Rossi .38 special [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Rossi .38 special


thinblueline90
05-23-2012, 11:23
So I bought my soon to be wife a Rossi revolver the other day and was under the false impression that is was a .357 the saleswoman selling me the weapon didn't offer up any objection. I did feel duked, but all in all it is an accurate weapon. Is it a weapon I can be comfortable with my lady carying as her CCW? It only holds 5 rounds and it is only a .38 which does bother me. What should i do, trust it or should i sell it and get something more depenable like a .380 or a .9?

deputy tom
05-23-2012, 11:34
Go back to the store and tell them you were duped and get what you want.tom.

bac1023
05-23-2012, 11:35
How is a 380 more dependable than a 38 Special revolver?

BTW, I like Rossi revolvers.

thinblueline90
05-23-2012, 11:44
Being honet I don't know the difference between a .38 and a .380. I originally thought it was the same round, but I had a couple guys around my home town tell me there's a difference,even though they could not specify. I just want to feel comfortable knowing that if worst come to worst she will be able to protect herself against a dope head high on pcp. I only carry .40 or bigger for the personal satisfaction of KNOWING if or when i ever have to pull the trigger It'll be lights out.

M&P15T
05-23-2012, 11:56
Being honet I don't know the difference between a .38 and a .380. I originally thought it was the same round, but I had a couple guys around my home town tell me there's a difference,even though they could not specify. I just want to feel comfortable knowing that if worst come to worst she will be able to protect herself against a dope head high on pcp. I only carry .40 or bigger for the personal satisfaction of KNOWING if or when i ever have to pull the trigger It'll be lights out.

Some thoughts on pistols as SD/CCW pieces;

.40 does not, in any manner, equal "lights out". Pistols are notoriously inefficient for stopping people, especially those on drugs such as PCP. Pistols are not shotguns or rifles, but they're able to be carried concealed, so they're what we use.

.38SPCL and .380ACP are two entirely different rounds, but in their basic loadings are similar in effectiveness. Will .38SPCL work on a doped-up PCP freak? Someone else might be able to answer better than I, but the long and the short of it is, it depends on where the BG gets hit, shot placement. However, my other short answer is "no". Both rounds (in their standard loadings) are not that great, although they've killed many, many people. 9MM would be a better choice, but the die is cast at this point.

As far as buying a .38SPCL only revolver, instead of a .357MAG that can shoot both......I doubt your wife would enjoy shooting full-house .357MAG loads out of a small, 5 shot snubbie.

ZombieJoe
05-23-2012, 12:16
I had a Rossi revolver, no complaints. It was accurate and reliable. The triggers not bad either. But if it is not what you or your wife want, get some thing else.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Bruce M
05-23-2012, 12:21
There are any number of police shootings in which a subject took multiple hits from .40 or .45 that did not instantly stop the bad guy. I do not think I would ever totally count on a .40 or another handgun round to stop an incident. That said a couple of generations of guys somehow managed quite fine carrying a five shot .38 special revolver. Given a choice I would opt for a Smith and Wesson over the Rossi but that is essentially nothing more than personal preference. While any of several of the more common 9mm loads develop a bit more energy than .38 special rounds, there are some .38 special loadings that surpass nearly all of the 9mm loadings. I would certainly be more comfortable with a five shot .38 special than with a .380.

ithaca_deerslayer
05-23-2012, 12:22
Most would say the .38 special is better than the .380. The .38 generally has much heavier bullets. And most would say the 9mm is better than .38, in short barreled guns with standard loadings, but they would also typically say the .38 is good enough. With the .380, because the bullets are so light, and velocity not especially high, there is a little less agreement as to whether it is good enough, but most will say it is the minimum they would consider for self-defense.

The .380 and 9mm are both made for semi-autos (or autos). The .380 has a shorter case than the 9mm. The .380 is often chosen because of the small and thin lightweight guns that use it. The 9mm doesn't usually come in guns that are quite as small. The .38 special has a longer case, and typically has heavier bullets than either of the other two. The .38 special is a revolver round, and is used in some small revolvers. The .38 special case could be loaded hot, but typically isn't. For those wanting something hotter (faster) than the .38 special, the .357 magnum was developed. It has just a little bit longer case.

In .38 special, the soft shooting, low velocity rounds are the 148 gr wadcutters. Good for a newbie to try in a new gun, so recoil is less. The next step up in recoil can be a 158gr, typically a semi-wadcutter for defensive use (people have decided the round nose are not very effective). Then for more velocity, there are the +P that typically have hollow points and might come in lighter bullets of 135gr or the heavier 158gr. There are also lighter weight FMJ for plinking (but not typically self-defense) in 125gr.

