For how much? $4-5k? lol
Looking for cc revolver
- Thread starter LUCKYDAWG13
- Start date
For how much? $4-5k? lol
OP
OP
LUCKYDAWG13
Member
Not in my price range
OP
OP
LUCKYDAWG13
Member
How do you like that kimber. To me it looks like the perfect carry gun
dickydalton
Member
I have another KimberK6S, 2" with night sights and laser. They are great revolvers.
shoebox1.1
Member
That’s what i did. Upgraded edc from 638 to 686 2.5+. Much more confidence inspiring having 2 more rounds!! And it carry’s fine
I've carried a S&W 642 with a Crimson Trace laser grip for years. It's just about ideal; compact, light weight and 38+P packs a wicked punch. I like Buffalo Bore FBI loads.
Dave DeLaurant
Contributing Member
My 3" S&W 60 Pro Series (top) might interest you. It's about 25 ounces with the Pachmayr Compac grip I prefer.
It comes from the factory with a front sight with a small tritium insert, but if that isn't visible enough you might consider one of these XS big dot front sights:
xssights.com
It comes from the factory with a front sight with a small tritium insert, but if that isn't visible enough you might consider one of these XS big dot front sights:
Aftermarket Smith and Wesson Revolver Sights | Tritium Sights
Browse our collection of revolver sights, all made to fit a variety of Smith & Wesson firearm heights. Smith and Wesson front and rear sight replacement. Click to shop today!
xssights.com
tws3b2
Member
642 and alike are about the most easy/comfortable you gonna find to carry. Didn't take me long to figure that out.
JERRY
Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2003
- Messages
- 4,161
It's probably already been said... Keep your current gun and upgrade the front sight.
shoebox1.1
Member
Xs big dot!! This is Gemini sp101
OP
OP
LUCKYDAWG13
Member
I might just do that. But I still want to look at that kimber
shoebox1.1
Member
I’m half tempted to put xs on my 686 2.5 if they make em
I've carried a J frame Smith for over 30 years: at first, a M36 in .38 Special, and later a M60 .357 Magnum. Both have 3" bbl's, and I carry OWB, 100% of the time. I prefer the 3" bbl's for their greater inter-sight distance which allows better accuracy...add's a bit of weight to dampen recoil, and are every bit as easy to conceal as the shorter 1-7/8" Smith bbl's. I do dress around the gun, and avoid wife beaters and speedos as a rule...at 78, those days are behind me!!
Both guns have adj. sights, and no, I've never had them get hung up on clothing during the draw movement. I like the adj. rear sight which allows me to zero any ammunition I care to load. For better visibility with my fading eyesight, I dab the front sights with white typewriter correction fluid or nail polish; it makes it pop right out in dim light. Too, I've never found adj. sights "fragile" as derided by some. And neither have two family members who had long careers in the Border Patrol, dating back to when they carried M66's, (which they prefer to the current issue bottom feeders: Sig, Glock et. al.)
As to loads, for many years, I carried the old "Treasury"/"FBI" load, (a good LSWC HP, at 950 fps), and handloaded them when commercial rounds were unavailable. I always loaded .38 Special brass to +P velocities, finding that the shorter case allowed surer ejection (even with the full length ejector rod on the 3" bbl'd guns), noticeably better than in .357 brass. Much later, when Speer finally came out with the good Gold Dot bullet, loaded for expansion from short bbl's, I made the change. Nowadays, I carry the 135 GD JHP in its .38 +P Special commercial offering. Both guns shoot it well, eject it promptly, and it hits where I'm looking.
As to the guns themselves, the M36 (blued gun below), has a better DA and SA trigger than the newer M60, but both are more than adequate out to 15+ yds, DA with my arthritic hands and 78 yo eyes doing the steering. The triggers improve with age and practice, but any decent gunsmith can tune them without jeopardizing ignition...(read: overly light trigger return and mainsprings).
So if you're considering a move back to the days of yore...carrying a revolver for civilian self defense, I doubt you could find a better combination than a good 3" bbl'd Smith, either a J or K frame. They do demand a training regimen to get acquainted and develop proficiency, but the process is far from the daunting odyssey as described by some. Hell, LEO's & civilians did it for near on a century... and you may find that mastery of the old design has it own level of satisfaction that many of us have come to cherish.
Best Regards, Rod
Both guns have adj. sights, and no, I've never had them get hung up on clothing during the draw movement. I like the adj. rear sight which allows me to zero any ammunition I care to load. For better visibility with my fading eyesight, I dab the front sights with white typewriter correction fluid or nail polish; it makes it pop right out in dim light. Too, I've never found adj. sights "fragile" as derided by some. And neither have two family members who had long careers in the Border Patrol, dating back to when they carried M66's, (which they prefer to the current issue bottom feeders: Sig, Glock et. al.)
As to loads, for many years, I carried the old "Treasury"/"FBI" load, (a good LSWC HP, at 950 fps), and handloaded them when commercial rounds were unavailable. I always loaded .38 Special brass to +P velocities, finding that the shorter case allowed surer ejection (even with the full length ejector rod on the 3" bbl'd guns), noticeably better than in .357 brass. Much later, when Speer finally came out with the good Gold Dot bullet, loaded for expansion from short bbl's, I made the change. Nowadays, I carry the 135 GD JHP in its .38 +P Special commercial offering. Both guns shoot it well, eject it promptly, and it hits where I'm looking.
As to the guns themselves, the M36 (blued gun below), has a better DA and SA trigger than the newer M60, but both are more than adequate out to 15+ yds, DA with my arthritic hands and 78 yo eyes doing the steering. The triggers improve with age and practice, but any decent gunsmith can tune them without jeopardizing ignition...(read: overly light trigger return and mainsprings).
