Revolver for home defense

[jereece]

I am a new member to this board and this is my first post. I am 53 and have been around guns most all my life. I have owned shotguns for years but never owned a hand gun. I am familiar mostly with revolvers. I worked a couple years as a security guard at a nuclear power plant back around 1980.

I am looking for a handgun for home protection. Something my wife would feel comfortable using. I was thinking about a Smith & Wesson 686 with a 2 to 3 inch barrel. My thought was revolver because it's simple to operate in an emergency situation and short barrel because it would be a little lighter, easier to maneuver and shots would be fairly short range if someone broke into our house.

My Questions;

1. Is my thinking sound and logical?

2. Any suggestions other than Smith & Wesson 686 Short Barrel?

3. My local firearms shop is expensive. They want over $800 for this gun. I have seen it online for a little over $600. Any good places to buy online or should I go to a local gun show to purchase?

I appreciate any recommendations.

Thanks,
Jim

 

[gp911]

I'd lean toward a 4" barrel since concealment isn't a big factor. The longer barrel will reduce muzzle flash a little and allow for a little more velocity. There are a ton of similar choices to look at both from S&W as well as Ruger (gp100, the 'six' series that preceded it, etc). The .357 is a good choice because you can start out shooting .38s and get used to handling the gun then go up in recoil in increments. You have a lot of options, enjoy the search!

 

[Sam1911]

Hi! And welcome to THR!

Sure, your logic is perfectly sound. You can make many different choices for a home-defense weapon that will all get the job done.

None of them will do so without making sure anyone who's going to use that weapon has good training with it and knows both how and when to use it.

As for the WHEN part of that, (legal and tactics issues) we'll leave that for another thread.

But the HOW part is quite important, and a .38 (or .357) revolver is a fine choice for teaching someone and getting them the many rounds of solid practice they need to be safe and proficient with it. .38s are relatively cheap to buy (even cheaper to reload) and the recoil won't be a problem to overcome as you help her develop her skills.

A 686 is a mighty fine gun, but it is large, heavy, and expensive. You could make several other choices from Smith & Wesson's lineup (especially their PAST line up) that would do the job very well and be lighter on your budget and lighter for her to use as well.

The 686 is an "L-frame" gun and it is well-suited to full-power .357 Magnum loads. That weight will tame the recoil a bit. The older "K-frame" guns are a bit smaller and lighter and will do the job perfectly well, especially as you'll be shooting the .38 Special anyway, for at least 99% of her shooting, most likely.

You could pick up a 4" barrel "Model 64" (stainless K-frame .38 Special) for under $300 and she'd have a fine trainer and home-defense gun that would outlast your grandkids.


...

Another thing to consider is that handguns are not easy to make hits with. No gun will make hits if you haven't trained and practiced, but handguns do require a bit more skill to wield well than long-guns do. If she's absolutely set on a handgun, a revolver is a fine choice. If she's more open-minded, a 20-ga. shotgun loaded with low-recoil buckshot shells will probably be more forgiving of a new shooter's fledgling skills and will deliver a devastating payload onto the target.

 

[Skribs]

Lighter gun means more recoil, which is going to be a detriment to a recoil-sensitive shooter. I'd look at a Ruger over S&W. Both are noted for quality, Ruger is noted for not jacking up the price even though they overbuild their guns. I'd put a vote in for the Ruger SP101. It's about half the price of the 686, 3" barrel, holds 5 rounds, and is a very comfortable gun to hold and shoot.

 

[rcmodel]

+1 on a 4".

The snubby guns are no joy to shoot indoors with decent SD ammo.
And the longer barrel will give a performance increase due to higher velocity.

BTW: There are still a lot of very nice used S&W K-Frames & Rugers out there.

For $800, you could buy a pair!

rc

 

[threefortyduster]

Excellent reasoning. That is one of the main draws of revolvers, the simplicity. Point, shoot. Anyone can do it, and it takes some of the confusion out of a potentially deadly situation (no worry about safeties, whether a round is in chamber, etc).

As for individual selection, Ruger GP100, Taurus Medium Frames (bit harder trigger pull), and the Smiths are all out there. They all have great size grips (big enough to hold), and I'd lean towards a 4" barrel as was mentioned above.