I'm just trying to give you an idea of what's out there :)

If she likes the revolver, it should be a good self-defense gun. She'll have to practise shooting. Start with the 148gr wadcutters. See how it goes. They can be used for self-defense, but consider moving up to the 158gr semi-wadcutters (heavier and faster, and load more easily into the cylinder), or any of the premium +P defensive loads.

thinblueline90
05-23-2012, 12:31
I love this website. I am just getting schooled right and left on things I "thought" I knew. Which is good to me. I would rather learn here than Have to learn elsewhere. I've only been fooling with handguns for a year new, literally one year. You are right .40 doesn't nessacarily equal lights out. I do like to think it does though. The revovler is very accurate i'm really just unsure about the round if it's reliable...but at the end of the day it's whatever SHE is comfortable with right? I mean I did buy it FOR her. I never realized there was such a huge difference in all these rounds. I always thought that .380 was smallest the .9 then .38 a .357 is just a supped up .38. Man calibers are confusing. Is there like a cailbers for dummies book anywhere?

Bring_it!
05-23-2012, 12:51
I have a Rossi M88 (stainless) and consider it very "reliable" for function.

ithaca_deerslayer
05-23-2012, 12:58
I never realized there was such a huge difference in all these rounds. I always thought that .380 was smallest the .9 then .38 a .357 is just a supped up .38. Man calibers are confusing. Is there like a cailbers for dummies book anywhere?

I've always liked "Cartridges of the World" by Frank Barnes.

Your basic description I quoted seems right. The .380 is shorter than the 9, thus less powder and lower velocity. They also seat a shorter and lighterweight bullet in the case.

The .357 is a supped up .38 special (which is itself a supped up .38 from older loadings). But to keep from blowing up guns, when they developed the .357 they lengthened the case a little so it wouldn't fit in the .38 guns. But you can shoot the .38's in a .357 gun.

While it is often debated on GT, the basic "problem" with a .357 magnum in a small lightweight revolver is that it has a lot of recoil, and doesn't seem to increase the velocity enough to be worth the extra BOOM and NOISE. So many people prefer the .38 special in small lightweight revolvers. But in larger revolvers with a longer barrel, the .357 magnum is popular, such as for hunting. The recoil isn't bad in the heavier guns, and the longer barrel allows the powder to more efficiently drive the bullet faster out the barrel.

I've got a 6" .357 magnum for hunting. But for a 2" carry revolver, I chose a .38 special. While I'd have nothing against the smaller gun being a .357, I was only going to shoot .38's in it anyway. Some guys get the .357 just to have the option, and that's fine, but the .357 gun typically costs a lot more than the .38 special gun, so why bother? But with the longer barreled larger revolvers, the .357 magnum makes sense because you know you are going to shoot magnums for hunting :) .44 magnum also makes sense for hunting revolvers :)

I doubt there is anyone on GT who's wife carries a lightweight small revolver with .357 magnums in it. And there are very few guys who do, either (some do, and more power to them). Most people have .38spl +P in their small carry revolvers.

ithaca_deerslayer
05-23-2012, 13:16
As to dependible, that is something people like about revolvers. It gets into a huge internet debate, but most people would agree that a revolver is more simple and dependible for the average shooter to use.

The semi-auto is more prone to jams. This is an over generalization, of course. But the semi-auto can be more finicky to different kinds of ammo, and how the gun is held by the shooter, and how the gun is cleaned and lubricated, and stuff like that.

It also generally seems to be true that larger semi-autos are more reliable than smaller semi-autos. I believe it is both a design issue, and a physics issue, affecting the smaller guns. This is one of the reason why small revolvers continue to be popular.

The semi-autos enjoy a quicker reload, and the larger ones can have a much higher capacity. Many people also shoot semi-autos more accurately than revolvers. Especially if the sight radius is longer, or if the trigger requires less pressure to fire.

There is no real right or wong. It is a matter of sorting through the various plusses an and minuses and picking whatever best meets your preferences and priorities :)

hoghunter82
05-23-2012, 13:19
She will be fine with the .38 caliber. Throw some +p in the cylinder. As far as being duped, don't most if not all guns have the caliber stamped right on the barrel or frame in plain sight? Anyway, based on my bad luck with small .380s I would chose the .38+p revolver over the .380 auto any day. In fact I did. Sold the .380 and picked up the Ruger LCR .38+p and never looked back.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Berto
05-23-2012, 14:05
Nothing wrong with what you have. Load it with a proven load like the Rem FBI load (+p 158gr lead semi wadcutter hollowpoint) or 135 gr Speer Gold Dot and you will have a good balance of power and controllability.
.357mag is a step up in power, but in a smaller revolver it can be a case of diminishing returns with the increased blast and recoil, and there are are hotter .38sp loads that can give you similar performance (like 9mm +P) if you really want it....but you probably won't.

diamondd2
05-23-2012, 15:23
Just have her keep out of areas overrun with doped up pcp crackheads and you won't have a problem.

