Author Topic: .38 Special +P shopping (Read 2827 times)

oldhunter · « **on:** September 12, 2009, 03:03:24 AM »

For several months, I have had the urge to buy one of the lightweight "hammerless" .38 Special +P revolvers for concealed carry. Although I currently own several small to medium size pistols & revolvers, the more I read about these popular guns, the more interested I am. Yesterday, I stopped in one of my favorite gun shops to look around and found three of these revolvers staring at me from one of the handgun cases. I tried to resist but ended up fondling them and offer my opinion without the benefit of shooting any of them.

1.) Ruger LCR -- Listed price of $429.00. Weight 13.5 oz. Good trigger for a double action gun, smooth with predictable break and overall an excellent quality revolver,

2.) S&W model 442 -- Listed price of $525.00. Weight 15 oz. Decent trigger pull but longer and harder than the LCR. Also excellent quality as are all S&W guns.

3.) Taurus -- Do not remember the model but the salesman said it was one of the Taurus lightweight revolvers comparable to the Ruger and S&W. Listed price of $370.00. Quality was a step down from the above two and the trigger pull was very long and extremely heavy.

If I were to make a decision today, I would buy the Ruger LCR. About $100.00 less than the Smith, lighter and all reports I have read indicate it is easier to shoot than either of the others. I would not consider the Taurus.

Only time will tell if I succumb to my current urge but will provide an update if I do.

oldhunter

rockbilly · « **Reply #1 on:** September 12, 2009, 05:40:23 AM »

Oldhunter, In my opinion you get what you pay for. While the Rugar is a nice little gun is does not have the quality that a Smith has. In addition, (my opinion) a plastic gun is a throw away gun, I'd be willing to bet, if used, they won't be around as long as the all metal gun will be. If you really plan on going this route, I'd recommend you go with a Smith 649 in .357, it's a little heavier, but it will be here, and functioning, long after the Rugar has ben put to rest.

oldhunter · « **Reply #2 on:** September 12, 2009, 06:23:50 AM »

I can't argue with what you say but, many people said the same thing about "plastic" pistols when Glock first hit the market. Now look at the trend. Although Ruger is the first revolver with a blend of polymer, stainless steel and aluminium, I bet that Smith & Wesson and others will soon follow. Time will tell.

oldhunter

Mikey · « **Reply #3 on:** September 12, 2009, 11:47:11 AM »

oldhunter: a good compromise to the 'hammerless' style is the S&W 638 - might still be able to get it in matt black or have the stainless matt finished if you like, but this is a SA/DA +P revolver that gives you the benefit of smooth draw from a pocket, dependable double action and a partially concealed hammer to cock if need be. My M38 is 13oz empty with it's aluminum frame. The heaviest part of the package is the ammo. jmtcw.

rockbilly · « **Reply #4 on:** September 12, 2009, 12:56:20 PM »

Oldhunter. Glock only has about a 20 year history, I think the first polymer frame gun was made in 1983, and mass produced about 1985 for import to America, but how many of those guns are still around today? I have two guns that belonged to my grandfather, a .32 Hand Ejector First Model of the 1896 manufactured in 1899, I also have his Colt Officer's Model Target, manufactured in 1908. Both of these guns lock up tight and could be shooters if I desired. When Glock, Rugar, Matel and the other plastic gun makers have one around that has been as well used and aged as long as these I might change my mind. And the great thing, if taken care of these guns will be here for another 100 years.

I no longer own a Glock, I tried a Kel-Tec, thought it was trash, have looked at the Rugar LCP and LCR I decided I'd stick with the metal guns, I am not wild about the aluminum guns, not sure about the titanium but having worked in the aircraft industry for many years would prefer either over a plastic model.. There is not a plastic or polymer product produced yet that is not broken down by UV rays, so don’t take your plastic out without a sunscreen.

Bottom line, it is what every trips your trigger, that’s why they make em.

oldhunter · « **Reply #5 on:** September 15, 2009, 01:19:58 AM »

My thanks to all that shared their thoughts and opinions on this subject.

oldhunter

Old Griz · « **Reply #6 on:** October 25, 2009, 08:12:42 AM »

I wouldn't worry about the Ruger being a polymer gun. I got one of the early Glocks, and it is still holding up quite well. I'm sure it will last my lifetime.

However, I agree with Mikey. I have the S&W 638 and I like having the option of cocking the shrouded hammer.

45-70.gov · « **Reply #7 on:** October 25, 2009, 09:15:09 AM »

cocking those shouded hammers are dangerous more so tham conventional hammer
something that should never be done in self defence.....so why practice it

can't go wrong with the smith it is lighter than you said tho

i prefer 640 [20 oz 357] 0ver 642 my kids alll have 642

that ruger is a nice unique looking gun might even be a better gun....let us know

avoid the tarus

Graybeard · « **Reply #8 on:** October 25, 2009, 11:26:06 AM »

Yup my vote goes to the S&W 638 as well. Around here I commonly see them for around $400 new.

