Shootability of an airweight/lightweight snubby?

[SanduneCC]

I currently have an SP-101 for a toss in jacket, grab-n-go gun. Problem is it’s too heavy and it sags down the pocket, calling attention to itself, plus I don’t like the exposed hammer which may hamper deployment. I’ve been thinking about a S&W Scandium or Taurus Titanium with concealed hammer. I’d get it in .357 loaded with .38+. Any issues with these lightweight as far as shootability goes?

 

[MillCreek]

Interestingly enough, I too have a 2.25" SP-101 (several of them) and I also recently went through the same decision to purchase a more lightweight revolver for carry. After much research, I went with a Taurus 651 in titanium (.357, five shot, 2" barrel, shrouded hammer). It weighs 19 oz loaded.

I changed the stock grips to an Uncle Mike's boot grip, insofar as I find the palm swell to considerably diminish the pain from shooting. I am currently carrying the .38 +P 135 grain JHP Speer Gold Dot specially designed to expand from a short barrel. I am still learning how to best shoot it, but it clearly hurts a lot more, and my recovery time is longer than shooting my usual .357 125 grain JHPs out of my SP-101s. But for pocket carry, it is the bees knees in an Uncle Mike # 4 pocket holster.

 

[Old Dog]

Well, I've got a couple S&W Airweights (637, 642)... in .38, and not even the scandium or titanium varieties ... Not sure what you mean by "shootability" but although these lightweights are a joy to carry (really, I don't know why anyone would need anything even lighter) they're, frankly, not much fun to shoot (a lot, that is). With .38 +Ps, the recoil is substantial (my wife says brutal); there's quite a "push" back ... In DA, follow-up shots can be difficult for many shooters to master (especially those used to autopistols), but the little guns can be quite accurate. IMO, these guns require a bit of dedication if you're gonna carry 'em daily. But -- personally, I love the Airweights.

 

[Old Fuff]

The answer to carrying a revolver in a pocket is to have a good pocket holster, with pockets to match. I sometimes carry a Taurus CIA blued steel, .38 Special, and see no need for the Magnum, which in my view is counter-productive. I am aware of some problems with the all-Titanium revolvers, less so with the aluminum & steel ones, and very few with that all-steel guns (as for myself, I haven't had any). When it comes to shooting (which is the part that really matters) I can place the first shot more accurately, and do the same with fast follow-up shots, then I can with the lighter models. The Ruger SP-101 is the lightest .357 Magnum I would consider carrying, I would not hesitate to bob the hammer and go to double-action only, and I would find a way to conceal it if that was necessary. It's not as easy to carry as the ultra-lightweights, but if you have to use it, it will be a blessing.

 

[HSMITH]

I have a Smith M37 that is very accurate, easy to shoot and pleasant to carry. I prefer it to my steel snubbies by a large margin. When I find a decent price on a round butt M38 I will probably have found a new best friend.

 

[P95Carry]

I'm with Fuff (an age thing? ) ....... I am not overly phased by weight and having shot one or two ultra light snubs - yuk, not for me. May be more comfortable to carry but IMO they suck when it comes to controllability. I'd certainly only carry +P 38's as max, whereas the SP of mine can be managed with .357's if i want - even so, hardly ''comfortable''.

I find ways to manage weight - which usually means OWB almost all time. Pocket carry will bring in my R9 probably which at 17 ounce all up is fine in pocket.... and it's all ''normal'' metals!

 

[Classified00]

I have a SW 642 that is pretty much my anytime gun. As others have stated, it carries wonderfully but it's definately not a range gun. I can keep all 5 in a paper plate at 10+ yards. I also have an SP 101. The recoil of the 642 is less than firing maggies from the 101. Oddly enough, after I put wood grips on the 642, the felt recoil actually seemed less

I put 30 - 40 rounds downrange in a session and I'm done with the 642. All in all, it's worth the trade off to me.

 

[DHart]

Definitely not fun for extended shooting, but to have on hand for the extremely unlikely event that five shots might have to be fired, the 642 makes an unbeatable no-excuse-not-to-have-it-with-you-snag-free-reliable-lightweight bullet launcher. It is the gun that often rides in my motorcycle jacket pocket and I don't even notice that it's there - I also use a Kahr PM-9 for the same purpose - great little 9mm!

At 18 to 20 feet (typical defense distance is usually less than that, even) the 642 is fairly effective and accurate - just not much fun to shoot.

On occasions when I can deal with the extra weight, I usually choose the 640 or one of my Dick Specials; they're much more controllable and more fun to shoot for longer periods of time:

My SP-101 is a fine gun, for sure, but it just doesn't excite me like the 640 and DS revos do... so it doesn't often see much use.

