TruthTellers
New member
^ That, plus a single action pull makes it a much more fun plinking gun.
Humpback bodyguard 38's
- Thread starter Sudo
- Start date
The question is always answered in a general, ambiguous manner, never a specific scenario, suggesting to me that the "evidence" for a "...possible occasion...", is more fantasy than it is a logical or realistic scenario. The reason, "...nobody can predict when or how such a circumstance might present itself...", is because there is more likelihood of being struck by lightning...but we don't wear rubber underwear do we.
I'm patiently waiting for the "hostage" scenario.
Unless you live in the south side of Chicago, your "chance" of being involved in a gunfight is about the same as being struck by lightning. So, using your logic, why carry a gun at all?
It must be nice to have a crystal ball to predict the "logical or realistic scenario" that might befall me so that I can plan ahead accordingly. I'm sorry, but I have no means currently at my disposal to peer into a murky glass to discern the more specific and less general and unambiguous circumstance you apparently can envision that I can't.
Until my eyes are made privy to the future, I see no reason to not prepare for that unlikely bolt from on high. I'm sure you will find this incredulous but, believe it or not, I even have insurance that will cover a house fire on a house that most probably will never burn. Which is why, I guess, that my underwear is made by Goodyear...
But I return to the point I made earlier: what's the downside to carrying a revolver with a covered hammer that can also be fired in a sa mode, however unlikely that configuration will ever be needed, as compared to a revolver having a concealed hammer that can only be fired in the da mode?
Last edited:
.38SPL enthusiast
New member
I love my Airweight Bodyguards. They make great farm guns. I definitely appreciate and utilize the single action capability of my gun. Small varmints 30 yards away are not safe from my wadcutters.
Has anyone here ever seen one of the Michigan Police Supply model 38's? They have a stainless cylinder and a blued barrel. They're really neat.
Has anyone here ever seen one of the Michigan Police Supply model 38's? They have a stainless cylinder and a blued barrel. They're really neat.
I own a very nice 649 Bodyguard (stainless .38 Spl) from the 80's. I rather like it a lot. It was the second J-frame I purchased after I got into LE (the first being a 3" nickel 36 RB).
Handy little snub. I seldom carried it off-duty or in retirement, though, preferring my lighter Centennial-style snubs.
While I prefer the Centennial-style or DAO models for normal defensive carry roles (I also own a pair of 642-1's & M&P 340's, and a 37DAO), having SA capability in the 649 let's me more easily practice slower, longer distance shots out at 35-50+yds. At close range (25yds & less) I prefer DA/DAO. (I use my DAO snubs out to 50+yds, but the DA triggers make it more challenging to cluster hits in the scoring zones, or on steel. Good practice, though.)
A couple thoughts as an instructor who has trained both LE (predominantly) and private citizens (after normal hours for close to 10 years) who were using revolvers.
It's far too common to see people thumb-cocking their SA-capable revolvers for various timed drills, even for shooting from only 3yds. Trying to thumb-cock a revolver at speed creates ample opportunity for manipulation issues. It also takes more time than just "trigger cocking" the hammer to fire it (DA shooting). Imagine trying to thumb cock a revolver in the midst of some chaotic, rapidly evolving and dynamic life-threatening situation?
A revolver cocked into SA normally means a very light and short trigger pull is going to fire the gun. The lighter and shorter trigger makes it much easier to fire the revolver, which, unfortunately, includes unintentionally doing so. It's little wonder why some of the larger LE agencies in the "revolver days" eventually converted to DAO revolvers.
Handy little snub. I seldom carried it off-duty or in retirement, though, preferring my lighter Centennial-style snubs.
While I prefer the Centennial-style or DAO models for normal defensive carry roles (I also own a pair of 642-1's & M&P 340's, and a 37DAO), having SA capability in the 649 let's me more easily practice slower, longer distance shots out at 35-50+yds. At close range (25yds & less) I prefer DA/DAO. (I use my DAO snubs out to 50+yds, but the DA triggers make it more challenging to cluster hits in the scoring zones, or on steel. Good practice, though.)
A couple thoughts as an instructor who has trained both LE (predominantly) and private citizens (after normal hours for close to 10 years) who were using revolvers.
It's far too common to see people thumb-cocking their SA-capable revolvers for various timed drills, even for shooting from only 3yds. Trying to thumb-cock a revolver at speed creates ample opportunity for manipulation issues. It also takes more time than just "trigger cocking" the hammer to fire it (DA shooting). Imagine trying to thumb cock a revolver in the midst of some chaotic, rapidly evolving and dynamic life-threatening situation?
A revolver cocked into SA normally means a very light and short trigger pull is going to fire the gun. The lighter and shorter trigger makes it much easier to fire the revolver, which, unfortunately, includes unintentionally doing so. It's little wonder why some of the larger LE agencies in the "revolver days" eventually converted to DAO revolvers.
Because you have a single-action capability doesn't mean you are required to cock each time before shooting. Most people I know and shoot with understand why it's a bad idea to shoot sa in a da revolver in any circumstance under stress. Pretty basic stuff, really.
