Which .357 magnum for hiking?

[Logistar]

I know this has been discussed before but the thread on the 5-in model 60 has me REALLY confused now!

I decided that a .44 magnum was just too big to carry on trails. I am fairly certain that I want a .357 magnum for this purpose. I used to want a 686 but found that it is just too big for my hand. A Taurus 650 CIA feels just great in my hand but the barrel seems a bit short (I can handle the recoil just fine though).

Anyway, if you had small hands (like me) and wanted a gun with the usual compromise of power/accuracy/size/weight/durability/concealment that will typically be used for hiking... well...

any ideas?????

THANKS!

 

[P. Plainsman]

You indicated you wanted some barrel length. The situation seems tailormade for the 3" stainless Ruger GP100 -- fixed sights, and has a smaller grip than the 4" or 6" GPs. Bull tough gun.

Also consider the 3" Ruger SP101 (smaller than the GP, equally tough, typically a worse trigger, one less shot) or a K-frame S&W 66 or 19 (might need an aftermarket grip; sometimes will have a great trigger).

 

[reload4me2]

Hiking

When hiking I carry a Ruger SP101 38/357 with a three inch barrel. I carry it in an Uncle Mike's Sidekick - Size 2. I like the 3 inch barrel vs the snub for accuracy and bullet speed; yet it is easy for me to carry comfortably. The holster is a Cordura padded affair with a strap that snaps and the gun rides low in the holster with the trigger guard almost completely covered, but I can still get a good grip on the butt. The strap covers the back of the hammer and snaps which again covers the gun and gives good retention. I too have small hands and the SP101 fits me just fine.

I hike in AZ where there are lots of rocks and spiney plants to catch on - things that can scratch, The Cordura holster is very good to protect against this. Final testimony, I have been thrown from a horse wearing this set up and landed on my strong side where the gun was - landed on a patch of small gravel like earth - very compacted. The gun stayed secure. The only damage to the gun was a scrape on the SP 101's standard rubber grip. The hoster had a little ground in dirt - no other damage. I did not sustain anything but a bruise where the gun butt pushed on my lower/lateral ribs - I think a non rubber grip would have left me with a fractured rib - but I am not willing to try it again with a wooden one!

I have also used a Wilderness Safe Packer but found it more bulky than the above.

That is what I do for hiking. Backpacking - which I do no more is a different matter in my book. Every ounce feels like a pound by the end of the day and here I would be thinking Air weight/Ti type frames.

 

[pezo]

Gp100 in 3". You wont regret it.

 

[Sprout]

You might think about a 3" M60. Light, adjustable sights, extra sight radius, and not as big as the GP101, SP101, or 686.

 

[surfinUSA]

I like the 2.5, 3, or 4 inch K & L frame magnums for the woods. But in a J frame I would look for a 3 inch model 60, 357 mag with adjustable sights. I'm pretty sure that the ungainly 5 inch version was developed for sale in Canada. IIRC their handguns need at least a 4 1/4 inch barrel.

 

[MikeJ]

I also highly recommend the Ruger GP100 with the 3" barrel. I think you will find it to be ideal for your needs, I love mine.

 

[spj]

I sure like my Taurus titanium CIA, 651. 17oz of .357. It kicks, but so what.

 

[Logistar]

Looks like I need to check out a 3-in Rugar SP101 (and maybe the GP100) as well as a Model 60 (with 3-in barrel).

I definitely don't want to go any less than 3 inches on the barrel.

I'll often be in conditions similar to those mentioned by reload4me2. I appreciate the holster info too!

I also ran across this....

http://www.firearms.smith-wesson.com/store/index.php3?cat=293600&item=831383&sw_activeTab=1

Any advantages over the Rugar SP101/GP100/Model 60 ? (other than weight)

 

[V-fib]

SP101 3"

 

[Old Fuff]

Why turn down the model 60/5"/.357 Magnum? It was designed specifically for the purpose you have in mind. It has a longer sight radius and better ballistics then you'll get from a shorter barrel, and most of the objection to it so far is that the grips are too little and that makes it look funny. On the last point I agree, but grips are easy to change. Any other .357 Magnum revolvers that offer a 5-inch barrel are considerably heavier, and weight is something you are trying to get away from.

 

[Sir Aardvark]

Model 60

Lightweight and plenty tuff!

 

[unclestu]

Yeah, what Old Fuff said...

I agree w/Old Fuff. One of those 5" .357 Model 60's, with a decent set of grips on it, should make an outstanding outdoorsman's revolver. There are *lots* of grips made for the small-frame S&W's, surely you can find something that will fit your hand. It offers good sight radius, with adjustable sights too. Yes, you can learn to "hold off" with fixed sights, but it's a PITA.