 

[double0757]

340pd

I have learned to love my 340pd. I experimented with different loads and grips. For pocket carry you are better off with the 38+p. But for strong side carry you can use bigger grips and go with reduce load .357 mag. Yes, is not fun to put 50 rounds of .38+p but you don't need to. I figure that as a pocket gun it will be used at very close range so to place 2 shoots from the pocket to a 5yrd target in three seconds or less, is no problem. Also I can put first shot .38+p follow by .357mag reduce load in the same amount of time. I practice once or twice a month and a box of 50 last me for at least two seccions of practice. The very true advantage is that is the gun I find my self carrying the most, even to the shower (just joking).

Double O

 

[DaisyHead]

DHart,
Nice photography guy. Do the 640 and 642 have a shrouded hammer - capable of SA if necessary?

 

[akviper]

I have the Smith 342 Airlight. You forget which pocket it's in due to the weight but it's not fun to shoot. You can carry it in the hottest weather and it doesn't seem to make pockets sag. I qualify with it every 3 months and shoot a few rounds every month but it's definitely not a fun plinker. There is a lot of recoil but you can make hits if you do your part.

 

[DHart]

Thanks DaisyHead... the 640 and 642 are designed for one thing only: super smooth/snag-free profile for pulling from concealment in clothing for close range combat defense. The hammers are entirely internal and sealed to the outside world so as to not allow any lint, dirt, or miscellany down into the works. They are intended to be fired DAO, just as one would almost certainly have to shoot in close quarters defense situations. They can be fired from within a coat pocket if necessary... a very nice feature, as sometimes you don't recognize a threat until they are two feet in front of you and you only have time to pull a trigger, no time to pull out a gun. They are not made for precision distance shooting. For all these reasons they are DAO. You can buy models which have shrouds around the sides of the hammer, which still allow single action cocking if desired... but I prefer the internal hammer design because it has a much trimmer profile in the hammer area (no humpback) which makes it a lot easier to pull from a pants pocket, won't allow lint to fall down into a "shroud area", and to my sensibilities looks a lot nicer. And with such a gun, I want to train and be completely grounded in DA shooting only, which is more difficult to do, requires more practice to achieve proficiency, and also happens to be the most likely scenario should the gun ever have to be called to duty.

 

[DaisyHead]

...the 640 and 642 are designed for one thing only: super smooth/snag-free profile for pulling from concealment in clothing for close range combat defense...

The more you talk, the more I salivate. DAO is just fine for me, I'm well versed in shooting and wont have any problem nailing precision shots in DA. The 642 looks to be the cat's meow. Thanks for the enlightenment.

 

[DHart]

DaisyHead... glad I could be of some help.

For me, the 640 is THE Cat's meow, as long as the weight doesn't present any issues... it's just such a simple, solid, svelt, superb achievement in a small carry revolver that's a pleasure to shoot as well.

But if you need one to ride in a pocket, the 642 purrs as sweet as can be... I can even slip it into my front jeans pocket and pull it out readily... that's quite something, in my view.

For a midnight walk on the beach, a walk in the remote woods, through an urban downtown district... you can hold a 642 in your hand inside your coat pocket and look perfectly natural without giving anything away, and yet, if you had to, you could fire it in defense of your life right through your coat pocket, instantly... that capability does inspire nice confidence when you find yourself in potentially spooky circumstances.

Shrouded hammer designs can work for pocket carry, but their humpback shape adds a lot of bulk in the hammer area, making the gun harder to pull from a pocket and the shroud offers an entry point for lint, dirt, gremlins to enter and collect between the hammer and the frame - something that needs to be constantly checked and cleaned if necessary. There is a potential, however slight, for something getting in there and hanging up the gun. There are already enough things that can go wrong in a defense situation without adding yet another possibility for trouble... not a risk that appeals to me.

Bobbed hammer designs also have some capability of being fired from within the pocket as well, but there is a risk of the hammer catching on the inside of the pocket during it's retraction or during it's free fall - potentially hanging the gun up. Again, not an appealing risk to me.

So with respect to choosing a revolver design for pocket carry, I believe the centennial design (sealed internal hammer) is by far the best choice, though certainly not the only one.

 

[BigG]

They are an excellent gun that takes extra dedication to learn to operate as well as longer barreled revos. The hammerless 38 S&Ws are the best I've found.

 

[P. Plainsman]

For my taste, the "sweet spot" in the panoply of defense snubbies is the S&W 642 -- the hammerless Airweight (but not Ti/Sc) .38+P J-frame. Weighs 15 oz empty. With good .38+P ammo like the 135 grain Speer Gold Dots, it has a decent punch, is brisk but still shootable (you can run through a box of carry ammo without too much pain; you won't "fear" the gun), and it is light and portable in a simple pocket holster. A balanced, well engineered tool. I have a good deal of experience with one, and it is what I'm going to start carrying soon.

I have no interest in going any lighter, into the wondermetal snubbies -- except for the 432PD, the 11 oz sixshooter in the soft-recoiling .32 Mag. caliber. That seems like a plausible "always" rig.

The next "sweet spot" for me would come in at 23-27 oz, and is occupied by the Ruger SP101 and S&W 640. If I'm launching a .357 Mag in my defense, then realistically I want it to be from an all-steel platform like these.

