View Full Version : Snubnoses
03-31-2012, 09:27 PM
What do you have, and what do you like for snubnoses?
Only one I have, and only one I have fired is, Ruger SP101, with a bobbed hammer. SS, about 25oz. I am surprised they still make this, it seems outdated. I bought it in 2000. I would have thought they would have made one with a enclosed hammer. Because of the weight it seems to shoot ok. I don't have experience with others. Though because of its weight you know its there. Seems to run around $500.
I was bumming around today. Fleet Farm has S&W 642 .38 for about $380. This interests me, except for the internal lock. Nice feeling gun. They also had Ruger LCR .38 for $425. Boggles me that Ruger would be more. Clerk said FF would be expanding into the handgun market, even more. They had around 30 models. Be nice to seem a big store carry handguns, probably help with the price. My LCP was $309 with them, $349 at Gander, and $300 at a Midwest Shooting Supply.
I also looked at some Charter Arms at Gander. Very light. Almost feel to light. They too make some concealed hammer .38s for around mid 300s. Though for that price, might as well go with Ruger or S&W.
But, Charter Arms had a pretty cool snubnose, with a shortened hammer. Not concealed, so you could shoot single action, but smaller and less likely to get caught on clothing. This gun has my interest, as do the 642 and LCR.
Its always a tough call, with weight. On one hand my SP101 seems like a nice gun, but I don't know if I would buy it again, when there are so many lighter and cheaper guns out there. Size wise, I don't think the they are that much smaller. Dunno, would have to look again, curious how they would do with IWB holster.
If I ran into a used prelock 642, I would be tempted.
One of my favorite carry guns, but kinda big is my S&W 696 .44spcl 3". I used to carry it, then bought SP101. But it is still a good gun when you got the room.
03-31-2012, 09:45 PM
I have an Airweight Smith, a SP101 with a 3" barrel and a Smith and Wesson 629 with a 3" barrel. I also have a Smith and Wesson 327 that has a very short barrel but has a long forcing cone to make up for it. It is an 8 shot and is very light for a 357. http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_764974_-1_775655_757896_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y
03-31-2012, 09:47 PM
Everyone likes pictures, SP101 and 696.
I also looked at Charter Arms Bulldogs, .44spcl. I like the .44spcl. Light gun though, and I wonder how it would shoot. Though that can be said of alot of snubnoses.
03-31-2012, 09:51 PM
The 8 shot S&W seems cool, but to much money. I don't understand how having big cylinder drives the price up that much. Though I don't see others doing it, so there must be a reason.
03-31-2012, 09:55 PM
Its a scandium frame with a titanium cylinder. It is also a custom shop gun. That stuff drives up the price.
03-31-2012, 10:07 PM
Why isn't anyone doing a plain old 8 shot? I appreciate fine things, but for me, there is a price break. Money is relevant to that person though. I am also learning it is relevant to the time in your life. I never would have thought I would buy a $50 belt when I was younger.
03-31-2012, 11:17 PM
I prefer something with a little weight to it, in the 20-23 ounce range for a snub, but do have one at 17 ounces.
A 17 ounce .357 doesn't get much practice because it just isn't that comfortable to shoot.
Shooting .38's in it is OK but it's still not a gun that you're going to run 100 rounds through in a session.
Then you can go to the 13 ounce .38 model in the LCR, which isn't even a choice for me when you can have the .357 for a few bucks more.
Most of the charters have aluminum frames which keeps the price down along with no real metal finish qualities like others have.
Taurus has an 8 shot, but they start costing more with each extra round in the cylinder.
04-01-2012, 12:38 AM
True a light gone will get less range time. But will be carried more often, or atleast more enjoyably. I do believe you need to know your gun, but wonder how much is good shooting skills and practices. Not to say, I don't like a good shooting gun, I am torn. But I lean a bit to easier to carry, the more you have it with you.
I have put 100 rounds at a time through my LCP, 10oz, but that is only .380. I am looking .38s.
04-01-2012, 01:42 AM
Is the bobbed or concealed hammer really worth it? What is the mob using?
04-01-2012, 08:38 AM
It is pretty lively with 357s. I shoot mostly 38s in it. The trigger is very good.
04-01-2012, 10:04 AM
[QUOTE=Berserker;3376]Is the bobbed or concealed hammer really worth it? QUOTE]
Personally I'd never pay for a bobbed hammer, if I want such a thing I'll do it myself.
04-01-2012, 11:28 AM
I like the Smith and Wesson bodyguard with the shrouded hammer.
04-01-2012, 12:05 PM
When I said bobbed, I meant bobbed or shrouded. You lose the ability to shoot SA. I like the Charter Arms with the small hammer.
04-01-2012, 12:46 PM
Ah, a shrouded hammer is internal, a bobbed hammer is still external, just has the spur removed, or most of it anyway.
04-01-2012, 01:00 PM
I realize that, but it has the same function. Bobbed hammers are kinda of outdated.
04-01-2012, 01:27 PM
Ya, the bobbing came before the internal hammer was around. I personally like a hammer gun. It's one of my quirks. LOL.
04-01-2012, 01:37 PM
I do like being able to fire SA. Wonder why more manufacturers don't come out with short hammers. The Charter Arms is not a ton cheaper the S&W, which I would prefer. Though I don't like the internal locks. I may someday, but I haven't bought a post Clinton S&W.
I'd consider a older J frame or maybe LCR, or maybe take the plunge and try a Charter.
