• You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Small Auto Comparison

Status
Not open for further replies.
P-64 again!

You guys are really missing out on a superb little jewel in the Polish P-64 in 9x18. Safe, small 6"x4.5", accurate, reliable, built like a tank, fits the hand great, easy to use and conceal, 6+1 cap. And very inexpensive compared to the overpriced, overrated, unhandy guns in your list. If you haven't tried one, don't knock it. I love my Rugers but I carry a Polish P-64 for many good reasons!
 
I guess if he or someone had the patience - a comparison of all snubs would be handy!
Click to expand...
Actually that wouldn't be so hard.
There's just not as many different sizes and configurations for revolvers.
With automatics, it seems that each company has designed their guns from the ground up so each is noticably different. Also automatics are less "customizable" than revolvers so things like grip size and trigger reach become more important.

WIth revolvers, the most commonly encountered ones are just variations on a theme if not just outright copies.

You have the 5-shot J-frame size as used by Smith & Wesson, Taurus & Rossi.

The slightly bigger 6 shot Colt D-frame size which is the Detective Special, Cobra, Agent and Diamondback. The Ruger five shot is also close in size being just barely smaller.

Then there's the slightly bigger six shot S&W K-frame size. The Taurus 5-shot .44 and .45 revolvers are almost identical in size. The six shot Rugers are also close enough for most comparisons.

Since snub revolvers are only available in a few select barrel lengths,the biggest detail would be the differing weights. Height would be determined by the type and brand of grips used and could easily be changed.
 
BluesBear,
Good reasons! Twisted my arm!!!
I'll add the 642 for reference purposes!

==================================================
BluesBear and P95Carry,
When I first started the chart I had originally intended to include all handguns 6" or less .32 ACP or larger. But as I researched the specs I decided personally that I was more interested in an auto than a revolver, so I just went with autos to save all the research time and keep the chart smaller.

I would be willing to do a revolver chart as a "joint" venture. If others would be willing to supply the specs and photos, I would be willing to combine that input into a chart. BluesBear's idea of just showing different "classes" of revolvers rather than every make and model may be good. If this is attempted we should probably start a separate thread for it.

=================================================
B.FRANKlin,
Is the Polish P-64 available new?
Is it less than 6" long?
And if so, where can I get the specs and a side view photo of it?
 
Yep - probably another thread if we do this (post link in this one) - well if you are prepaired again to consolidate data - assuming we can get enough.

I can only measure up 2 - SP-101 2 1/4 and M85 Taurus 2". But I know we have boatloads of Smith owners so - maybe we can gather what's needed - have to see.
 
BluesBear and Others,

The S&W web site doesn't give the...
Overall Height:
Overall Width:
Weight Loaded:
of the 642

Can you or someone else supply this info so I can add the gun to the chart?
 
While the S&W 642 is a fine revolver, in my opinion, the standard J-frame model 36 or 60 would be better for comparison purposes especially the original .38 special/1.875" barrel. (S&W used to call it a 2")

Plus the fact that there are a LOT more of them around than the hammerless/shrouded variants.


My S&W literature shows:
The .38 Special Model 36 at 6.3125" overall and 20oz empty.
The .38 Special Model 37 at 6.3125" overall and 15oz empty.
The .357 Magnum Model 60 at 6.5625" overall and 21.5oz empty.
 
You guys are really missing out on a superb little jewel in the Polish P-64 in 9x18. Safe, small 6"x4.5", accurate, reliable, built like a tank, fits the hand great, easy to use and conceal, 6+1 cap. And very inexpensive compared to the overpriced, overrated, unhandy guns in your list.
Click to expand...
Isn't the P64 as heavy as a makarov? You may as well carry a small 1911. :rolleyes:
 
BluesBear,
While the S&W 642 is a fine revolver, in my opinion, the standard J-frame model 36 or 60 would be better for comparison purposes especially the original .38 special/1.875" barrel. (S&W used to call it a 2")

Plus the fact that there are a LOT more of them around than the hammerless/shrouded variants.