I would highly recommend buying at a local shop if possible, but if you're set on buying online, check out Buds Gun Shop, haven't heard too many bad things about them.

 

[Skribs]

it takes some of the confusion out of a potentially deadly situation (no worry about safeties, whether a round is in chamber, etc).

I just carry an XDm and keep a round in the chamber 24/7. If I'm gripping it, safety is off, and a round is always chambered. So it's not a reason to choose revolver over semi, IMO.

 

[JTQ]

The late Mr. Camp has a bunch of good articles on his Hi-Powers and Handguns site that may be helpful.

House vs. Carry Guns
http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/House vs Carry Guns.htm

Revolver: Obsolete or Enduring
http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/The Revolver Obsolete or Enduring.htm

There are other articles worth reading, here is his home page
http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/index.html

 

[wrs840]

You could pick up a 4" barrel "Model 64" (stainless K-frame .38 Special) for under $300 and she'd have a fine trainer and home-defense gun that would outlast your grandkids.

This is the perfect answer to the OPs question. My 64-8 (ca.1994) police-trade that I bought for <$300 has been a true joy to own.

 

[verdun59]

My wife just does not like having to rack the slide on any of my pistols, consequently we have a revolver as her go to gun, and it's a 3" Ruger Sp101. The recoil is not bad and she is willing to practice with it, and that's what it's all about practice, practice, practice.

 

[rcmodel]

A revolver for non-shooters like the OP's wife is a much safer option then a semi-auto pistol.

A revolver is either loaded, or it isn't.
You can quite easily open the cylinder to see if it is, or not.

No forgetting the one in the pipe after you take the mag out, no clearence drills to remember, etc.

rc

 

[Steve C]

I'd suggerst a 4" K frame police revolver that is lighter and smaller than a L frame gun and a bit easier to handle for a woman. You can get .38 splecial S&W Model 10's in blue or 64's in stainless on the police surplus market for a reasonable price generally under $400. If you keep the original smaller grips your wife should have no problem holding on to the gun and firing it.

If you want a .357 mag you can look for a S&W model 65 which is the same gun chambered for the .357 mag. which will allow you to shoot both magnums and specials.

If you order off the internet you still will need a local dealer to recieve the gun and do the required paper work. Most dealers charge $20 to $30 bucks for this "service". Get a copy of their FFL and address and make arrangements with your dealer regarding price of service before ordering a gun from an internet dealer or individual. If you find a person locally with a gun you want to buy face to face you can usually skip the dealer and paperwork in most states.

 

[22-rimfire]

You can't go wrong with a S&W.

As a less expensive alternative, consider a 3" Ruger GP-100 or SP-101. Both are very good revolvers in 357 mag. The triggers will be stiffer than a comparable S&W (at first), but you can smooth one out with dry firing and not hurt a thing.

I keep a 3" GP-100 in the house as my primary home defense handgun. It is loaded with 38spl +P's since I suspect the muzzle blast and flash of a 357 mag indoors may be a bit upsetting.

Just remember, it is generally harder for someone to become proficient with a short barreled revolver over the same revolver with a longer barrel. But at home defense ranges (<10 yds), it shouldn't be too difficult to become sufficiently proficient.

Another one that I love is the Colt Detective Special (38spl). Fine proven gun! If you are like me, I don't want to use a safe queen, so you have to find one with a little wear that is affordable.

 

[Kendahl]

There is nothing wrong with a revolver for self defense. Although my wife can handle my Colt Gold Cup automatic, she prefers her Colt Diamondback revolver.

Your best bet is a medium frame, six shot, double action revolver from Colt, Ruger or Smith and Wesson. Taurus is another possibility although they have a checkered reputation. Don't be afraid to check out used guns.

You don't want to go too big or too small. Too big a frame means that someone with a small hand will have a hard time shooting it double action. Too small means that it is nasty to shoot (recoil, muzzle blast and flash) and difficult to shoot accurately. Aftermarket grips may provide a better fit. For a house gun, four inches is the best barrel length followed by three inches.

The same logic applies to caliber. .38 special / .357 magnum is a good, middle of the road choice. With anything smaller, you sacrifice stopping power. With anything bigger, size, weight and recoil beome issues. Shoot .38 wadcutter target ammunition for initial training and work up to .38+P or .357 hollow points for defense.

