Tami talks about snub-nosed revolvers and the joys thereof in the carrying of them. Here’s a snippet:
The point Werner (the trainer) hammered home most was that accurate shooting is crucial. My 432PD holds six rounds, and the far more typical .38 Spl./.357 Mag. has but five. Ammunition management is important; you need to make good hits.
Werner emphasized the importance of getting a good sight picture and using ammunition that shoots to your gun’s point-of-aim.
Amen and amen, and I say again: amen.
When I’m not carrying my 1911 (which is only about 20 percent of the time), I carry my S&W Airweight in its Milt Rosen holster, loaded with Hornady Critical Defense .38 Special +P (which the gun loves with a passion):
Over the many years I’ve owned both guns, I’ve fired more practice rounds through the 1911, but I’ve practiced far more often with the Smith — while I practice quite a bit with the 1911, I always shoot at least fifteen rounds with the 637 at every range session, regardless of whatever other guns I’ve brought with me for the day. Why? The little Airweight .38Spl is far more difficult to shoot accurately than the Government .45ACP.
And in the much-lamented absence of the .357 Mod 65 in my collection, the 637 serves as my interim bedside gun. In a bedroom SHTF scenario, you don’t want to be trying to remember how to align the sights and when the double-action trigger will let off.
Tami says it, and I repeat the advice: if you carry a snubbie, practice shooting it more than you think you need to.
What are your thoughts about the Smith 642, equipped with a CT Laser Grip? IMHO, its about the same as your 637, so long as one is using the same kind of ammo. I like the CT because the sights just plain suck, and if I need to use it for something more serious than putting holes in paper, I want to hit only the goblin(s) that I’m aiming at, and not some kid or other innocent nearby.
I do absolutely agree that practice is REQUIRED, often – and when I do that it is with the laser shut off. You can’t rely for your life on a battery-powered electronic accessory…even if it has so far worked flawlessly and with utter reliability.
Thanks for everything that you do.
I’ve found that the grips/stocks are an important part of accuracy in those snubbies. My S&W 442 now wears some modified Italian made (no brand marked) rubber grips that are a little bit bigger than those boot grips you show. I’ve cut the third finger groove off the bottom, about where the frame ends. The rather narrow backstrap covering area is ground down to widen the contact surface for hand comfort in recoil.
What got my attention was that the difference at 40 yds (tin can range) was a hit probability that was twice as large with the boot grips. Apparently the harder boot grip material added to the exposed frame backstrap allowed the gun to move during trigger manipulation and/or recoil, at least for me. The soft grips allow me to make head shots at 40yds, but the boot grips drop that to perhaps 20 yds. In addition, I can shoot std pressure ammo (125grs seems to be it’s preferred round) all day long (it’s not rated for +P).
The drawback of the soft grips are that they are a wee bit larger due to the covered frame, and cover garments stick to them more than to the plastic ones. The gun feels much more secure in the hand. Trade-offs are a balancing act.
Comments are closed.