said, 9mm seems to be reliably back in stock. I know that the only centerfire ammo that I would buy is 9mm. With that said, when the next latest and greatest panic hits and it will, I will start reloading my 9’s again because they will be off the shelves as well and will be back to a dollar a round when you do find them.
 
I agree ^^. I am more referring to shooters that enjoy/want a wheel but don’t want to spend the money on the standard, rimmed factory ammo and like you said, 9mm seems to be reliably back in stock. I know that the only centerfire ammo that I would buy is 9mm. With that said, when the next latest and greatest panic hits and it will, I will start reloading my 9’s again because they will be off the shelves as well and will be back to a dollar a round when you do find them.
If 9mm is your caliber of choice for all your handguns, that's fine. I can speak for myself and certain people as a whole and for me I have a number of revolvers collecting dust because factory ammo is not available or priced at levels I don't care to pay and the primers much the same. A .22 revolver is fine and all (except there are few affordable double actions available currently), but for more serious use the next best option is 9mm and there are a few options at prices I find acceptable as I'm sure others do.

It's enough of an issue that I'm considering buying a 9mm only revolver just to have some wheelgun to shoot.

Quite frankly whoever is buying a .38 or .357 that doesn't already have a good stockpile of ammo or reloading components would be making a bad decision because I see nothing that leads me to believe that ammo issues for .38 or .357 will improve for another two years.
 
...Shooters are "forcing" (via the laws of supply and demand) ammo makers towards 9mm.

I suspect you are correct what with the sales of 9mm
autos. But those sales are linked to the near total turn
back to 9mm by the FBI and various police forces after
a fling with the .40 S&W.
 
I suspect you are correct what with the sales of 9mm
autos. But those sales are linked to the near total turn
back to 9mm by the FBI and various police forces after
a fling with the .40 S&W.
Right. I would include the FBI and police amongst the "shooters" i.e. customers, that drove the shift to 9mm. Point is, it wasn't the manufacturers deciding they wanted to sell more 9mm and manipulating the market to do that. It was customers, including military, LE and private, that decided that's what they wanted and the manufacturers obliged.
 
Back
Top