Just saying.

fnfalman
05-23-2012, 16:40
.38 Special snubnose revolvers make great defensive tools...for a very experienced shooter.

It's not something that you just buy and give to the old lady.

Return the gun and buy her a .22LR pistol so that she can get trained on how to shoot a gun properly, much less a snubnose.

ithaca_deerslayer
05-23-2012, 17:39
.38 Special snubnose revolvers make great defensive tools...for a very experienced shooter.

It's not something that you just buy and give to the old lady.

Return the gun and buy her a .22LR pistol so that she can get trained on how to shoot a gun properly, much less a snubnose.

No need to sell the gun, but do look for instruction, and either borrow or buy a .22lr to learn on.

And as I'll say again, make sure to get 148gr wadcutters to learn on. Makes a huge difference, even if you have to go to 5 stores or order them off the internet to find them. Doesn't matter the specific brand.

fnfalman
05-23-2012, 18:31
No need to sell the gun, but do look for instruction, and either borrow or buy a .22lr to learn on.

And as I'll say again, make sure to get 148gr wadcutters to learn on. Makes a huge difference, even if you have to go to 5 stores or order them off the internet to find them. Doesn't matter the specific brand.

Why would anybody make a novice learn how to shoot with a snubbie revolver? Might as well pistol whip her across the face so that she'd be pissed off and never bother to shoot any more.

A snubbie is probably about the worst weapon to learn on.

ithaca_deerslayer
05-23-2012, 19:45
Why would anybody make a novice learn how to shoot with a snubbie revolver? Might as well pistol whip her across the face so that she'd be pissed off and never bother to shoot any more.

A snubbie is probably about the worst weapon to learn on.

You are half right, but just a tad dramatic about this.

I agree it is not the best to learn on, but it doesn't have to be sold. I bet in 2 lessons, I could get her shooting it ok.

The first lesson I would start her on my S&W 63 .22lr and Ruger GP100. Working on grip, stance, aim, and surprise break with dryfire. Then shots in single action in the 63, and single and double action, with 148gr wadcutters .38 special in the GP100. Both of those sitting at a bench, blank sheet of paper 10 feet away :) Then move to standing up with those 2 guns. Switch to a bullseye target at out to 7 yards if all goes well.

The next lesson, test recoil in 9mm, moving from my Beretta 92, to Glock 26. Then her Rossi with 148gr wadcutters. See where it goes from there. Probably go back and forth with my 63, working on various things as needed, such as an empty chamber and surprise break.

cowboywannabe
05-23-2012, 20:03
I have a rossi .44spl. Its a better copy of the s&w than taurus.

M&P15T
05-24-2012, 04:45
You are half right, but just a tad dramatic about this.

I agree it is not the best to learn on, but it doesn't have to be sold. I bet in 2 lessons, I could get her shooting it ok.

The first lesson I would start her on my S&W 63 .22lr and Ruger GP100. Working on grip, stance, aim, and surprise break with dryfire. Then shots in single action in the 63, and single and double action, with 148gr wadcutters .38 special in the GP100. Both of those sitting at a bench, blank sheet of paper 10 feet away :) Then move to standing up with those 2 guns. Switch to a bullseye target at out to 7 yards if all goes well.

The next lesson, test recoil in 9mm, moving from my Beretta 92, to Glock 26. Then her Rossi with 148gr wadcutters. See where it goes from there. Probably go back and forth with my 63, working on various things as needed, such as an empty chamber and surprise break.

So, to teach her how to shoot her Rossi .38 snubby, you would use the following;

S&W63 .22
Ruger GP100
Beretta 92
GLOCK 26

You would try to teach someone to shoot a specific firearm by having them train with 4 others, 3 of which have severely different ergonomics and fire control types.

I would suggest you re-think you're teaching style.

ithaca_deerslayer
05-24-2012, 05:04
So, to teach her how to shoot her Rossi .38 snubby, you would use the following;

S&W63 .22
Ruger GP100
Beretta 92
GLOCK 26

Sorry, but that is an antiquated idea on training. You're trying to teach someone to shoot a specific firearm by having them train with 4 others, 3 of which have severely different ergonomics and fire control types.

I would suggest you re-think you're teaching style.

Interesting post. The goal would be to teach someone to shoot. I often have women come to me with a small carry gun their husband bought for them. But they never really learned to shoot, and are having trouble with it.

So first, teach them to shoot according to NRA basic pistol methods (or have them take the course if they want). Then, use the variety of guns I own to transition them to smaller carry guns with increasing recoil. I would like to own a medium .38 for this transition, but I don't. Thus the use of a couple 9mm for that bridge. And the people seem to like knowing they can shoot a semi-auto as well as a revolver.

