What are my lightest options?

Status
Not open for further replies.

stevekl

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
394
I honestly thought I could figure this out on my own but I'm having trouble researching this. There's so many S&W models and some of them even look identical to eachother...so that's confusing too.

So I'll just ask: does anyone happen to know the lightest s&w that chambers either .38/357 or .327?
 
i cant help alot as im not an end all be all expert but my guess is you have to know your alloys
i know they have aluminum revolvers but from what i understand the lightest smiths are scandium somewhere in the 13-14oz range unloaded

if your not set on a smith the Ruger LCR is nice its 13.5oz and +P rated
mine shoots nicely

are you looking for hammered hammerless shrouded?
 
Ohhhh you know what, I forgot about the LCR...

Darn now I have to think about that.

I am looking for hammerless, DAO
 
i love mine
i dont own a smith to compair too but it does the job just fine for me

as for light smiths that are hammerless snubs theres the
340-357magnum-12oz (scandium model)
640-357magnum-23oz
649-357magnum-23oz
40-38+P-21oz
42-38+P-21.4oz
438-38+P-15.1oz
442-38+P-15oz
638-38+P-15oz
642-38+P-15oz

thats all from smiths official site hope that helps

i didnt see anything lighter than the LCR other than the 340 at 12oz
 
340pd 12 oz
M&P 340 13.3
Both will shoot .357. the 340pd 120gr+ the M&P no .357 limitation.
The pd is Sc/Ti cylinder, the M&P Sc/Stainless cylinder.

The M&P has night sites and is an awesome snub all things considered. Put a set of Crimson Trace 405s on it and you have the most versatile snub on the planet. ;) day or night. 38 spl - all grain of .357.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=282173
 
342 11.8 oz
Good luck finding one, especially a pre lock.

Saw one for sale about three years ago for $300. Still kicking myself in the arse for not grabbing it.
 
Good luck shooting one with full loads...

It WILL hurt. Thereafter, you'll only load/shoot .38's.

.
 
Good luck shooting one with full loads...

It WILL hurt. Thereafter, you'll only load/shoot .38's.

Take these statements with a grain of salt. Recoil is completely subjective.

I own a 360pd (same as the 340pd but hammered and SA/DA), I shoot full 158 gr. loads quite regularly. Usually a box or two at a time. Granted it does have a little sting to it, but it's nowhere close to what I'd call hurting.

I have not tried any Buffalo Bore or Double Tap in it yet, my opinion of it may change under those loads. But I know going into trying them, tat it would only be for a try, definently not regular carry ammo.

With all that being said, it might be worth it to you to rent one for a try. Just to see what it'll be like.

Wyman
 
Well I plan for this to be purely for carry so it won't be a range gun. But I understand what I am getting into with lightweight revolvers. I think.
 
David E is correct; 357s in a 340 scandium framed revolver WILL HURT. It's not subjective. After 10 rounds and a bloody web between my thumb and index finger, I said "enough". I still carry it, but with 38+Ps and expect it will still hurt when I shoot it.
 
386PD is 18oz
386NG is 21oz

Both seven shot L frames with 2.5" barrels. Higher capacity, more to hang onto, a little longer barrel (1/2") and not quite as abusive with full power 357's. The PD is discontinued but you can find them, I have one and it's super light for it's size. I've carried it IWB and it's lighter than my Kahr P40 that I usually carry.
 
I have not tried any Buffalo Bore or Double Tap in it yet, my opinion of it may change under those loads.

Probably.

I fired Corbon's 125 grain JHP out of one with wooden grips.

IT HURT.

Give that a try before you say "it's subjective."

.
 
Well I plan for this to be purely for carry . But I understand what I am getting into with lightweight revolvers. I think.

Limiting yourself voluntarily to only 5 shots launched from a platform that's difficult to hit with and then not practicing with it enough to gain adequate skill is not a good game plan.

Get a gun that you're not afraid to shoot your chosen defense loads in. Practicing with 148 wadcutters, then loading it with Corbon Headknockers is naive.

The ubiquitous .38 Spl 158 LSWCHP +P is controllable in my 642 and is a decent defense round.
 
recoil may not be subjective as some would state but pain tolerance is
dont buy into the IT WILL HURT YOU comments being screamed at you
if the light weight revolvers hurt so badly then no one would ever own one
some people can handle shooting them all day others shoot them once and decide its time for a change thats why there are so many choices
 
The lightest empty weight S&W is the eight-shot .22LR Al frame Al cylinder 317, SKU #160222 & MSRP $766, and 1.87" barrel weighing in at 10.8 oz. Now, to .357Ms - the 340PD #163062 & 360Pd # 163064 - are both Al/Sc frame/Ti cylinder at 11.4 oz and MSRP $1,122. The .38 Special +P 158gr LHPSWC, like Remington's R38S12, is a tried and true stopper from a snubby. If you are going to carry that round, the additional weight of the 642, SKU #163810 & MSRP $600, will be welcomed - and likely not noticed. I know it's nearly half the price of the lighter unit's prices will be noticed. I carry one so-loaded most of the time, the remainder being with it's larger sibling, a 296, both in a Robert Mikas' pocket holster.

