When did the 38Spl stop being "Enough"? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : When did the 38Spl stop being "Enough"?


Pages : [1] 2

TN.Frank
01-29-2012, 16:38
I know there are some of us here on the forum who feel that the good ol' 38Spl(especially in the +P loading) is more then adequate for self defense, especially out of small frame revolvers BUT it seems like many want to poo poo this neat ctg. as being under powered or just plain inadequate for a self defense round.
LEO's use it for decades and granted, the LRN ammo they used WASN'T the best but with proper ammo this little round does a pretty good job IMHO.
So, at what point did people start thinking that the 38Spl just wasn't good enough to get the job done for a civilian self defense round?

ZekerMan
01-29-2012, 16:44
Well......its not a 10mm but the .38 will get the job done IMHO if put in the correct place. I have 3 revolvers placed around the homestead loaded with .38+P just in case.

michael e
01-29-2012, 16:44
I still carry one, I fell it's a good round still.

Eric2340
01-29-2012, 16:52
That's what is in the old lady's and Mom's .357s both(S&W 686 and 66), b/c both of them can get GOOD hits w/ them.


Works for them! :)


.

bac1023
01-29-2012, 16:55
I actually think its better than ever with today's ammo.

Jason D
01-29-2012, 17:02
I have no problem carrying a 4" K-Frame in .38 Special.

ca survivor
01-29-2012, 17:04
my only use for the .38 Special is a J frame as a BUG.

samurairabbi
01-29-2012, 17:05
So, at what point did people start thinking that the 38Spl just wasn't good enough to get the job done for a civilian self defense round?

It wasn't really the CARTRIDGE that faded from favor; it was the REVOLVER that shoots it. Starting in the late 1980's, the autoloading handgun took off in public perception, even in the 9mm caliber, because of its ammo capacity and possible rate of fire. The rimmed .38spl cartridge could not be easily adapted to such a handgun.

Also, the 38spl is limited by its low pressure. It could not be "improved" to operate at a SUBSTANTIALLY higher pressure with different powders, because of all the handguns in that caliber still floating around. The +P variant was about all that could have been done.

Ronaldo
01-29-2012, 17:09
People aren't any tougher these days, so the .38 is as deadly, or maybe deadlier, that it ever was. I think is has little to do with performance; sometimes things just go out of fashion. The nines and forties are just so much more coolio!

Even though .38 Sp. isn't 'fashionable', it has served me well for many years. It's not so much that the cartridge is weak or impotent, it's that these days cops and some self-taught 'combat' shooters aren't very good shots so they depend on spray 'n pray when the going gets tough.

Unless an adversary is a mutant or on some drug, most folks will respond to being plugged by ceasing the activity that caused the hole to be put into them. I for one still depend on the good 'ol reliable .38 much of the time. I don't feel like I'm sacrificing anything except quantity. 15 is nice, but sometime, or most times, 5 will do the job.

So I believe it is more than 'enough'. Like money, you get the best return from bullets placed wisely, not scattered all over the landscape.

I wouldn't normally respond to a thread like this but I was recently at my favorite indoor range, and watching the Gecko45 wannabees blasting away at three yards yielding shotgun-like patterns made me wonder if any of these young guys have a clue how bad they are? Sadly, a lot of rounds never made it onto the paper.... and won't on the bad guy either.

Ronaldo

Feanor
01-29-2012, 17:12
I carry .38 spl all the time, choose your ammo wisely, and it's all you will likely ever need.

pennlineman
01-29-2012, 17:22
The .38 spl has been and probably always will be my favorite cartridge. I've never been concerned with what the latest fad is though. It has stood the test of time.

NeverMore1701
01-29-2012, 17:29
I have no problem with the round, I don't so much like being limited to 5 shots, slow reloads, and mediocre sites.

ca survivor
01-29-2012, 17:30
I carry .38 spl all the time, choose your ammo wisely, and it's all you will likely ever need.
nice pair of wheel guns you have there, but they are .357 magnums right?

Nestor
01-29-2012, 17:37
Do You feel like some more powerful gun is needed now?

Narkcop
01-29-2012, 17:38
I carry a Ruger LCR a LOT!!!! In .38spl it's just right.

barth
01-29-2012, 17:45
http://www.speer-ammo.com/products/bullet_tests.htm

azbuckeye
01-29-2012, 17:46
I have no problem with the .38 Special and would gladly carry one. Today's selection of PD ammo gives plenty of good choices.

CDR_Glock
01-29-2012, 17:47
I have a Ruger LCR 38. I pocket carry it at times. It's an effective cartridge.

It really depends upon where I need to go and what I need to wear.

walt cowan
01-29-2012, 17:49
i carry both 10 and 38. not at the same time though.

Andrewsky
01-29-2012, 17:49
It became obsolete in 1911.

Here is my Model 10. It's a piece of junk.

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb30/Andrewsky89/Picture002.jpg?t=1327783993

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb30/Andrewsky89/Picture003.jpg

It's cool that's it's all wood and steel but it's outperformed in every way by any decent automatic pistol.

Nestor
01-29-2012, 17:52
It became obsolete in 1911.

Here is my Model 10. It's a piece of junk.

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb30/Andrewsky89/Picture002.jpg?t=1327783993

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb30/Andrewsky89/Picture003.jpg

It's cool that's it's all wood and steel but it's outperformed in every way by any decent automatic pistol.

I'm collecting such garbage. Feel free to drop it on me once it will start rotting.

hogship
01-29-2012, 17:59
In the early to mid part of last century, the 158 grain lead round nose was the standard duty ammunition for police use. Don't ever let anyone kid you that this cartridge won't kill the bad guys.......very dead!

I seldom carry 38spl anymore, but if I did, I'd load up with a standard pressure, and jacketed hollow point these days.

The +P and +P+ are more powerful, for sure......but considering the application, regular old standard loadings will get 'er done.........

Those who think otherwise are just responding to capitalism, and how marketing creates a "need" to get the "new and improved"........

ooc

AK74play
01-29-2012, 18:04
Haaaa, I carry six .38spc +p and hotter in my 6 inch 686 in a vertical shoulder holster and dont feel under gunned one bit. That six inch barrel really lets the round shine.

MedicOni
01-29-2012, 18:06
I like .38spl, but I hate revolvers. fun round to fire out of lever guns though :)

wmspdi
01-29-2012, 18:08
A wise person told me once that "every bullet fired has a lawyer attached to it". The "spray and prey" shooters don't seem to realize that every bullet they send down range that misses the target, or high power round that goes through it (due to over penetration), and hits a bystander is a wrongfull death suit or neglegent homicide case waiting to be filed. The term "overkill" comes to mind.

I admit that I carry a SIG P229R 40 S&W stoked with 180 Talons on duty, but I carry a S&W 042 J frame with a Crimson Trace laser and (2) Safariland Comp II speedloaders off duty. I practice regularly and know those first 5 rounds of Federal 129gr 38 Spl +P are going into the target(s), and in most cases not through it.

I am more worried about the moral and legal issue of killing an innocent bystander than I am about reloads for multiple gunmen or "zombies". The caliber is fine. The "I need more boolitts" shooters just need to learn better tactics, use cover and do more practice.

My $>02 worth.

Wyoming
01-29-2012, 18:17
I know there are some of us here on the forum who feel that the good ol' 38Spl(especially in the +P loading) is more then adequate for self defense, especially out of small frame revolvers BUT it seems like many want to poo poo this neat ctg. as being under powered or just plain inadequate for a self defense round.
LEO's use it for decades and granted, the LRN ammo they used WASN'T the best but with proper ammo this little round does a pretty good job IMHO.
So, at what point did people start thinking that the 38Spl just wasn't good enough to get the job done for a civilian self defense round?

It started in the 1930's when they brought out the 357 Magnum. It wasn't until the early 1970's when a company named Super Vel brought out a lighter , faster 110 grain bullet in JACKETED HOLLOW POINT! What seems obvious to us now never occurred to the big ammo manufactures then. That was the beginning of developing better ammo for police. There was a learning curve by the time the 158 SWC +P came out. That round in a 4" barrel became effective for police use. They were happy with that until the "wonder 9's" came out.

If you were a cop what would you like to carry? A all steel revolver with 6 shots and two speed loaders or a lightweight semi ?

The 38 Special is still popular for CCW carry in 2" revolvers.

Feanor
01-29-2012, 18:24
nice pair of wheel guns you have there, but they are .357 magnums right?

They are indeed, though the little model 66 has never tasted a single .357 magnum cartridge, that duty is left to the 686. A thing I do with short barreled revolvers like the 2.5" model-66 intended for defensive carry, is restrict them to soft point bullets. PENETRATION is king! JHP's in my experience are dismal performers from such short barreled .38/.357 revolvers, either failing to open, or in the case of the 110 gr +P+ Ranger load, opening up to quickly and fragmenting.

Lowjiber
01-29-2012, 18:33
I carried a concealed J-Frame, Titanium, 38spl +P for over twenty years. However, I finally reached a point where I was tired of trying to keep a revolver concealed. It is simply too fat when compared to a single-stack 9mm.

For me, the newer self-defense 9mm rounds are very effective, and I see no reason to go back.

wmspdi
01-29-2012, 18:33
True, but the light weight auto also brought it own set of problems. Failures to feed, failures to extract, magazine feeding issues, break in periods, cleaning issues. training drills to clear malfunctions and parts breakage and more.

Most cops are not "gun people" and don't often practice outside of required firearms training. Their sidearm is just a tool, like their flashlight or handcuffs, to tote around on their duty belt. To that end less weight is better. At the last qualifications for my department I was amazed how bad some of my fellow LEOs were. They only cared about passing the state requrements. Don't use LEOs as a benchmark.

I like my SIG, Glocks and 1911's but I don't feel under gunned with my J frame.

hogship
01-29-2012, 18:49
A wise person told me once that "every bullet fired has a lawyer attached to it". The "spray and prey" shooters don't seem to realize that every bullet they send down range that misses the target, or high power round that goes through it (due to over penetration), and hits a bystander is a wrongfull death suit or neglegent homicide case waiting to be filed. The term "overkill" comes to mind.

I admit that I carry a SIG P229R 40 S&W stoked with 180 Talons on duty, but I carry a S&W 042 J frame with a Crimson Trace laser and (2) Safariland Comp II speedloaders off duty. I practice regularly and know those first 5 rounds of Federal 129gr 38 Spl +P are going into the target(s), and in most cases not through it.

I am more worried about the moral and legal issue of killing an innocent bystander than I am about reloads for multiple gunmen or "zombies". The caliber is fine. The "I need more boolitts" shooters just need to learn better tactics, use cover and do more practice.

My $>02 worth.

The fallacy in this line of thinking is to assume that if a person chooses to have faster reloads, and more shots between reloads........that the person is any less trained, experienced, or capable a shooter than someone who chooses a revolver.

It's a kind of thinking that could put your life in jeopardy.

To make that point......let's just say you WERE going to be in a civilian gunfight of some unknown circumstances......it's GOING to happen. You don't know when, where, why, or any relevant facts or details. There will be at least one bad guy shooting at you, maybe more. You don't know whether the BG knows what he's doing, or not. What would YOU CHOOSE for the BG to be armed with......a revolver, or an automatic?

I believe anyone who would choose his opponent to have an automatic, instead of a revolver, is being disingenuous.

So, why wouldn't any person with reasoning skills consider the possibility (even if remote, but still a reasonable possibility) that giving oneself the best, or most advantages in a bad situation isn't, at the very least........wise in concept?

Since this always seems to boil down to "chances are" more shots won't be needed, those who prefer revolvers seem to rely on the "statistics" more than they do the reasonable possibilities. The possibility does exist that the advantages an automatic has over a revolver, just might be needed, and in the cards. To my way of thinking, it's a gamble of one's LIFE, and not a necessary gamble at all.

I'd have a hard time considering anything but an automatic when I'm on "the street". Maybe I'm just an old "fogey", or something, but there have just been too many times in my life that I've had a need, and I've had a solution to that need, BECAUSE I was prepared for that possibility beforehand.

For the record, I keep a revolver at home for HD, and I have revolvers for big nasty critters in the woods........but, "the street", and the thugs who rule the street, are an entirely different matter.

ooc

CMG
01-29-2012, 19:11
When did the 38Spl stop being "Enough"?

When capacity became the primary selection criteria.

Lee Jurras helped keep it relevant beyond the 60s, with the advent of good hollow-point ammo.

Nestor
01-29-2012, 19:13
The fallacy in this line of thinking is to assume that if a person chooses to have faster reloads, and more shots between reloads........that the person is any less trained, experienced, or capable a shooter than someone who chooses a revolver.

It's a kind of thinking that could put your life in jeopardy.

To make that point......let's just say you WERE going to be in a civilian gunfight of some unknown circumstances......it's GOING to happen. You don't know when, where, why, or any relevant facts or details. There will be at least one bad guy shooting at you, maybe more. You don't know whether the BG knows what he's doing, or not. What would YOU CHOOSE for the BG to be armed with......a revolver, or an automatic?

I believe anyone who would choose his opponent to have an automatic, instead of a revolver, is being disingenuous.

So, why wouldn't any person with reasoning skills consider the possibility (even if remote, but still a reasonable possibility) that giving oneself the best, or most advantages in a bad situation isn't, at the very least........wise in concept?

Since this always seems to boil down to "chances are" more shots won't be needed, those who prefer revolvers seem to rely on the "statistics" more than they do the reasonable possibilities. The possibility does exist that the advantages an automatic has over a revolver, just might be needed, and in the cards. To my way of thinking, it's a gamble of one's LIFE, and not a necessary gamble at all.

I'd have a hard time considering anything but an automatic when I'm on "the street". Maybe I'm just an old "fogey", or something, but there have just been too many times in my life that I've had a need, and I've had a solution to that need, BECAUSE I was prepared for that possibility beforehand.

For the record, I keep a revolver at home for HD, and I have revolvers for big nasty critters in the woods........but, "the street", and the thugs who rule the street, are an entirely different matter.

ooc

Again and again we are coming to the same point. Let's call it:
What may happen?
Zombies?
Maybe.
Thug on the parking lot?
Maybe.
Now, it's clear that instead of picking up the gun that You are the best with, You prefer to make your choice basing on the type of self-protection scenario envisioned. I actually believe it's the wrong sequence of priorities, but that's me. Things like the most possible scenario, individual's personal belief on what constitutes an effective defense caliber or type handgun they prefer or trust should be far less important.
What is important than?
The type of handgun that You can actually shoot the best.
Obviously it's not quite as important as it should be for many.
That's why I'm always leaving those threads with the impression that the "high capacity fans" may actually not be so focused on shot placement.

CajunBass
01-29-2012, 19:14
The way I remember it, in the mid 70's to mid 80's, the writings of Jeff Cooper (and others, but Cooper stands out in my mind) and the rise of IPSC shooting did a lot to push the 38/357 revolver to the back burner.

AA#5
01-29-2012, 19:14
It's all Jeff Cooper's fault. :supergrin:

He always praised the 45 ACP & said nothing else was adequate.

cowboy1964
01-29-2012, 19:16
A wise person told me once that "every bullet fired has a lawyer attached to it". The "spray and prey" shooters don't seem to realize that every bullet they send down range that misses the target, or high power round that goes through it (due to over penetration), and hits a bystander is a wrongfull death suit or neglegent homicide case waiting to be filed. The term "overkill" comes to mind.

If you want to fire the minimum number of bullets, wouldn't you want a larger/more powerful caliber? What does capacity of the gun have to do with it? Just because you have 17+1 doesn't mean you have to fire all of them. I don't get this idea that someone is going to be more accurate with a 5-shot snubby than a 17 shot Glock. That doesn't even make sense.

AA#5
01-29-2012, 19:16
I forgot where I read it, but a cute quote from an LEO while discussing caliber/effectiveness:

"Me shootin' straight with my 38 beats the bad guy givin' me jive from his 45."

CDR_Glock
01-29-2012, 19:23
I do feel comfortable with my 8shot Model 627. But I do put 357s in it.

I never fed it 38.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Veedubklown
01-29-2012, 19:29
I actually think its better than ever with today's ammo.

Don't think I've ever disagreed with ya Bac, and I sure wouldn't start now!

This also being said for .380 and .410. There's been huge advances across all ranges of ammo, but the developments for these 3 cartridges in the last 5 years has been insane.

Andrewsky
01-29-2012, 19:36
Again and again we are coming to the same point. Let's call it:
What may happen?
Zombies?
Maybe.
Thug on the parking lot?
Maybe.
Now, it's clear that instead of picking up the gun that You are the best with, You prefer to make your choice basing on the type of self-protection scenario envisioned. I actually believe it's the wrong sequence of priorities, but that's me. Things like the most possible scenario, individual's personal belief on what constitutes an effective defense caliber or type handgun they prefer or trust should be far less important.
What is important than?
The type of handgun that You can actually shoot the best.
Obviously it's not quite as important as it should be for many.
That's why I'm always leaving those threads with the impression that the "high capacity fans" may actually not be so focused on shot placement.

Quit being so obtuse. Lose the sissy pistols and get yourself a Glock.

hogship
01-29-2012, 19:43
Again and again we are coming to the same point. Let's call it:
What may happen?
Zombies?
Maybe.
Thug on the parking lot?
Maybe.
Now, it's clear that instead of picking up the gun that You are the best with, You prefer to make your choice basing on the type of self-protection scenario envisioned. I actually believe it's the wrong sequence of priorities, but that's me. Things like the most possible scenario, individual's personal belief on what constitutes an effective defense caliber or type handgun they prefer or trust should be far less important.
What is important than?
The type of handgun that You can actually shoot the best.
Obviously it's not quite as important as it should be for many.
That's why I'm always leaving those threads with the impression that the "high capacity fans" may actually not be so focused on shot placement.

Howdy Nestor......

Your response was expected, so I hung around for a bit........ At the very least, you are entertaining! :supergrin:

I'd say zombies falls within the "impossibility" part of the meter! :wavey:

If you base your handgun choice on the "most possible scenario", then not having a gun at all is well within the odds of your ever needing one, and THAT, my friend, is the most possible scenario......so, why do you arm yourself?...... Ahh-ha!....... I see!....... You arm yourself against the "possibility" you might need to defend yourself with it. Boy, now that doesn't seem to compute at all, since a remote "possibility" is why you arm yourself in the first place......and a remote "possibility" is why you don't arm yourself against what is well within a reasonable assumption of a circumstance you might encounter!

Hey, Nestor, friend.......I understand why you choose the way you do. I hope you, in turn, understand my reasoning for the choices I make. I'm not now, or don't believe I've ever said your choices were wrong or bad........it's just that your choices would be the wrong choices for me, considering my differing base viewpoint on the matter.

Believe me when I say I really do appreciate your thoughts and input on gun subjects. I have even come to admire and respect your opinions on this forum.....even when we disagree.....Berto, too!

It does seem that this particular disagreement between us will be forever that!......so, don't expect me to ever agree on this one! :supergrin:



ooc

Fallout
01-29-2012, 19:59
Hand guns of any caliber are not effective stoppers no matter how you chalk it up. If you take out the brain or spinal cord obviously those are instant stops.

People assume all to often from the movies that when someone is shot by a gun they drop and are incapacitated. People also assume that moving targets are easy to hit. Having been present during an Officer involved shooting when the bad guy didnt go down until multiple center mass rounds were put into him was an eye opener.

Another talking point is number of rounds

About 11 years ago we had an officer shot in the face as he was approaching a house to investigate a 911 hangup. After he was hit he drew his weapon and dumped a mag into the ground hit a reload then continued firing until he couldnt see because of the blood running into his eyes. Suspect wasnt hit ultimately surrendered after standoff. Officer lived and recovered completely. Viewing the crime scene u could see where he was walking the bullets up to the window the suspect was firing out of ultimately shooting out the window the suspect had been perched in. When the officer gave his statement he said that after he realized he had been shot he drew his weapon and fired at the suspect in the window. He said that he thought he was aiming directly at him but that the bullets werent hitting where he could see them. He said shortly after he reloaded he couldnt see anymore and stopped firing. When it was explained what we had found he didnt believe it until he saw the crimescene photos and diagrams. He said and Im sure in his mind he thought he was aiming at the suspect in the window the entire time. In reality he was drawing and getting on target all while pulling the trigger.

There is a number of physiological side effects that come into play when you think that you are fixing to die. Accuracy is greatly effected by them. Im not saying being familiar with its operation and training your fundamentals is not important because it is. But if you think you are going to be Dirty Harry and start dropping fools with one shot you are setting yourself up for failure.

speedway
01-29-2012, 20:01
I have no problem carrying a 4" K-Frame in .38 Special.


I have a 2" K-frame in my pocket as I am typing this.

ctfireman
01-29-2012, 20:02
I'm comfortable with it.

TN.Frank
01-29-2012, 20:20
I think a few folks hit on some things. As LEO's switched to semi-autos, revolvers just kind of fell out of style. It's gotten to the point where many just don't feel comfortable with 5 or 6 shots anymore. I even found myself getting into that mind set but I've shaken it off and now feel fine with my little J-Frame. Way I look at it I've got a 5 shot revolver that's been with me all the time and went with me everywhere for the last week where as my PX4 sat home with those 14 rounds in the mag doing me NO GOOD what so ever.
Also, as some have said, folks are prone to want the "latest, greatest" so even when something is working well they still want something "better". I've always tried to stick with what works, heck I've got a carburetor on the motor in my truck because it works, it's simple and it's something I understand. Same with the ol' 38Spl, I've loaded this ctg. for decades, mostly with 158gr SWC's and Unique and time and time again it works.
I'm glad to see that there's a few other folks like me that still appreciate this great ol' round. Long live the 38Spl. :supergrin:

circa02
01-29-2012, 20:34
The way I see it, you're probably going to run out of time before you run out of bullets. Say you have 12 rounds instantly available. You pull and shoot all of it an aggressor, hitting him, say, 8 times and he still doesn't drop. I don't think hes gonna wait for you to reload.

wmspdi
01-29-2012, 20:34
The fallacy in this line of thinking is to assume that if a person chooses to have faster reloads, and more shots between reloads........that the person is any less trained, experienced, or capable a shooter than someone who chooses a revolver.

It's a kind of thinking that could put your life in jeopardy.

To make that point......let's just say you WERE going to be in a civilian gunfight of some unknown circumstances......it's GOING to happen. You don't know when, where, why, or any relevant facts or details. There will be at least one bad guy shooting at you, maybe more. You don't know whether the BG knows what he's doing, or not. What would YOU CHOOSE for the BG to be armed with......a revolver, or an automatic?

