I personally carry a S&W 642 loaded with .38+P every day. I feel it is adequate for my needs. If you feel you need more stopping power you could always go with one of the 357 magnum models.
I don't really care for the looks of the LCR, but know someone who has one and loves it.
I don't really care for the looks of the LCR, but know someone who has one and loves it.
Improvements in ammo make .38+p a good option. A few years ago, .38 was marginal.
For pocket carry, you are pretty limited. You want light, hammerless, small. Ruger LCR, Smith in many variations, and Smith clones made by Taurus, Rossi, and a couple others. The Smith and its clones can be all steel, or one many combinations of alloys. Steel is heavier and better for managing recoil, alloys are better for carry. I have a strong preference for pocket revolvers that are rust resistant, so I am not much interested in blued steel guns for pocket carry. Most newer Smiths have that stupid lock. I don't want one. I don't know anything about the Smith clones made by Taurus, etc.
For me, the Ruger SP101 is a fine revolver [and I am wearing one right now], but just a little large and heavy for pocket carry.
Any pocket revolver is a carry a lot, shoot a little proposition. The LCR was designed for it, is very light, does not have a lock, and all reports say it has the best DA trigger yet. I have a rule that I never buy a gun until it has been out on the market for a year or so, to see if it holds up or if it gets recalled. If there are no recalls, I'd say buy a new one in the spring. If the plastic still bugs you, buy an older hammerless alloy Smith that has not been shot a lot.
jej
For pocket carry, you are pretty limited. You want light, hammerless, small. Ruger LCR, Smith in many variations, and Smith clones made by Taurus, Rossi, and a couple others. The Smith and its clones can be all steel, or one many combinations of alloys. Steel is heavier and better for managing recoil, alloys are better for carry. I have a strong preference for pocket revolvers that are rust resistant, so I am not much interested in blued steel guns for pocket carry. Most newer Smiths have that stupid lock. I don't want one. I don't know anything about the Smith clones made by Taurus, etc.
For me, the Ruger SP101 is a fine revolver [and I am wearing one right now], but just a little large and heavy for pocket carry.
Any pocket revolver is a carry a lot, shoot a little proposition. The LCR was designed for it, is very light, does not have a lock, and all reports say it has the best DA trigger yet. I have a rule that I never buy a gun until it has been out on the market for a year or so, to see if it holds up or if it gets recalled. If there are no recalls, I'd say buy a new one in the spring. If the plastic still bugs you, buy an older hammerless alloy Smith that has not been shot a lot.
jej
Smith & Wesson 642 all the way. After looking @ the Ruger LCR was not liking the loose rattle it has [ kind of concerned of if it were to get droped or banged around would it lock up or break ?] The Smith J frame revolvers have been around a while & have proven themselves worthy as shown by alot of officers using them as their backup weapon. I myself only trust my life to a weapon that has been a PROVEN weapon that our law inforcment or military will carry.
As of right now they make their "Classic" 40 and 42, AKA lemonsqueezers without the lock; however, they are still MIM guns as to parts. The OP would be better off looking for an older model, 38, 49, 40, 638, 649, 640, in .38spl. The all steel guns will handle all the +P he wants to put through it. The alloy frames should only be fired with enough +P to know POA/POI, and any other practice should be done with standard pressure .38spl ammo.
As to the .38spl being marginal, it really never was, its more what was carried than what was available. The .38spl has almost from its begining been available in what was called the .38 Police load. This was a 200gr loading, not to be confused with the 38/44, that had a very good reputation for putting them down, even though it had a round nosed profile, the bullet would become unstable on impact and tumble, creating more damage. More to political hacks, most agencies chose the 158gr loading with round nosed projectile, we don't want to hurt the BG's to much, the 158gr round nosed projectile had a horrible track record. Eventually the .38spl SWCHP+P came onto the scene, and we again had a very effective loading. The lighter weight +P rounds are good, but one has to understand that most all .38/.357 revolvers are made to shoot POA/POI with the 158gr loadings. At close range, inside 10 to 15yds, this won't matter much, however if a shot is taken at longer range POA/POI will be greatly effected, unless the gun has adjustable sights an has been adjusted for this.
.38 as marginal - you are right. I was issued the marginal stuff in the 1970s and did not think about what was really available. For sure, now, plenty of good SD loads are produced.
Point of aim issues - yes, but a snubby pocket gun is built for use at powder burn distances, not at longer ranges that an expert can engage.
jej
Point of aim issues - yes, but a snubby pocket gun is built for use at powder burn distances, not at longer ranges that an expert can engage.
jej
There are some current production S&W's without the internal lock. For a self defense gun these are the way to go.
http://www.topgunsupply.com/smith-wesson-model-442-airweight-.38spl-p-without-internal-lock.html
http://www.topgunsupply.com/smith-wesson-model-642-centennial-38spl_p-without-internal-lock.html
http://www.topgunsupply.com/smith-wesson-model-442-airweight-.38spl-p-without-internal-lock.html
http://www.topgunsupply.com/smith-wesson-model-642-centennial-38spl_p-without-internal-lock.html
Similar threads