Check out the 642's threads here, it is a well respected piece of personal protection - and S&W's best seller. If you don't like it's silver colored Al frame and SS barrel & cylinder, the 442 is the same price - and black. The small boot grip that comes standard on all of these models isn't comfortable in a troll's hand, much less any human's hand. It does make it a pocketable protector - and is a necessary evil to keep it a 24/7 CCW. Larger and more comfortable grips will likely result in protection you leave home, and that isn't a 'good thing'. The money you saved can be applied towards a good SS plinker. Shoot the pocket protector enough to get - and keep - proficient. Get a dedicated plinker for 'fun' - and possible double duty as a home protector.

Stainz

PS The absolute worst recoil in a revolver that I have experienced was from a 340 with the OEM boots and some hot & nasty CorBons. Big whack and nothing to hold on to. My years of shooting a .454 SRH was nothing - neither was a friend's .500 Magnum - by comparison.
 
if your not set on a smith the Ruger LCR is nice its 13.5oz and +P rated
mine shoots nicely

I recommend Sticking to you first inclination, a 38Spl and or 357Mag.

I stole this information from M4Carbine.net site under their Terminal Ballistics board.

The Data and comments are from Dr. Gary Roberts. The leading researcher in terminal ballistics in America today. Works very closely with many LEO agencies and particularly the FBI. Dr. Roberts is or was US Navy Reserve, and a reserve Police officer in California too. Not all Ivory tower.

As BUG’s fit in the category of gun type you are looking for. Consider this data before you should get a 380. Not that you should not, but be aware of the limitations of it’s effectiveness.

For the record I do have a Colt Pocketlite Pony in 380, but carry one of my 3 ‘J’ frames for BUG duty. Two air weights at 15oz in 38Spl and a 940 at 23 oz IIRC, that uses 9mm with moon clips. The 940 revolver is no longer made.

Data and information for you to ponder and hopefully help you with your decision.

If you are an LE officer, carry a BUG!!!

Many small, easily concealed semi-automatic pistols which are recommended for law enforcement backup or concealed carry use fire .380 ACP or smaller bullets. While these small caliber handgun bullets can produce fatal wounds, they are less likely to produce the rapid incapacitation necessary in law enforcement or self-defense situations.

Handguns chambered in .380 ACP are small, compact, and generally easy to carry. Unfortunately, testing has shown that they offer inadequate performance for self-defense and for law enforcement use whether on duty as a back-up weapon or for off duty carry. The terminal performance of .380 ACP JHP's is often erratic, with inadequate penetration and inconsistent expansion being common problems, while .380 ACP FMJ's offer adequate penetration, but no expansion. All of the .380 ACP JHP loads we have tested, including CorBon, Hornady, Federal, Remington, Speer, and Winchester exhibited inconsistent, unacceptable terminal performance for law enforcement back-up and off duty self-defense use due to inadequate penetration or inadequate expansion. Stick with FMJ for .380 ACP or better yet, don't use it at all. The use of .380 ACP and smaller caliber weapons is really not acceptable for law enforcement use and most savvy agencies prohibit them.

While both the .380 ACP and .38 sp can obviously be lethal; the .38 sp is more likely to incapacitate an attacker when used in a BUG role.

BUG--Infrequently used, but when needed, it must be 100% reliable because of the extreme emergency situation the user is dealing with. Generally secreted in pockets, ankle holsters, body armor holsters, etc... Often covered in lint, grime, and gunk. By their very nature, usually applied to the opponent in an up close and personal encounter, many times involving contact shots. A small .38 sp revolver is more reliable in these situations than a small .380 ACP pistol, especially with contact shots or if fired from a pocket.

The Speer Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP and Corbon 110 gr DPX JHP offer the most reliable expansion we have seen from a .38 sp 2” BUG.

Downside to the 135 gr +P Gold Dot is the appreciable recoil and relatively poor intermediate barrier performance.