I believe anyone who would choose his opponent to have an automatic, instead of a revolver, is being disingenuous.

So, why wouldn't any person with reasoning skills consider the possibility (even if remote, but still a reasonable possibility) that giving oneself the best, or most advantages in a bad situation isn't, at the very least........wise in concept?

Since this always seems to boil down to "chances are" more shots won't be needed, those who prefer revolvers seem to rely on the "statistics" more than they do the reasonable possibilities. The possibility does exist that the advantages an automatic has over a revolver, just might be needed, and in the cards. To my way of thinking, it's a gamble of one's LIFE, and not a necessary gamble at all.

I'd have a hard time considering anything but an automatic when I'm on "the street". Maybe I'm just an old "fogey", or something, but there have just been too many times in my life that I've had a need, and I've had a solution to that need, BECAUSE I was prepared for that possibility beforehand.

For the record, I keep a revolver at home for HD, and I have revolvers for big nasty critters in the woods........but, "the street", and the thugs who rule the street, are an entirely different matter.

ooc

Based on the logic above I should just leave my handguns at home at carry my AR15 with two 30 round mags clipped for rapid reload. Or maybe check one of the MP5 9mm submachine guns out of the armory. Or better yet have my AR15 on the seat of the car, my SIG P229 in a pancake holster, my J frame on my ankle, and a few "flash-bangs" in my pocket. I live and serve as an LEO in a suburban community, not South Central L.A., so please tell me how much is enough in "Rambo World"?

You can over prepare for the events in life that probably will never ever happen. On duty, we are looking for, and responding to trouble. Off duty I'm not looking for it, and it is not likely looking for me, so my 38 snub is a "just in case" tool. Carry what you want, but my J frame is enough for me off duty.

BTW- Those off us in law enforcement are limited by departmental policy regarding the types and caliber of weapons we are authourized to carry both on and off duty. Sometimes the authorized high capacity duty weapon is just not practical to carry during one's off duty hours. My J frame is a great pocket gun when I am usually packing light.

JackMac
01-29-2012, 20:41
shot placement. I saw a man shot in the lower back with a 158 gr. 38 spl. and the round went completely through him. He lived. Saw another shot in the head, the round went under his scalp and exited behind his left ear. Did not penetrate his skull. Was a glancing shot, entered to the left of his left eyebrow. Had it been centered between his eyes he would not have lived. Saw a dead center chest shot with 38 spl. and that gentleman died before EMS arrived. Shot placement is key with any pistol round. The 38 spl is a still a good round that is greater now due to the variety of loads available.

Sheepdog Scout
01-29-2012, 20:42
It's the same reason many people think that the 9mm is an ineffective round. Because so many people are infatuated with size. Whether it be .40, 10mm, (same size, different ballistics), or the old .45.

But whether it be .38 or 9mm. Especially with the newer SD offerings, both are perfectly fine.

If you want one shot stopping power. You'd better haul around a Barrett 82 in .50 BMG and shoot someone at point blank range.

hogship
01-29-2012, 20:48
The fallacy in this line of thinking is to assume that if a person chooses to have faster reloads, and more shots between reloads........that the person is any less trained, experienced, or capable a shooter than someone who chooses a revolver.

It's a kind of thinking that could put your life in jeopardy.

To make that point......let's just say you WERE going to be in a civilian gunfight of some unknown circumstances......it's GOING to happen. You don't know when, where, why, or any relevant facts or details. There will be at least one bad guy shooting at you, maybe more. You don't know whether the BG knows what he's doing, or not. What would YOU CHOOSE for the BG to be armed with......a revolver, or an automatic?

I believe anyone who would choose his opponent to have an automatic, instead of a revolver, is being disingenuous.

So, why wouldn't any person with reasoning skills consider the possibility (even if remote, but still a reasonable possibility) that giving oneself the best, or most advantages in a bad situation isn't, at the very least........wise in concept?

Since this always seems to boil down to "chances are" more shots won't be needed, those who prefer revolvers seem to rely on the "statistics" more than they do the reasonable possibilities. The possibility does exist that the advantages an automatic has over a revolver, just might be needed, and in the cards. To my way of thinking, it's a gamble of one's LIFE, and not a necessary gamble at all.

I'd have a hard time considering anything but an automatic when I'm on "the street". Maybe I'm just an old "fogey", or something, but there have just been too many times in my life that I've had a need, and I've had a solution to that need, BECAUSE I was prepared for that possibility beforehand.

For the record, I keep a revolver at home for HD, and I have revolvers for big nasty critters in the woods........but, "the street", and the thugs who rule the street, are an entirely different matter.

ooc

Based on the logic above I should just leave my handguns at home at carry my AR15 with two 30 round mags clipped for rapid reload. Or maybe check one of the MP5 9mm submachine guns out of the armory. Or better yet have my AR15 on the seat of the car, my SIG P229 in a pancake holster, my J frame on my ankle, and a few "flash-bangs" in my pocket. I live and serve as an LEO in a suburban community, not South Central L.A., so please tell me how much is enough in "Rambo World"?

You can over prepare for the events in life that probably will never ever happen. On duty, we are looking for, and responding to trouble. Off duty I'm not looking for it, and it is not likely looking for me, so my 38 snub is a "just in case" tool. Carry what you want, but my J frame is enough for me off duty.

BTW- Those off us in law enforcement are limited by departmental policy regarding the types and caliber of weapons we are authourized to carry both on and off duty. Sometimes the authorized high capacity duty weapon is just not practical to carry during one's off duty hours. My J frame is a great pocket gun when I am usually packing light.

Flashbangs.....MP5.....AR.........Rambo world?

Logic you say?

OK, answer the question please.......

ooc

gunowner1
01-29-2012, 20:49
I have a 2" K-frame in my pocket as I am typing this.
I have a 3" K Frame on my desk as i type this.

Berto
01-29-2012, 21:03
It was about capacity. There was no issue with the .38sp performance with a good load, in fact the 147gr 9mm loads were developed to approximate the FBI .38sp load performance.
My confidence in the revolver comes from years of consistent practice and learning to hit with it well, along with the fact I don't experience malfunctions anywhere near as often as I do with autos, even 'good' ones.
Those things are more important to me than whether I need to reload after 6 or 14.
LE deals in seeking crime and often involves large groups, capacity has much greater value vs someone needing personal defense weapon.

hogship
01-29-2012, 21:22
It was about capacity. There was no issue with the .38sp performance with a good load, in fact the 147gr 9mm loads were developed to approximate the FBI .38sp load performance.
My confidence in the revolver comes from years of consistent practice and learning to hit with it well, along with the fact I don't experience malfunctions anywhere near as often as I do with autos, even 'good' ones.
Those things are more important to me than whether I need to reload after 6 or 14.
LE deals in seeking crime and often involves large groups, capacity has much greater value vs someone needing personal defense weapon.

Hello Berto........

There probably isn't anyone on this forum who would disagree with your choice of a revolver, for the reasons you do. I don't, anyway......but I don't make that choice for myself.

Tell me...........is it reasonable to think it's an impossibility you will never miss a moving target, once, twice, or more? Is it reasonable to think you'll never be faced with more than one assailant? Is it possible you could walk into a rape in progress by an armed gang? Is it possible you could be standing near a bank when it's being robbed and you clearly see the faces of the robbers as they exit?

The point is......you don't know these things......and, other than citing probability and statistics, examples like those I made up above are not just possible......they are probable to someone, somewhere, at some time.

These improbable things can, and do happen........not just the specific examples I've given, but a vast amount of possibilities in which some of these things do happen to some unfortunate bystanders......people no different than you and I, not just police.

ooc

Berto
01-29-2012, 21:57
Hello Berto........

There probably isn't anyone on this forum who would disagree with your choice of a revolver, for the reasons you do. I don't, anyway......but I don't make that choice for myself.

Tell me...........is it reasonable to think it's an impossibility you will never miss a moving target, once, twice, or more? Is it reasonable to think you'll never be faced with more than one assailant? Is it possible you could walk into a rape in progress by an armed gang? Is it possible you could be standing near a bank when it's being robbed and you clearly see the faces of the robbers as they exit?

The point is......you don't know these things......and, other than citing probability and statistics, examples like those I made up above are not just possible......they are probable to someone, somewhere, at some time.

These improbable things can, and do happen........not just the specific examples I've given, but a vast amount of possibilities in which some of these things do happen to some unfortunate bystanders......people no different than you and I, not just police.

ooc

I agree, just as I don't see see how one weapon can be entirely adequate for 'street use' but not adequate for HD or vice versa, wolves travel in packs whether at the ATM or kicking in your door. There is no crystal ball, every choice is a balance of pro's and cons.
I choose based on what I feel best suits MY needs and addresses my perceived threat levels. For pocket, it's a revolver. For belt, usually an auto.

Cool?:dunno:

hogship
01-29-2012, 22:11
I agree, just as I don't see see how one weapon can be entirely adequate for 'street use' but not adequate for HD or vice versa, wolves travel in packs whether at the ATM or kicking in your door. There is no crystal ball, every choice is a balance of pro's and cons.
I choose based on what I feel best suits MY needs and addresses my perceived threat levels. For pocket, it's a revolver. For belt, usually an auto.

Cool?:dunno:

Yep, cool.........:supergrin:

What's "adequate" is an opinion......and obviously not shared by us!......but, that's ok

As far as the wolves......that's a good point. We've got wolf packs living only a few miles from where I live. Darn liberals and their wanting to re-introduce them into this area. One of the local ranchers was attacked recently........bad news, and the liberal press didn't want to run with the news.......but, that's another story. I saw some photographs of the damage done to the rancher.....really bad stuff. Local newspaper and tv didn't want to touch the story, because........well, wolf re-introduction is a liberal project, and they didn't want to buck the system. :steamed:

ooc

TN.Frank
01-29-2012, 22:49
I'd kind of hope that once you shot the first couple "wolves" the rest of em' would get the hint and move to easier pickings down the street. I mean really, in a SD situation do you really think they'll take the time to notice that I've only got a 5 shot revolver and wait for me to unload on em' before they jump me or do you think that once I cap off a couple three rounds they'll run away to try and live another day to commit their crimes.

NeverMore1701
01-29-2012, 22:55
I'd kind of hope that once you shot the first couple "wolves" the rest of em' would get the hint and move to easier pickings down the street. I mean really, in a SD situation do you really think they'll take the time to notice that I've only got a 5 shot revolver and wait for me to unload on em' before they jump me or do you think that once I cap off a couple three rounds they'll run away to try and live another day to commit their crimes.

Most likely, but having 10 shots per target makes me all warm and fuzzy :supergrin:

English
01-30-2012, 06:30
hogship,
As usual you are talking a lot of sense!

We can split the needs of self defence into two categories. In one, a petty criminal wants your wallet because it is easier than working. He doesn't want to kill you because it is dangerous to him to do so. He certainly does not want to get shot because the value of your wallet is less than the value of not being shot. If he can escape, any firearm will be enough to drive him off. A .38sp is as good as anything but a .32 or .380 semi auto will do as well.

The second category is where a different kind of criminal is entirely prepared to kill you or possitively intends to kill you. This can range from a druggie who just does not care about anything except his next fix to a group of some kind of weirdos to what we can call well controlled criminals you have witnessed in the act of their high value crime. If you survive the first contact the attack will not stop with a few loud bangs and for this the .38sp is totally inadequate.

The probabilities must be strongly biased towards the first category of encounter but in that a better strategy might be just to hand over your wallet. Once you start shooting he will start shooting and it is a rare wallet that is worth getting shot with anything anywhere on your body. So the most sensible reason to go armed, unless you can spot the oncoming attack before a gun is pointed at you, is to defend yourself in extremis. And for that the .38sp is significantly inadequate both because it lacks enough KE and because of its capacity/size.

I have a delightful scandium snubby but I would sooner have a small 9mm auto pistol for self defence at no relative loss and several gains to the 9mm. Once we get to the size of a 4" barrel .38sp there is no argument in favour of it over a 9mm or 357SIG auto of the same size.

English

Nestor
01-30-2012, 06:31
I would like to add just two things. First, from my personal point of view I will always pick up the firearm that I'm most proficient with. I don't really understand the idea of shooting each and every BG in the group that we just may or may not encounter. How many opponents are You planning to shoot at? I think that if we are going to stay alive and even better put down one or two of them the rest will pull back. If not...well here is the other thing I don't fully understand. Revolver can be reloaded quite quickly. It's not a weapon limited to 6 rounds. I'm usually carrying 4 speedloaders on me. How much faster one can reload the auto vs revolver? 1 second maybe? Maybe even not that. Practice is the key here. If one doesn't like the revolver, one doesn't carry it. This is fine and easy to understand. However anyone who carries the wheelgun is not risking his own life by making such choice. This is nonsense.

Nestor
01-30-2012, 06:35
Howdy Nestor......

Your response was expected, so I hung around for a bit........ At the very least, you are entertaining! :supergrin:

I'd say zombies falls within the "impossibility" part of the meter! :wavey:

If you base your handgun choice on the "most possible scenario", then not having a gun at all is well within the odds of your ever needing one, and THAT, my friend, is the most possible scenario......so, why do you arm yourself?...... Ahh-ha!....... I see!....... You arm yourself against the "possibility" you might need to defend yourself with it. Boy, now that doesn't seem to compute at all, since a remote "possibility" is why you arm yourself in the first place......and a remote "possibility" is why you don't arm yourself against what is well within a reasonable assumption of a circumstance you might encounter!

Hey, Nestor, friend.......I understand why you choose the way you do. I hope you, in turn, understand my reasoning for the choices I make. I'm not now, or don't believe I've ever said your choices were wrong or bad........it's just that your choices would be the wrong choices for me, considering my differing base viewpoint on the matter.

Believe me when I say I really do appreciate your thoughts and input on gun subjects. I have even come to admire and respect your opinions on this forum.....even when we disagree.....Berto, too!

It does seem that this particular disagreement between us will be forever that!......so, don't expect me to ever agree on this one! :supergrin:



ooc

Hey Hogship,
no worries...our small disagreements are making this place just a bit more colorful. That's always fun :wavey:

wmspdi
01-30-2012, 07:44
I can live with "6 for sure" (or 5 in a J frame) before a reload, as opposed to the risk of a malfunction after the first shot and having to spend time performing a clearance drill. Few people carry extra magazines on their belt, if at all, since they have 10 or more in the gun. If you have a jam and have to do a clearing drill (while taking fire) you have a big problem. Auto loaders can, and do, jam from time to time. Revolvers are much more dependable and the manual of arms is simple... point and shoot. Would bigger bullets in a revolver be better? Maybe... or maybe not. How quickly can you recover from the heavy recoil for a second shot?

As far as KE, any energy not dumped into the target (as in a through and through) is wasted, and a danger to anyone down range. Compared to the size of a human target there is very little difference in the diameter between a .357, .400 or even .450 bullet. Between the extremes it is only .093 inches. Since a fast light .357 size 38 +P can expand to the size of a .45 hardball it blurs the lines even more. No handgun round is fast enough to create the hydrostatic shock of a rifle round, so you have to disrupt a major organ (shot placement to the heart, brain or lungs) to stop the fight, or wait for wound blood loss to cause blackout.

These days many people are trusting their lives to pocket .380s with 7 rounds, and all but worthless sights. I feel the .380 is OK for summer time, but is a little too light for year round use. But for some a .380 (or 38 snub) is the biggest gun they can carry. After all the first rule of gun fighting is to have a gun. At some point you have to play the statistics, because if you accept the worst case scenario you would either have to arm up like Rambo, or never leave your home fortress.

BTW- In case you think I don't like auto pistols just let me state that I own 1911s in 9mm, 40 and 45 ACP, Glocks in 9mm and 40, a SIG P229 40, a Kahr PM9, a S&W Model 10 and a J frame 042 (early model 442). The J frame with a Crimson Trace laser is what I carry most of the time. I bet my life on it.

TN.Frank
01-30-2012, 08:44
I think a lot depends on where you live. Here in Crossville it's fairly peaceful, low crime rate and it's normally restricted to certain areas. As long as I avoid those bad areas I won't have to worry much about becoming the victim of a crime. Now if we ever move back to Phoenix, AZ you can bet your bottom dollar I'll be packin' something in 40cal with at least a 11+1 round with a couple extra mags to boot.
Like I said before, my 642 has been at my side(or inside my waste band,LOL) since I got it last Saturday, my PX4 normally sat in a drawer so which one would serve me better in a gun fight, why the one that I'm able to have with me and that's my little 642, 5 shot.
If I've got to face down a gang of criminals then I really don't even think an AR with a 30 round mag would be enough since I'm only one man vs God knows how many criminals in the gang. I've got to be dead on with each and every shot, they've only got to get lucky with a couple shots to get me. I try to plan my life to stay out of such situations if at all possible. I've carried all manner of handguns over the years(starting at age 19 with a Cap n' Ball Remington) and in 31 years I've never needed to use one, I just pray that I never do but if I do I also pray that what I have at the time will be enough to take care of business.

M&P15T
01-30-2012, 08:57
People aren't any tougher these days, so the .38 is as deadly, or maybe deadlier, that it ever was. I think is has little to do with performance; sometimes things just go out of fashion. The nines and forties are just so much more coolio!

Even though .38 Sp. isn't 'fashionable', it has served me well for many years. It's not so much that the cartridge is weak or impotent, it's that these days cops and some self-taught 'combat' shooters aren't very good shots so they depend on spray 'n pray when the going gets tough.

Unless an adversary is a mutant or on some drug, most folks will respond to being plugged by ceasing the activity that caused the hole to be put into them. I for one still depend on the good 'ol reliable .38 much of the time. I don't feel like I'm sacrificing anything except quantity. 15 is nice, but sometime, or most times, 5 will do the job.

So I believe it is more than 'enough'. Like money, you get the best return from bullets placed wisely, not scattered all over the landscape.

I wouldn't normally respond to a thread like this but I was recently at my favorite indoor range, and watching the Gecko45 wannabees blasting away at three yards yielding shotgun-like patterns made me wonder if any of these young guys have a clue how bad they are? Sadly, a lot of rounds never made it onto the paper.... and won't on the bad guy either.

Ronaldo

People aren't tougher, they're just better armed. Bad guys are packing better stuff these days, so it's just an arms race one must keep up with. Plus, many times attackers are found to be under the influence of narcotics, and that is why multiple hits and capacity is a big bonus. It's not about going out of "fashion", it's the reality of changing times and threats.

Revolvers are over-matched fire power wise to modern autos, so that's why most people understand that cartridges like .38 in a revolver is not the best choice for HD/CCW.

Spray & pray? How many times have you been in a gun fight? Please share with the class how you stood still and took careful, aimed shots with your .38 snubby while being shot at.:upeyes::upeyes:

I love how you and other people talk about how this pistol or that cartridge has "served" them well.......when by "served" 99% of people mean it's what's easy and covenient to carry. Get in an actual gun fight, face and armed assailant (or mutiple assailants) and that little .38 revolver in your hand is going to feel like a single shot derringer.

M&P15T
01-30-2012, 09:02
I can live with "6 for sure" (or 5 in a J frame) before a reload, as opposed to the risk of a malfunction after the first shot and having to spend time performing a clearance drill..........In case you think I don't like auto pistols just let me state that I own 1911s in 9mm, 40 and 45 ACP, Glocks in 9mm and 40, a SIG P229 40, a Kahr PM9, a S&W Model 10 and a J frame 042 (early model 442). The J frame with a Crimson Trace laser is what I carry most of the time. I bet my life on it.

You must have seriosuly bad luck if all of your autos malfunction all the time. Maybe better maintenance?

itslucky
01-30-2012, 09:07
I carry Colt Cobra .38 spl all the time

Ronaldo
01-30-2012, 09:14
M&P15T, sounds like you have been reading too many Operator fanboy magazines...

Yes I have been under fire, more than once.

Yes, I have returned fire, more than once.

I'm still here, unharmed.

Does your mommy know you're using her computer???

Ronaldo (see my sig line and learn from it)

Baba Louie
01-30-2012, 09:18
For LEOs I'd say when the Miami Shootout occurred, which coupled w/ new Austrian plastic framed higher capacity semi auto being practically given away to Agencies around the country.

Miami Vice showed everyone that the new TV criminals had super duper firepower, Scarface showed everyone that Movie bad guys were pert near invincible... and your local coppers are packing Colt and S&W wheelguns?!?!

Time for a change for them. Which did put a lot of nice handguns on the market for us... didn't it?

carbuncle
01-30-2012, 10:00
I like .38 alright, I still want another 85 to replace the one I sold when I moved to an anti-gun state. But right now, I like 6 rounds of 180 grain Golden Sabers, with another 7 in my pocket, in a delivery system less than an inch thick a little more than 10 rounds of 158 grain LSWC...

Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk

wmspdi
01-30-2012, 11:40
You must have seriosuly bad luck if all of your autos malfunction all the time. Maybe better maintenance?

Most of my autos are race guns and don't "usually" malfunction, but I have seen many CC autos at the range, and at matches, that have choked. All it takes is once at the wrong time. That is why we teach clearing drills! If the risk of a FTF or FTE was not real there would be no need to teach the drills. Have YOU ever had to clear a malfuntion while under fire, or at least on the clock in a competition? It's very easy to become all thumbs under the stress.

You can miss just as easy with an auto, and put innocent lives at risk with all those stray rounds. As far as the bad guys being better armed... Hey, they are now getting their hands on bullet proof vests. I saw a guy selling them at a gun show a few months ago. No police ID required and I saw a couple of gang bangers trying them on. Better practice for that precise head shot now because hits to the body will only hurt and make them even madder.

I agree with another poster. Match the weapon to your risk level, and carry more firepower of you feel the risk warrents it, but don't dismiss the 38 +P revelover. For many of us not spending time in the hood it fits our needs.

wmspdi
01-30-2012, 11:47
For LEOs I'd say when the Miami Shootout occurred, which coupled w/ new Austrian plastic framed higher capacity semi auto being practically given away to Agencies around the country.

Miami Vice showed everyone that the new TV criminals had super duper firepower, Scarface showed everyone that Movie bad guys were pert near invincible... and your local coppers are packing Colt and S&W wheelguns?!?!

Time for a change for them. Which did put a lot of nice handguns on the market for us... didn't it?

