Ruger LCR or S&W Airweight?

[Patton]

My personal experience is that I carried an airweigth S&W 638 for quite a while, but it was just too much recoil to practice well with. I eventually bought a 649 (exact same gun, steel frame instead of the airweigtht) and it's much easier to shoot. It does weight a bit more in the pocket, but it hasn't been much of an issue for me.

This may be your personal experience but I consider it some of the most accurate information posted in this thread. Even in a snub nose 38spl in 20-24oz gun is a tack driver. You sacrifice a lot to carry a 13-15 oz gun.

[mhl6493]

I have owned a cw380, it was ok. The G42 is quite a bit bigger but not in a bad way. As far as shooting the two, the Glock is probably a better shooter. The G42 and the M&P Shield honestly conceal about as well as a j frame or LCR. The G42 I have handled was a friends who has had a little bit less than 100% reliability. I can tell you though, the Shield is a lot better of a package than the G42, more powerful round with more capacity, without getting much larger. The Shield may be a better shooter as well. Call me crazy though, my Shield is the second one I own and I would trade it in a heartbeat for another good j frame, even though I own several.

My complaints on the Kahr was it had an extremely tight chamber not liking any reloads and just had rough edges. I used to get cuts just handling it, I actually preferred a LCP over the Kahr.

 

I agree.  Even though a semi-automatic like a Shield might make more sense for me in some ways, I'm just drawn to revolvers.  And all things considered, I think I would prefer a steel J-frame to a lightweight -- if I can carry it.  I really need to find one at a lgs in my area so I can look at it up close before I make up my mind.  With the popularity of the lightweights, what are the odds a typical gun shop with have something like a Smith 640 or 649?  

[Patton]

 I really need to find one at a lgs in my area so I can look at it up close before I make up my mind.  With the popularity of the lightweights, what are the odds a typical gun shop with have something like a Smith 640 or 649?

Unfortunately what you and I both like are not too easily found. You may find a model 60 easier than a 640 or a 649. To my understanding 38spl 60/640/649 are special runs only as they are produced in heavier .357 mag versions now. Now here is something else to consider, while I prefer an all steel j frame a airweight with larger grips isn't too bad.

[221 Fireball]

Can't scientifically prove it but my LCR seems to have less recoil than the heavier Mod 36 I had. Of course the Smith had skinny wood grips and the LCR has some pretty cushy grips, but I wonder if the polymer frame of the LCR doesn't also absorb some of the recoil.

 

But to debunk my own myth, I had a Kel-Tec 9mm that absolutely hurt to shoot. That grip just pounding the inside of my palm for every shot.

 

There just are so many variables to felt recoil, not only depending on gun design, but the person holding it and how they hold it. I have a Glock 19 (don't tell my friends) and a Browning Hi-Power and shooting the same ammo, the Hi-Power has more felt recoil than the 19, even though the Browning is heavier.

 

"...all the science, I don't understand..." - Rocket Man   :pleased:

[Patton]

Can't scientifically prove it but my LCR seems to have less recoil than the heavier Mod 36 I had. Of course the Smith had skinny wood grips and the LCR has some pretty cushy grips, but I wonder if the polymer frame of the LCR doesn't also absorb some of the recoil.
 
But to debunk my own myth, I had a Kel-Tec 9mm that absolutely hurt to shoot. That grip just pounding the inside of my palm for every shot.
 
There just are so many variables to felt recoil, not only depending on gun design, but the person holding it and how they hold it. I have a Glock 19 (don't tell my friends) and a Browning Hi-Power and shooting the same ammo, the Hi-Power has more felt recoil than the 19, even though the Browning is heavier.
 
"...all the science, I don't understand..." - Rocket Man   :pleased:

Those wooden magmas on j frames are sexy but don't do a lot for recoil. I will agree on everything, recoil is weird. A pf9 may be the worst recoiling handgun I have ever shot, a shield may be the lightest in 9mm without getting super big. The LCR may recoil less than an airweight come to think of it.

[221 Fireball]

Those wooden magmas on j frames are sexy but don't do a lot for recoil. I will agree on everything, recoil is weird. A pf9 may be the worst recoiling handgun I have ever shot, a shield may be the lightest in 9mm without getting super big. The LCR may recoil less than an airweight come to think of it.

 

Patton, there may be one more worse than the PF9, my son bought one of those XDS "slim" .45 single stacks ... OUCH!  He sold it after our first range session with it... LOL.

