Why shouldn't I buy pic related for an EDC? >always ready,

>>33644643


>Never malfunctions

Just got back from the range where a revolver was needing to go around two or three times to set off the primers.

Have personally experienced revolver malfunctions where insufficient crimp with a light gun+heavy recoil combined to set bullets forward and prevent cylinder rotation.

Malfunction free my ass. When a revolver goes down it goes down hard.

Nothing wrong with OP pic related in general, but there are a LOT of autoloaders in the same size/weight/boom level that will perform at least as well.

>>33644643
>buying a new S&W with a Hillary Hole

>>33644721
explain

>>33644643
>never malfunctions
Fuddlore. I've seen all kinds of failures.

A friend of mine carries a S&W airweight in .357. Very nice gun. Go for it.

>>33644721
This is why you don't buy one.

You can get 442s without em though.

>>33644643
>Optimal
What does that mean?

Capacity, range, recoil

>>33644673

/thread

>>33644643
Because the 637 is essentially the same thing, only it has an exposed hammer

File: 642L1.jpg (473KB, 1459x881px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 1459x881px

Forget the haters. I tongue my Hillary Hole every morning before I strap it on, for luck.

In all honesty, in ten years pic related's never had a Failure To Go Bang, even with WC reduced power springs installed. Feed it decent ammunition and you'll do fine.

>>33644721
>>33645763
>Hillary Hole.
WTF is this?

>>33645763
Reduced power springs in your carry revolver? You're a madman or a moron. Reliability above all else.

>>33644643
No reason not to, just don't kid yourself about them being failproof or having amazing performance versus a 9mm subcompact, 38 special doesn't like snub barrels. The lack of weight also gives them potent recoil.

>>33645992
>38 special doesn't like snub barrels
For please to be telling, what means this?

>>33645920
Mandela effect

>>33644737
>Hillary Hole
-100 points from your asthetics bonus

File: Umemaro_Pizza_Girl.jpg (64KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 720x480px

>>33644643
>Why shouldn't I buy pic related for an EDC?
because with a P226 you could have 18 rounds of 9mm in flush fit mec-gar mags
instead of 6 rounds in a revolver

>>33644643
i got one, its a glove box gun. didnt like carrying it

>>33644643
>Why shouldn't I buy pic related for an EDC?
>>always ready, double action
>>5 for sure
>>small, lightweight
>>never malfunctions
>>optimal at close close-middle range
>Convince me otherwise. Non-free state btw

A revolver without a hammer is like a man without balls.

>>33645992
i dont believe you

>>33644673
>Just got back from the range where a revolver was needing to go around two or three times to set off the primers.

Have fired tens of thousands of rounds through revolvers and never once experienced this.

The only thing I can think of is a cap and ball with bad primers or an utterly defective gun with a damaged frame, mainspring or indexing

>>33646456
good thing it has a hammer, otherwise it wouldn't be able to ignite primers

>>33646499
>good thing it has a hammer, otherwise it wouldn't be able to ignite primers

For the profoundly autistic out there

a revolver with out an external hammer is like a man without balls.

>>33646433
I have a p226, way too big to CC.

>>33646510
You seem to be quite concerned about hammers, and men's balls.
Is this the right forum for you, really?

>>33646644
proofs

>>33646459
Nothing likes short barrels and you buying 8" barrel revolvers and bull barrels does not make up for your own inadequacy. The best you can do is try to carry more loads than a derringer.

>>33644673
>Just got back from the range where a revolver was needing to go around two or three times to set off the primers.

Next time don't use a Taurus or RIA or whatever other shit tier revolver you bought for less than 300 dollars.

>>33644643
>5 for sure
>never malfunctions
Revolvers can and certainly do malfunction. However, there are several advantages to having a revolver as your primary or secondary carry pistol.

>much simpler manual of arms is a benefit for certain situations
>can be fired from inside a jacket pocket without jamming, unlike a semi-auto
>all revolvers are "stand off capable," and can be fired while being pressed up against a surface, such as the bad guy's chest
>shape of profile is a little better suited for ankle carry than semi-autos, IMO

>>33644643
I love my 642 but:
1. you better practice with it b/c hits with a DAO snubby don't come easy.
2. carry good ammo. 38 spl even in +P is anaemic, not shit but its no powerhouse
3. get good with reloads, 5 is fine but if you can't connect or there is more than one determined bad guy you will probably need to reload (or maybe just an admin reload if no ones attacking you).
If you can handle that that's a great ccp. I carry mine over many "better" guns about 90% of the time.

>>33644643
>>>33644643
>always ready, double action
So is every gun regardless of SAO, DAO, Striker and DA/SA
>5 for sure
And that's all you're going to get
>never malfunctions
When revolvers have malfunctions, it's typically fucked to the point where it cannot be fixed like a handgun malfunction ie. tap rack
>optimal at close close-middle range
hell no

J frames are one of the most difficult and unpleasant guns to shoot effectively. As a backup gun to your primary carry gun, absolutely. But as a primary carry gun you're fooling yourself if you think it's suitable.