The FBI would have been out gunned regardless what handgun they carried vs 2 perps with automatic rifles and vests. Never take a handgun to a rifle fight, much less a machine gun battle.

To match the firepower on the street I would issue fully automatic weapons to the police like they do in other countries. But then we risk a public relations nightmare with cries of "police state". Oh, and then there is the issue of all those full auto rounds sprayed all over the place and the risk to innocents. It's all a matter of balance.

And yes... my IDPA S&W Model 10 was a police turn in that I got super cheap! :supergrin:

Glockaround the Clock
01-30-2012, 13:14
To sell something sometimes you need to create a percieved need. I'm fine with a 38 special because I have seen them work.

series1811
01-30-2012, 13:17
I really think it has a lot to do with the same thing that gave 9mm such a bad name: the 1986 FBI shootout in Miami. Most of those agents were carrying .38's.

And, that is unfortunate, and not really fair. Because after soaking up lots of mostly badly placed rounds, it was three .38's in the K zone each, that finally put a stop to Platt and Matix.

esh325
01-30-2012, 13:24
As far as lethality goes, I never heard somebody say the .38 special wasn't enough. Perhaps in capacity it's not enough.



You can miss just as easy with an auto, and put innocent lives at risk with all those stray rounds. As far as the bad guys being better armed... Hey, they are now getting their hands on bullet proof vests. I saw a guy selling them at a gun show a few months ago. No police ID required and I saw a couple of gang bangers trying them on. Better practice for that precise head shot now because hits to the body will only hurt and make them even madder.


It's a silly argument to imply that people with automatics are just spray and pray shooters that don't care about where their shots go.

3000fps
01-30-2012, 13:26
A friend of the family carried a little .38 SPL for over 15 years without ever changing the ammo or opening the cylinder. He did a lot of brick work and carried mexican style all through the years.

The gun had to be essentially junked because it was so caked with sweat that the cylinder was locked shut and unable to open.

That was a case of negligence on his part, but interesting none the less.

Check this video out,

http://youtu.be/0JffIlTeteY

brisk21
01-30-2012, 13:32
There sure isn't anything wrong with a .38 special. I just don't like snubnose revolvers. I have two of them. I don't like the slow reloads, the heavy ass trigger, or the fact there is nothing in a revolver to dampen recoil. I also don't like trying to conceal the fat cylinder in the middle of a skinny gun. Plus, I can't shoot them as good as I can my sub compact 9mm and .380. My two J-frames are guns I have almost no use for, but one was my dads when he was a cop and the other my dad bought for me. (he bought my 2 brothers the same models, so we all have matching snubnose j-frames). So I can't ever get rid of them. Sentimental value greatly outweighs real value.

M&P15T
01-30-2012, 14:38
M&P15T, sounds like you have been reading too many Operator fanboy magazines...

Yes I have been under fire, more than once.

Yes, I have returned fire, more than once.

I'm still here, unharmed.

Does your mommy know you're using her computer???

Ronaldo (see my sig line and learn from it)

Ronaldo;

You've been underfire and still here because better men than you actually returned fire while you ducked and cried for your mother.

Does she know you're on the internet telling lies again?

No one has anything to learn from a liar, so bugger off mate.

Bald Baron
01-30-2012, 14:41
I carry a ruger sp101 IMB in the summer with no worries.:wavey:

M&P15T
01-30-2012, 14:43
Most of my autos are race guns and don't "usually" malfunction, but I have seen many CC autos at the range, and at matches, that have choked. All it takes is once at the wrong time. That is why we teach clearing drills! If the risk of a FTF or FTE was not real there would be no need to teach the drills. Have YOU ever had to clear a malfuntion while under fire, or at least on the clock in a competition? It's very easy to become all thumbs under the stress.

You can miss just as easy with an auto, and put innocent lives at risk with all those stray rounds. As far as the bad guys being better armed... Hey, they are now getting their hands on bullet proof vests. I saw a guy selling them at a gun show a few months ago. No police ID required and I saw a couple of gang bangers trying them on. Better practice for that precise head shot now because hits to the body will only hurt and make them even madder.

I agree with another poster. Match the weapon to your risk level, and carry more firepower of you feel the risk warrents it, but don't dismiss the 38 +P revelover. For many of us not spending time in the hood it fits our needs.

I've owned 13 GLOCK pistols, and 3 or 4 other autos. Of all of those, only 2 were not 100% reliable. I've never had to clear a failure during a comp because I don't **** around with my pistols, I leave them stock.

Race guns are going to malfunction because they're Frankenguns. They're competition only pieces of **** that have been screwed up by wanabe gun-smiths in their 50s and 60s that are trying to get a mechanical advantage over better shooters.....I've seen plenty of them at IDPA matches. I've watched magazines lose their after-market floor plates and spray their guts all over the shooting range, and much, much more. Stock auto pistols these days are pretty much reliable. To worry over an auto not being reliable (to the point where you won't carry one) is to have never been able to just leave one stock.

My current G17C has about 3-5k through it, without a single failure. This panty-waisted whining about autos being un-reliable is nothing but fantasy and whistful dreaming of the olden days when wheel guns and 1911s ruled.

And you can miss even easier with a 5 shot, double action, crappy sighted .38 snubby, and have fewer rounds in the pistol to boot. Sounds like a plan for someone that thinks the worst threat they'll see is a rabid dog.

And yes, my attitude comes from the hood....Detroit and Benton Harbor, MI. to be exact. Obviously you've never lived in such an area, or your attitude would be very different.

Berto
01-30-2012, 15:27
I've owned 13 GLOCK pistols, and 3 or 4 other autos. Of all of those, only 2 were not 100% reliable. I've never had to clear a failure during a comp because I don't **** around with my pistols, I leave them stock.

Race guns are going to malfunction because they're Frankenguns. They're competition only pieces of **** that have been screwed up by wanabe gun-smiths in their 50s and 60s that are trying to get a mechanical advantage over better shooters.....I've seen plenty of them at IDPA matches. I've watched magazines lose their after-market floor plates and spray their guts all over the shooting range, and much, much more. Stock auto pistols these days are pretty much reliable. To worry over an auto not being reliable (to the point where you won't carry one) is to have never been able to just leave one stock.

My current G17C has about 3-5k through it, without a single failure. This panty-waisted whining about autos being un-reliable is nothing but fantasy and whistful dreaming of the olden days when wheel guns and 1911s ruled.

And you can miss even easier with a 5 shot, double action, crappy sighted .38 snubby, and have fewer rounds in the pistol to boot. Sounds like a plan for someone that thinks the worst threat they'll see is a rabid dog.

And yes, my attitude comes from the hood....Detroit and Benton Harbor, MI. to be exact. Obviously you've never lived in such an area, or your attitude would be very different.


Some of just shoot alot, and recognize the strengths and weeknesses of handguns. Being a punk from a crappy neighborhood is not something that lends credibility-except to other punks.

NeverMore1701
01-30-2012, 15:43
From the last time this thread rolled around:

What I learned in this thread:

A. People who carry pistols with double-stacked magazines and/or reloads are paranoids who can't shoot worth a crap.

B. People who carry revolvers or single stack autos are dinosaurs who couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.


That sound about right? :tongueout:

ColdSteelNail
01-30-2012, 16:15
I carry my G23 most of the time. 2nd is my LCR and I have complete confidence in it.

AA#5
01-30-2012, 16:22
I've owned 13 GLOCK pistols, and 3 or 4 other autos. Of all of those, only 2 were not 100% reliable. I've never had to clear a failure during a comp because I don't **** around with my pistols, I leave them stock.

Race guns are going to malfunction because they're Frankenguns. They're competition only pieces of **** that have been screwed up by wanabe gun-smiths in their 50s and 60s that are trying to get a mechanical advantage over better shooters.....I've seen plenty of them at IDPA matches. I've watched magazines lose their after-market floor plates and spray their guts all over the shooting range, and much, much more. Stock auto pistols these days are pretty much reliable. To worry over an auto not being reliable (to the point where you won't carry one) is to have never been able to just leave one stock.

My current G17C has about 3-5k through it, without a single failure. This panty-waisted whining about autos being un-reliable is nothing but fantasy and whistful dreaming of the olden days when wheel guns and 1911s ruled.

And you can miss even easier with a 5 shot, double action, crappy sighted .38 snubby, and have fewer rounds in the pistol to boot. Sounds like a plan for someone that thinks the worst threat they'll see is a rabid dog.

And yes, my attitude comes from the hood....Detroit and Benton Harbor, MI. to be exact. Obviously you've never lived in such an area, or your attitude would be very different.

Amazing to me how people fall for advertising that starts with, "Improve the reliability & accuracy of your pistol with our________."

Nestor
01-30-2012, 16:46
.38 Special especially from 4" heavy barrel, especially in +P hollowpoint will do the job if placed in the right spot. Being intimately familiar with whichever handgun you choose for self defense is critical to being able to use it and reload effectively. All the high capacity and super dancing powers won't do much if You can't hit your target and hit it fast. In normal self-defence applications the ability to deliver several decisive hits is more important than a very large magazine capacity, but marketing works wonders. Having a good reserve of ammo is nice, but is secondary to having the ability of making the effective hits. Most crimes are for profit or ego and getting shot serves neither. Facing determined, possibly lethal resistance will cause most criminals to seek easier prey somewhere else. Likewise an attacked citizen should retreat if he can as long as his ego allows.
Firstly, the most likely threat to the citizen is still a burglar, mugger, rapist, or car-jacker no matter what the internet gurus believe in.
If one is caught by a terrorist/gang attack one is likely to be outnumbered and out-gunned by the SMGs, assault rifles, grenades and God only knows what else. Sadly and realistically, the options are to try take a few before going down or attempt to escape.
Either way one in such scenario will run out of time much faster than the bullets.
If one feels it's something common in his neighborhood maybe it's time to move out instead of constantly spreading BS and insulting the others about their choices?
Rocket science it isn't. :wavey:

wmspdi
01-30-2012, 17:44
I've owned 13 GLOCK pistols, and 3 or 4 other autos. Of all of those, only 2 were not 100% reliable. I've never had to clear a failure during a comp because I don't **** around with my pistols, I leave them stock.

Race guns are going to malfunction because they're Frankenguns. They're competition only pieces of **** that have been screwed up by wanabe gun-smiths in their 50s and 60s that are trying to get a mechanical advantage over better shooters.....I've seen plenty of them at IDPA matches. I've watched magazines lose their after-market floor plates and spray their guts all over the shooting range, and much, much more. Stock auto pistols these days are pretty much reliable. To worry over an auto not being reliable (to the point where you won't carry one) is to have never been able to just leave one stock.

My current G17C has about 3-5k through it, without a single failure. This panty-waisted whining about autos being un-reliable is nothing but fantasy and whistful dreaming of the olden days when wheel guns and 1911s ruled.

And you can miss even easier with a 5 shot, double action, crappy sighted .38 snubby, and have fewer rounds in the pistol to boot. Sounds like a plan for someone that thinks the worst threat they'll see is a rabid dog.

And yes, my attitude comes from the hood....Detroit and Benton Harbor, MI. to be exact. Obviously you've never lived in such an area, or your attitude would be very different.

Just for the record my carry guns are all stock. They have to remain stock to be authorized for carry on and off duty by my department. I have seen stock autos malfunction, including a few stock Glocks, as well as "Frankenguns". But we are not talking about customized game guns here. Some of the guns I have seen choke were bone stock Glock Gen 4.

I never said wheel guns rule, I only maintain they are still a viable carry weapon for those of use who don't feel we need to be armed to the teeth to go about our business. I am more accurate with my laser sighted Crimson Trace DAO 38 J frame ( 8 lbs factory trigger) than alot of the Glock fan boys I see at the range.

I never said I won't carry an auto, my personal duty gun is a SIG P229R D/S decocker in 40 S&W, and I am also qualified to carry a Glock 23, a Kahr CW9 (BUG), S&W Bodyguard 380 (BUG) and an AR15 when I need real firepower. I just don't feel the need to carry any of them off duty most of the time.

I am glad you have a weapon that you feel works for YOU! Please grant the rest of us the right to decide what meets our needs, without the insults that result from your narrow perspective of life in the hood.

It's time for me to move on to other topics as this thread has gone WAY off topic...

hogship
01-30-2012, 18:49
hogship,
As usual you are talking a lot of sense!

We can split the needs of self defence into two categories. In one, a petty criminal wants your wallet because it is easier than working. He doesn't want to kill you because it is dangerous to him to do so. He certainly does not want to get shot because the value of your wallet is less than the value of not being shot. If he can escape, any firearm will be enough to drive him off. A .38sp is as good as anything but a .32 or .380 semi auto will do as well.

The second category is where a different kind of criminal is entirely prepared to kill you or possitively intends to kill you. This can range from a druggie who just does not care about anything except his next fix to a group of some kind of weirdos to what we can call well controlled criminals you have witnessed in the act of their high value crime. If you survive the first contact the attack will not stop with a few loud bangs and for this the .38sp is totally inadequate.

The probabilities must be strongly biased towards the first category of encounter but in that a better strategy might be just to hand over your wallet. Once you start shooting he will start shooting and it is a rare wallet that is worth getting shot with anything anywhere on your body. So the most sensible reason to go armed, unless you can spot the oncoming attack before a gun is pointed at you, is to defend yourself in extremis. And for that the .38sp is significantly inadequate both because it lacks enough KE and because of its capacity/size.

I have a delightful scandium snubby but I would sooner have a small 9mm auto pistol for self defence at no relative loss and several gains to the 9mm. Once we get to the size of a 4" barrel .38sp there is no argument in favour of it over a 9mm or 357SIG auto of the same size.

English

Yes, indeed......also, a lot of sense. Thanks English.
ooc

hogship
01-30-2012, 18:58
Hey Hogship,
no worries...our small disagreements are making this place just a bit more colorful. That's always fun :wavey:

Yep, right Nestor......

It doesn't matter that there is disagreement.......It's never a surprise, because there will ALWAYS be those who don't agree with whatever opinions I have....... and those who do!

There are plenty of times you and I see "eye to eye", just as well! :wavey:

Later, buddy.......

ooc

hogship
01-30-2012, 19:00
People aren't tougher, they're just better armed. Bad guys are packing better stuff these days, so it's just an arms race one must keep up with. Plus, many times attackers are found to be under the influence of narcotics, and that is why multiple hits and capacity is a big bonus. It's not about going out of "fashion", it's the reality of changing times and threats.

Revolvers are over-matched fire power wise to modern autos, so that's why most people understand that cartridges like .38 in a revolver is not the best choice for HD/CCW.

Spray & pray? How many times have you been in a gun fight? Please share with the class how you stood still and took careful, aimed shots with your .38 snubby while being shot at.:upeyes::upeyes:

I love how you and other people talk about how this pistol or that cartridge has "served" them well.......when by "served" 99% of people mean it's what's easy and covenient to carry. Get in an actual gun fight, face and armed assailant (or mutiple assailants) and that little .38 revolver in your hand is going to feel like a single shot derringer.

An excellent post..........^

MannyA
01-30-2012, 20:00
I carry .38 spl all the time, choose your ammo wisely, and it's all you will likely ever need.

Could that have to do with your being a "senior" member?:tongueout::rofl::faint:

Andrewsky
01-30-2012, 21:19
.38 Special especially from 4" heavy barrel, especially in +P hollowpoint will do the job if placed in the right spot. Being intimately familiar with whichever handgun you choose for self defense is critical to being able to use it and reload effectively. All the high capacity and super dancing powers won't do much if You can't hit your target and hit it fast. In normal self-defence applications the ability to deliver several decisive hits is more important than a very large magazine capacity, but marketing works wonders. Having a good reserve of ammo is nice, but is secondary to having the ability of making the effective hits. Most crimes are for profit or ego and getting shot serves neither. Facing determined, possibly lethal resistance will cause most criminals to seek easier prey somewhere else. Likewise an attacked citizen should retreat if he can as long as his ego allows.
Firstly, the most likely threat to the citizen is still a burglar, mugger, rapist, or car-jacker no matter what the internet gurus believe in.
If one is caught by a terrorist/gang attack one is likely to be outnumbered and out-gunned by the SMGs, assault rifles, grenades and God only knows what else. Sadly and realistically, the options are to try take a few before going down or attempt to escape.
Either way one in such scenario will run out of time much faster than the bullets.
If one feels it's something common in his neighborhood maybe it's time to move out instead of constantly spreading BS and insulting the others about their choices?
Rocket science it isn't. :wavey:

Your argument would be more convincing if you'd spend less time downplaying the obvious and significant advantages of automatics and more time explaining what advantages revolvers might have.

Berto
01-30-2012, 22:15
Your argument would be more convincing if you'd spend less time downplaying the obvious and significant advantages of automatics and more time explaining what advantages revolvers might have.

I'll help.

1) They are most likely to work in real S/D situations, more so at contact range.

2) they are typically more accurate.

3)they are easier to use (adm handling) and no seperate parts to get lost/damaged. A self contained weapon.

4)better with cover, can't jam itself with thrown brass or slide interruption (this applies to shooting from retention too)

5) not grip sensitive, works if trigger is pulled.

6)can use any ammo/bullet profile, more versatile.

7)can handle the most powerful cartridges

8)simplicity of use, safety; immediately obvious if loaded.

THose are the obvious ones, if we get into triggers and paradigms of civilian carry needs, there's probably more.:whistling:

bullet1234
01-30-2012, 22:27
I still carry a J frame 38spl today,,,, and hey guys I have never had
a jam in a wheelie,,,, and I have never had a semi-auto that DO NOT
JAM a one time or another ,,,, I have Glocks, Brownings, Smiths, Colts,
you get the picture. As far as 5 shots go,,,, most gun battles only have
1 - 3 shots fired and it is over,,,, but you can carry a speed loader ,,,, like
I do; also ,,,, just in case.

MinnesnowtaWild
01-30-2012, 23:19
Nothing wrong with .38 Special. I think people have just moved on to modern weapons that allow many more rounds to be fired in a small, reliable, affordable package. So many good, small firearms on the market. In the past, a snub nose .38 Special was one of the only options for a BUG.

DonD
01-30-2012, 23:29
high power round that goes through it (due to over penetration), and hits a bystander is a wrongfull death suit or neglegent homicide case waiting to be filed. The term "overkill" comes to mind.

I'd like someone to cite documented incidents where a round penetrated the torso of an adult body and inflicted a serious injury to a bystander. No doubt it has happened somewhere, sometime but I'd bet is is a VERY rare circumstance. Missing entirely is a different story and that can and will happen with all kinds of handguns.

Because I would never want a round fired in grave necessity to fail to do what is needed is why I default to full house .357 ammo for CCW. Each to his/her own. Don

GlockFish
01-31-2012, 01:27
When did the 38Spl stop being enough?

1971. The year Dirty Harry was released and Harry Callahan uttered these words

"I know what you're thinking, punk. You're thinking "did he fire six shots or only five?" Now to tell you the truth I forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and will blow you head clean off, you've gotta ask yourself a question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?"

byf43
01-31-2012, 07:02
When did the 38Spl stop being "Enough"?

The caliber has not stopped being 'enough', but, the term "Wondernine" started pushing the revolver to the back of the line-up for police departments and some gun enthusiasts.

Ya know. . . I always hated that darned term. "Wondernine".
Someone in the media got a word into our language and made the semi-auto 9mm look like it was a ray gun!

"OMG!!!!!!! Our police are so under-gunned. Jimmy-Jo Bob has a wondernine in his hands, and our poor police are 'stuck' using their inadequate, obsolete .38s. OMG! The humanity!"

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzaaaaaaaap!! Yup. Wondernine, alright.

Now, I've got more semi-autos, than I do revolvers, but, there is NOTHING 'wrong' with the .38 Special!!!
I've got an OLD Charter Arms "Undercover" that I carried and felt comfortable carrying it.
Same with a S&W mdl 60 and a mdl 19, or my mdl 66!
What do I carry in them??? Federal "Ny-Clad" .38 +P!!! (Don't practice w/+P in the Charter Arms.)

However, in today's society, a semi-auto in 9mm or .40 S&W or .45 acp is a LITTLE better weapon to carry.
Why????? Capacity. Ease/speed of reloading. Flatter/thinner/easier to conceal (power vs. weight/size).


There's some disagreement in this thread. Friendly disagreement is good.

Fortunately. . . there's NO 'wrong answer'!!!!!!!!

Nestor
01-31-2012, 07:07
Your argument would be more convincing if you'd spend less time downplaying the obvious and significant advantages of automatics and more time explaining what advantages revolvers might have.

There is no point in trying to convince someone who don't want to be convinced, but there are some advantages for sure.
Revolvers are almost foolproof when it comes to misfires or jams.
If one occurrs, just pull the trigger again and rotate another round into firing position.
Easy to clean, no need to lubricate really.
You can't accidentally eject the magazine.
It's nearly impossible to jam the wheelgun.
You don't have to think "did I put a round in the chamber?" or check the loaded chamber indicator.
It is easier to teach someone how to use a revolver than a semi-auto.
You can load a revolver, put it on top of the fridge and leave it there for 50 years.
It operates without ammunition, so it's easy to train with.
Instead of interrupting your train of thought to rack a slide and reset a hammer, you can concentrate on performing a complete trigger sequence.
Revolvers are economically more efficient, too. Iím not talking about initial cost, but all the other stuff that comes into play.
Can You ďlimp wristingĒ the revolver?
In close-quarters fights, the revolver is more resistant to induced failures.
:wavey:

M&P15T
01-31-2012, 07:24
Some of just shoot alot, and recognize the strengths and weeknesses of handguns. Being a punk from a crappy neighborhood is not something that lends credibility-except to other punks.

Being a fud from up-state retirement home U.S.A. that can't function in the current century, clinging teary-eyed to ancient and out-date firearms loses you all credibility also.

Judging that someone is a "punk" (ages old euphamism) because they lived in bad areas is pretty tiny minded too, but your true colors are on display as it is.

Andrewsky
01-31-2012, 07:33
There is no point in trying to convince someone who don't want to be convinced, but there are some advantages for sure.
Revolvers are almost foolproof when it comes to misfires or jams.
If one occurrs, just pull the trigger again and rotate another round into firing position.
Easy to clean, no need to lubricate really.
You can't accidentally eject the magazine.
It's nearly impossible to jam the wheelgun.
You don't have to think "did I put a round in the chamber?" or check the loaded chamber indicator.
It is easier to teach someone how to use a revolver than a semi-auto.
You can load a revolver, put it on top of the fridge and leave it there for 50 years.
It operates without ammunition, so it's easy to train with.
Instead of interrupting your train of thought to rack a slide and reset a hammer, you can concentrate on performing a complete trigger sequence.
Revolvers are economically more efficient, too. Iím not talking about initial cost, but all the other stuff that comes into play.
Can You ďlimp wristingĒ the revolver?
In close-quarters fights, the revolver is more resistant to induced failures.
:wavey:

I agree, and I find that revolvers are a little bit more comfortable to carry because they have no weight in the grip. Carrying an automatic with 15 rounds in the grip (above the centerline of the belt) is no fun.

