Tweet
I'm counting down the days before California lets me buy my next handgun (bought my daughter something in preparation for her 21st birthday earlier this month), and I'm set on getting a very light, small, reliable revolver--something easy to throw in a purse or shove in a pocket, something that can be depended upon if it comes down to that.
My top choices have boiled down to the Smith & Wesson 642 and the Ruger LCR, both in .38 Special +P. Also not yet knocked out of consideration are their .357 variants. It seems each day I wake up with my mind set on a different selection from this field.
When one starts researching these light snubbies, one thing that stands out are words and phrases like "pain," "getting your hand slammed in the car door," "not a shooter," etc. Not promising. In addition, both families have their promotors. I figured the smart thing to do before making up my mind would be to go the the local firing range and rent the darn things and see for myself.
So today I found myself at Iron Sights in Oceanside. Their 442 (the matte black version of the 642) was out to the manufacturer for service, but they did have the even lighter 340PD (the scandium alloy version of the 642 in .357, both lighter and more than double the price) for me to shoot, along with an LCR. Good enough for today's checkout.
The contenders:
The S&W 340PD, weighing in at 11.4 oz empty, 6.31" long, MSRP $1019, vs. the Ruger LCR, weighing 13.5 oz and 6.5" long with a MSRP of $525.
I could hardly notice the weight difference, but I found I could close my eyes and correctly identify each revolver by weight. Both guns, though heavily used as range rentals, looked to be in good condition, and all the moving parts were tight and smooth. I liked the feel of the S&W's smaller grip better, but was able to get a good firm grasp on either gun. I shook the Ruger gently, and sure enough I heard its signature rattle.
Time to start shooting. With all the build-up I've been getting from online forums, I was practically chanting, "Don't flinch! Don't flinch! Don't flinch!" to myself in ironic anticipation of some real hurt. But the range ammo, which was not +P, did not hurt. I would compare the recoil to hitting a baseball with an aluminum bat; the guns jarred and vibrated rather than stung or stabbed or bit. I felt little noticeable difference in recoil between the S&W and the Ruger, though if I had to say I'd say the recoil was slightly better with the Ruger.
I'd wanted to see what it felt like to fire a .357 Magnum round through the 340PD, and the guy behind the counter rummaged around in some bins and came up with a single .357 round. Once again visions of the airweight gun flying out of my broken fingers haunted me as I chambered that round, took a deep breath, and fired...
...And what an anticlimax that was. In my hands (smallish for my frame) the .357 didn't feel very much more powerful than the .38 Special I'd been shooting. It was more powerful, and the gun sure bucked more, and I had no problem feeling the difference...but still, meh, hitting a baseball with an aluminum bat.
I'm thinking now I'll go for a .357 for sure, shoot a lot of regular .38 ammo at the range, and carry .38 +P. I feel good about this choice only because I actually tried shooting the guns for myself. But then, if I go .357 I'll have to either add 3.6 oz to what I'll have to carry (Ruger) or add $570 to what I'll have to pay (S&W). Hmm, maybe "for sure" was premature. Anyway, back to the range report.
As everyone points out all over the Internet, the Ruger's trigger pull was smoother than the S&W's. Noticeably so. But I wouldn't make the selection based on this difference; in neither case was the trigger pull a big deal. Maybe those other guys are all real used to shooting pistols rather than revolvers, or maybe I haven't been spoiled yet by something really nice.
The 340PD had a serious reliability issue: the first four times I loaded the gun, one round failed to fire (IOW 4 out of 20 times). The cylinder would turn, and I would hear and feel the snap of the hammer falling...but nada. In each case, I did what I would not have been able to do with an autofeed pistol: I simply pulled the trigger again and took my next shot. Upon examination, the unfired ammo showed no indication it had ever been near a firing pin. After I shot the .357 round, the 340PD fired every round. I reported this to the guy behind the counter, and as he replaced the gun in the glass counter he mused that it probably needed its timing looked at.
It looks like I'll need to practice a lot with my new snubbie, whichever model I end up buying. My shots were all over the place at 10 yards with the 340PD. All were "on paper," but my "groups" (if you'll excuse the term) were sometimes 12" across. It was strangely difficult for me to focus on the front sight when shooting--I'd see it, but it was all fuzzy-looking. I'm almost 50, so I peered at the sight more closely, and at close range through my bicfocals the sight seemed squared enough. The LCR's sight, on the other hand, easily resolved itself in my sight picture (it had the standard pinned ramp sight). Although I preferred the way the 340PD felt in my hands, I shot more accurately with the LCR; my groups with that gun were 5-8".
So, yeah, I won't mind shooting a small light revolver in .38 Special +P or even .357. But I'm going to wait for Iron Sights' 442 to come back from the factory before making a decision which to buy. I don't think the recoil will be a problem for me putting the requisite rounds through any of the choices at the range.
