Pocket Gun

[W.R.Buchanan]

It looks real cool but no I did look at one but it's just not a good fit for me

Randy

[rfd]

j-frame lightweight revolver in .38spl is best for me. it's a gun that will conceal where most won't and will be right about the 1 pound mark. snubbies have been well proven defensive weapons for many decades. some may say their only critique is the 5 round capacity. but if we're realistic about civilian EDC CCW, capacity is not an issue. since they're so easy to conceal, and that they adapt extremely well to 95% or better of all civilian street clothing, they are guns that will always be carried. some may say the .38spl is not the ideal defensive cartridge/bullet. again, being realistic about personal self defense, a .38spl +P is nothing to fluff off as weak cartridge. some may claim a lightweight .38spl snubnose might not be the gun for everyone with regards to recoil and accuracy, but i think that's dispelled for most people who choose the right cartridge build and include a bit of practice. and to boot, revolvers are very safe carry guns, and always at the ready to go bang. be realistic about your needs for an EDC CCW ECQ daily carry. my choice is the s&w 642c.

[FergusonTO35]

I really like my Kimber Micro .380. It is very accurate and easy to shoot, and carries as easily as anything else I have ever tried. I have had some issues with it, hopefully they are fixed. First, the mag would come unlatched and slide down just a bit sometimes when fired. Kimber replaced the mag release and spring and that was corrected. A few months ago, the firing pin plate slipped down under recoil and locked the slide back. Replaced the firing pin spring with a Wolff and that problem hasn't recurred in a couple hundred rounds.

If I had to do it over again, I would get the Sig P238. The Kimber is an almost exact copy of the 30+ year old Colt Mustang, whereas the P238 has some updates. Particularly, the barrel locks into the ejection port like nearly all modern pistols, whereas the Mustang and Micro lock into small grooves inside the slide. The P238 has a spring loaded external extractor, whereas the others still use the internal fixed extractor.

[Petrol & Powder]

I’ve got a couple of thousand rounds through my 642. All cast and the cast majority were +P. It doesn’t seem any worse for wear. Either I got lucky or they’re stronger than they look...........

While I wouldn't recommend shooting thousands of +P rounds though one, they will absolutely hold up to thousands of rounds of standard velocity 38 Special with the occasional 25-50 rounds of +P thrown in.

They are a lot stronger than they look.

The little J-frame is stronger than people give it credit for. Take a minute to look one over. The locking notches are between the chambers in the thickest part of the cylinder. There's quite a bit of steel in that little 5 shot cylinder. The barrel shank does not have the flat cut at the 6 O'clock position like the K-frame does. The barrel shank is almost flush with the frame and is fully surrounded by the frame. The frame is fairly large in comparison to the cylinder (although the top strap may be the weak point on the alloy frames). They are stout little guns.

I've got a 442 that is over 20 years old and it's been shot a lot, including more than a 1000 rounds of +P. It is still tight and shows no signs of giving up. I had to fit a new hand when it got out of time a few years ago but other than that - it has held up fine.

I will caution that if an alloy J-frame develops excessive end shake, you need to correct that immediately. The alloy frame is very strong but they do not tolerate being hammered by a loose cylinder. Excessive end shake will damage any revolver but it damages an alloy frame faster.

[rfd]

head's up, such a deal --- S&W 642 j-frame, no internal lock, for $340/shipped at sportsmans ...

https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperst...2.cfm/ID/64138

[LUCKYDAWG13]

that is a good deal

[samari46]

Old plain Jane S&W model 36. Either speed strips or speed loaders. And think I may go old school. Belt slides which hold 12 rounds. Have a couple which are way to wide as they were normally riding on a policemans duty belt, I can have then cut so that they are not so wide. Or belt pouches holding 12 rounds each. Why not still viable in this time. Frank

[rfd]

i would refrain from going with an external hammer revolver. there is absolutely no need for that in a defensive revolver, and very well may be a detriment on multiple levels. i used to think the exact opposite, but i was Dead wrong. an internal hammer revolver is the best way to go for EDC CCW.

[str8wal]

i would refrain from going with an external hammer revolver. there is absolutely no need for that in a defensive revolver, and very well may be a detriment on multiple levels. i used to think the exact opposite, but i was Dead wrong. an internal hammer revolver is the best way to go for EDC CCW.