The Hawk
01-31-2012, 07:44
When something goes 'bump' in the night, I feel very comfortable knowing I have a revolver full of .38 special +P hollow points ready to meet the need.
Yeah, I have a .40 Glock as well. However, the revolver is located in a secret area away from the Glock should I happen to be there when the need arises.

BlayGlock
01-31-2012, 07:47
The problem is not the round, it is the delivery system. ex/ with a gun that I can carry just as easy, say a Kahr pm9 or g26, I get more ammunition on board.

purrrfect 10
01-31-2012, 08:50
In the early to mid part of last century, the 158 grain lead round nose was the standard duty ammunition for police use. Don't ever let anyone kid you that this cartridge won't kill the bad guys.......very dead!

I seldom carry 38spl anymore, but if I did, I'd load up with a standard pressure, and jacketed hollow point these days.

The +P and +P+ are more powerful, for sure......but considering the application, regular old standard loadings will get 'er done.........

Those who think otherwise are just responding to capitalism, and how marketing creates a "need" to get the "new and improved"........

ooc

Sounds like since you don't carry your 38 any more you jumped on the band wagon responding to capitalism to the new and improved.

I don't have a thing against a 38 except I don't like a revolver my buddy who is a little guy has a few of them and swears by them. I will admit they are fun to shoot and very deadly for sure. I want a G 25 G28 in the worst way Why can't i buy one Damn it ! ???????????

Back to the thread...It boils down to capacity I think LEO in many situations needed more cartridge capacity and quicker reload should they get into a shoot out, giving them the best edge. I think also larger Caliber for damage and penetration and the edge at farther distant s What do you think?

TN.Frank
01-31-2012, 08:53
Back to the thread...It boils down to capacity I think LEO in many situations needed more cartridge capacity and quicker reload

because 90% of em' can't shoot for beans. :whistling:

country85
01-31-2012, 08:59
Story I always heard growing up was back in the mid to late 80's some where in SC(were I'm from) a guy got pulled over for speeding, as the officer approached the guy jumped out of his car all jacked up on angel dust or pcp, what ever the newest "super upper" was at the time and tackled the officer, the cop put 5 rounds in his chest and 6 round was a glancing head shot and the guy still wrestled the gun away from the cop reloaded it and killed the officer before he died his self...I've never confirmed this exact story but have heard tons of stories that sounded almost the same, either way I think a 38, even loaded at normal pressures is a darn good self defense round

TN.Frank
01-31-2012, 09:14
If someone isn't going to go down after 6 rounds of 38spl there's a good chance that they're not going down after 6 rounds of anything else and that within the time it takes to fire 6 rounds they'll be on you and take your gun away and kill you no matter what you're packin'. All that a modern semi would have done was allow the perp to not have to reload the gun before he killed the LEO.
I've always learned it's two to the body then one to the head. If that won't take someone out of the fight then you're screwed from the start.

country85
01-31-2012, 09:19
If someone isn't going to go down after 6 rounds of 38spl there's a good chance that they're not going down after 6 rounds of anything else and that within the time it takes to fire 6 rounds they'll be on you and take your gun away and kill you no matter what you're packin'. All that a modern semi would have done was allow the perp to not have to reload the gun before he killed the LEO.
I've always learned it's two to the body then one to the head. If that won't take someone out of the fight then you're screwed from the start.

Very well said

lawdog734
01-31-2012, 09:37
I like 38 revolvers too. I am a better then average shooter. I never have had to shoot a person but I did shoot a charging pit bull while on duty. My first 3 shots missed. Shot 4 went thru it's back leg. It wasn't till shot 5 when the dog jumped at me and I but a contact shot thru the center of its chest that it stopped. My point? You can never have to many rounds and you are never as good as you think.

series1811
01-31-2012, 10:37
I like 38 revolvers too. I am a better then average shooter. I never have had to shoot a person but I did shoot a charging pit bull while on duty. My first 3 shots missed. Shot 4 went thru it's back leg. It wasn't till shot 5 when the dog jumped at me and I but a contact shot thru the center of its chest that it stopped. My point? You can never have to many rounds and you are never as good as you think.

There is that point, for sure. When my partner was shot, he was asked how many rounds he thought he had fired and he said two. There were ten shell casing from his gun on the ground (and he hit his assailant twice).

Berto
01-31-2012, 14:23
Being a fud from up-state retirement home U.S.A. that can't function in the current century, clinging teary-eyed to ancient and out-date firearms loses you all credibility also.

Judging that someone is a "punk" (ages old euphamism) because they lived in bad areas is pretty tiny minded too, but your true colors are on display as it is.


:crying:

fastbolt
01-31-2012, 15:24
When did the 38Spl stop being "Enough"?

I missed the memo where the venerable .38 Spl stopped "being enough".

I do, however, remember when we switched from revolvers to hi-cap 9's, and we were told that the 9's were close enough to being as good as a .38 Spl, but we now had the advantage of being able to carry more rounds in the guns. :rofl:

Hey, I was pretty displeased to be giving up my .357 Magnum service revolver at the time. :steamed:

Over the course of many more years in the field (which included more than 20 years of being a firearms instructor) I ended up carrying issued and personally-owned 9's, .40's & .45's ... and also eventually returned to carrying 5-shot .38's on my own time, and into retirement.

I think the development of better designed hollowpoint ammunition has done a lot for leveling the field, so to speak, and that includes keeping the .38 Spl a viable choice for a secondary/off-duty defensive caliber.

One thing I do miss about the days of the service revolver was that folks seemed to develop a better handgun shooting skills foundation. After all, it required some fair amount of work to properly master a heavy DA trigger pull, while acclimating to the various weirdly shaped grip frame designs and grip stocks the various manufacturers somehow thought were "natural". :rofl:

We certainly proved we'd buy any number of after-market and custom grip stocks back in those days, trying to make the revolver grip frames better conform to our hands and let us get good reach & leverage on the DA triggers. :)

If you could master a DA revolver, shooting it accurately and rapidly in double action, using either the iron or adjustable sights of the day, and learn to control the recoil of +P, +P+ or Magnum loads, you could probably learn to shoot just about anything that you could hold in a hand. :tongueout:

Sure, we were limited to 6 shots in duty-size wheelguns. Big deal. We were also limited to 7-rd magazines in 1911's. (Remember when the 8-rd mags were the latest & greatest thing to come along?)

Some folks had already looked at the hi-cap pistols available in those days in the form or the M59 & Browning HP, so there's always been the capacity-minded folks looking for a way to achieve that advantage.

To each their own, I say.

Magus
01-31-2012, 17:35
I feel perfectly comfortable with .38 Special. Thousands of people have dropped dead from the old .38 Special. Still a very viable round, especially with modern +P loads.

Berto
01-31-2012, 19:10
New ammo:

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=294

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=293

Hmmm....looks pretty 9mm-ish.

WarEagle32
01-31-2012, 23:19
I see no reason for a 38. There are numerous guns that out perform it in every way. Size, strength, and capacity its a loser. It's 100 years past it's prime. I would feel more comfortable with my LCP than with my 38 snub. I feel under powered with either!

SK2344
01-31-2012, 23:38
I don't think the 38 spl was ever said to be, "Not Enough"! They have IMO always been very popular Guns and always will be to the purest of gun owners. The Trend and Fad has been for the small, lightweight .380 type guns and they sell off the chart but this does not preclude the snub nose .38's from being one of the most popular guns out there. I think everyone should own at least one!

Nanuk
01-31-2012, 23:40
The 38 special has never been special for me. It was an improvement on the 38 S&W and the 38 colt if I recall correctly. Like Wyoming said, in the 1930's cops needed something to shoot the gangsters with in their cars and the 38 was not up to the task. My grandfather was one of those cops, and he carried a 45 colt with 45 acp's on moon clips for reloads.

In 32 years as a cop (Local, Military, Federal) I only used a 38 as a BUG. What I saw on the street a 38 and a 9mm are about equal in stopping BG's, (which was not impressive) just 9's carry a lot more bullets. I carried either a 357 Magnum or a 45 until it was mandated that I carry the issue 40.

atakawow
02-01-2012, 04:06
If someone isn't going to go down after 6 rounds of 38spl there's a good chance that they're not going down after 6 rounds of anything else and that within the time it takes to fire 6 rounds they'll be on you and take your gun away and kill you no matter what you're packin'. All that a modern semi would have done was allow the perp to not have to reload the gun before he killed the LEO.
I've always learned it's two to the body then one to the head. If that won't take someone out of the fight then you're screwed from the start.

I don't get it. Didn't you create a thread a while ago bashing the ineffectiveness and how outdated revolvers are?

What caused the sudden change of heart?

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 08:22
Let's list the same old tired arguments from the revolver fans;

Auto users need the capacity because they can't shoot.
A revolver is "six for sure".
A revolver won't jam.
"Most" CCW firearms uses are over in one or two shots.

Look, we get it...you like revolvers. Fine.

Revolver fanatics (especially, for some reason, snubby owners) will got to the ends of the earth to try and justify what they carry, and so will auto lovers. The difference is that there are serious performance benefits to carrying an auto versus a snubby that will never go away, and this seems to create quite a bit of butt hurt amongst the revolver fans.

Let's be realistic, the performance differences between something like my G17C and a .38 J-frame are night and day. I would take the Pepsi challenge of lining-up on man-sized target at 7 yards, drawing from concealment, and putting 18 rounds on target. I'd do that with anyone here and their 5 or 6 shot revolver..........and it wouldn't even be close.

Well, unless Jerry Miculek posted here already.:rofl::rofl:

But revolvers like the J-frame are far easier to carry concealed, and that's the real reason to own and carry one.

If you "feel" comfortable with a .38 snubby 5 or 6 shot, more power to you. Some simply would rather carry the bigger auto and know they have more rounds that are easier to get on target fast. Snubby carriers trade ease of carry for performance, and it's that simple.

When did .38SPCL stop being enough? When Gaston Glock filed for his 17th patent. Hell, the .38Spl was originally a black powder loading, so it's limited in it's case pressure maximums versus newer cartridges like the 9MM.

DonD
02-01-2012, 08:37
I guess what I don't understand when people comment on this thread saying that they love .38 snubs is why? Why buy a .38 snub when you can get a .357 snub of the same weight and you can shoot .38s, .357s loaded down so you don't get deposits in the cylinder bores or whatever level of .357 ammo you choose, get your cake and eat it too.

I understand if you have an oldie you like but buying a new one when you can have a .357 puzzles me. Sort of like going to a car dealership and saying you don't want the high performance model that has no downsides, you'd rather have a slower version. Don

SDGlock23
02-01-2012, 08:45
I think the old 38 Special is a sufficient enough cartridge for self defense, but compare it to small 9mm's on the market. I have had 4 J-frames and while small, my Kahr PM9 is smaller and holds anywhere from 2-3 rounds more with faster reloads to boot. I think the 9mm is better for SD than the 38. My PM9 (and the lesser LCP 380 ACP) have been flawless and I don't buy into the idea that revolvers don't jam...I've had multiple revolvers jam up on me. How so? Unburnt powder can sometimes get in there and gum up things and at that point, it's not good. Granted it's rare, but I've had it happen several times. 7-8 rds of 9mm in a smaller package than the 5 rds of 38 or even .357 seems a no-brainer to me.

Nestor
02-01-2012, 08:53
I guess what I don't understand when people comment on this thread saying that they love .38 snubs is why? Why buy a .38 snub when you can get a .357 snub of the same weight and you can shoot .38s, .357s loaded down so you don't get deposits in the cylinder bores or whatever level of .357 ammo you choose, get your cake and eat it too.

I understand if you have an oldie you like but buying a new one when you can have a .357 puzzles me. Sort of like going to a car dealership and saying you don't want the high performance model that has no downsides, you'd rather have a slower version. Don

The real downside to the short barrels is the increased muzzle blast and flash.
The idea that the .357 is rather no more efficient in the two-inch guns that a hot .38 Special doesnít seem to be true. While neither is at its best in the snub, the magnum is the more potent of the two...but than again, You have to deal with the effect of this power at the end of the short barrel.

Nestor
02-01-2012, 08:58
9mm is "newer" than .38 Special is by 4 years.

English
02-01-2012, 09:06
if nothing else, the .38sp lacks power. Worse than that it lacks power for size. The cartridge is 10mm, nearly half an inch, longer than the 9mm which has more power. The steps up from .380ACP, through .38sp. to 9mm and .357 magnum are remarkably close.

If people realy want small revolvers, it is time the ammunition companies made a 9mm length rimmed .38 in 9mm and 9mm lite configurations. Then revolvers could be made with barrells half an inch longer and cylinders nearly half an inch shorter vor the same overall length. The .38sp is very out dated.

English

hunter won
02-01-2012, 09:09
FWIW the 5 shot j frame S&W loaded with the Speer 135 grain Gold Dot has been doing an excellent job for the NYPD.

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 09:10
9mm is "newer" than .38 Special is by 4 years.

9MM was designed from the start as a modern, smokeless powder round, .38Special was designed as a black powder cartridge.

.38Special+P+ uses around 20,000 PSI at max pressure. 9MM can be loaded up to 39,200 PSI in standard loadings. This is why 9MM is much more effective despite being a much shorter cartridge over-all length wise.

It's not just the 4 years, it's the technology and design differences between the two cartridges.

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 09:16
FWIW the 5 shot j frame S&W loaded with the Speer 135 grain Gold Dot has been doing an excellent job for the NYPD.

When do you believe the last time was that an NYPD officer used a j-frame? Since the NYPD went to the G19, P226 and S&W5946 9MMs, I doubt there are more than a handful of NYPD folks still carrying a j-frame.

Keep in mind, any officer (regardless of specific job) must carry one of those three weapons since 1994. That's 18 years of no .38 snubbies being issued.

nathanours
02-01-2012, 09:20
I guess what I don't understand when people comment on this thread saying that they love .38 snubs is why? Why buy a .38 snub when you can get a .357 snub of the same weight and you can shoot .38s, .357s loaded down so you don't get deposits in the cylinder bores or whatever level of .357 ammo you choose, get your cake and eat it too.

I understand if you have an oldie you like but buying a new one when you can have a .357 puzzles me. Sort of like going to a car dealership and saying you don't want the high performance model that has no downsides, you'd rather have a slower version. Don

I bought a S&W 642 because I was able to pick it up a couple years ago for only $300. I have fired 357 out of a J frame and it is not the most fun thing out there. I know that I was only going to carry and shoot 38 +p, so why bother paying the other $400 just to get features I wasn't going to use?

Nestor
02-01-2012, 09:27
9MM was designed from the start as a modern, smokeless powder round, .38Special was designed as a black powder cartridge.

.38Special+P+ uses around 20,000 PSI at max pressure. 9MM can be loaded up to 39,200 PSI in standard loadings. This is why 9MM is much more effective despite being a much shorter cartridge over-all length wise.

It's not just the 4 years, it's the technology and design differences between the two cartridges.

...and both are listed as the proven manstoppers.

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 09:36
...and both are listed as the proven manstoppers.

Neither are "manstoppers".

Both suck, 9MM just sucks less. Given the choice, I'll go with 18 rounds of the one that sucks less, rather than 5 or 6 rounds of the one that sucks more.

Oh, and as far as I know, there's no "Proven Manstopper" list out there. If there was, 9MM and .38Special would be far, far down it.

Sad, this is what Hollywood does to the children.

Nestor
02-01-2012, 09:44
Neither are "manstoppers".

Both suck, 9MM just sucks less. Given the choice, I'll go with 18 rounds of the one that sucks less, rather than 5 or 6 rounds of the one that sucks more.

Oh, and as far as I know, there's no "Proven Manstopper" list out there.

Sad, this is what Hollywood does to the children.

Experience is a wonderful thing.
It enables me to recognize a mistake that I'm making when trying to have a civilized conversation with You.
I prefer to stick to Massad Ayoob ammo selection.
Being from the tough neigberhood is not good enough here :wavey:

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 09:55
Experience is a wonderful thing.
It enables me to recognize a mistake that I'm making when trying to have a civilized conversation with You.
I prefer to stick to Massad Ayoob ammo selection.
Being from the tough neigberhood is not good enough here :wavey:

Yes, experience is a wonderful thing......but the rest of your post makes no sense. Are you trying to say that Massad Ayoob recommends .38special, and that is why you use it?

And what are you trying to say about tough neighborhoods?

hunter won
02-01-2012, 10:31
When do you believe the last time was that an NYPD officer used a j-frame? Since the NYPD went to the G19, P226 and S&W5946 9MMs, I doubt there are more than a handful of NYPD folks still carrying a j-frame.

Keep in mind, any officer (regardless of specific job) must carry one of those three weapons since 1994. That's 18 years of no .38 snubbies being issued. A few have them and are using them with excellent results. A detective fired one shot killing a mugger on his way to work.

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 10:54
A few have them and are using them with excellent results. A detective fired one shot killing a mugger on his way to work.

Sure...a few.

J_Rico
02-01-2012, 11:46
Not sure how many NYPD officers carry j-frames, but it must be considerable.

Was it not a request from the NYPD that led to the Gold-Dot 135gr short-barrel load?

My wife's home defense firearm is a S&W Model 19 loaded with the 158gr +P LSWCHP. She shoots it well and is comfy with it and that is what matters most IMO.

I say carry what you can, shoot what you like and fine day to all. :wavey:

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 11:50
Not sure how many NYPD officers carry j-frames, but it must be considerable.

J-frames have not been issued or allowed with the NYPD for 18 years.

Only those officers that were already carrying them got "grandfathered" so they could continue using them.

Most NYPD officers retire after, what, 30 years? Plus the fact that previous to 1994 they were only issued to plain-clothes types........plus the fact that firearms have to be either re-built or replaced?

I'd bet the numbers are closer to the dozens than the hundreds.

Glock19Fan
02-01-2012, 12:05
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1398650

It did well in this shooting.

Berto
02-01-2012, 15:06
9MM was designed from the start as a modern, smokeless powder round, .38Special was designed as a black powder cartridge.

.38Special+P+ uses around 20,000 PSI at max pressure. 9MM can be loaded up to 39,200 PSI in standard loadings. This is why 9MM is much more effective despite being a much shorter cartridge over-all length wise.

It's not just the 4 years, it's the technology and design differences between the two cartridges.

Wrong.

Pressure isn't the end game if the case capacity is small (like 9mmP), this is why .38sp can drive a heavier bullet faster than the 9mm.
Pressure also has nothing to do with effectiveness. :upeyes:

Nestor
02-01-2012, 16:09
Wrong.

Pressure isn't the end game if the case capacity is small (like 9mmP), this is why .38sp can drive a heavier bullet faster than the 9mm.
Pressure also has nothing to do with effectiveness. :upeyes:

Don't waste your time Berto.
This guy knows everything better than the FBI statistics, Jeff Cooper, Massad Ayoob and all the members of this forum all together. He operates with the "facts" only and constantly excepts anyone to "prove" him everything just to call it a BS moment later. Must be though to be the punk.

cowboy1964
02-01-2012, 16:46
If someone isn't going to go down after 6 rounds of 38spl there's a good chance that they're not going down after 6 rounds of anything else and that within the time it takes to fire 6 rounds they'll be on you and take your gun away and kill you no matter what you're packin'. All that a modern semi would have done was allow the perp to not have to reload the gun before he killed the LEO.
I've always learned it's two to the body then one to the head. If that won't take someone out of the fight then you're screwed from the start.

Well, you're assuming that you achieve 100% hit ratio, which never happens basically. And there are cases where someone emptied a 7 or 8 shot .45 at multiple bad guys. Has anyone ever heard of a civilian or cop gunfight where they actually put 2 in the chest and 1 in the head? It just doesn't happen except in exceptional circumstances.

More rounds NEVER hurt but fewer MIGHT.

Nestor
02-01-2012, 16:51
More rounds NEVER hurt but fewer MIGHT.

This is true. It's always some kind of compromise.
Some of us are just better or feel better with the revolvers, so we compromise the capacity for accuracy.
You may be in better position with the high capacity auto that works for You :wavey:

Six4Sure
02-01-2012, 17:04
I love it for concealed carry, S&W model 442 with +Ps and I love it for target shooting, 4" 686. It will be around as long as revolvers are. Its cheap to reload and is deathly accurate out of a service revolver. If diameter of round and power were the only criteria for a good SD ammo, then I would carry a 44 magnum! But in reality the best concealed gun is the one you can carry and shoot effectively. For me it is a jframe in 38 special.

Now since I have gotten a Glock 17, I have had a hankerin' for a model 940! 9MM and a jframe, that is a good combo!

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/__KONc6M3jls/SkrerzD0I7I/AAAAAAAAAqQ/iJA4Hqranj0/s640/sw940+008.JPG

Andrewsky
02-01-2012, 18:20
This is true. It's always some kind of compromise.
Some of us are just better or feel better with the revolvers, so we compromise the capacity for accuracy.
You may be in better position with the high capacity auto that works for You :wavey:

I highly doubt that 99% of shooters would be more accurate with a revolver than an M1911. The revolver's DA trigger, short sight radius, and usually awkward grip assure that.

Nestor
02-01-2012, 18:58
I highly doubt that 99% of shooters would be more accurate with a revolver than an M1911. The revolver's DA trigger, short sight radius, and usually awkward grip assure that.

You know, the company I work for is in the process of switching from S&W model 10 to S&W M&P 40 as we speak. You have to take the introductory course and later qualify with the new pistol at the range.
Most of the folks I talked to are saying something along the lines:
"I'm shooting more straight with the revolver, but the pistol has higher capacity, so it's ok with me". Food for thought.

hogship
02-01-2012, 19:10
I highly doubt that 99% of shooters would be more accurate with a revolver than an M1911. The revolver's DA trigger, short sight radius, and usually awkward grip assure that.

Not only that, but you have multiple chambers that must align up exactly the same for the best accuracy to be had......only one chamber on an automatic, and it aligns with the barrel exactly the same for each and every shot.