There have been many reports in the scientific literature, by Dr. Fackler and others, recommending the 158 gr +P LSWCHP as offering adequate performance. Please put this in context for the time that these papers were written in the late 1980's and early 1990's--no denim testing was being performed at that time, no robust expanding JHP's, like the Barnes XPB, Federal Tactical & HST, Speer Gold Dot, or Win Ranger Talon existed. In the proper historical perspective, the 158 gr +P LSWCHP fired out 3-4" barrel revolvers was one of the best rounds available--and it is still a viable choice, as long as you understand its characteristics.

While oversimplified, bare gelatin gives information about best case performance, while 4 layer denim provides data on worst case performance--in reality, the actual performance may be somewhere in between. The four layer denim test is NOT designed to simulate any type of clothing--it is simply an engineering test to assess the ability of a projectile to resist plugging and robustly expand. FWIW, one of the senior engineers at a very respected handgun ammunition manufacturer recently commented that bullets that do well in 4 layer denim testing have invariably worked well in actual officer involved shooting incidents.

With few exceptions, such as the Speer 135 gr +P JHP and Barnes XPB, the vast majority of .38 Sp JHP's fail to expand when fired from 2" barrels in the 4 layer denim test. Many of the lighter JHP's demonstrate overexpansion and insufficient penetration in bare gel testing. Also, the harsher recoil of the +P loads in lightweight J-frames tends to minimize practice efforts and decrease accuracy for many officers. The 158 gr +P LSWCHP offers adequate penetration, however in a 2" revolver the 158gr +P LSWCHP does not reliably expand. If it fails to expand, it will produce less wound trauma than a WC. Target wadcutters offer good penetration, cut tissue efficiently, and have relatively mild recoil. With wadcutters harder alloys and sharper leading edges are the way to go. Wadcutters perform exactly the same in both bare and 4 layer denim covered gel when fired from a 2" J-frame. For example, the Win 148 gr LWC: VEL = 657 f/s, PEN = 20"+, RD = 0.36", RL = 0.64", RW = 147.4 gr

When faced with too little penetration, as is common with lightweight .38 Sp JHP loads or too much penetration like with the wadcutters, then go with penetration. Agencies around here have used the Winchester 148 gr standard pressure lead target wadcutter (X38SMRP), as well as the Federal (GM38A) version--both work. A sharper edged wadcutter would even be better... Dr. Fackler has written in Fackler ML: "The Full Wadcutter--An Extremely Effective Bullet Design", Wound Ballistics Review. 4(2):6-7, Fall 1999)
Quote:
"As a surgeon by profession, I am impressed by bullets with a cutting action (eg. Winchester Talon and Remington Golden Saber). Cutting is many times more efficient at disrupting tissue than the crushing mechanism by which ordinary bullets produce the hole through which they penetrate. The secret to the increased efficiency of the full wadcutter bullet is the cutting action of its sharp circumferential leading edge. Actually, cutting is simply very localized crush; by decreasing the area over which a given force is spread, we can greatly increase the magnitude to the amount of force delivered per unit are--which is a fancy way of saying that sharp knives cut a lot better than dull ones. As a result, the calculation of forces on tissue during penetration underestimate the true effectiveness of the wadcutter bullet relative to other shapes."

For years, J-frames were considered "arm's reach" weapons, that is until CTC Lasergrips were added. With the mild recoil of target wadcutters, officers are actually practicing with their BUG's; when combined with Lasergrips, qualification scores with J-frames have dramatically increased. Now 5 shots rapid-fire in a 6" circle at 25 yds is not uncommon--kind of mind blowing watching officers who could not hit the target at 25 yds with a J-frame suddenly qualify with all shots in the black…

Before the advent of the 110 gr standard pressure Corbon DPX load, I used to carry standard pressure wadcutters in my J-frames with Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP's in speed strips for re-loads, as the flat front wadcutters were hard to reload with under stress. My current J-frames are 342's; previously have used the 38 and 649. I like the 342 w/Lasergrips very much. Shooting is not too bad with standard pressure wadcutters and 110 gr DPX; not so comfortable with the Speer 135 gr JHP +P Gold Dots. Any of the Airweight J-frames are fine for BUG use. The steel 649's were a bit too heavy for comfortable all day wear on the ankle, body armor, or in a pocket. There is no reason to go with .357 mag in a J-frame, as the significantly larger muzzle blast and flash, and harsher recoil of the .357 Magnum does not result in substantially improved terminal performance compared to the more controllable .38 Special bullets when fired from 2” barrels.

At this point in time, the two best loads for 2" J-frames are the Corbon 110 gr JHP DPX standard pressure load and the Speer 135 gr +P JHP Gold Dot.

