Size comparison: SP101, S&W M60, S&W 642

I

indigo-357

New member
Hello all.

This is my first post, but I have been reading this site quite frequently. I am currently deployed and I plan on buying a new revolver when I return to the States in six months (1/2 way done with my deployment today).

I've narrowed my choices to the Ruger SP101 or a S&W of similar size. From browsing previous posts, I am familiar with the intimacies of the "bad" Ruger trigger and the "weak" Smith frames. What I'd really like to see illustrated, however, is the actual difference in size between the guns listed in the title: SP101, 60, 642. I know the 642 is .38, but I added it simply for size comparison purposes.

I've seen posts where some contributors to this forum claim to pocket carry an SP101, whereas others think it absurd. Yes, the heft of the SP101 plays a factor in this, but do the external dimensions allow for comfortable pocket carry?

Ideally, one of you fortunate members with a healthy firearms collection would take a few side by side photographs for comparison purposes. If I can't get that, I'll take a written description and be nearly as happy.

Thanks in advance for any and all help provided.

Indigo
 
Here you go-
snubbies.JPG

SP-101(24oz), S&W 642(17oz), NAA Black Widow(12oz)

The Ruger is a great gun but its a brick and needs a holster and a good belt. The other two are pocket friendly. :D
 
Thanks!

Rangie,

That's perfect! I plan on holster carry for the most part, but in those grab and go instances I want to make sure it'll actually fit in my pocket. I really just want something substantial, yet smaller than my 686.

Try concealing a 4" 686 in your pocket. Whether or not they recognize it as a gun, your genital region garners a lot of attention! Definitely not a grab and go (again, not the primary purpose of the smaller revolver), and I don't necessarily have my rig on at all times.

Thanks for the pic, truly appreciated.

Indigo
 
Weight advantage

I would own a Ruger if I were going to shoot alot or maybe the steel frame 60. The lighter guns would be carry alot shoot a little for me. Maybe someone can specify from experience if alot of practice with the heavier Ruger in 38 translates into proficiency with the lighter handier Smiths. The Ruger would also be nice as a home gun unless you expect to be attacked by gangs.
And I don't think you could wear it out. I have a 60 and a 640 that are OK to shoot with +P lead, they don't hurt the hand or anything. But now I have the bug to look for an alloy frame gun, preferably without the new extra key safety parts to complicate things. I think the Ruger is more accurate at 25 yds, from my experience long ago. If that makes a practical difference.
 
The 642 and 60 are pretty much the same size. The 642 is lighter and easier to carry in a pocket.

The 60 handels .38 +p's a lot better than the 642. The 60 isn't a real monster with .357's but it'll get your attention when you touch one off.

The SP101 is about the same size as the 60, it's just a little heavier. I put a pair of Hogue grips on my SP101 and it turned a neat gun into a great gun.

I don't shoot that many +p's in my 642, usally 3 or 4 cylinders full each range session.

Out of my 3 magnum snubbies (Taurus 605,Taurus 606, SP101), the SP101 is my favorite. It just feels better in my hand and it seems to have less recoil than the other two.

For holster carry you can't beat the SP101. If you're looking for something to pocket carry i would look at one of the S&W Airlights.
 
I have done pocket carry with a 2.25" SP101, but you need relatively big pockets and a good belt. It is a little deeper top to bottom and a little longer in the grip than a Model 60 or 642. You could adjust this, to some extent, by choice of grips.

The covered top of the 642 makes carry, and especially draws, easier, and also keep some of the dust and lint out of the lockwork.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top