This is why target 22 revolvers are seldom as accurate as target 22 automatics. For that statement to be noteworthy, it must be noted that the most accurate 22 autos have a fixed barrel......although the statement above about multiple chambers as opposed to a single chamber is still significant when considering inherent accuracy.

ooc

carbuncle
02-01-2012, 19:13
Is it weird that I want a 4" barrel .38? Not a .357, but a dedicated .38: for some reason, I think I need to add one to the collection.

Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk

hogship
02-01-2012, 19:19
Is it weird that I want a 4" barrel .38? Not a .357, but a dedicated .38: for some reason, I think I need to add one to the collection.

Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk

Heck no..........Although my choice for a ccw is no longer a revolver, it's still a good choice for anyone who so chooses........and, the 38spl is a cartridge that isn't appreciated as much as it should be.......every bit as good as the 9mm. (Some would say it's better, and I couldn't disagree!)

This model 60 no-dash is what I was using when I last regularly ccw'd with a revolver. Every once in awhile, I still do use it........just not regularly.
http://pic50.picturetrail.com/VOL431/781008/1401653/207381953.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com/VOL431/781008/1401653/393014277.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com/VOL431/781008/1401653/197558963.jpg

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 19:47
Wrong.

Pressure isn't the end game if the case capacity is small (like 9mmP), this is why .38sp can drive a heavier bullet faster than the 9mm.
Pressure also has nothing to do with effectiveness. :upeyes:

Really? Oh, o.k.

A heavy for caliber .38SPCL load like Buffalo Bore's 158gr. LSWCHP leaves a 2.5" snubby barrel at about 1059FPS producing a whopping 393 ft. lbs. of energy. All wrapped up in a 5 or 6 shot tiny package that usually has crappy sights, and forces the shooter under stress to use a long DA trigger pull for rapid shooting.

I carry Corbon's 115gr. JHP that moves out at 1350FPS and delivers 464 ft. lbs of energy. And I've got 18 of those rounds ready to go, with a nice, light trigger and better sights.

Know where that better performance comes from? Higher pressure.

And I'd bet that you could find even better performing .38SPCL ammo, stuff I don't know or care about. In the end the biggest draw-back is the pistol platform those rounds reside in. Snubbies, and revolvers in general, are nowhere near as effective for getting rounds on target quickly. Snubbies have their place for CCW because they're easy to carry, not because of their performance.


My Pepsi challenge still stands if you really think that .38SPCL in a revolver is the way to go for sheer shooting performance. 18 rounds on a man-sized target at 7 yards (longer if you so desire), and see who does it faster.

Bring money and a camera.

pennlineman
02-01-2012, 19:50
:yawn:

Berto
02-01-2012, 19:52
I highly doubt that 99% of shooters would be more accurate with a revolver than an M1911. The revolver's DA trigger, short sight radius, and usually awkward grip assure that.

Many folks in the military claimed they couldn't hit anything with the 1911 either. DA revolvers typically have really nice SA triggers too and a 5" revolver will have the same sight radius as the 1911.:whistling:
Not sure how scientific your opinion is.

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 19:56
Don't waste your time Berto.
This guy knows everything better than the FBI statistics, Jeff Cooper, Massad Ayoob and all the members of this forum all together. He operates with the "facts" only and constantly excepts anyone to "prove" him everything just to call it a BS moment later. Must be though to be the punk.

I know what I know. And what I know started with reading many of the same authors and experts you mentioned above. Then I grew up, and discovered that those guys aren't in my shoes. They don't live where I do, or look at things the same way as I do. I got some basic info from them, and then took things from there my damn self by learning from my own experiences.

FBI statistics? Great, if you're a LEO, almost useless if you're a CCWer...a distinction in statistics you have yet to grasp.

As far as being a punk? Easy to insult sitting behind a computer in Canada.

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 19:57
Many folks in the military claimed they couldn't hit anything with the 1911 either. DA revolvers typically have really nice SA triggers too and a 5" revolver will have the same sight radius as the 1911.:whistling:
Not sure how scientific your opinion is.

So, under the stress of a life or death situation, you're going to be thumbing back your hammer to take nice, accurate shots?

Berto
02-01-2012, 20:01
Really? Oh, o.k.

A heavy for caliber .38SPCL load like Buffalo Bore's 158gr. LSWCHP leaves a 2.5" snubby barrel at about 1059FPS producing a whopping 393 ft. lbs. of energy. All wrapped up in a 5 or 6 shot tiny package that usually has crappy sights, and forces the shooter under stress to use a long DA trigger pull for rapid shooting.

I carry Corbon's 115gr. JHP that moves out at 1350FPS and delivers 464 ft. lbs of energy. And I've got 18 of those rounds ready to go, with a nice, light trigger and better sights.

Know where that better performance comes from? Higher pressure.

No. It comes from the extra two inches of barrel.:upeyes:

And I'd bet that you could find even better performing .38SPCL ammo, stuff I don't know or care about. In the end the biggest draw-back is the pistol platform those rounds reside in. Snubbies, and revolvers in general, are nowhere near as effective for getting rounds on target quickly. Snubbies have their place for CCW because they're easy to carry, not because of their performance.

No disagreement here, not sure when we started comparing snubby .38s to G17s with ninja porting.....The OP asked about the round, the answer was capacity vs the revolver, which most of us understand.
Once it was established the .38sp was equal to the 9mm, you seemed insecure and shifted the discussion to platforms. Weird.


My Pepsi challenge still stands if you really think that .38SPCL in a revolver is the way to go for sheer shooting performance. 18 rounds on a man-sized target at 7 yards (longer if you so desire), and see who does it faster.

Bring money and a camera.

How about this: we use the same guns, and I'll happily bring a camera.

BTW, Pepsi sucks too.

Berto
02-01-2012, 20:04
So, under the stress of a life or death situation, you're going to be thumbing back your hammer to take nice, accurate shots?

No. I shoot just as well DA. He referred to accuracy.

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 20:11
No. It comes from the extra two inches of barrel.:upeyes:

Buffalo Bore 158gr. LSWCHP: S&W Mt. Gun, 4 inch- 1162 fps (474 ft. lbs.)

Corbon 100 gr. Pow'r Ball
Caliber: 9mm Luger + P.
Bullet Wt.: 100gr Pow'RBall.
Velocity: 1475fps.
Energy: 483ftlbs.
Test Barrel Length: 4.0 Inches.
OOOOOOOPS!
No disagreement here, not sure when we started comparing snubby .38s to G17s with ninja porting.....The OP asked about the round, the answer was capacity vs the revolver, which most of us understand.
Once it was established the .38sp was equal to the 9mm, you seemed insecure and shifted the discussion to platforms. Weird.

Nope, I've been discussing both cartridge and platform from post one. Go back and re-read if you must. (Post #62). Weird is not reading the whole thread and understanding the trends in the discussion.

How about this: we use the same guns, and I'll happily bring a camera.

BTW, Pepsi sucks too.

Wait, I thought this was about how .38SPCL and revolvers are at least as good as automatics. Changing your mind?

Oh, o.k., you can bring a GLOCK too. Don't forget the money.

Berto
02-01-2012, 20:19
I know there are some of us here on the forum who feel that the good ol' 38Spl(especially in the +P loading) is more then adequate for self defense, especially out of small frame revolvers BUT it seems like many want to poo poo this neat ctg. as being under powered or just plain inadequate for a self defense round.
LEO's use it for decades and granted, the LRN ammo they used WASN'T the best but with proper ammo this little round does a pretty good job IMHO.
So, at what point did people start thinking that the 38Spl just wasn't good enough to get the job done for a civilian self defense round?


M&P

Well, here's the OP.

This tactic of wearing people down with your ignorance is apparent.
What YOU are talking about is known as 'moving the goal posts' when your point is refuted.

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 20:22
M&P

Well, here's the OP.

This tactic of wearing people down with your ignorance is apparent.
What YOU are talking about is known as 'moving the goal posts' when your point is refuted.

Yes?

What point are your referring to? What has been refuted? Christ, at least be clear about what you're attempting to say.

I know this may be a shock, but you do understand that within threads as long as this one, the topic kind of shifts and moves, right?

Oh, and just to be clear, the OP was also discussing both cartridge and platform, just like I've been......it's right there in the post you quoted. But you probably noticed that yourself, right? Goal posts, right?

OOOOOPS!

Berto
02-01-2012, 20:29
Buffalo Bore 158gr. LSWCHP: S&W Mt. Gun, 4 inch- 1162 fps (474 ft. lbs.)

Corbon 100 gr. Pow'r Ball
Caliber: 9mm Luger + P.
Bullet Wt.: 100gr Pow'RBall.
Velocity: 1475fps.
Energy: 483ftlbs.
Test Barrel Length: 4.0 Inches.
OOOOOOOPS!


Nope, I've been discussing both cartridge and platform from post one. Go back and re-read if you must. (Post #62). Weird is not reading the whole thread and understanding the trends in the discussion.



Wait, I thought this was about how .38SPCL and revolvers are at least as good as automatics. Changing your mind?

Oh, o.k., you can bring a GLOCK too. Don't forget the money.

Let's see if we can clear up your thinking;

I don't claim revolvers to be superior, I simply stated the advantages they have, just as autos have theirs.
I stated .38sp is just as effective as 9mm, which I can support and have supported.
If you truly want to see who has better abilities, with a given gun, bring it.

I have Glock, 1911, revolvers, derringers, snubbies whatever. Show what you got....you mentioned a camera, I have tons of pics on how I shoot. You?

You seem fixated on comparing a snubby to a G17, as if that's the only vindication you'll find in this debate. It was never about that...except maybe to you.:upeyes:

Berto
02-01-2012, 20:31
Yes?

What point are your referring to? What has been refuted? Christ, at least be clear about what you're attempting to say.

I know this may be a shock, but you do understand that within threads as long as this one, the topic kind of shifts and moves, right?

Oh, and just to be clear, the OP was also discussing both cartridge and platform, just like I've been. But you probably noticed that yourself, right?

OOOOOPS!

You're still scrambling to restructure the debate. Not working.:wavey:

Berto
02-01-2012, 20:45
Whew....quiet in here.:whistling:


I think I'll grab some food from the drive through, I'll bring my 442.

Pray for me.:supergrin:

dbarry
02-01-2012, 20:54
http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1280&bih=709&tbm=isch&tbnid=H3pwQHzgueerPM:&imgrefurl=http://endthefedusa.ning.com/photo/45-cause-they-dont-make-a-46%3Fcontext%3Dlatest&docid=qN-YThgn_QvUvM&imgurl=http://api.ning.com/files/ApJXJrnDcNMKKNyGiosjeyvrzmNA0Ge2dX6yfdyr2BtvgUYhxglu1vEoagfeObEvS6wzLAeQQXqh9A9vODs5-KKWCIhtoykh/file.451.jpg&w=384&h=480&ei=z_opT-usDsbh0QGRruiSCw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=367&vpy=140&dur=3271&hovh=251&hovw=201&tx=90&ty=129&sig=108850987768994094202&page=1&tbnh=172&tbnw=150&start=0&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0

M&P15T
02-01-2012, 20:55
Let's see if we can clear up your thinking;

I don't claim revolvers to be superior, I simply stated the advantages they have, just as autos have theirs.
I stated .38sp is just as effective as 9mm, which I can support and have supported.
If you truly want to see who has better abilities, with a given gun, bring it.

I have Glock, 1911, revolvers, derringers, snubbies whatever. Show what you got....you mentioned a camera, I have tons of pics on how I shoot. You?

You seem fixated on comparing a snubby to a G17, as if that's the only vindication you'll find in this debate. It was never about that...except maybe to you.:upeyes:

You are the last person that should be attempting to clear up anyone's thinking. Christ son, you need to start with your own.

The OP was discussing .38SPCL and small frame revolvers. I went along when you brought up the idea of longer barrels (usually in medium to larger frame revolvers) to level the playing field cartridge performance wise. Then, you got into the heavy for caliber .38SPCL loads to show the performance capabilities of the cartridge.....o.k., fine. I went along with you every time you've "moved the goal posts" on the conversation, while you've sat there and accused me of doing the same.

You just quoted how this whole discussion started with the OP asking when people started poo-pooing .38SPCL in small frame revolvers. I simply stated, when Gaston Glock filed for his 17th patent. The discussion has had many twists and turns from there.

I don't need to find vindication, as you have not supplied one bit of corroborating information for any of the statements you have made, or been able to refute one point I've put forward. I have been the one that has cruised the internet and found the hard facts and presented them, and every time you've just blithely ignored those facts because they haven't supported one thing you've said. .38SPCL is nowhere near as powerful as 9MM in their standard loadings. It's only when you "moved the goal posts" to 4" barrels (away from small frame/snubby revolvers), and then "move the goal posts" a 2nd time to heavy for caliber loads, that .38SPCL even comes close to 9MM. In standard loads, 9MM absolutely crushes .38SPCL. And don't even try to say that "small framed revolvers" doesn't mean a snubby, the 4 pictures on page 6 of this thread alone, as well as many others, clearly show what everyone is taking those words to mean.

Lastly, I compared my pistol to a snubby because that's what the OP was talking about, in the very post you quoted. If we keep the goal posts where they should be, and compare a small framed, short barrel snubby with standard .38SPCL 125 gr. +P loads, and compare it with standard 115 gr. 9MM +P loads out of a G17, we're talking total destruction....not even close. The OP asked when/why .38SPCL out of small framed revolvers lost favor, and the answer is high-capacity 9MM autos like the G17.

Look dude, you're so far from making any coherent, orderly or supported argument it's a joke. And I don't think that you're really trying to say that revolvers are better for self-defense, I get the feeling you understand that autos have better over-all performance. You could probably even admit that 9MM is a better cartridge, if your ego wasn't in the way.

I'm just waiting for the one revolver fan to finally say "Yeah, I know that a revolver isn't the best choice, but damnit, I just like them, and that's all that matters."

joecoastie
02-01-2012, 20:56
Whew....quiet in here.:whistling:


I think I'll grab some food from the drive through, I'll bring my 442.

Pray for me.:supergrin:

Wow, you DO live on the edge, hope you have something belt fed as a BUG. :supergrin:

method
02-01-2012, 21:07
Didn't anyone ever watch Miami Vice? Tubbs did quite well with a J Frame.

'Course, he did supplement it with his under-jacket howitzer from time to time.

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/1663/miami20vice08.jpg

Ruggles
02-01-2012, 21:38
I think the cartridge is a fine performer but I can not shoot a revolver 1/2 as well as a 1911. I choose the platform and then the cartridge I guess.

I love the over appeal of the S&W K Frame but damn if I can shoot them well enough. :(

Ruggles
02-01-2012, 21:41
Is it weird that I want a 4" barrel .38? Not a .357, but a dedicated .38: for some reason, I think I need to add one to the collection.

Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk

Heck no it is not. A 4" S&W Model 10 might just be the finest mass production revolver ever IMO. Nothing wrong with that at all :wavey:

Berto
02-01-2012, 23:29
You are the last person that should be attempting to clear up anyone's thinking. Christ son, you need to start with your own.

The OP was discussing .38SPCL and small frame revolvers. I went along when you brought up the idea of longer barrels (usually in medium to larger frame revolvers) to level the playing field cartridge performance wise. Then, you got into the heavy for caliber .38SPCL loads to show the performance capabilities of the cartridge.....o.k., fine. I went along with you every time you've "moved the goal posts" on the conversation, while you've sat there and accused me of doing the same.


Whoops Houston, we have a tantrum.....:yawn:
I'm going to indulge you in going through all this just to illustrate how FOS you are.
Again, here's the OP:

I know there are some of us here on the forum who feel that the good ol' 38Spl(especially in the +P loading) is more then adequate for self defense, especially out of small frame revolvers BUT it seems like many want to poo poo this neat ctg. as being under powered or just plain inadequate for a self defense round.
LEO's use it for decades and granted, the LRN ammo they used WASN'T the best but with proper ammo this little round does a pretty good job IMHO.
So, at what point did people start thinking that the 38Spl just wasn't good enough to get the job done for a civilian self defense round?


Yes he mentions small frame frame revolvers, he also mentions LEO use (med frame revolvers, BUG's), more importantly in concluding the question, asks;

So, at what point did people start thinking that the 38Spl just wasn't good enough to get the job done for a civilian self defense round?

Almost every person stated the .38sp was fine, some carried the J frame, some still carried the K frame. General agreement the .38sp round was fine.


Pg 3, I come in;

It was about capacity. There was no issue with the .38sp performance with a good load, in fact the 147gr 9mm loads were developed to approximate the FBI .38sp load performance.
My confidence in the revolver comes from years of consistent practice and learning to hit with it well, along with the fact I don't experience malfunctions anywhere near as often as I do with autos, even 'good' ones.
Those things are more important to me than whether I need to reload after 6 or 14.
LE deals in seeking crime and often involves large groups, capacity has much greater value vs someone needing personal defense weapon.


You come in at #62 with this sage reflection:

People aren't tougher, they're just better armed. Bad guys are packing better stuff these days, so it's just an arms race one must keep up with. Plus, many times attackers are found to be under the influence of narcotics, and that is why multiple hits and capacity is a big bonus. It's not about going out of "fashion", it's the reality of changing times and threats.

Revolvers are over-matched fire power wise to modern autos, so that's why most people understand that cartridges like .38 in a revolver is not the best choice for HD/CCW.

Spray & pray? How many times have you been in a gun fight? Please share with the class how you stood still and took careful, aimed shots with your .38 snubby while being shot at.

I love how you and other people talk about how this pistol or that cartridge has "served" them well.......when by "served" 99% of people mean it's what's easy and covenient to carry. Get in an actual gun fight, face and armed assailant (or mutiple assailants) and that little .38 revolver in your hand is going to feel like a single shot derringer.


.....which started your first pissing match with someone knowledgeable.

THis nugget of wisdom in particular, Revolvers are over-matched fire power wise to modern autos, so that's why most people understand that cartridges like .38 in a revolver is not the best choice for HD/CCW.



3 things:

One, it implys the the .38sp is inadequate (while you state that you carry 9mm)
Two, it puts you at odds with the vast majority of posters in this thread (an open ended discussion).
Three, it projects this assumption (surely earned on the mean streets of Detroit) that you know best what's suitable for the rest of us.

My response to your (contrived) experience with "13" Glocks, IDPA and 'comps' on #77 set off the BS detector, prompting my #78 response. Everything from you from that point on has galvanized that impression.

Next, You say I brought up 4" barrels. I did not. Nestor did. (post 82):wavey:

My next post was #89.

(Responding to Andrewsky)

I'll help.

1) They are most likely to work in real S/D situations, more so at contact range.

2) they are typically more accurate.

3)they are easier to use (adm handling) and no seperate parts to get lost/damaged. A self contained weapon.

4)better with cover, can't jam itself with thrown brass or slide interruption (this applies to shooting from retention too)

5) not grip sensitive, works if trigger is pulled.

6)can use any ammo/bullet profile, more versatile.

7)can handle the most powerful cartridges

8)simplicity of use, safety; immediately obvious if loaded.

THose are the obvious ones, if we get into triggers and paradigms of civilian carry needs, there's probably more.


THese things are factual, supported by any notable instructors. They are the advantages a revolver has over autos, not a stated universal supremacy of revolver, just the advantages.



You just quoted how this whole discussion started with the OP asking when people started poo-pooing .38SPCL in small frame revolvers. I simply stated, when Gaston Glock filed for his 17th patent. The discussion has had many twists and turns from there.

Not unexpectantly, you lie again; #115


Let's list the same old tired arguments from the revolver fans;

Auto users need the capacity because they can't shoot.
A revolver is "six for sure".
A revolver won't jam.
"Most" CCW firearms uses are over in one or two shots.

Look, we get it...you like revolvers. Fine.

Revolver fanatics (especially, for some reason, snubby owners) will got to the ends of the earth to try and justify what they carry, and so will auto lovers. The difference is that there are serious performance benefits to carrying an auto versus a snubby that will never go away, and this seems to create quite a bit of butt hurt amongst the revolver fans.

Let's be realistic, the performance differences between something like my G17C and a .38 J-frame are night and day. I would take the Pepsi challenge of lining-up on man-sized target at 7 yards, drawing from concealment, and putting 18 rounds on target. I'd do that with anyone here and their 5 or 6 shot revolver..........and it wouldn't even be close.

Well, unless Jerry Miculek posted here already.

But revolvers like the J-frame are far easier to carry concealed, and that's the real reason to own and carry one.

If you "feel" comfortable with a .38 snubby 5 or 6 shot, more power to you. Some simply would rather carry the bigger auto and know they have more rounds that are easier to get on target fast. Snubby carriers trade ease of carry for performance, and it's that simple.

When did .38SPCL stop being enough? When Gaston Glock filed for his 17th patent. Hell, the .38Spl was originally a black powder loading, so it's limited in it's case pressure maximums versus newer cartridges like the 9MM.


Here, YOU make the comparison to the g17C, as if that had anything to do with the validity of carrying a .38sp revolver.
If we take your assumption that the topic is about .38sp snubbies, and not the round itself or it's century of LE use, it would be safe to say we're discussing a gun used mostly as a pocket gun.
Do you pocket carry your G17C, Plaxico?
You also mention case pressures, meaningless when comparing completely different case volumes and illustrated with your own cited ballistics.



I don't need to find vindication, as you have not supplied one bit of corroborating information for any of the statements you have made, or been able to refute one point I've put forward. I have been the one that has cruised the internet and found the hard facts and presented them, and every time you've just blithely ignored those facts because they haven't supported one thing you've said. .38SPCL is nowhere near as powerful as 9MM in their standard loadings. It's only when you "moved the goal posts" to 4" barrels (away from small frame/snubby revolvers), and then "move the goal posts" a 2nd time to heavy for caliber loads, that .38SPCL even comes close to 9MM. In standard loads, 9MM absolutely crushes .38SPCL. And don't even try to say that "small framed revolvers" doesn't mean a snubby, the 4 pictures on page 6 of this thread alone, as well as many others, clearly show what everyone is taking those words to mean.


This is pure gold.

1) the only reason you're 'cruising the internet' is to learn about stuff and try to buttress a statement you had no knowledge to back.
2) you repeat the same fallacy over and over in hopes it will become true.
Truth: in an apples to apples comparison with their respective best loadings, bullet weights, pressure ratings and bbl lengths, the two rounds are equal with slight edge to .38 with heavy bullets, 9mm with light bullets.
There are far more low powered .38 loads for sure, revolvers don't need recoil pressure to function. That's why there is a huge range.
I don't understand your emotional reaction to this. If you don't believe me, go to caliber corner and we can comapare numbers.

