Smith & Wesson Models 40, 42, 640, 940, 442, 642, 340Sc, 342Ti and 340PD

The Smith & Wesson Model 640 Centennial is easily the most recommended variant of the J-frame line if the Internet counts for anything in gun selection. In 2006, the best selling firearm offered by Smith & Wesson was the Model 642, the Airweight version of the 640. It is often called hammerless which is a misnomer of sorts because it actually does have a hammer; its just completely enclosed within the frame, making the revolver double action only (DAO). It is a smooth, snag-free design which makes it ideal for pocket carry. Jim Supica, author of The Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson, said of the 642 that it was possibly the finest pocket revolver ever made.

One might jump to the conclusion that the hammerless design is a new thing brought about by our litigious society, but in fact, the hammerless design is quite old. Smith and Wesson introduced the Safety Hammerless .38 S&W in 1887. This gun was often called The Lemon Squeezer because it had a grip safety on the back strap. One had to squeeze the grip in order to fire the gun. In 1888 they produced a few of the .32 S&W Safety Hammerless pistols with 2 barrels. It was nicknamed the Bicycle Gun and may be S&Ws first production snubnose, but the Bicycle Gun is very rare. The Safety Hammerless pistols were top-break designs.

In 1952, Smith & Wesson applied the concept of the Safety Hammerless to the J-frame Chiefs Special and got the Centennial. The gun was named in honor of the company’s 100th birthday. In 1957, when the switch was made from named models to numbered models, the Centennial became the Model 40. Also in 1952, an Airweight Centennial was introduced which became the Model 42. Some 37 specimens of the Model 42 were built with aluminum alloy cylinders, but the rest had steel cylinders. These two models were produced from 1952 to 1974.

In 1990, the Centennial was re-introduced but in stainless steel and without the grip safety as the Model 640. It was a .38 Special. In 1996 the 640-1 in .357 Magnum was offered. Airweight versions, Models 442 (blued) and 642 (stainless) were also brought to market. As noted earlier, the Model 642 has been enormously successful.

As the centuries changed, Smith & Wesson worked in exotic space-age metals such as titanium and scandium to make the guns even lighter, and yet strong enough to chamber the .357 Magnum cartridge. While it still eludes me why anyone would want to fire .357 in an 11 ounce gun, I guess some folks do it. The new metallurgy produced models such as the 340Sc, the 342Ti and the 340PD.

Between 1991 and 1998, S&W produced the Model 940, a stainless Centennial chambered in 9mm. A group of three hundred were built in the .356 TSW caliber (good luck finding ammo for that one), and a prototype Model 942 Airweight in 9mm was built but did not go into production.

The design is a winner. One of the J-frames greatest assets, its ease of carry, is further enhanced by the snag-free concealed hammer design. But do you lose anything by going to the double-action-only format?

DAO versus DA/SA

Ill admit to a preference for exposed hammer revolvers. I don’t know why really. Maybe its the traditionalist in me. Maybe its because I like to have the option to fire single action if I want to. Single action fire is generally thought to be more accurate than double action. When target shooting and hunting, people prefer to manually cock the hammer to get that wonderful crisp 1 lb. trigger that a good revolver firing single action can give you. The sights just move around less when you don’t have to apply the force needed to cock the hammer.

On the other hand, people who carry a revolver for self defense should practice almost exclusively for double action fire, as if the single action option wasn’t even there. Why? Because there are almost no situations in which single action fire is appropriate in self defense. Most self defense situations unfold rapidly. There isn’t time to thumb cock a revolver and take careful aim in the way one would do while target shooting. A cocked revolver is dangerous in the adrenaline dump of a lethal force encounter. The trigger is just too light. Its too easy to fire when you don’t mean to. There was a well-publicized case in Miami several years back in which a police officer accidentally shot a suspect he was holding at gunpoint with a cocked revolver. The suspect was killed and the officer faced a lengthy court process which ultimately destroyed his career. In a nervous situation, a cocked revolver is dangerous. When you’re really nervous or scared, the heavy double action trigger pull is an asset rather than a liability. I can hear you say, Keep your finger off the trigger until you’re ready to fire, and that’s true, but we also know that people don’t always do what they’re supposed to do in the stress of a deadly encounter. The police officer in Miami is a good example. I’m sure he had heard the rules. A firm double action trigger can be a welcome piece of insurance against an accidental discharge. With the DAO Centennial, manual cocking isn’t possible, nor is it possible to be accused of negligently cocking the hammer in a civil action which could follow a self defense shooting.

Is there a case to be made for the DA/SA? A little imagination can generate scenarios in which single action fire could be an asset: a hostage situation, a survival situation in which a careful shot on a game animal might make the difference between living and starving, some kind of broken field situation in which there is an active threat but it is further away than a few yards. Admittedly, these all fall into the one-in-a-million category, but if its possible, it could happen.

As we have often seen before, all handguns are studies in compromise. For a self defense revolver, the Centennial seems to be an acceptable trade-off. Single action fire is sacrificed for superb, snag-free conceal-ability and the elimination of certain liabilities.

Reactions to the Smith & Wesson Model 640

The gun pictured here is the Model 640-3. It is the stainless steel .357 Magnum version with the integral lock. It is a beefy, solid snubby that balances well in your hand. With its solid construction and 23 ounces of weight, it will handle the hottest ammo without tearing your arm off. The sights are the standard notch type that are characteristic of this class of guns. They’re not great and I don’t see them too well, but they don’t snag and this is a close-range gun. The smooth organic contours of the 640 make it a superb concealed carry gun. It’s a bit heavy for pants pocket carry. If you like the Centennial but expect to do a lot of pocket carry, I would recommend the Airweight version, the Model 642 in .38 Special +p. If you like really hot ammo and/or intend to carry mostly in holsters and fanny packs, the heavier 640 is the ticket. I’m not sure about the dynamics of it, but the all-stainless J-frames seem to have better triggers NIB than the Airweights and AirLites do. The all-stainless versions are shooters. You can do extended range sessions or even matches (if you’re brave) with these without reducing your hand to a bloody pulp. It seems that most times I have watched people shoot Airweights and Airlites, they do about 15-20 rounds and quit because it’s uncomfortable. You can do a couple hundred rounds in the stainless guns and enjoy it. They’re also more controllable for rapid strings of fire because of their weight.

While I think the Model 60-15 remains my favorite tactical J-frame for it’s superior ballistics, sights, and ejector rod, the Model 640 is an easier gun to carry and has much to commend it. It is compact, powerful, robust, snag-free, and endowed with the legendary reliability of the Model 60 family of revolvers.

By Dan Smith – genitron.com

I’m relatively new to revolvers. Being a semi-automatic man for many years, I only have one revolver in my gun collection. That’s been a Smith & Wesson Model 66 .357 Magnum service revolver. Not a small gun, and with reasonable weight, this gun has none-the-less been a joy to shoot at the range, being quite capable of absorbing the power of a .357 Magnum round. This would be a nice home defense gun, and would be a reliable piece to have for camping or hiking. But, I wouldn’t consider it a good concealed carry weapon for self-defense. It’s just too big.

And my focus here is on self-defense. I’m not a hunter, so you won’t see me reviewing the likes of the Smith & Wesson Model 500 for instance. Nor will I probably ever review a .480 Ruger or .454 Casull model. These are big hunting guns, and I’ll let others review those models. So, for my first review of a revolver for self-defense, I jumped right into it and acquired the Smith & Wesson Airweight 360PD super-lightweight revolver.

Introduced in 2002, this small, lightweight revolver is built from Smith & Wesson’s “J” frame design which has a lineage that goes all the way back to 1950 with the introduction of their Model 36 “Chiefs Special”. The key feature of this “J” frame model is the use of exotic alloys in its frame and cylinder construction, producing one of the lightest revolvers on the market.

