Is the single stack nine the modern snubby?
- Thread starter great scot
- Start date
My two primary ccw guns are a Kimber Solo and a S&W 642, they are roughly the size and weight, but the Solo is slimmer and holds two more rounds. I prefer the Smith for pocket carry. In the winter months, I sometimes carry both, with the Solo IWB and the revolver in my outer overcoat or jacket pocket.
I haven't been entirely converted yet, but I think the little single stack 9s have become the modern snubby. I usually have a S&W J-frame or 3913 depending on weather, environment, etc. Wouldn't want that to get around and have to turn in my Man Card for carrying one of these little guns. I most often carried a full sized pistol even off-duty for years, but my resolve weakened as I got older
g.willikers
New member
No question.
But I was talking about practice, not training.
They are very different from one another.
First get training, then practice.
First get training, then practice.
First...
g.willikers
New member
Exactly.
Practice reenforces training.
But to know what and how to practice, training comes first.
And enough of it to satisfy one's needs and goals.
In the context of this discussion, practicing with small handguns should be for how they would actually be used.
At least that's the way I do it.
Small quick scenarios for small guns.
Keep it real and there's less need to wear yourself out at the range.
As someone who knows once said, (can't remember who), practice smart is best.
Practice reenforces training.
But to know what and how to practice, training comes first.
And enough of it to satisfy one's needs and goals.
In the context of this discussion, practicing with small handguns should be for how they would actually be used.
At least that's the way I do it.
Small quick scenarios for small guns.
Keep it real and there's less need to wear yourself out at the range.
As someone who knows once said, (can't remember who), practice smart is best.
Last edited:
g.willikers
New member
If anyone is interested on how to practice with small handguns, here's an excellent article about BUG matches.
http://gunsmagazine.com/web-extra-lessons-from-a-backup-gun/
http://gunsmagazine.com/web-extra-lessons-from-a-backup-gun/
I guess yes and no. The ones I've tried remain too large for pocket carry, so they can't replace my LCR as a pocket gun.
Should I find one that fits better and is as (un)pleasant to shoot, then perhaps. For larger pockets, my Glock 26 fits just fine in and therefore no need for a single stack.
I've tried the XDs, Shield and Glock 43. The SIG 938 looks like it might fit for me, but I haven't had a chance to try one yet.
Should I find one that fits better and is as (un)pleasant to shoot, then perhaps. For larger pockets, my Glock 26 fits just fine in and therefore no need for a single stack.
I've tried the XDs, Shield and Glock 43. The SIG 938 looks like it might fit for me, but I haven't had a chance to try one yet.
NO and NO
Does the single stack pocket auto's replace the snubbed nose revolver?
My opinion is they do not. I base this like all my opinions on my own training, education and experience. While I do have some safe queens, I tend to see firearms as tools. Depending on the task, I believe we need the right tool. I do not believe that there are one size fits all with firearms or any other tools.
The task at hand with most of us is to defend against an unknown assailant, in an unknown situation, he/her being armed with an unknown weapon. The idea of imagining a situation causing you to have to defend yourself is not just healthy but a good idea. While attending an advanced police training seminar I learned a training technique that later saved my life. While going through your everyday routine, stop and imagine a worse case scenario with the perp being armed with a handgun. Imagine how you would react to this. If your honest with yourself you will most likely end up shot or dead. The trick is to evaluate the situation and look for ways to change the outcome and make those changes in your lifestyle, tactics, weapons, or routine.
Ok so back to the question of " do single stack auto's replace the snubbie revolver?) are the single stacks the new snubbie? I suggest no. The single stack or any other auto is far less reliable of making multiple contact shots, shooting through clothing , purse's, packages. Most people do not have a tactical plan, much less a disaster plan in case of surprise or ambush. Very few people have actual experience or real world training, nor do they posses the information they'd need to make such decisions. So... strictly based on my own experiences and training, Knowing many of the methods and tactics used by robbers. muggers, burglars, home invaders, and opportunists I still carry, and recomend the snub nosed revolver.
maybe we need a discussion on how crooks work.
Does the single stack pocket auto's replace the snubbed nose revolver?
My opinion is they do not. I base this like all my opinions on my own training, education and experience. While I do have some safe queens, I tend to see firearms as tools. Depending on the task, I believe we need the right tool. I do not believe that there are one size fits all with firearms or any other tools.
The task at hand with most of us is to defend against an unknown assailant, in an unknown situation, he/her being armed with an unknown weapon. The idea of imagining a situation causing you to have to defend yourself is not just healthy but a good idea. While attending an advanced police training seminar I learned a training technique that later saved my life. While going through your everyday routine, stop and imagine a worse case scenario with the perp being armed with a handgun. Imagine how you would react to this. If your honest with yourself you will most likely end up shot or dead. The trick is to evaluate the situation and look for ways to change the outcome and make those changes in your lifestyle, tactics, weapons, or routine.
