Help me understand J-frames

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mitlov

Member
Joined
May 14, 2013
Messages
661
If I want a medium-size revolver from S&W, the answer is obvious: the 686. I understand how the Ruger LCR, SP101, and GP100 fit together in Ruger's lineup.

But when I look at compact S&W revolvers, I'm greeted with a multitude of different model numbers, and I can't tell which, if any, is their standard go-to snubbie. I don't need a full history of the J-Frame lineup--I realize that would be insane--but which would be S&W's main snubbie for conceal-carry (competitor to Ruger's LCR), and which would be S&W's compact all-rounder revolver (competitor to Ruger's SP101)?
 
S&W doesn't make a gun comparable in size to the Ruger SP-101.

A J-Frame is a J-Frame, and they are all the same size.
Only what they are made of, features, and finish differ.
(Blue steel, Stainless steel, air-weight alloy, and even lighter Scandium, etc.)
But they are all exactly the same size.

They used to make a K-Frame snubby, which was actually bigger then the Ruger, but somewhat comparable in weight.

But they no longer make that.

rc
 
the closest thing S&W makes to the LCR, (considering price, function, weight) would be the 642. The closest to a SP101 would probably be one of the Model 60 iterations
 
S&W has 3 different frames for the J frame line. The Chief's special frame has an open hammer, the Bodyguard frame has a shrouded hammer and the Centennial frame has a completely inclosed hammer. Then there is the partially polymer Bodyguard 38 that comes with a integral laser and it a totally different design from standard S&W revolvers.

Chief's Special Frame:
M317, M351PD, M36, M360, M37, M60, M63, M632, M637
Bodyguard Frame:
M438, M638, M649
Centennial Frame:
M340, M351 C, M43 C, M442, M640, M642

Some are Carbon Steel and some Stainless Steel, others are Aluminum Alloy, Scandium Alloy and Titanium Alloy.
 
Love me some 642. 637 is okay, have both. Did I mention, mmmmm, 642. Particularly with some practice.

Will admit I picked up an LCR .22 to get some live fire practice with a DA snub. Very nice trigger. Still love me some 642. Dry fire practice is key.
 
Maybe this will help you out-

The the Model 27 is a large frame- the N frame. The Model 10 is the medium frame- the K frame. The 686 is the L frame, sort of an intermediate size. The J frame is a small frame
 
Always been a big fan of the J frames, especially the shrouded hammer models, like the 649 and 638. My other favorite is the Model 36 with a 3" barrel and a round butt configuration.
 
ArchAngel above sorts this question out. When it comes to J-frames, you have four variables to consider:

1. Hammer design
2. Metal choice
3. Barrel length
4. Caliber

For hammer design, you can select from exposed hammer, shrouded, or fully enclosed. Each has a pro and a con. The exposed hammer (like the 637) lets you go to single action easily, but increases the risk of a snag when drawing from concealed carry. The enclosed hammer (like the 642) eliminates snag issues, but is DAO. The shrouded hammer (like the 638) splits the difference by minimizing snag while allowing single action. However, lint and dirt can still enter the firing mechanism.

With metal choice, whether going with blued steel, stainless, or one of the exotic alloys, you trade off weight versus ease of shooting. Even .38 spl out of a scandium frame can be a bit snappy. With .357, a lightweight snubbie is no "joy to shoot." Yet for daily carry, lighter is better. Over time, you feel every ounce.

For barrel length, most J-frames can be had in 1-7/8" and increments up to 3". All things being equal, a 3" barrel will give better muzzle velocity and accuracy than a shorter model. Shorter barrels are easier to conceal.

Caliber does not need discussion here, although .357 models (like the 649) can shoot both .357 and .38 spl.

The way I weigh all these criteria out, the 638 2 1/5" stainless is at the centerline of most pros and cons, and any other model will have more advantages and disadvantages.
 
No, the closest thing S&W makes to the LCR is the Bodyguard .38. Both are polymer framed and have a very smooth trigger. The S&W also comes with a laser, standard.

Oh, and they're both ugly.
 
I'm sure there are people here who know more about this than I do, but I see the basic difference in J-Frames as being they are either steel or alloy (allowing some J-Frames to handle +P ammo), and they can come with or without a hammer. Other than I don't see much difference.
 
Chilibreath

On older J frame models there were other differences such as the option of a longer barrel (3" on the Model 36 or 4" on the Model 34 Kit Gun), round or square butt, blued or nickel finish or steel, aluminum alloy, or stainless steel construction, as well as adjustable sights being available on certain models.
 
im aware of the Bodygard 38, but i know no one that has one and have not read many if any favorable reviews of it...thats why i defaulted to the 642...god knows how many people rave about that on here, and as it stands, it is probably the single most carried J frame in existence...the bodyguard 38 is not, nor is it anywhere near the top...that is why i did not compare it to the LCR
 
Howdy

Maybe this will help. Top to bottom, N frame Model 27, K frame Model 10, J frame Model 36.

