One all-purpose gun...

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

B-Fox

Inactive
I am looking for inexpensive and reliable gun that can be used for two purposes - fun at the range and defence.

I've considered .45 autos (which are really hot but damn costly), 9mm semi-autos (affordable and fun), and various revolvers (versatile and percise).

After reading thread about CZ-75 vs .357 Magnum I decided that it is probably better choice to go with revolver since I am not going to carry it around anyway.

I am looking for something in $500 range and the best I found for the money is S&W 686 Plus.

Also can somebody please forgive my total ignorance in the matter and tell me why the hell everybody is so pissed off with Smith Wesson? What the hell did that company do?
 
Smith & Wesson, out of the blue, signed an agreement with the Federal Gov't, that REALLY is a pice of work.

Go to political and legal forum, and search on Smith & Wesson and agreement, and you'll be able to find the text.

As for which gun is the best all around, I have always favored the S&W Model 19, or for a larger gun, the S&W Model 28.

Both are .357 Mag., are well balanced, and are a pleasure to shoot, especially with .38 Special ammo.
 
Mike's right on. Like the tobacco industry, except with less justice, S&W was looking at bankruptcy by blackmail and extortionary threatened litigation.

You'll also notice that Mike mentioned the revolvers ( K and N frames ) just smaller and just larger than the L frame 686. In blue.

I'd guess that's cause of quality control problems from the company being sold a few times, and also because stainless was initially hell on tooling and came out rougher than non-stainless. Try to find a knowlegeable person with no axe to grind to go with you and hit several shops, looking for nice older ( like pinned barrel S&W )used ones. You'll end up paying less and getting better made guns. A 4" Colt, Ruger or S&W in 357 would do, and get the one in the nicest condition rather than going by brand. All 3 made wonderful guns, and all three brands put out lemons. Have fun, and use what you save to practice with.



------------------
How could I have missed? The sights were dead on when I closed my eyes and pulled the trigger!
 
Have you completely removed the possibilty of getting a semi-auto. IF you're set on a revolver then ignore me completely but please do not get a new *&* instead get a used one, so the sellouts don't get any of your money.

Take another look at the 9mm semi-autos, there are many good companies out there, glock, sig, ruger, beretta. I'd personally recommend the Sig P228 or P229 (9mm) or the G19. IMHO these are some of the best all around pistols available today.

~bamf
 
Good thinking, but strongly suggest the 4" stainless heavy-lug adjustable-sight Ruger GP 100.

It will give you great satisfaction.

------------------
"All my ammo is factory ammo"
 
I'll concur strongly with the GP-100 with a 4" barrel, if you're sure you want a revolver. Those can be had brand spanking new for about $325 (give or take a little).

If you're not 100% committed to a revolver, I would go with either a Glock (17 or 19) or the CZ-75 in the price range you want to be in. In fact, I would go with the Glock even if you said you wanted to spend more than $500.

The biggest advantage to 9mm is the cost of the ammo. The only thing less expensive is .22 LR. If you get a .357 magnum, you can shoot less expensive (and lighter recoiling) .38 specials through it for practice and then load up full house rounds when you are not at the range.

And as far as .45 autos go, you ought to be able to get a Glock 21 in the $500 range, maybe slightly more. The shop where I work sells them for $529 fresh from the factory. And if you want a 1911 model, take a look at the Springfield Armory line. They're about the same price as the G21, and are wonderful pistols.

Best piece of advice I can give you is to go to a range, rent several of them (or borrow them from a buddy or two), and find out what fits you the best. The calibers you mentioned will all do the job so long as you do your part.
 
Since you didn't say anything about "carry", and your two biggies were fun at the range and safe at the house, I'd lean back towards the semi-auto, IMVHO. Even though I don't quite know who to believe, the Sanows and Facklers (sp? who cares) seem to give the 9mm's and 45's of the world a big edge over any .38, and the diff. between .357 and the aforementioned autos is (again IMVHO) not worth the extra recoil, lower round count.

the way I see it, if you're shooting at the range to have fun, then the more you're shooting, the more fun you're having! A couple of 10 round mags, an HKS mag-loader, and a semi-auto will shoot more, faster, than any semi-auto IN THE AVERAGE GUY'S HAND! I know some of you can reload your wheelguns in .86 seconds, but that's not average, that's IMPRESSIVE!