I spent three decades in le before retiring and have done my share of firearm and tactical instruction, with rifles, shotguns, semi-auto pistols and revolvers, and I've never understood why any LE agency would convert to DAO revolvers. Is it so hard to train officers to never cock a da revolver unless one and/or two situations are in play: the shot needed is at a longer distance and/or, a very precisely aimed shot is needed; neither of which is likely to happen-but can? Our course(s) of fire, whether using revolvers or (later) semi-autos, always included a 50 yard stage so that, even in the unlikely eventuality that a long range and/or deliberate, precise shot from a handgun would ever be needed, the officer would be trained to cope with said circumstance.
Training is everything. There is the absurd notion prevalent in contemporary "tactical talk" that pistols with high capacity magazines encourage a "spray and pray" mind-set. No it doesn't. Just because you have more bullets on board doesn't mean you have to shoot them all and just because you have a double-action revolver doesn't mean you have to cock the gun before shooting.
Le officers are not stupid and are perfectly capable of understanding basic firearm self-defense technique protocols. Proper training, to reiterate, is everything.
I consider the capability to make a single action shot a big advantage of the humpback.
That said, I rarely practice SA with my M49.
But I intend to start.
But I plan to practice with 25 yard plus shots, and will use the gun in SA and DA mode, both.
The chances I'll ever get into a situation where I need to take a long range shot defense shot against a human is extremely low. But after the terrorist shooter incidents in night clubs and office parties, it seems higher these days than earlier.
Also, I can imagine a scenario where you might need to shoot an aggressive coyote at 100 foot distance -- and I really don't want to wait for a rabid coyote to get real close.
I don't see the logic in taking away a capability (single action shots) that I might need -- even if the likelihood of needing it is low.
Saying SA capability is too dangerous and we shouldn't have it, reminds me of my liberal friends saying civilians shouldn't be allowed to have firearms at all because guns are too dangerous.
It's a matter of training and self discipline.
That said, I rarely practice SA with my M49.
But I intend to start.
But I plan to practice with 25 yard plus shots, and will use the gun in SA and DA mode, both.
The chances I'll ever get into a situation where I need to take a long range shot defense shot against a human is extremely low. But after the terrorist shooter incidents in night clubs and office parties, it seems higher these days than earlier.
Also, I can imagine a scenario where you might need to shoot an aggressive coyote at 100 foot distance -- and I really don't want to wait for a rabid coyote to get real close.
I don't see the logic in taking away a capability (single action shots) that I might need -- even if the likelihood of needing it is low.
Saying SA capability is too dangerous and we shouldn't have it, reminds me of my liberal friends saying civilians shouldn't be allowed to have firearms at all because guns are too dangerous.
It's a matter of training and self discipline.
straightshooterjake
New member
I own a bodyguard style J-frame, and I like them. But I think these guns have a disadvantage that is rarely mentioned: it is difficult to safely decock these revolvers if you cock one for a single action shot, and then decide not to fire.
To safely decock a revolver, you should put your off hand thumb in front of the hammer before touching the trigger. This method insures that if the hammer slips while you are lowering it, the gun will not fire. With a bodyguard revolver, it is not possible to block the hammer with your thumb. It is also difficult to get a really firm grasp on the shrouded hammer. For these reasons, I believe these revolvers should very rarely be cocked.
Due to the difficulty of decocking bodyguard revolvers, and fact that defensive revolvers should be used double action in the vast majority of circumstances, I now prefer DAO (double action only) J-frames for most purposes. While I still think shrouded hammer revolvers are a good compromise for some circumstances, I am no longer as enthusiastic about them as I was when I first got one.
To safely decock a revolver, you should put your off hand thumb in front of the hammer before touching the trigger. This method insures that if the hammer slips while you are lowering it, the gun will not fire. With a bodyguard revolver, it is not possible to block the hammer with your thumb. It is also difficult to get a really firm grasp on the shrouded hammer. For these reasons, I believe these revolvers should very rarely be cocked.
Due to the difficulty of decocking bodyguard revolvers, and fact that defensive revolvers should be used double action in the vast majority of circumstances, I now prefer DAO (double action only) J-frames for most purposes. While I still think shrouded hammer revolvers are a good compromise for some circumstances, I am no longer as enthusiastic about them as I was when I first got one.
Many people who have not shot the J frame revolvers much vastly underestimate their accuracy potential.
We used to have to qualify with our J frames at the same distances as our regular service revolvers, which included 18 rounds at 50 yards. I never had any problem hitting the silhouette at 50 yards, with most of my rounds in the K-5 area. This was made much easier because of the Model 49's single action option.
We used to have to qualify with our J frames at the same distances as our regular service revolvers, which included 18 rounds at 50 yards. I never had any problem hitting the silhouette at 50 yards, with most of my rounds in the K-5 area. This was made much easier because of the Model 49's single action option.
Model12Win
Moderator
I wish Smith would make a 638 no lock.
Model12Win
Moderator
Just nabbed a 638-2 no-lock on Gun Broker. Advertised as LNIB with original box and papers. One of my dream guns for sure, and at a good price. The 638 is one I have always wanted but I avoid the internal lock models.