Specifications –

Caliber: .357 Magnum, .38 Special +P, .38 Special

Action: revolving chamber

Length: 6.375 in

Width: 1.312 in

Height: 4.25 in

Cylinder Capacity: 5 rounds

Barrel Length: 1.875 in

Rifling: 5-grooves, RH twist

Trigger: double-action

Sights: red ramp front, fixed notch rear

Weight Empty: 11.3 oz

Weight Loaded: 13.7oz

Features –
Titanium cylinder.
Scandium/aluminum alloy frame.
Black anodized finish.
Stainless steel barrel tube.
Hogue Bantam Monogrip.

Click HERE to see the full line of Smith & Wesson revolvers.

Design Notes –

The frame of the 360PD is constructed from a scandium reinforced aluminum alloy. Scandium, a novel alloying element for aluminum, is mined and processed in Zhovti Vody, Ukraine, the only primary scandium mine in operation in the world. The key properties of this alloy are light weight, superior strength and good resistance to corrosion. The frame is topped off with a smooth black anodized finish.

The titanium cylinder weighs just 60% of what a similar stainless steel cylinder weighs and yet is able to withstand the same operating pressures. As with all “J” frame designs, this is a swing-out cylinder with an axial pin driven star extractor. The extractor pin rests in a slot in the bottom of the barrel shroud when the cylinder is closed.

The barrel is a hybrid construction consisting of a scandium/aluminum alloy shroud keyed into the frame with a metal tab, and a stainless steel barrel tube which is screwed into the frame with a special tool, holding the shroud in place.

The grip is a Hogue Bantam Monogrip, a one-piece wrap-around construction that is held into place by being pressed into a stock pin that extrudes from both sides of the frame near the base of the butt.

The Caliber –

The .38 Special cartridge was developed by Smith & Wesson and was introduced with its Military & Police Model revolver in 1899. It is considered one of the best-balanced, all-round handgun cartridges ever designed. It is also one of the most accurate and very widely used for match shooting. This subsonic round is available with bullet weights ranging from 95 to 200 grains.

The .357 Magnum cartridge was introduced in 1935 by Smith & Wesson for its heavy-frame revolver. Ammunition was developed by Winchester in cooperation with Smith & Wesson using a lengthened and strengthened version of the .38 Special case. While it has less power than .44 Magnum, it compares favorably to the .45 ACP, but with better armor penetration. Today factories offer over fifty different loadings in this caliber. Bullet weights range from 110 to 200 grains with an average muzzle energy exceeding 500 ft-lbs.

The following data set is based on standard factory loaded cartridges fired from a 4″ barrel, listed by weight, brand, type and muzzle velocity. This is only a very small sample of what is available.

.38 Special

123 grain Norma FMJ : 886 Feet Per Second
132 grain PMC FMJ : 841 Feet Per Second
158 grain MagTech SJHP : 890 Feet Per Second
125 grain Federal JSP+P : 900 Feet Per Second
158 grain CCI-Speer FMJ+P : 900 Feet Per Second

.357 Magnum

125 grain Remington JHP : 1220 Feet Per Second
158 grain Norma FMJ : 1214 Feet Per Second
180 grain Winchester JHP : 1180 Feet Per Second

Handgun Observations –

I should first note that in the description of the .357 Magnum cartridge above I mention a bullet weight range that goes as low as 110 grains. You will notice that engraved on the right side of the 360PD barrel is the statement “NO LESS THAN 120 GR BULLET”. This statement refers to .357 Magnum rounds only, not .38 Special rounds, and there is an interesting reason for this restriction. Magnum bullets that weigh less than 120 grains will exit their cartridge before the cartridge charge has a chance to completely burn. This charge will leak out onto the cylinder and frame while still burning, causing damaging oxidation to the gun’s exotic materials over time.

My initial observation of the 360PD was that the grip was obviously too small. But, I based this observation on my experience with many sub-compact semi-automatics whose standard grips are usually just shortened. Those grips are typically fat and straight as they house the gun’s ammo, and the grip stance usually leaves the little finger hanging. The grip on the 360PD though, has a small diameter and is ergonomically curved to fit deep within the palm of the hand. All of your fingers wrap fully around the grip and make good contact, including the little finger.

The 360PD’s sister, the 340PD, is basically the same revolver but with a spurless hammer, making the 340PD a double-action-only revolver. I chose the 360PD for its ability to fire in both double-action and single-action modes. Although the spurless hammer was designed to minimize snagging while being carried concealed, after a month of carrying the 360PD in-the-waistband I found no problems with the exposed hammer spur. In fact, when drawing the gun I found my thumb falling naturally next to the hammer spur, not only protecting it from snags but also staging my thumb for quick cocking during the draw for single-action firing.

I was surprisingly pleased with this with this little 5-round revolver. In my opinion it is quite adequate as a self-defense weapon. Having carried it for a full month, I am very comfortable with it, and now include it in my cache of weapons that I regularly use for concealed carry. I have a new appreciation for revolvers.

One note about cleaning Although the black anodized frame cleans easily, as well as the stainless steel barrel, I found it extremely difficult to remove gunshot residue from the somewhat porous surface of the titanium cylinder. I tried every gun solvent and cleaner I had with no success. What finally worked for me came from my car cleaning supplies. A small dab of magnesium and aluminum rim polish lifted the stains right off the cylinder.

Shooting –

With a barrel length under two inches and a sight radius under four inches, it was difficult for me to even hit a small target at 25 yards. Those with a more steady hand and sharper vision my have better luck than I had. But from my perspective, I consider this gun a short range weapon, and I limited my range tests to only 7 yards. Although the gun is rated for .357 Magnum rounds, after shooting just one box of fifty 125 grain rounds through the 360PD, the .357 Magnum recoil left me with a very sore wrist. Surprisingly, my palm and grip remained unaffected, which says a lot about the small Hogue Bantam grip. Firing .38 Special standard and +P rounds through the 360PD, on the other hand was quite an enjoyable experience. I have opted to stay with .38 Special+P rounds when carrying this weapon.

In double-action mode the trigger pull reaches a peak of 15.5 pounds at the mid point of its 3/4 inch of travel. It then drops to 4.5 pounds where it breaks to fire during the last 1/8 inch of travel. Short of the at-rest hammer block there is no other safety. In single-action mode when the hammer is drawn, the trigger moves all the way back to that final 1/8 inch of travel, where it sets, requiring just a slight 4.5 pound pull to fire the weapon.

Often I found I was able to pull through the 15.5 pound double-action travel, and then stop just short of the 4.5 pound break, holding to take aim just before firing. But occasionally I would un-intentionally pull through, prematurely firing the gun. Trying to pull straight through the 15.5 pound travel non-stop to fire the gun brought the worst results. In practice I found that the best control and accuracy for me resulted from drawing the hammer manually to single-action mode before firing.

This article is used by permission of the author
Visit his site. It’s a wealth of information

By Stephen A. Camp

I recently traded into a couple of S&W revolvers. One is considerably older than the other but the newer one (subject of this thread) has neither MIM parts nor that darned lock. It still has the recognizable Smith & Wesson “look” that I prefer.

The Gun

It is a vanilla little thing chambered for .38 Special. It is a Model 64-3. “Why buy the darned thing in .38 when you can get it in .357 in the Model 65?” is commonly asked about now
and it’s a reasonable question. My answer is three-fold and hopefully reasonable:

1. I still believe that with placement and “good” ammunition, the .38 is capable of doing what needs to be done in a self-protection scenario.

2. Fun is way toward the top of my list in shooting. The .38 Model 64 provides that.

3. Price; it was right.

Looking at the ratchet, hand, and area around the firing pin hole, the gun does not appear to have been fired much at all. The action was smooth and timing was more than satisfactory. The gun has no dings or scratches and looked new…although it had been fired a small amount.