Ok so back to the question of " do single stack auto's replace the snubbie revolver?) are the single stacks the new snubbie? I suggest no. The single stack or any other auto is far less reliable of making multiple contact shots, shooting through clothing , purse's, packages. Most people do not have a tactical plan, much less a disaster plan in case of surprise or ambush. Very few people have actual experience or real world training, nor do they posses the information they'd need to make such decisions. So... strictly based on my own experiences and training, Knowing many of the methods and tactics used by robbers. muggers, burglars, home invaders, and opportunists I still carry, and recomend the snub nosed revolver.
maybe we need a discussion on how crooks work.
Perhaps during "practice" (using your definition) it might be possible to minimize the effects of felt recoil via mindset. But not during "training" since training is focused on the details of properly carrying out a process--something that's not compatible with an artificially induced panic.
Training and practice must continue together. The good habits built by initial training will have to be continually reinforced or they will fade.
Proper practice reinforces training. If the "practice" is such that it causes the shooter to lose focus on technique (e.g. via artificially induced panic) then the shooter will have to focus more heavily on "training" to insure that the "practice" doesn't cause good habits to fade.
You can't have it both ways. When I pointed out that an artificial panic is not good training, you then brought up the concept of "practice" as distinct from "training" because obviously your example was not good "training". Then when it was correctly pointed out that "training" must continue along with "practice" you responded with the idea that "practice" reinforces "training".
The problem is that your concept of "practice" isn't consistent with the principles of good "training" and therefore it does not reinforce "training", it primarily measures the current level of proficiency. As you define "practice" it is actually likely to work against the carefully ingrained habits generated by "training".
"Practicing" in a way that's inconsistent with "training" will absolutely require ongoing "training".
No matter how one tries to break this down, it's going to be necessary to do a significant amount of work at the range (practice and training) to build and maintain proficiency with a handgun. Much of that will have to be "training" which means that recoil WILL be a factor, even if it's not during "practice".
g willikers said:
You might not "notice" the recoil, just like you might not "notice" the muzzle blast if you "train" realistically by not wearing earmuffs.
Doesn't mean that either one is not there. Your eardrums are still getting destroyed whether you notice the pressure waves or not, just like your split times and accuracy are degraded by the recoil and muzzle blast whether you notice them or not.
You'll have to make your own decision on whether one hit combined with some slower, less accurate shots due to unnoticed increased muzzle blast and recoil are preferable to multiple faster and more accurate hits.
I'm a big believer that all common carry handguns are essentially equal (puny), and if I'm stuck with a handgun the only thing that will make any difference in stopping a drooling meat eating monster hell bent on eating my kids is effective placement of multiple rounds.
Last edited:
OldMarksman
Staff
Doesn't matter one whit whether you "notice" it.
The question is one of how quickly one can hit a fast moving attacker with multiple rounds. Recoil is one of the issues that make that difficult.
jglsprings
New member
Everyone has a plan...
You are going to very disappointed some day.
The rebound slide spring in my Model 60 broke one day at the range. - the gun stopped working. Any gun, no matter how "perfect" or "dead nuts reliable" can fail...
You are going to very disappointed some day.
The rebound slide spring in my Model 60 broke one day at the range. - the gun stopped working. Any gun, no matter how "perfect" or "dead nuts reliable" can fail...
How long and how much have you been shooting a revolver?
Ive been shooting them for quite a long time now, and have had some pretty ugly (and learning) stoppages with them over the years.
At least with the autos, a TRB normally gets you back in business pretty quick. Revolver stoppages tend to be DRT in nature, and the gun isnt readily restored to use without tools.
All it takes is a bullet jumping a crimp, or you reload incorrectly and you get junk under the extractor star, etc, and the gun all of a sudden stops working, and you cant get it going again, and at the worst possible moment.
With anything, practicing failure drills is just as important as practicing anything else. If you havent had a failure yet, you will at some point, thats pretty much a guarantee. Best to be proactive, do preventive maintenance up front, and learn how to deal with the bad things in practice.
Ive been shooting them for quite a long time now, and have had some pretty ugly (and learning) stoppages with them over the years.
At least with the autos, a TRB normally gets you back in business pretty quick. Revolver stoppages tend to be DRT in nature, and the gun isnt readily restored to use without tools.
All it takes is a bullet jumping a crimp, or you reload incorrectly and you get junk under the extractor star, etc, and the gun all of a sudden stops working, and you cant get it going again, and at the worst possible moment.
With anything, practicing failure drills is just as important as practicing anything else. If you havent had a failure yet, you will at some point, thats pretty much a guarantee. Best to be proactive, do preventive maintenance up front, and learn how to deal with the bad things in practice.
If you mean to say that there was a time when most detectives and civilians carried a snubby for concealed carry and today most of those same persons carry semi autos for concealed carry, then yes, the single stack nine is today's snubby.
After that I think the remaining similarities are akin to the similarities made between a Ford Model T and today's modern cars; both have four wheels, an engine...
After that I think the remaining similarities are akin to the similarities made between a Ford Model T and today's modern cars; both have four wheels, an engine...