Where do you rank the 38 snubby as far as a defensive weapon

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nothing wrong with a 5 shot snubbie, as long as you practice with it.

That being said, since I bought a Springfield XD SubCompact 9 mm, I normally have it handy.

Considering it's about the same size as a snubbie but, has a 13 + 1 capacity, or a 16 + 1 if you choose, what's not to like?

Plus, I'm much more accurate with the XD than I am with a snubnose. ( I replaced the trigger with a PowderRiver Precision Trigger, as I have with all of my XD's.)

Still, nothing beats a good 1911!
 
If it's something you'll practice with and carry, it's a good choice.

I like my Model 37 Airweight in a pocket holster. We're good friends and traveling companions.
 
CCW Civilian Defensive Weapon Rankings:

Nothing = 0
Sharp Stick =50
Full Auto M-16 pistol with 7 each 30 round magazines= 100

Snubby would be a 98, full-size semi auto pistol with 3 extra 17 round mags would be a 99.

Number of angels who can dance upon the head of a pin = 7,567,345,983,295,275,009,742 (answer to another useless scholarly debate).
well put
I'd rank it somewhere around Staff Sergent to Master Sergent. :rolleyes:
Still, nothing beats a good 1911!
yep
 
If it's something you'll practice with and carry, it's a good choice.
Well, if it is something with which you can train, it may be an adequate choice.

I learned early on that I could not train effectively with one.

Crude Werner has from time time offered courses for them, but I have not seen one listed for several years.
 
Another way to look at it. How many years did police plain clothes men carry a colt or S&W snubnosed revolver?
That is a whole nother discussion! We are talking about civilian SD, not police work. We can run the other way, the police go to the gunshots. A snub nose revolver would be a good BUG for them but when the bad guys are carrying 17+1 the police need plenty of firepower too. The police carried revolvers when there was nothing else, now there is.
 
Anyone who has troubles manipulating the slide on a comparably sized semi-auto like a G43 is going to have big troubles with the DA trigger pull on a stock j-frame.
That's simply not the case.

I've seen lots of women who had problems manipulating a slide who could easily pull a trigger.
 
That's simply not the case.

I've seen lots of women who had problems manipulating a slide who could easily pull a trigger.

You've seen lots of women who couldn't manipulate the slide on a Glock 43 but had no problems with the DA trigger pull on a j-frame revolver?

Sorry, but that's not even in the realm of believability.
 
When I carry one, it's largely out of nostalgia. I'll carry one of three Undercover .38 revolvers I own. Lately, it's been a stainless model I recently got, about 1985 vintage, I think. It's a solid and handsome shooter. The other one I'll sometimes tote is one I bought the day I was sworn in onto the job in 1987 (the third one, made in 1966, was my dad's, and I won't carry that one.)

I usually don't feel "less-armed" than when I'm carrying my 8-round semi-auto, a PF9 and, with that one anyway, I'm usually not carrying a reload (I know, I should.) But, in either case, there's usually a NAA .22 in a pocket also.

Absolutely I believe they are still a viable self-defense tool for the average LAC.
 
azrocks writes:

You've seen lots of women who couldn't manipulate the slide on a Glock 43 but had no problems with the DA trigger pull on a j-frame revolver?

Sorry, but that's not even in the realm of believability.


Actually, he said he'd seen lots of women "have problems" doing so, not completely unable to. I believe him, as I am married to one. But she handles the trigger on a Taurus PT-22, a rimfire DAO pistol known for a heavy spring, consistently every time. A J-frame revolver's trigger really isn't the big deal "Glock-only" guys make it to be, and it takes less training than effective and consistent slide manipulation usually does.

I don't doubt she could be taught to rack a G43, but I wouldn't want her betting her life on it until well after she'd mastered it.
 
I don't think ranking is useful as it implies a linear or continuous continuum which does not exist.

However, my view of the snubby. I've trained with it and taken a great class from Claude Werner on snubby uses.