There's plenty of resources on J frames and revolvers by Tom Givens and he's quick to point out their weaknesses as a main carry weapon. Read up on the 1986 FBI Miami shootout, one FBI agent only got 5 shots off (iirc they all missed) and he never got a reload off, ever.

What you're thinking is comfort=effectiveness. Sure as shit, nobody has ever been in a gunfight with a bigger gun wishing they had their J frame instead. The only real merit on the J frame is that it can be used as a contact distance weapon where you're playing twister with the bad guy as revolvers cannot get knocked out of battery.

Seriously, J frames blow for purely shooting. Lot of recoil, no real useable sights, miserably slow reload and if it malfunctions with something like a timing issue you are absolutely fucked. This is all coming from someone who wants to still get one for a backup gun. Just understand it's a good backup to a larger gun such as a Glock 19 or M&P9C.

Check out some of Wayne Dobbs, Darryl Bolke, Chris Baker and Tom Given's writings on revolvers and J frames.

>>33646475

>My leg is broken
>Well my leg isn't broken so yours isn't either.

S&W 19 that had been in a drawer for at least 20 years, with ammo to match.

>>33646979

I'm seeing your typing, so that means your hands aren't servicing my cock. Get back to work.

>>33644643
They're harder to shoot than most guns and >>33644673

>>33646644
Really? Because people have been successfully CCing sigs, glocks, 1911s, etc with zero problems.

>>33646433
Why do you want to do with 18 rounds that you can with 6?

>>33650253
>info only relevant to noncrimped retard tier ammo, 9mm revolvers, and revolvers/ammo that have been neglected for literally multiple decades straight

Seems like a highly relevant and pertinent data point. Revolvers are clearly not very reliable.

>>33650322
1911s and compact sized glocks are waaaaay easier to conceal than the fat ass boat anchor that is a p226.

>>33649309
You fire a full .357 out of one of these little bastards and you won't tell me it's not enough power.

>>33650391
I've carried a p226, g22, and now a p-07. They're not hard to carry or conceal. And I don't wear exceptionally loose clothing, just properly sized shirts and usually slim cut pants.

Okay, I got a few reasons why you shouldn't EDC a S&W J-Frame. Keep in mind that the J-Frame isn't bad for what it is; Rather, it's limitations come from just that: What it is.

1: The relatively large wheel- This makes the gun harder to conceal. Pistols hide better, and are more comfortable to carry because they don't have wheels sticking out like a dick-tumor. Really, this is why people carry their J-Frames in fanny packs.

2: Bad Sights- This isn't an accurate gun. Also, the hammer-less model the double-action only, which means the tough trigger makes it even more inaccurate. This doesn't matter if your shooting something at point-blank, but not all threats happen at point blank.

3: Recoil and Muzzle Blast- Long story short, you aren't going to get follow up shots if you miss. This mixes with point #2 to be a bit of a concern. And shooting .357 out of a J-Frame is, well... It's an event at the range, and a nightmare in real life.

Honestly, just carry a Glock 42, Springfield XD, S&W M&P, or any other normal carry pistol. Hell, carry a pocket pistol like the M&P Bodyguard, Ruger LCP, or Bersa Thunder. They'll all serve you better unless you want to be one of those fanny-pack holster fruitcakes.

>>33650488
>1: The relatively large wheel- This makes the gun harder to conceal. Pistols hide better, and are more comfortable to carry because they don't have wheels sticking out like a dick-tumor. Really, this is why people carry their J-Frames in fanny packs.
There are certain ways that small revolvers can conceal a little better than semi-autos. I think they might be a little better suited to ankle holster carry and maybe shoulder holster carry. Overall, though, yeah, they're kind of fat in the middle and long.

>2: Bad Sights- This isn't an accurate gun. Also, the hammer-less model the double-action only, which means the tough trigger makes it even more inaccurate. This doesn't matter if your shooting something at point-blank, but not all threats happen at point blank.
Please rephrase to reflect that the limitations belong to the shooter, not the gun. Your gun isn't inaccurate. You are.

>3: Recoil and Muzzle Blast- Long story short, you aren't going to get follow up shots if you miss. This mixes with point #2 to be a bit of a concern. And shooting .357 out of a J-Frame is, well... It's an event at the range, and a nightmare in real life.
OP's pistol is only chambered in .38 special. Look on the barrel. That's a model 642.

>>33644643
>double action revolver

why do people recommend these, how can anyone tolerate a double action trigger pull ALL THE TIME?

at least DA/SA autos switch to single action after the first shot

>>33650379
>Compared to feed lip problems, old and or damaged mag springs, damaged mag bodies, under powered ammunition, bad primers, limp wristing, putting the gun on safe while drawing (frame safety), putting the gun on safe while loading (slide safety), failed to squeeze the trigger low enough (trigger safety), and many more.

>>33650601
Some people are good enough shooters that they can hit accurately with any kind of trigger. Obviously a DAO J-frame isn't going to see a lot of time at the shooting range outside of keeping up with proficiency.