[JReedEsq]

My wife recently took the HCP class with the LCR that I bought for her about 18 months ago.  The Smiths look nice, and the LCR is the only revolver I've ever owned so my opinion may not count for much but: The LCR has a smoother trigger, better stock grip, and the availability of a much better front sight.  To me, it's LCR hands down from a practical perspective.  

[mhl6493]

My wife recently took the HCP class with the LCR that I bought for her about 18 months ago.  The Smiths look nice, and the LCR is the only revolver I've ever owned so my opinion may not count for much but: The LCR has a smoother trigger, better stock grip, and the availability of a much better front sight.  To me, it's LCR hands down from a practical perspective.  

 

Thanks.  I definitely plan to check out the LCR before I do anything.  I checked with Tactical Advantage Corp in Knoxville (I heard that they rent guns to try them out), but they don't have either the 642 or the LCR available to rent.  (Not sure why, given how popular they are.  I guess most folks want the semi-automatics).  Shooter's Depot in Chattanooga has them both, but their rental fee is a lot higher than TAC.  May just have to bit the bullet (yeah, I know) and pay up...

[Trekbike]

[quote name="mhl6493" post="1146590" timestamp="1399404076"]but they don't have either the 642 or the LCR available to rent. (Not sure why, given how popular they are. I guess most folks want the semi-automatics). .[/quote] I honestly think most shops don't rent snubbies because it would cut down on the number of sales. Most folks don't enjoy shooting them. My wife wanted one, I warned her but that's what she wanted so she bought it. First words out of her mouth after shooting it was, "I think I bought the wrong gun". She did get used to the recoil with some different grips. Edited May 6, 2014 by Trekbike

[mhl6493]

I honestly think most shops don't rent snubbies because it would cut down on the number of sales. Most folks don't enjoy shooting them. My wife wanted one, I warned her but that's what she wanted so she bought it. First words out of her mouth after shooting it was, "I think I bought the wrong gun". She did get used to the recoil with some different grips.

 

That makes sense to me.  I shot a friend's LCP a couple of weeks ago.  Just looking at it, I thought it might be exactly the little pocket gun I was looking for.  Size-wise, sure.  And then I fired it.  Uh, no...  :surrender:

[Fourtyfive]

I have a Kahr P380 , love it but had to send it back to the factory 2 times before it was reliable. If you want the reliability of a light weight revolver that's the way to go ; if you feel confident carrying it then you have the right gun. The light weight revolver is not a range gun , it is a carry piece. Edited May 6, 2014 by Fourtyfive

[mhl6493]

I have a Kahr P380 , love it but had to send it back to the factory 2 times before it was reliable. If you want the reliability of a light weight revolver that's the way to go ; if you fell confident carrying it then you have the right gun. The light weight revolver is not a range gun , it is a carry piece.

 

Very true.  My instructor in my carry permit class a couple of weeks ago told us that our carry gun probably would never be our favorite gun.  Something has to be compromised to achieve concealability.  I'm still trying to figure out what exactly that balance is for me.  I'm still thinking a steel or lightweight revolver, or maybe something like a small 9mm (Shield, LC9, etc).  Having ready access to actually shoot and try out all the models I'm considering is the biggest problem.  

[Fourtyfive]

Very true. My instructor in my carry permit class a couple of weeks ago told us that our carry gun probably would never be our favorite gun. Something has to be compromised to achieve concealability. I'm still trying to figure out what exactly that balance is for me. I'm still thinking a steel or lightweight revolver, or maybe something like a small 9mm (Shield, LC9, etc). Having ready access to actually shoot and try out all the models I'm considering is the biggest problem.

If your just starting to carry you will soon buy a bunch of guns , one day you will have a favorite or 3.

And a drawer full of holsters. Edited May 6, 2014 by Fourtyfive

[mhl6493]

If your just starting to carry you will soon buy a bunch of guns , one day you will have a favorite or 3.

And a drawer full of holsters.

 

And a bank account with a lot of zero's...  :cry:

[Fourtyfive]

And a bank account with a lot of zero's... :cry:

Just part of the game brother.

[Patton]

My instructor in my carry permit class a couple of weeks ago told us that our carry gun probably would never be our favorite gun. Something has to be compromised to achieve concealability.

Until just a couple of years ago I would have said there is no such creature, but the Shield comes close! This is coming from a lifelong Glock and j frame fan.