The revolver was cleaned and something told me to remove the side plate. I’m glad I did as there was a large amount of black grease in the gun. All of the internals came out and were cleaned. A tiny bit of careful polishing here and there and a once over with Militec and I reassembled. The action was smoother and more importantly, the gun was clean.

Shooting

I fired 250 rounds of assorted factory .38 Special ammunition through the little S&W. Distances were 7, 10, 15, and 25 yards for groups and a bit farther (35 yards or so) at fired shotgun hulls on the berm.

The two high shots out of the group were my fault. My eyes simply don’t see the light-colored stainless front sight and if I’m not careful, I unconsciously keep raising it to make it more visible.

I also fired a few of my usual “carry load” through this revolver which does not appear rated for +P use. It will be shot some with it now and again, but will be shot mainly with standard velocity/standard pressure ammo, be it factory or handload.

Ammunition

I also fired the gun over the chronograph with what .38 ammo I could lay my hands on quickly. Each average velocity listed as well as other data is based on ten shots fired approximately 10′ from the chronograph screens.

*Corbon 115-gr. JHP +P+:
Average Velocity: 1349 ft/sec
Extreme Spread: 111 ft/sec
Std. Deviation: 39 ft/sec

*This ammunition is no longer produced by Corbon. It uses a Sierra 9mm 115-gr. Power Jacket Hollow Point. This load hits nearly 1200 ft/sec from my Model 642 and I personally consider it too hot for alloy J-frame use. Concerned for cracked forcing cones, I do not shoot it in J-frames at all.

Magtech 125-gr. Guardian Gold +P:
Average Velocity: 927
Extreme Spread: 48
Std. Deviation: 14

Federal American Eagle 130-gr. FMJ:
Average Velocity: 802
Extreme Spread: 50
Std. Deviation: 15

Federal 147-gr. Hydrashok +P+:
Average Velocity: 911
Extreme Spread: 50
Std. Deviation: 14

Remington 158-gr. LSWCHP +P:
Average Velocity: 883
Extreme Spread: 18
Std. Deviation: 9

Observations

I like it even though it might not be a majority’s choice. It is extremely easy to shoot with each load fired today. None had what I’d call excessive recoil; part of that may be due to my usually shooting my Model 642. I was pleased to see that the extra barrel length enhanced the velocity of my favored LSWCHP load by approximately 10% over my J-frame’s 1 7/8″ barrel; that gun averages right at 800 ft/sec using the same ammunition (same lot #).

One-handed shooting was not difficult at all and shooting falling plates at 10 yards was just plain fun. The previously-mentioned shotgun shells were knocked all over the berm about 4 times out of each six shots; I’ll shoot the little thing until that average is better. I still believe “placement is power” for “serious” matters and think it’s more fun to hit than to miss.

For a carry gun, I still prefer the Model 642 as I normally use a pocket holster. That said, this one will be loaded from now on and serve as a house gun, and as a belt gun now and then.

It’s a neat little .38 and a revolver that can often be had at considerable savings over the .357 in the same condition if buying used.

Best.

By Mike Guffey

The Colt Detective Special was an American DA/SA revolver first produced in 1927 as a shortened version of the Police Positive Special handgun. It was designed for ease of carry and concealment. It proved very popular and over 1.5 million were produced in several models by the time production finally ended in 1986. Though originally offered in .32 caliber, the most common of the Colt Detective Specials were chambered for the .38 Special cartridge fed from a 6-shot cylinder and had a 2-inch barrel. (Some models with 3-inch barrels can also be found.) It is a classic-style, swing out cylinder, double action compact revolver with fixed blade front sight and notch-style rear sights and full lenght ejector rod. The cylinder rotates clockwise, unlike Smith & Wesson revolvers. The Detective Special models were also available in other calibers.

The gun first became popular [in 1926] after J. H. FitzGerald, a Colt shooter, began to cut the Police Positive guns down to two inches for use as belly guns. In fact, FitzGerald went even further and bobbed the hammerspurs and cut out the front of the trigger guards in an attempt to make a real speed gun. They called them FitzGerald Specials, and many savvy gunmen preferred them for fighting guns.

– Jim Wilson, writing in the May, 2003, “Shooting Times:

The original square butt configuration was the most common revolver shown in detective movies during the late 20’s through the early 50’s though the first issue (generation) was only manufactured for about 10 years. It had an unshrouded ejector rod housing which gave it a distinct and unmistakable silouette with its square butt. The round butt was first produced in 1933 and the extractor was shortened and shrouded about 1958. Later issues of this handgun had a less distinct appearance. In all, there were four generations of the Detective Special by the time production ended. There are many of these fine revolvers still in service today, though, sadly, Colt no longer caters to the concealable snubby or the revolver market.

Colts Detective Special is still considered by many to be one of the finest snubbies ever made.

The Most Common Question About Older 2″ Snubbies

(As received in e-mail to this site)
Q: Is it safe to use +P ammunition in my classic Colt not rated for it?

A: The revolver was never rated for this higher power ammunition by Colt, not even the late production models. Anecdotal information suggests that current gunsmiths will say, “Sure, go ahead. No problem.” This, of course, is an easily denied statement since there is nothing in Colt’s literature to confirm or deny this position.

AHEM! While it may be that using +P is not likely to cause a kaBOOM! event, there are other types of damage which may occur. And this type of failure could be caused by a combination of other problems such as cartridge case failure or a bullet lodged in the barrel occuring at the same time high power ammo is used.

Q: Wait, wait, wait. A kaBOOM! event?

A: A kaBOOM! (kB!) event is a catastrophic failure of a firearm when it is fired, an explosion sending damage and debris flying in all directions. There are no statistics available on such problems with any but Glock pistols and that is somewhat of an apples/oranges situation.

Here are the important issues:

1. 1. There is always a possibility a firearm suffers from unrecognized damage by the current or previous owner which may have occurred from the use of high power, hot, handloads or use of ammunition loads for which it is not rated. Cracks and metal fatigue can be cumulative and be unrecognizable by the naked eye. Such conditions amount to an accident waiting to happen.
   2. The blast of +P ammo is noticably greater than that of .38 Special loads. This means if it is fired indoors in a self-defense situation two problems will probably occur. The volume of the blast will temporarily (perhaps permanently) damage your hearing. If fired in a darkened room, the blast will temporarily impair your night adjusted vision.

The Long and Short of It

The use of ammo for which this model firearm (or any firearm) has not been rated is not recommended. It amounts to abuse of the gun and will cancel or exempt any potential liability which its manufacturer might otherwise have had. This is true of factory or hand loads.

So here are your safe options regarding using +P ammo in a revolver with a 2″ barrel: (1) Get a current production S&W LadySmith, (2) Get another late production model Colt or S&W or use one rated for .357 Magnum, (3) Obtain another inexpensive 2″ barrel revolver such as the Taurus Model 85 or a Rossi with a 2″ barrel.

