Alright, I just applied for my CCW permit the other day, should have it mid-next week. Currently my only handgun is a Kimber Pro Carry, not exactly ideal for tucking away inconspicuously and I was wondering if anybody might have some recommendations for an inexpensive revolver. There was a Charter that caught my eye, but I've never really heard anything about them. The price is appealing, however that may mean that accuracy is lacking... I'd prefer a .357 mostly for the sheer fact that, if I want to I can still throw .38's in it, whereas it just doesn't work the other way around. Suggestions welcome!
Snubbies?
- Thread starter DocDizz
- Start date
Kreyzhorse
New member
Take a look at any S&W snub nose. I prefer the Airweight's for carry, but they make several types.
Ruger also makes the SP snub nose. Heavier gun, not quite as refined as the S&W but still a very good choice.
As far as Charter or Taurus, it's a crap shoot. You might get a good one and you might get a bad one. As an ex Taurus owner, to me, the risk just isn't worth it.
Ruger also makes the SP snub nose. Heavier gun, not quite as refined as the S&W but still a very good choice.
As far as Charter or Taurus, it's a crap shoot. You might get a good one and you might get a bad one. As an ex Taurus owner, to me, the risk just isn't worth it.
dairycreek
New member
This carry combo has sure worked well for me. A Ruger SP-101 (short barrel) in a Comp-tac 2 O'clock carry holster. I recommend the combo highly. BTW the little Ruger is really a great gun.
indiandave
New member
You get what you pay for. Charter arms do not have a good reputation, Ruger and S&W do. If you are planing to carry often I would sugest an S&W airwieght like the 642. lugging around a heavy gun all day is not fun.
I don't think a snub would carry any better than your Kimber. It is smaller overall, but snubs still have that cylinder that is at least as wide as autos.
I'd be looking at small autos if you want to tuck away something, like the Ruger LCP, and things of that nature.
If you are convinced that a revolver is the way to go, there are smaller Smiths that can be had, but they'll beat you up if you shoot magnums from them.
I'd be looking at small autos if you want to tuck away something, like the Ruger LCP, and things of that nature.
If you are convinced that a revolver is the way to go, there are smaller Smiths that can be had, but they'll beat you up if you shoot magnums from them.
azredhawk44
Moderator
I've got a S&W 642 airweight in my pocket right now, in an uncle mike's pocket holster.
I switch off between this revolver and a 3" Ruger SP-101 .357 carried IWB when at work, and sometimes carry bigger if on a road trip or it's the weekend.
I have yet to experience a day where I'm disarmed due to frustration with carrying or inability to dress around the gun after getting the 642 to augment the SP-101.
The Ruger shoots better, but the S&W is easier to have with me.
Hope this helps.
I switch off between this revolver and a 3" Ruger SP-101 .357 carried IWB when at work, and sometimes carry bigger if on a road trip or it's the weekend.
I have yet to experience a day where I'm disarmed due to frustration with carrying or inability to dress around the gun after getting the 642 to augment the SP-101.
The Ruger shoots better, but the S&W is easier to have with me.
Hope this helps.
When it comes down to it, the Kimber is probably almost as concealable as a snubbie wheelgun.
It really boils down to comfort, carry style and personal choices.
Lots of folks pocket carry a 642/442 or similar lightweight .38 for protection. Most of the lightwight guns will beat up the shooter after 18 rounds or more of +P ammo. The steel frame guns don't carry in your front pocket too well, but work IWB or OWB.
My favorite is the .357 Bodyguard
For nearly the same size and weight I can carry a 3914 9mm with nine rounds. Still, I prefer wheelguns and I think they can get into action much faster.
My $0.02 worth.
It really boils down to comfort, carry style and personal choices.
Lots of folks pocket carry a 642/442 or similar lightweight .38 for protection. Most of the lightwight guns will beat up the shooter after 18 rounds or more of +P ammo. The steel frame guns don't carry in your front pocket too well, but work IWB or OWB.