Heck, a 5" .357? If it's legal where you live, you could bag a deer with it! No kiddin, that little gun offers serious power in a nice small package. Versatile, too. Use .38 Special wadcutters for the odd bunny or squirrel, 158 gr SWC's for a general load, and carry full house .357's for hunting larger critters, or for "just in case". Wild people? Let them worry about you! If you get one, be sure to get a few shot loads for it too. (Can you tell that I think it's a *very* interesting revolver?)

 

[Brian Williams]

Hiking/woods walking is the reason I had this made. S&W 65 round butt with 4" pencil barrel from a 64, shoots and carries like a 3" but just a tad bit more speed and a longer sight radius.
Other ideas is a 3" 60 with adjustable sights, I have one in 38 but load it 38+p
and the Ruger sp101 in 3"

 

[ReadyontheRight]

Stainless Ruger SP101.

Of course, the old joke is that if you are carrying anything smaller than .44 mag for large bear protection, you should shave off the sights and be sure to smooth out any rough edges on the gun.

Anyone care to deliver the punch line in "THR-friendy" language?

 

[sfhogman]

Naw. The only possible punchline just ain't suitable for THR.

 

[dairycreek]

The S&W 386. A 7-shot 38/357 with a 3+ inch barrel which weighs in around 18 ounces. Light and just right for hiking backpacking.

 

[BullRock]

This my first day on this forum, and this is the second time I have agreed with PEZO. Go figure!!! GP-100, 3"

 

[Marshall]

Here's a new S&W product.

Medium frame revolver in .357 Mag. It has a 4" bbl with high-vis adjustable sites. it's 7 shot's which can come in handy. It has a titanium cylinder and easy to hold grips.

The 4" bbl in a medium frame revolver is going to have more holster choices than a 5" bbl J-Frame. It a hevier duty gun than a J-Frame too. I have Model 60 with a 2 1/8" bbl, for hicking and being in the woods I would rather a 4" K/L-Frame or even a 4" N-Frame. I think the 4" is the best of both worlds for what you're describing.

S&W 520

My other choice would be a 4" GP 100 .357 mag

 

[thalo]

In .357 for hiking, hands down I'd choose the 327 Performance Center snubby. Light weight, great trigger, fixed sights, and a whopping EIGHT shots with super fast reloads using fullmoon clips. This is the one you want.

 

[Tacoma]

If you are truely backpacking where every oz counts, AND you can swing the $600+ price tags , ( and arn't afraid of recoil )the 14.5 oz S&W 360 kit gun scandium revolver is the cats behind. If you can't ( or won't) then consider the advice for a 3"mod 60 ( about 24 oz) and /or a 3.1" Sp101 (about 26 oz). Both are stainless and will take a beating. While, I'm partial to the S&W for fit, finish and action, the Ruger is hammer tough and has the advantage of it's unique take down system. It can be completely field stripped with only a knife and it's onboard takedown pin. (and rinsed out if you really had too. ) Kinda wish the SP still could be had without the full lug though.

 

[Black Majik]

I'm gonna agree with dairycreek on the S&W 386 Scandium. That's what I would have suggested also.

But with the BLACK finish

 

[Marshall]

With a good belt and holster you have no need to carry a baby barrel gun, I'm assuming you want to be able to hit something you shoot at. The 4" K or L frame size gun is a great hiking gun, not too big, not too small.

 

[Tom C.]

I have several candidates. In order of descending weight:
S&W Model 27-2, 6" (40+ oz.)
Ruger Blackhawk, 4 5/8" (40+ oz.)
Ruger 101, 3" (24 oz.)
S&W 360, 3" (12 oz.)
The last has particularly vigorous recoil.
If I wanted east coast black bear medicine, I would probably opt for the Ruger 101 with 180 gr. SWC.

 

[P. Plainsman]

Sorry, but I must strongly disagree about the overpriced 327 PC pictured above. I would not use that gun for hiking/ critter defense. Gun Tests magazine reviewed it recently and the velocities they got out of the weird-looking teeny barrel were LOW. As in, .357 Mag rounds coming out of the barrel at around 910 fps -- that is far too low, especially for your purpose.

With those numbers you'd do as well to pack a plain-Jane 4" Model 10 in .38 Special with the old FBI load. You could afford four nice used Model 10s for the price of one 327PC.

I have to say, the odd-looking, expensive, low-performing 327PC is my current poster child for how S&W is in danger of losing the plot when it comes to wheelguns. Yeah, yeah, Gun Tests is an eccentric magazine, but I trust them to read a chrono meter. The numbers they got for that gun were disturbing.

Now, standard S&W .357 K-frames and L-frames with some decent barrel length -- maybe that new 520 -- that is another matter, a better use of the money, and a sound choice.