Here is your chance to help the OP and me by giving us good details of a better training approach and gun selection advice for his soon to be wife. I know you prefer semi-autos, so I'm not sure if you will be able to offer any revolver help, but please do try to offer some help :)

M&P15T
05-24-2012, 05:51
Interesting post. The goal would be to teach someone to shoot. I often have women come to me with a small carry gun their husband bought for them. But they never really learned to shoot, and are having trouble with it.

So first, teach them to shoot according to NRA basic pistol methods (or have them take the course if they want). Then, use the variety of guns I own to transition them to smaller carry guns with increasing recoil. I would like to own a medium .38 for this transition, but I don't. Thus the use of a couple 9mm for that bridge. And the people seem to like knowing they can shoot a semi-auto as well as a revolver.

Here is your chance to help the OP and me by giving us good details of a better training approach and gun selection advice for his soon to be wife. I know you prefer semi-autos, so I'm not sure if you will be able to offer any revolver help, but please do try to offer some help :)

It has nothing to do with platform selection. Revolver, autos, whatever one likes. The basic concepts behind learning to shoot should be the same.

When working with a brand new shooter, especially a female adult that has never handled a firearm before, it is most important to understand the emotional side of things. Sounds misogynistic, but it's true. The basic idea is that, if they aren't having fun, aren't getting on target quickly, they will grow frustrated and tire of the endeavor very quickly. Conversely, if they have some good success, right off the bat, their interest will be peaked, and they will be more apt to stick with shooting as not just training for SD/HD, but as a hobby.

The main emphasis (and I have taught a few new female shooters, and gotten them on target @ 7 yards, taking out the black, very quickly) is on trigger technique and muscle memory patterns. By far, the most important part, is trigger technique. A trainer can teach stance, grip, sight alignment, and other techniques, but if a new shooter doen't first start with (and master w/dry-fire) trigger technique, their rounds will never be accurate, and the rest will all be for naught.

Your idea of using a S&W63 is good, because it's a j-frame in .22 (please correct me if I'm wrong), and almost identical to a Rossi .38 So it will have almost identical ergonomics, trigger and sights, but with less recoil. That is a good idea once you get to the range with a new shooter, but the ground-work for said new shooter has to start without shells, without live-fire.

With new shooters, I have always started with quite a bit of dry firing, at home, in a quiet and relaxed atmosphere. This gives a new shooter the chance to learn in a very concentrated manner, without the distractions of loud, concussive fire going off all around them. This gives them the chance to focus on, feel and learn, the mechanical break and re-set of the particular trigger they will use in the future.

Atmosphere is extremely important. The normal atmosphere at a gun range is loud, concussive, intimidating, and sometimes downright scary for new shooters. We experienced shooters don't even notice it, it's just part of the scenery. But for new shooters it can be an over-whelming experience, so it's best to teach the basics in a quiet, relaxed environment. Starting with lots and lots of dry-fire, where trigger control techniques, along with proper grip, can be learned. I acutally have found that sitting on the couch, dry firing and focusing on nothing but trigger technique and grip, is an awesome way to start. Then, once that is comming along nicely, stance can be taught. Oddly enough, sight picture I have almost never even discussed, unless the person in question is obviously struggeling with it at the range. Sight picture is a pretty natural thing to figure out. I do, however, discuss the need for vision focus on the front sight.

Another idea is to try to avoid turning learning to shoot into a classroom session. I have found that teaching is best done (given the opportunity, like when living with said new shooter) whenever the perspective new shooter expresses interest. With the OP, he lives with his wife, so the at-home dry fire and such could be tried whenever she shows an interest. No need to force or cajole, just work with her whenever she shows interest.

I also would highly reccomend taking a new shooter to an outdoor range first, instead of an indoor range. The sounds and concussive effects are much lower outside. It's also wise to get to the range when you know it will be empty, like a Tuesday morning or something like that. With no other people shooting around them, the new shooter will have a quiet, relaxed atmosphere to try live-fire for the first time. If the ground-work has been done properly, I can almost guarantee that a new shooter will find themselves taking out the black at 7 yards right off the bat. Recoil, noise and muzzle blast should be the only new things to be experienced. The basics of trigger technique, grip and stance should already be understood and practiced.....and recoil, noise and muzzle blast are enough to try and handle for new shooters, much less trying to pile-on learning all of the proper shooting techniques at the same time.

Getting into GLOCKs, Berrettas and larger revolvers will not help the OP's wife learn to shoot her Rossi .38. It will actually be detrimental, and move her backwards. Keeping with one platform, one trigger type, one set of ergonomics and muscle memory patterns, is paramount to a new student gaining confidence quickly, and enjoying a lifetime of shooting.