Old Griz · « **Reply #9 on:** October 25, 2009, 11:29:04 AM »

Quote from: 45-70.gov on October 25, 2009, 09:15:09 AM

cocking those shouded hammers are dangerous more so tham conventional hammer
something that should never be done in self defence.....so why practice it

What in the world do you base this on? There's nothing any more dangerous in cocking the shrouded 638 that any other gun with a hammer.

Noreaster · « **Reply #10 on:** October 25, 2009, 01:54:49 PM »

I carried a S&W airweight for years and I'm sorry I sold it. As for the Ruger it doesn't look as small as the Smith. If you don't intend to pocket carry, it probably wouldn't be an issue. Ruger has great customer service. I'm sure it would be a quick, free, fix, if there was ever a problem. I wouldn't hesitate to buy a Ruger. As far as that goes S&W has a good record of customer service over the last five years or so. Good luck with your purchase and let us know what you get.

45-70.gov · « **Reply #11 on:** October 25, 2009, 02:06:03 PM »

Quote from: Old Griz on October 25, 2009, 11:29:04 AM

Quote from: 45-70.gov on October 25, 2009, 09:15:09 AM
cocking those shouded hammers are dangerous more so tham conventional hammer
something that should never be done in self defence.....so why practice it

What in the world do you base this on? There's nothing any more dangerous in cocking the shrouded 638 that any other gun with a hammer.

the few accidental discharges i have talk to people about

false alarm then tried to lower the hammer with a shaking hand

kiddekop · « **Reply #12 on:** November 03, 2009, 07:39:59 AM »

Quote from: oldhunter on September 12, 2009, 03:03:24 AM

For several months, I have had the urge to buy one of the lightweight "hammerless" .38 Special +P revolvers for concealed carry. Although I currently own several small to medium size pistols & revolvers, the more I read about these popular guns, the more interested I am. Yesterday, I stopped in one of my favorite gun shops to look around and found three of these revolvers staring at me from one of the handgun cases. I tried to resist but ended up fondling them and offer my opinion without the benefit of shooting any of them.

1.) Ruger LCR -- Listed price of $429.00. Weight 13.5 oz. Good trigger for a double action gun, smooth with predictable break and overall an excellent quality revolver,

2.) S&W model 442 -- Listed price of $525.00. Weight 15 oz. Decent trigger pull but longer and harder than the LCR. Also excellent quality as are all S&W guns.

3.) Taurus -- Do not remember the model but the salesman said it was one of the Taurus lightweight revolvers comparable to the Ruger and S&W. Listed price of $370.00. Quality was a step down from the above two and the trigger pull was very long and extremely heavy.

If I were to make a decision today, I would buy the Ruger LCR. About $100.00 less than the Smith, lighter and all reports I have read indicate it is easier to shoot than either of the others. I would not consider the Taurus.

Only time will tell if I succumb to my current urge but will provide an update if I do.

oldhunter

I carried a 3" S&W Chiefs Special 5 shot 38special for years,then when Ruger came out with the security six I bought a 4 inch in SS which I carried off duty and on backpacking and hunting trips made a big mistake when I traded it off.Recently purchased a Ruger GP 100 SS 4" 357 revolver nice gun fired it sunday it's accurate & liked the Hogue rubber grips Ruger sold with it ,have them on my blackhawk.

Dee · « **Reply #13 on:** November 03, 2009, 08:03:14 AM »

Quote from: 45-70.gov on October 25, 2009, 02:06:03 PM

Quote from: Old Griz on October 25, 2009, 11:29:04 AM
Quote from: 45-70.gov on October 25, 2009, 09:15:09 AM
cocking those shouded hammers are dangerous more so tham conventional hammer
something that should never be done in self defence.....so why practice it

What in the world do you base this on? There's nothing any more dangerous in cocking the shrouded 638 that any other gun with a hammer.

the few accidental discharges i have talk to people about

false alarm then tried to lower the hammer with a shaking hand

I guess you'd really be screwed if you were using a Colt SA Army or Ruger Vaquero for self defense wouldn't ya?

kiddekop · « **Reply #14 on:** November 07, 2009, 09:00:20 AM »

Quote from: rockbilly on September 12, 2009, 05:40:23 AM

Oldhunter, In my opinion you get what you pay for. While the Rugar is a nice little gun is does not have the quality that a Smith has. In addition, (my opinion) a plastic gun is a throw away gun, I'd be willing to bet, if used, they won't be around as long as the all metal gun will be. If you really plan on going this route, I'd recommend you go with a Smith 649 in .357, it's a little heavier, but it will be here, and functioning, long after the Rugar has ben put to rest.

I had a Ruger SS 4" Security Six 357 mag that I shot in matches and carried on backpacking trips & hunting plus off duty,I traded it to a club member wish I had kept it.Recently I did some searches for used security sixes and read about owners who had fired 40k to 50k rounds thru them and they've help up.Prices are really high for used security sixes.I bought a newRuger GP100 357mag with 4" barrel,like the Hogue Rubber Grips,tried it out at our range with 38spec +P's and some of my 357 mag reloads fired everything and is accurate.I have a S&W Mod 19 357 mag with 6 inch barrel that was worked over by a very skilled gunsmith it's very accurate.

deerhunter · « **Reply #15 on:** May 26, 2010, 09:55:59 AM »

Oldhunter, what did you end up getting? How do you like it?