Another Point of View on +P in the D-frame Colts:

“I have a comment regarding the use of +P ammo in .38 caliber Detective Specials. According to the owners manual that came with my .38 Special Diamondback, purchased in the early 1980s, D-frame Colt revolvers, specifically including the Detective Special, can safely use +P ammo, subject to certain limitations. The manual recommends that steel frame guns, e.g. the Detective Special, Police Positive and Diamondback, should be inspected by a gunsmith after firing 2,000 to 3,000 rounds of +P. For alloy frame guns such as the Agent, Viper or Cobra, the recommended number of rounds between inspections is 1,000. I certainly would be hesitant to use any +P rounds in a first or second issue weapon, but assuming that there were no changes in the Diamondback throughout its production life and I dont think there were Id think that any Detective Special made during that same timeframe would be suitable for limited firing of +P ammo. In my case, I usually shoot standard pressure ammo at the range, but keep a couple of speed loaders filled with +P rounds available should a serious situation arise. I have shot enough +P ammo through my Diamondback to know that the POA POI relationship is very close to that of standard pressure ammo.” — Dean Storm

This page is use by permission only from The Armed Citizen

A friend of mine and I have an ongoing debate about which snubby is uglier, the Centennial or the Bodyguard. The camel hump hammer shroud on the back of the Bodyguard’s frame, while eminently sensible, has never appealed to my eye. However, it is completely functional. The hammer shrouded Bodyguard, unlike the Centennial, remains snag-free for pocket carry while allowing for single-action fire. The hump also helps the Bodyguard to stay in position when carried in a pocket holster.

The Bodyguard is unusual in one way, in that it was introduced first in the Airweight version as the Bodyguard Airweight in 1955. It later became the Model 38 in 1957. The steel frame Bodyguard was introduced as the Model 49 Bodyguard in 1959. The original Bodyguard “Pre-Model 38” was built in the “four screw” configuration.

In 1985, the Model 649 was introduced. It was a stainless steel version of the Model 49, and it was built until 1996. In 1997 the Model 49 was discontinued in favor of the stainless Model 649 in .357 Magnum.

In 1989, The Model 638 Bodyguard Airweight Stainless was introduced. This was an aluminum alloy and stainless steel version of the original Model 38. Also in 1989, the Model 638-1 was produced. It is distinguished from the Model 638 because it as a 1/8″ sight width.

In 1996, the 638-2 was reintroduced on the “J-Magnum” frame. The J-Magnum frame is identical to the original J-frame except for the fact that it is 1/10″ longer, to accept the .357 Magnum cartridge. Even the .38 Special guns produced from this time forward are built on the J-Magnum frame.

In 1997, the Model 649-3 was introduced. This was a stainless steel Bodyguard chambered in .357 Magnum built on the J-Magnum frame.

From Notpurfect we hear:

“Despite its antiquated basic design, limited capacity, and unimpressive power, this might be among the most politically incorrect of all firearms. At least it would be, if more people were aware of its design, and mission. To the uninitiated, this is simply an oddly shaped, sort of freakish revolver. The hump backed model 49 fires the .38 Special cartridge from a 2” barrel, and has a capacity of only 5 rounds. It is really too expensive, and well made to qualify as a Saturday Night Special (whatever meaning that phrase may happen to have at the moment). Like most specialized devices, the strange appearance of the Model 49 is a reflection of being narrowly designed for a particular function. In the case of the model 49, the gun has been designed to be carried, and even fired, from inside of a pocket.” http://www.notpurfect.com/main/m49.html

Perhaps the most infamous photograph of a pistol from the Twentieth Century involves the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard. It was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1969. It is the picture of South Vietnamese General Nguyen Ngoc Loan shooting a Viet Cong captain named Bay Lop in the head. I hesitate to bring up this incident, but at the same time, it is impossible for me to chart the history of this hand gun without acknowledging this moment in history.

At the height of the Tet Offensive, the general executed Bay Lop who had been responsible for the deaths of many American and Vietnamese personnel. Photographer Eddie Adams snapped the picture at the moment that the bullet crashed through the prisoner’s brain. It should be noted that the photographer later became friends with the general and had great regret over the effect of the photo on the general’s life. Adams sent an apology to the general’s family at his death. His statement was “The general killed the Viet Cong; I killed the general with my camera.”

“Adams frequently offered a qualified defense of Loan’s infamous act. Within context, and given the inevitable fog of war, he would say, the killing was understandable, if not excusable. As historian Robert D. Schulzinger points out in A Time for War, the executed VC fighter “had killed some Saigon civilians, many of them relatives of police in the capital.” – Duncan Currie, “Photographs Do Lie”

Regardless of this tragic episode, the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard has rendered exemplary service for fifty years and remains a favorite to many in the pocket gun/backup class of self-defense weapons.

It has gotten so friggin hot that shorts and a t-shirt are about the only thing I can stand to wear. My preference is for a pair of cargo shorts with nice, deep pockets. In this mode of dress, the Airweight Model 637 is the perfect gun for concealed carry. My darling wife insisted on a set of Crimson Trace LaserGrips for it am I a lucky man or what? Her concealed carry permit is on the way, so I know Im going to have to buy another light snubby soon doesnt bother me a bit. I dont kick down doors for a living, and a five-shot snubby loaded with +p does the job just fine. The gun shop commandoes can rave about their 18-round magazines, but the fact of the Airweight Model 637 matter is that the five in the snubby is usually five more than I actually need. With a couple of speed-loaders in the little pocket in the front of the main pocket, loaded with Remington 129 grain +p, I am adequately armed. I dont worry a bit. I know I can shoot this little gun and ruin any bad guys day with it in a heartbeat.

I stopped by my favorite gun shop, Shooters Supply in Lyndon, Kentucky. My favorite salesperson there is Albert Lui. We always visit a long time whenever I stop by. Hes a member of the Kentucky Practical Defense League like I am and we have shot a lot of matches together. Like me, he loves the tricked-out 1911s for the match, but when I stopped by the shop to pick up a set of Hogue Monogrips for the Model 60, we got to talking about snubbies. I was packing the Model 637 in a pocket holster. Albert showed me the gun he was packing. With all of the cool guns that Shooters has to offer, (and they have a bunch) he was packing the Smith & Wesson Model 649 accessorized with a Barami Hip-Grip. This is an all-steel .357 Bodyguard. He had a local gunsmith slick-up the trigger and it was really nice. Quoting Albert, “It’s enough gun for me. I just don’t put myself in situations where I’m going to need more than five rounds.” Conceptual connections.

With the Crimson Trace LaserGrips, the snubby becomes a formidable weapons system. I took my darling bride and my eldest son to the range this week. She had the CT grips on the Model 60 and he was shooting the XD-9 Tactical equipped with an Insight X2 laser sight/tactical light combo. They both shot much tighter patterns using the lasers than they did with iron sights. I like them too.

A lot of folks like to say that the five-shot j-frames are obsolete. These are usually folks who are packing baby Glocks or Kahrs. Theyre wrong. The little j-frames are still the most easily concealed and comfortable to carry handguns of anything available today. The little Kahr’s and Kel-Tec’s are attractive in many ways. The Kel-Tec’s in particular are very concealable but they are a tad underpowered. Personally, I remain distrustful of the Kahr’s. Quite a few people simply prefer the simplicity and reliability of the revolver, and it can launch a really powerful round if you so choose.

One thing I notice is that you almost never find deals on these guns used. The people who have them hang onto them. They work. They do the job.

By Syd

Gunsmiths have told me that, even though it is thought to be OK to dry fire a revolver with empty chambers, it is better to have either empties or snap caps in the chambers for dry firing, especially if you plan to do a lot of it. I first bought a set of Triple-K plastic snap caps. They were puny and pathetic. They lasted about one cycle through my .357 Magnum before they shattered, literally. They also have another weakness: they are flat on the front, making them undesirable for reloading practice.

One of the more difficult aspects of handling a revolver is achieving a quick reload. Its something which should be practiced until the reload is smooth and swift. If you get a chance, watch a video of Jerry Miculek shooting, and notice how smooth and fast he reloads his revolver. Practice and multiple repetitions are essential to achieve real competence in this procedure. Not being Jerry Miculek, my reloads are the pits, and I wanted to practice them. I needed a durable dummy round that would stand up to heavy use, both in speedloader practice and dry fire.