If you haven't noticed, I view basic pistol courses like ones that the NRA put on in classroom/shooting range environments, to be next to useless. It's usually nothing but a bunch of over-weight, middle aged wannabes enjoying the one time in their lives when women are pretty much forced to shut up and listen to them, and do exactly as they say. It's a very poor learning environment, and completely ignorant of how women learn the best, which is on their time, at their speed, when they want to. It also represents piling on waaaaay too much information at once, combined with experiencing a new and intimidating set of sensory perceptions, in a foreign and alien environment. It's waaaay too much at once for most people.

jbotstein1
05-24-2012, 06:33
I have found that wikipedia is a great source for information on the many different calibers. It shows velocity and force of impact for many different bullet weights. It also shows dimensions, gives you a history of the round, and a bunch of other stuff.

ithaca_deerslayer
05-24-2012, 08:01
It has nothing to do with platform selection. Revolver, autos, whatever one likes. The basic concepts behind learning to shoot should be the same.

When working with a brand new shooter, especially a female adult that has never handled a firearm before, it is most important to understand the emotional side of things. Sounds misogynistic, but it's true. The basic idea is that, if they aren't having fun, aren't getting on target quickly, they will grow frustrated and tire of the endeavor very quickly. Conversely, if they have some good success, right off the bat, their interest will be peaked, and they will be more apt to stick with shooting as not just training for SD/HD, but as a hobby.

The main emphasis (and I have taught a few new female shooters, and gotten them on target @ 7 yards, taking out the black, very quickly) is on trigger technique and muscle memory patterns. By far, the most important part, is trigger technique. A trainer can teach stance, grip, sight alignment, and other techniques, but if a new shooter doen't first start with (and master w/dry-fire) trigger technique, their rounds will never be accurate, and the rest will all be for naught.

Your idea of using a S&W63 is good, because it's a j-frame in .22 (please correct me if I'm wrong), and almost identical to a Rossi .38 So it will have almost identical ergonomics, trigger and sights, but with less recoil. That is a good idea once you get to the range with a new shooter, but the ground-work for said new shooter has to start without shells, without live-fire.

With new shooters, I have always started with quite a bit of dry firing, at home, in a quiet and relaxed atmosphere. This gives a new shooter the chance to learn in a very concentrated manner, without the distractions of loud, concussive fire going off all around them. This gives them the chance to focus on, feel and learn, the mechanical break and re-set of the particular trigger they will use in the future.

Atmosphere is extremely important. The normal atmosphere at a gun range is loud, concussive, intimidating, and sometimes downright scary for new shooters. We experienced shooters don't even notice it, it's just part of the scenery. But for new shooters it can be an over-whelming experience, so it's best to teach the basics in a quiet, relaxed environment. Starting with lots and lots of dry-fire, where trigger control techniques, along with proper grip, can be learned. I acutally have found that sitting on the couch, dry firing and focusing on nothing but trigger technique and grip, is an awesome way to start. Then, once that is comming along nicely, stance can be taught. Oddly enough, sight picture I have almost never even discussed, unless the person in question is obviously struggeling with it at the range. Sight picture is a pretty natural thing to figure out.

Another idea is to try to avoid turning learning to shoot into a classroom session. I have found that teaching is best done (given the opportunity, like when living with said new shooter) whenever the perspective new shooter expresses interest. With the OP, he lives with his wife, so the at-home dry fire and such could be tried whenever she shows an interest. No need to force or cajole, just work with her whenever she shows interest.

I also would highly reccomend taking a new shooter to an outdoor range first, instead of an indoor range. The sounds and concussive effects are much lower outside. It's also wise to get to the range when you know it will be empty, like a Tuesday morning or something like that. With no other people shooting around them, the new shooter will have a quiet, relaxed atmosphere to try live-fire for the first time. If the ground-work has been done properly, I can almost guarantee that a new shooter will find themselves taking out the black at 7 yards right off the bat. Recoil, noise and muzzle blast should be the only new things to be experienced. The basics of trigger technique, grip and stance should already be understood and practiced.....and recoil, noise and muzzle blast are enough to try and handle for new shooters, much less trying to pile-on learning all of the proper shooting techniques at the same time.

Getting into GLOCKs, Berrettas and larger revolvers will not help the OP's wife learn to shoot her Rossi .38. It will actually be detrimental, and move her backwards. Keeping with one platform, one trigger type, one set of ergonomics and muscle memory patterns, is paramount to a new student gaining confidence quickly, and enjoying a lifetime of shooting.