The N frame was originally S&W's large frame, designed for the 44 Special cartridge. Later it was adopted to 45 Caliber with the Model 1917 and also adapted for the high pressure 357 Magnum cartridge. Later still it was beefed up a bit for the 44 Magnum.

The K frame was conceived in 1899 as a six shot revolver for the brand new 38 Special cartridge.

The J frame is a bit smaller, it is the right size for a six shot 32 caliber revolver. When chambered for 38 Special, the cylinder is only large enough for five chambers, not six. For a concealed carry 38, you are looking at the most popular, before all these modern J frames began proliferating. The five shot Model 36, known before 1957 as the Chief's Special. It had a 1 7/8" barrel. Other J frames may be made of different alloys, may or may not have concealed hammers, but the frame and cylinder size are pretty much the same.


3_frames.jpg





If you wanted a six shot 38 with a two inch barrel, you could get a M&P like this. Its successor after 1957, the Model 10, was also available with a two inch barrel.

snubnoseMP02.jpg



If you moved over to a Colt, you could get the six shot 38 caliber Detective Special. About midway in size between the S&W K frame and J frame. Just big enough to stuff six 38 caliber chambers into a two inch barreled revolver.

IMG_0563.jpg

Sorry, I don't have any double action Rugers to show for comparison.
 
I don't own a Bodyguard 38, but have shot one. I think the little gun is underrated. It's light, comfortable to shoot and pretty accurate. I'm embarassed to say that it did much better for me with the laser than it did with the open sights.

If the Ruger LCR hadn't shown up at about the same time, people would be raving about the Bodyguard 38.
 
S&W doesn't make a gun comparable in size to the Ruger SP-101.
Click to expand...

Well the 640-1 is close.

attachment.php


All are mine and all are in .357 magnum.

Notice the SP-101s size the 60-1 and 640-1. The S&Ws are a bit lighter and more compact but not alot more.

Deaf
 
Actually all J-frames are not the same size. Earlier models were shorter and had a smaller cylinder window. In 1996, S&W decided to compete with the Ruger SWP-101 and offer a small-frame .357. They lengthened the frame a bit and enlarged the cylinder window and cylinder. They also added more metal to the frame to make room for the safety lock.
 
David E said:
Not sure what you mean. The enclosed frame S&W Centennial came out in 1952, the LCR in 2009.
Click to expand...
He's not talking about the Bodyguard J frame, he's talking about the new partially polymer Bodyguard 38. IMO S&W made a big mistake using the Bodyguard name for their new revolver since it's easily confused with the Bodyguard frame.
 
Thanks everyone for the feedback. That helps a lot, particularly compared to S&W's unexplained list of a dozen or so slightly-different models.
 
As you've learned by now, the S&W 642 is the comparable model. However, I highly recommend that you test fire both before making a decision. My father-in-law has the 642. It's light, compact, and very reliable -- heck, it's a Smith. BUT, it hurts to shoot. You may dismiss that on account of the caliber. But, its weight, stiff frame, and grip make it tough. Specifically with respect to the grip, you'll notice that the two sides of the grip are flush with an exposed metal frame.

Ouch!

Recently I was able to test fire an LCR and I found it amazing as to how different the two guns are when shooting. I did some research to find that the LCR's primary designer (some European name) was able to design the polymer frame to absorb a lot of the recoil. The long-strand fiberglass injected polymer is pliable -- there's a significant amount of flex in the material. That absorbs a bunch of recoil. But perhaps most notable is the LCR's grip, the Hogue Tamer, which includes a thick gel pad insert in the back of the grip. So instead of having the metal frame destroying your hand, you have that grip with the gel insert.

As for durability concerns, Ruger stress tested an LCR, putting more than 10,000 rounds through it. When American Rifleman called and asked to test one out for an article in a 2009 issue, Ruger sent them that pistol. It functioned flawlessly and the gun was given the highest rating. I love mine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
J, K, L, N Frames
Replies
10
Views
772
Jim K
J
3
  • Locked
SP101 and S&W J-frame share holsters?
Replies
5
Views
1K
TonyB
T
Elkins45
  • Locked
Why choose an LCR over a J-frame?
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
5K
shoebox1.1
shoebox1.1
Macchina
  • Locked
Going to get a J-Frame for pocket carry... Which one?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
3K
OrangePwrx9
O
A
  • Locked
22 Magnum in J-Frame...What are my options?
Replies
9
Views
3K
VA27
VA27
Back
Top