testtest

J Frame? Well....

The S&W Model 36 heavy barrel 3 inch was my duty revolver in Air Force OSI in the 70's. It replaced our Model 15's which were difficult for some of our smaller framed agents to conceal. It was a good shooter and easy to carry on long protection details but we shot them a lot and military service loads were wearing them out. They were eventually replaced with a subcompact 1911. I added one to my duty gun collection about 5 years ago and get a blast of nostalgia every time I pick it up. I would still feel well armed if I got the urge to carry it as my EDC.
 

Attachments

  • Classic 629.jpg
    Classic 629.jpg
    169.5 KB · Views: 13
I've recently transitioned from pistol to revolver but still have a bit of the more capacity bug. My current EDC is a 3" SS .327 Fed Mag SP101 6-shot. For next year's handgun purchase I'm debating between the 7 shot GP100 .357, 8 shot Redhawk .357 and the SRH Alaskan which is "only" 6 shots again but is .44 Mag. Right now I'm favoring the two Redhawk contenders at maybe a 40/40/20 split with maybe a slight lean to the 8 shot Redhawk. Maybe it's 41/39/20.
 
LDB said:
One of, if not the best, looking of any snubbie. The sights are what all guns should have. But too light. An advantage when the "pocket" is the cargo pocket of Tru-Spec pants. I know I shouldn't, but I'm seriously considering either a 2.75" Redhawk .357 or the 2.5" Super Redhawk Alaskan .44 as next year's handgun pick and it would be pocket carry in the cargo pocket also.
Click to expand...
I cannot conceive of carrying anything that big/heavy in any pocket (or a pocket big enough to even hold one)😳. I’ve carried a 69 Smith and a 4 5/8’ SBH concealed, but certainly NOT in a pocket
 
LDB said:
I've recently transitioned from pistol to revolver but still have a bit of the more capacity bug. My current EDC is a 3" SS .327 Fed Mag SP101 6-shot. For next year's handgun purchase I'm debating between the 7 shot GP100 .357, 8 shot Redhawk .357 and the SRH Alaskan which is "only" 6 shots again but is .44 Mag. Right now I'm favoring the two Redhawk contenders at maybe a 40/40/20 split with maybe a slight lean to the 8 shot Redhawk. Maybe it's 41/39/20.
Click to expand...
What do you intend to do with those choices you are contemplating for next year?
 
Anchorite said:
Are you a reloader/handloader?
Click to expand...
I plan to be. I'm studying now and accumulating kit and kaboodle with the intent of starting to reload some time next year when I feel I know enough to do it competently and have some brass fired from my guns to reload.

And I think I'm narrowing down to a .357 choice to not add a new caliber into the mix and lower costs as a side benefit.
 
LDB said:
I plan to be. I'm studying now and accumulating kit and kaboodle with the intent of starting to reload some time next year when I feel I know enough to do it competently and have some brass fired from my guns to reload.

And I think I'm narrowing down to a .357 choice to not add a new caliber into the mix and lower costs as a side benefit.
Click to expand...
Well, I would recommend the 38/357 for you. Easy to reload and the GP will weigh less than the RH.

Lots of versatility in the 357. Cost wise, the 38/357 wins too.
 
Thanks for the good input. Logical me agrees on all that. Illogical me wants the RH in either the .357 or my first .44. May have to split the difference and go with the RH .357 for the easier and less expensive shooting plus one more round. We'll see.
 
Winchester67 said:
Yes, I know a lot of guys carry these because they are so easy to pack. Harder to shoot with that short sight radius, small grips and small sights. If you put on bigger grips, you should carry a K Frame as they are easier to shoot under stress. If you belt carry a J frame, please look into a three inch barrel because of the bigger sights and longer sight radius. A two inch J Frame is pocket or ankle carry only for me. And with cargo pants, I can still pocket carry the three inch in a pocket holster. Try it!

Look how much wider the sights are on a heavy BBL three inch.

View attachment 99139

View attachment 99140

This version also has a square butt, which is almost as easy to hide but gives you a little more to grip. Again, on a belt it hides as easy as a two inch but is so much easier to shoot. Don't handicap yourself in the name of convenience. What does Clint Smith say? A sidearm is meant to be comforting, not comfortable.
Click to expand...
IMHO, anyone who actually trains and practices should be and have been able to shoot snubbies of all sizes well for the ~75 years they've been around. I don't believe the sight radius is a big factor at common civilian defensive distances. For duty and outdoorsman activities where much further shots might be required, a longer sight radius makes a bigger difference. That said, I do prefer and carry a 3" model 60 on the belt for increased velocity.

If we're talking about shooting standard .38 or .38 +P, I don't see much of a point with defaulting to a ~33-ounce revolver for a belt gun. A steel-framed J-frame-sized revolver would be much more concealable and comfortable to carry on a regular basis. I only agree with your "easier to shoot" claim when it's a .357 in a J-frame vs. K-frame.