It is a quite viable gun. You can deploy it quickly from a pocket and shoot accurately in reasonably close distances.

It's a really a single mugger gun for its core purpose. If you were in an intensive or complex gun fight (rare but possible in today's terrorist world), they are very slow to reload as compared to training with a semi. Yes, Jerry can - but YOU are not him and not wearing his gear.

Great BUG for when all goes wrong.

I suggest that those who opine shoot the gun in a match of some sort to see how it actually works under stress.

I don't feel unarmed with one but would prefer a semi on my belt as the EDC main gun.

Here is an evaluation of shooting a snubby in a close in match by me:

Short range with the J frame – 642.

Short range with the J frame – 642.

I have another thread on Eric's short range match in San Antonio. However, I wanted a new thread to discuss the orientation of this week's shoot.

I decided to shoot my SW 642 that has a CT laser grip. Looks like Tam's 432. I wore a holster as you can't draw from the pocket (Eric wants to avoid the obvious from folks of unknown skills). I had two speed loaders (HKS speed loaders) on the other side. So, gun on the left side and the ammo on the right.

I've previously shot this in IDPA and I took Claude's snubby class.

Eric's match is designed to simulate real and close up encounters that he draws from life and videos of such. Thus, the targets can be complex. There can be no easy cover and clear shot paths. This is unlike IDPA where the design usually gives you cover and the path to shoot fairly easily with cover with a small number of no-shots.

One stage had six targets mixed in with overlapping and close to equal numbers of no-shoots. Another had three close in opponents with t-shirts to obscure the obvious IDPA centers. Third, a drill: three targets, hit the first with two, the second with three , reload and the last with 4. Repeat. Fourth – barricades, no shoots and lots of targets – the kicker – the last target is at 10 yards (the farthest distance) and it is a picture of a terrorist. You have to fire one shot at the head – if you miss – it is considered that he was a bomber and he blows up and you lose 10 seconds (as you are blown up). Last, a series of close targets with a kneeling component. Disclosure- I don't kneel in matches – my knees are shot. I don't need to hurt them and also they can go and over I go. That happened in another match and I kept control of the gun down range and finished from the ground. But I don't want to risk it. So give me a penalty.

So, how did it go?

1. Accuracy – pretty decent – on the first stage before my grip and trigger settled in – I missed two head shots between some no shots but got the body shots.

2. On the others, usually 0-3s (targets were 2 shots, except for some mandated 2 body and 1 head and the bomb dude. So at these distances I was in the range of most of the semi shooters and better than some. I got the head shot on bomb dude – by that stage my muscle memory of the J had returned. Most people in my squad got the bomber but some were blown up. The other squad blew up quite a bit or so I am told.

3. The laser – at the real close – I could see the dot and used it for a fast sequence close up. However, in the TX sun, it was not visible beyond really close and looking for it, is stupid – thus -the old iron fixed sights.

4. The tee shirts – lots of folks shot so low. Below the bottom of the 0 circle. Hmm? I dealt with those by remembering what I was taught and shot between the shoulders.

5. The no – shoots. In the very crowded stage, about 5 out of 8 people hit a no shoot. The shots were usually on their edges, I don't recall a center mass shoot through but there could have been one. Something to think about for the Internet dude who will not shoot an innocent in a Orlando scenario because he is soooo good.

Take away about the J as a gun. Well, I could use it. With multiple targets – oh, are those reloads slow – no I'm not Jerry and I run out three times in a stage.

Thus, it is a nice one or two mugger at the gas pump gun. In the pocket and let's hope they flee in terror. In some horror show – I would prefer my Glock. I shot that the match before and it was much, much easier.

The J is uncomfortable to shoot after 90 rounds – ouch. 130 gr. UMC. Started to feel it. Usually never feel my 9mm, 45 ACP or a 380. These weren't +Ps, my usual carry.

It's not a gun for the nongunner if you take it seriously as compared to pulling it out and scaring the bad guy away. Yes, folks do use these successful and shoot them better than me.