>at least DA/SA autos switch to single action after the first shot
When your adrenaline is flowing and you truly fear for your life, there isn't much difference between a 10 pound pull and 5 pound pull.

File: 1456459419021.gif (1MB, 350x197px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 350x197px

>>33650613
Any firearm can malfunction, even a single shot break action shotgun, and any flaws of the design can be overcome with high enough manufacturing quality; however, there are other reasons to choose a revolver or semi-auto pistol over the other. One very important advantage that semi-autos have over revolvers is the speed (and ease) of reloading. Unless you're Jerry Miculek, almost everybody is going to be able to press the mag catch button, jam a new magazine into the magwell and thumb the slide catch lever faster than they can reload a revolver.

>>33650640
Which is irrelevant in almost all civilian shooting with a CCW. 2-3 rounds fired. The only reason to pick one or the other is "I would rather carry X" or "I want one with X features"

File: 1482902862733.jpg (20KB, 550x414px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 550x414px

>>33644673
Disassemble and stretch the hammer spring out a bit and put it back in. problem solved

>>33645763
was this gun supposed to look like Florida on purpose or what?

>>33650690
The trigger would be more relevant for that situation, and semi-autos have the market cornered on being able to squeeze off shots quickly with a nice crisp trigger.

>>33650745

I seriously hope you don't do this. If the hammer spring is worn out, then replace it with a NEW hammer spring. Forcing an old spring to stretch out is only ever going to be a very short term, temporary fix. This is what dumbasses do because they are too lazy or perhaps stupid to buy a new part for $4 plus shipping.

>>33650433
What position/holster? OP here. I have p226 but have found it too big to carry so far. Still love it though.

>>33644643
>Convince me otherwise. Non-free state btw
>Non-free state btw

No need to convince you otherwise. This might be your best choice on that parameter alone. Depending on how draconian your states laws are, I personally wouldn't consider it worth the hassle to carry an automatic. You could only carry no more than 4 additional shots, probably with lower energy to boot.

But as others have said, don't delude yourself into thinking that revolvers are these magical fail-proof devices.

File: 1492002026299.png (39KB, 1000x893px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1000x893px

>>33644673

>he shoots cheap revolvers.

File: 2016-07-30 08.23.23.jpg (571KB, 2584x1934px) Image search: [Google]

571KB, 2584x1934px

My wife loves hers.

>>33644643
> never malfunctions

8/10 , made me respond

>>33651703
subtle

>>33649493
Do you seriously OP is going to be getting shoot outs?
>>33650433
I bet you can carry anything under those folds
>>33650601
Some people aren't bitches
>>33650995
The I'm sure the .005 second difference is negligible

>>33650756
America's wang.

>>33652638

Kek, thats actually mine now, she grabbed a ruger lcr in 22lr

>>33644643
Those small J frames take quite a bit of practice and experience to use efficiently. The recoil is sharp and anything past 7 yards starts to take some decent skill to put rounds accurately on target. They're easy to carry and will definitely get the job done, it's just not optimal. I have some buddies who are older shooters who have been in the game for along time ,and they carry them.

>>33653197
Unless it's a single action and then it's point and shoot.

You can jerk, you can compensate recoil, hold it wrong, but it doesn't matter, the trigger is just too good to miss anything. If sights aligned when you slightly increase pressure on the trigger, hammer drops before you can fuck it up.

>>33652673
>The I'm sure the .005 second difference is negligible
That's probably because you're an idiot. Who said anything about splits between shots? Trigger quality mainly dictates people's ability to be accurate with a given gun.

How come every time I come on k people are always fighting and no one is ever answering OP's question?

>>33644643
It's a great choice if you are willing to practice with it. Get some laser grips, too because the sights suck.

Alternately, I would look for a performance center model or pro series that has the dovetailed sights. Or a kimber k6s which gives you good sights nad one more round.

I have a 3" model 60 pro in 357 coming monday to carry for outdoorsy shit.

>Just got back from the range where a revolver was needing to go around two or three times to set off the primers.

How much do you want to bet that the person having these problems either put in a lighter mainspring or messed with the mainspring tension on his revolver in order to try and lighten the trigger?

>Malfunction free my ass. When a revolver goes down it goes down hard.

The OP was talking about "never malfunctions," he was obviously referring to all of the things that hang up autoloaders--failure to feed, failure to eject, double-feeding, failure to go into battery, etc.

>there are a LOT of autoloaders in the same size/weight/boom level that will perform at least as well

It's hard to beat a J-frame for pocket carry. The Glock 43, Shield, and XDS are too large for anything other than cargo pants, and the LCP doesn't meet the FBI minimums for penetration with most self-defense ammo.

Also, I'm surprised this has not been posted yet:

http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/revolver-ballistics-test/

They have results from both 2'' and 4'' barrels. The performance of .38 Special out of a snubnose is actually far better than what most people give it credit for thanks to advances in bullet tech. It actually did better than both .45 ACP and .40 did in the autoloader ballistic tests.