Lightweight .357's?

J

JASON KRASSOW

New member
I'm thinking about buying a lightweight .357 for backpacking/hiking protection. I have looked at both the Tauras and the S & W. It seems the Tauras would be better simply because it holds 7 rounds instead of 5, what are some opinions out there? Thanks...
 
For me anyway, every additional ounce matters when it comes to "carrying" for much, much longer periods of time than shooting.

5 vs. 7 not a big deal here either, altho I would suggest getting a speedstrip of speedloader. Who was it said something to the effect of "The only difference is the number of rounds left in your gun when you are found dead because you did not do your job with the first two."?

Lots of choices out there with both the Tauri & Smiths. Shop well, shoot well.
 
Why carry it unless you are proficient with it ?
Most can't become proficient unless they shoot quite a bit.
Unless the gun is comfortable to shoot, most won't shoot it much.

Most weight sensitive hikers could do with skipping a burger a week.

Tone up, trim down and carry a full sized gun in comfort.

Sam
 
Look into a Ruger SP-101. It's not light weight, but it's low bulk. It's durable, which is a plus for hiking and extended carry, and the weight will make it a bit more comfortable to shoot than a super lightweight .357.

Given a choice between S&W and Taurus, I'd say go with the Smith. Taurus has really spotty QC and I would NOT trust my life to one, which is essentially the role you're looking to fill here.

One question: If the need arises, what do you anticipate shooting with the pistol? Humans and feral dogs are two of the most common threats. If you're in Mtn. Lion country, a .357 is a great choice, if not then you might consider a compact auto in 9mm, .40 or .45.
 
I know I will get hammered for Taurus bashing, but IMHO
I believe that Smith & Wesson makes a better product;
as reports grow of Taurus revolver's being too loose.:(

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
Actually, Taurus and Smith make both a 5 and 7 shot 357....
The Taurus is the 617 and is available in a Ti gun...the S&W is
the same 7 shot and it a Sc PD model. Both are heavy enough
to take some of the recoil from the rounds and light enough to carry hiking or where ever. Look at both...in a head to head in a recent rag, the Taurus shot more accurately, was just a reliable, handled the recoil better and was cheaper...
Look around and see what you like...for 357 small/med framed guns you have a multitude of choices.
Shoot well
 
I agree with Ala Dan Brian B & nef12ga

Smith & Wesson's Quality Control is superior compared to Taurus's Quality Control. I will never again buy, or trust another Taurus product with my life. I have owned two semi-auto's and four revolvers from Smith & Wesson in the last twenty years, and have had no, none, any problems, not even one from any of them!

I now at this time own three S&W .357MAG revolvers, model's 686plus, 386PD, and 360Sc, I would suggest that you take a look at the S&W Model's 386PD or the 386-Mountain Lite. Both guns are made with Scandium frames, seven round Titanium cylinders weighing 18.5oz., are great revolvers, and are worth every penny I paid for them!
The only other suggestion I would agree with was Brian B's, suggestion to give the Ruger SP-101 a good look.

Just my opinion nothing more. :)
 
Heh.

Gotta love the "Taurus Sucks!" posts that begin with:

"I've heard..."
"A buddy had..."
"I read on the Internet..."
"I owned one five years ago, and..."

;)

Truthfully, as far as rate of returns for revolvers sold over the last five years goes, I'd say the lowest percentage of lemons I've seen would be Ruger, followed by Taurus, then *&*, with Colt bringing up the rear. There was a time right before Colt discontinued their DA wheelgun line that it seemed like we were getting some kind of complaint on every other gun. Also, I think a big part of the difference between the return rate on the Taurus/Ruger and the *&* guns is probably that folks will tolerate minor fit & finish issues on a $250-$350 gun that they won't on a $500 gun.

As far as the "I'd never trust my life to a Taurus!" bit, there's folks on this board who'd never trust their life to a Glock, those who'd never trust their life to a Beretta, those who'd never trust their life to a 1911, those who'd never tr... well, you get the picture; name the brand or type of gun, and out of 15,000+ members, I'm sure we can scare up a few who think it's a dangerous lemon. ;)
 
All I'm saying is that I currently own one, and it doesn't go bang every time.

