laser sights solve snubbies' biggest shortcoming

[Dr_2_B]

I recently commented to a friend that a laser sight on a snub-nosed revolver solved its biggest shortcoming - that being the short sight radius & smaller sights making it more difficult to shoot quickly accurately.

Think that's a fair statement or am I off-base?

 

[tryshoot]

I have lasers on my lcp and s&w 642 and shoot both of them more accurite

 

[ColtPythonElite]

Never needed such a gadget.....I think lasers are often the crutch for the shooter's shortcomings.

 

[cpt-t]

Lazer sights on subbies

Dr_2_B: I belive you are right on lazer sights. I have a Crimson Trace on my 640 S&W and several other hand guns and so does my Son. With the Crimson Trace the lazer comes on when you grip the gun and goes off when you release the grip a very sight amount. You don`t have to worry about swithes or seperate on & off buttons, just grip the gun. I don`t see a Crimson Trace as a gadget or as a crutch. I see them as a advantage and everytime I have had to use a gun for real, I wanted every advantage that I could get my hands on.
Good Luck To You: ken

 

[arizona98tj]

Lasers on a handgun....is it any more lame than having a scope on a rifle? No.

 

[Doc3402]

Think that's a fair statement or am I off-base?

That depends on what problem you're trying to solve with the laser

In my opinion the biggest shortcoming of a snubbie is not the sight radius or the sights. The biggest shortcoming to me is their inconsistency past about 25 feet. You can lock one down in a rest and check it. I have yet to see one that will group well at any extended distance.

Don't take that as a knock against snubbies, but that is the nature of the beast. If using a laser within a snubbie's range limitations helps you out, go for it. Keep in mind that using a laser with a snubbie to get a tighter group at 25 yards is like asking Paris Hilton to speak on the merits of abstinence. It could happen, but it's not a realistic expectation.

With all that said you could benefit from the laser. In a low light situation the sights on a snubbie are horrible. The laser would help immensely.

In a 'what have I gotten myself into?' situation the ergonomics on a snubbie are usually not a big help in providing a consistent grip. Again, the laser could be helpful.

At the range the laser could actually hurt you. It fosters bad habits. You spend less time working on grip, and trigger control and more time watching the little red dot.

As a rule I never recommend a laser until the shooter is good without one. Once they know what they are doing a laser can make them better and more confident.

 

[mavracer]

In my opinion the biggest shortcoming of a snubbie is not the sight radius or the sights. The biggest shortcoming to me is their inconsistency past about 25 feet. You can lock one down in a rest and check it. I have yet to see one that will group well at any extended distance.

Funny mine do just fine at 25 yards. Maybe yours just has a bad ground strap.

 

[Doc3402]

Yeah, that must be it. Of course it depends on your version of just fine, too.

Using a Ransom rest for 25 feet I have five distinct holes that can be covered with a cigarette pack. At 25 yards I can cover the 5 holes with a half sheet of notebook paper. Again using the Ransom rest, with a 4 inch barrel at 25 feet I have one large hole and at 25 yards I can cover the group with a half dollar.

Hey, wait a minute. I'll bet the recoil from the lighter gun is moving that 8 foot wood picnic table I have the rest clamped to.

 

[Brian Williams]

A laser tends to be a crutch, using sights a snubbie should be just about as accurate as a 3 or 4 inch gun. Doc3402, you might want to do some checking on your gun and see if the barrel, forcing cone and the throats are consistent.

 

[Doc3402]

In my hand they are just about the same. In the rest is a totally different story. No, I'm not saying I'm a more stable platform than a clamped down rest. I think I'm just luckier.

The thing is that I can repeat the results with 3 J frame Smiths and an SP 101, although the Ruger is tighter than the short Smiths at 25 yards. At 25 feet there was no measurable difference with the four short guns.

The ammo was 125 gr Gold Dot JHP in all of the test guns including the longer barrels. No, I have not tried anything else. I was trying to make a point that day, and it came out the way I suspected it would.

I don't know, but it convinced me. After my gun store trip yesterday I'll be trying the same test with a 6 inch barrel soon. I picked up a cosmetically rough 6" Mod 19-3 yesterday for a really good price. It has a lot of holster wear, but no rust. Mechanically it seems fine.