If you haven't noticed, I view basic pistol courses like ones that the NRA put on in classroom/shooting range environments, to be next to useless. It's usually nothing but a bunch of over-weight, middle aged wannabes enjoying the one time in their lives when women are pretty much forced to shut up and listen to them, and do exactly as they say. It's a very poor learning environment, and completely ignorant of how women learn the best, which is on their time, at their speed, when they want to. It also represents piling on waaaaay too much information at once, combined with experiencing a new and intimidating set of sensory perceptions, in a foreign and alien environment. It's waaaay too much at once for most people.

Good post and I agree with most of what you said. And I would also suggest most of what you said to a new shooter.

However, I believe there needs to be a bridge to get from the recoil of a .22 to the recoil of a small carry gun. We can disagree here, that is fine. In my experience, it is best to go gradual, over a 1/2 hour from the 22 they leaned the basics on, to a large 38 or 9, to a medium 38 or 9, to a smaller 9 then to whatever carry gun they have. I don't own a medium 38, but have on occasion borrowed one from other instructors. The transition is done in a very reassuring way. See, this gun doesn't feel too different than that gun, does it. Good job. Now try this one, see not too different from that last one. Good job. And soon we are at the carry gun that they had brought with them and were afraid of. But now they know how to shoot it and have learned to deal with recoil, and don't find it so troublesome afterall.

If I was a better teacher, perhaps I could go straight from a 22 to their small carry gun. But instead, I find that both me and them need a bridge of some transition guns to get there. it was typically their husband that introduced them directly to their carry gun, and that didn't go over so well, so that is why they have come to me.

As for the NRA basic pistol course and NRA instructors, it is at least a program of instruction and safety thought out and written down. There are probably thousands of different NRA instructors. Some probably good. Some probably affiliated with other instruction, such as law enforcement or military training. Some are teachers in other areas, such as grade school or college. Some may indeed be fat. Some may be on power trips. There is a wide variety of people involved. But at least they are trying to help new shooters who are starting from scratch. Probably most of the time doing a better job than the typical wannabe teaching person (with the same wide variety of personal traits, faults, and fatness as the NRA instructors) who hasn't gone through any training process with any organization :)

But this discussion is good, because it gives the OP an idea of some issues to start looking at in trying to help his soon to be wife :)

M&P15T
05-24-2012, 08:08
Good post and I agree with most of what you said. And I would also suggest most of what you said to a new shooter.

However, I believe there needs to be a bridge to get from the recoil of a .22 to the recoil of a small carry gun. We can disagree here, that is fine. In my experience, it is best to go gradual, over a 1/2 hour from the 22 they leaned the basics on, to a large 38 or 9, to a medium 38 or 9, to a smaller 9 then to whatever carry gun they have. I don't own a medium 38, but have on occasion borrowed one from other instructors. The transition is done in a very reassuring way. See, this gun doesn't feel too different than that gun, does it. Good job. Now try this one, see not too different from that last one. Good job. And soon we are at the carry gun that they had brought with them and were afraid of. But now they know how to shoot it and have learned to deal with recoil, and don't find it so troublesome afterall.

If I was a better teacher, perhaps I could go straight from a 22 to their small carry gun. But instead, I find that both me and them need a bridge of some transition guns to get there. it was typically their husband that introduced them directly to their carry gun, and that didn't go over so well, so that is why they have come to me.

As for the NRA basic pistol course and NRA instructors, it is at least a program of instruction and safety thought out and written down. There are probably thousands of different NRA instructors. Some probably good. Some probably affiliated with other instruction, such as law enforcement or military training. Some are teachers in other areas, such as grade school or college. Some may indeed be fat. Some may be on power trips. There is a wide variety of people involved. But at least they are trying to help new shooters who are starting from scratch. Probably most of the time doing a better job than the typical wannabe teaching person (with the same wide variety of personal traits, faults, and fatness as the NRA instructors) who hasn't gone through any training process with any organization :)

But this discussion is good, because it gives the OP an idea of some issues to start at in trying to help his soon to be wife :)

Ya know, I've never done a transition thing from a light to service caliber cartridge. But then, I've always used G19s to start new shooters, and they are very soft and easy shooting pistols. With a snubby, going from a .22 version to a .38 sounds like a good idea, as long as they are identical in every way except for caliber. It is really important that the trigger, ergos and such are the same.

Seriously, you should try what I described.....it works really, really well. Trigger technique and consistent ergos above all else. If you're going to step calibers, make it happen with the same platform. Don't mess with developing memory muscle patterns and the learning of a trigger type. That can happen later, after they have become proficient shooters.

As far as the NRA thing, I understand that trainers for the NRA cross a wide path personality and teaching ability wise. My concern is that some of them (too many of them) do more harm than good, especially when working with women. But then, I am a self-taught person, so maybe I shouldn't comment.

fnfalman
05-24-2012, 08:29
I agree with many ideas that Ithaca_deerslayer and M&P15T said about making training fun and less intimidating. The old school teaching technique of "grunting it through" is long gone. These people aren't trained to be soldiers. Shooting must be "fun" for them first and the self-defense aspects can be worked in later.

