Smallest, most accurate, lightest .357 please????

J

Jody Hudson

New member
First what are the smallest, most accurate, lightest, .357 revolvers you know of old and new. Old preferred if there are any.

Also, what is the chrono speed of .357 vs. .38 out of a short tube. Should I just drop the small .357 idea? I wonder if the short tube is getting any more out of a .357 than a .38 +P?

I am not very familiar with revolvers but am interested in some data on this. I did several searches in this forum but did not use the right terms or something didn't work, or this has not been discussed??????

Thanks,
Jody
 
Your terms are contradictory, since accuracy is rarely a consideration in small, light guns. Except for (maybe) the 2-shot derringers, the new S&W revolvers in Scandium are without a doubt the lightest .357's ever. I have not fired any of those, but have fired the equivalent size in Titanium and the recoil is wicked. The argument is that in an emergency (and that is what such a gun is for) the recoil is tolerable or even unnoticeable. But such a light gun and powerful load will discourage the practice that one should have before carrying any gun for serious purposes.

There are smaller guns, like the derringers, but most are poorly made and should not be relied upon.

As to ballistics, you are right that there is little advantage (about 100 fps) to be gained from the .357 in a 2" barrel. Bullet placement is most important, but here is the practice problem again. If you shoot the light gun enough, even with .38 Special, to be confident of placing your shots, you will be so beat up by recoil that you may flinch at the thought of touching the gun.

Most people who carry small guns say that they won't need them over 4-5 feet. My response is to ask where they got the crystal ball, as I would like to buy one.

Unless size and weight are THE only considerations (which is rarely the case) I would go for a steel frame, and consider a longer (3"?) barrel.

Jim
 
I wondered about that! I thought the tube length would defeat the speed but wasn't certain at all.

As long as the accuracy is there I'll gladly shoot the little bugger. I am not tooooo sensitive to recoil.

But I've made my mind up now as to caliber.

I used to actually compete, informally, with the Tampa Police, pretty much every day. I used, among other unlikely revolvers and pistols, two tiny little snubs -- a .38 Colt and a S&W from time to time. Both of the ones I had were competition accurate with wadcutters and I shot against the older Cops who still had the long tube Smiths and Colts. Not all of the old snubbies were THAT accurate but many were.

I will practice with the cheapest loads I can find most of the time; reloaded WCs in target load. I will likely load the little revolver with QuickShoks and snake shot.

It is also for my Lady and she doesn't shoot enough to stay proficient with the controls of one of my Makarovs or FEGs. So, as always, I am going to go with a revolver for the seldom practicing shooter. It's for the woods and perhaps home if she wants. I will mostly let her practice with only the lightest loads because of the size and weight -- but... there will be bigger stuff for her to use when she doesn't notice the recoil (i.e. when she needs it).

NOW, how about the size on those new fangled ultra-lights. They seem a lot bigger to me and a lot more expensive. Perhaps we would be best to go with one of the 30-50 year old snubbies by Colt or S&W. What does a scuffed but seldom used one of those oldies go for and how does that compare to newer snubbies by Taurus, Rossi, etc.
 
FWIW, my path of reasoning down the same trail has lead me to start saving up for either a used S&W Model 60 with 3" barrel, or a Ruger SP-101 with 3-inch. I would probably prefer the Smith because it has adjustable sights, but I hear lots of nice things about the accuracy and regulation of the SP-101, too.

I just really like the 3" barrel better. Doesn't seem to affect concealment much.
 
Taurus makes some pretty nice looking Titanium revolvers. I'm partial to the Titanium Tracker, which is available in both a 7-shot .357 and a 5-shot .41 mag. These have 4" barrels, adjustable sights, are ported and have unique grips to help with recoil. Depending on which of your contradictory attributes you value most, these would be good choices. They are about as light as any .357 (I think they weigh about 24 oz, if memory serves), but you trade a little compactness for more accuracy. I think the 4" barrel would be a big plus with the .357 cartridge.

Taurus also makes more compact snub-nose style titanium .357s, but I haven't paid much attention to them because they don't appeal to me. I should say that I haven't used any of these guns, just handled and read about them. But I do like what I've seen. I think the trackers are very nice looking, well-thought-out guns.

Doug

[Edited by DougB on 05-08-2001 at 03:54 AM]
 
Howdy Cousin Jody,

I don't know what loads Jim Keenan was chronographing, but my S&W M-640 sure beats his results.

Using Federal Premium 125 gr. JHP's my M-640 produced 1207 fps average for three five shot strings.

With Winchester 110 gr. JHP White Box ammo, I got and average of 1210 fps for three five shot groups.

With Cor-Bons heavy loaded 125 gr. JHP's I averaged 1260 fps. Recoil was vicious with my skinny wooden grips.

I don't think I've ever chronographed any standard .38 SPL from a snubby that came within 300 fps of those averages.

I do agree with Jim when he said small, light and accurate rarely all fit in the same package. Personally, if my 25 ounce M-640 were any lighter, I'd use .38 SPL ammo in it. The new Titanium and scandium flyweights hold no attraction to me. They feel toy-like and I have no desire to deal with the added recoil.

Size wise, there are plenty of J-frame sized flyweights in .38 SPL, but the .357's I've handled are L-frame sized. Not really big, but sort of bulky for packet carry.

In this old gun crank's opinion, If you are going to opt for a barrel long enough to make pocket carry impossible, you might as well get a belt gun, i.e. K-frame size or larger. If you want something bigger or longer of barrel than a 2 1/8" J-frame snubby, go ahead and get a K-frame. Either a 2.5" M-19/66 or a 4" barreled version of the same gun. I believe you will like the more traditional guns better and shoot them better due to the reduced recoil.

