Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Wisdom From The Tactical Professor

  1. #1
    Member Wheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Jawja

    Wisdom From The Tactical Professor

    "Perceived advantages of terminal ballistics, which are often illusory, are irrelevant if the target isn’t hit."

    https://tacticalprofessor.wordpress....n/#more-155555

    If you're not reading Claude's blog, you should. There's lots of good stuff there.
    Men freely believe that which they desire.
    Julius Caesar

  2. #2
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Erie County, NY
    That's why I have two 32 cal snubbies. One is a 432 - light weight with 32 HR Mags. The other is a 632 - 3 inch barrel, SS finish, comp'ed and fiber optics sights in 327 mag. BTW, the 327 mag is not without a little bit of recoil punch when you shoot it. While this may be heresy - if I had to carry a revolver on my belt - I would carry the 632 as compared to my SW Model 19 or similar frames. My little old hands and concealment needs fit that gun better. I can shoot the 19 just fine but to each his own. SW should get back on the 32 cal bandwagon for snubbies. I took Claude's snubby class - well worth it.

    Since IDPA is changing its rules as we speak everyday, there is only SSP now - they should mandate that everyone has to shoot a match with a J frame-ish snubby once a year! That would be hoot.

  3. #3
    Site Supporter DocGKR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Hence one of the advantages of using a low recoil, but still effective load like a 148 gr full target wadcutter in a .38 J-frame...
    Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie

  4. #4
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Erie County, NY
    Got one of those also - 642. Shot a match with it with wads quite a few years ago. Not to sound like a jerk but I hit a small steel target at a distance and knocked it down. Heard a round of applause. As I said elsewhere, the biggest advantage is that I win my division as no one else shoots bugs usually. IMHO, the revolver role in today's world is in the small guns with loads that are shootable. Carry the Model 19 is doable but a Glock 19 or 26 is so much more easy to carry - again IMHO.

  5. #5
    Member Wheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Jawja
    Quote Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer View Post
    Got one of those also - 642. Shot a match with it with wads quite a few years ago. Not to sound like a jerk but I hit a small steel target at a distance and knocked it down. Heard a round of applause. As I said elsewhere, the biggest advantage is that I win my division as no one else shoots bugs usually. IMHO, the revolver role in today's world is in the small guns with loads that are shootable. Carry the Model 19 is doable but a Glock 19 or 26 is so much more easy to carry - again IMHO.
    A G 19 or 26 may be easier for you to carry, it might even be easier for most to carry, but it's not easier for everyone to carry. There are too many variables to toss any one make or model out as the best for ease of carry, but the J frame hits that mark more than any other design. That being said, our experiences drive our choices and actions.
    Men freely believe that which they desire.
    Julius Caesar

  6. #6
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Erie County, NY
    I think I said that for belt carry, a bigger revolver such as a SW Model 19 (or similar frame) or a 686ish, doesn't make sense for me if I can carry a modern higher cap semi. Obviously, one's experiences and needs determine what you do. I also made clear that if circumstances warrant, I carry J frames, train with and shoot them in competitions. If one wants to carry as a concealed handgun on the belt, a bigger revolver, I have no problem with that. No problem.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •