JCN’s Taurus 380 Snubbie review

[JCN]

The op is an able investigator and is an aspiring gun tinkerer. He tinkers better than I do. Being dense, I do not see a viable outcome except the satisfaction of tinkering and producing a product that satisfies the tinkerer. In the end we still have an anemic cartridge chambered in a revolver produced by a company that does not value quality control. I give the op an A for skill level in tinkering and report writing. The thread is interesting.

Glad you get me! It’s kind of almost like a gaming thread. Competition guns and ammo for USPSA minor make energy in the 250 ft lb range despite being shot from 45 oz guns.

I like revolvers and I game with anemic ammo and moon clips.

All the lessons and muscle memory scale up to full power ammo and guns just like the semiauto stuff does.

As an aside, my wife carries anemic SD ammo. The 38 special “LITE” FTX from Hornady.

She doesn’t want to carry anything hotter so really that’s kind of the niche we are looking at here.

[RevolverRob]

Not trying to be rude, but can you clarify what kind of reloading speed you’re at?

With moons you can throw them at the gun, which is what I was showing with my chamfer video.

But I can tell you 100% that they load faster without rattling around if you have a general index.

If you’re off a few degrees it doesn’t matter.

If you watch Jerry’s revolver reloads he definitely times the open cylinder.

When you get down to the sub 1.7 second reloads you need every advantage.

So when you say “unnecessary” I’d agree that indexing is unnecessary if you’re going for 3 second reloads but necessary if you’re going for 1.6 second ones.

I'm not at all offended, let me clarify a bit.

1) It is always necessary to time/index the cylinder for a reload. It not only helps you get the bullets into the cylinder, it keeps the cylinder from free spinning, and it lets you keep a firm grip on the gun during the reload. This is why non-fluted cylinders suck and that stupid "rip cord" reloader sucks. You don't let the cylinder spin when the gun is open, that's stupid Hollywood shit and how you break a good revolver. However, you index the cylinder when you open the gun.

This is a separate step from indexing the reload. (to be clear, I was only talking about indexing the reload).

2) I run at about 2.3-2.5 seconds or so. I don't go much faster than that, because I'm not chasing gun games right now and by far the slowest part of my reload is fishing the speed loader out of my pocket, not indexing it. Coming off the belt, I can get down around 2.1-2.2 with practice.

3) I also wasn't clear, indexing a speed loader/moon clip for a reload for a snub that you're firing in a defensive framework is unnecessary, in my opinion. Get the thing in your hand and 'throw' it at the cylinder (not literally, just get the bullets to the cylinder). You can get it in there by feel (phrasing) often without an issue particularly round tips and big holes (phrasing), it's really a classic round peg-round hole situation (phrasing).

But everyone should do it how they want to do it (phrasing). My main point is don't over think it, just do it (phrasing).

Jerry M actually does a couple of things I never do with a revolver reload, because he chases time and I don't. I never bring the gun down to my waist, I bring the bullets to the gun up. I don't drop my vision and workspace to my belt buckle. This is kind of a bad gamer habit with a revolver. Keep the gun and head up. If you keep the gun and head up and bring the bullets up to the gun, you can see the bullets go into the cylinder with your peripheral vision. There is no need to look down at the gun, unless you bring the gun into your body, and there is no need to do that at all in most situations, unless you're chasing outright speed.

This is one of those cases where competition and defensive weapon use are a bit at odds. What increases speed in a competition setting for a revolver isn't really best practices for defensive use.

Does that make sense?

[JCN]

@RevolverRob

Yes! Thank you for clarifying!

Totally makes sense.

I’m not sure what I think regarding defensive revolver.

I kind of think best practice for defensive revolver is carry a second revolver.

I am somewhat ignorant about defensive uses and am just imagining a particular situation where you might want the fastest reload possible, watching the target in the peripheral vision in order to accomplish that.

Or if you’re behind cover and looking to get back into the fight quickly.

Those might be situations where it could be appropriate in a defensive setting?

I think “feeling the bullets in” qualifies as indexing the loads though. Especially if the cylinder is indexed already.

[RevolverRob]

@RevolverRob

Yes! Thank you for clarifying!

Totally makes sense.

I’m not sure what I think regarding defensive revolver.

I kind of think best practice for defensive revolver is carry a second revolver.

That does generally seem to be the best practice. We do know from looking at various data for shootings, reloads usually do not matter.

I am somewhat ignorant about defensive uses and am just imagining a particular situation where you might want the fastest reload possible, watching the target in the peripheral vision in order to accomplish that.

Or if you’re behind cover and looking to get back into the fight quickly.

