A favorable review found online for on roster S&W snubbie

[Darto]

http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/smith-wesson-mp-38/#comment-42251

The reviewer above seems to really like the gun because of ergonomics better than most snubbies, in his opinion.

sku 10062 (Cal approved roster OK)

S&W website page:

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_832549_-1_792654_757781_757781_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

[P5Ret]

I like the gun itself, what I don't care for is the laser. I asked someone who owns one if the laser is removable, and he did not think it was. If Smith came out with the same gun without the laser or it was removable, I'd buy it.

['ol shooter]

I have a 442, same size gun, with Crimson Trace grips on it, and it shoots very well with handloaded ammo. I use 125 gr. XTP's over a mid-weight charge of Titegroup.

[Marquand]

I respect the reviewer and his article is certainly valid. That said, short of being better suited for the left handed, I see nothing that the S&W Bodyguard revolver does that the 442/642 line doesn't do just as well. It's strictly a matter of personal preference.

[Squidward]

I tend to ride the gun high, so I often cut my thumb on the cylinder release latch of my 642. The location of the latch on the Bodyguard would alleviate my issue.

But I'm not real big on lasers; to distracting for a "belly gun" IMO.

[smittty]

I'm satisfied with the aloy j-frames such as the 642, 340, etc. I foolishly traded my 642 but still have the 340.

I'll be carrying my MP340 on my upcoming fishing trip. These light weight revolvers make perfect kit guns.

[MikeSmith]

I've never seen one in person so I don't know for sure, but from the pics it looks like they incorporated polymer into the back half of the frame? Must be why they are coming out with all these new 38 special snubs and not 357 mags anymore. I'll stick with my all stainless steel model 60. It may be a little heavier but I know it can take hot loads of 357 all day long.

[Marquand]

I've never seen one in person so I don't know for sure, but from the pics it looks like they incorporated polymer into the back half of the frame? Must be why they are coming out with all these new 38 special snubs and not 357 mags anymore. I'll stick with my all stainless steel model 60. It may be a little heavier but I know it can take hot loads of 357 all day long.

Well, two reasons come to mind. First, a lightweight .357 revolver can be extremely uncomfortable to fire and if the end user is going to be shooting .38 ammo through it most of the time then there's little use in providing the handgun in .357. Secondly, most .357 rounds doesn't perform very well out of such short barrels since most of the powder is burning outside the barrel. Why deal with the increased muzzle flash and blast for little benefit?

[smittty]

357 mag from the short barrel still has more power than anything in its weight class, but few handguns have this much recoil.

['ol shooter]

I've never seen one in person so I don't know for sure, but from the pics it looks like they incorporated polymer into the back half of the frame? Must be why they are coming out with all these new 38 special snubs and not 357 mags anymore. I'll stick with my all stainless steel model 60. It may be a little heavier but I know it can take hot loads of 357 all day long.

Frame is aluminum alloy, per the website, just like my 442. It and my 442 are rated for +P, but the recoil is vicious.