2" J-frames are a great BUG's and marginally acceptable low threat carry guns, because they are lightweight, reliable, and offer acceptable terminal performance at close range--downsides are difficulty in shooting well at longer ranges because of sight and sight radius limitations, along with reduced capacity coupled with slower reloading. Nonetheless, with the addition of CTC Laser Grips and an enclosed or shrouded hammer, the 2" J-frame models without key locks (I personally will NEVER own firearm with an integral lock) may be the best BUG's and most reliable pocket handguns available.

Another great BUG option if it can be comfortably carried, is a compact 3-3.5" barrel 9 mm pistol like the G26, Kahr PM9, Sig P239, or S&W 3913, as these offer superior terminal performance compared to either .380 ACP or .38 Sp handguns. A G26 is particularly nice when using a G19 or 17 as a primary weapon due to the ability to use the same magazines.

As always, don't get too wrapped in the nuances of ammunition terminal performance. Spend your time and money on developing a warrior mindset, training, practice, and more training.

Make an informed decision.

Go figure.

Fred

Stupid should hurt
 
I am not a fan of .357 Magnum in a light weight snubby, but in a self defense situation it's unlikely you'll fire more then 5 rounds anyway. So, the pain of firing probably won't be a concern.

That said, I carry .38+P rounds in a light weight .38 snubby. The recoil doesn't bother me a bit. Of course, I only fire one or two cylinders (5-10 rounds) of +P ammo through these guns at any range session. Any other shooting is done with standard velocity .38's. More +P rounds may hurt eventually. I fire few of them due to the cost of +P ammo as well as reducing unnecessary stress on the guns.

My .38's are:
Taurus 85 Multi-Alloy which has an aluminum frame and titanium cylinder/barrel shroud. Weight is <14 oz unloaded.
Taurus 851 in titanium. Weight is about 17 oz.

Both are carried frequently.

If you want to go really light, try out a Ruger LCP (< 10 oz unloaded).
 
They are not fun to shoot. Wear a belt and get a Taurus 85 in steel or a Ruger SP101. Your pants will not drop.

Not as pocket guns.
I did try a steel Taurus 85. Even with a good belt, the weight drags your trousers down. To me, that's rather uncomfortable.
Now, on the hip, both those guns are fine choices!

As far as not being fun...that's true, IMHO. These light weight revolvers are great self defense tools, but not the best choice for plinking (well, the SP101 can be a fun plinker).
 
I have to wonder why people complain about carrying a 25 ounce revolver, but have no issues carrying a wallet, car keys, and cell phone.

I have carried a stainless Centennial (M640) in a Kramer pocket holster since 1994 with no issues. Yes, it weighs about 10 ounces more than an Airweight, but it is not an issue in my right front pocket. I can and do practice with it with no pain or concern about bullets jumping the crimp. I also have one of the new "classic" M40 Centennials that is also a nice pocket carry. I had a pre-lock M342PD which was going to be an ankle carry gun, and I found it painful to shoot, but my wife, carpal tunnel and all, likes it. It is now her carry gun. Go figure.
 
I have to wonder why people complain about carrying a 25 ounce revolver, but have no issues carrying a wallet, car keys, and cell phone.

None of those things (including the gun) are outrageously heavy, in and of itself. But when you put everything together, it'll add up faster than you think.

Weight around your waist (added weight, not body weight) can have serious ramifications to the health of your back. I am formerly a power lifter having benchpressed over 400 pounds on a number of occassions (14-15 years ago). About 10 years ago I started having back problems from my tool belt (carpenter for a living). I routinely had 25 pound pieces of plywood put me on my knees in pain. I quit wearing the heavy belt, back problems were gone in less than 2 weeks.

I'll save the ounces where I can. That includes everything that you listed above. Including my .357 that fully loaded weighs in at a scant 15 ounces. Any sting will be gone shortly. And under a SD stuation, with adrenaline pumping, it'll feel like a .22 going off.

Wyman
 
Take these statements with a grain of salt. Recoil is completely subjective.

While this is true, I suspect most people have found/would find the recoil of lightweight 357s to be quite painful, ranking right up there with slamming your hand in the hood of a car. :eek:

Try before you buy.

Personally, I find the hammerless S&W 642 in 38 Special to be an ideal pocket gun. Light enough not to flail around in your pocket, but heavy enough to soak up 38+P recoil to the point of being manageable. Not as fun as a K or L Frame, but doable.
 
I shot this M360 at the range today with standard load .38 FMJ's. No problem with multiple, grouped shots.

Last full cylinder was with CorBon DPX's loaded with Barnes Bullets.

No significant accuracy problems after stepping up to +P loads, but I wouldn't be comfortable shooting 50 rounds thru it.

Why, you ask? Because it costs so much!;)

13.3oz
GoldDots005-1.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top