Recommend a snubbie

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yet another vote for the 642. I've been pocket carrying one for a couple months now, don't even know it's there. Not only me, others that know I'm carrying it can't tell which pocket it's in.

I did have to send it back to S&W 'cause the cylinder would stick when trying to open it - round trip was about 2 weeks.

Also sent it in for a trigger lightening job. Much easier to shoot now. Took it out yesterday & just for the heck of it I shot at a 24" x 18" piece of plywood at ~60 yards. Hit the plywood with every shot. I'm much more confident in this little snubbie now.

Oh yeah, paint the front sight, even the wifes'/girlfriends' fingernail polish will work good for that.
 
I have many "snubbies" from Colt, S&W and Ruger. A snubby can fill many niches, from belt and shoulder rig carry to pocket and ankle carry and can be for primary or backup use.

If I had to stick with just one for all 'round use, it would definitely be the 2 1/4" barrel Ruger SP101.
At 25 oz, it's light enough to carry all day easily, yet has enough mass that shooting full power .357 Magnum loads is consistently comfortable, or at least not uncomfortable, which can't be said for any other similarly-sized snubby revolver.

If you're determined to shoot and carry only .38 Special, I'd recommend an all-steel Smith (the 649 would be my choice) rather than an aluminum framed 442/642 (yes, I do own one), but the little Ruger is the definite pick for .357 Magnum use.

OTOH, if you're looking for just pocket carry, get a 340PD or other "scandium" alloy model. It carries much lighter in the pocket than the 442/642s, even though the nominal weight difference is only 3 oz.
Best.
 
For what you describe it sounds like the S&W 642 is the way to go.

The 642 is great, a modern classic. It is light (has an aluminum-alloy, or "Airweight" frame), has good fit & finish, is good for pocket carry, reliable, and is chambered in .38 Special +P, which means it can be loaded with credible defensive ammo. The 158 grain .38+P Remington lead hollowpoints or the 135 gr .38+P "Short Barrel" Speer Gold Dot are the real deal.

The 642 has a stainless cylinder, making it significantly more corrosion resistant than the 442 with its blued-steel cylinder. I do prefer the looks and the sight picture of the 442, but people who pocket carry them report a constant struggle against corrosion. Go with the 642.

These little guns require regular practice to use well. That's especially true if the user is new to revolver shooting, as it sounds like you are.

If you wanted a .357 Magnum snubby, that's a different proposition. Personally, there are no truly pocket-carryable .357s that I have an interest in. You want a steel-frame gun in a .357, which means the S&W 60 or the Ruger SP101. The 60 weighs 22.5 oz empty -- almost as much as your P99 -- and the Ruger weighs a few ounces more. Great guns (especially the Ruger), but that's not what you're looking for.

Good luck.
 
Last edited:
taurus 85

I bought mine about 10 yrs ago when I lived in Va and had a ccw. july and august were just too hot to wear enough clothes to hide my "normal" carry gun so I got the 85 snubby. It has the smoothest trigger action of any gun I've ever shot, I'd say it's d.a. is smoother then most s.a. but that's just my gun. I've owned taurus revolvers and pistols for years and I've never had a problem and would recommend them to anyone.
 
I also like a hammer gun. I have had a M85UL alloy frame Taurus for 8 years and it's held up very well to IWB and pocket carry. I've fired some +P in it, but mostly light stuff. It's very accurate and has a MUCH better out of the box trigger than any 642 smith I've tried. The little 642 is a dandy pocket gun and only a few dollars more'n my Taurus, though. I can get one for a little over $300, the Taurus was something like $285 I think.

That Taurus has one slick trigger, though, amazing. It's one of the slickest DAs on a revolver I've felt for out of the box. The quality issue is a myth when compared to Smith and Wesson IMHO. Yeah, there seems to be some folks that get lemons. Maybe more bad ones come off production than at the Smith factory, I don't know. I've yet to see a bad one, though. I have this little M85UL and a M66 nickel iin .357, a medium frame gun. Both are excellent.

If you want a hammerless pocket gun, I'd go with the 642, or actually, I like the airweight body guard models with the shrouded hammer, but single action capable. Pocket carry purists will point out that grit can get in that slot where the hammer is. I clean my guns often, though, and really appreciate a revolver with single action capability because I use my revolvers for more than just short range self defense. I like to plink tin cans, even pop a rabbit now and then. If you're going to do any relatively long range shooting with your snubby, single action shooting is nice.

attachment.php
 
A buddy recently bought a S&W mod 60 for $250 so the deals might be few & far between, but still there if you're patient ;) IMO, the S&W j-frames are the way to go & the steel guns are the nicest of the bunch. If I were going to get one today, it would be a 640 ;)
 
Buying a small-framed revolver probably isn't something I'd ever casually recommend to someone asking about a smaller defensive handgun ...

