THE carry revolver
- Thread starter Marko Kloos
- Start date
Mike Irwin
Staff
"They just have different markings."
And COMPLETELY different feng shui.
And COMPLETELY different feng shui.
glockorama
New member
rballi: OUCH!
, Stop it, I'm dyin'.
, Stop it, I'm dyin'.A month ago i posted that I had obtained a like NIB M13 vintage 1990. I've since put some Hogue pau ferro bantom grips on it and carry in a Desantis holster. My feeling is that as a belt gun a 3" K frame is just as concealable as a J frame and that the only advantage a J frame snubby has is as a pocket pistol.
Has anybody had the opportunity to do a side-by-side comparison between a 3" k frame and a Colt Dtective Special. Just curious as if there is that much difference in size between these two six shot revolvers.
Has anybody had the opportunity to do a side-by-side comparison between a 3" k frame and a Colt Dtective Special. Just curious as if there is that much difference in size between these two six shot revolvers.
Anyway, it's my new carry gun, relegating the 686 with the 2 1/2" barrel to "spare carry gun" duty. If there's a better balance of power, concealability, and versatility, I haven't found it yet.
END
That may well be a true statement if this un were out say in 1900. Now we have these guns called autoloaders. I will stick to my Glock 33.
PAT
END
That may well be a true statement if this un were out say in 1900. Now we have these guns called autoloaders. I will stick to my Glock 33.
PAT
Marko Kloos
Inactive
I have a Glock 33 as well, you know. It's a fine pistol, and a lot of capacity in a very lightweight and robust package. The 3" Model 65 is all over the Glock in some areas, though. Since I own both guns, I am familiar with their respective strengths and weaknesses.
It's more versatile as far as ammunition goes. I can stuff anything from .38 Special low-powered wadcutters to .357 Magnum 180gr. loads into the cylinder, and every imaginable bullet shape in any weight between 110 and 180 grains. I don't have to worry about cycling or feeding in any of the literally hundreds of loads available for .357 Magnum or .38 Special.
The .357SIG is a fine self-defense round, but it's a one-trick pony as far as ammo selection goes. It only does the (admittely fine) 125gr. load, but an autochucker in .357SIG lacks the sheer load versatility of a .357 Magnum revolver.
The M65 also points better than the G33, has a superior trigger, a longer barrel, and better controllability due to the full grip.
Different strokes for different folks, Pat. I like the Glock just fine, but I like the M65 better. Thankfully, I can own and appreciate both. My carry preference lies with the sixgun, yours lies with the bottom feeder. Both have their own unique drawbacks and advantages.
M
M58
Guest
Coltdriver
New member
Well I have only auto's in my current collection (with the exception of a Colt Walker BP Pistol).
I have been waiting for the longest time for that Kahr PM 9 to come out. Then it does and it is small, hard to find and apparently not built to the highest standards.
So I start casting around for a Revolver. Now I got to have at least two of em. I went off and caught revolver fever.
I wanna j frame .38 for pocket carry. Every bit as small, light and with +P, potent as a little 9mm.
But I just got to have one of these fire breathin .357's!
I figured that to be realistic and shoot a full, authentic .357 load that one of the middle size frames has to be about right.
Your pistol is beautiful.
I have been waiting for the longest time for that Kahr PM 9 to come out. Then it does and it is small, hard to find and apparently not built to the highest standards.
So I start casting around for a Revolver. Now I got to have at least two of em. I went off and caught revolver fever.
I wanna j frame .38 for pocket carry. Every bit as small, light and with +P, potent as a little 9mm.
But I just got to have one of these fire breathin .357's!
I figured that to be realistic and shoot a full, authentic .357 load that one of the middle size frames has to be about right.
Your pistol is beautiful.
It's more versatile as far as ammunition goes. I can stuff anything from .38 Special low-powered wadcutters to .357 Magnum 180gr. loads into the cylinder, and every imaginable bullet shape in any weight between 110 and 180 grains. I don't have to worry about cycling or feeding in any of the literally hundreds of loads available for .357 Magnum or .38 Special.
SNIP
I can put a 40 sw barrel or a 9mm barrel in my GLock 33 and shoot a variety of bullet weights at diffeent velocitys. The 65 is not up to a steady diet of hot 357 mag hunting loads so its advantage here is there but limited.
The .357SIG is a fine self-defense round, but it's a one-trick pony as far as ammo selection goes. It only does the (admittely fine) 125gr. load, but an autochucker in .357SIG lacks the sheer load versatility of a .357 Magnum revolver.
SNIP
I agree but I like this one trick pony works well for its intended purpose. The handloader like myself has the option of using bullets as light as 90 grains at 1700 fps and as heavy as 150 at 1200 fps.
The M65 also points better than the G33, has a superior trigger, a longer barrel, and better controllability due to the full grip.
SNIP
The glock trigger is shorter and lighter with a short reset and as a result superior. I find the Glock 33 with my 11 round mags (LEO only) controlable. Much more so than the ruger sp101 that I fired with full power ammo.
Different strokes for different folks, Pat. I like the Glock just fine, but I like the M65 better. Thankfully, I can own and appreciate both. My carry preference lies with the sixgun, yours lies with the bottom feeder. Both have their own unique drawbacks and advantages.