If you have reloading equipment, it is possible to build dummy rounds with no primer or powder, but in my experience, these can become a management issue. Since they look so much like ammunition, they have to be marked with paint and kept separately so as to not be confused with the real thing. I have also found that the bullets in dummy ammo tend to work forward with repeated dry-fires, eventually rendering them unusable for practice. A-Zoom Practice Ammo is one solid piece of aluminum which is anodized with a burgundy color. The bullets dont come loose, and they are not easily confused with really ammo.

I discovered A-Zoom Practice Ammo Rounds while surfing around the web. A-Zoom snap-caps are precision CNC machined from solid aluminum to exact size, then hard anodized. This hard anodized surface provides for ultra-smooth functioning and long cycling life. The highly durable dry fire Dead Cap can take over three thousand dry fires while protecting the firing pin. The manufacturer states that A-Zoom snap caps last over 30 times longer than conventional plastic snap-caps. A-Zoom Snap Caps are available in over 130 sizes from 50BMG to 22 Hornet.

The .38 Special snap caps that I purchased are shaped like lead round-nose .38 Special ammunition so the practice reload with a speedloader is an excellent simulation for live ammunition. In short, the A-Zoom is a better snap cap. Especially if you practice dry fire and speedloader drills, I highly recommend them.

By Stephen A. Camp

Very common in gun shop discussions, shooting magazines and books, as well as on the Internet are incessant discussions on “which caliber is the best”. Also included will be questions and opinions on which load leads the pack for a given caliber. Some walk with extreme confidence as they have the latest version of this or that handgun and it’s loaded with “nuclear” ammunition. Besides, whatever “expert” they subscribe to has proclaimed that this combination is “best”, citing gelatin testing or whatever. Others look up “street stats” on how well or poorly a certain caliber/load has worked. Some simply trust the gun shop person’s decision on ammunition selection and walk out secure in the “fact” that they are now capable of protecting themselves with the “best’ ammunition money can buy.

I do believe that certain calibers and loads offer some advantages over others, but don’t really think it will always be a visibly distinct advantage and not the difference between daylight and dark that some would have us assume. (I’m speaking here of calibers ranging from .38 Special from a 4″ barrel, 9mm, and up. These have sufficient power to offer both adequate penetration and expansion from what I’ve seen.)

Some have concerns about serious lack of penetration. Opinions vary as to how much is enough. Some subscribe to the “two holes is better than one” theory and go with the deepest penetrators they can find, often .45 ball. Others want expansion but at least (10, 12, 14″, pick a number) of penetration. Very heated debates occur over such differences of opinion.

Here are my thoughts on the matter and I claim zero status as any kind of “expert”. Neither am I a physician or pathologist. I am a shooter and a hunter. Take it for what it’s worth and then you decide if there’s any merit in what follows.

Over-Penetration:

It is a concern, but one that is overrated in my view. So many shots fired in gunfights completely miss the intended recipients that I believe getting the hits in the first place should take higher priority. With FMJ or non-expanding loads, there certainly is the possibility of a bullet creating a through-and-through wound and possessing enough residual velocity to injure or kill another person. With most JHP’s or expanding loads, should the target’s torso actually be completely penetrated, the expanded bullet will have lost considerable speed. It will probably be less dangerous, but the heavy magnums like .41 and .44 could be exceptions. It is not unusual for pathologists to find expanded bullets inside the clothing near the exit wound when preparing the body for autopsy.

In his book, Gunshot Wounds, Dr. Vincent J.M. Di Maio reports that a 38-caliber LRN bullet requires at least 191 ft/sec to penetrate skin. He finds that the same bullet needs an average velocity of 280 ft/sec to penetrate two layers of skin and 6″ of muscle as this is the average velocity lost when such penetration’s occurred during testing. It seems reasonable that if we’re firing a 9mm, .38, or .357 expanding bullet that doesn’t expand, but still has around 300 ft/sec or so upon exiting the felon’s torso, it is possible for it to injure an innocent bystander.

In the field, I witnessed a friend shooting a 35-lb. javelina with 230-gr. .45 ACP Ranger SXT from a 5″ 1911. At his shot, the animal collapsed and sand flew behind it. Another buddy and I found the fully expanded bullet lying on top of the sand. This animal was shot broadside and is not as thick as an average adult human male. I’ve no doubt that had the expanded forty-five smacked another person that it would have raised a whelp, but I do not believe it would have injured anyone.

An officer under my command was required to shoot a felon. He hit the bad guy in the heart with a 9mm 124-gr. Hydrashok +P+. The bullet did not exit the body. Another officer I know was shot with a .40 180-gr. JHP from a Glock 22. It remained in his torso until surgically removed. Yet another officer was hit from the side with a .380 ACP 95-gr. FMJ. This bullet precipitated a gunfight. The bullet penetrated an arm, entered and traversed the heart/lung region, exited between the ribs and fully penetrated his other arm!

Believe it or not, the bullet traveled along the inside of his ribcage and did not damage anything vital! At the scene neither he nor I knew that and it was a pretty tense time waiting on the ambulance! I have no idea what residual velocity the 95-gr. bullet retained, but I’ll bet it was not much. Upon being shot, he returned a shot from his 9mm Hi Power, but missed the felon! Which bullet was more dangerous to other folks in the area? Obviously, the round that missed its intended target was.

It certainly remains possible that over-penetration can occur, but with expanding ammo I’m not sure how likely it is to be capable of inflicting serious bodily injury. Again, the FMJ or solid bullets will almost certainly be the worst offenders in this regard. Gunscribe, Massad Ayoob, once wrote that about seven out of ten .45 ACP 230-gr. FMJ bullets exit the average adult male torso. I suspect that 9mm FMJ in 115 to 124-gr. exits more often.

If an expanding bullet fails to fully mushroom, it should be slowed down and present less threat of over- penetration. Di Maio notes that in penetrating two layers of skin and 6″ of muscle, the 158-gr. LRN bullet lost velocity in the range of 214 to 337 ft/sec. The same weight/caliber SJHP lost 264 to 335 ft/sec. (Gunshot Wounds. Di Maio. Elsevier Science Publishing Company. P215.) He attributes this to the blunter shape of the expanding bullet when expansion does not occur.

Unless our target is naked or not wearing a shirt, coat, etc, there remains a chance that a bullet that does fully penetrate his torso might be captured in his clothing. Again, I think misses are far greater threats than over-penetrating bullets in most instances.

If you use .41 or .44 Magnum, I do think the chance of dangerous over penetration exists as quite a few of the expanding bullets are designed for deeper penetration for hunting applications. I’d look at defense loads from Corbon or Winchester’s Silvertip JHP’s in these calibers. I understand that Speer has just introduced a Gold Dot hollow point for the forty-one, but have no information on how it penetrates.

Expanding ammunition in .38, .357, 9mm, .40, or .45 ACP is usually designed for either rapid or “controlled” expansion and geared toward defensive use rather than deeper penetration which is desirable in hunting rounds. Of these more commonly used calibers, the .357 does have some loads specifically tweaked to penetrate deeply as it is more frequently found in the hunting fields than 9mm, etc. I would avoid the use of JSP ammo in the defensive handgun for two reasons:

1. It frequently does not expand.
2. It will probably completely penetrate a human torso.

Adequate Penetration:

It has been said that we want expansion but we need penetration. I believe this. The rhubarb seems to be over what is “adequate.” At the same time, I do not believe that loads failing to achieve whatever is deemed adequate are necessarily inadequate or doomed to failure. Opinions range from 9 to 10″ to the more popular view of 12 to 14″. Some want no less than 16″.

Let’s take a look at this issue.

The mandate for deeper penetration stems from those believing that the only damage done by a handgun bullet comes from the permanent crush cavity. In other words, the bullet damages only that which it contacts. They cite that at velocities below about 2000 ft/sec, the temporary stretch cavity’s creation is neither violent nor large enough to cause any significant damage.