Those might be situations where it could be appropriate in a defensive setting?

For sure I can think of situations. It gets pretty academic pretty quickly though and you'll be in very different positions than you might expect. Todd Louis Green (founder of P-F) had a saying, "The stance that happens most in shooting is 'happenstance'." - This was in the context of Weaver/Isoceles/Whatever the core point is, fundamentals carry over regardless of position and shooting to solve a problem is going to make you do things you don't anticipate.

I think “feeling the bullets in” qualifies as indexing the loads though. Especially if the cylinder is indexed already.

That is distinctly possible. I guess I think of it as it isn't conscious effort or requiring a visual or tactile index to tell me which way the bullets are oriented. But given that the space between the bullets is relatively small and the cylinder is indexed, you're right there is more 'indexing' than not going on. And I can adjust on the fly if my bullet hits the rear of the cylinder, instead of chamber, just by twisting the speed loader or gun (I actually have no idea which one of those I twist, I've never really paid attention).

[JTMcC]

What kind of numbers are we talking about? I have too many guns so probably won’t see more than a few thousand rounds. Dry fire I can put on the cycles though.

You're the one driving this bus..... so we'll take whatever data you produce and be happy with it ; )

[Buckeye63]

Im posting this without reading the whole article.. I apologize ..
I owned two Taurus 380Acp revolvers .. I was so much wanting them to work for me ...
Both Functioned 100% , heavy triggers .. and the M380 weighed more than they should..
Taurus should have used ,
a non-shrouded barrel ,
a shorter cylinder with a extended barrel/forcing cone
That would have lengthen the barrel without increasing the OAL length of the gun ..
Also Taurus should have used a similar concept to the Non- View ..
compact grip and titanium cylinder ..
In this configuration the M380 would have been , a drop in your pocket BUG revolver
That would have weighed around 11oz .with the short grip frame , shortened titanium cylinder ,
shortened non-shrouded barrel and aluminum frame

I think they had a great Idea.. but didn’t follow through with it..

[JCN]

Im posting this without reading the whole article.. I apologize ..
I owned two Taurus 380Acp revolvers .. I was so much wanting them to work for me ...
Both Functioned 100% , heavy triggers .. and the M380 weighed more than they should..
Taurus should have used ,
a non-shrouded barrel ,
a shorter cylinder with a extended barrel/forcing cone
That would have lengthen the barrel without increasing the OAL length of the gun ..
Also Taurus should have used a similar concept to the Non- View ..
compact grip and titanium cylinder ..
In this configuration the M380 would have been , a drop in your pocket BUG revolver
That would have weighed around 11oz .with the short grip frame , shortened titanium cylinder ,
shortened non-shrouded barrel and aluminum frame

I think they had a great Idea.. but didn’t follow through with it..

It’s buried in the thread, but with $8 of springs it’s an 8 pound trigger now.
At 14oz it’s not bad.

I think titanium cylinder would put it out of reach price wise for a lot of Taurus shoppers.

[JCN]

Saw my first 0.20 split with the M380.

TK moons work great.



Even though the caliber is marginal, it’s really the only way I’m going to practice speed drills with a 14 oz snub.

I’m not a masochist and this is about as spicy as I want to shoot in a gun this light!

[revolvergeek]

Experience with various S&W and Colt .45 ACP revolvers is they have pretty good accuracy. Especially so the S&W's, even in examples with somewhat nasty barrel bores. Don't think the freebore in the cylinder has much impact on the accuracy front.

I have had excellent accuracy with older S&Ws with or without moon clips. I have a modern S&W 22-4 for a while, and forget accuracy it would only sort of fire some of the time without moon clips. The older guns had a nice sharp distinct shoulder to the chamber whereas the 22-4 was a tapered, inconsistent mess. The accuracy for my 1917 Colt was limited mostly by my ability to pull the trigger on that beast!

Personally I like this thread and discussions of oddball options in general. I have wondered about these little revolvers and if, within the limits of Taurus' QC, they could be a modern version of the myriad old .32 Long and .38 S&W (not special) revolvers that were everywhere and hugely popular back in the late 1800 - mid 1900s. This little revolver makes sense to me as a low recoil option for certain shooters; more than a 22, but less than a .38 spl. Of course there are 'better' options, but there are lots of noncommited gun owners that don't want 'better', they just want 'ok'. I bet if S&W came out with an i-frame sized 642 shooting .380 in moon clips they would sell tons of them. .380 is often more plentiful and cheaper than .38 spl in today's market.

[revchuck38]

@revolvergeek - The 22-4 was specifically designed to be shot only with moon clips or .45 AR brass. Mine works fine.