Snip
I agree with this. People should carry what they want its a free country but the reality is the revolvers is obsolete. That does not mean you can't make it work. Lots of people drive old cars but they are still old.
(I wanna j frame .38 for pocket carry. Every bit as small, light and with +P, potent as a little 9mm.)
Afraid not the 9mm has the 38 +p by about 200 fps in almost every bullet weight. The 9mm is about half way between the 38+p and the 357 mag. That being said the titanium and alluminim 38 revolvers do make good back up guns and ok ccw guns when nothing larger would work. This is the lowest level of protection I would ever carry.
PAT
SNIP
I can put a 40 sw barrel or a 9mm barrel in my GLock 33 and shoot a variety of bullet weights at diffeent velocitys. The 65 is not up to a steady diet of hot 357 mag hunting loads so its advantage here is there but limited.
The .357SIG is a fine self-defense round, but it's a one-trick pony as far as ammo selection goes. It only does the (admittely fine) 125gr. load, but an autochucker in .357SIG lacks the sheer load versatility of a .357 Magnum revolver.
SNIP
I agree but I like this one trick pony works well for its intended purpose. The handloader like myself has the option of using bullets as light as 90 grains at 1700 fps and as heavy as 150 at 1200 fps.
The M65 also points better than the G33, has a superior trigger, a longer barrel, and better controllability due to the full grip.
SNIP
The glock trigger is shorter and lighter with a short reset and as a result superior. I find the Glock 33 with my 11 round mags (LEO only) controlable. Much more so than the ruger sp101 that I fired with full power ammo.
Different strokes for different folks, Pat. I like the Glock just fine, but I like the M65 better. Thankfully, I can own and appreciate both. My carry preference lies with the sixgun, yours lies with the bottom feeder. Both have their own unique drawbacks and advantages.
Snip
I agree with this. People should carry what they want its a free country but the reality is the revolvers is obsolete. That does not mean you can't make it work. Lots of people drive old cars but they are still old.
(I wanna j frame .38 for pocket carry. Every bit as small, light and with +P, potent as a little 9mm.)
Afraid not the 9mm has the 38 +p by about 200 fps in almost every bullet weight. The 9mm is about half way between the 38+p and the 357 mag. That being said the titanium and alluminim 38 revolvers do make good back up guns and ok ccw guns when nothing larger would work. This is the lowest level of protection I would ever carry.
PAT
Marko Kloos
Inactive
That depends on your definition of obsolescence. They still launch bullets like they did before Miami Vice and the sudden love affair of LEOs with hi-capacity autochuckers.
The only technical advantage of the auto over the revolver from a "tactical" standpoint is capacity and reload speed. End of story. I highly doubt that this relegates the revolver to "obsolescence", just because a revolver doesn't allow for easy substitution of shooting skill with ammo capacity.
The only technical advantage of the auto over the revolver from a "tactical" standpoint is capacity and reload speed. End of story. I highly doubt that this relegates the revolver to "obsolescence", just because a revolver doesn't allow for easy substitution of shooting skill with ammo capacity.
END
Not quite
Autos are also easier to fire more accurately understress due to the lighter shorter trigger pull. This is why 1911 dominated SWAT teams even in the revolver dominated period. Autos are also more tolerant of abuse. They take bags and scrapes better. Revolvers handle neglect better tough. I will say that having more rounds will not make up for poor shooting so we do need to practice with both. Autos are also easier to conceal and offer more horse power for any given size comparison with few exceptions. My 33 is the size of a 5 shot snub yet hits harder than a 357 mag fired out of a 2 inch revolver. Only when you get to 44 mag revolvers do revolvers start to take the power race.
PAT
END
Not quite
Autos are also easier to fire more accurately understress due to the lighter shorter trigger pull. This is why 1911 dominated SWAT teams even in the revolver dominated period. Autos are also more tolerant of abuse. They take bags and scrapes better. Revolvers handle neglect better tough. I will say that having more rounds will not make up for poor shooting so we do need to practice with both. Autos are also easier to conceal and offer more horse power for any given size comparison with few exceptions. My 33 is the size of a 5 shot snub yet hits harder than a 357 mag fired out of a 2 inch revolver. Only when you get to 44 mag revolvers do revolvers start to take the power race.
PAT
That Model 65 will throw a factory-loaded 158gr Gold Dot @ 1400ish fps. Whatcha got in that G33
END
I don't know of many people who could shoot the 65 with that load with any degree of speed while maintianing accuracy. Besides it would hurt. I also doubt you will get that velocity from a 3 inch 65.
PAT
END
I don't know of many people who could shoot the 65 with that load with any degree of speed while maintianing accuracy. Besides it would hurt. I also doubt you will get that velocity from a 3 inch 65.
PAT
juliet charley
New member
Definitely not true across the board. There are lots of people who shoot revolvers better than autos (me included)--and outshoot a lot of auto shooters.
SWAT teams are not necessarily your average cops (or your average shooters), and the mission is different. (BTW, in the "Age of Glock," 1911s still dominate SWAT teams.)
Not necessarily (and that's even before we talk about magazines).
Tolerant of neglect? You've probably just described the ideal cop gun.
I don't think the difference is so great than anybody who just took two in the thoracic cavity would notice, do you?
Last edited: