J frame--pocket carry--steel or airweight?

T

tbeb

New member
I will soon buy a used Smith & Wesson J frame revolver to carry in my front pants pocket. My question has nothing to do with the fact that a steel gun is easier to shoot than an airweight. My question has nothing to do with which model is best for pocket carry.

My question is: Will a 13-15 oz. gun pocket carry >>a whole lot easier<< than a 19-21 oz. gun? I'm sure a lot of you folks have carried both weights and can speak from experience. (Point is-- should I only consider an airweight?) Thanks.
 
Last edited:
In my opinion, it depends whether you intend to shoot it, or carry it. I have a Model 360. Great gun for carry, not so great for shooting. I also have a Ruger 101. Great gun for shooting, a little heavy for pocket carry. I am also concerned about the durability of the aluminum framed .357s. Can't believe they can stand up to constant shooting, any more than your hand can with them. The steel guns, like the 101 or 60 should last forever. Your choice.
 
I like the scandium models.... you should try them both out before you buy.......Yes their is a noticable difference in weight when carrying but only you can decide if it's a big enough difference to effect your final decision.....Don't forget recoil.....are you the shy type ?......if so go for the 36.
 
My old M38 Airweight Bodyguard is about as heavy a gun as I can comfortably carry in a pants pocket. It is about as light a gun as I care to shoot with full power ammo. I have a much nicer 640 but it is too heavy for a pocket and if I am going to wear a holster I can just as easy take a .357 x 6 shot or a .45 ACP.
 
No Airweight for me

As a Police Weapons Instructor moonlighting as a Civilian Indoor Rangemaster one day in 1977, I heard an explosion and a very loud scream. A reloader with a Smith Airweight loaded a .38 special without powder among his reloads and in rapid firing, the powderless round had its primer push the wadcutter bullet into the barrel so the cylinder rotated and he could not stop pulling the trigger on the next round. My inspection revealed that the top three cylinders and top strap were gone and the fellow was holding in shock what was left. the pieces stuck in the ceiling and each side of his booth and none of the three cartridges were intact anywhere. Luckily no one was injured.

The Airweight was taken off the market unless one has been reissued
 
First importance is have a good pocket holster.

I have carried steel I and J frames in pockets for many years without noticing any weight problem.

3" Model 36 full of Cor-Bons with holster weighs 36.9 oz. I never have a problem wearin it in front or rear pocket.

And I only weigh 145...dressed and armed.

Sam
 
Paul,

They didn't take the Airweight off the market; they just quit putting aluminum cylinders in them. Weight went up from 11 ounces (Sound like a familiar number, titanium fans?) to 14 or so.
But that was done long before 1977, more like 1957. Either he had an old Chiefs Special Airweight or there was something wrong with his gun or ammo worse than a powderless shell. Maybe he left the powder out of one and doubled up on the next? Bet he wasn't loading on one of your Stars.
 
I find the steel J-frame to be no problem in an ankle holster or the side pocket of a heavy coat, but want something lighter in a pants pocket. As has been commented, there is a noticeable increase in recoil, but there ya go. Current manufacture Airweights are rated for any +P, but the scandium & titanium models have some ammo restrictions; if you are predisposed to a certain defensive load, make sure it's compatible with your choice.

BTW, I prefer a "hammerless" design for a pocket gun and would prefer a Centennial or Bodyguard model over a Chiefs for that role.

Steve
 
I have a S&W 640 (23oz.) that I carry in a IWB holster and an Airweight model 37 (15oz.) that I have pocket carried from time to time. There is a noticeable difference between the two. If I were going out today to get a pocket revolver it would be the Airweight 642 Centennial. It is rated for +P, my 37 isn't, and is the ideal pocket carry revolver as far as I am concerned.
 
It all depends on you.

Your pants style, your body type, how you like to wear your belt, your tolerance to weight in your pocket, etc.

You'll have to make that choice for yourself.

I much prefer Airweight pocket carry.
 
See if your gunshop won't let you drop the different models in your pocket to see how they feel. The local gunshop here allowed me to do just that. I settled for a M36 Ladysmith. Yeah yeah, I know. My search for the perfect snubby (for me) took me a while, but this was the model that felt light enough, felt good in the hand, and didn't cost a ton of $$$. Carry it all the time around the house, and my wife doesn't even know I have it in my pocket. It prints a little bit, but more like a lump in my jeans pocket than a concealed revolver. (Is that a gun in your pocket or are you happy yo see me?) ;) In a jacket pocket, I almost forget It's there.

Carry it loaded with Gold Dot 124 gr +P.

Totally a subjective thing here. YOU gotta like what you get.
 
Taurus 85 multi, 13 ounces, in a Kramer pocket holster works for me. The steel version is about 6 or 7 ounces heavier. Doesn't seem like much, but it does make a difference in the front pocket.
 
My experience so far with the J-frames is that very few people end up carrying a steel gun in the pants pocket after they try the lightweights. Especially in slacks.

The low-cost 442 and 642 are great guns for pocket carry if you are going to use 38+P ammo. Also the 638, which is considered by some as "the thinking person's pocket gun". I like the 340PD .357. adk
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all your comments. I will look for a used S&W model 37 or 38 or 442. My second choice, only because they're a tad larger, will be a Colt Cobra or Colt Agent.

I'm sorry to see TFL go. I've only been a member for 2 1/2 months but have thoroughly enjoyed this forum. Merry Christmas to all!
 
TFL closure

I felt sick when I picked up on the fact that TFL is closing. I have thoroughly enjoyed this forum especially in the presence of many "quality"and knowledgeable members

C.R.Sam and Mike Irwin:
If I may ask what forums do each of you plan to visit after TFL closes?
Herb Leventhal
hlvnth@cs.com
 
IMO the answer depends on the pants you choose. I have no trouble carrying my S&W 940 in the pocket of a pair of jeans or other sturdy pair of pants. However, living in Austin, where it gets hot, I spend a good amout of time in shorts when there is still snow on the ground in other parts of the U.S. For lightweight shorts, especially with an elastic waist, or even the flannel 'lounge pants' I wear around the house when it is cold, the S&W 342 is the only way to go. My 940 would have my lounge pants around my ankles before I took two steps. Not a pretty sight.
 
Jeff has described perfectly my experience with my 940. Limits the dress options more than a lightweight would, but it's do-able. I'm thinking a Scandium may be in the distant future for me - I'll get one of the many used ones I've been hearing about! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top