My ideal here would be the 3" barrel SP101 with its hammer chopped to DAO format, but you would have to have a gunsmith do that; the stock DAO SP101 comes with a 2" barrel.

 

[Gunsnrovers]

The little J Frames are nice to carry and they do shoot well, but I don't like shooting them at all. Even in .38 there is not much joy in it.

Now K frame snubbies are another story. My 2" M10 and M15 I enjoy bringing to the range.

I imagine the Sp101 would be in a similar class. Decent sized grip and weight to make range sessions less "memorable" on your hand.

 

[Kacerdias]

I'll chime in here. I generally tend to prefer autoloaders for defensive carry except that here in Texas is stays pretty hot and the autoloader I generally have with me (CZ-75B) is quite hard to conceal without a jacket. I may go to my CZ-100 soon but that's for another forum.

At the last gunshow I picked up a S&W 637 Airweight .38+P as a summer gun and I love it. Yes, it is fairly hard on the hands at the range but the action is smooth and DA shots aren't difficult at all with some practice. It's not "fun" to shoot by any means but I'm confident I could handle 5 shots to the appropriate critical areas if I ever have the need to, heaven forbid. The 637 does have a fully exposed hammer so there is the possibility of snagging. But I've found that if you draw it with your thumb resting on the hammer then it draws very quickly and snag-free. I prefer *some* sort of hammer because I at least want the option of being able to fire in SA for precisely aimed shots.

The greatest feature of the lightweight smithy's is the concealment factor. They disappear as well as my brother's Keltec P3-AT. But then again, I'd rather have a .38+P when I need it than a plastic .380. But that's just me.

One question though - Can anyone recommend a good pocket holster for this pistol? Ideally it would be thin and cover the hammer. Just one less thing to worry about, right?

 

[P. Plainsman]

I find I have to use a different weak-hand grip when I shoot two-handed with a little J-frame. I usually do the Jerry Miculek thing (at least that's where I first heard it described) of clasping weak hand fingers around strong-hand fingers and clamping down the weak-hand thumb over the strong-hand thumb. That's my DA revolver grip. But with little guns like the 642 the weak hand thumb tends to get in the way of the trigger finger when you pull the trigger. So I shift the weak hand palm under the wrist bone of the strong hand -- the weak hand basically turns into a simple rest.

Just reporting what I do, not recommending. People's hands are different and I'm no expert.

It would seem that in many plausible defensive-use situations with a snubby you're not going to have the luxury of going to a stable two-handed shooting stance anyway.

 

[Preacherman]

I have a S&W 442 and 642, and one or the other is my constant companion. I've got Crimson Trace grips on both (the small, compact "boot grip" size), and with the laser "dialed in", I can make head-shots out to 25 yards if I need to (and at close range, firing from the hip after a hurried draw, they make COM hits much, much easier!).

I did some comparisons between snubbies and small pistols recently. Check out the thread here.

 

[GEM]

I tried the TX CHL protocol with my 442 and shot a 242 IIRC. That's shootable for my purposes when I carry it.

 

[Rotorflyr]

Sandune,
From the way your post reads, you want to purchase a pocket .357 and load it with .38+p when you carry it, why would you do that instead of either purchasing a .38+p (such as a Taurus 851) or going with a .357 (such as the 651) and load it with .357 ammo

A small pistol like that isn't going to be fun to shoot .357 out of anyway, so I don't get why you would purchase a .357 then bother to load it with .38's to begin with. If you want a dual capable gun IMHO it should be a seperate piece then the little carry gun your looking for.

The hammer/shrouded hammer/no hammer issue is a personal choice and have strengths and weaknesses to be considered. For something to carry in a pocket I'm still undecided on DAO no hammer, or DA/SA shrouded hammer when I purchase a pocket carry revolver.

 

[patentmike]

How about the S&W 341 .32 H&R?
Anybody try one of these yet? About half way between the SP101 and kel-tec P-32 in weight and power.

http://www.firearms.smith-wesson.com/store/index.php3?cat=363021&item=1033876&sw_activeTab=1

 

[BluesBear]

Having fired MillCreek's Total Titanium Taurus 651 I agree it is a superb ultra lightweight pocket gun. Accuracy is superb.

Firing it with real .357 magnum loads is a handful, and even though recovery is a bit slower, but with practice it can be mastered.


But, having said that, I still prefer the slight extra weight of the all steel version.

 

[medic_guns]

I have been carrying a 342 ti S&W for 6 years. It is really nice to carry. At 11 oz. empty, it feels like a toy, but roars like a cannon when the trigger is pulled with +P's sitting in it. I hate firing it. It is horribly inaccurate, too. I guess for <10 feet it would do the trick. Chances are, if an attack happens, it will be up close and personal and five shots of .38 +P should be adequate. I have a Colt DSIII on the way that will become my new carry piece. 6 is better than five.

RIc