My S&W literature shows:
The .38 Special Model 36 at 6.3125" overall and 20oz empty.
The .38 Special Model 37 at 6.3125" overall and 15oz empty.
The .357 Magnum Model 60 at 6.5625" overall and 21.5oz empty.
Click to expand...
The S&W website doesn't have the 36 but has a 36 LS, 360, 360 Gun Kit, and 360PD. Is one of these what you were referring to?
It has a 37.
It does not have a 60, but it does have a 60 LS.
Which would you like to use? I doesn't matter to me, but seems to me that lightest and smallest would be a better comparison to the autos.
BTW the LS versions (the 60 is only an LS version) have "Lady Smith" engraved on the frame. This probably means that most men would be embarrassed just to have one their hand with other people present.

Also, the S&W site does not give this info which will be needed for the chart.
Overall Height:
Overall Width:
Weight Loaded:
Do you have it or can you get it?
 
Since the Models 36, 37 & 60 are the basic, familiar models I looked up their specifications.
I have a rather large collection of catalogues and factory literature. I just went through it and copied the length and weight of the most common J-frame revolvers.

I did this for your comparison of pocket revolvers to small automatics, not to be a comprehensive revolver comparison.


But for clarification and general information;

The model 36 is the original Chief's Special .38 revolver.
The Model 37 is called the Chief's Special Airweight.
The Model 60 is the stainless steel version called the Chief's Special Stainless. It was also the very first stainless steel handgun.

The offshoots such as the double action only hammerless Models 40 & 42 were called the Centennial (40) and Centennial Airweight (42).
The shrouded hammer models 38 & 49 were called the Bodyguard (49)and Bodyguard Airweight (38).

S&W usually listed them as the same weight as a Chief's Special. If I recall there's about an half an ounce or so difference.

In modern day S&W jargon a 5 preceeding the model means it is a carbon steel model. ie 549
The number 6 signifies a gun with a stainless steel frame. ie 640
The number 4 signifies a lightweight frame. ie 442
The number 3 signifies an ultralight frame. ie 360
 
BluesBear,

You suggested adding a typical revolver to the chart so I'm leaving up to you!
What revolver that is still available new would you like shown as a typical pocket revolver in the Pocket Auto Comparison Chart?

If it is a S&W I can get a photo of it. If it is not S&W I could still possibly get a photo but I can't guarantee it.

I will need ALL the specifications so it can be compared to the autos "apples-to-apples".



Just fill this in completely for me and I'll add the gun to the chart.

Make and Model:
Caliber:
Frame Material:
MSRP: $
Operation:
Capacity:
Overall Length:
Overall Height:
Overall Width:
Weight Empty:
Weight Fully Loaded:
 
Ahhh I gotchya.

Since this is just for a comparison, like the 4" box, I would just call it a "Typical J-frame size revolver.
Then I would list the length and height (since all are within fractions of being the same) and then list the weights of several of the most commonly encountered models.

For a photo I would just do a shadow image of the revolver since it is just for comparison. I have several hi-res images i can send you.

I'll PM you later today (Tuesday) after I get the weights and measurements.
I'll have access to a J-frame and ammo by then.
 
this is one of the best threads I've read in A LONG TIME!!! Boy the time and effort is mui impressive. I wished this thread was around when I bought my mouse gun. I bought the Kel Tec 32. For me the size and weight can't be beat. With an unkle Mikes #1 and a block of wood the size of a mag (if your like me and don't have a spare) in the front of the holster , it prints like a wallet, and stays upright.
Thanks for the good read :D
 
I've been wanting an R9 but was hoping they'd come down in price and be available in some reasonable time period.

Any update in either category?

Beautiful piece of workmanship . . . . so I guess in the end I'll pay what it costs but wish they were more readily available.
 
