Best revolver for CONCEALED carry

Status
Not open for further replies.
How about the LCR 327, with 6 round capacity, it has 3 or 4 different loads, including the federal 327 mag, which has similar ballistics to the 357 and holds one more round?
 
How about the LCR 327, with 6 round capacity, it has 3 or 4 different loads, including the federal 327 mag, which has similar ballistics to the 357 and holds one more round?
The gun's size is better suited to 32 H&R, losing the comparison of 327 to 357.
 
The gun's size is better suited to 32 H&R, losing the comparison to 357..
The LCR doesn't have a hammer spur. I think you have LCRx in mind that does have a hammer spur. And I would prefer the .357 magnum over the 327 Fed Mag. Even If it only carries 5 instead of 6 rounds.
 
Correct. I have already edited that post. I think 327 would have made more sense fired mostly single action. The LCRx is an odd duck with its cartridge restrictions.
 
The Lcrx comes in 357 and 38, it doesn't come in 327, or I would have jumped on it. Also after reading the Legal ramifications of having a hammer on a carry gun, IE: Ayoob, it kind of makes me think twice about having a hammer on a defensive revolver.
Although few are familiar with this, the Courts look down on a revolver used in a shooting because they consider a staged revolver, "one with the hammer pulled back, "a Hair trigger" which has occured enough to make several experts in shootings, adverse to carrying a hammer equipped revolver.
Yes i think it's stupid, but after looking it up, it is true, also it was brought up that if you have enough time to pull back the hammer, that your life really was not in danger, also bull, but look it up and please don't shoot the messenger.
 
The Lcrx comes in 357 and 38, it doesn't come in 327, or I would have jumped on it. Also after reading the Legal ramifications of having a hammer on a carry gun, IE: Ayoob, it kind of makes me think twice about having a hammer on a defensive revolver.
Although few are familiar with this, the Courts look down on a revolver used in a shooting because they consider a staged revolver, "one with the hammer pulled back, "a Hair trigger" which has occured enough to make several experts in shootings, adverse to carrying a hammer equipped revolver.
Yes i think it's stupid, but after looking it up, it is true, also it was brought up that if you have enough time to pull back the hammer, that your life really was not in danger, also bull, but look it up and please don't shoot the messenger.
I have a LCR in 357 and I prefer to shoot 38 +P Special in the gun as .357 ammo is tough to handle for practice. On thing I would recommend for all snubbie's is a laser sight. I've shot mine with and without the Crimson Trace grips I have for it. World of difference.You don't have to aim the gun with the laser sights just put the dot where you want your shot to go. Helps if you are shooting from the ground or having to shoot with your support hand.
 
The Lcrx comes in 357 and 38, it doesn't come in 327, or I would have jumped on it. Also after reading the Legal ramifications of having a hammer on a carry gun, IE: Ayoob, it kind of makes me think twice about having a hammer on a defensive revolver.
Although few are familiar with this, the Courts look down on a revolver used in a shooting because they consider a staged revolver, "one with the hammer pulled back, "a Hair trigger" which has occured enough to make several experts in shootings, adverse to carrying a hammer equipped revolver.
Yes i think it's stupid, but after looking it up, it is true, also it was brought up that if you have enough time to pull back the hammer, that your life really was not in danger, also bull, but look it up and please don't shoot the messenger.
The LCRx in 357 is "new" and only a snub. We have yet to see the more sensible 3" barrel version with longer grip.
 
The Lcrx comes in 357 and 38, it doesn't come in 327, or I would have jumped on it. Also after reading the Legal ramifications of having a hammer on a carry gun, IE: Ayoob, it kind of makes me think twice about having a hammer on a defensive revolver.
Although few are familiar with this, the Courts look down on a revolver used in a shooting because they consider a staged revolver, "one with the hammer pulled back, "a Hair trigger" which has occured enough to make several experts in shootings, adverse to carrying a hammer equipped revolver.
Yes i think it's stupid, but after looking it up, it is true, also it was brought up that if you have enough time to pull back the hammer, that your life really was not in danger, also bull, but look it up and please don't shoot the messenger.
But those are anti-gun arguments from an antagonistic liberal prosecutor. Hand wringing about what they might do should not control the entire world of concealed carry. Ayoob just creates a lot of hand wringing and pedantic mothering. Next we'll say that single action only is illegal, because it entails a "hair trigger".
 
