Smith & Wesson snub 38 special +p (how are they?)

D

Dead

New member
wife was able to try out a bunch of semi auto and a few revolver firearms today... now she wants a small 38special. i showed her a bunch of smith and wesson airweight 5 shots with exposed hammer, hammerless, and "hidden" hammer models both on blue and stainless. i dont remember model numbers, but what is the good and bad about these small snub 38's?


p.s. she can hit the center of the target with everything :). from small 380 bodyguard to full power 357 from a sorta small revolver and everything in between.
 
They are generally built quite well. The only "problems" I've seen with them are cosmetic - the silver coated ones can start flaking after holster wear. I had a 442 (black anodized) and it was a quite decent little revolver. I sold it only because I wanted a model 438 (semi-exposed hammer) which I'm still looking for.
 
I would definitely not put her in a 640 - at least not expecting to fire .357's. The extremely short barrel wastes much of the power that a .357 would normally have over a .38 special and converts it into muzzle blast. It also weighs more than the .38 special models. When you are looking, remember that the 4?? are black anodized and the 6?? are silver coated. Both are aluminum framed (except for the high-dollar scandium framed models).

I know you mentioned only S&W snubnosed revolvers but you might also want to check out Ruger's LCR. You can get than in 9mm.
 
what is the good and bad about these small snub 38's?
Click to expand...

The Smith J-frame (the family of .38 snubs) is among the most tried and true of any line of revolvers. To my knowledge, all the modern J-frames can handle +P rated ammo. I have a 1984 model 60, and S&W assured me that it is +P rated (even though it doesn't specify). So they're built plenty sturdy.

I don't carry my J-frame. If I were to carry one, I'd choose a hammerless, double-action-only model. Just my 2-cents. I see no point in having single action in a snubbie. (I see no point in having single action in any revolver; with the exception of cowboy action, those with weak hands or other disabilities, or hunting applications.)

The "bad" of these little revolvers is just that - they're little. Recoil can be sharp. They can be difficult to handle. My hands are smaller than average (but bigger than most women's), and I find them too small to grip well. Their short barrels make ammo selection more critical. And of course, short barrel guns are difficult to aim and are really only useful at close distances (which is fine if it is being used for carry defense).

But overall, I'm all for anybody who are comfortable shooting them and they want to carry for self-defense. Compact, simple, reliable, sufficiently potent.
 
I would definitely not put her in a 640
Click to expand...

I definitely would :)

But not to shoot 357 ammo though it. As a man, if I carried one, I'd load it with 38+P's.

I like the 640 for a few reasons:

It's an all-stainless frame, so it's got a little mass to it. The barrel end and extractor rod is shrouded, so there's a little more mass up front. Further adding to the mass, it has a precious 1/4" more barrel length than the usual 1.875". And because it's a 357, and not a 38, there is a further mass gain from the longer cylinder. These things alltogether make it a better handling gun than most the other J-frames.

It's double-action only; thus, eliminating the need for a hammer. Hammers and concealment are generally not compatible.

And since we're talking about such short barrels here, that extra 1/4 inch of length is actually ballistically significant (probably 20 f/s or so). It's not much, but every little bit counts.
 
"Felt recoil" is a highly subjective thing. All I can say is that the "Airweight" and "Airlite" S&W's produce heavy recoil - the stronger the load, the worse it is. The "Airlite" 357 magnums are just outrageous on this (they HURT). The regular "Airweight" alloy framed guns, at about 15 oz. empty, are bad, but tolerable. A good recoil absorbing grip helps. Light target loads help, but those are not much good for SD.

Many make the mistake of thinking that these are good "beginner's" guns or "ladies" guns - not so. They are challenging to learn to shoot well and the recoil doesn't help. Many women simply will quit these guns, after 1 round, or even 1 cylinder load.

I carry an Airweight S&W 442, which was originally purchased new for a youngish lady, who quit the thing after THREE rounds (and not even +P's at that). I got it at a steal. I am a big guy (6'4" and 270 lbs) and I consider the recoil excessive.