 

[mavracer]

I was trying to make a point that day, and it came out the way I suspected it would.

I think this is one of the reasons behind the old saying there are lies, damn lies and statistics.
I have no idea what is going wrong with your testing but there's something,
I have several times shot 5 shots from a snub at 25 yards into ~3" groups off hand. Way too often to be dumb luck.

 

[Doc3402]

I have several times shot 5 shots from a snub at 25 yards into ~3" groups off hand. Way too often to be dumb luck.

I have, too. I can do it a fairly high percentage of the time for as long as my hands will hold up. Unfortunately, shooting free hand introduces way too many variables to make it a true test.
I don't know the answer, but I don't doubt what I saw.

What I suspect may not even be close, but the only answer I can come up with is the bullet weight, short barrel, and slow rifling twist combine to make things less than optimal. When you switch to the 4 inch barrel you are roughly doubling the amount of time and distance the rifling has an effect on the projectile.

Like I said, I don't know, but that's the only thing that makes sense to me. To confirm it I would need both lighter and heavier bullets at the same velocity. The lighter bullets should tighten up, the heavier bullets should be worse.

 

[Stress_Test]

All I know is, that after watching Hickok45 ring the gong and roll those silhouette targets with snub nose guns, I'm pretty sure that the gun itself won't be the limiting factor for me!

 

[Guillermo]

unless there is something wrong with the gun (as I suspect with the inconsistent J Frame mentioned above) a quality firearm with a 1 7/8 inch barrel is virtually as accurate as one with a 4 inch barrel.

Bob Mundon popped 3 in a row at 200 yards so the problem is not the accuracy of snubbies.

The shorter sight radius is an issue.
The short grip on a J-Frame is an issue
The lack of leverage of the barrel makes for more effort needed for follow up shots

I used the term "issue" rather than "problem" because like all things, they can be overcome with skill and practice.

As to the question, I have no problem with sighting aides.
Crimson Trace, for instance, makes a quality product. Handy in low light, a definite aid in follow up shots. To me, the best thing is showing a new shooter where there barrel is pointing during normal handling, as well as how much the gun can move during the triggerpull.

Laser sights have two drawbacks
One is that it trains the shooter to look at the target...not the front sight.
Second is that a shooter can come to depend on something that can easily fail.

So lasers can be useful but for me they more of a training tool than sighting system for a defensive handgun.

 

[mavracer]

I have, too. I can do it a fairly high percentage of the time for as long as my hands will hold up. Unfortunately, shooting free hand introduces way too many variables to make it a true test.
I don't know the answer, but I don't doubt what I saw.

I don't doubt what you saw either, I just doubt your results are typical.
If you normally out shoot a ransom rest there's something wrong with the rest or how your using it. also I'd add that one test with one type of ammo is really of no value.

 

[M2 Carbine]

Think that's a fair statement or am I off-base?

Gun mounted lasers are the best thing that's come along in my lifetime (75 years).
All of my defense guns, handguns, rifles and shotguns are equipped with (good) lasers or laser/lights.
For instance.








I also have a number of practice laser equipped guns.







I have a backyard range where I can practice low light/dark shooting (about 4-5 times a week). I also allow friends and new shooters, I teach to shoot, to practice using lasers.



Many shooters, from 2nd day new shooters, to people that have been shooting many years quickly become very good when (properly) using the laser. With knowledge and a little practice they become deadly and very fast, almost never missing.


Put it this way, if you can do this, in low light/darkness using your current method of low light shooting you do not need a laser.

On her third day of iron sights shooting I told this senior lady to shoot the gun out of the BG's hand, using a laser equipped gun. After a brief lesson on using gun mounted lasers she did this at 10 yards.
I told her this wasn't acceptable because she missed once.



Fast firing from the hip, at 25 yards, in the dark, using a S&W M&P 15/22. The laser/ light is the Streamlight TLR-2.