Shooting a standard size revolver requires good, basic revolver skills. Shooting a reduced size, or even diminutive, revolver requires even more refined revolver skills, by most folk's accounts ...

The very attributes that folks favor when it comes to the short-barreled 5-shot snubguns ... short barrels/sight radius, reduced profile iron sights, smaller grip dimensions, short trigger reach, light weight, etc., etc.. ... can often be the very things that make it much harder to accurately, effectively and safely shoot the little guns.

Factor in the DAO models and the heavier triggers, and you have some issues that would seem to reasonably require some increased skills, knowledge and training considerations.

I've watched some young LE pistols shooters, who were reasonably skilled and competent pistol shooters, suddenly feel as though the world had changed the rules when they brought their newly purchased J-frames to the range for qualification, and discovered they suddenly couldn't shoot nearly as well as they had expected ...

Whenever one of our folks asks me what I think of 5-shot revolvers for off-duty/Secondary Weapons, I first explain the pro's & con's, and then offer to them shoot a couple of them we keep in the training collection, or one of mine, if I've got it that day. More often than not, shooting one is enough to make them reconsider things. Some folks just don't seem to be inclined to spend the extra time and effort mastering the skills necessary in order to shoot the little guns as well as they would like, or as well as they could, it seems.

When I first picked up my 642-1 Airweight, I discovered I had to spend some frequent range sessions dusting off my revolver skills ... and I'd already owned a couple of other steel-framed J-frames, and a Ruger SP101. Once I'd worked my way through more than a case or two of various .38Spl ammunition using my 642, as well as a couple of training J-frames (steel and Airweight models), I was starting to feel comfortable and confident in my skills once again. Then, I had to make sure I included them in my training frequently enough in order to keep my skills from starting to rust again.;) Not necessarily easy. I rather consider the J-frames, especially the Airweights, to be demanding little things. If you're willing to consider shooting a perishable skill with larger handguns, then you can see how much more difficult it might be for a lot of folks to maintain their with the smaller models.

Then, there's the whole beach & sand issues to consider. Revolvers tend to dislike grit getting into the innards ...

The steel vs. lightweight snubgun issue is one to consider carefully, too. I can't certainly can't pretend to make the right choice for anyone other than myself ... and I own both steel & Airweight models.;)
 
fastbolt

You've brought up a couple points that I'd forgotten to mention in my previous post, mainly that it does require a bit of practice to become proficient with one of these little weapons.

I've owned a Taurus 66 in .357 for over 10 years, so I'm not unfamiliar with revolvers. But the first time out with the 642 was an eye-opener. The first shot hit a ~36" high wooden table that was inside the range, between me and the target, about 6 yards away. The second shot hit the bottom of the target. After a few hundred rounds I can now keep them COM.

A good trigger job and a new set of grips (that fit you) make a lot of difference too.

IMHO, Test firing one, either borrowed or rented, prior to purchase is a good idea for any firearm.

edited for spelling error
 
Last edited:
Thanks ... and you mentioned something I didn't think to mention regarding the sights.

I also paint the front sights of my snub revolvers so I can more easily see them. My 50-ish year old eyes are probably a contributing factor, as well.

Anyway, I may change when my paint runs out, but I tried both white & orange sight paints from one company, and settled on the orange. Makes for a nice, bright, neon/day-glo orange front sight floating up there in front of me, and has been surprisingly useful even in low/reduced light situations during night ranges, with some sort of back-lighting available, anyway. The orange was really useful in letting me more easily and more quickly see the front sights on my 642 & 649, and even on my SP101 & 37, for that matter ... especially during daylight hours, when the sunlight would make the 642's sights hard to distinguish.
 
Depends. Carry alot/shoot a little? Any Airlite S&W J frame, preferably a 642. Or check out the Taurus Ultralite.

Carry alot/shoot alot? A steel J frame S&W, Taurus or a Ruger SP101. Or maybe a K frame S&W snubby.

Don't overlook the used gun market. I see S&W 36's and 60's around all the time. Sometimes at very reasonable prices. It's pretty hard to beat the old classic "Chief's Special".
 
That Taurus has one slick trigger, though, amazing. It's one of the slickest DAs on a revolver I've felt for out of the box. The quality issue is a myth when compared to Smith and Wesson IMHO.
I disagree with the last sentence. I've seen nice, smooth-functioning Taurus snubbies and I've also seen a fair number with fit & finish problems. Case rim clearance problems in loading the cylinder; things like that. More so than Smiths.

But I agree with the drift of your first two sentences. In my experience the DA triggers on current Taurus snubbies do tend to shade the S&W J-frames.

Good for Taurus; it's one reason they're putting competitive pressure on S&W. I am seriously considering picking up a Taurus 85SSUL like MCgunner's pictured above. But I will insist on handling the gun before purchase and applying the good old "revolver checkout."

Whereas I would buy a NIB S&W snubby sight unseen with reasonable assurance of getting a well-made gun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top