Avoid what I will call niche guns. Examples are revolvers chambered for 9 mm or 45 ACP and .44 special snubbies. They have their place but are not appropriate for a first (and perhaps only) general purpose handgun.

 

[ShadowsEye]

Add me to the S&W police trade in .38 club, add a $15 Houge rubber grip and you'll have a phenomenal shooting (if not a little ugly) revolver for cheap.

 

[Black Knight]

A revolver for home defense is fine. I would go with a 3-4 inch barrel unless it will also be your carry gun then a 2 1/2" barrel my suffice. Since you mentioned the 686 I will address a couple of points on that particular revolver. It is a fine choice to start with. I carried one for several years as an armed security officer working night patrol operations. It never failed me. Now for ammo, do not use 357 Magnum ammo inside. The muzzle blast is quite amazing not to mention over penetration at close range. You do not want to shoot and the bullet goes through a BG and then through a wall hitting someone else. Stay with 38 Special +P ammo. It is much safer in both regards. I still have my 686 and it has 38 Spec+P ammo. Actually I use the same load in all my 357s at home.

 

[MedWheeler]

Another vote for a less-expensive and more suitably-sized (you're getting it for her, right?) K-Frame S&W or similar-sized model from another maker. If you come across a used Ruger Security-Six with a four-inch barrel, you will be hard-pressed to find a better, more solid value. The same maker's Service Six is the same gun without adjustable sights. Both are out of production, but are available used, typically for around three bills.

 

[BSA1]

DANG IT! SAM1911 beat me to all the good points.

As pointed out the K-Frame S&W is most excellent choice. If the grip is too small for your wife's hand it is a easy project to round the frame or shop around for a Model 10 that has been factory modified.

As for price I recently picked up a used Model 10-6 from Cabelas for $219. With tax I walked out the door with it for $239. I am going to give it to my daughter when she moves out for home.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Another recommendation for the 4" S&W K-frame, be it a model 10, 13, 14, 15, 19, 64, 65 or 66. I personally recommend the Model 65 ("combat magnum") in a 4" for your purposes. The 65 is a stainless .357 with fixed sights.

The K-frames can't handle a steady diet of super-hot magnum loads (occasional is OK), but are fine with common commercial .357 fodder, and will last pretty much forever with .38 & .38 +P loads.

The K-frame is heavy enough to make shooting enjoyable for most any shooter, but is not the rather hulking gun that the L-frame (686, etc) are.

Here is a pic of a few of mine I took for frame size comparisons:



They are, from top to bottom, a Ruger Super Redhawk, S&W 629 (N Frame), S&W 686 (L Frame), S&W 65 (K Frame), Ruger SP101, S&W 37 (J-Frame)

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I have to agree with the 4" barrel for home defense.

I also agree you can buy a very nice used K frame for a good price or try to find a Ruger Six-series revolver.

My home defense pistol is an older 4" S&W M&P loaded with the FBI Load. (158gr LSWC/HP .38 Special +P)

 

[TestPilot]

I disagree.

The line of thought is stereotype and rethoric based than logic based.

Simplicity?

Revolver: Pick it up, aim, pull trigger.
M&P, Glock, XD, etc.: Pick it up, aim, pull trigger.

What's the difference?



Weight?

Even 2~3 inch barrel M686 are heavier than full size sevice version of all 3 self loaders I've mentioned.



What about actually hitting things?

M&P and XD's trigger, and even Glock trigger is easier to pull than a DA revolver trigger.

Take your wife to a rental range and let her shoot those pistols. Most ranges will have those pistols for rent, and it will at least have a Glock. Then ask her what was most easiset to shoot with.

 

[Sam1911]

The line of thought is stereotype and rethoric based than logic based.

Simplicity?

Revolver: Pick it up, aim, pull trigger.
M&P, Glock, XD, etc.: Pick it up, aim, pull trigger.

What's the difference?

No, it's emminently logical, if you look at the bigger picture. You're thinking only of the single step of firing the weapon. When considering the rest of the manual of arms, the picture changes a bit.

I'm sure none of us*, here, would think that there's anything complicated about loading a magazine, inserting it into the pistol, racking the slide, (maybe dropping the mag and topping off, reinserting the mag) -- and then dropping the magazine to unload, but also having to retract the slide to empty the chamber, and ONLY doing it in that exact order.