Also, there are two different mind sets here that the two of you are disagreeing on:

1. Train this lady to shoot the .38 snubby that her husband had bought her. If this is the case, then use a wheelgun in .22LR that is similar in size and operation is a good thing.

2. Training this lady to shoot. Period. In this case, introducing her to a variety of guns is better. This way she can make up her own mind as to which firearm she would prefer.

I am of the #2 line of thought. That may not be what the hubby wanted, but I wanted a prospective gun owner to be a thinking gun owner and not just a parrot. I'd show her how to shoot, then I'll introduce her to various guns of differing designs and calibers. THEN she can decide what's best for her.

Now, if she doesn't care enough and just wanted to learn with what her husband got her, then I'd go with #1 and give her lots and lots of bang time with the .22LR snubnose. Let's face it, mastering the DA pull isn't easy. You can spend oodles of money shooting .38 Special and give her sore hands (even the lightest .38 load is much more powerful than the hottest .22LR round), or you can just let her practice with the .22 long enough to reasonably put rounds on target with DA shooting and then transition over to the larger caliber. I don't know about you guys, but 500-rounds of the cheapest .38 Special still ain't cheap.

AA#5
05-24-2012, 08:36
So I bought my soon to be wife a Rossi revolver the other day and was under the false impression that is was a .357 the saleswoman selling me the weapon didn't offer up any objection. I did feel duked, but all in all it is an accurate weapon. Is it a weapon I can be comfortable with my lady carying as her CCW? It only holds 5 rounds and it is only a .38 which does bother me. What should i do, trust it or should i sell it and get something more depenable like a .380 or a .9?

No, you should get something more dependable than a Rossi.

M&P15T
05-24-2012, 08:48
I agree with many ideas that Ithaca_deerslayer and M&P15T said about making training fun and less intimidating. The old school teaching technique of "grunting it through" is long gone. These people aren't trained to be soldiers. Shooting must be "fun" for them first and the self-defense aspects can be worked in later.

Also, there are two different mind sets here that the two of you are disagreeing on:

1. Train this lady to shoot the .38 snubby that her husband had bought her. If this is the case, then use a wheelgun in .22LR that is similar in size and operation is a good thing.

2. Training this lady to shoot. Period. In this case, introducing her to a variety of guns is better. This way she can make up her own mind as to which firearm she would prefer.

I am of the #2 line of thought. That may not be what the hubby wanted, but I wanted a prospective gun owner to be a thinking gun owner and not just a parrot. I'd show her how to shoot, then I'll introduce her to various guns of differing designs and calibers. THEN she can decide what's best for her.

Now, if she doesn't care enough and just wanted to learn with what her husband got her, then I'd go with #1 and give her lots and lots of bang time with the .22LR snubnose. Let's face it, mastering the DA pull isn't easy. You can spend oodles of money shooting .38 Special and give her sore hands (even the lightest .38 load is much more powerful than the hottest .22LR round), or you can just let her practice with the .22 long enough to reasonably put rounds on target with DA shooting and then transition over to the larger caliber. I don't know about you guys, but 500-rounds of the cheapest .38 Special still ain't cheap.

Yeah, this is why I like GLOCKs, or other striker fired, medium/small framed pistols for starting new shooters.

Oh well, no point in discussing it now.

fnfalman
05-24-2012, 09:04
Yeah, this is why I like GLOCKs, or other striker fired, medium/small framed pistols for starting new shooters.

Oh well, no point in discussing it now.

So, instead of a heavy DA pull, you'd have a decent SA pull, but then the novice will have to do with snappy recoil and limpwrist issues in addition to learning the fundamentals?

Not to mention, the cheapest 9mm ammo is still around $10/box of 50. $10 will get you about 300-rds of .22LR.

4 glocks
05-24-2012, 09:26
My GF bought a S&W 442 before I met her. She had never shot it or any other gun except a .22 rifle when she was young.

She learned very fast without any issues. I will say she is a natural shot. She has shot 12 gage auto and pump, .357 and 9mm with out issue.

When she got her CCP she did not carry her gun. When we would go out I would say carry one of my guns LCP and 5 shot .38 after carrying my guns for a while she started carrying her gun all the time.

I had a Rossi years ago and it was a good gun for the money.

Just take her shooting you may be supprised.

ithaca_deerslayer
05-24-2012, 09:31
My GF bought a S&W 442 before I met her. She had never shot it or any other gun except a .22 rifle when she was young.

She learned very fast without any issues. I will say she is a natural shot. She has shot 12 gage auto and pump, .357 and 9mm with out issue.

