So I got my Toyota Camry first gun and now I'm looking to

Get a .357, you can blast .38 specials through it.

>>34853630
>snub

Just get a .38 Special

>>34853630
You can shop around for an old S&W but they're a bit pricey

>>34853664
Why? Don't they make modern ones?

Or do they no longer make those walnut handled ones in every 80's cop movie ever?

>>34853639
This nothing beats a gun that can shoot two different calibers.

>>34853687
They do make modern ones but they're going to have a Hillary hole drilled in the frame. Personally it's what keeps me from buying new manufacture S&W

>>34853707
w-what's a Hillary hole?

File: 55.jpg (339KB, 1232x816px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 1232x816px

>>34853639
You can find an old model 60 that will work well, you just won't want to shoot 357 out of it because .357 sucks ass out of a gun that small. You need at least a K frame for .357 to become tolerable (My 19-2 related). My buddy just bought a 36 to complement his 60 that is also pretty bad ass

>>34853687
Newer Smiths have the aforementioned lock that stands a chance of breaking and locking the whole gun up, not to mention the simple fact it was a caving in to anti-gun activists. Also the older guns have better fit and finish thanks to a better attention to detail. Plus the new ones lack the 70s era beat cop/detective aesthetic.

>>34853760
Gotcha, fuck, so how much more expensive are they? Looks like modern ones are around $700-$900

>>34853630
You want to buy either a Ruger or a Smith and Wesson. Both are great; do not consider anyone else. Is weight an issue? If weight is a serious consideration, get an alloy-framed gun. If not, get a steel-framed gun.

Specific recommendations:

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/products/sp101/specSheets/5719.html

OR

https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-66-combat-magnum

The Ruger is smaller, lighter, and less expensive. The Smith and Wesson is larger but holds one more shot and also has a full-length ejector rod. Neither will fail you as long as you exercise due diligence.

>>34853740
its a trigger lock in the frame of the S&W revolvers under .44 cal. S&W pussied out under Clinton and voluntarily added them (much to the chagrin of everyone) to their revolvers. Problem is occasionally the recoil can cause the lock to engage and prevent you from continuing to fire which negates the worth of dropping 700 bucks, or any money for that matter, on an EDC.

>>34853630
Model 19 or 66 SW

>>34853760
This right here is the Pinnacle of SW .357. Beautiful gun anon

File: dod-still02.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>34853781
>that Ruger handle

File: m206.jpg (84KB, 745x451px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 745x451px

Get a cheap beater anon and if you find you like wheelgatology you can look into getting something more refined.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Revolvers/BI.aspx?Keywords=m206&NoReserve=1&Condition=2&Sort=4

Read this so you know how to inspect a revolver before you buy one of these cheap guns. They are cheap because QC is spotty. You can get a good one but you need to know how to check it.

http://www.thesixgunjournal.net/a-revolver-buyers-checklist/

God speed anon.

File: sw986.jpg (23KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x500px

Like this one, holy crap it's beautiful

>>34853863
oh wait it's 9mm, nvm

File: Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan.jpg (330KB, 3000x1651px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 3000x1651px

>>34853630
>38 or .357?

Not going straight to .454 is a mistake anon.

>>34853779
Something you should consider is that the advice to "get a pre-lock S&W" is akin to "get a Mosin to start shooting," in that it was valid advice years ago but is inadvisable now due to the way market trends have developed. 10-20 years ago, you could get a nice pre-lock gun for much less than a new one due to everyone dropping revolvers for LE use. This is no longer the case due to collectors massively inflating the prices on pre-lock guns + the advice to "get a pre-lock S&W" becoming a standard mantra--buying a pre-lock gun will ALWAYS cost you more than a new one unless it's a rust bucket, parts only, or bubba'd.

The locks suck from an aesthetic standpoint, but they are only a serious problem in the really small, really lightweight guns shooting magnum cartridges.

Also, the newer guns have smaller clearances and tighter tolerances than older ones, which in turn translates to better muzzle velocity than older ones. See:

http://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/revolver-velocity-vs-barrel-length/

AND

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=102

>The below velocities are offered so that you can see what guns/barrel lengths give what velocities with this new 357 mag. ammo. You'll notice that new S&W revolvers with short barrels are often shooting faster than older S&W revolvers with longer barrels. The new S&W revolvers are very good and are made with equipment that makes them more consistent and faster than the S&W revolvers of yesteryear.

>>34853863
>>34853883
oh but they make a .357 version, wishlist

File: Fitz2.jpg (135KB, 1024x789px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1024x789px

>>34853862

Buy this cheap fucker and then cut it up into a Fitz special.

File: Ruger GP100 .44spl.jpg (130KB, 1350x900px)

130KB, 1350x900px

>>34853888

Trips says yes.

Also pic related is unfluted sex in .44spl.

File: ladysmith.jpg (33KB, 529x400px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 529x400px

Why does the Ladysmith have to look so damn good?

File: 58.jpg (307KB, 1232x816px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 1232x816px

>>34853899
>This is no longer the case
Depends on where you look, my pinned and recessed 19-2 I got for $450

File: PART_1501358082819.jpg (102KB, 580x435px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 580x435px

>>34854018
Then my buddy got his flat latch 36 for 225 at a pawn shop

>>34854018
And you can wear it out if you shoot too many magnum loads....

http://www.gunblast.com/Butch_MagnumLoads.htm

Buy a pre-lock K-frame if you want sexy aesthetics. Buy something of new manufacture if you want a shooter that can handle plenty of magnum loads.

>>34853783
You mean that incredibly rare and undocumented issue that is easily mitigated by removing the locking mechanism?