However this is critically more complicated than swinging open a cylinder and either having cartridges in it or not.




(* -- None of us here, of course, would screw that up, but spend enough time at shooting ranges, even with experienced competition shooters, and you'll see people get that sequence out of order in a moment of distraction and end up with a round left in the chamber unexpectedly ... or a negligent discharge. Almost impossible to make that mistake with a wheelgun.)

 

[Lawdawg45]

I am a new member to this board and this is my first post. I am 53 and have been around guns most all my life. I have owned shotguns for years but never owned a hand gun. I am familiar mostly with revolvers. I worked a couple years as a security guard at a nuclear power plant back around 1980.

I am looking for a handgun for home protection. Something my wife would feel comfortable using. I was thinking about a Smith & Wesson 686 with a 2 to 3 inch barrel. My thought was revolver because it's simple to operate in an emergency situation and short barrel because it would be a little lighter, easier to maneuver and shots would be fairly short range if someone broke into our house.

My Questions;

1. Is my thinking sound and logical?

2. Any suggestions other than Smith & Wesson 686 Short Barrel?

3. My local firearms shop is expensive. They want over $800 for this gun. I have seen it online for a little over $600. Any good places to buy online or should I go to a local gun show to purchase?

I appreciate any recommendations.

Thanks,
Jim

Welcome! Just a couple of thoughts, the muzzle blast from a magnum indoors would be nearly incapacitating, so look at a S&W model 10. It's a K frame .38 with 6 shots and is lighter than the 686 you mentioned, plus they can be found used for under $300!

LD

 

[thecarfarmer]

First, Jreece, welcome to the board from another new guy!

Now, QFT:

(snip)
Take your wife to a rental range and let her shoot those pistols. Most ranges will have those pistols for rent, and it will at least have a Glock. Then ask her what was most easiset to shoot with.

If you let her rack the slide, load the mags and cylinders, clear the weapons, etc., she'll be able to tell which she prefers.

But I'm with Sam1911's first post, that a lightweight shotgun would be an easier thing to make hits with than any handgun, with serious man-stopping power.

You might take Mrs. Jreece to a gravel pit with a few cabbages, your smallest shotty, and a couple borrowed pistols, and the pair of you could do some plinkin'. It'd give her a good first-hand feel for the difference in aiming short and long guns, and a real good visual on the difference in effectiveness of the rounds.

Unlike you, I've got very little experience with shotguns or rifles. Most of my experience has been in the last two years, where I've shot several bricks of .22LR, and 2-3K rounds of defensive-caliber through semi-autos. And a few dozen rounds through wheelguns. So, I use my Glock 21 (.45) for home defense.

I recently picked up a Mossburg 500 12 ga for that role, but need practice with the weapon to be "autopilot" with the controls (such as remembering to rack the pump after shooting). So, I'm temporarily sticking with my G21. However, the first day with a shotty, I could shoot it from the hip, and put birdshot pretty much wherever I wanted to at 'home defense' distances, without taking a long time to aim. So, Ms. Mossburg will soon become the chairperson of my welcoming committee once we get more familiar.

My opinion: asking 'revolver vs. autoloader' is the wrong question; 'what does Mrs. Jreece like' is the right one. Assuming, of course, that she's intelligent and reasonable - but you wouldn't be putting a gun in her hands if she weren't, right?

Just my .02...

-Bill

 

[TestPilot]

No, it's emminently logical, if you look at the bigger picture. You're thinking only of the single step of firing the weapon. When considering the rest of the manual of arms, the picture changes a bit.

I'm sure none of us*, here, would think that there's anything complicated about loading a magazine, inserting it into the pistol, racking the slide, (maybe dropping the mag and topping off, reinserting the mag) -- and then dropping the magazine to unload, but also having to retract the slide to empty the chamber, and ONLY doing it in that exact order.

However this is critically more complicated than swinging open a cylinder and either having cartridges in it or not.

I did consider that aspect.

There are two loading manipulation situation: Combat and admin.

Combat wise there is no comparison.

Admin wise, the slight perceived added complexity may exist, but there is no hurry in an admin manipulations. Whether if that complexity matters or not should be left up to OP's wife to decide.

There is much benefit that may be given up by just assuming self-loaders are too complex for her. It is not fair that her capacity is assumed for her.