While I agree somewhat with that statement, it depends on the design of the gun. On some revolvers the spur is pronounced and could snag, but my LCRx's hammer is low profile and I have run it though the motions and have zero concern. I like the ability to cock the gun to make a pinpoint shot if necessary.

[Mohavedog]

Ruger LCP. Personal preference over the LCP II. Slim, light, and I've never had a malfunction - never. Pocket holster and it doesn't produce a bulge / outline in a pants' pocket. I don't use an off-duty anymore, don't / won't stop any more bank robberies, etc. I just want a "get off me gun" and this one does it for me. Should circumstance dictate otherwise, I'd start at 9mm / .38 as a minimum and work up quickly from there.

I agree with almost all you have said here. I would take the LCP over the LCP ll because I just don't completely trust a single action for pocket carry with a round in chamber (as it should be). It would have to dire unavoidable circumstances where I would intervene because of my age. So for me my use would be at contact or point blank range. Where I would modify your .38/9mm minimum cal is to go down to .380 acp due to concealability and weight of the weapon.

[rfd]

it's not so much about a possible snagging issue, it's that an external hammer revolver used to shoot a person can yield legal concerns for the shooter. it can also make for an unsafe revolver when prematurely cocked during a confrontation. i believe than an internal hammer revolver is the safest, most reliable and efficient defensive handgun. i can "stage" my 642c reliably on command just by pulling the trigger, and then it's no different than if it was a cocked hammer, and ready to fire with less than a pound of trigger pull.

[owejia]

"it's that an external hammer revolver used to shoot a person can yield legal concerns for the shooter" Can you elaborate on this please?

[rfd]

chris baker - "There is also the legal issue to consider. I’m no expert in this area, but it’s a topic that Massad Ayoob has written about extensively over the years. The possibility exists that you could become involved in a justifiable shooting, and instead of trying to convince a jury that your actions were intentional but unjustified, an over-eager prosecutor could use that light single action trigger to allege that you fired accidentally, and then get a conviction for manslaughter or negligent homicide. It sounds far fetched, but it’s happened more than once, and it’s definitely worth taking into account."

https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/d...nly-revolvers/

[Mr_Sheesh]

Has anyone other than Massad Ayoob written on this? I usually use 1911 family guns for SD - Have revolver tho & could use it for SD too; Training I have had included a fair bit of using SA shooting for revolvers for hostage situations, a wife or kid probably would NOT appreciate you "oopsing" and putting a hole in them, to prevent their being held hostage? Ayoob knows a lot, but seems to go a bit far afield on some opinions, according to some...

[str8wal]

chris baker - "There is also the legal issue to consider. I’m no expert in this area, but it’s a topic that Massad Ayoob has written about extensively over the years. The possibility exists that you could become involved in a justifiable shooting, and instead of trying to convince a jury that your actions were intentional but unjustified, an over-eager prosecutor could use that light single action trigger to allege that you fired accidentally, and then get a conviction for manslaughter or negligent homicide. It sounds far fetched, but it’s happened more than once, and it’s definitely worth taking into account."

https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/d...nly-revolvers/

Pfffft

[str8wal]

Ayoob knows a lot, but seems to go a bit far afield on some opinions, according to some...

Exactly!

[Petrol & Powder]

head's up, such a deal --- S&W 642 j-frame, no internal lock, for $340/shipped at sportsmans ...

https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperst...2.cfm/ID/64138

That is a good deal

[Petrol & Powder]

Without getting into legal issues, I can say with absolute confidence that I would never carry a snubnose revolver that had a hammer spur.
For me a snubnose needs to have an internal hammer or a bobbed hammer.

I'm NEVER going to shoot that type of gun in single action and a hammer spur is just one more thing to snag on something.

Single action capability on a snubnose is like a security blanket, deep down inside you know you don't need it but some people are afraid to give it up.

[luvtn]

I have had multiple .38 snubs, only one with a bobbed hammer. You draw them with your thumb on the hammer. NO SNAG!
luvtn

[Mr_Sheesh]

Browning BDA I just drew it with my thumb covering the hammer from a pocket holster, it never snagged on me. 14 rounds of .380 seems to be enough to discourage most pests...