Just get a Taurus, OP.
There's no need to spend a shit ton on a name like S&W or Ruger. Taurus actually makes VERY solid revolvers.

>>34854359
>buying a pistol only to remove parts o make it workable
What are you? A Glockfag?

>>34853888
YA, ummmm. I would do bad things for that.

>>34854017
I almost bought one.... The fagot at the counter talked me out of it. It was way better then the other options they had at the time.

>>34855638
>rare and undocumented
>only need to remove parts if you're legitimately terrified of unfounded speculation

I didn't say it was perfect, just that it's a pretty stupid gripe nogunz faggots like yourself baselessly perpetuate.

>>34853630
Have I got the deal for you pedro
http://tsswarehouse.com/shop/ruger-sp101-357-mag-ltd-ed-revolver-2-25-barrel-stainless-finish-titanium-nitride-hammer-trigger-rubber-grip-ruger-5781/

>>34856235
So spend $50 more than the standard sp101 because the trigger and hammer have been blinged out?

That's not a deal, and it looms like shit.

File: 1266.jpg (310KB, 800x571px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 800x571px

>>34853630

While we're talking revolvers, I'm really tempted to grab an old Webley Mark 4 for around 300-400 bucks.

Are they good guns outside the sweet aesthetics and the break top design? I'm sorta hesitant because they take .38S&W. But I love the look so much.

File: webley 4.jpg (69KB, 926x522px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 926x522px

>>34856835
Forgot a pic

File: Webley_short1.jpg (92KB, 1536x1024px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1536x1024px

>>34856846
Looking for one of these?

>>34854359
Nigger, its common as fuck in airweight/scandium in .357, and I've personally seen it happen on a 638. No matter what, an active safety should never interfere with proper functioning.

No lock ever

>>34856908
No, I rather like the longer barreled ones. But I've never shot one before, just seen them shot and I really like the way they look. DESU I've never shot .38S&W, just .38 special but I imagine its pretty similar in feel. I just don't know if they're good overall guns or not.

>>34854359
>undocumented

Took me about 1.8 seconds to find documentation. And it's not one of their scandium pieces of shit either it's a full on 686.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/01/robert-farago/revolvers-can-fail-smith-wesson-performance-center-686-locks-up/

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/01/robert-farago/confirmed-smith-wesson-686-internal-lock-failed/

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/01/robert-farago/why-im-selling-my-new-smith-wesson-686-for-an-old-smith-wesson-686/

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/02/robert-farago/more-proof-that-yes-a-smith-wesson-revolver-lock-failed/

>>34856835

Fun gun, historically interesting, weak ass rounds.

File: Webley bayonet.jpg (197KB, 1872x1053px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 1872x1053px

>>34856846
Needs more stabby stabby.

>>34853783
>gun part has shit design
>this is somehow the politician's fault and not the manufacturer's

File: 171.jpg (451KB, 1643x1089px) Image search: [Google]

451KB, 1643x1089px

>>34859721
It was the politician's fault for the pressure to do so, and Smith's fault for giving in. Both are to blame which is why if you're gonna buy a Smith, get an old one used so you aren't supporting their recent political decisions.

>>34859908
If you buy used it doesn't matter if it has the hole or not. S&W isn't getting paid twice for that gun. I refuse to buy new or used hole guns because 1) they are fuck ugly and ruin the aesthetics of any gun they are on 2) It's like admitting I can't be trusted with a gun that doesn't have "for the children" features.

File: 191.jpg (322KB, 1724x1142px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1724x1142px

>>34859928
I won't argue against that. I have not bought a Smith new, only used, and I won't buy a lock gun.

File: images.duckduckgo.com.jpg (1MB, 3456x2304px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3456x2304px

>>34859975
Digging the victory 22 anon.

>>34853630
I'd go with 38SPL, 357 is not very fun to shoot out of a light snub and 38+p defensive ammo can work pretty solid. Honestly go rent one at a range and see if you care between, if 357 fits your bill go for it.

SW or Ruger are both solid options, I really love the LCR for the scifi stylings and pocket carry it but the 442 or 642 are comparable and have a classier look.

Is manurhin overrated these days? I hear that the new 73s aren't the same as the old ones since being bought out.

>>34860454
No idea. As far as I know no one is importing new Manhurins into the US so there's no reason for us burgers to keep up to date with them.

>>34854018
I had the chance to buy a TRG42 for $1200 once. "Where you look" and searching long and hard and getting a lucky break because shipment came in or some guy didn't know what he had aren't the same

>>34854374
Whats that Mcpaycheck look like that it prompts you to say Ruger and S&W cost a lot? Rugers whole reputation is built on being an affordable workhorse and S&W has been cranking out guns forever so the market is pretty good if your aren't buying a NIB performance center gun. Any gunshow or pawnshop should have a dozen model 10s, a few GP100s and at least a security six with the odd colt trooper

>>34856835
I don't know shit about the those specifically but since I highly doubt it's gonna be a serious use gun, who gives a shit. I have two guns that serve Amy serious purpose, everything else I have is for fun or because I thought it was neat and that is what a lot of people especially on /k/ fail to see (partly due to poorfags and gearqueers)

.38S&W is a powder puff and you can get it for under .50 cpr so have at it man.

>>34853630
be cool and get a charter arms bulldog in .44 special
shoot at young women in new your city like a real hero

File: 164.jpg (689KB, 1971x1305px) Image search: [Google]

689KB, 1971x1305px

>>34860413
>victory
No... nooo...

The majority of these I have a problem with due to their size

I feel like once you're at or above a 3" barrel it kind of defeats the purpose

>>34853783
Is that why everyone gets mad about it? I just thought it was autistic whining