I've seen used Glock 19's and 23's for $425 - $475, and I've even seen an HK or two for around $475 - $525, and the latter priced one had nite sites.

As for guarding the house, you've got anywhere from 8 - 17 rounds of ammo (depending on the gun) in a semi, and with Glocks and HK's, you can fairly cost efficiently attach an incredibly bright little flashlight under the barrel to see before you shoot, without taking up a hand to do it!

My .01 1/2 :)

[This message has been edited by Onslaught (edited August 21, 2000).]
 
Rusty,

The reason I didn't mention the 686, and the reason I do not like them, is that they have the full underlug barrel, which I hate, despise, abhore, and detest!

If the 686 series (actually 586, since I also do not like stainless steel) came WITHOUT that full underlug, the design would be a winner for me.

------------------
Beware the man with the S&W .357 Mag.
Chances are he knows how to use it.
 
Mike, they do offer a 586 without the full under lug. It is called the model 19. ;) Personally I like the full under lug but in this case I highly recommend the model 19 for a number of reason.

Aside from what has been stated above the model 19 can also be used as a carry gun if you decide later you want to. With .38's it is very cheap to shoot. However with .357's it is a formitable stopper. The steel guns have a better reputation for durablity than the stainless guns.

Do not but a new Smith!

------------------
Gunslinger

I was promised a Shortycicle and I want a Shortycicle!
 
B-Fox,

In posts over the past few days, we discussed the virtues of 357 magnum revolvers. IMHO, for the money the Ruger GP100 (specifically, the KGP-141) is the best readily available medium frame .357 revolver. My earlier posts provide some details. There's no question the S&W 686 is also excellent. However, when you can buy a brand-new KGP-141 for slightly over $300, that's the way to go.

Regards.
 
Interesting...I thought I was nearly alone in not liking either full lugs or stainless guns. I do have 686 and 696 snubbies that are good tools. But I think the early short lugged 19s rule.

Police trade in 4" 19s often available for a little over $200 in great mechanical condition. Often a little holster shine gets you a better price. Lower price of a used gun leaves bucks for more ammo or componants.

Sam...my favorite 9mm is the 9X32R.
 
B-Fox, what happened to the exploding logo?

If you've decided on a revolver, the S&W686+ is hard too beat. Of course, if you want to be politically correct, you may want to look into the Taurus Tracker (this is a decision that I'm presently struggling with myself -- if you're interested, do a search on that since I posted the topic less than a month ago) -- the Tracker is of slightly less quality but it's also cheaper.

Being a pistol man myself, I would suggest that you do not discount the auto too quickly though. When loaded with the BEST rounds, both Marshall & Sanow and The Facklerites agree that there is no significant difference in stopping power between the .45ACP, .40S&W and the 9mm. They DO, however, disagree strongly on exactly what the best loads for each caliber are. This has been a topic that has been beaten to death here on TFL with both sides presenting very strong arguements for their particular point of view. I personally go both ways and listen to both sides by alternating ammo every other round figuring that it is better to be half wrong than all wrong (there have been a few threads on whether it makes sense to alternative ammo as well -- do a search on that if you're interested in reading more about it).

Getting back your pistol options and staying within your $500 limit, you may want to consider either a Ruger or a Taurus -- while they are not my personal favorites and I have very little experience with them, very fine things have been said about them both here on TFL and in print in the various GunRags.

Finally, with regard to the S&W boycott, I am of the opinion that anthing sitting on the dealer's shelf is fair game since the profit on that item has already been made by S&W. If you want to learn more and share your thoughts, comments & ideas with regard to Smith & Wesson products, why don't you come join other S&W owners at the Smith & Wesson Firearms Enthusiast's Web Board, which is no way affiliated with the Smith & Wesson Company of Springfeild, MA.

FUD
fudflag.gif
Share what you know & learn what you don't
 
Gunslinger,

I think you're being tongue-in-cheek, but for any who don't know, the 586/686 have the same grip dimensions as the K-frame guns (Model 19/66, etc.) but have a beefed up main frame that will better take the pounding delivered by a diet of full-bore .357 Mag. ammo.

The 586/686 L-frame was developed to correct this shortcoming in the K-frame magnums.

Why they choose to stick a full underlug on all of the L-frames is beyond me.

Why S&W started sticking full underlugs on guns like the 617 and the .32 Mags is COMPLETELY beyond me. It takes a gun that should be sweet and totally destroys their handling characteristics.

