Airlight frames -- stability, accuracy, durability?

[Ed Dixon]

Airlite frames -- stability, accuracy, durability?

I haven't even decided to buy a small wheelgun yet, let alone a S&W, so this isn't meant to provoke boycott-fueled derision. I'm curious in general about the ability of a significantly lighter gun with a 2"-3" barrel to perform as reliably and positively as a similar revolver weighing an extra ten ounces or more. How much, if anything, is sacrificed in performance by the reduction in weight?

 

[VictorLouis]

What you are sacrificing is the ability for quicker follow-up shots, and easy recoil. Muzzle flip and felt-recoil are markedly increased in the ultra-super-duper-featherweight guns made of UnObtanium-alloy. What you gain is pocketability, or ankle-ability unlike anything you've ever used in steel. If possible, shoot the object of your desire before you buy one, or seek out a used one. That way, you won't take it too hard in the wallet if you decide that it's not for you.

 

[coz]

Bought an Airweight .38. It's a great defensive weapon, limited to only 5 shots, but very accurate and well made.

Notice I said "defensive" weapon. Shoot it, learn it, then carry it.

It ain't fun to shoot. After about 15 rounds, the recoil is annoying.

Now, I have put a nice rubber grip on that helps, and had a trigger job as this is a hammerless model and the trigger needed it.

Again. Very accurate out to 25 yards, but recoil is abusive.

 

[bountyh]

Mr Dixon: to answer your question about reliability: I don't own an airlite (and wouldn't) but I have read a lengthy series of gun tests on various models and the performance has been very poor I think. Some of this is due to gun makers trying to "stretch" .38 snubs into +p and magnum guns and they just aren't up to it. Some may be due to poor quality by gun makers in general. Overall, I would not own an ultra-light. I would get a steel gun like a SW66 or 686 and live with the extra weight. If I had to get an ultra-light, SW products have fared best overall but have had a couple of clunkers. I think airlites are such a new product, it will take a while for the gun makers to get up the learning curve.

 

[BobR]

I have an older Model 37, exposed hammer, S&W airweight.
I really like it. As long as it is used with the proper ammo it is a fine gun. Mine is normally used for the quick runs to the store and other very short, one stop trips. I do not use it for day long carry.

I use Federal 110G Hydra Shoks in it, no +P ever, and the recoil is very managable, the muzzle flip is not that excessive, and is surprisingly accurate with the 2" tube.

I think most people try to get the max velocity out of their Airweights, and to do so use +P or mag rounds. And therin lies the problem. If you want it to be a comfortable, accurate shooter, you need to match the ammo to the gun.

So, I guess I am saying, by all means get the Airlight, carry it , practice with it, and enjoy it. Just try many different types of ammo to find the best one for your ability and the gun.

Bob

 

[M1911]

I have a S&W 642 with the ~2" barrel. It's one of the AL framed ones.

Advantages:

- light
- small
- fits in a pocket
- has been reliable for the few rounds I've put through it.

Disadvantages:

- the rear sight is just a shallow groove in the back strap and the sight radius is very short. The result is that it is very hard for my poor eyes to shoot the thing accurately. Wouldn't want to have to use it past 20 feet. I am less accurate with this thing than ANY of my pistols.
- the trigger is fairly heavy (that can probably be fixed by a decent smith).
- recoil is NOT fun. 15 rounds and I'm done. I can just imagine the lighter (and much more expensive) scandium and titanium models. No thanks.

Note that the 3" stainless steel revolvers (e.g., Ruger SP101, or S&W Model 60) are a WHOLE different ball of wax. Much better sight radius, less recoil, easier to shoot accurately. And a whole lot harder to fit in your pocket. Can't have your cake and eat it too

Regarding reliability, it is my understanding that even the K-frames will not endure a very large number of full-boat .357 loads, so I assume that the J-frame Model 60 will show even less life when used in such a manner. That said, my hand will wear out long, long before my Model 60. I shoot primarily shoot .38 out of that gun. YMMV.

M1911

 

[C.R.Sam]

Most people require quite a bit of practice to get proficient with a snubby.
Most people are uncomfortable shooting a lot out of a lightweighe snubby, hence many do not become proficient.

Defensive gun is supposed to be comforting, not comfortable.

If you can't shoot your lightweight a lot....get a heavier gun.

Sam

 

[juliet charley]

I think the Airweights (442/642) are the best of lot. The little J-frames are special purpose weapons. They are last-ditch, close-range self-defence weapons. They are not ideal self-defence weapons, but they are ideal carry weapons. They really do require a lot practice (though I limit most of practice to seven yard line and no further than the fifteen yard line) to remain proficient.

I think the real mistake most people make with these weapons (and the manufacturers have fed-in) is to significantly overload these little revolvers--they are not .357 Magnum or even +P weapons. Any benefits you might gain (and you gain few, if any) out of the hotter ammo is far less than the drawbacks (recoil, flash, lack of controllability/follow-up--not to mention the wear and tear the weapon and the shooter). Don't let anybody tell you with these little revolvers to carry one type of ammunition and practice with another--there is far too much difference in shooting low power loads and full power loads in these little weapons. They are best served--for practice and carry--by the plain old 148-grain wadcutter. If you feel you need to carry +Ps or magnums, these are not the weapons for you (even though they may be chambered for magnums or rated for +P).

 

[BigG]

Most people require quite a bit of practice to get proficient with a snubby. Most people are uncomfortable shooting a lot out of a lightweighe snubby, hence many do not become proficient.

Defensive gun is supposed to be comforting, not comfortable.

Amen.

Do not trash a gun just because you are afraid or do not like to shoot one. The S&W alloy-framed guns are superlative weapons and will outlast the owner 99 times out of 100, imho.

This also includes those made of unobtainium in magnum flavors.

 

[coz]

I said that the J-Frame Airweights are not "shooting" weapons, and my meaning is that it's not a fun gun to go punch paper.

However, I do shoot it to maintain proficiency, but, I don't put 50 - 200 rounds through it like I do with my semi-autos, except for the Kel-tec p-11 (same reason as it can be painful).

The Airweight I have is very accurate and with the full hogue rubber grip, it doesn't require repositioning between rounds as it did with the standard grip. It is a good pocket gun and very lightweight.

just my .02

 

[sox]

Had a SW Ti 342PD. I think there is such a thing as "too light"
and this is it. I like to enjoy shooting my guns. I did not enjoy my Ti. Recently, I tried a SW 60 .357 2.25" and Ruger SP101 side by side. Shot both with same 125gr .38 load. Very enjoyable, no pain. So, I will be gettin one or the other, it is a tough decision. This board is great thought, over the years I have learned alot, and no doubt it has saved me some money and time. Good luck.

 

[steyr scout]

Way back when S&W made ammo they developed the Nyclad composition bullet. They optimized the 125 gr. HP non + p for use in their mod. 37 airweight. Federal still makes these and they expand very well from a short bbl. There were some bright nickle square grip frame S&W 37's made with color case hardened hammers and triggers. They are as slick as can be and the square grip frame make them just a little easier to point and hang onto without affecting concealability. Trick one out with a Barami hip grip and a Tyler T adapter and you get a tool for the first rule, always have a gun.