I've been wanting an R9 but was hoping they'd come down in price and be available in some reasonable time period.
Click to expand...
HR - bad news twice I fear. Price has actually gone up, end of March or April - forget which. The costs on this lil pup have been huge - forget the small size - the investment in R&D, machines, tooling etc - have inevitably made this gun very expensive. Remember too - one thing folks often forget, the Feds take 10% of each gun sold in tax!!!

The sales are pretty brisk and since the Company's move to a new facility end of last year, in fact production has in relative terms been cranked up considerably. With that tho is even more stringent QC - and so in the end, the waiting list is still long. All this is part of a considerable success story but one also that has had huge costs to bear, over IIRC some 6 or so years since Karl drew on his napkin!

Remember tho too - there are many other top end firearms and custom jobs too - where prices do not come cheap and waits can usually be measured in several months.

Sorry to not tell you what you'd rather have heard.
 
Idea for Maximum Energy Delivered Calc

(P95 - thanks . . . . I'll wind up with one anyway! Can't resist quality machining and design. What is the wait time up to?)

Re Max Energy delivered number: If the manufacturer says the gun can handle any SAAMI load then couldn't we put in the highest numbers for the given caliber?

That would then be useful when compared against other pistols that need a certain specific ammunition to function where we could use whatever that number is . . . .

I second the vote for adding a Smith J-Frame. Also my choice for pocket carry and I think it would dwarf the pistols on the page . . . . which makes a real good case for buying one of these little fellows!
 
Highland Ranger,

Thanks for your suggestions. If someone can provide the SAAMI specs. I will be glad to add them.

I have added a J-frame as you and others requested.

I think the comparison is rather interesting, because you and many other revolver fans consider the J-frame so very small.

The model 360 and some other models are lighter weight than the autos especially in similar and even larger calibers. But in dimensional size the J-frame is actually larger than all of the autos (it doesn't even fit the chart's requirement of under six inches in length). I don't have the width dimension, but I'm pretty sure it is wider than all the autos also. I'm not saying that the J-frame is not easily carried in a pocket, but compared the autos -- though some models are lighter, they are also bulkier.

I don't want make this an auto vs. revolver thread. We all know that they both have their place and everybody has individual requirements and preferences... but the J-frame isn't as tiny (compared to pocket autos) as many think it is.
 
I should not read comparison threads like these now I want a pocket auto,.... maybe I should wait untill I have my 9/642 back from the smith, but looking at the comparison between a R9, pm9 and a p-11 I think I would go with the p-11 cause my daughter loves hers.
 
Love the chart.

Correction on Kahr weights from Kahr website.

PM9 is 14 oz + 1.9 oz empty mag = 15.9 total
PM40 is 15 oz + 1.9 oz mag = 16.9 total
 
I think it is interesting that Kahr is "under" in their weights and sizes on their website (like the PM9 listed as 5.3" long when it is actually 5.62" long). When it comes to weight, there must be some law that says that you must be within .2 ounce or something. This may allow Kahr to be in the "15's" rather than in the "16's". I weighed the PM9 about a year ago on my triple beam balance and found that is was a little over 16 ounces, empty. Maybe it is just manufacturing tolerances?
 
Is there a reason why the R9 can't shoot +p loads? It's the only thing keeping me from getting one.
 
The only thing that would make this chart better would be to have a rectangle superimposed showing the thickness of the gun
Otherwise this is fantastic.

For those of us who like old stuff a chart of old guns would be a cool reference.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Small Auto Comparison Charts
Replies
0
Views
4K
Bobo
B
S
  • Locked
Slide thickness vs. Overall thickness of various autos
Replies
7
Views
3K
Paints
P
D
  • Locked
Compact Auto Comparison Chart
Replies
1
Views
16K
Johnny Guest
J
ontarget
Looking for an accurate 32 ACP.
2 3
Replies
72
Views
3K
Walkalong
Walkalong
B
  • Locked
Popular Handgun Ammo Comparison Chart
Replies
23
Views
3K
Nimitz
N
Back
Top