My favorite is the .357 Bodyguard
For nearly the same size and weight I can carry a 3914 9mm with nine rounds. Still, I prefer wheelguns and I think they can get into action much faster.
My $0.02 worth.
The 686 is certainly an excellent .357 magnum. You need to decide, however, exactly the niche you want to fill with a revolver. If you want to conceal carry when the Kimber is too big, then the 686 is not the way to go. If you want it for range use and occasional carry under a jacket or such, then a 686 will do just fine.
OneFreeTexan
New member
Snubbie
I carry some argentina made off brand 38 Special in a leather holster that came with. They fit soo nicely on my right side, easy to conceal, and have carried them so long I don't even know they are there. I practice with the gun at least four days per week, keep it clean and take good care of it. Inspect it under a magnifier every time I shoot it to look for cracks or any signs of metal stress. I can't ask for a better gun
Accuracy testing: Many folks talk of conducting handgun accuracy tests at 25 and even 50 yards. Actually, testing short-barreled revolvers at ranges over 10 yards is sort of like testing an over-the-counter hunting rifle at the 1,000-yard line at Camp Perry. Ninety percent of big-game kills are made at ranges under 200 yards which is why most writers (who know their audience and their readers’ abilities) test rifles at 100-200 yards—it’s a realistic test distance.
Yet, some of the same writers will test short barrel self-defense handguns at 25 yards (a recognized NRA competition distance) when the intended and real use is at ranges typically (according to FBI data, too) under 5 yards. The reality is that the bad guy wants you and/or your money and to get you and that money they must get much closer. When inserting bullet holes into an attacker at longer ranges, the shooter had better be able to prove that that the attacker was able, capable (had the weapon reach), the willingness and, demonstrated through his actions, was actively trying to cause and could cause great bodily harm at that longer distance. If not, the defender will get to see first-hand how our criminal and civil court cases work concerning their long range shooting skills.
I carry some argentina made off brand 38 Special in a leather holster that came with. They fit soo nicely on my right side, easy to conceal, and have carried them so long I don't even know they are there. I practice with the gun at least four days per week, keep it clean and take good care of it. Inspect it under a magnifier every time I shoot it to look for cracks or any signs of metal stress. I can't ask for a better gun
Accuracy testing: Many folks talk of conducting handgun accuracy tests at 25 and even 50 yards. Actually, testing short-barreled revolvers at ranges over 10 yards is sort of like testing an over-the-counter hunting rifle at the 1,000-yard line at Camp Perry. Ninety percent of big-game kills are made at ranges under 200 yards which is why most writers (who know their audience and their readers’ abilities) test rifles at 100-200 yards—it’s a realistic test distance.
Yet, some of the same writers will test short barrel self-defense handguns at 25 yards (a recognized NRA competition distance) when the intended and real use is at ranges typically (according to FBI data, too) under 5 yards. The reality is that the bad guy wants you and/or your money and to get you and that money they must get much closer. When inserting bullet holes into an attacker at longer ranges, the shooter had better be able to prove that that the attacker was able, capable (had the weapon reach), the willingness and, demonstrated through his actions, was actively trying to cause and could cause great bodily harm at that longer distance. If not, the defender will get to see first-hand how our criminal and civil court cases work concerning their long range shooting skills.
Kreyzhorse
New member
Truer words have not been spoken in this thread. If you want a range gun, the 686 is a great option. If you want a small CCW, the 686 is not really an option at all.
I have a Kimber Compact ll 34oz and a 340 S&W snub nose airlite 13.8 oz. You forget that you are carrying the 340 it is so lite. It is easier to carry than a Kimber or any much heavier gun. I also have a 642 airweight 15.8 oz and I can't tell the difference between it and the 340. Plus the Kimber Pro has a much larger grip than a snub nose and larger grip than my Compact ll.