Concealed carry 38 snub - Old school or new school?

A 10 oz 38 works for me.
attachment.php
 
Last edited:
The LCR does have a sweet trigger. And it is easily available in 9MM if you want one, unlike the S&W j frames. It is light and is easily carried.

But it is hideous. Looks too "space age-ey". Polymer doesn't belong on a recolver. And it's really no lighter than a 442 or 642.

I'd get a 442. Same as 642 but better finish. Available without the lock, of course.
 
Nothing pretty about a humpback!
I think my LCRx looks way nicer!
Click to expand...

Well of course you do. If I had an ugly dog, I'd tell everyone I thought it was best looking dog on the planet. ;) :p :)

Yeah, if you want to be a pretty boy, you can have the 642, but if you want to be a bada$$, you have to have the LCR. (just messing with you CajunBass
Click to expand...

Why son. When you're as BadBass as I am, You don't need to carry an ugly gun to prove it. ;) :D
 
I tried to bring myself to buy a Ruger LCR. I really did. I looked at it. I handled it. I tried the trigger. I really wanted to like it.
Click to expand...

Same here. Its a great choice, and I won't knock anyone for going with it. It is my mom's preferred carry gun.

I fall into the minority on this opinion, but I really don't care for the trigger on the LCR. Specifically the limp, mushy reset. I greatly prefer the firm, positive reset on the J Frames. Additionally, after years of fire/dry fire, and a cleaning/relube of the internals, my 642 has a smoother action than most LCRs I've handled. There's also something about the geometry of the J Frame that works a little better for me. Consequently I shoot a J Frame in any guise significantly better than the LCR.

But this is just me, and as I said, I know I don't have much company on the trigger.
 
I had to make a similar decision. Wanted to semi-retire an all-steel Taurus 85 after about 20 years of carry.

I ended up going with a 642. Strongly considered the LCR, but that day my gunsmith had a no-lock 642 for $20 cheaper so to me that's a no-brainer. The LCR is still a fine carry piece and would have served me just as well I suspect.

The Colt would hold value very well (of course), but would also be expensive to fix if something happens. Not saying "don't get it", just something to factor in.


My old 85 is a lot more pleasant to shoot, and not much more difficult to carry (I do IWB 99% of the time anyway). But the 642 has a few small advantages that make it better for the pocket, no question. Any of the guns mentioned would do you fine. The "humpback" of the LCR and x38 Smiths has grown on me, and I don't find them as visually unappealing as I used to. And if you want your hammer, you could always get a 637. All are fine and will suit the purpose.
 
Homerboy said:
The LCR does have a sweet trigger. And it is easily available in 9MM if you want one, unlike the S&W j frames. It is light and is easily carried.



But it is hideous. Looks too "space age-ey". Polymer doesn't belong on a recolver. And it's really no lighter than a 442 or 642.



I'd get a 442. Same as 642 but better finish. Available without the lock, of course.
Click to expand...


S&W hasn't put a 9mm J-frame out in years, but you can make one...

0C16F4B7-D8DB-458A-ABC5-356095D13323_zpsw9x1669z.jpg


F1F1A079-1667-4044-90F3-E53A3D610E0D_zpsq3enji7e.jpg


http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/438321-my-9mm-642-1-a.html

In regards to the LCR weight... it is heavier than my 642 with CT grips. Not slight, but noticeably. The 9mm is on the same frame as the .357, and you really feel it holding the two side by side (compared my father's .357 when I was looking at picking one up).
 
Bought a Ruger LCR (.38 spc)...loved it so much I gave it to my daughter when she left home.
Bought a S&W Model 36..loved it so much I gave it to my new daughter-in-law.
Bought another S&W Model 36...loved it so much I gave it to my wife.
Bought another S&W Model 36..loved it so much I gave it to a close friend.
Bought another Ruger LCR (.357)...I still have this one...new school.
I would recommend either. Both great guns (old and new school). I loved my Model 36's but found another LCR at a great price first (I don't buy guns unless they're at a great price) and bought it.
Now, I don't need another snubby...unless I can find one at a great price.
 
For a carry revolver, I want as much capacity as possible. The Charter Arms Police Undercover is a 6 shot 38 Special. I ordered the spurless hammer from Charter, and at 20 ounces, its an excellent, lightweight revolver.

I just ordered a Taurus 617, its a 7 shot 357 with a 2" barrel. It hasnt arrived yet. It is larger, and heavier than the Charter, but 7 rounds is supreme. Taurus makes an aluminum 817, which is a 7shot 38 Special, but I believe its out of production
 
In the end, like all Ruger revolvers, since the "six" series, it was just to blinking ugly to buy. It might be good, but it's ugly. And that matters to me. I look at my guns a lot more than I do anything else with them.
Click to expand...

CajunBass, you make a good point which is one of the reasons why I totally ignored Ruger until the GP-100 came out. I remember looking at Herter's revolvers in 0.401 caliber and thinking... gosh that's ugly. Same applied to the Ruger center fires. With the GP introduction, I did some backtracking and purchased a Super Redhawk, Redhawk, Blackhawk, GP-100, and now the LCR in revolvers. Eventually got rid of the Redhawk in 41 mag. Just didn't shoot it and I didn't see any collector reason to keep it. But I still don't particularly like the look of the old speed six/service six model even though many love them here. Just have way too many choices when it comes down to it.
 
If OP wishes to chnage from one 38 snubbie to another 38 snubbie, it would be helpful to know what it is about the current snubbie that don't like or are lacking that you hope to overcome with a new one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top