------------------
Beware the man with the S&W .357 Mag.
Chances are he knows how to use it.
 
I sort of like the look of a full lug :( Is there a technical/shooting reason why you guys are against it? I don't have a lot of experience with revolvers (been a pistol man for nearly two decades) so I honestly don't understand the drawbacks. I would figure that the extra weight along the barrel would help to absorb recoil.

[This message has been edited by FUD (edited August 21, 2000).]
 
Bout three years ago I retired my old K-22 and replaced it with a 17-6 6" with all the Ts. New gun was a tack driver, would hold one inch at 50yds from any chamber, looked ugly with the long lug and I couldn't hold it through a match. Somebody got a heck of a deal on it.
 
On second thought, M18's (4") or M17's are running 300/350 used, and what's left over of your 500 could buy 6000 to 8000 22's.
That is a lot of fun.

It is also a lot of practise.

If you do that, you'll be able to hit a golf ball size target every time, fast, with a sight picture at inside distances. You might even get good at point shooting orange or grapefruit size groups at 7 yards and under.

Now THAT is protection. Remember the three keys to stopping an aggressor with a handgun: 1)shot placement 2)shot placement 3)and shot placement.

If you can get 38 reloads at $10 per hundred, you save $7.50 every hundred by shooting 22s, $75 per thousand. After 5,000 rounds you've saved $375 and can find a 4" 19 in excellent condition that is 98.5% identical in feel to your 22, and is already an old friend. I may take my own advice on this one.

jump.gif



------------------
How could I have missed? The sights were dead on when I closed my eyes and pulled the trigger!
 
i don't consider a $500 gun and inexpensive gun because IMHO the best guns cost that much - GLOCKS. for $500 you can buy almost any glock, a beretta (which are also very reliable), possibly a sig but maybe it would have to be used, or a good revolver. i really hate to say it but the best DA revolvers are S&Ws. i would never buy a new S&W after what they did but i would buy a used pre-sellout gun. i have an S&W 686+ that i bought before they sold out for $415 and love it. its great for defense since its of course extreemly reliable being a revolver and the .357mag is a great round. also you can shoot inexpensive .38 wadcutters in it for practice.

i use a Glock 19 for home defense. i bought mine for i believe $459 but prices have gone up a bit since then. i feel glocks and berettas are basically as reliable as revolvers. my beretta 92FS has gone 3000 rounds without jamming once and my glocks are as reliable.

as for 9mm vs. .45 i'd go with the 9mm. it's cheaper for target practice, has less recoil, holds more rounds, is easier to train with and has a lot of stopping power. i feel that the difference in stopping power between all handgun defense calibers is much less than many people think. i feel very confident in the stopping power of my Glock 19 when loaded with good quality hollow points.
 
FUD:

1) it creates better accuracy by damping the vibrations, but the increased accuracy is miniscule compared to 2 below.
2) for defense it adds weight and unbalances a gun IMHO and slows it down just when need a quick and perfectly placed shot is needed.
3) the added weight does help with recoil recovery, on the other hand if the first shot is a well-placed 125 full charge 357 load, most likely the second shot ( or third if you've double-tapped ) won't be needed. Col. Cooper's burst of exasperation that you're supposed to take your opponent out with the top of the magazine, before he can return the favor is on point here. Also the idea you can't miss fast enough to catch up.
4) finally to me the full underlug is a flat-out wannabe imitation of the Python. The checkered topstrap 27, pinned and recessed, is on the same level. Put the early 60's Colts and Smiths next to each other and you are talking about deciding which is the better by tenths of a per cent. Stainless, full lugs, unpinned barrels and non-recessed chambers, and poor quality control all came about the same time.

------------------
How could I have missed? The sights were dead on when I closed my eyes and pulled the trigger!
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Remember the three keys to stopping an aggressor with a handgun: 1)shot placement 2)shot placement 3)and shot placement[/quote]

Rusty, let me disagree with you on this one... .357 Magnum hollow point from 4" barrel will stop aggressor independent of shot placement (well, unless you get the aggressor in the finger or something)...

------------------------------------------

bfox.gif
 
Political discussion aside, I used to carry a S&W 686. The trigger was, to say the least, pretty rough.

------------------
"Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true."
Homer Simpson... but attributed to Algore.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top