Doc Hudson
 
Article in an older Speer manual relates the tale of two identical revolvers firing the same load at over 200fps apart.

All guns are ALWAYS different.

Suggest a 3" M60 or the Ruger SP101.
 
I currently have thre snubbies.

Colt Magnum Carry .357 2"
Colt SFV1 .38 2" (like a detective special)
S&W M60 Ladysmith .357 2"

The Magnum Carry is a six shot with a Hogue rubber boot grip from the factory. It is the largest of the three. It's comfortable to shoot .357, and is my wife's personal favorite for protection. The grip is soft rubber, which makes it a little tacky, so material tends to cling to it.

The SFV1 is a six shot .38 with hard rubber grips. The grips and cylinder are a shade smaller, making it more ideal for my wife's usual method of concealment. The grips do not cause material to cling like the Magnum Carry's. It is very comfortable to shoot .38's, even the hotter loads.

The M60 is the smallest of the three, by quite a bit. It's a five shot .357 with small wood grips. I can slip it in my front pocket with ease, and it disapears. It is the least comfortable to shoot, of the three. My wife does not like it at all. The small, smooth grips allow the gun to jump around in your hand with .38+P loads. When I shoot .357 through it using a two handed grip, it hurts the thumb of my support hand with every shot.

They're all great guns,but each has subtle advantages and disadvantages when comparing them.

If you want your Lady to like whatever you get, you should look at different models and let her get what she likes. If you want a home/field gun, a three inch or four inch barrel may be more practical.

A two inch tube is as acurate as a four inch tube from the bench, but it is hard to point shoot a two inch barrel with any acuracy, in my experience.
If I was in a threat situation it would take way too long to draw and line up the tiny front and rear sights on any of the above mentioned guns. I would point shoot. The results are acceptable at ten to fifteen feet, but beyond that, I would want to be taking careful aim.

The other posters all know a lot more about this than I do. I just thought my personal experience with these models may be of some assistance. Good luck with your decision.
 
I had the same question, did all the research myself, and came up with a S&W .357 model 60 with a 2 1/8 inch tube, and the stock 3 finger boot grips replaced with the 2 finger grips off of a .38 J-frame. For my mode of carry with that gun (Galco ankle holster), it is much easier to carry than anything else (including runner ups: Ruger SP101, Colt Detective Special, and short barrelled 6-shot S&W's).

Times, though, they are a changing. While I don't believe they are actually out yet, the new Scandium S&W's are about the same size, but much lighter. While they will be more expensive, I'd wait for them to come out. When they do, I'm going to get rid of my Model 60 and Model 342ti.
 
re: get rid of my Model 60 and Model 342ti

Try to shoot one of the Scandium guns with full power loads first. You might not enjoy it enough to ditch two guns you already have.

Doc Hudson
 
Gotta go with Doc Hudson on this...

Every time I've chronoed .357 and .38 loads from the same 2 1/4" barreled revolver the .357 ALWAYS beats the .38 sp +P by at least 275 fps.

There is a big difference. You should get the 357 and shoot 38's in it until you're comfortable with the .357 loads. If you get the .38 only you cannot move up in power without buying a whole new gun. The best small .357 (IMHO) is a 3 1/16" Ruger sp101. It isn't a lightweight though.

If you want a light, shootable gun that the wife won't mind holding out at arms length then the Taurus model 85UL .38 special should fit the bill. They are good guns, quite accurate, with a lifetime warranty from Taurus.

Goodluck,

Kilgor
 
I had my S&W Model 649 out this weekend, and actually shot it for the first time in a couple of years at least. This is the “Bodyguard” version of the J frame 357, which I like better than the “Centennial” version, since it gives me the ability to shoot single action for more deliberate shots. I shot both 125 grain Remington JHP 357s and some hot 38 special handloads. I chrono’d the 357s at 1260 fps, but didn’t chrono the 38s. With the 38 loads, I was able to put all my shots in a 2 inch circle at 15 yards, shooting single action. The 357s went a little more wild, probably because I was flinching a little; the Spegel boot grips I’ve got on the piece don’t absorb recoil to any significant degree.
 
Ruger Security Six would be my pick. Find one with a 2.5 tube get you a Hogue grip and your ready. Its cheap,comes with adj. sights and is a six shot and very functional.
 
Back when I got my snubbie, there weren't really any small-frame .357s. I bought a Taurus Mod 85 .38Spl, in stainless, with a three inch barrel. The longer barrel balances better, has better pointaility with the longer sight radius. The CH (Concealed Hammer) versions had not come out yet either. I rounded off any sharp edges with a file (thanks to the stainless for that one....) and I carry that as my favorite CCW gun. A S&W 60 was about the only other choice back then. Ruger had just come out with the SP series so that was an unknown...

Anyway, I feel comforted with that little Taurus stuck in my waistband. I might look in to one of those little spring steel clips that goes between the gripframe and the grip.

Best of luck with your decision.
 
The new Scandium might be uncomfortable, but I can always decide to shoot .38's out of it. I'd just rather have the option. Besides, it will give me more room in my safe!
 
What docster said makes a lot of sense. I recently bought a 2 3/4" Security 6 at an auction. My regular load (110 gr. JHP) does over 1200 fps. and generates 370 ft/#'s of muzzle energy. Using a hunting load I carry in my S&W 27 it pushes a 140 gr JHP over 1200 fps achieving 470 ft/#'s. I shot this load just to test the strength of the Ruger and would not use it on a regular basis but in fact there was no sign of excessive pressure ( no flattened primers or sticky ejection). These numbers can never be approached with a .38 snubby. Had the revolver round butted and added some Pacmayr grips and it is very pleasant to shoot with the 110 gr load. regards, birdman
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top