This is why you are 'moving the goalpost' as I stated.

Comparing a full size pistol ballistics to a snub nosed revolver....and again to reiterate, YOU introduced this element.; the idea that .38sp is insufficient because (as if we should give a ****) you carry a g17C and therefore everyone else should too.

Really? Oh, o.k.

A heavy for caliber .38SPCL load like Buffalo Bore's 158gr. LSWCHP leaves a 2.5" snubby barrel at about 1059FPS producing a whopping 393 ft. lbs. of energy. All wrapped up in a 5 or 6 shot tiny package that usually has crappy sights, and forces the shooter under stress to use a long DA trigger pull for rapid shooting.

I carry Corbon's 115gr. JHP that moves out at 1350FPS and delivers 464 ft. lbs of energy. And I've got 18 of those rounds ready to go, with a nice, light trigger and better sights.

Know where that better performance comes from? Higher pressure.

And I'd bet that you could find even better performing .38SPCL ammo, stuff I don't know or care about. In the end the biggest draw-back is the pistol platform those rounds reside in. Snubbies, and revolvers in general, are nowhere near as effective for getting rounds on target quickly. Snubbies have their place for CCW because they're easy to carry, not because of their performance.


My Pepsi challenge still stands if you really think that .38SPCL in a revolver is the way to go for sheer shooting performance. 18 rounds on a man-sized target at 7 yards (longer if you so desire), and see who does it faster.

Bring money and a camera.


You want to couch the discussion around the .38 snubby vs your Glock.

VVVVVVVVVV

Lastly, I compared my pistol to a snubby because that's what the OP was talking about, in the very post you quoted. If we keep the goal posts where they should be, and compare a small framed, short barrel snubby with standard .38SPCL 125 gr. +P loads, and compare it with standard 115 gr. 9MM +P loads out of a G17, we're talking total destruction....not even close. The OP asked when/why .38SPCL out of small framed revolvers lost favor, and the answer is high-capacity 9MM autos like the G17.

No, the OP referred to civilian carry;

So, at what point did people start thinking that the 38Spl just wasn't good enough to get the job done for a civilian self defense round?


Not LE use. THere are a few similarities between LE and CCW, but also a ton of differences like we don't wear uniforms with a service pistol on our hip, going to crime scenes for a living....that one sorta stands out for me.
Thugs use all sorts of weapons, Glocks, Hi points,six shooters, zip guns etc.

Go to The armed citizen .com or something similar and highlight how many running gun battles you come across.
:yawn:

From the beginning, you saw a discussion about revolvers as an affront to your sanctity of pistol choice. It was never about that, so you try to make the discussion about that....which is sad.


Look dude, you're so far from making any coherent, orderly or supported argument it's a joke. And I don't think that you're really trying to say that revolvers are better for self-defense, I get the feeling you understand that autos have better over-all performance. You could probably even admit that 9MM is a better cartridge, if your ego wasn't in the way.

I'm just waiting for the one revolver fan to finally say "Yeah, I know that a revolver isn't the best choice, but damnit, I just like them, and that's all that matters."

You can't have it your way when speaking for other people, sorry.

carbuncle
02-02-2012, 01:10
Heck no..........Although my choice for a ccw is no longer a revolver, it's still a good choice for anyone who so chooses........and, the 38spl is a cartridge that isn't appreciated as much as it should be.......every bit as good as the 9mm. (Some would say it's better, and I couldn't disagree!)

This model 60 no-dash is what I was using when I last regularly ccw'd with a revolver. Every once in awhile, I still do use it........just not regularly.
http://pic50.picturetrail.com/VOL431/781008/1401653/207381953.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com/VOL431/781008/1401653/393014277.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com/VOL431/781008/1401653/197558963.jpg

Nice...thanks for the encouragement! Now I need to settle on a snubby, too!

Novocaine
02-02-2012, 01:21
.38 FBI load out of 4Ē barrel hangs with the best of them in my book. 2 inch snub is nothing to sneeze at either but is not exactly the hammer of Thor. Sure, the traits of a snub (small, reliable and powerful) are more difficult to combine in automatic. But thatís what revolvers became- niche weapons. And they drag .38Spl to become niche caliber along. Reliability of modern service automatics and ammo is the reason. Because for the most shooters itís easier to score accurate hits in a hurry with a full size automatic than with a full size revolver. Capacity and ease of reloading donít hurt either.

Revolvers used to be appealing option for people on a budget, no longer the case.

Few years back a local doctor was killed in home invasion. Two BGs armed with 9mms (Lorcin and Firestar to be exact). The doctor by all accounts was a very good marksman, gun enthusiast and collector, CCW holder, all that. Wife opens the door, gets pistol-whipped, screams; doctor hears ruckus, grabs loaded .38 and comes down the stairs. BG shoots and misses, doctor empties his .38. Hits one intruder three times, kills him on the spot. Starts wrestling with surviving BG who shoots the doctor twice. The doctorís wife and brother-in-law arm themselves with cooking pots and whatnot and join the fray. Together they disarm and subdue BG. Wife also gets shot but survives, doctor dies. BG pleads self-defense at trial.

To me this story exemplifies what is wrong with using .38 revolver for a house gun when you have access to more effective weapons and why it falls out of favor with the mainstream crowd.

GlockFish
02-02-2012, 01:55
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3d/The_Internet_is_Serious_Business.jpg

atakawow
02-02-2012, 03:30
:rofl: @ the "pressure = power" argument. Some of you really need to take up reloading to fully understand how things work. I have the powders and reloads on hand to prove this wrong over and over and over again, with hard facts.


Which caliber has more potential? Let's make this short and simple. Bullet weight/diameter are almost always interchangeable between the .38spl and the 9mm. Assuming the test subjects are using 125 grain lead slugs. If subject A (.38spl) can cram a whole lot more powder inside its case than subject B (9mm), which do you think will propel the bullet faster?

The result is pretty clear. The .38spl has much more potential than the 9mm. HOWEVER, finding a platform that could support such pressure could prove rather difficult.

Nestor
02-02-2012, 05:50
I know what I know. And what I know started with reading many of the same authors and experts you mentioned above. Then I grew up, and discovered that those guys aren't in my shoes. They don't live where I do, or look at things the same way as I do. I got some basic info from them, and then took things from there my damn self by learning from my own experiences.

FBI statistics? Great, if you're a LEO, almost useless if you're a CCWer...a distinction in statistics you have yet to grasp.

As far as being a punk? Easy to insult sitting behind a computer in Canada.

No matter right or wrong You simply can't stop insulting the others.
You are so predictible that it's no longer entertaining :yawn:
If You are acting like a punk, don't be surprised to be called one.

TN.Frank
02-02-2012, 10:04
I watched "Police Guns" on Modern Marvels on the History Ch. last night. According to one guy from the Mass. PD he said that PD went to semis not because of a lack of stopping power on the J/K Frame and 38spl ctg. but because of capacity. Because of all the civil unrest in the '60's and '70's LEO's felt that they needed more rounds on board to take care of riot conditions.
That's great if you're an LEO where you many encounter such things but for civilian use 5 or 6 shots should give you enough time to run away from the threat since we have no reason to stick around and engage the threat. We're not law enforcement and don't need to take the bad guy into custody, we just want to throw some lead his way to confuse him enough for us to escape IMHO.
I don't have a problem with semis but I also don't practice as much as I should and a revolver is a lot more forgiving for those of us who can't get out to shoot as much as we'd like to.
That's the great thing about this country, you can choose to carry whatever you want be it J-Frame, snub nose K-Frame, Ruger LCP, Full size Beretta 92, pick what works the best for you and your situation and run with it. Here in my little part of the world the J-Frame is working out just fine.
I would like to move up to a K-Frame for HD but only because a larger revolver would be easier to handle and the longer barrel would give me a bit better ballistics and I'd get one more shot in the cylinder. For EDC/CCW I'm sticking with my 642, it's light, compact, very reliable and I just feel better with it then I would a small semi.

1911ES
02-02-2012, 10:46
The .38 is actually better than ever. The ammunition selection far more advanced than the previous years.

I carry the S&W 642 airweight when traveling light... :suntan:

HexHead
02-02-2012, 10:49
we just want to throw some lead his way to confuse him enough for us to escape IMHO.


Good grief.

TN.Frank
02-02-2012, 11:25
Good grief.

So what, you think I'm going to stand toe to toe with an armed thug(or maybe two or three of em') and duke it out until we're all dead?
The point of self defense is to get away from the confrontation IMHO, not to stand there and fight it out until I either kill em' all or get killed.
There's an old saying, "He who fights and runs away lives to fight another day.", I'm not an LEO, I have no obligation to take Mr.Bad Guy into custody.

I'm going to put hits on the target, with any luck those hits will cause him to change his mind about the confrontation, in the mean time I'm going to be putting as much distance between him and me as I can.

ithaca_deerslayer
02-02-2012, 11:42
Lastly, I compared my pistol to a snubby because that's what the OP was talking about, in the very post you quoted. If we keep the goal posts where they should be, and compare a small framed, short barrel snubby with standard .38SPCL 125 gr. +P loads, and compare it with standard 115 gr. 9MM +P loads out of a G17, we're talking total destruction....not even close. The OP asked when/why .38SPCL out of small framed revolvers lost favor, and the answer is high-capacity 9MM autos like the G17.


You are Berto are both right. He is right that .38spl can crush 9mm. No two ways about that. That is because .38spl can be loaded to be near .357mag (and that creates other issues, and that's why we have the .357mag, but still it makes clear that the .38spl has lots of potential above the 9mm).

But you are right that in the typically found loads, off the shelves and in most peoples guns, the 9mm crushes the .38. The only caveat to that is the 158gr is also common load in .38, and the heaver bullet keeps the .38 from being "crushed" too much by the 9.

Where you are completely right is in your assessment of the high-cap auto like the 17 being the reason for the demise (or decreased popularity) of the .38spl. Add to that the 26. People can have relatively small guns in the 26 and get the balistic advantage of the typical 9mm, with more rounds, less recoil, and typically more accuracy from the shooter than with the .38 revolver.

Still, in my opinion, in many of your posts you tend to downplay the strengths of the .38 snubbie. Retro guys like Berto and me, and many others, find the .38 snubbie to have many advantages over the semi-auto (and of course the semi-auto has many advantages over the .38 snubbie). In my opinion, your views would be stronger if they were just a little more balanced. Just an opinion, take it for what it's worth to you. :)

ithaca_deerslayer
02-02-2012, 11:52
...
Few years back a local doctor was killed in home invasion. Two BGs armed with 9mms (Lorcin and Firestar to be exact). The doctor by all accounts was a very good marksman, gun enthusiast and collector, CCW holder, all that. Wife opens the door, gets pistol-whipped, screams; doctor hears ruckus, grabs loaded .38 and comes down the stairs. BG shoots and misses, doctor empties his .38. Hits one intruder three times, kills him on the spot. Starts wrestling with surviving BG who shoots the doctor twice. The doctorís wife and brother-in-law arm themselves with cooking pots and whatnot and join the fray. Together they disarm and subdue BG. Wife also gets shot but survives, doctor dies. BG pleads self-defense at trial.

To me this story exemplifies what is wrong with using .38 revolver for a house gun when you have access to more effective weapons and why it falls out of favor with the mainstream crowd.

Thanks for that story.

I agree with you. The .38 revovler is good and useful, but if given a choice, the G17 would be better. All other things equal, and thinking about that home defense story above.

If crap happens and you grab one gun and go to find out what's going on... I'd much rather have a G17 than a .38 snubbie. Even rather have a G17 than a GP100 .357mag. And, taking the G17 to the door is more practical than taking a shotgun.

But if I gotta go out concealed in public, there are times, places, circumstances, that the .38 snubbie is the better choice for concealment purposes than the G17. And once you start downsizing the semi-auto to be similar in size to the snubbie, reliability issues start to creep in.

That's my 2 cents :)

fastbolt
02-02-2012, 12:34
Few years back a local doctor was killed in home invasion. Two BGs armed with 9mms (Lorcin and Firestar to be exact). The doctor by all accounts was a very good marksman, gun enthusiast and collector, CCW holder, all that. Wife opens the door, gets pistol-whipped, screams; doctor hears ruckus, grabs loaded .38 and comes down the stairs. BG shoots and misses, doctor empties his .38. Hits one intruder three times, kills him on the spot. Starts wrestling with surviving BG who shoots the doctor twice. The doctor’s wife and brother-in-law arm themselves with cooking pots and whatnot and join the fray. Together they disarm and subdue BG. Wife also gets shot but survives, doctor dies. BG pleads self-defense at trial.


Unless there was another really similar case, I remember learning about that case some years ago. Sad and tragic.

I remember at the time thinking that it seemed as though it might have been less a matter of caliber and more a matter of capacity (before he exhausted his ammunitio), and perhaps the nature of the hits he made on the one attacker before being overwhelmed by another attacker. We'd probably all like to think that maybe if he'd had more rounds available (like a 8-10+1 rounds 9mm, or some such pistol) that he might have prevailed and survived, but there's really no way to know.

There are also examples of cop carriers of 5-shot revolvers who died when they exhausted their ammunition against one attacker, as well as a few who prevailed against 2-3 attackers armed with a 5-shot .38 Snub.

Yes, capacity and being able to reload with a magazine are primary advantages with semiauto pistols, but those advantages still have to be effectively employed within any given set of conditions and circumstances. Sometimes circumstance and events (luck) may not go the way we might wish.

I'd never presume to try and convince one of our guys & gals to go to a 5-shot snub instead of a compact 9, .40, .45 or even a 6-7 shot .380 ... as long as they can use whatever choice they make safely, accurately & effectively. For the folks who are experienced revolver shooters, or who may have the desire to take the time to learn to become a skilled revolver shooter? I'm not going to try to dissuade them, either.

It takes more time and effort (and continued practice) to master even the larger 6-shot wheelguns (or 7-8 shot models nowadays), though, and even more so to use the smaller snubs.

It generally seems easier to teach the younger shooters to use the smaller pistols than a revolver, though. ;)

Of course, comes to that, full-size pistols are always going to remain arguably better choices than smaller ones, too.

It's all a balanced compromise to be carefully assessed and determined by each individual.

NeverMore1701
02-02-2012, 12:43
I'll still stick to my full size, high capacity semi for primary carry, but I'm sure I'll end up with a couple of three revolvers for fun some day.

TN.Frank
02-02-2012, 14:13
IF there's 3 or 4 attackers you may not be able to shoot fast enough even with a semi-auto with an 18+1 round capacity. You've got 4 folks shooting at you and if they can shoot at all one of em' is sure to get hits on you before you can take out all 4. Sad fact is that even with modern semis a single person still isn't much of a match for more then one or two. When the odds get stacked against you it's probably time to run, not stand and fight.

tuica
02-02-2012, 15:04
When better cartridges were invented. Cheers.

GlockFish
02-02-2012, 15:42
What we have learned from this thread:

1. The 38spl is still considered "enough" for most people. They excel as pocket guns. And they have killed many bad guys in the past. The new generation of .380's are neato too.

2. There are people who no matter what, are going to carry the biggest caliber they can. ie "I carry a 1911 IWB no matter what I'm wearing. I also have a Desert Eagle .50 strapped in an ankle hoster. Anything below .45 cal is useless."

I love Glocktalk.

NeverMore1701
02-02-2012, 15:49
IF there's 3 or 4 attackers you may not be able to shoot fast enough even with a semi-auto with an 18+1 round capacity. You've got 4 folks shooting at you and if they can shoot at all one of em' is sure to get hits on you before you can take out all 4. Sad fact is that even with modern semis a single person still isn't much of a match for more then one or two. When the odds get stacked against you it's probably time to run, not stand and fight.

Move > shoot, no matter what you're carrying.

smitty704
02-02-2012, 17:44
Well, if it's the only option then g ahead and carry it. But if you have a high capacity 9mm, .40S&W, 45ACP, etc... I don't understand why you would carry a .38spl. That s my opinion.

So as far as WHEN the .38spl became "not enough", I would say when the G17 came out. ;)

Six4Sure
02-02-2012, 18:04
Is it weird that I want a 4" barrel .38? Not a .357, but a dedicated .38: for some reason, I think I need to add one to the collection.

Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk


Not at all, I would love to have a model 10 and was about to buy one when the deal on my Glock came up. Budsgunshop.com has Square and Round butt 4" 10s for 270!!

chief63
02-02-2012, 18:55
Well, if it's the only option then g ahead and carry it. But if you have a high capacity 9mm, .40S&W, 45ACP, etc... I don't understand why you would carry a .38spl. That s my opinion.

So as far as WHEN the .38spl became "not enough", I would say when the G17 came out. ;)

Why carry a pistol when you can carry a machine gun under a trench coat?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Andrewsky
02-02-2012, 18:58
It's kind of sad how this forum has become a haven for people who don't realize revolvers are obsolete technology. The ghost of John Moses Browning is looking on with furious anger and great dismay!!!

TN.Frank
02-02-2012, 22:37
It's kind of sad how this forum has become a haven for people who don't realize revolvers are obsolete technology. The ghost of John Moses Browning is looking on with furious anger and great dismay!!!

That's ok, the Ghost of Samuel Colt and Daniel B. Wesson are ready to step in with their revolvers and take care of Mr.Browning if things get out of hand.:rofl:

Berto
02-03-2012, 19:38
This was fun, it's not like not like I don't like autos or 9mm-I have a bunch including the Luger pistol.
None of that has much to do with what constitutes "enough".
Ask 50 people what that is and you'll get 50 different answers; some people think a derringer is enough, some nothing less than their jungle clipped AK.
What I do for work and in my free time means 95% of the time it's the .38sp snubby, so when some fool says it isn't enough because they use a 9mm....WTF, there's no notable difference...I can load ammo in my .38 that's a little better or a ton worse depending on bullet weight and recoil tolerance.
Then it must be because my gun holds more, great...carry it then, but that still doesn't mean crap about what is "enough".
That's why we call handguns a compromise...a G17 is unquestionably more gun than a .38 revolver, it has three times the firepower, but that won't replace skill and won't make any difference in the first six rounds, nor will it drop into a cargo pocket.
It's just a question of degree when I decide how much compromise I'm willing to make.
I actually like the idea of seeing how significant the difference is between a G 17 and one of my snubbies is at 7 yards, maybe six vs six and 18 vs 18...all I have is a G20 so maybe M&P and I could do this.
I'm in...

J_Rico
02-03-2012, 23:46
Is it weird that I want a 4" barrel .38? Not a .357, but a dedicated .38: for some reason, I think I need to add one to the collection.

Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk

Did the same thing a few years ago. My first handgun was a S&W 19. Added a couple more .357s along the way. Then decided I really wanted a Model 10. It is a classic medium frame revolver and beautiful in my opinion.

Go find you one and enjoy. :wavey:

M&P15T
02-04-2012, 07:56
This was fun, it's not like not like I don't like autos or 9mm-I have a bunch including the Luger pistol.
None of that has much to do with what constitutes "enough".
Ask 50 people what that is and you'll get 50 different answers; some people think a derringer is enough, some nothing less than their jungle clipped AK.
What I do for work and in my free time means 95% of the time it's the .38sp snubby, so when some fool says it isn't enough because they use a 9mm....WTF, there's no notable difference...I can load ammo in my .38 that's a little better or a ton worse depending on bullet weight and recoil tolerance.
Then it must be because my gun holds more, great...carry it then, but that still doesn't mean crap about what is "enough".
That's why we call handguns a compromise...a G17 is unquestionably more gun than a .38 revolver, it has three times the firepower, but that won't replace skill and won't make any difference in the first six rounds, nor will it drop into a cargo pocket.
It's just a question of degree when I decide how much compromise I'm willing to make.
I actually like the idea of seeing how significant the difference is between a G 17 and one of my snubbies is at 7 yards, maybe six vs six and 18 vs 18...all I have is a G20 so maybe M&P and I could do this.
I'm in...

Very easy to do. 7 yards, 18 rounds, man-sized IDPA target & timer....who's faster? It's not even going to be close with the revolver having to be reloaded 3 times. 6 rounds will be close, but if the shooters have similar skill levels, the auto will still win. I've shot a snubby, both with .38 and .357, I know the limitations in their sights, trigger, etc.

I would be in, but there's a bit of a distance issue. I'm not driving across the country.

El_Ron1
02-04-2012, 08:03
I'm collecting such garbage. Feel free to drop it on me once it will start rotting.
:patriot: http://www.emofaces.com/en/emoticons/p/poland-flag-waving-emoticon-animated.gif http://files.vector-images.com/clipart/smiley190.gif

Andrewsky
02-04-2012, 09:08
I've done some testing with several of my handguns. I've found that my group size is 50% smaller with a Sig Sauer P226 or CZ-75 than it is with a 4" S&W Model 10. The difference is due to the trigger and sight radius.

M&P15T
02-04-2012, 09:50
I've done some testing with several of my handguns. I've found that my group size is 50% smaller with a Sig Sauer P226 or CZ-75 than it is with a 4" S&W Model 10. The difference is due to the trigger and sight radius.

It's not group size that's in question. With either a large auto or a snubby, you could take your time and get accurate shots. It's about getting rounds on target COM quickly, as if you're in an SD situation.

Andrewsky
02-04-2012, 10:08
It's not group size that's in question. With either a large auto or a snubby, you could take your time and get accurate shots. It's about getting rounds on target COM quickly, as if you're in an SD situation.

I was shooting as if I were in an SD situation...

JuneyBooney
02-04-2012, 10:14
IF there's 3 or 4 attackers you may not be able to shoot fast enough even with a semi-auto with an 18+1 round capacity. You've got 4 folks shooting at you and if they can shoot at all one of em' is sure to get hits on you before you can take out all 4. Sad fact is that even with modern semis a single person still isn't much of a match for more then one or two. When the odds get stacked against you it's probably time to run, not stand and fight.

I have been in a situation like that and most of the time when you shoot at the first one they all run off. That is unless you are dealing with pros out to get you but most of us will be dealing with thugs.

M&P15T
02-04-2012, 11:28
I was shooting as if I were in an SD situation...


Ah ha......gotcha.

Nestor
02-04-2012, 12:00
I've done some testing with several of my handguns. I've found that my group size is 50% smaller with a Sig Sauer P226 or CZ-75 than it is with a 4" S&W Model 10. The difference is due to the trigger and sight radius.