Conclude, it's a bug or mowing the lawn gun. Today's world, I want better for the extreme case. Taking Claude's class was a big help. Laser – maybe at night or from a weird angle with no time for a sight picture but I like the sights better. The match is a good one as it moves away from some of the artificiality of the big games.

Note – don't trust the spell checker – it turns UMC into a bad word.

Here's a report on Claude's class:

https://blog.hsoi.com/2010/03/01/aar-snub-training-with-claude-werner/
 
I personally think that the .38 Special cartridge is grossly underrated.
With proper bullets, it's both a great carry cartridge and the small revolvers fit the night stand well.
 
I used to carry a .38 snubby exclusively. I now have another CCWs that suit me a bit better. That being said, I would not feel under-gunned if that's all I had on me. After much practice and many rounds, my 642 trigger smoothed out considerably. I can shoot it quite accurately.
 
A J-frame revolver's trigger really isn't the big deal "Glock-only" guys make it to be, and it takes less training than effective and consistent slide manipulation usually does.
My wife can operate a snubby revolver trigger but it is quite difficult for her and she has to use both index fingers at once to get it to pull all the way through.

She also has trouble operating slides on some autopistols. She has tried the G43 and was able to operate it although it wasn't easy for her.

What's the difference between difficulty racking a slide and difficulty pulling a trigger?

1. It's unlikely one would have to operate the slide even once during a self-defense shooting but one must operate the trigger for every shot.

2. Difficulty operating the slide doesn't affect accuracy. Having to use both fingers and strain to get the trigger pulled definitely does affect accuracy.

3. Difficulty operating the slide doesn't slow down follow-up shots. Having to use both fingers and strain to get the trigger pulled definitely slows down follow-up shots.

It's actually moot, as far as she's concerned. The same issue that causes her to have low hand strength also causes her to have low recoil tolerance. She absolutely refuses to shoot small centerfire revolvers any more because she finds the recoil unacceptable.

My sister has similar issue with snubby recoil. Her home defense gun used to be a Model 60 in .38spl. She can still shoot it but her upper body strength is limited after her cancer surgeries. She finally decided that she was unable to control it properly and felt like it might actually recoil out of her hands. She switched to a 9mm semi-auto as a result of the problems and has no issues shooting it.
 
Rate?

I dunno. But the shape of a snubby suits me, and it's my everyday carry piece unless the weather is cold enough to make it practical to cover a larger gun.

If funds supported it, I *would* upgrade... but it'd be to a .44 snubby, not to an autoloader.
 
Actually, he said he'd seen lots of women "have problems" doing so, not completely unable to. I believe him, as I am married to one. But she handles the trigger on a Taurus PT-22, a rimfire DAO pistol known for a heavy spring, consistently every time. A J-frame revolver's trigger really isn't the big deal "Glock-only" guys make it to be, and it takes less training than effective and consistent slide manipulation usually does.

There's no comparison between a PT-22 trigger and a stock j-frame. None.

I'm a 220lb man who works with his hands, either shoots or engages in dry-fire practice daily, competes here & there, and can easily rack anything I've ever shot... and I find the stock j-frame's DA trigger a significant impediment to accuracy. Are you seriously suggesting that a woman half my size who doesn't have the minimal hand strength necessary to rack the slide of a G43 can effectively use a j-frame trigger in a life or death situation with any reasonable hope of success? Not forgetting, of course, that even if it had a 1911's trigger the rest of the platform still makes achieving accuracy a challenging endeavor.

It appears that in your attempt to make everyone feel good about their choice in handguns, you've left logic at the door. All the wishing in the world isn't going to change the fact that a long heavy DA trigger pull, strong recoil, and weak hands are a poor combination if you're attempting to do anything other than develop carpal tunnel.

Weak women and heavy triggers isn't a training issue. It's a physical limitation issue. And carrying a gun isn't about just carrying it... it's about actually being able to use it effectively should the need arise. It seems to many people mistake the ability to shoot a gun with the ability to shoot someone (whos shooting back at you) with it.