IMHO, if you're going to carry a K-frame, you might as well carry an L-frame. With a similarly configured barrel, they're within an ounce or two of a K-frame and are more robust, so they can handle a study diet of .357 longer. As @Anchorite would put it, you can get 16.67% more capacity. :)
 
LDB said:
It ain't for the faint of heart. :LOL: But it weighs the same weather in my cargo pocket or a belt holster. If I ever somehow decide OC is really a thing then maybe in a holster, but I like the anonymity of my cargo pocket.
Click to expand...
I’d strongly encourage you to handle a Redhawk or Super Redhawk extensively before plunking down your $$$. These are great revolvers BUT they are very large and very heavy. As a result it’d take a huge pocket to hold either and an even bigger one for it to actually “conceal” such a cannon-not to mention the downward pull on one side of your britches. Belt gun? Yeah, they’ll work but still require an effort to conceal. I believe if you ever really look into this you’ll pretty quickly figure out these are not the ticket for a “pocket” revolver. A nice J frame works great and is fairly easy to cc. Even there, steel frame ones tend to make a pocket droop and they are 1/2 the weight (and size) of what you are considering. Finally, simple fact is that if it is not at least fairly comfortable/ easy to tote then eventually it’ll wind up sitting in the safe at home because it’s a pita to carry. Just because you “can” do something doesn’t necessarily mean you should. I have, and on occasion still do, cc a 69 S&W in a pancake for a few hours when hiking in the sticks. It’s 2/3 the weight of what you’re looking at and not something I’d care to do daily. Doing something for a couple hours is vastly different than doing the same thing, day after day, all day long. And if you’re Not carrying all day, everyday, you’re merely kidding yourself about being ready bad things to occur. If i knew when something bad was going down I wouldn’t go get a gun, I’d be someplace else. Choose wisely. Good luck
 
Well, the Redhawk .357 which might have held a slight lead is out. The OAL won't work. I currently carry an SP101 and have for a while, definitely not as heavy but not light by any means either. The problem with a J frame is capacity. I ideally want 8 rounds with 7 being somewhat more common. I'd go with 6 in .44 as that's all there is and they are enough bigger to offset the fewer rounds. And I don't like recoil so I don't want to go as light as a J frame either.

The 627PC checks all the boxes except being a Ruger. The 686+ drops 3 more oz. but loses a round. The SP101 disappears, even knowledgeable and observant friends were surprised I had it. Before carrying one of these I'd take the pants and get the pocket sewn with an extra run of HD thread for reinforcement although I don't think it's needed. I may include the Taurus 692 which adds a 9mm cylinder in the suspects list although I don't know it would ever be used.
 
LDB said:
Well, the Redhawk .357 which might have held a slight lead is out. The OAL won't work. I currently carry an SP101 and have for a while, definitely not as heavy but not light by any means either. The problem with a J frame is capacity. I ideally want 8 rounds with 7 being somewhat more common. I'd go with 6 in .44 as that's all there is and they are enough bigger to offset the fewer rounds. And I don't like recoil so I don't want to go as light as a J frame either.

The 627PC checks all the boxes except being a Ruger. The 686+ drops 3 more oz. but loses a round. The SP101 disappears, even knowledgeable and observant friends were surprised I had it. Before carrying one of these I'd take the pants and get the pocket sewn with an extra run of HD thread for reinforcement although I don't think it's needed. I may include the Taurus 692 which adds a 9mm cylinder in the suspects list although I don't know it would ever be used.
Click to expand...
I can't recommend Taurus for defensive work. It's a crap shoot whether you get one that works. I have seen far too many failures with them on my range to place any trust in them. Ruger makes a dependable revolver.
 
I'd definitely have to run some rounds through it to be confident carrying it but that's true of any of them. Ruger is definitely good but the only ones that meet all the requirements are the 2.5" GP100 and the SRH Alaskan, the SRH actually better on OAL.
 
LDB said:
Well, the Redhawk .357 which might have held a slight lead is out. The OAL won't work. I currently carry an SP101 and have for a while, definitely not as heavy but not light by any means either. The problem with a J frame is capacity. I ideally want 8 rounds with 7 being somewhat more common. I'd go with 6 in .44 as that's all there is and they are enough bigger to offset the fewer rounds. And I don't like recoil so I don't want to go as light as a J frame either.

The 627PC checks all the boxes except being a Ruger. The 686+ drops 3 more oz. but loses a round. The SP101 disappears, even knowledgeable and observant friends were surprised I had it. Before carrying one of these I'd take the pants and get the pocket sewn with an extra run of HD thread for reinforcement although I don't think it's needed. I may include the Taurus 692 which adds a 9mm cylinder in the suspects list although I don't know it would ever be used.
Click to expand...
Try a 329PD-lightweight, 6 rounds of .44 mag. It’s half the weight of the Rugers.
 
Recoil is my mortal enemy. I actually want weight to offset it. And the 329 is much too long OAL as well. There's an 8" OAL hard limit for my carry option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top