The difference is due to trigger control skills. CZ75 and S&W model 10 will group the same (no experience with SIG) if You are spending enough time with both of the platforms. No need to blame the gun.

Nestor
02-04-2012, 12:01
:patriot: http://www.emofaces.com/en/emoticons/p/poland-flag-waving-emoticon-animated.gif http://files.vector-images.com/clipart/smiley190.gif

:wavey:

TN.Frank
02-04-2012, 12:15
I actually shot my best groups ever with a S&W M27, 8 3/8". Second would have been my S&W M13, 4" but the M27 didn't win out by much. Both shot like a house a fire, wish I still had that M13.:crying:
I find if you slick up the DA on a revolver and put a lighter rebound spring in em' you can shoot DA groups that'll be as good if not better then any DA semi auto on the market. Also, you have to relearn how to use your trigger finger when shooting a DA revolver. You don't shoot tip of the finger, you shoot almost to the first knuckle so you get enough force to work that DA trigger properly.

Andrewsky
02-04-2012, 12:36
The difference is due to trigger control skills. CZ75 and S&W model 10 will group the same (no experience with SIG) if You are spending enough time with both of the platforms. No need to blame the gun.

Yeah, I'll have to keep testing. To be fair, I have much less experience with the revolver.

Nestor
02-04-2012, 12:45
Yeah, I'll have to keep testing. To be fair, I have much less experience with the revolver.

Nothing wrong with that.
The revolver may not work for You, but in the end your trigger skills will improve anyway...which will benefit your auto shooting skills :)

hogship
02-04-2012, 13:01
Well, if it's the only option then g ahead and carry it. But if you have a high capacity 9mm, .40S&W, 45ACP, etc... I don't understand why you would carry a .38spl. That s my opinion.


I feel the same way smitty........for myself and my own choices that apply to me!

Guess what this all boils down to is that to some people, capacity and faster reload capability is meaningless, and they are willing to bet their lives that these things will never make any difference in the outcome.....

For myself, I don't want to wager my life on anything, unless I give myself the most favorable chance of winning that bet. Capacity and faster reload may never come into play, but I'll be damned if I'm going to predict that they won't!

Some time back, I asked this question in post #30:



To make that point......let's just say you WERE going to be in a civilian gunfight of some unknown circumstances......it's GOING to happen. You don't know when, where, why, or any relevant facts or details. There will be at least one bad guy shooting at you, maybe more. You don't know whether the BG knows what he's doing, or not. What would YOU CHOOSE for the BG to be armed with......a revolver, or an automatic?



At this point, I don't think anyone has ever answered this question......especially Berto, Nestor, and a few others who have chosen the revolver for personal protection, when they just as easily could have chosen an automatic.

The reason why this question has never been answered, is because the answer itself reveals what the person thinks of the mechanical "real world" differences between revolvers and automatics separate of any knowledge whether that BG person knows how to shoot, or not. Of course, the answer does depend on an honest answer, and not some concocted answer based on strained logic.

I'm going to answer my own question, right here and now........I would choose my opponent to be armed with a revolver. The reason I would make that choice, is because I'm in control of basic logic when I understand that the chance of my own survival is greater if the BG runs out of ammunition sooner than later......and, he'll reload slower, instead of faster.

There, you have it........it's really very simple reasoning.







This is not to say a revolver in capable hands can't overcome any unforeseen self defense situation.......just that it has less specific advantages that can be entered into the equation to determine the best odds of survival.........

Those who choose a revolver.....great. I've got no problem with their choice, or the reasons why they've made that choice......but I do have a problem with my own sense of logical deduction, If I were to make that same choice for myself!

ooc

L Pete
02-04-2012, 15:45
Hit per hit, there 38 ain't enough difference from the 9 mm, to cause any worries. It's the misses that cause problems. Most gunfights, and I do empathize "most", are at such short distances that sights will be come irrelevent.

Revolvers are among my most favorite things. I still shoot regularly, and I most say that when pressed for marksmanship at longer distances, my S & W model 67 will easily out shoot my Glock 17. This model 67 is box stock, excepting the front sight was changed to a plan Partridge blade. The Glock is also box stock, except for a sight change. They're both good and accurate guns, but I've been shooting revolvers double action so long, I just do much better with the revolver.

I would not feel uncomfortable in the least with a 38 Spl. Nothing gives me a more secure feeling than the feel of a K frame in my hand. It' just old habits are difficult to break.

In the old days, the reason for the switch over from 38 to 9mm was about firearm capacity, not cartridge power.

fpgeek
02-04-2012, 15:49
I know there are some of us here on the forum who feel that the good ol' 38Spl(especially in the +P loading) is more then adequate for self defense, especially out of small frame revolvers BUT it seems like many want to poo poo this neat ctg. as being under powered or just plain inadequate for a self defense round.
LEO's use it for decades and granted, the LRN ammo they used WASN'T the best but with proper ammo this little round does a pretty good job IMHO.
So, at what point did people start thinking that the 38Spl just wasn't good enough to get the job done for a civilian self defense round?

There are a lot of bodies in marked and unmarked graves throughout North America that can attest to the .38 SPL round. Our agency will soon be issuing J-frame .38 SPL revolvers as secondary weapons. That is, as soon as the Feds release them.

Berto
02-04-2012, 16:36
I feel the same way smitty........for myself and my own choices that apply to me!

Guess what this all boils down to is that to some people, capacity and faster reload capability is meaningless, and they are willing to bet their lives that these things will never make any difference in the outcome.....

For myself, I don't want to wager my life on anything, unless I give myself the most favorable chance of winning that bet. Capacity and faster reload may never come into play, but I'll be damned if I'm going to predict that they won't!

Some time back, I asked this question in post #30:



At this point, I don't think anyone has ever answered this question......especially Berto, Nestor, and a few others who have chosen the revolver for personal protection, when they just as easily could have chosen an automatic.

The reason why this question has never been answered, is because the answer itself reveals what the person thinks of the mechanical "real world" differences between revolvers and automatics separate of any knowledge whether that BG person knows how to shoot, or not. Of course, the answer does depend on an honest answer, and not some concocted answer based on strained logic.

I'm going to answer my own question, right here and now........I would choose my opponent to be armed with a revolver. The reason I would make that choice, is because I'm in control of basic logic when I understand that the chance of my own survival is greater if the BG runs out of ammunition sooner than later......and, he'll reload slower, instead of faster.

There, you have it........it's really very simple reasoning.







This is not to say a revolver in capable hands can't overcome any unforeseen self defense situation.......just that it has less specific advantages that can be entered into the equation to determine the best odds of survival.........

Those who choose a revolver.....great. I've got no problem with their choice, or the reasons why they've made that choice......but I do have a problem with my own sense of logical deduction, If I were to make that same choice for myself!

ooc

I'd rather the BG be armed with an auto.
I think my chances for survival are better based on these reasons:

1) BG's often use cheap low quality weapons. Cheap low quality autos are notoriously unreliable....and some less cheap ones as well.
2) Many fights are contact range. While I'm no Krav pro or eager to attempt a disarm, your hypothetical includes this possibility and I'd MUCH rather fight a weapon that can be more easily disabled by slide contact or mag release.
3) The whole cross section of pistols doesn't assure firepower superiority and hate it love it, it literally does not make a difference in 99% of gunfights we civilians encounter.

Only hits count, and years of studying CCT vids and different gunfights be it CCW or armed storekeepers or ATM robberies or jackasses in the bar parking lot, there's a burst a shooting, people haul ass in opposite directions and someone either goes to the hospital or morgue or jail. Revolver or auto figures somewhere around 11 in on the list of ten most important factors in successful badassery.

Everything is a gamble, I could get robbed at the ATM on the way to work, someone could road rage me in traffic or a piano could fall on my head.
I'll hope none of those things happen, even any gun is no guarantee I'll handle an armed attack....IMO people idealize this kind of crap waaay too much.

chief63
02-04-2012, 17:47
I choose not to limit myself. There are times you just can't - or don't want to - conceal a large capacity semi-auto. Mouse guns and snubbies certainly have their place.

Nestor
02-04-2012, 19:33
Some time back, I asked this question in post #30:



At this point, I don't think anyone has ever answered this question......especially Berto, Nestor, and a few others who have chosen the revolver for personal protection, when they just as easily could have chosen an automatic.

The reason why this question has never been answered, is because the answer itself reveals what the person thinks of the mechanical "real world" differences between revolvers and automatics separate of any knowledge whether that BG person knows how to shoot, or not. Of course, the answer does depend on an honest answer, and not some concocted answer based on strained logic.

I'm going to answer my own question, right here and now........I would choose my opponent to be armed with a revolver. The reason I would make that choice, is because I'm in control of basic logic when I understand that the chance of my own survival is greater if the BG runs out of ammunition sooner than later......and, he'll reload slower, instead of faster.

There, you have it........it's really very simple reasoning.







This is not to say a revolver in capable hands can't overcome any unforeseen self defense situation.......just that it has less specific advantages that can be entered into the equation to determine the best odds of survival.........

Those who choose a revolver.....great. I've got no problem with their choice, or the reasons why they've made that choice......but I do have a problem with my own sense of logical deduction, If I were to make that same choice for myself!

ooc

That's all great, but the reality is that You have no choice over what BG is carrying. He may jump on You with a shotgun, AR15, auto, revolver, knife or fist. I simply don't care what he's carrying.
Are You expecting me to leave behind the gun that I'm the best with just because he may be using this or that?
Is this your reasoning?
I need the best tool for the job and in my case it's K frame revolver.
I'm not preparing myself for the BG's gun, because I can't.
I'm preparing myself to make the hits as fast and as accurate as I can and this is the only thing I care for.
In my case it may be accomplished the best with the S&W revolver.
Remind me please since when the capacity alone started to winning the firefights?
I kinda believe it's about the hits.
..and how long it takes to reload the revolver for a TRAINED individual?
2 seconds?
How long it takes to reload the auto?
And don't tell me that most people are carrying full size guns as CCW because they don't.
They are usually choosing smaller, compact pistols that have just a few more rounds than revolver has, so reload
sooner or later may be your problem as well. On top of that small autos are not as reliable as the revolvers are,
so maybe clearing the jam may be on order as well. Ohh..well, if that's the case You will need more than 2 seconds.
Hitting your opponent first and within 2-3 seconds since SHTF is your best chance of walking away in one piece.
Your reasoning may be good for You, but for sure is not universal to all of us.

ithaca_deerslayer
02-04-2012, 19:57
Nestor, good post. At least have something on you and know how to use it. Nobody wants lead going their way. Having some lead to accuately throw is better than not having a gun.

Nestor
02-04-2012, 20:23
Ohhh...I nearly forgot.
Here is the flower power to all those, "my choice is better than yours" guys.
Flower on the left was brought to You by Speer Gold Dot and the one on the right by Winchester PDX1 :tongueout:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/Admon/IMG_3347.jpg

Have a wonderful weekend!

DonGlock26
02-05-2012, 09:19
I know there are some of us here on the forum who feel that the good ol' 38Spl(especially in the +P loading) is more then adequate for self defense, especially out of small frame revolvers BUT it seems like many want to poo poo this neat ctg. as being under powered or just plain inadequate for a self defense round.
LEO's use it for decades and granted, the LRN ammo they used WASN'T the best but with proper ammo this little round does a pretty good job IMHO.
So, at what point did people start thinking that the 38Spl just wasn't good enough to get the job done for a civilian self defense round?

It's not the cartridge, it's the platform. The semi-auto outperforms the revolver in in-gun ammo capacity and reloading speed. The revolver is still an excellent choice for a pocket pistol, summer carry, ankle carry, and back-up.

_

Andrewsky
02-05-2012, 09:39
Just as an example, last night I was out walking my dogs. I am in a process of doing some work on my full size automatics so I carried my S&W Model 10-8. I had a leather OWB holster, two Safariland Comp 2 speedloaders in a nylon belt pouch, and a flashlight. I was using a Beltman 1.5" belt. Since I was in a low risk environment I felt that I'd be okay with just 18 125 gr. .38 special JHP's. In that situation it might have been more important to have highest reliability than highest capacity, so I don't think I was at much of a disadvantage (if any) by carrying the revolver.

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb30/Andrewsky89/revolver.jpg

Berto and Nestor I hope you enjoy this because for the next nine full moons I will be arbitrarily anti-revolver. I don't want you guys to get bored.

Nestor
02-05-2012, 11:09
I think that we already get used to it. No worries. When one bases his life on principle, 99 percent of his decisions are already made. :wavey:

DEADEYEGUY
02-05-2012, 11:40
With the caveat that no pistol caliber weapon (at least none you can easily carry and conceal) is a good stopper you can do allot worse than a .38 Special. Although the .38 has a fair size case length it was originally a blackpowder cartridge. At least from what I've read on it's history. So it isn't able to be loaded to it's full potential. Thus the .357 Magnum came along. But even that isn't clear cut. When the F.B.I. issued S&W Model 13's .357's with 3" barrels they loaded them with .38 Special 158gr. +P LSWCHP. Felt it was the best combination of power and controllability.
No complaints I've ever read of from them using this combination. Chicago P.D. and the R.C.M.P. also liked this round in .38. The .38 Special in the same weight 158gr. LRN had a pretty dismal record. If you get a chance read Jim Cirillo's book on gunfights. He would often carry 3 .38 revolvers when working Stakeout's at high risk locations. In fact he experimented with allot of early JHP's and other types of bullets to get more smack out of the round. So it goes back to what we always hear. A bullet has to penetrate deep enough to get to vitals. Best if it expands while doing so. And you need to place your shots in the vitals and repeat as needed.
Their are a few .38 Special loads that meet the penetration and expansion criteria in 4" and above barrels. A few like the 135gr. +P Gold Dot in 2" barrels. Except ammo selection and lots of training and practice that's about the best you can do. The attacker(s) mental state, drugs, alcohol, and luck also come into play. Their was a shooting here recently regarding a young lady and a crazy boyfriend she was trying to get away from.
She carried a j-frame because she could have it on her at all times. It was loaded with 148gr. lead wadcutters because that was the limit of what she could handle in the little gun. He broke in one night and grabbed her by the throat. She had the j-frame in her bathrobe pocket. Five of the wadcutters through his heart at contact range and he was DRT. So even "weak" rounds like the 148gr. wadcutters going deep enough and through the right place will work.

Andrewsky
02-05-2012, 12:13
I think that we already get used to it. No worries. When one bases his life on principle, 99 percent of his decisions are already made. :wavey:

Many people I know me tell me I probably have a mental condition that precludes me from making firm decisions.

hogship
02-05-2012, 15:40
Many people I know me tell me I probably have a mental condition that precludes me from making firm decisions.

Actually, there were some German Generals just prior to WW2 who made some firm decisions about the ability of their soldiers to prevail in war by using accuracy through a well placed shot from a bolt rifle......in spite of the realization that their men would likely be facing automatic rifles. When they acquired some practical experience about this theory some of them changed their minds and realized that more shots and superior reloading capability meant that more of their men would survive individual engagements. Unfortunately, this realization came too late to effect any outcome!

There are those who feel a military engagement isn't the same thing......This may be true in some cases, but in other cases, that's not true. Many military engagements are a gunfight between two opposing soldiers, on very much the same proximity, mental condition, and equipment considerations that a civilian gunfight would be......one incident after another, but in quick succession. For these times, in any given instant, the comparable circumstances are very much the same.

And the police? Tell us that one police officer confronting one BG is any different than an ordinary citizen against that same BG? Maybe the police should go back to revolvers........

:wavey:

ooc

Nestor
02-05-2012, 16:45
And the police? Tell us that one police officer confronting one BG is any different than an ordinary citizen against that same BG? Maybe the police should go back to revolvers........

:wavey:

ooc

Many Law Enforcement Officers carry revolvers as a back up weapon that can be used at extreme CQ distance when the main gun will be inoperable.
However since we are talking the sidearm here...there are some differences between encounter of the police officer and civilian with the BG.
Difference is that the average police officer will usually encounter felons as the result of a police attempt to arrest the felons.
Now the other way around.
It is usually the case that a person who attacks police officers knows that they are armed because uniformed police generally carry their arms in an unconcealed fashion.
That is not the case with civilians who, if they are armed, are usually carrying their weapons concealed rather than openly.
The attacker knows the risk of attacking the police.
It involves the use by the police of their guns, while the attacker of a civilian has an unknown probability of encountering an armed victim, since the probability of a civilian being armed is much lower than the probability of the police officer being armed.
It's safe to assume that for this reason anyone who is attacking the police will be better prepared (armed) than while attacking the average civilian.
The civilian is generally surprised by the felon as opposed to the police officer who expects to be dealing with a felon. This element of surprise means that the possible firefight will take place at much shorter distance than with the police. Revolver has a few advantages over auto while used at extreme CQB distance. It's a fact.

Andrewsky
02-05-2012, 17:21
Actually, there were some German Generals just prior to WW2 who made some firm decisions about the ability of their soldiers to prevail in war by using accuracy through a well placed shot from a bolt rifle......in spite of the realization that their men would likely be facing automatic rifles. When they acquired some practical experience about this theory some of them changed their minds and realized that more shots and superior reloading capability meant that more of their men would survive individual engagements. Unfortunately, this realization came too late to effect any outcome!

There are those who feel a military engagement isn't the same thing......This may be true in some cases, but in other cases, that's not true. Many military engagements are a gunfight between two opposing soldiers, on very much the same proximity, mental condition, and equipment considerations that a civilian gunfight would be......one incident after another, but in quick succession. For these times, in any given instant, the comparable circumstances are very much the same.

And the police? Tell us that one police officer confronting one BG is any different than an ordinary citizen against that same BG? Maybe the police should go back to revolvers........

:wavey:

ooc

Well the Germans invaded Russia with over 1.5 million men and only brought about 3,000 tanks with them (rough figures). I think most people underestimate the role that small arms played in WWII.

hogship
02-05-2012, 17:27
Well the Germans invaded Russia with over 1.5 million men and only brought about 3,000 tanks with them (rough figures). I think most people underestimate the role that small arms played in WWII.

In that case, the great majority of the small arms were bolt rifles on both sides......

Not sure what the point is, but when the Garand entered the argument, I believe it's effect on the war's progress was, in the eyes of the participants, themselves.......a factor not small.

Nestor, your response above this one made me LOL for real! :wavey:

ooc

Andrewsky
02-05-2012, 17:29
In that case, the great majority of the small arms were bolt rifles on both sides......

Not sure what the point is, but when the Garand entered the argument, I believe it's effect on the war's progress was, in the eyes of the participants, themselves.......a factor not small.

Nestor, your response above this one made me LOL for real! :wavey:

ooc

Yes. I think in war, you need to pursue every advantage you can get. This is something the French didn't figure out until their young women had new boyfriends that called them Fraulein.

Nestor
02-05-2012, 17:36
Nestor, your response above this one made me LOL for real! :wavey:

ooc


I always like to read the factual, constructive responses of the others.
Thanks for yours though.

hogship
02-05-2012, 17:48
I always like to read the factual, constructive responses of the others.
Thanks for yours though.

Hey, ol' buddy.......just telling you the truth!

Your response made me LOL, that's a fact.

ooc

Sharky7
02-05-2012, 21:53
It's not the cartridge, it's the platform. The semi-auto outperforms the revolver in in-gun ammo capacity and reloading speed. The revolver is still an excellent choice for a pocket pistol, summer carry, ankle carry, and back-up.

_

Well said. In a shooting, ammo goes fast. It's easy to shoot 5-7 rounds in just 2-3 seconds. Doesn't mean that revolvers still don't have their place.

HKLovingIT
02-06-2012, 00:08
I know there are some of us here on the forum who feel that the good ol' 38Spl(especially in the +P loading) is more then adequate for self defense, especially out of small frame revolvers BUT it seems like many want to poo poo this neat ctg. as being under powered or just plain inadequate for a self defense round.
LEO's use it for decades and granted, the LRN ammo they used WASN'T the best but with proper ammo this little round does a pretty good job IMHO.
So, at what point did people start thinking that the 38Spl just wasn't good enough to get the job done for a civilian self defense round?

When Meth and PCP were invented but then there is always the .357 Magnum for dedicated revolver guys.

It's really up to each guy. If you think it's fine, it's fine. I have a Smith 442 that goes out and about with me on occasion. It has its place.

mac66
02-06-2012, 10:10
I didn't read this whole thread but back in the mid '70s when I got in the business our issued service pistol was a S&W Mod 10 HB. Some guys used dump pouches, some used loops. The big upgrade was when went to a Model 19 and speed loaders. Back in those days some departments were experimenting with 9mm semis. The Illinois State Police for example was one of the first to use semis. They had S&W 39s or 59s, I can't remember which. Interestingly, many of us carried semis as backup guns. My sergeant carried a Browning Hi-power, lots of us carried 25s, 22s, or in my case an AMT 380 Back-Up (man, I wish I'd kept it). I carried a Series 70 1911 and then a Star PD off duty. Most guys carried .38 snubbies off duty though Walther PPKs were pretty popular.

There was also a lot of discussion about what was best service pistol. Stories came out of California about cops being killed while trying to reload their revolvers. Of course one story that came out of Illinois was about the 9mm not being able to stop a bad guy after multiple shots. State police shot a guy 13 times or so after which he shot the officer. Of course they used FMJs back then but that is probably where "the 9mm is weak" reputation came from.

In the early 1980s there were a lot of anti-government survivalist and militia groups forming up. They were using semi auto rifles (the Mini 14 was big back then) and the police felt they were not adequately armed to counter these groups. There were a number of confrontations with these groups. if you recall, the FBI had the same issue in the Miami Massacre, agents were killed by bad guys (mini 14) while they tried to reload revolvers. This was when the FBI started looking at semi-autos.

In the mean time, stainless steel revolvers replaced most others in police service and then the world changed forever with the introduction of the Glock. Wonder 9s became the thing until the .40 was invented.

Lt Scott 14
02-06-2012, 13:38
When I was hired as a Deputy Marshal, we were issued M66 357 mags after qualifying at the LEO Academy. Weapons used at the Academy: M10 S&W 4in 38 spec. Our dept "advised" our purchase of M10s, ammo, leather gear then after graduation, M66s.All fit the same holsters, and speedloaders.
The basic quals were revolver and shotgun. Some other PDs issued 9mms, and they seemed as easy to fire, easy to hit targets, we hoped for a transition due to mag capacity. Not for 6 years, then 40 cal.Glocks. All worked well, and still have mine (M10) after 24yrs. BUG: 442 38 spec. still on duty.