When she got her CCP she did not carry her gun. When we would go out I would say carry one of my guns LCP and 5 shot .38 after carrying my guns for a while she started carrying her gun all the time.

I had a Rossi years ago and it was a good gun for the money.

Just take her shooting you may be supprised.

Just to clarify, did she have experience shooting .357 and 9mm before she got the 442?

M&P15T
05-24-2012, 09:39
So, instead of a heavy DA pull, you'd have a decent SA pull, but then the novice will have to do with snappy recoil and limpwrist issues in addition to learning the fundamentals?

Not to mention, the cheapest 9mm ammo is still around $10/box of 50. $10 will get you about 300-rds of .22LR.

Snappy recoil? On a G19? Serioulsy? Never been a problem, ever, not even with a 70+ year old first time female shooter. Never seen any malfunctions either, not due to "limp wristing", handling a pistol for the first time, nothing.

I'm not arguing against .22 for economic reasons, I'm all for .22 caliber versions of what-ever pistol the new shooter will eventually use. The idea is picking a platform/ergonomics/trigger and sticking with it until the new shooter develops into a decently seasoned one. Heading for a G19? Get a .22 conversion kit. Rossi .38? S&W .22 version of a j-frame.

Restless28
05-24-2012, 09:42
My wife carries Sabre Red instead of a gun because she still isn't co
comfortable with a handgun. She may never be, but at least she has the Sabre.

I now find myself comfortable with a 642 in an Uncle Mikes 3 in my pocket and a small canister of Sabre Red.

The best advice is to avoid as many situations as possible that dictate a gun. Situational awareness is cheap.

4 glocks
05-24-2012, 10:16
Just to clarify, did she have experience shooting .357 and 9mm before she got the 442?

No she did not. She had only shot a 22 rifle when she was young. She got the 442 just before I met her, and did not want to shot it by herself. Our first date was shooting her 442 and some of my guns .357 and 9mm Glock.

She took to shooting very fast and had no issues shooting anything. It may not be the same for all woman.

fnfalman
05-24-2012, 10:20
Snappy recoil? On a G19? Serioulsy? Never been a problem, ever, not even with a 70+ year old first time female shooter. Never seen any malfunctions either, not due to "limp wristing", handling a pistol for the first time, nothing.

Yes, snappy recoil. Maybe not with every female, but surely enough to make these guns to be non-universal. Not to mention the girth of the grip.

I'm not arguing against .22 for economic reasons, I'm all for .22 caliber versions of what-ever pistol the new shooter will eventually use. The idea is picking a platform/ergonomics/trigger and sticking with it until the new shooter develops into a decently seasoned one. Heading for a G19? Get a .22 conversion kit. Rossi .38? S&W .22 version of a j-frame.

I agree, but the guns don't have to be exactly the same. Besides, how do you know which gun the individual will end up using? You expect the individual to make an informed decision right off the bat and buy a gun then go get trained? that's not logical.

fnfalman
05-24-2012, 10:22
She took to shooting very fast and had no issues shooting anything. It may not be the same for all woman.

It's not the same for every man either. A good trainer would adopt to the students' idiosyncracies.

M&P15T
05-24-2012, 12:12
Yes, snappy recoil. Maybe not with every female, but surely enough to make these guns to be non-universal. Not to mention the girth of the grip.



I agree, but the guns don't have to be exactly the same. Besides, how do you know which gun the individual will end up using? You expect the individual to make an informed decision right off the bat and buy a gun then go get trained? that's not logical.

You're not following the conversation, and I'm not going to repeat it for you.

And I have no idea of what to say if you think a G19 has snappy recoil, or has a "girthy" grip. How many have you owned or shot?

fnfalman
05-24-2012, 12:23
And I have no idea of what to say if you think a G19 has snappy recoil, or has a "girthy" grip. How many have you owned or shot?

It's a double stack mag pistol. Ergo, the girth of the grip may not agree with people with small hands and short fingers.

And now you claim that the snappy recoil of the G19 is a non-issue. Guess what, I've seen it as an issue. You claim that the grip size of the G19 isn't an issue. Guess what? I've seen it as an issue.

As far as a G19 goes, you got me there. I have neither owned or shot one. But I do have a G17 since 1988. Does that count?

fnfalman
05-24-2012, 12:29
You would try to teach someone to shoot a specific firearm by having them train with 4 others, 3 of which have severely different ergonomics and fire control types.



I've always used G19s to start new shooters, and they are very soft and easy shooting pistols. With a snubby, going from a .22 version to a .38 sounds like a good idea, as long as they are identical in every way except for caliber. It is really important that the trigger, ergos and such are the same.

Sounds like double-speak to me.

One moment you advocate using similar guns to the one the shooter ended up with. The next moment you advocate the use of Glocks to train shooters. How do you know that they will end up with Glocks?