04-01-2012, 05:45 PM
The reason I like the Bodyguard so much is that the hammer is shrouded but it can still be cocked for a single action shot if desired.
04-01-2012, 06:22 PM
That has got my interest. I like the hammer better on the Charter Arms, it comes out a little bit more. But I want to see one of these now.
04-01-2012, 06:44 PM
I have seen them with a 3" barrel. I love that!
04-01-2012, 08:36 PM
Just got done shooting my SP101 with cheap .38s, does shoot nice. Curious how those J frames at about 10oz less shoot. On my hip, it carries nice. Not so much in pocket.
I got the LCP for pocket. I am curious about the J frames, but wonder if they are to in the middle. If I come across one without the lock, I will definitely think about it.
I want to say, I am good for now, but I feel guilty lying to you people.
If I come across one without the lock, I will definitely think about it.
do you mean the key safety lock?
if so, what real difference does it make?
I mean in practical terms of operation, smoothness, reliability, not collectability. Thanks.
04-01-2012, 10:04 PM
First I don't want out of principles, they made the deal with Clinton. But there have been rare instances of it malfunction. You have added a device that can render your gun useless. Guns vibrate alot, I don't want it.
04-01-2012, 10:21 PM
Zerk what are you referring to?
I have a whole box of the key safety locks that you put down the barrel to make them inoperable. Never used one once and don't plan to. It's up to the owner if he uses the locks the gov. just mandated that the manufacturer include them with any NEW handgun.
First I don't want out of principles, they made the deal with Clinton.
as I recall, ruger kissed kkklinton on the lips.
and then they kissed bill.
04-01-2012, 11:30 PM
Post Clinton S&W have a lock built into the gun, the revolvers I have seen, it is a hole above release for the cylinder. They provide some type key that turns it, and locks it internally.
The chance of it failing is rare, but handguns are not like rifles and shotguns, that the worse thing that happens is you miss the big one, or the stick up goes bad.
S&W was boycotted, and it had an effect. The company was sold, and I read the agreement was nullified, but they still have the locks. Most gun companies told Clinton to pound sand. Colt did something to move more into the military market, which must have been excluded from the ban.
You can open the sideplate and remove the lock. But then you have a whole, to let dirt in. Could probably seal it some how. At the moment there is enough used S&W, that I will avoid. Some day, am sure some improvement or model, will win me over.
04-01-2012, 11:32 PM
as I recall, ruger kissed kkklinton on the lips.
and then they kissed bill.
What do you mean?
04-02-2012, 06:16 AM
The locks suck. I wish S&W would get rid of them now.
Hello......Smith and Wesson......anyone listening?
04-02-2012, 09:21 AM
I am surprised they haven't. None or most of the other manufacturers don't have them. My understanding was the Clinton agreement was voided when they got sold. It just seems like simple business to me to get rid of them, but I guess it is not belief of the current owners. The new owners are build some kind of gun safety.
I guess they have listened according to wikipedia
Smith & Wesson announced in March, 2009, that it would begin phasing the internal lock out of its revolver lineup. Smith and Wesson is now producing the original model 442 and 642 without the internal lock.
04-02-2012, 06:36 PM
Its funny you said that because I was just checking out their site and they advertise the guns that come without locks.
04-02-2012, 06:42 PM
It's all about california and that state where Boston is.
04-02-2012, 07:07 PM
Well they sell all over the world and to all 50 states. They better get that through their heads.
The locks are stupid!!!!
04-02-2012, 10:16 PM
Tell us how you really feel!:eagerness:
04-02-2012, 11:38 PM
Looking at a S&W forum, I suspect Wikipedia is wrong. Not positive, cause it is a forum. Many talk about simply removing the lock. One point is that you are missing out on improvements. Which may be enough to get me to buy one someday, but not in a rush right now.
04-03-2012, 06:52 AM
Look at the 642 and the 442.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_757768_-1_757767_757751_image#http%3A%2F%2Fwww.smith-wesson.com%2Fwebapp%2Fwcs%2Fstores%2Fservlet%2FCat egoryOnlyResultsDisplayView%3FpageSize%3D16%26page View%3Dimage%26catalogId%3D750051%26top_category%3 D757751%26parent_category_rn%3D757767%26beginIndex %3D16%26categoryId%3D757768%26categoryId%3D757768% 26langId%3D-1%26storeId%3D750001%26filterResults%3D%26useFilte r%3D%26identifier%3D1333446714962
04-03-2012, 09:28 AM
Bad link. I was having trouble this weekend getting on there site.
04-04-2012, 06:46 AM
The site takes quite a while to load.
02-13-2013, 12:27 AM
The compromise that works best for me is a Smith Model 640, all stainless J-frame in .38 Special +P (actually tested for +P+ in this case) carried in a pocket holster. It weighs about 21 ounces unloaded. Some people consider that too heavy for pocket carry. I don't mind the extra few ounces because it allows me better control with severely arthritic hands. I've carried it daily for over ten years, and don't feel undergunned.
02-13-2013, 01:21 AM
I really enjoy my 10oz LCP, and I can shoot it well. But it has jammed alot. So I bought a Jframe. I thought my SP101 was to heavy and bulky for pocket carry. I have since thought about selling it. But the .357 has such great stopping power, and I have never sold a gun yet.
I did read, when researching the siting on my SP101 2.25, to site using just the front blade, and not line it up in the groove. People claim it shoots truer, and aims faster. I haven't tried it but will.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.