Switched to a revolver for ccw...

Lots of articles talk about how much harder snubs are to shoot accurately than semi autos....
Click to expand...
It should be viewed in the correct context. I carry a snub and view my possible use for defence as being most likely a point-blank attack situation. In such a scenario, "shooting accurately" is not much of a consideration...if he is not in my face, he is not likely of sufficient threat for me to shoot rather than retreat...I do not anticipate being involved in a stand-up gunfight. Therefore, I don't need no stinking auto, no stinking sights, and no stinking hammer spur. ;)
 
Fjblair said:
Lots of gun owners are infatuated with high capacity. Facts be damned, I need seventeen rounds and a backup in an ankle holster. I do it too sometimes, but a J-frame .38 in my pocket is my go to ccw. There are no bad choices.
Click to expand...
I have to agree with you. My philosophy has always been that if you have not handled the situation with one or two shots you are dead. If you have to carry that much ammo one of two things has happened, you are in a war zone, or you are a LEO.
 
I have a SP101 DAO in .357... I installed new hammer and trigger springs along with hammer shims. It has become my favorite gun to shoot.
 
Triggers on many of today's snubbies are routinely bad
Click to expand...

The SA triggers on my S&W snubbies have been very good ... never needed a trigger job on any of them. But the SA triggers on my S&W L-Frames and N-Frame have been very heavy from the factory, and I've needed to lighten the rebound springs to make them nice.
 
I have a SP101 DAO in .357... I installed new hammer and trigger springs along with hammer shims. It has become my favorite gun to shoot.
Click to expand...

Most of my experience with the SP101 involves models made about twenty years ago. They were okay. I've handled more recent incarnations of the SP101 and haven't been happy with the trigger. I don't think it's just a matter of me getting older or needing to break things in. I sent my most recent SP101 for a professional trigger job and it helped, but not as much as I would have liked. Comparing it to an older one I have, I notice that the new one has a lot more side-to-side slop in the trigger and hammer.

I think shims could be the answer but I've never done that. Which ones did you use?
 
I have an SP101 that I bough new about a year ago (Wiley Clapp model) trigger was smooth and crisp, but too heavy. A Wolff spring fixed it in about 30 seconds.
 
I've just never been that crazy about the micro centerfires in .380. A friend had an NAA .380 that was an absolute horror to shoot.
 
Mike Irwin said:
I've just never been that crazy about the micro centerfires in .380. A friend had an NAA .380 that was an absolute horror to shoot.
Click to expand...
If I still lived back on that side of the country I'd offer to bring a few of the newer micro-380s up for you to try. Might surprise you, particularly the Remington RM380, Beretta Pico and S&W M&P Bg 380. Sure surprised me.
 
Mike Irwin said:
I've just never been that crazy about the micro centerfires in .380. A friend had an NAA .380 that was an absolute horror to shoot.
Click to expand...
Since this is in the 'revolver' section..just got a taurus M380 revolver..Really nice little handgun that works well when I wear less loose fitting clothes..Nice shooter..WAY better than the Ruger LCP it replaced..that was an awful shooter even with a recoil reducing new spring.
 
There is a parallel discussion about 9mm revolvers going on in another thread. That, I can understand. Revolvers in .380 are another story. I have to ask "why". The real benefit of .380 is that it fits in tiny semi-automatic handguns. Small revolvers as a class tend to be the next size up. They allow for .38 special, .357 magnum, 9mm, a couple of rimfire options, and a host of .32-caliber choices from the anemic .32 S&W to the modern super-magnum that is .327 Federal. That scratches just about any itch requiring a small revolver. Why in the world would you want or need .380 in the mix?
 
Cosmodragoon said:
Why in the world would you want or need .380 in the mix?
Click to expand...

The Taurus 380 revolver is a little shorter than most snubbie revolvers by about 1/3 inch. Not much, I know.

The usual 380 round has about 40% less recoil than a 38 Special and about 50% less than a 9mm.

Some people might find these features attractive. You might not think they're worth it, but someone else might.

It's never bad to have lots of options to choose from.
 
The Taurus 380 revolver is a little shorter than most snubbie revolvers by about 1/3 inch. Not much, I know.

The usual 380 round has about 40% less recoil than a 38 Special and about 50% less than a 9mm.

Some people might find these features attractive. You might not think they're worth it, but someone else might.

It's never bad to have lots of options to choose from.
Click to expand...

If I wasn't clear earlier, I think the large spectrum of revolver rounds that are currently available covers the recoil and power spectra pretty comprehensively. The size difference could be worth something though. How much smaller is this Taurus revolver than the LCR or your average J-frame? Is the difference enough to really make it shine for a CCW choice?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top