For the most part, I believe that this is true but do not immediately accept that the temporary cavity is meaningless. I believe that if two bullets penetrate the same distance and expand to the same diameters, the one producing the larger temporary cavity is probably more effective. The rounds may very well be equivalent if striking an area in which organs are elastic, but might have a bit of an edge if striking near an inelastic organ and cause some damage even without contacting it. The destruction from the temporary cavity would not compare with that from higher velocity rifle ammunition.

My personal preference is for ammunition that expands and penetrates approximately 12 to 14″ in 10% ballistic gelatin. Having used such ammunition in hunting, I’ve seen pretty consistent results and made clean one-shot kills. Certainly the shooting of various wild animals does not correlate exactly with defensive handgun use, but I believe there is some correlation. I do not believe that the mechanism of collapse in a living, non-homogeneous, organism can be entirely predicted in the laboratory using gelatin.

At the same time, the collection of data on what has or has not “worked” is not the full answer, either. The reason is that we cannot ascertain how many of the “one shot stops” were for psychological vs. physical reasons. Did the bad guy stop because he had to or because he wanted to?

Ammunition penetrating less than 12″ is probably quite effective when shooting aggressors head-on and when no intermediate barriers exist. It might not be so effective if one’s required to shoot his opponent from the side where an arm is likely to be hit and more penetration’s required to get to vitals like the heart or aorta.

I settled on the 12 to 14″ range as I think this is the better compromise between a load that might penetrate too little vs. one that regularly punches 16″ and probably exit the average human torso. Were I extremely concerned with over-penetration issues, I’d pick a rapidly expanding JHP that does 9 to 11″ rather than some of the pre-fragmented bullets. Bullets penetrating 12 to 14″ should suffice in most scenarios whether shooting is face-to-face or from more oblique angles without excessive penetration. I am willing to accept a bit smaller expanded bullet diameter to achieve this.

Realistic Expectations:

I think this is where we go astray; we expect way too much from our handguns. Hunters have known that seemingly equivalent shots on similar animals can produce very differing results. One may instantly drop while the other runs, yet both received lethal hits to the heart/lung area. This is so often seen that’s it’s accepted. Deadly force scenarios for most of us are much rarer and there are folks interested in self-protection that have no experience in hunting; they have never seen anything shot. They have never seen a deer with a shredded heart run a hundred yards. They have seen shoot-em’-ups on television and movies. Many of us do not have the proper “respect” for what adrenaline can do and most have not witnessed the damage a person on PCP can withstand and just keep going!

If a 150 pound deer can be shot through the heart with a .30-06 180-gr. expanding bullet at 2700 ft/sec and keep moving, should we expect that a 200 pound human hit with a 180-gr. expanding forty-caliber bullet at 975 ft/sec to be instantly incapacitated?

I believe it’s an unrealistic expectation to assume that any defensive pistol cartridge will deck a human being as though struck by lightning. It will happen on some occasions, but not all and probably not the majority.

The high-velocity rifle bullet doesn’t always stop the game animal even with good hits, but normally the animal will not run as far before dying as when hit with an arrow. Even though hemorrhaging severely, they can go surprising distances if too quickly pursued. Adrenaline and the will to live push them beyond what many consider possible.

I submit that pistol bullet impact is more akin to the effect of the arrow than the centerfire rifle bullet.

In a life-and-death struggle, seconds seem like hours. The good guy has been forced to shoot the felon, but nothing happens despite a good hit. He shoots again and again and again and finally the bad guy drops. The actual time frame may have been but a few seconds, yet to our survivor, his handgun/load seemed not up to the job. None of them are in my opinion. Some are better than others, but none smite like the Hammer of Thor and it’s simply not realistic to expect it. It could also be dangerous. Expect a failure and be mentally prepared to deal with it. Expect that multiple shots may be necessary to actually stop a determined aggressor.

Increasing “Stopping Power”:

Easy to say, but harder to do under stress is getting the hits. The hunter doesn’t simply shoot at the animal’s body; he strikes at the vitals. I submit that we must do the same thing, but have very compressed time frames in which to do it! Some say this is not possible and is an unrealistic expectation. I say “it is what it is” and that placement is power. There are torso hits and there are good torso hits. A bullet through but a lung gives the aggressor a case of walking pneumonia and is not a sure stopper unless he is devastated mentally. I doubt that any of us want to count on that. A bullet that cuts the aorta or pierces the heart is quite something else. It may not instantly stop him, but the clock is ticking and his conscious time will usually be measured in seconds rather than minutes.

Pick the load/caliber/handgun you want, but without the ability to place your shots at speed, do not expect it to “stop” quickly. Even if you can make quick, accurate shots do not place too much faith in your gun, caliber, or load. You can do everything right and still not instantly stop your attacker. The handgun simply doesn’t have enough power. We use them because they are convenient and able to be with us when attack is not expected.

Firearm trainers have indicated that the long arm is much to be preferred to the handgun for defense. They’re not speaking only with regard to the ease of accuracy, but to the increase in power. Unless the brain or central nervous system’s damaged, we need the rifle to do what we expect the pistol to.

To increase your odds, I suggest the following:

1. Select a handgun in at least .38 Special or 9mm and base that selection on reliability and how well you personally shoot that weapon, be it revolver or semiauto. Use one that you are comfortable with. It doesn’t matter if it’s double-action S&W or a Browning single-action automatic. What matters is if you can get the hits with it and are comfortable using it.
2. Learn what you can from serious researchers in bullet performance and make your decision on a carry load, but be sure that it is reliable in your handgun.
3. Practice.
4. Practice.
5. Practice.

The “practice” part is too often neglected. Having the “best” gun and ammo is not nearly all of the solution. Competence with it is essential. Practice routinely and if necessary get training.

If you shoot a forty-five as well as a 9mm, go with the former, but do not expect it to be vastly superior to the nine. With equivalent hits, I doubt that much if any difference will be seen. If one does better with the 9mm, I’d cast my lot with it. Once you have a caliber capable of adequate penetration and expansion, placement is power.

Best.

By Stephen A. Camp

Out of vogue for many these days is the snub-nosed .38 Special revolver. Some still do tote one by choice as either their primary concealed carry handgun while others relegate it to backup duties for a more potent piece. Snubs can be had in several calibers and more than one frame size, but this article will focus on the J-frame Airweight .38 Special. I suggest that what is discussed here would apply equally to J-frames be they of steel, stainless, or one of the newer metal alloys used these days. I prefer to Airweight (aluminum frame) to all-steel as I tote the snub via pocket holster and find the latter a tad heavy for this convenient mode of concealed carry. The Airweight is plenty light but heavy enough that one does not usually have to worry that certain bullets will work out of their cases under recoil. This cannot be said for some of the newer revolvers that are even lighter than the Airweight. If I couldn’t find an Airweight snub, I’d go for the heavier rather than the lighter versions.

Clint Smith is reputed to have said something to the effect, “Handguns are meant to be comforting, not comfortable”. I tend to agree if one is pretty sure of treading a hazardous path, leads a high-risk life-style, or works in a dangerous profession. Before retiring as a full-time peace officer, I seldom carried less than a 9mm or .45 automatic off duty. Were I in the jewelry business in Los Angeles or a bodyguard or something similar, I would not rely solely on a snub. More than likely I’ve served my last arrest or search warrant. I’ll not kick in any more doors or be sworn to confronting and arresting wanted felons known to be dangerous on sight. These days I’m around the house feeding ducks or goldfish, writing a bit, at the range, or hunting lease and that’s about it. Before he passed, my father was in need of constant medical attention. On one hurried trip into a large city after the midnight phone call, the snub was in my pocket all right but there was a cocked-and-locked .45 in a strong side belt holster as well. The area around the hospital had been the scene of a recent homicide and several aggravated robberies. Going into a know risky area I wanted “comforting” more than “comfortable.” You get the idea; for most of my time I’m in a very, very low risk environment. True warriors will opine that one could be under deadly attack at any time and that is true, but we all play the odds to a degree. Knowing that a dozen gang bangers were heading my way to rid the world of my shadow and that I couldn’t retreat or get police intervention, I’d go with something other than a handgun to be sure. At the same time, I refuse to be “naked” and want a firearm on or near me 24/7. More than any compact 9mm or .380 ACP, the snub .38 meets my own personal requirements at least to the minimal level. For me, the .38 snub excels as a pocket gun. If going to a belt gun, OWB or IWB, a more effective and larger handgun can easily be carried.