[Trekbike]

[quote name="Patton" post="1146642" timestamp="1399416865"]Until just a couple of years ago I would have said there is no such creature, but the Shield comes close! This is coming from a lifelong Glock and j frame fan.[/quote] I agree. If I was in the market for a carry piece that would be it but I've always been an M&P fan. My wife really likes to shoot my daughter's Shield.

[DaveTN]

Very true.  My instructor in my carry permit class a couple of weeks ago told us that our carry gun probably would never be our favorite gun.  Something has to be compromised to achieve concealability.  I'm still trying to figure out what exactly that balance is for me.  I'm still thinking a steel or lightweight revolver, or maybe something like a small 9mm (Shield, LC9, etc).  Having ready access to actually shoot and try out all the models I'm considering is the biggest problem.

As most of us have found there is no perfect gun; it is application driven. That’s why so many of us have multiple guns, because we have multiple applications.

It sounds like your main concern is concealment. To get concealment you have to give up capacity and barrel length. There is a chance you will be in a shooting AND need more than five or six rounds, but it’s up there with winning the lottery or being struck by lightning. It also won’t be a target gun; that is a different application and requires a different gun.

You can’t go wrong in a revolver with a steel or stainless J-frame; it has owned the revolver concealment application for decades. I have a model 36 I have had for nearly 40 years and still carry. However if I were buying today I would get a model 60 so I could use .357 if I wanted to, it also won’t have finish issues.

You also mentioned the Shield. As you can see from the replies and other threads it is very popular. It’s my favorite “Sub Compact” because I could get it in .40S&W.

Neither will impress anyone as a target or range gun. If you want that get a S&W 686 L-frame, it will shoot the center 10 ring out of a target at 25 yards; then you just have to find a way to conceal it.

You are going to need more than one gun. Just decide if you want the carry gun or the range gun first. You can buy and sell guns without losing a dime. The only other hobby I have had where I could do that was Corvettes.

[mhl6493]

As most of us have found there is no perfect gun; it is application driven. That’s why so many of us have multiple guns, because we have multiple applications.

It sounds like your main concern is concealment. To get concealment you have to give up capacity and barrel length. There is a chance you will be in a shooting AND need more than five or six rounds, but it’s up there with winning the lottery or being struck by lightning. It also won’t be a target gun; that is a different application and requires a different gun.

You can’t go wrong in a revolver with a steel or stainless J-frame; it has owned the revolver concealment application for decades. I have a model 36 I have had for nearly 40 years and still carry. However if I were buying today I would get a model 60 so I could use .357 if I wanted to, it also won’t have finish issues.

You also mentioned the Shield. As you can see from the replies and other threads it is very popular. It’s my favorite “Sub Compact” because I could get it in .40S&W.

Neither will impress anyone as a target or range gun. If you want that get a S&W 686 L-frame, it will shoot the center 10 ring out of a target at 25 yards; then you just have to find a way to conceal it.

You are going to need more than one gun. Just decide if you want the carry gun or the range gun first. You can buy and sell guns without losing a dime. The only other hobby I have had where I could do that was Corvettes.

 

Very good advice.  Thanks.  I actually bought my first gun recently, a Ruger GP-100.  I plan to use it for home defense (.357) and range practice (.38).  So I already have that base covered.  My next purchase will be exclusively for concealed carry purposes.  

[hipower]

JMO, I don't believe you could make a better choice for a first gun. You bought a good revolver in a configuration that gives you 2 caliber choices, and a very durable, well made, and highly thought of(not that it makes any difference) pistol.

 

Congratulations

[Trekbike]

As most of us have found there is no perfect gun; it is application driven. That’s why so many of us have multiple guns, because we have multiple applications.
 

 

Yep.  The same holds true with holsters.  It was when I first started carrying did it click with me and now I can somewhat understand why women have so many different purses.   

[mhl6493]

JMO, I don't believe you could make a better choice for a first gun. You bought a good revolver in a configuration that gives you 2 caliber choices, and a very durable, well made, and highly thought of(not that it makes any difference) pistol.

 

Congratulations

 

Thanks.  I did a lot of research before I bought it, and everything I read kept coming back to a stainless steel 4 inch .357/.38.  Even folks whose favorite gun was something like a Glock 19 said that if all of their guns were in a fire and they could only save one, it would be a 4 inch SS .357.  Very versatile.  That made my decision for me.  Also considered a Smith 686, but they're pretty hard to find and more expensive.

