Is the single stack nine the modern snubby?

G

great scot

New member
I have a Smith Shield in 9mm and I just bought a Glock 43. I had a chance to compare them to my Smith 442 and it got me wondering whether single stack polymer 9mms are the modern equivalent to the classic .38 special snub nose revolver? Both are light, relatively powerful, and easily concealable. But, both have limited capacity and sight radius, and both can be a handful to shoot. I can imagine a modern Serpico or Popeye Doyle carrying a Glock 43!
 
It's a good analogy except for the "handful to shoot" part, I mean, they can be, but don't have to be. I've owned both a SIG P938 and a Ruger LC9s (my current co-EDC), and neither of them were difficult to shoot. My former LCR 38 was a different story. 50 rounds and I was done and lucky to stay within an 8 inch circle. Either of the above semi-autos, I can easily go 200+ rounds with good accuracy
 
...50 rounds and I was done and lucky to stay within an 8 inch circle. Either of the above semi-autos, I can easily go 200+ rounds with good accuracy
Click to expand...
In my self-defense fantasies, I only envision firing five or so rounds total...your self-defense fantasy evidently is much richer than mine. In your imagination, just where/how do you carry that many rounds? ;)
 
In my self-defense fantasies, I only envision firing five or so rounds total...your self-defense fantasy evidently is much richer than mine. In your imagination, just where/how do you carry that many rounds?
Click to expand...
I don't have self-defense fantasies and I don't usually try to carry as many rounds as I typically shoot during a practice session.

But I do like to practice with my carry gun to build skill and I consider the ability to shoot a decent amount of ammo at the range during a practice session a big advantage. I find that it's much harder to build skill in a gun if it's so uncomfortable to shoot that I have to limit my range sessions with it to just a handful of rounds.
 
I replaced my Charter Arms .38SPL Snubby with a LC9 and never looked back. Easier to pocket carry the gun and the spare ammo. Easier to shoot as well.

The single-stack 9mm is the new .38SPL snub.....and the single-stack .40S&W is the new .357Mag snub.
 
Maybe but you've got to love the LCR. It's a modern revolver that's light to carry but relatively easy on the hand. I find .38 special very pleasant to shoot with it. I feel like the .327 Federal version hits a sweet spot in the compromise between power and ease of control, plus six shots. It might not be most popular choice anymore but it's still "the modern equivalent to the classic .38 special snub nose revolver".
 
dahermit said:
In my self-defense fantasies, I only envision firing five or so rounds total...your self-defense fantasy evidently is much richer than mine. In your imagination, just where/how do you carry that many rounds?
Click to expand...
Well, I'm also one of those people who believes in practicing a lot with any gun I'm going to carry. Strange, but true.
 
I carry a g26 or 19 daily but I have a soft spot for snubbies. I've had a shield and an xds 45. But they just don't do it for me.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
 
My 26's have replaced my 642s. Basically the same size, and carried in the same places I carried the 642's, but offer a lot more.

I get twice the onboard ammo, a good set of night sights, and the capability to be basically a full sized gun, with a simple mag swap. Shoots like a full sized gun too.
 
Is the single stack nine the modern snubby?
I have a Smith Shield in 9mm and I just bought a Glock 43. I had a chance to compare them to my Smith 442 and it got me wondering whether single stack polymer 9mms are the modern equivalent to the classic .38 special snub nose revolver? Both are light, relatively powerful, and easily concealable. But, both have limited capacity and sight radius, and both can be a handful to shoot. I can imagine a modern Serpico or Popeye Doyle carrying a Glock 43!
Click to expand...

My two most commonly carried guns are a S&W 642 and an XDS 9mm. So, yeah.
 
Fun with recoil.
Youse guys realize that guns only recoil when you pay attention to them.
The next time you're at the range, try this:
Imagine the target to be some drooling meat eating monster hell bent on eating your kids.
Your immediate job is to stop it in its tracks, right then, right now.
Drop that creep in the mud before it moves another foot.
Betcha' you won't notice any recoil at all, no matter what you are shooting.
Of course, the more realistic the target, the better.
But that's the idea what ever the target you have to use.
This works even better if someone else is yelling Look Out, Danger, Danger or the equivalent.
 
It not the initial recoil thats the issue, its the repeated pounding, with minimal grips that tends to start to aggravate. ;)

I can shoot my 26's with +P+ loads all day. 50 rounds out of my 642's, and my hand hurts for a couple of days.
 
For those who choose one of those little beaters, maybe the trick is not to practice with them so much.
It isn't really all that necessary to use a lot of ammo in order to get a meaningful practice session.
It's more about making a realistic plan about what to practice.
IDPA has added a BUG division recently for small handguns.
Maybe they have some course designs for them that would useful for practice without wearing yourself out.
But running short quick practice stages should do it.
No one is going to use one for fighting a war.
Just a thought.
 
Is the single stack nine the modern snubby?
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

It surely replaces the six shot 2 1/2 snub .357 magnums (which most people used .38s in anyway) and 2 inch K frames but not the J frame 5 shot .38s.

Now the Glock 42, in .380, gets awful close to replacing the J, the the 43 is more like a K frame replacement. The exemptions are those people who cannot retract the slides, then the revolver still has a place for them.

BTW, I have both 42 and 43 as well as LOTS of K frame and J frame snubs.

Except for woods carry, I now use the Glocks.

Deaf
 
It has for me.

All it took was one range trip with a LC9s to realize that I shot it better, right out of the box than I could any J-frame size revolver I'd ever owned.

The Colt Cobra I was carrying went in the safe, the Ruger went into a holster.
 
I would agree that it has taken a big chunk back from the ole standard wheel gun. I find them easier to carry and faster to reload, they also are easier than a small revolver for me to shoot. YMMV
 
the compact single stack 9mm can easily be equated to filling the modern role of the J frame of yore. the same can be said for the holstered side arm of the modern mid frame Glock or Sig replacing the K or L frame of days gone by.
 
Imagine the target to be some drooling meat eating monster hell bent on eating your kids.
Your immediate job is to stop it in its tracks, right then, right now.
Drop that creep in the mud before it moves another foot.
Click to expand...
I agree that this would probably take your mind off the recoil. On the other hand, I can't imagine a worse way to train.

Training should involve carefully doing things exactly correctly with enough repetitions to ingrain the proper methods. An artificially induced panic may help one ignore the effects of recoil, but it's not a good way to insure that training is carried out correctly.
For those who choose one of those little beaters, maybe the trick is not to practice with them so much.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's a good idea to practice so much that you begin to hate shooting one, but very small/compact carry guns tend to be hard enough to shoot even with practice. Having to cut back on practice significantly due to recoil is making a bad situation worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top