At the same time, I absolutely reject carrying a weapon that cannot be used effectively. The compact snub can be (depending upon how one defines “effectively”), but it takes work. At my personal minimum for “power” and with limited shots on tap before reloading, it is essential that the snub user be able to make each and every hit a decisive one.

If you carry or plan to carry a snub, perhaps my practice recommendations might be of at least some use. Most of the time I go to the range and shoot some sort of handgun at least once per week. Frequently I might go two or three times depending upon my schedule or if a project is in the works. I make it a point to shoot my J-frame at least once every other week and often more. The snub is shot slow-fire for practice at precision work, rapid-fire for when that might be essential, and a bit of point shooting is included. I also suggest some strong and weak hand shooting in additional to the usual two-hand hold.

“But the snub ain’t no target gun. It’s a belly gun meant for up close and personal!” True enough until it’s not. What if you’re required to make a shot where you can only see part of your aggressor? What if you have to take a “rescue” (head) shot at 10 yards? What if you have two opponents and but two shots left and they’re rapidly advancing? You’d have to almighty quick to reload with a full five before they get to you in most instances, Jerry Miculek excluded.

The old saying that “practice makes perfect” is not true. Perfect practice does or at least lets us see improvement.

The very attributes that make the snub so easy to carry work against making it easy to shoot well. It compactness translates to short sight radius. Lightweight equals greater felt recoil and a harder gun to hold steady against the double-action trigger pull. The small cylinder means 5 shots instead of the usual 6. The 1 7/8″ barrel results in lower velocity than longer barrel revolvers and we don’t get full case extraction unless the ejector rod is depressed briskly.

Accurate shooting of the snub is possible despite the preceding downside issues. All shooters have the desire to be good shots. Fewer have the desire to do the work required to get there. I am certainly not a master shooter, but several approaches to marksmanship have helped me and translate well to the snub revolver.

Assuming that one already has understanding of shooting fundamentals like trigger control, breathing, grip, sight alignment, sight picture, and so forth, let’s tailor a little shooting regimen for the snub .38.

Start at relatively close range: Even though we’re speaking of accurate “target shooting” here, most are best served by starting off at 3 to 5 yards. Error magnifies itself with distance. Seeing groups come down in size builds confidence and that encourages practice. As repetitions of correct trigger pull, etc, burn themselves into the shooter’s hardwiring distances can be increased. Don’t get into too much of a hurry to do this and don’t get in a rush for firing more quickly

Don’t shoot beyond your individual fatigue limit: 99% of shooting is done “between the ears.” In other words, we have to use our brains. This requires concentration and concentration is the handmaiden to fatigue. The great marksman and Marine sniper, Carlos Hathcock, said that when “working” he would “crawl inside his bubble.” He was saying that he was concentrating at the maximum level on his sight alignment, breathing, and so forth. It’s exceptionally easy to fire the gun, but not so easy to make the bullets go where we want them. There is a price. It’s concentration and mental fatigue. Just routinely burning ammunition is not good once we get beyond checking for reliability and familiarity with the snub. When tired I tend to let down my guard so to speak. I think we all do and this allows for bad traits such as jerking the trigger, etc. to crop up. It seems like these bad habits can be ingrained with but a few shots, but require many to break! Bad shooting technique is hard to “unlearn.”

For many beginning shooters, 50 to 75 meaningful shots are about right for the serious range session with the snub. The number of rounds that can be fired using correct techniques will increase as the shooter’s practice continues over the weeks, as will the distances at which hits can be made.

Use realistic targets: A 1″ dot at 25 yards is not a realistic target for the snub. I suggest a bullseye roughly 4″ in diameter for distances out to about 15 yards. I also use the same size target at ranges of but a few feet. Is this not roughly the size of a human heart? For most folks it has been my experience that this size target allows them to not cover the target completely with the front sight, obscuring it. There is also a place for humanoid targets with the snub, particularly when the shooter gets to more rapid firing or wants to practice “failure to stop” drills which involve chest and head shots combined.

Shoot regularly: If at all possible practice with the snub at least once a month at the minimum. It has been my experience that 10 really good shots fired each day accomplish more than 50 fired at one time at the end of the work week. Most of us do not have ranges at our homes and cannot get to a firing range each day so this is not attainable. That said, most reading this do shoot. Take the snub and a box or two of ammunition to the range with you and put forth the effort to have a short, but meaningful training session.

Shoot ammunition you can handle: Ammunition intended for defensive purposes is often a bit more powerful than standard loads not having expanding bullets. While it is necessary to shoot some of the ammunition we intend to carry in the gun, not each and every shot has to be. Who has heard the dictum, “Practice with what you carry”? It’s my view that this is more applicable to ammunition for use in semiautomatics. Feeding and extraction reliability are more ammo dependent than with the revolver. This emphatically does not mean that revolvers cannot malfunction and it does not mean that some ammunition can contribute to this. Years ago a friend of mine was involved in a shootout. His .357 was loaded with ammo he’d never even fired. All six shots were required and he could not reload. The fired cases had expanded so much that they couldn’t be extracted. Fortunately, the “problem” had been “solved” by that point, but we see that the reliable revolver is also ammunition dependent to at least some degree.

My practice loads are either handloaded or are the inexpensive FMJ sold by Federal, Winchester, or Remington. I use Remington 158-gr. LSWCHP +P for carry. Most of the time I practice with the inexpensive ammunition, but do fire a cylinder-full or two of the hotter loads when changing carried ammunition for fresh. Felt recoil is greater, but such will not be felt in a life or death defense scenario. It will have a slightly different point of impact than the usual practice rounds, but the difference is minute, particularly out to about 7 yards. At ten yards if the practice load hits near the middle of the suggested 4″ target, the 158-gr. LSWCHP +P will, too.

Most of the inexpensive FMJ ammunition used for the range weighs 130 grains. If you’re really concerned with slight variations between points of impact with the heavier +P load, there are standard velocity JHP’s in the 110 to 125-gr. range. I prefer the heavier 158-gr. LSWCHP +P.

At least once per month, fire a few rounds of your “carry ammo.”

Practice reloading: Five shots are not many. For most of us private citizens, they are enough, but that cannot be a hard and fast rule. Be sure that you can fully eject fired cases from your snub with one hand. I carry and use the HKS speedloader and carry at least one in addition to my snub. I find that these are easy to carry concealed and are quicker for me than Bianchi speed strips. The strips are flatter and can be used when more than one reload is being carried. Whichever you prefer, practice with them.

Make sure that your snub “fits” you: Usually this primarily refers to having a set of grips that are comfortable. Unlike belt guns to a degree or target pistols, there are limitations on grips for the snub. Sometimes we have to balance concealability against comfort. The small stocks common to J-frames decades ago were certainly easy to conceal but they allowed the gun to really twist during recoil. Most of us added Tyler grip adapters to fill in the space along the front grip strap and under the rear of the trigger guard. This helped immensely and I have no problem with that set up today. More comfortable grips could be had from several makers but they were just too large. I see little point in putting grips nearly as large as those for K-frames on the J-frame snub if the pistol is to be carried concealed. I offer this general rule of thumb for picking J-frame concealment grips: no longer than the bottom of the grip frame and no covered back strap. Each increases the size of the butt with regard to concealment. They may very well be more comfortable to shoot, but they will be harder to hide.

