Which one is a HIGH QUALITY .38+P snubby with a shrouded hammer?
- Thread starter Para Bellum
- Start date
Kreyzhorse
New member
+1.
You can't go wrong with either of those.
S&W 638
Picked up the 638 a week ago with some extra money I got for the holidays. Took It to the range today and ran 200 rounds through it. Wow I love my new BUG. Light and can be shot in single or double, easy to hid and the recoil is easily managed. Well built little revolver. Hats off to S&W
Picked up the 638 a week ago with some extra money I got for the holidays. Took It to the range today and ran 200 rounds through it. Wow I love my new BUG. Light and can be shot in single or double, easy to hid and the recoil is easily managed. Well built little revolver. Hats off to S&W
Jim Watson
New member
I have an elderly Model 38-0 Bodyguard Airweight.
It isn't much fun to shoot, so I am not likely to wear it out with occastional practice, but it does its job.
By "quality issues around the connection between the barrel and the frame" I assume you mean the occasional scare story about the receiver ring of a J frame Airweight cracking through, which is irrepairable and ruins the gun. It is a really rare occurrence so I would not worry about it for a recent gun under lifetime warranty.
I would not worry about it with a 1980s 49-1 which has a steel frame.
I was not impressed by the peculiar thing taking over the Bodyguard name.
If the Detective Special you mention has the Colt attachable shroud, it would be operationally equivalent, with "the all important shot... the sixth one." I don't think you would wear it out, either, in spite of the Internet Scare Stories about the fragility of Colt revolvers.
The shrouded hammer isn't much use. I have tried thumb cocking my M38 and it is a slow and touchy process. The smart buy in "belly guns" is the fully enclosed hammer of the 640 or the Ruger LCR.
It isn't much fun to shoot, so I am not likely to wear it out with occastional practice, but it does its job.
By "quality issues around the connection between the barrel and the frame" I assume you mean the occasional scare story about the receiver ring of a J frame Airweight cracking through, which is irrepairable and ruins the gun. It is a really rare occurrence so I would not worry about it for a recent gun under lifetime warranty.
I would not worry about it with a 1980s 49-1 which has a steel frame.
I was not impressed by the peculiar thing taking over the Bodyguard name.
If the Detective Special you mention has the Colt attachable shroud, it would be operationally equivalent, with "the all important shot... the sixth one." I don't think you would wear it out, either, in spite of the Internet Scare Stories about the fragility of Colt revolvers.
The shrouded hammer isn't much use. I have tried thumb cocking my M38 and it is a slow and touchy process. The smart buy in "belly guns" is the fully enclosed hammer of the 640 or the Ruger LCR.
It was the OP who mentioned a shrouded hammer (vs. a concealed one), but I think Jim Watson has a point, and it is probably why the model 38 and its successors have not been very popular. For the ranges at which a short barrel revolver would be used, some DA practice would probably pay off better than the ability to cock the hammer, at least with the hammer spur barely peeping out of the shroud.
Jim
Jim
I like the Bodyguards not so much for the single action option but for the ability to get an extremely high grip. I grip high enough that the little hammer nubbin actually slides under the web of my hand. Others mileage will vary but that works very well for me.
Last edited:
Andy Blozinski
New member
I've got a hammerless Chiappa Rhino. I can't deal with the lack of rear sight, but that's just me. A buddy of mine can pick it up and plug the whole cylinder into a few inch circle at 7 yards no problem. The only down side to the thing is the heavy trigger pull.
Cosmodragoon
New member
It really does make a difference. The LCR is more comfortable to shoot all around. The .38 +p version is actually on a smaller frame than the .357 and 9mm versions. It's a tiny bit more concealable and works well with the cartridge. The grips are amazing but some people prefer smaller and slicker. You'll find more after-market grip options for a J-Frame.
Para Bellum
New member
Wow Folks,
thank you or your time and thought!
Mike: The price offered is EUR 200,-. (USD 240,-). Quality is said to be good I'll check keeping your most appreciated words well in mind.
The Ruger LCR also is a good Option, I'll check it out.
Have good day
PB
Cruising this post, it seems Jim Watson was the only one who mentioned the 640. I'm not a J-frame guy, but if it were me, the 640 is the only real choice. I don't consider it being DAO to be a drawback. I haven't cocked back the hammer on any of my revolvers in years. I see no point in shooting single action - especially in a SD situation.
Crankgrinder
New member
I own an lcr in .38 spl. I have not tried the smiths but I'm extremely happy with my lcr. It's light, handy and it is very much a quality firearm.
Even though I have (and sometimes pocket carry) a S&W 442 (DAO - no exposed hammer), I really want to replace it with a 438 (DA/SA with a partially shrouded hammer). There is a specific type of carry I do where I really want that ability to fire SA and/or advance the cylinder.