[JAB]

I have a Smith and Wesson J-Frame - a 642.  It is one of the airweight models and is DAO as the hammer is completely enclosed (because hammers can snag when pocket carried.)  It is not fun to shoot - especially with +P rounds - and I would be ashamed for anyone to see my results when trying to hit a bullseye target from any, real distance.  That said, the 642 is my most often carried handgun.  I am confident that I could use it to defend my life at 'typical' SD distances.  It fits in the right, front pocket of most pairs of pants or shorts I own and when I am wearing jeans with a 'watch pocket', the speed strip I cut down (to hold five rounds instead of six so it is shorter - the j-frame only holds five, anyhow) will slide right in that watch pocket.

 

I have dry-fired a couple of LCRs and have to say that they have an amazingly smooth, nice DAO trigger.  I don't know what the recoil is like but they have a little 'cushion' built into the grips (right about where the web of the hand hits) which is supposed to help absorb some of the recoil and make firing them more pleasant.  I have been told by folks who own them that the cushion does work.  I might have chosen one of them instead of my 642 but I am just not sold on polymer for a revolver.  If they made a lightweight, metal version I'd be sorely tempted.

 

I also have a P3AT (.380 semiauto) that makes a good pocket gun.  In fact, before I got the 642 it was probably my most often carried.  The reason I prefer the 642 is that, in my mind, when you get down to truly small guns but are still trying to run a decently powered cartridge I think semis in that category are really kind of pushing the envelope - and walking the fine edge of functionality.  The little semiautos also can be very ammo picky - which is not to say that all of them are but such is more likely than with a larger semiauto and a whole lot more likely than with a revolver.  In the interest of full disclosure, I will say that I like revolvers better, in general.  Even if that were not the case, I think that with really small/light guns I would still trust wheelguns a whole lot more.  Of course, that is simply my opinion.

 

On the other side, I will say that I wouldn't give up the P3AT, either, because there are occasions - although rare - where even the 642 won't conceal very well.  Due to its very thin, flat nature the P3AT can usually hide even in those situations.

 

Those small guns are also nice when you want to belt carry but don't want to have to wear a cover garment, etc.  Some folks would say, "If I am going to belt carry then it is going to be a bigger gun."  I see their point but the thing is such small guns can be worn OWB and hide pretty well under nothing more than a loose t-shirt or polo type shirt - especially in this day where people have cell phones, Ipods, etc. causing bulges on their belts under their shirts.  I don't like having a bunch of stuff in my pockets and, since I won't put anything else in a pocket that has a gun in it, pocket carry means putting everything else in my other pocket.  Also, a gun carried in a pocket isn't always easily accessible - especially when sitting or driving/riding in a car.  For that reason, I sometimes belt carry one of the little ones - although not all that often.

 

Very good advice.  Thanks.  I actually bought my first gun recently, a Ruger GP-100.  I plan to use it for home defense (.357) and range practice (.38).  So I already have that base covered.  My next purchase will be exclusively for concealed carry purposes.  

 

You know, depending on your body style and with the right holster and attire, you could carry the GP-100 'casually' concealed.  By 'casually' concealed, I mean something like OWB with a tucked in t-shirt and an unbuttoned, untucked shirt over the gun.  That is the way I usually carry when I go for something besides pocket carry.  You would probably want something that holds the gun high on your belt.  I thought it would be impossible to carry my Ruger P-95 (a 9mm semiauto that is as 'overbuilt' as Ruger's revolvers) with any kind of concealment until I found that a belt slide holster that holds it with the trigger about even with my belt-line, fairly tight to my body and with a slight forward cant does make it possible.

 

I haven't gotten around to making a holster for my GP-100, yet, but I am thinking something along the lines of a pancake holster that will hold it in a similar position as the belt slide holds my P95 would probably work best.  Take a look at holsters like the Simply Rugged Sourdough Pancake to get a general idea of what I mean.  I am certainly not suggesting that the GP-100 is the best choice for concealed carry - I am just saying that, with the right holster, it could be carried until you get something a little easier to carry or conceal.