So far the “best” carry grip I’ve tried for pocket carry has been the checkered rubber copies of Craig Spegel’s popular boot grip. These come standard on S&W J-frame snubs. I find the J-frame snub significantly easier to control with these than with the old grip from years ago. I actually prefer the rubber to wood in this instance. The reason is that pocket carry in hot climates lends itself to sweat coming in contact with grips day in and day out. Eventually this will stain the wood grip next to the body and it can sure lead to a rusty grip screw. I cannot abide rust. I wipe off my carry snub each day and also put a bit of oil on the grip screw. This will not be absorbed by the rubber grip, but can be with wood. Whether you opt for wood or synthetic, I strongly recommend the boot grip style stocks for the snub.

Forget ego and shoot beyond your comfort zone: Those damned bullseye targets are unforgiving things! They show each and every mistake and resulting poor shot. Once we have gotten to where we can keep our shots in a nice tight group, we tend to keep repeating it. We tend to “like” that which we do well at. The problem is that if this is at but 10 feet, we’re pretty limited in our ability with the snub.

Move the distance out a little. If you’ve been practicing at 5 yards and can keep your shots in the bullseye, begin shooting some at 7 yards. Continue this until you’re seeing that, by golly, you actually can shoot tight groups farther out. If you can work your skill level up to the point that you can practice confidently at 10-yards or so, the snub .38 will probably serve well in a deadly force encounter. When at this level, practice some at greater distances and keep doing the work closer in, too. I think ten yards is a reasonable training distance for folks used to the snub and one worth working toward for those who are not.

Each of us has our own cadence when shooting. It’s one we’re sure of getting the hits with; it’s comfortable. Too often, it’s slow. Earlier I railed against shooting too fast, but once accuracy levels have been met, we need to build our speed a bit. At the same time we do not want accuracy to go out the window.

If you’re shooting well at 10 yards, move in to about seven. Now, shoot a bit faster than you normally do, but do not forget about sight picture and trigger control. Your first few attempts will probably result in slightly larger groups. Try it another time or two and see if you’re holding your own. If you are, just keep working at that pace and see if the groups don’t drop on back down with time. If they do not, slow down a little. It may be that smaller increments of speed are in order.

Don’t just assume that you can do no better. Push yourself a little; you might be very pleasantly surprised, but don’t go beyond your fatigue point. (As you become a more seasoned shooter with the snub, I bet you find that this point comes later and later.) If you can, shoot with folks who are better than you are. Much of the time this tends to make us bring our levels up to more closely match those more skilled.

Shoot in various ways: Most of our shooting is done two-handed. I strongly suggest that we practice some one-handed shooting, too. Do this with both strong and weak hand. It will not initially help our egos, but it might just save our lives if we work at it. (You will appreciate those boot grips here!)

I am a proponent of using the sights whenever possible. What if it’s not possible? What if we have to fire at very close range and have but an instant?

Once the shooter can get the hits with the sights, I think it’s wise to practice shooting at the same targets pointing the gun with one hand and looking over the top of it. Nothing says that our first “invitation” to a deadly encounter might not be the loss of a hand or a broken arm. By the time we try point shooting I’m hoping that we’ve become considerably more familiar with the snub. It usually is not too difficult at closer range. I limit my point shooting to 7 yards or less; usually about 5 yards. If we can, I believe that even a “flash sight picture” is better than none at all. It that is just not possible, having more than one tool in the box can be a lifesaver.

The snub .38 is not the best defensive arm available. In my opinion it is among the best that can be unobtrusively and comfortably carried. It offers no free rides. Compared to some .380’s it is definitely harder to shoot well. The reward is that you can shoot a heavier bullet at velocities similar to the .380. The downside is that you have fewer shots and more recoil. We’re also blessed with a very simple manual of arms with the revolver and very good reliability.

To make the small .38 snub work, we need competence. That comes from dedicated practice and effort.

Best.

Visit Stephen’s site at Hi-Powers and Handguns

By Conservative Scalawag

For those on a budget who want a reliable out-of-the box, no-frills, five- shot .38 Special, they might want to look at the Taurus M85. Unfortunately, the name Taurus has been synonymous with being an unreliable and cheap gun, of the likes of Raven Arms, who makes low quality pistols. Let me clear up this rumor, they make an affordable and reliable self-defense gun. Nothing more and nothing less – simply the best bang for your buck. I won’t fool you; this isn’t the gun to do trigger jobs on or to customize, just a great self-defense weapon.

To my knowledge, this is the only gun manufacture that comes with a lifetime warranty on the gun, not the owner. Therefore, if you do buy one used, the company will cover it for repair at no cost to you. Yet another added bonus if you ask me.

A little history on the company – Taurus, based in Brazil, has been making guns since 1941 and importing to the US since 1968. In 1970, Bangor Punta Corporation, then owner of Smith and Wesson, purchased a holding share of Taurus. This explains why many of the Taurus revolvers look a lot like Smiths, as many were made on the same tools. Sadly, few, if any parts are interchangeable – Taurus using coil springs for the main spring, unlike Smith and Wesson. In 1977, Taurus broke out on its own, cutting all ties to Smith and Wesson. By 1984, the company created a subsidiary know to all as Taurus USA, based in Miami, Florida. Two of the guns that became their meat and potatoes were the M85 .38 special and the M66 .357 magnum revolvers.

The post-1996 Taurus revolvers and semi-autos models all have key locking features to disable the weapon. On the revolvers, it’s located on the hammer; on the semi-autos, it is located on the upper receiver or slide. Neither of my current Taurus revolvers, the M85 nor the M94 (4” .22LR nine shot) have this feature, being pre-1996 models. It is a feature that I have never been fond of, though I understand that gun companies have to be politically correct in today’s climate. Taurus’s locking feature is, however, voluntary to engage by the owner.

All Taurus revolvers do use a transfer bar and have the firing pin located in the frame for safety. Having the firing pin in the frame, to my knowledge, was first introduced Andrew Fyrberg in 1891 and later perfected, I believe, by Ruger in the 1970’s. Other revolvers, such as Colt and Smith, utilize hammer blocks that are effective in their own right.

Taurus also makes the Model85 in many other variants, some very similar to those made by Smith and Wesson. Such as the Model 851, equivalent to the S&W bodyguard and the Model 650 equivalent to Smith’s Centennial. The M85 are made in Ultra-light versions too, for those who wish for something lighter.

The M85 can handle +P rated loads, such as 135 grain Gold Dot, my personal preference for carry load. The revolver is also relatively accurate for having a 2” barrel, making four and five-inch groups at 25 feet. In my opinion, this is good enough for my self-defense. After all, it is a snub nose revolver, not a target gun; its role is to defend at close range.

I have had two Taurus .38 specials in my life, my current older version and one newer version. I highly recommend any Taurus revolver – their reliability and simplicity can’t be beat for the affordable price. In fact, I’m keeping room in the safe for a M66 .357 from Taurus which will fill three roles for me, as a bedside gun, field gun, and possible used as a hunting gun.

Taurus Model 85 Specs:

Model: 85B2
Caliber: .38 SPL +P RATED
Capacity: 5
Barrel Length: 2″
Action: DA/SA
Finish: Blue
Grips: Rubber
Weight: 21 oz
Construction: Steel
Frame: Small

Front Sight: Fixed Rear
Sight: Fixed
Trigger Type: Smooth
Length: 6-1/2”

Width: 1.346″
Height: 4.28″
Rate of Twist: 1:16″
Grooves: 5
Safety: Transfer Bar