1. While you are not likely to notice painful recoil under stress, physics doesn't care if you notice it or not. A gun with more recoil will still be harder to control, probably less accurate, and produce slower follow-up shots than one with light recoil, regardless of whether you are conscious of this in the heat of the moment.

2. Painful shooting equates to less practice for most people.

Very good points.
 
Why not get the benefit of that new trigger which with the tamer grip and the extra 327 round, is indeed not as pretty but does carry 20% more ammo that has very similar ballistics to the 357? Just curious for my own needs. If I am going to carry a higher powere revolver for a 2nd gun or even around the house, as I carry my PF9, for 10 yrs now, why not substitute a 6 round gun instead of a 5 round gun, which I would put a big dot on for night use out back with the dogs when I take them out several times in the evening
 
Although few are familiar with this, the Courts look down on a revolver used in a shooting because they consider a staged revolver, "one with the hammer pulled back, "a Hair trigger" which has occured enough to make several experts in shootings, adverse to carrying a hammer equipped revolver.
In the absence of eyewitness testimony, is there any way for an investigator or a prosecutor to know whether a DA/SA revolver was fired in double-action or single-action mode?
 
In the absence of eyewitness testimony, is there any way for an investigator or a prosecutor to know whether a DA/SA revolver was fired in double-action or single-action mode?
No.

That does not eliminate the risk.

There is a reason why many major police departments started using revolvers without single action capability some decades ago.
 
No.

That does not eliminate the risk.

There is a reason why many major police departments started using revolvers without single action capability some decades ago.
A DAO revolver would be a detective's or a bug gun, wouldn't it? In uniform isn't it mostly a Glock thing?
 
I sold a S&W M&P 340 because of the recoil and bought a 642 . But if you want to pocket carry a .357 I would look at the M&P 340 because it is so light , but it will not be fun to shoot , not even with 38's . It does have a better feeling trigger and better front sight than my 642 , I did like that part .

The Ruger LCR weighs about 4oz. more and is slightly bigger . It has a nicer trigger than my 642 and you can get a night sight for it . It also comes in 9mm if you want to stick with 9mm .

If you decide that you might not like pocket carrying , I would look at the SP101 3" , I did . The extra weight tames the recoil of the .357 a lot better and you get a little bit more FPS from the longer barrel .

Here are some of my holsters for my 642 . First is a Mikka pocket holster , round cut . It stays in your pocket when you draw your revolver , it does print in normal fitting jeans . I carry in the pocket when I am lazy and don't want to put on a holster and dress around it .

Second , is a OWB holster made by K&D holsters . They are no longer in business , its a shame because it is one of my favorite holsters . OWB is my favorite way to carry , most comfortable .

Last is a Milt Sparks VMII IWB holster . It is the hardest to get on and you have to buy your pants bigger in the waist .


+1000 on the 340 and the Mika holster. I gave my 340 to a former friend. Okay, he wasn't that upset. I bought a SP101 and I think the trigger is better in the Ruger and it doesn't annoy Arthur.
 
It goes to capability more than anything else, the "hair Trigger" gives the prosecuting attorney the ability to say you were somehow more prone to killing the subject due to the amount of preassure needed to fire the gun, "legal mumbo jumbo", would be sililar to having a modified carry gun with a change of springs and polishing the internals, that's why guys like Ayoob tell you not to modify your carry gun, it makes you look like a gunfighter.
 

Yep, 642 ain't bad. I bought this one new 20 years and my decided a month ago that she liked it. Poof...gone :scrutiny:

412255743.jpg
 
But those [statements about the light pull of a single action trigger] are anti-gun arguments from an antagonistic liberal prosecutor.
"Anti gun"? Not necessarily .

The more likely issue pertains to what a plaintiff's attorney will argue in a civil trial.

The standard of proof in civil court is much lower than in a criminal case.

That and the snagging issue led me to have the hammer bobbed on a Ruger SP101
 
I'm missing something in this argument about single-action "hair triggers." I can see it being relevant if someone is claiming that a shooting was accidental, but how is it relevant in a self-defense case? If you reasonably felt that your life was in danger and you pulled the trigger on purpose, why is the lightness of the trigger pull a legal issue at all?
 
Words lifted from the link in post #98..."The bobbed hammer makes this a DAO revolver with a heavier trigger pull."

I'm guessing the writer meant as compared to cocking a hammer and shooting single action.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top