This was the end of this young girl's first day learning to shoot with iron sights.
As we packed up I gave her my Crimson Trace equipped 38 S&W J Frame and a bunch of ammo. After a quick lesson on shooting with the laser the young tore the targets up. I don't recall her missing the heads even one time. And this was the FIRST DAY the girl had ever touched a gun.




Using the laser from arm's length to 40 yards.
Even though it was so dark the target was not much more than a gray blur at 40 yards, using the laser it was still easy to keep all the shots near center, while standing (two hands).




Even shooting "weak hand" from the hip it is easy to center your shots with the 2 inch barrel revolvers.



So, if you can consistently fire fast and very accurately in low light and darkness you probably don't need a laser..........
unless you come up against a shooter with a laser and knows how to (properly) use it.

 

[rugerman]

I bought my wife a Ruger LCR with crimson trace grips a couple of years ago, she has a problem with pushing the gun just as it goes off. With the laser it is easy to show her what she is doing wrong. It also makes it easy to learn to control trigger jerk because she can see it when the laser dot jumps around on the target. From what I've seen the sights & laser are equally accurate, but the laser makes it easier to see what you are doing right or wrong so you can correct it. The laser also makes it easier to teach shooting with both eyes open.

 

[340PD]

I believe Very few are capable of looking at the front sight when a gun is needed for self defense. We all think we do, but few are. Your eyes will always go to the threat of danger and what is going on. Try sighting a snubbie laying on your back on the floor using your weak hand. I can easily do that with my CT lasergrips. Don't get me wrong, I know they can fail. I also know time to get a proper grip and sight picture is preferred, but I now spend much of my range time learning to point shoot at 30 feet using no sights at all. Stats used to tell us the gunfight is 3 shots in 3 seconds, from 3 feet. If so, it will not matter what sights you have on your gun.

 

[Guillermo]

Stats used to tell us the gunfight is 3 shots in 3 seconds, from 3 feet

those stats are from law enforcement. Often they have approached a bad guy. Perhaps questioning or writing a ticket.

They are meaningless when it comes to civilian shootings, for which there are no statistics available.

 

[Doc3402]

If you normally out shoot a ransom rest there's something wrong with the rest or how your using it.

I don't normally out shoot the rest. Heck, I normally don't even come close to what the rest can give me on other guns. All I know is it happened with this batch of guns, and it was a drastic difference with longer barrels.

also I'd add that one test with one type of ammo is really of no value.

Very true, but in all fairness I was trying to show the guy what might happen with the ammo he chose to carry every day.

What I was expecting was a slight drop and a slightly looser group as range increased and barrel length decreased. I was more than a little bit shocked at what actually did happen. Again, the only thing I can lay it off to is the slow twist in the rifling. This should not have happened.

 

[mavracer]

Again, the only thing I can lay it off to is the slow twist in the rifling.

Since most manufactures use the same twist rate for 2 and 4" barrels, I'd suspect that the gun was moving around in the rest or your snub has something wrong with it. I assure you off bags I can shoot 3" groups on damand with either of my CT equiped snubs.

 

[Doc3402]

The guns, as in more than one. Three J frames and an SP 101. A model 60, a 360 PD, and a 442. Smith is using somewhere around one turn in 18.5 to 18.75 inches. The SP 101 is using 1 in 18.75.

I don't know if it is because of the funky barrel or not, and no, this is not a plug or a praise, but Glock uses right around 1 turn in 9.5 inches. There has to be a reason.

 

[dawei]

Lasers work both ways; NOT COOL!

 

[Zaydok Allen]

I think it's really important to practice without the laser. Most defensive situations take place in low light conditions and utilizing a laser is a great idea, but it should never be depended on as the only aiming solution.

Still, it is helpful. I also like mine for dry fire training to work on my trigger pull.

 

[mavracer]

The guns, as in more than one. Three J frames and an SP 101. A model 60, a 360 PD, and a 442. Smith is using somewhere around one turn in 18.5 to 18.75 inches. The SP 101 is using 1 in 18.75.

Yes and they use the same twist in 6" GP100s and 686. Glock doesn't make a 38 special or a 357 magnum so what they use for rate of twist is totally mute.
Look It's obvious you have made up your mind and reason isn't working so I'm out of this one.