So if you're considering a move back to the days of yore...carrying a revolver for civilian self defense, I doubt you could find a better combination than a good 3" bbl'd Smith, either a J or K frame. They do demand a training regimen to get acquainted and develop proficiency, but the process is far from the daunting odyssey as described by some. Hell, LEO's & civilians did it for near on a century... and you may find that mastery of the old design has it own level of satisfaction that many of us have come to cherish.
Best Regards, Rod
My normal carry position with M60 in the leather.
M36 with Pachmyar's
.357 M60 Smith and its understudy, M63 .22 LR
Same M60, but with "Bateleur" grips by Altamont. It's a pretty good grip up to .38 Special +P level, but beyond that the only comfortable option for me has been Hogue's Monogrip as seen in the pic above.
M36 with Pachmyar's
.357 M60 Smith and its understudy, M63 .22 LR
Same M60, but with "Bateleur" grips by Altamont. It's a pretty good grip up to .38 Special +P level, but beyond that the only comfortable option for me has been Hogue's Monogrip as seen in the pic above.
Last edited:
lee n. field
Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 4,453
Price no object, I'd probably be looking at a S&W 19 Carry Comp (or same thing in stainless, if it exists). Accessorize as desired. I'd be looking for a spurless DAO hammer, for carry, but not a big deal if that doesn't happen.
Another possibility is one of these. Ruger GP100, stainless, 2.5" barrel, adjustable rear, fiberoptic front. Heavy, but hits all the other good points.
Price being an object, I'd probably be looking at a Taurus 692. In the .357/9mm convertible version, there are 2.5" and 3" barrel versions, all with adjustable rear sights. And, Viridian announced a Lasergrip for these at SHOT this year. Still heavy(ish) (IMHO), but lighter than the GP100.
OP
OP
LUCKYDAWG13
Member
I think the kimber k6s is calling for me. But haven't had my hands on one to see how it feels. Looks like it's running right around $1000. So have some time to think about it while I'm saving. 
I can still hit what I aiming at with my SP101 but I know I need to start looking. For something with better sights. And really prefer 3 dot sight
I can still hit what I aiming at with my SP101 but I know I need to start looking. For something with better sights. And really prefer 3 dot sight
shoebox1.1
Member
Zendude
Member
I have not had an opportunity to handle one, but 4” SP101 revolvers are made with adjustable sights. There have been special runs of 3” SP101 revolvers with better sights. Then, there is the option of Gemini Customs Small Wonder Sights.
i tend to remain an SP101 fan, because the factory grip remains a custom-level best fit, in my hand.
i tend to remain an SP101 fan, because the factory grip remains a custom-level best fit, in my hand.
I carry a 686+ with the 3" barrel that hold 7 rounds . Many might consider too big or wide I personally do not see the problem . But a nice revolver also that is more slimline is the S&W model 60 with 3" barrel, this revolver holds 5 rounds. This is my revolver I carry OWB.
Last edited:
TTv2
Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2016
- Messages
- 5,566
The short barrel Sp101's have horrible sights. I get it, they're built for carry, but if I'm going to carry a revolver that's capacity challenged I want to be as accurate as possible and the SP101 with gutter rears and a low ramp front are not up to par.
There are Talo distributor exclusives for both the SP101 and GP100 that have taller front Tritium sights and a Novak style rear. These are far better and IMO should be standard catalogue items, not distributor exclusives.
IDK what S&W is doing outside their Ultimate Carry J frames, nor do I care as once you get bigger than that Smith seems focused on making "classic" versions for collectors to fill up their safes with or competition models, very little emphasis on carry until you get to the Scandium N frames. I will give S&W credit tho, they do better than anyone at putting the best sights on J frames and making them extremely light, however the velocities from what I've seen from some are disappointing; I think Smith's loosening up their tolerances to have less scrap.
It's a questionable trade: do you want better sights at the sacrifice of lower velocity and effectiveness on target or do you want more effectiveness, but with more difficulty seeing the sights and decreased accuracy? I'm tempted to just stop thinking about it all and keep buying Taurus revolvers that are half the price.
Anyway, between the SP101 and GP100 Ruger is the winner over Smith. If Taurus would follow suit and get tritium sights on their .357 and .44 revolvers (and make some 3 inch versions) I'd recommend them, but Ruger is leading the pack in that regard, so I'd go with them even tho they cost as much as Smith's now.
There are Talo distributor exclusives for both the SP101 and GP100 that have taller front Tritium sights and a Novak style rear. These are far better and IMO should be standard catalogue items, not distributor exclusives.
IDK what S&W is doing outside their Ultimate Carry J frames, nor do I care as once you get bigger than that Smith seems focused on making "classic" versions for collectors to fill up their safes with or competition models, very little emphasis on carry until you get to the Scandium N frames. I will give S&W credit tho, they do better than anyone at putting the best sights on J frames and making them extremely light, however the velocities from what I've seen from some are disappointing; I think Smith's loosening up their tolerances to have less scrap.
It's a questionable trade: do you want better sights at the sacrifice of lower velocity and effectiveness on target or do you want more effectiveness, but with more difficulty seeing the sights and decreased accuracy? I'm tempted to just stop thinking about it all and keep buying Taurus revolvers that are half the price.
Anyway, between the SP101 and GP100 Ruger is the winner over Smith. If Taurus would follow suit and get tritium sights on their .357 and .44 revolvers (and make some 3 inch versions) I'd recommend them, but Ruger is leading the pack in that regard, so I'd go with them even tho they cost as much as Smith's now.
Mannlicher
Member
I don't know of anyone making a three inch barrel revolver that is hammerless. Some years back I had the S&W custom shop build one for me. Started with a used Model 65 and had them install a new barrel and convert the lockwork to DAO and hammerless. Cost was actually very reasonable.