BTW, the guy behind the counter recommended the S&W Bodyguard in .38 Special +P--like the LCR, it has a polymer frame. He says the trigger was terrific on the Bodyguard. So far the idea hasn't thrilled me, but who knows how I'll feel when I wake up in the morning?
My top choices have boiled down to the Smith & Wesson 642 and the Ruger LCR, both in .38 Special +P. Also not yet knocked out of consideration are their .357 variants. It seems each day I wake up with my mind set on a different selection from this field.
When one starts researching these light snubbies, one thing that stands out are words and phrases like "pain," "getting your hand slammed in the car door," "not a shooter," etc. Not promising. In addition, both families have their promotors. I figured the smart thing to do before making up my mind would be to go the the local firing range and rent the darn things and see for myself.
So today I found myself at Iron Sights in Oceanside. Their 442 (the matte black version of the 642) was out to the manufacturer for service, but they did have the even lighter 340PD (the scandium alloy version of the 642 in .357, both lighter and more than double the price) for me to shoot, along with an LCR. Good enough for today's checkout.
The contenders:
The S&W 340PD, weighing in at 11.4 oz empty, 6.31" long, MSRP $1019, vs. the Ruger LCR, weighing 13.5 oz and 6.5" long with a MSRP of $525.
I could hardly notice the weight difference, but I found I could close my eyes and correctly identify each revolver by weight. Both guns, though heavily used as range rentals, looked to be in good condition, and all the moving parts were tight and smooth. I liked the feel of the S&W's smaller grip better, but was able to get a good firm grasp on either gun. I shook the Ruger gently, and sure enough I heard its signature rattle.
Time to start shooting. With all the build-up I've been getting from online forums, I was practically chanting, "Don't flinch! Don't flinch! Don't flinch!" to myself in ironic anticipation of some real hurt. But the range ammo, which was not +P, did not hurt. I would compare the recoil to hitting a baseball with an aluminum bat; the guns jarred and vibrated rather than stung or stabbed or bit. I felt little noticeable difference in recoil between the S&W and the Ruger, though if I had to say I'd say the recoil was slightly better with the Ruger.
I'd wanted to see what it felt like to fire a .357 Magnum round through the 340PD, and the guy behind the counter rummaged around in some bins and came up with a single .357 round. Once again visions of the airweight gun flying out of my broken fingers haunted me as I chambered that round, took a deep breath, and fired...
...And what an anticlimax that was. In my hands (smallish for my frame) the .357 didn't feel very much more powerful than the .38 Special I'd been shooting. It was more powerful, and the gun sure bucked more, and I had no problem feeling the difference...but still, meh, hitting a baseball with an aluminum bat.
I'm thinking now I'll go for a .357 for sure, shoot a lot of regular .38 ammo at the range, and carry .38 +P. I feel good about this choice only because I actually tried shooting the guns for myself. But then, if I go .357 I'll have to either add 3.6 oz to what I'll have to carry (Ruger) or add $570 to what I'll have to pay (S&W). Hmm, maybe "for sure" was premature. Anyway, back to the range report.
As everyone points out all over the Internet, the Ruger's trigger pull was smoother than the S&W's. Noticeably so. But I wouldn't make the selection based on this difference; in neither case was the trigger pull a big deal. Maybe those other guys are all real used to shooting pistols rather than revolvers, or maybe I haven't been spoiled yet by something really nice.
The 340PD had a serious reliability issue: the first four times I loaded the gun, one round failed to fire (IOW 4 out of 20 times). The cylinder would turn, and I would hear and feel the snap of the hammer falling...but nada. In each case, I did what I would not have been able to do with an autofeed pistol: I simply pulled the trigger again and took my next shot. Upon examination, the unfired ammo showed no indication it had ever been near a firing pin. After I shot the .357 round, the 340PD fired every round. I reported this to the guy behind the counter, and as he replaced the gun in the glass counter he mused that it probably needed its timing looked at.
It looks like I'll need to practice a lot with my new snubbie, whichever model I end up buying. My shots were all over the place at 10 yards with the 340PD. All were "on paper," but my "groups" (if you'll excuse the term) were sometimes 12" across. It was strangely difficult for me to focus on the front sight when shooting--I'd see it, but it was all fuzzy-looking. I'm almost 50, so I peered at the sight more closely, and at close range through my bicfocals the sight seemed squared enough. The LCR's sight, on the other hand, easily resolved itself in my sight picture (it had the standard pinned ramp sight). Although I preferred the way the 340PD felt in my hands, I shot more accurately with the LCR; my groups with that gun were 5-8".
So, yeah, I won't mind shooting a small light revolver in .38 Special +P or even .357. But I'm going to wait for Iron Sights' 442 to come back from the factory before making a decision which to buy. I don't think the recoil will be a problem for me putting the requisite rounds through any of the choices at the range.
BTW, the guy behind the counter recommended the S&W Bodyguard in .38 Special +P--like the LCR, it has a polymer frame. He says the trigger was terrific on the Bodyguard. So far the idea hasn't thrilled me, but who knows how I'll feel when I wake up in the morning?
Comment