I mentioned in the other Taurus thread that it does a good job when it does go bang, so I'll have a smith fix the timing and put a Wolf (or is it Wolfe?) spring set in it some time.

No manufacturing process is perfect, and everyone produces a lemon from time to time, but I'm inclined to suggest people chose a weapon from a company with a better hit:miss ratio when it comes to reliability.
 
Thanks, Tamara

I've owned 2 Taurus revolvers; Nothing wrong with either of them. Taurus makes a bevy of revolvers in the larger calibers with various barrel lengths that you could look into for your intended purpose.
 
I do adventure racing and have found that every ounce does make a difference. The best gun imo is the gun that you will carry with you. The Ruger is way too heavy. I have found that my S&W 340 is what I carry while I train (30-40 mile mountian bike rides, 10 mile runs and 20 mile kayak trips) I live in florida, so I do not have to worry about large predetors... four legged type. We have plenty of two legged, thats why I carry. To get better balistics, you could go with the three inch barrel 360 for less than two more ounces.
 
well for sticking into a backpack inside a holster or for just having the holster on belt, for someone of my size the new 4inch gp100 would seem perfect to me, it is light compared to my redhawk, but here is another vote for an sp101, surprisingly this small gun also fit my hand rather nice-- wouldnt want the extra recoil of scnadium or titanium guns, but does s/w make a regular version of their 686pd? without all the light metals?
 
Tamara said:

Gotta love the "Taurus Sucks" posts that begin with:
Click to expand...
"I've haerd...", "A buddy had...", "I read on the Internet...", "I owned one five years ago, and..."
Click to expand...

Tamara I think you need to reread the post's again, becouse no where did anyone say that "Taurus Sucks" or any of the other statements you made. I personally do not appreciate anyone accusing me of making statements that I did not make! :rolleyes:

Tamara said:
As far as the "Id never trust my life to a Taurus!" bit,
Click to expand...
Tamara what we stated is just an opinion, and only an opinion. I guess only your opinion counts on this forum.
 
Last edited:
Tamara I think you need to reread the post's again, becouse no where did anyone say that "Taurus Sucks" or any of the other statements you made. I personally do not appreciate anyone accusing me of making statements that I did not make!
Click to expand...

KEN CHAVEZ, I think you need to reread my post again and tell me where I accused you of anything. ;)
 
I own, carry and have worked on a number of S&W and Tarus revolvers. The newer Taurus models are every bit as good as S&W products. Taurus has an edge in lockup and from what I've seen in machining. I would give Smith the edge in looks and trigger smoothness (with the flat mainspring K, L and N's). I would also give the big Smiths for target work.

I was not aware of failures in the Taurus hammer safety system - which was offered to S&W for free. But, it only takes a minute to remove it from the weapon or epoxy it shut.

My only problem with Taurus is that they won't sell me spare parts - so about all I care to do with them are change springs and polish etc.

Oh! Another thing, don't let anyone tell you porting isn't useful on a snubby. The lighter the gun the more porting helps, my two inch ported guns are way more pleasant to shoot than my un-ported ones.

You'll be happy with either Taurus or Smith for backpacking and hiking.


Elliot
 
E357,

I don't think anyone's disputing the effectivness of porting.

My concern with porting on a small, defensive gun is the possibility of sending a high-pressure jet of powder gas and particulates into your own face if you find yourself having to shoot from a contorted position, such a high body retention position.

I personally would rather not take the chance of blinding myself temporarily during a time when I need all of my faculties.
 
K frame S&W any model but preferably stainless. 2.5-4 inch barrel preferably with a round butt configuration.

6 shot
totally reliable
accurate beyond belief even with a 2.5 inch barrel
easy to carry and conceal
hard to break
probably the best all around hand gun for 85% of the hangun owning public. one of the most versitile weapons you can own.
If I could only one one hand gun it would be an S&W model 65 with a 3 inch barrel and round butt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top