The Old JFrame Is Seeing Less and Less Use

R

rgillis

New member
My Model 37 and 642 S&W j-frames use to be my go to firearms while biking or during other summer activities where carrying something larger just wasn't practical. But since I picked up a ruger lcp, the old j-frames seem to be getting chosen less and less.

Is anyone else noticing the same?
 
Nope...been carrying a J frame for about 35 years of one sort or another. Just can't see the need for a 380. If you like it though no sweat :) To each their own!

I've got a family of J frames, a 638, a 642, an engraved 60, and a 640 357...and if I am going to a problem area then it's a Glock 27 or Glock 30.
 
Yes. I was carrying my SP 101 a lot until I bought my LC9. It's just an easier carry, lighter and easier to conceal.
 
Skadoosh & jolly
Your points are well taken....and while the LCP could ever completely replace my j-frame smith's; while participating in in activities like mountain biking and such the LCP's compactness is damn hard to beat!;)
 
Still carry a J-frame. Like the 38 spl. better than the 380 (although I do have a couple) if I feel the need for higher round count drop the 9m/m Kel-Tec P11 in the pocket if a compact or full size is not doable. I am a creature of habit an carry 2 reloads no matter what what pistol is being carried.
 
I carry a S&W 638 and carried a 642 for years. To me if its pocket carry it fits the bill perfectly, highly reliable, accurate, hard hitting for its size. I have looked over the LCP and P3AT but what I have isnt broke so I wont try to fix it. The J frame us just to much of a well rounded pocket carry package to move onto something else. Thats of course IMHO. I know alot of people that carry the micro .380's and there is no going back for them. I am sticking with my tried and true for pocket carry. IWB its all the Shield9 these days.
 
The LCP is an instant classic. Well-engineered rather than innovative, it brings together all the features one would want in a gun for that niche. I probably won't buy one, and just keep using the J-frame because it's good enough. However, if I were starting from scratch, I'd probably get the LCP first.

Then again, I may need to do my patriotic duty and stimulate the economy...
 
The LCP looks alittle to much like a P3AT to me. The Kel Tec was around well before and not that many people talked about them or carried them. Then Ruger made their version and its the best thing since paper money. Reminds me of the same situation with the HS2000 only meeting huge popularity when it started being "made" by Springfield Armory. Off the topic I know but something that I have thought of more then once about the LCP.
 
Well I certainly chumped that one. This one is in the right place.

LCP = pistol

LCR = revolver

Getting old stinks...

As for the original question, I've bought several carry autos but I always seem to gravitate back to my J frame.
 
Don't sweat it, Mike, we all make mistakes. You mods generally do a great job of keeping the yammering masses on point.

That said, right now, the J-frame is in my pocket. This afternoon, who knows, it might be the LCP?
 
Being a firearms instructor, I get to shoot quite a few backup guns at LE qualifications. I've shot several LCP's, seen more shot and only one has jammed with any regularity. I do take issue with their front sight which disappears in even daylight if the direction of lighting is wrong.

I guess it goes to your line if thinking on what a pocket gun should do. If it's "hose an adversary" at 0-7 yards, the LCP will do that. I tend to believe that the smaller calibers require more precision be really effective. My old Charter Undercover .38 will dot soda cans at 25 yards with a lead bullet reload and chop up a 50 foot bull at that same distance, using Winchester 125 grain +P* JHP's.

I almost talk myself into a pocket auto every so often; but then I go shoot the Undercover and those thoughts go out the window. I guess the bottom line is if you have something reliable that meets your needs, think hard about mastering it instead of grabbing the Next Big Thing.

* No, you're not supposed to shoot +P in old Undercovers.
 
willmc33 said:
The LCP looks alittle to much like a P3AT to me. The Kel Tec was around well before and not that many people talked about them or carried them. Then Ruger made their version and its the best thing since paper money. Reminds me of the same situation with the HS2000 only meeting huge popularity when it started being "made" by Springfield Armory. Off the topic I know but something that I have thought of more then once about the LCP.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? Kel Tec sold their pistols like big macs before the LCP. I'm sure Ruger took a bite out of Kel Tecs market share but people are still buying and carrying them.
 
I am serious. Kel Tecs sold but not like the LCP when it came out. People act like the LCP had changed the world and Kel Tec had been doing it for years. Kel Tec has not been as popular or sold as many as the LCP. Thats my point.
 
willmc33 said:
I am serious. Kel Tecs sold but not like the LCP when it came out. People act like the LCP had changed the world and Kel Tec had been doing it for years. Kel Tec has not been as popular or sold as many as the LCP. Thats my point.
Click to expand...

I think that had a lot to do with appearance. The LCP is more refined cosmetically compared to the Kel Tecs. I recall when the P3AT came out everyone and their uncle bought one. IMO, the LCP is a much better looking gun but the Kel Tec has the better trigger.

As for the OP, I can see where your coming from. While j-frames are great for carry (I use one for EDC) the LCP is almost impossible to beat for a small, light gun in a decent caliber.
 
As a LE firearms instructor I basically see 2 broad categories of folks using the smaller backup/off-duty guns.

The older shooters who came up using revolvers, and who are willing to dust off their DA revolver skills, often seem to do well with the little DAO J's.

The younger shooters who haven't done much (or any) revolver shooting, seem to gravitate to the diminutive pistols because they carry larger pistols as duty guns.

There are folks within each group who can shoot their choices well, and those who can't.

Being an older shooter, I tend to choose the J's (I have 7 of them, as well as a SP101 ;) ). I can shoot them pretty well.

I can also shoot the assorted little pistols well, but something about the little 5-shot wheelguns just seems to make them settle in my hand better while shooting them fast and accurately.

I also like the fact that the little J's are able to use heavier bullets than the .32's & .380's (although a 105gr .380 is nudging the lightest .38 loads of 110gr). There's been some decent development of defensive loads in the 130-135gr range for the venerable .38 Spl.

I try to avoid advocating for either choice when it comes to little handguns folks may be considering choosing for themselves. It's their choice, since it's going to be their lives (or that of their families) that are going to be on the line, after all.

I like to recommend they consider putting in some range time in assessing which choice might work better for them, especially when trying to use either choice in some of the more demanding courses-of-fire.
 
Depends on my pants.

If I am wearing jeans or shorts with similar pockets I carry the J IWB. If it is cargo pants or cargo shorts or something with similar pockets or overalls it is the LCP. I feel okay armed either way. Sometimes I carry the J-frame IWB in cargo pants if I am feeling cozy with it. I really like both guns and plan to keep both, but if I had to give up one it would be the J-frame. The LCP can go places it can't for me. The LCP is much easier to carry. BTW, my J is a S&W 642 38Sp, so the firepower / knockdown arguement is somewhat less important than if it were a 357.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top