Sgt127
02-06-2012, 15:08
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/atlanta-video-beating-765912

This is a good example of what a real use of a defensive handgun may look like.

Possibly one handed, possibly weak handed (the other fending off kicks to the head). On your side. Shooting up. While being pummeled. The gun possibly being driven against you. Or against the attacker.

Thats a real deal. If that auto jams, that snappy tap-rack-bang you have practiced to death at the range will only work if the other hand is not keeping a box cutter, or, in this case boot, off your head.

I like both. I carry both. They both have a definitive strong point. But, be realistic in what you think you need a defensive gun for. This is alot more likely than getting caught up in a protracted gunfight with a pack of Hells Angels.

HKLovingIT
02-06-2012, 15:17
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/atlanta-video-beating-765912

This is a good example of what a real use of a defensive handgun may look like.

Possibly one handed, possibly weak handed (the other fending off kicks to the head). On your side. Shooting up. While being pummeled. The gun possibly being driven against you. Or against the attacker.

Thats a real deal. If that auto jams, that snappy tap-rack-bang you have practiced to death at the range will only work if the other hand is not keeping a box cutter, or, in this case boot, off your head.

I like both. I carry both. They both have a definitive strong point. But, be realistic in what you think you need a defensive gun for. This is alot more likely than getting caught up in a protracted gunfight with a pack of Hells Angels.

All very true and I'd like to add that trying to fish a revolver or small auto out of pocket during something like this can be pretty problematic. I'm trying to move away from pocket carry for awhile now. AIWB keeps looking better and better under a lot of circumstances. Anyway - off topic - back to arguing about caliber:rofl:.

Sgt127
02-06-2012, 15:24
All very true and I'd like to add that trying to fish a revolver or small auto out of pocket during something like this can be pretty problematic. I'm trying to move away from pocket carry for awhile now. AIWB keeps looking better and better under a lot of circumstances. Anyway - off topic - back to arguing about caliber:rofl:.

Funny you should mention that. For me, always appendix for a concealed self defense gun. Accessible with either hand. Yes, I actually practice drawing the gun left hand upside down and squeezing the trigger with my pinky. I can reliably get hits at just outside of touching distance :) (maybe two feet) doing that. Seriously, its just a shoot someone off of you technique. But, it does work.

Nestor
02-06-2012, 15:28
When I often can hear: "I have 5000 rounds thru my pistol and it's been 100%", I'm always wondering how many of those rounds were fired on the range punching the paper...and how this relates to reliability under physical pressure from the opponent. I did play such game with the revolver and training ammo and only once the opponent was able to rendered the revolver inoperable - a guy with huge hands grabbed the top of the revolver, blocking the hammer. During the same training we played as well with S&W MP40. Well, rate of success for the "BG" was much higher. Some of us obviously are finding funny that the revolver won’t be sidelined by inadvertent occurrences trying to downplay its obvious advantage - immunity to: clothing that fouls the slide, ejected casings that get knocked back into the ejection port, or slight contact that slows the slide enough to induce a malfunction. Maybe it's funny, I don't know.
What I know though is that the shrouded or concealed hammer revolvers in particular are about as immune to induced malfunctions as can be imagined. It's still very valuable choice especially for the situation when the gun owner must struggle with the BG in hand to hand combat at contact distance.

Berto
02-06-2012, 19:10
When I often can hear: "I have 5000 rounds thru my pistol and it's been 100%", I'm always wondering how many of those rounds were fired on the range punching the paper...and how this relates to reliability under physical pressure from the opponent. I did play such game with the revolver and training ammo and only once the opponent was able to rendered the revolver inoperable - a guy with huge hands grabbed the top of the revolver, blocking the hammer. During the same training we played as well with S&W MP40. Well, rate of success for the "BG" was much higher. Some of us obviously are finding funny that the revolver wonít be sidelined by inadvertent occurrences trying to downplay its obvious advantage - immunity to: clothing that fouls the slide, ejected casings that get knocked back into the ejection port, or slight contact that slows the slide enough to induce a malfunction. Maybe it's funny, I don't know.
What I know though is that the shrouded or concealed hammer revolvers in particular are about as immune to induced malfunctions as can be imagined. It's still very valuable choice especially for the situation when the gun owner must struggle with the BG in hand to hand combat at contact distance.

Stuff like that gets overlooked often in these discussions, and it really does matter.
Gunfights are less than ideal 'square range' scenarios, shooting is very often one-handed and less than ideal grip, stance or location.
Try your gun with those things in mind, see how it works.

NeverMore1701
02-06-2012, 20:15
Stuff like that gets overlooked often in these discussions, and it really does matter.
Gunfights are less than ideal 'square range' scenarios, shooting is very often one-handed and less than ideal grip, stance or location.
Try your gun with those things in mind, see how it works.

Absolutely makes a huge difference, I (like everyone else) can see my hit ratio go down. Makes me glad I have lots of rounds on tap :whistling:

M&P15T
02-06-2012, 20:17
Absolutely makes a huge difference, I (like everyone else) can see my hit ratio go down. Makes me glad I have lots of rounds on tap :whistling:

Plus, if the BG gets a hand on your pistole as you're pulling the trigger, while it may not cycle the next round, he's probably gonna be shot afterwards.:rofl:

NeverMore1701
02-06-2012, 20:34
If someone gets their hand on my gun, I'll probably either go for my knife or smart tossing out tracheal strikes.

TN.Frank
02-06-2012, 23:03
It seems to me that all these extra rounds that the LEO's have with their semis hasn't made them better shots, if anything they get a worse score for rounds expended per hit. Back in the days of 6 shot revolvers LEO's would get 2 or 3 hits per cylinder full of ammo. Today most LEO's get 2 or 3 hits per magazine full of ammo, more rounds, same number of hits.
Makes me wonder if we don't need to go back to 6 shot K and L frame revolvers so LEO's will work on their marksmanship a bit more. :whistling:

Nestor
02-07-2012, 05:54
Plus, if the BG gets a hand on your pistole as you're pulling the trigger, while it may not cycle the next round, he's probably gonna be shot afterwards.:rofl:

Once you choose hope, anything's possible.

Andrewsky
02-07-2012, 06:14
It seems to me that all these extra rounds that the LEO's have with their semis hasn't made them better shots, if anything they get a worse score for rounds expended per hit. Back in the days of 6 shot revolvers LEO's would get 2 or 3 hits per cylinder full of ammo. Today most LEO's get 2 or 3 hits per magazine full of ammo, more rounds, same number of hits.
Makes me wonder if we don't need to go back to 6 shot K and L frame revolvers so LEO's will work on their marksmanship a bit more. :whistling:

What we need to go back to is the ultimate handgun for a well-informed gentleman...a handgun with a background that is quite colorful, if not highly distinguished: Colt's .45 Automatic.

English
02-07-2012, 06:46
Once you choose hope, anything's possible.

That is a statement that sounds true but isn't. There is always a limit to possibilities. More important, gunfights are all hope, which is another way of saying that they are greatly determined by probability. No matter how good you are, some part of the probability curve can result in you loosing and the incompetent BG winning. These uncontrollable risks are far greater than the risk of a good auto pistol jamming and so that argument in favour of the revolver fails.

With regard to ultra close quarters where the BG can get hold of your pistol, it is easy to prevent a revolver from firing at all, provided that it is not already cocked. In contrast the auto can be prevented from firing only briefly since a sudden backwards pull will put the slide back in battery and it will then fire just one shot. This is all nice hypothetical stuff but the reality is that as soon as the gun is grabbed it will be twisted off target. The real question is why was it not fired before it was grabbed? The only answer to that is that it was grabbed as it was comming out of the holster and that leads to an entirely different tactic. At very close range trying to draw is almost a gurantee of loosing if you are against a competent individual.

English

Nestor
02-07-2012, 08:25
These uncontrollable risks are far greater than the risk of a good auto pistol jamming and so that argument in favour of the revolver fails.

I'm very interested in how the "uncontrollable risks" are not affecting the autos and only the revolvers, so in the end the autos are not jamming and coming out on the top? Are we creating the reality now?
Also can You share with us how one can "very easily" prevent the revolver from firing at all?
Especially one with the shrouded or concealed hammer?

Nestor
02-07-2012, 08:47
At very close range trying to draw is almost a gurantee of loosing if you are against a competent individual.

English

Drawing and firing your gun will not guarantee your survival.
Your drawing and shooting skills are only a small part of the formula for survival in close combat.
That's where the three D'sóDistract, Disrupt and Draw tactics applies.

English
02-07-2012, 09:47
I'm very interested in how the "uncontrollable risks" are not affecting the autos and only the revolvers, so in the end the autos are not jamming and coming out on the top? Are we creating the reality now?
Also can You share with us how one can "very easily" prevent the revolver from firing at all?
Especially one with the shrouded or concealed hammer?

Let us take the easy part first. The function of a revolver can be blocked by graqsping the cylinder to prevent it turning. As the hammer being cocked is mechanically linked to the cylinder turning to present the next cartridge, blocking the cylinder movement prevents the revolver from firing and a shrouded hammer merely means that the revolver cannont be cocked already in which case a revolver would fire without further movement of the cylinder. This is not a significant factor since if your gun has been grabbed it is already too late.

With regard to the different risks all I meant was that the 1 in 2000 to 1 in 5000 chance of a good auto pistol failing to fire and cycle properly makes an absolutely negligible difference to the total risk of being in a gunfight at all. You would probably need to be in 100 to 250 gunfights before you had a failure and by that time the BG might be effectively out of action anyway. The people who can survive that many gunfights without being shot themselves must be very rare or, more likely, non existent. Gunfights are very dangerous and the added danger of a pistol failure will make very little difference to that.

I honestly believe that the reliability issue is irrelevant. What matters most are ease of fire, ease of concealability, effectiveness per shot and number of rounds without reload. Bullet momentum for bullet momentum, autos are easier to shoot effectively than revolvers of the same weight because the recoil spring reduces the felt recoil. This results in practical autos being lighter than practical revolvers and, for most people across a variety of necessary dress codes, that makes the auto easier to conceal. Whether the flatter shape of the auto or the more irregular shape of the revolver is easier to conceal is something widely disputed and I have nothing to add to that. The extra capacity of the auto is a nice extra but if we assume the .38sp to be as effective in its best loads as the 9mm in its best loads, I would sooner have a single stack auto than the revolver and have a couple of rounds extra as a bonus. But then, I shoot autos better than revolvers. If, like you if I remember correctly, I shot revolvers better than autos, that decision would probably change.

English

TN.Frank
02-07-2012, 09:57
What we need to go back to is the ultimate handgun for a well-informed gentleman...a handgun with a background that is quite colorful, if not highly distinguished: Colt's .45 Automatic.

I think the L-Frame, 4" S&W did quite well, granted it was with 125gr Mag loads but the record is still one of the tops for one shot stops. 95% of the time a LEO doesn't need a gun anyway, it's all traffic tickets and accidents that they're responding to so a good 6 shot revolver should still fit the bill for more LEO's, only the SWAT/Emergency Response Teams really only need the "firepower" of a semi-auto.

Nestor
02-07-2012, 15:39
Let us take the easy part first. The function of a revolver can be blocked by graqsping the cylinder to prevent it turning. As the hammer being cocked is mechanically linked to the cylinder turning to present the next cartridge, blocking the cylinder movement prevents the revolver from firing and a shrouded hammer merely means that the revolver cannont be cocked already in which case a revolver would fire without further movement of the cylinder. This is not a significant factor since if your gun has been grabbed it is already too late.

With regard to the different risks all I meant was that the 1 in 2000 to 1 in 5000 chance of a good auto pistol failing to fire and cycle properly makes an absolutely negligible difference to the total risk of being in a gunfight at all. You would probably need to be in 100 to 250 gunfights before you had a failure and by that time the BG might be effectively out of action anyway. The people who can survive that many gunfights without being shot themselves must be very rare or, more likely, non existent. Gunfights are very dangerous and the added danger of a pistol failure will make very little difference to that.

I honestly believe that the reliability issue is irrelevant. What matters most are ease of fire, ease of concealability, effectiveness per shot and number of rounds without reload. Bullet momentum for bullet momentum, autos are easier to shoot effectively than revolvers of the same weight because the recoil spring reduces the felt recoil. This results in practical autos being lighter than practical revolvers and, for most people across a variety of necessary dress codes, that makes the auto easier to conceal. Whether the flatter shape of the auto or the more irregular shape of the revolver is easier to conceal is something widely disputed and I have nothing to add to that. The extra capacity of the auto is a nice extra but if we assume the .38sp to be as effective in its best loads as the 9mm in its best loads, I would sooner have a single stack auto than the revolver and have a couple of rounds extra as a bonus. But then, I shoot autos better than revolvers. If, like you if I remember correctly, I shot revolvers better than autos, that decision would probably change.

English

I would like to ask You one question, if You don't mind that of course.
Have You ever tried to block the cylinder of the revolver by grabbing it from the other guy?
I'm asking because if You did, You wouldn't probably mention the word "easy" in the same sequence.
We are coming into the mechanics of the gun grabbing act now.
If You want to grab the auto, You can use your whole palm to grab the slide and hold it against the frame. There is absolutely nothing between your hand and slide which is important operational part of any auto pistol.
If You can hold it solid You are turning your opponent's gun into single shot pistol at the best.
Now If You are attempting to grab the revolver the palm of your hand will land on the top of the frame and You can attempt to try to block the cylinder from spinning with your fingers ONLY.
This fact alone gives You far lesser chance of using all your force to prevent the gun from firing plus the owner may use the support finger to help himself firing another and another round.
Bottom line is that You can't use the same kind of force to block the slide and the cylinder because of the way those firearms were constructed.
I encourage anyone to try that with the real opponent and training ammo.
Easy to say in theory, but not exactly as easy to accomplish in real life.
:wavey:

Novocaine
02-08-2012, 03:36
The function of a revolver can be blocked by graqsping the cylinder to prevent it turning.

I'd say, grasping is a big word. More like pinching it lightly between two fingers. A girl with not enough strength to crush an egg will render any revolver dead by gently cupping the cylinder with her palm. And speaking of "user induced malfunction", another BS revolver mantra, I donít ever recall failing to see trigger short-stroking when people start pretending they are JM.
Hitting the mag release will render the gun inop! Yeah, like hitting the cylinder latch will not. Btw, in case of auto you still have one shot.

Back to the topic, sure, 38Spl is enough. In long barreled guns. Thing is as youíre making this cartridge effective by increasing the length of the barrel the appeal inherent to revolver goes down. About as many 4Ē K-frames get shot from the pocket as do G17s.

The ONLY platform where .38 makes practical sense is concealed hammer snub-nose. And even there 9mm is perhaps a better choice. As soon as SW grows a pair to chamber aluminum J-frame in 9mm it's game over. Might be the reason why they donít do it, they know it will kill 442/642 line.

Not like reloading speed matters much but on a super slim chance it might come handy how can anyone with the straight face say that reloading snub nose .38 with its castrated ejector is remotely as fast and fumble free as any semiautomatic? Youíre lucky if you donít end up with a shell under the star(those pesky user induced malfs again). And do people actually train to reload this thing prone/ on the back? How about with one hand? Itís an eye opening experience.

Novocaine
02-08-2012, 03:58
Whatta you got there, a Wop 9? F....n' Fiat of guns, always jammin' on you at the wrong time.


http://www.imfdb.org/w/images/7/79/Gets-pistol2.jpg

English
02-08-2012, 08:03
I would like to ask You one question, if You don't mind that of course.
Have You ever tried to block the cylinder of the revolver by grabbing it from the other guy?
I'm asking because if You did, You wouldn't probably mention the word "easy" in the same sequence.
We are coming into the mechanics of the gun grabbing act now.
If You want to grab the auto, You can use your whole palm to grab the slide and hold it against the frame. There is absolutely nothing between your hand and slide which is important operational part of any auto pistol.
If You can hold it solid You are turning your opponent's gun into single shot pistol at the best.
Now If You are attempting to grab the revolver the palm of your hand will land on the top of the frame and You can attempt to try to block the cylinder from spinning with your fingers ONLY.
This fact alone gives You far lesser chance of using all your force to prevent the gun from firing plus the owner may use the support finger to help himself firing another and another round.
Bottom line is that You can't use the same kind of force to block the slide and the cylinder because of the way those firearms were constructed.
I encourage anyone to try that with the real opponent and training ammo.
Easy to say in theory, but not exactly as easy to accomplish in real life.
:wavey:

I was using the word "easy" to describe the relative force needed to block the cylinder rather than the skill of getting your hand on it in the right way. As Novocaine expresses, it does not take much strength to block the movement of the cylinder.

Combatives are never easy but if you can get your hand on the revolver in the right position the shooter is nearly powerless because of the leverage advantage. It all depends on speed of course but there are several effective disarms from there with unpleasant consequences for the shooter. It is a long time since I played these games!

More important is that the shooter should not be in a position where his gun can be grabbed.

English

Andrewsky
02-08-2012, 14:07
Nothing like people who don't carry telling you what kind of gun to carry.

Fox
02-08-2012, 16:16
The movie "Dirty Harry" had a big impact on public perceptions about the .38 Special.

Fox
02-08-2012, 16:23
The ONLY platform where .38 makes practical sense is concealed hammer snub-nose. And even there 9mm is perhaps a better choice. As soon as SW grows a pair to chamber aluminum J-frame in 9mm it's game over. Might be the reason why they donít do it, they know it will kill 442/642 line.

9mm snubbies have been produced in the past, but they don't sell.

Not like reloading speed matters much but on a super slim chance it might come handy how can anyone with the straight face say that reloading snub nose .38 with its castrated ejector is remotely as fast and fumble free as any semiautomatic? Youíre lucky if you donít end up with a shell under the star(those pesky user induced malfs again). And do people actually train to reload this thing prone/ on the back? How about with one hand? Itís an eye opening experience.

Open up the hand-ejector revolver and tip the barrel straight up, then hit the ejector rod. They will eject without any problems


Just some counterpoints to some weak arguements.

Nestor
02-08-2012, 16:29
Nothing like people who don't carry telling you what kind of gun to carry.

No, You got it all wrong my Friend.
They just tell You that your choice is stupid, so are You.

Nestor
02-08-2012, 16:32
I feel like with the revolvers a success seems to be largely a matter of hanging on after others have let go. If You train with one on regular basis, there is not too much to discover, except for excellent reliability, accuracy and easy of use.

Sgt127
02-08-2012, 16:42
the 1 in 2000 to 1 in 5000 chance of a good auto pistol failing to fire and cycle properly makes an absolutely negligible difference

Just to add a little persepective to this. That would be a good rate of reliability for the average auto and, what most people see.

When all we taught at the range was everybody standing on thier hind legs, punching little holes in a piece of paper X number of feet away, autos rarely jammed. but, they did have malfunctions. Fairly easy to clear.

When you add the dynamics of a fight to the shooting. The failure odds go way up. Slides hitting barricades. Limp wrists. Magazines getting spit out without warning. Failures to feed. Failures to get brass out of the gun. all kinds of stuff goes wrong with what was, once, a perfectly reliable auto.

Again, if you have distance, the auto is generally the winner. When you are in a ground fight, or fighting and shooting, not so much. I have seen several dead guys with a stovepiped auto laying beside them. Particulalry in a suicide. Worst case scenario for an auto. Contact shot and immediate limp wrist.

Berto
02-08-2012, 17:50
Let us take the easy part first. The function of a revolver can be blocked by graqsping the cylinder to prevent it turning. As the hammer being cocked is mechanically linked to the cylinder turning to present the next cartridge, blocking the cylinder movement prevents the revolver from firing and a shrouded hammer merely means that the revolver cannont be cocked already in which case a revolver would fire without further movement of the cylinder. This is not a significant factor since if your gun has been grabbed it is already too late.

With regard to the different risks all I meant was that the 1 in 2000 to 1 in 5000 chance of a good auto pistol failing to fire and cycle properly makes an absolutely negligible difference to the total risk of being in a gunfight at all. You would probably need to be in 100 to 250 gunfights before you had a failure and by that time the BG might be effectively out of action anyway. The people who can survive that many gunfights without being shot themselves must be very rare or, more likely, non existent. Gunfights are very dangerous and the added danger of a pistol failure will make very little difference to that.

I honestly believe that the reliability issue is irrelevant. What matters most are ease of fire, ease of concealability, effectiveness per shot and number of rounds without reload. Bullet momentum for bullet momentum, autos are easier to shoot effectively than revolvers of the same weight because the recoil spring reduces the felt recoil. This results in practical autos being lighter than practical revolvers and, for most people across a variety of necessary dress codes, that makes the auto easier to conceal. Whether the flatter shape of the auto or the more irregular shape of the revolver is easier to conceal is something widely disputed and I have nothing to add to that. The extra capacity of the auto is a nice extra but if we assume the .38sp to be as effective in its best loads as the 9mm in its best loads, I would sooner have a single stack auto than the revolver and have a couple of rounds extra as a bonus. But then, I shoot autos better than revolvers. If, like you if I remember correctly, I shot revolvers better than autos, that decision would probably change.

English

What you believe may be fine and good, but reality indicates otherwise. Pistol jams happen very frequently in combat. Revolvers have approx 100yrs of LE and military use in this country and the history of reliability is well deserved.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_167_28/ai_110457294/?tag=content;col1
The one with the G17 jamming was local.


You can jam a revolver, but it's not nearly the same as disabling a semi auto, and a revolver can be rotated into battery even if the cylinder is being grasped FYI. The snub revolver esp is the hardest weapon by far to disarm, leverage is completely against against you and you will be extremely hard pressed to not get your hand shot off.
This idea that one can accidently hit the cyl release is also pretty funny vs the mag release getting hit while leaning up against something.
Again also, I don't believe anyone stated the snub revolver is better than a service auto.
I'll happily take a snub revolver over a small auto, though.

The notion that the G17 being a game changer is also problematic given the existence of pistols like the 3rd gen S&W autos, and BHP which established high capacity and reliability well before Glock came along. The Glock simply offers lower cost, a consistent trigger system and high durability.

The FBI/Miami shootout is probably the worse example of revolver shortcomings, given the .38sp revolver ended the fight on an assailant wounded several times by both .38sp, several 9mm and 12ga weapons.
To use it as an example of a shortcoming strains credibility.