I have a SW642 and I love it, nice and light in the pocket. The DAO is not a problem.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #16 on:** May 26, 2010, 11:16:55 AM »

Other than shooting a target or snake why cock ? it takes time you don't have in a fight , if you really need to shoot. The old cat. list the airweights at 13 or so OZs with wood grips the new rubber grips must add the weight. If you want to cut weight then get a S&W 340 PD , 12 ozs with rubber grips even less with SS wood grips. The Ruger LCR 357 is over 17 ozs . And I wouldn't get the taurus either.

Noreaster · « **Reply #17 on:** May 26, 2010, 12:09:19 PM »

Update for you. Went to the range yesterday for quals. One of the Chief's has a Ruger LCR. He has had it for awhile now and lets everyone shoot it. No problems what so ever.

jhm · « **Reply #18 on:** May 27, 2010, 03:41:45 AM »

One other thing to consider in the PLASTIC guns it cost the Manufacturers a lot less to build them and that increases their profit volume, their lies their incentivive to make them apeal to the customer base without lowering the price too much, look at the plastic rifle stocks compared to the decent wood stocks not really a lot of difference in price compared to the cost to manufacture. Jim

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #19 on:** May 27, 2010, 03:45:50 AM »

The J frame has proven itself for years , Ruger (and I like their guns ) has gone thru. many changes since the death of William Ruger . It has also had a lions share of recalls . They fix their problems and are a top notch company but who wants a defense gun that has a recall ? Its all about confidence and trust.

pneuby · « **Reply #20 on:** May 27, 2010, 09:26:02 AM »

The LCR's been out for just over a year. It very well may need a little more time in the hands of the 'beta-testers' in the marketplace.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #21 on:** May 27, 2010, 09:31:14 AM »

Maybe it will maybe it won't but why take a chance ?

Doublebass73 · « **Reply #22 on:** May 28, 2010, 05:03:37 AM »

I have over 500 flawless rounds through my LCR. It's very fun to shoot and nice and light to carry.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #23 on:** May 28, 2010, 05:09:00 AM »

Now that is good imfo. Thanks

Doublebass73 · « **Reply #24 on:** May 29, 2010, 12:20:12 PM »

I have another 700 or so rounds of .38 loaded up ready to go. I'll let you know if I have any problems after I shoot them through the LCR.

Bigeasy · « **Reply #25 on:** May 29, 2010, 12:34:11 PM »

My only complaint with the Ruger snub is its bulk. Even though it is light in weight, it seems just enough bulkier then the Smith that it might be too much for pocket carry. If I had to revert to holster carry, then I would choose a more substantial weapon then a 38 snub. Though I did not shoot it, the D/A pull of the Ruger seemed just as nice as any Smith J-Frame I have shot, and the sights were a little bolder. So in baggy pants, or a purse, why not?

Larry

Dee · « **Reply #26 on:** May 29, 2010, 01:05:15 PM »

Had the same problem with SP101. Too bulky, and too heavy, and the trigger pull was longer. The action cleaned up nice, but not as nice as a cleaned up Smith action. I always admired the Python and owned two 4"ers. Their action cleaned up really nice also but the action was longer just like the Ruger so I sold both. The fact of the matter is, a shorter pull action such as the Smith is faster into a fight. By milliseconds perhaps, but faster, and when your on target you don't have to wait that extra pull length for it to go.
My first fight was with a Smith 357. My second one about a year and a half later was with a Colt Commander. The very next shift after the last fight, I showed up for work carrying another Smith 357. When I got the auto back I sold it.
The bottom line on the whole deal is, get what suits ya.

oldhunter · « **Reply #27 on:** June 01, 2010, 02:05:47 AM »

"Oldhunter, what did you end up getting? How do you like it?
I have a SW642 and I love it, nice and light in the pocket. The DAO is not a problem."

So far, all I have done is look and read all of the pros and cons about all snubbys. I am a also interested in the new LCR .357 mag for sale and believe this offers more choices to a buyer. I move slow and rarely buy until I am very sure that a gun is the one I want.

oldhunter

mdi · « **Reply #28 on:** June 01, 2010, 06:46:11 AM »

I've had a Taurus Mod. 85 for nearly 20 years and it functions flawlessly. I haven't used much +P because I shoot for fun and only occationally use +P. My next purchase will be the Ruger LCR, and I have no concern about the "plastic" frame. Even though the SW snubbies are the Cream-of-the-Crop, I'm gonna try the Ruger. I've had Smiths and I felt guilty dropping the in my pants pocket or in my tackle box; just too nice a finish for knockaround...

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #29 on:** June 01, 2010, 06:53:01 AM »

Never understood why a well worn finish on a gun matters . To me its a tool not a bit of art. I can tell you that carrying one everyday will leave scars . But I really don't care its insurance and I want the best I can afford if it shows wear so be it I do also . My truck gets used also.