So, use that information as you will, but be forewarned. Suffice it to say, I do NOT recommend one of these guns for ladies or beginners - unless the person in question is pretty "tough".
 
she has shot full power 357mag from a smallish revolver already, doesnt bother her too much (though she much prefers reg 38's). she has shot everything from 22lr to "super mags 454, 460, 500mag using corbon loads..

the thing is to find something she likes :)
 
Another vote for the Ruger LCR 357. For her, my advice would be to load it with 38+Ps.
The reason I mention the 357 model is because it is mainly built of stainless steel, particularly where is needed, for its durability and weight. And with the Hogue grips is not bad to shoot.
 
One thing to add to good info already posted.Ruger's LCR's (centerfire) are praised for their light,smooth DA trigger pull. :D
 
I have a M&P340, great little gun and +p 38's are no problem at all, not much more snap than a standard 38. .357 magnums are a whole 'nother story, the gun is a beast when firing those, like catching a fastball with your bare hand. There isn't a lot of advantage to .357 in these guns anyways (barrel is too short to develop .357-magnum class velocities), so not a lot of point except to freak out your friend by slipping one in the cylinder among the .38s. :D
 
Then there you go. If the lady in question is not recoil sensitive, your job is a million times easier.

Any of the S&W j-frames are good, reliable guns. This includes the alloy-framed ones. There are a number of different models, in both aluminum alloy and steel (frames).

The Ruger LCR is reputed to be a good choice. Have not owned or shot one, but I do know that they have a nice trigger.

The Ruger SP101 is a very nice gun. Very solid and reliable, easy to strip and clean. Heavier than a j-frame or an LCR, though.

Basically, you won't go wrong with most any of the choices in small revolvers, especially if you stick to S&W or Ruger. Even the Taurus model 85 is usually a solid, reliable little revolver (but you are taking a bit more risk with them, as QC can sometimes vary a good bit).

It comes down to having her handle (and if possible, shoot) as many different choices as she can.

Since it sounds as if only revolvers are being considered....I'll stop there.
 
I enjoy shooting my 642, a concealed hammer Airweight. I don't shoot +Ps when practicing and usually carry Hornady's 110 grain Critical Defense loads. As with any handgun, especially an Airweight, I try to dry fire practice regularly.

If your wife can, she should rent one and shoot it at a range to see if she likes it.
 
Pocket carry- Weight

Go for the lightest one. Big difference between my 10 oz 337PD when compared to my 16 oz M60. Both in 38 special. Some require only jacketed bullet in +P loadings. Lead may jump crimp.
 
My EDC is a 642-2, that used to belong to my wife. I had a 442 at the same time. They're both good guns. About the only down side to them is recoil, and that can be taken care of with a set of Hogue Recoil Tamer grips, or something similar.

I haven't seen any finish wear on the 642. I got no idea how old it is. I've only had it a few months, but I got it used. I do carry it every day in an OWB holster.

I guess one other "down" is that it's so light I can't tell I've got it sometime and have to feel to make sure it's there. I also don't worry much about a heavy "gun belt" anymore.

I'm also one who said I didn't see what the big deal about the J-frame was...until I tried one.

I looked at a Ruger LCR, but couldn't get past the ugly. As with most other Ruger revolvers.
 
My old Model 42 Centennial has a rather stout recoil with regular .38 Special rounds. I am not saying it is unmanageable, but it does become less enjoyable to fire as the round count advances per shooting session.

I would not seek out heavier loads. :)
 
I have to agree with Nick CS on this. The 640 is heavier than the airweight models, though not excessively so. The extra weight buys a more comfortable experience in shooting +P ammo. Shooting 357 rounds in a 640 is not particularly unpleasant in my experience, but that's not something you want to do on a regular basis. Moreover, you're trading recoil, flash, and perhaps less accuracy or shooting speed for a bit more power; I prefer better controllability and accuracy over a marginal increase in velocity. Your wife may be able to shoot 357 ammo in a J-frame without problems, but I expect that after 5-10 rounds her enthusiasm would diminish. For most people, shooting many rounds of +P ammo in airweights becomes unpleasant, whereas in a 640 it is not a problem. Tradeoff is weight vs comfort and control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top