 

To illistrate my point, here are some pics from a few years ago when a guy on another forum was wondering if it would be possible to carry a similar gun concealed.  At the time, I had a Taurus 66 (which I recently traded for a GP-100.)  The 66 was pretty much as 'big' as the GP-100 but not quite as heavily built.  Anyhow, I used these pics just to show what can be hidden under just an unbuttoned shirt.  Notice that the 66 was in a FOBUS holster which really isn't the best for concealment and isn't really all that great a carry holster (I didn't carry it much except at home and in the woods so really didn't need a good concealment holster.)  I do plan to carry the Gp-100 some - more often than I carried the Taurus, anyhow, so that is why I plan to make a better holster for it.  Also, as you can see from the pic, I ain't exactly svelte so that probably helps me hide stuff.  Also, this is in no way 'deep cover' but you would be surprised how little attention people pay.  Also, a printed shirt - especially something like a Hawaiian shirt with a fairly 'busy' and somewhat irregular print/pattern - can be very thin and lightweight but still do a good job hiding things.

 

 

This was what I had 'on me' at the time.  As I said, I was going for the idea of showing how much could be hidden in that mode of dress so I went with the Taurus in not-that-great a holster.  This was before I had the 642 and the P3AT is in the pic in my home-made pocket holster.

 

Edited May 9, 2014 by JAB

[mhl6493]

Thanks again for all the great advice in this thread.  I went down to my lgs this morning, just to hold a few and talk for a while about what I'm thinking/looking for.  I actually ended up buying a new Ruger LCP.  I know, I said that I shot one before and didn't much like it.  And that's true.  But the trigger on this one felt a lot better than the older one I shot.  And as to it's snappiness, it'll never be a range gun for me, obviously.  But I'm determined to shoot it enough to feel comfortable with it should I ever have to use it.  In the end, the concealability won me over.

[JAB]

Thanks again for all the great advice in this thread.  I went down to my lgs this morning, just to hold a few and talk for a while about what I'm thinking/looking for.  I actually ended up buying a new Ruger LCP.  I know, I said that I shot one before and didn't much like it.  And that's true.  But the trigger on this one felt a lot better than the older one I shot.  And as to it's snappiness, it'll never be a range gun for me, obviously.  But I'm determined to shoot it enough to feel comfortable with it should I ever have to use it.  In the end, the concealability won me over.

 

Well, then, everything I said above about the P3AT pretty much applies to the LCP as it is, in many ways, Ruger's clone of the P3AT.  Good choice for concealed carry, I think, and the 'pocket .380' craze of a couple years back resulted in quite a bit of new R&D going in to .380 defensive ammo.

 

Most people recommend running a couple hundred rounds through one of these small semiautos in order to break them in and get used to them.  You will certainly want to test whatever ammo you decide to carry to make sure it will function 100% (forgive me if I am telling you things you already know.)  Personally, I like Federal Hydrashoks.  They were the only premium SD ammo I could find when I first started testing out the P3AT and, as they have always functioned reliably (for me) I have stuck with them.  These are now considered 'older tech' but in pretty much every test I have seen, both formal and informal, they give good penetration and consistent (although not a great deal of) expansion.  Some folks also really like the Hornady Critical Defense .380 ammo.  Based on what I have seen, it doesn't give the most penetration and even Hornady doesn't generally claim that it will meet the F.B.I. '12 inch' requirement.  Then, again, we aren't the F.B.I. and - as Hornady says - civilian self defense needs can differ from LEO needs.  One advantage to the Critical Defense stuff is that it has a polymer 'tip' inside the hollowpoint cavity.  This likely helps in feeding, especially in small guns, and is also intended to help prevent clogging of the hollowpoint and aid in expansion. 

 

If you find that you have trouble holding/controlling the LCP, there are rubber, slip on grip sleeves made for them.  I have used such grip sleeves on my P3AT and find that they add just enough width and grippiness to improve shootability without negatively impacting the ability to pocket carry.  People who want to make the surface a little more 'grippy' without adding much bulk sometimes simply cut a section from a bicycle innertube and slide it over the grips.  I have also tried this and it does help keep the grips from slipping around in your hand.  Something else that I have on the main carry mag of my P3AT (as can be seen in the pic, above) is a 'pinky extension'.  In my hands, that little plastic extension really adds a lot of control.  Of course, having held but never fired an LCP, it might already have grips that are more 'controllable' in the first place.

 

Believe it or not, especially with one or two of the minor modifications I mentioned, these little guns can be fun to shoot.  In fact, Even though I like the 642 better for carry  I have to grudgingly admit that my P3AT is sometimes fun to shoot while, as I mentioned, my 642 is not.  The only problem might be finding enough ammo, right now, to really have fun with it.

 

Congrats on finding your (first) concealed carry gun.  Enjoy it and carry safe!

Edited May 9, 2014 by JAB