Finally, it's not just the trigger. It's the recoil as well. Lightweight j-frames have significant recoil, even with non-plus-p loads. That's another thing that usually doesn't mix well with limited hand strength.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Weak women and heavy triggers isn't a training issue. It's a physical limitation issue. And carrying a gun isn't about just carrying it... it's about actually being able to use it effectively should the need arise.
Applies also to men with tendonitis and arthritis.

And to the need to remain proficient.

Ninety rounds through a 642--standard loads-put my hand in a soak after every session. And then I was advised that the damage is cumulative and rreversible.

My XD-S does not give me that problem.
 
Heavy snub trigger vs Glock 19

FWIW,
Had my mom out visiting her newest grand baby last week and wanted her to try some pistol options since she has VERY weak hands (arthritis & loss of cartilage in both hands). She had totally failed to bond with my step-dad's Sig 938 so we did some dry fire practice on the couch using my Colt DS and G19.

The revolver option is busted... no way could she squeeze the trigger in DA mode and not enough strength to pull back the hammer using either thumb. On to the Glock...

While racking the slide is impossible, holding the pistol steady with both hands and working the trigger cleanly was fine. Off we go to the Bass Pro range.
She was able to make fairly decent shots on a B27 target (first one was in L shoulder, next two were a little low center) set up at 4 yards. We talked about the need to practice wearing shooting gloves and take some pain meds/ ice pack afterwards, plus the importance dry-fire practice.

But the critical point is that if she had a Glock in a quick access pistol safe in Condition 1 she would be much better off than having a LCR .22mag or Smith 642. If anyone has better ideas for her I'd really love to hear them. Thanks!
 
Applies also to men with tendonitis and arthritis.

And to the need to remain proficient.

Ninety rounds through a 642--standard loads-put my hand in a soak after every session. And then I was advised that the damage is cumulative and rreversible.

My XD-S does not give me that problem.

Absolutely. I don't have any of those problems and I find shooting anything more than 50 rounds uncomfortable, which as you suggest does not bode well for maintaining proficiency.
 
A small revolver doesn't have to have a trigger that's terribly long or impossibly hard to pull. Put down the J-frames and pick up an LCR.
 
A J is not a bullseye or PPC gun. It is a last ditch, put the barrel against the threat, get off me gun. It can be shot from inside the coat pocket or purse without worry of jams. The long heavy trigger pull is part of the safety.

If the 642/442 is to light for you find a 640.

If the stock trigger of the 643/442 is to heavy for you order a Lady Smith spring kit. Lightens the pull, does not sacrifice reliability.

If you want to fully experience J flash and recoil forget the 642/442. Come to the range with me and I'll let you try my 340 M&P with full power 357 mags. And yes I do know what arthritis of the fingers and wrist feels like. Live with it everyday.

Yes there is still a place for the J. Like the Model O Colt it is not a beginner's gun but once mastered it is a very viable tool when used within its limitations.
 
I regret to say I haven't taken any such classes outside of the basic CHL class, where I qualified with a 1911. I didn't own anything smaller at the time.

The LCR is still difficult to shoot well at speed, but it's not as hard as a J-frame S&W, and I think part of the reason is the better trigger pull.
 
FWIW,
[...] no way could she squeeze the trigger in DA mode and not enough strength to pull back the hammer using either thumb. On to the Glock...

While racking the slide is impossible, holding the pistol steady with both hands and working the trigger cleanly was fine. [...] If anyone has better ideas for her I'd really love to hear them. Thanks!

Does it have to be a handgun? A pump shotgun in .410 or 28 gauge relies more upon gross-motor arm movement than hand strength. The little youth models are convenient for household use.

Between the two I would pick the .410 because factory buckshot loads are available, and I do not think birdshot is suitable for defence. On the other hand, Brenneke offers a 28 gauge slug. :what:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top