Pocket Handgun: Small 9mm Auto or 642 Airweight?

[Rex G]

For those not already familiar with the issue, the ejector rod, on S&W revolvers, does not spontaneously and immediately jump from firm to falling off. It happens gradually, so, can be discovered, and remedied, by checking the weapon regularly, such as during the normal, regular wiping-down, for dust and lint. Notably, S&W ejector rods are not all tightened in the same direction. All of mine are tightened in a counter-clockwise direction, but earlier ones tighten in a clockwise direction. I do not know the date of the change in thread direction.

[Chuck Haggard]

Yes, I meant for defensive use. I'm surprised to hear that the old school JHP loads are recommended over bonded Speer Gold Dot 125gr and 158gr. I take it's an overpenetration issue?

Does the extra "horse power" of the Silvertip or Remington give any advantage over, say, a modern duty 9mm load?

The 125 and 158gr Gold Dots are more of a hunting load, they penetrate a LOT. The Speer Gold Dot bullet chart info is accurate.

http://https://www.everydaynodaysoff...Comparison.jpg

As far as does something like a 158gr .357 have an advantage over a good 9mm loading? I think some, from my experience in shooting deer with both. I still mostly carry 9mms when I'm not in the woods though.

[SwampDweller]

The 125 and 158gr Gold Dots are more of a hunting load, they penetrate a LOT. The Speer Gold Dot bullet chart info is accurate.

http://https://www.everydaynodaysoff...Comparison.jpg

As far as does something like a 158gr .357 have an advantage over a good 9mm loading? I think some, from my experience in shooting deer with both. I still mostly carry 9mms when I'm not in the woods though.

For some reason I can't see the link, but I know I've found it before.

Thanks for the insight, that helps. Long ago I went down the revolver rabbit hole, but I was younger and more foolish and was running cases of hot .357 Magnum through an old Python. Once that broke (though I got it fixed), I just kind of stopped with revolvers, but now I find myself more interested in them in a defensive carry capacity, both in terms of a J Frame for the pocket and I'm even curious about a "duty-ish" size 4". I used to carry that 6" Python and I'm not sure the extra 2" over 4 inch is doing anything meaningful other than making it more complicated to carry and draw.

Ever since that Python I've always been attracted to the idea of finding a medium-to-full-size revolver that could stand up to the kind of hard use a quality semi auto would. Been thinking about the GP100.

[Half Moon]

For those not already familiar with the issue, the ejector rod, on S&W revolvers, does not spontaneously and immediately jump from firm to falling off. It happens gradually, so, can be discovered, and remedied, by checking the weapon regularly. Notably, S&W ejector rods are not all tightened in the same direction. All of mine are tightened in a counter-clockwise direction, but earlier ones tighten in a clockwise direction. I do not know the date of the change in thread direction.

It happened sometime in the early 1960's. In theory the change in thread direction was supposed to minimize the risk of the ejector rod backing out since the cylinder rotating the opposite direction wouldn't unscrew the rod. In practice it's hit or miss whichever the direction of the threads. My early '80's Model 38 is more prone to back out than anything I own. On the other hand I have both pre-Model # and early '90's models that have never backed out. Go figure.

[Rex G]

It happened sometime in the early 1960's. In theory the change in thread direction was supposed to minimize the risk of the ejector rod backing out since the cylinder rotating the opposite direction wouldn't unscrew the rod. In practice it's hit or miss whichever the direction of the threads. My early '80's Model 38 is more prone to back out than anything I own. On the other hand I have both pre-Model # and early '90's models that have never backed out. Go figure.

Thanks. All of my revolvers are newer than this, except one, and, I have not disassembled that one, or found the ejector rod to be loose, so, the thread direction has become a concern, yet.

[SwampDweller]

As mentioned before, I've often pondered a GP100 as a "duty" size revolver that could run for long periods of time with minimal issues, given frequent cleaning. I like the Smiths better in terms of feel, but it seems like the Ruger double action revolvers are about as close as you can get to Glock 17 reliability in a revolver format. If I'm wrong on this and the Smiths are, I'd like to know. It just seems that revolvers often need to go down for service - at a gunsmith level no less - at quite a more substantial rate than autos if shot with regularity. Does Ruger have an advantage over Smith in this way, or am I incorrect in thinking this?

For a pocket carry lightweight gun/BUG .38 Special I have no issues trusting a J Frame with no lock, since it won't be run as hard as a full size handgun might be.

[DiscipulusArmorum]

The 125 and 158gr Gold Dots are more of a hunting load, they penetrate a LOT. The Speer Gold Dot bullet chart info is accurate.

http://https://www.everydaynodaysoff...Comparison.jpg

As far as does something like a 158gr .357 have an advantage over a good 9mm loading? I think some, from my experience in shooting deer with both. I still mostly carry 9mms when I'm not in the woods though.

Ammo question that's relevant to the 9mm pocket pistol discussion in this thread - a couple of us in the ammo subforum noticed that in a recent P&S podcast you said that you've never seen 147gr HST expand from anything shorter than a Glock 19. Can you discuss this a bit more? Were you referring to "street" results or your own testing? At one point 147 HST was known to be a good performer out of short barrels, at least in some calibrated gel tests, so I was rather taken aback when I heard you say that.

[SwampDweller]

The 125 and 158gr Gold Dots are more of a hunting load, they penetrate a LOT. The Speer Gold Dot bullet chart info is accurate.

http://https://www.everydaynodaysoff...Comparison.jpg

As far as does something like a 158gr .357 have an advantage over a good 9mm loading? I think some, from my experience in shooting deer with both. I still mostly carry 9mms when I'm not in the woods though.

Sorry to pelt you with another response to this post, so I'll keep it short: Do you see a valid use for a medium-to-large frame revolver as far as an every day defensive carry, or does a revolver mainly only remain logical as a pocket/BUG? As in, outside of outdoors activities (ie, two legged predators rather than 4 legged).

[4RNR]

As mentioned before, I've often pondered a GP100 as a "duty" size revolver that could run for long periods of time with minimal issues, given frequent cleaning. I like the Smiths better in terms of feel, but it seems like the Ruger double action revolvers are about as close as you can get to Glock 17 reliability in a revolver format. If I'm wrong on this and the Smiths are, I'd like to know. It just seems that revolvers often need to go down for service - at a gunsmith level no less - at quite a more substantial rate than autos if shot with regularity. Does Ruger have an advantage over Smith in this way, or am I incorrect in thinking this?

For a pocket carry lightweight gun/BUG .38 Special I have no issues trusting a J Frame with no lock, since it won't be run as hard as a full size handgun might be.

Not really no. Ruger's are well built but they're not plug and play. S&W is well built and I've had 4 go to the gunsmith. 1 broken firing pin, 3 cylinder had a hard time rotating after less than 6 rounds. One of which also had some light primer strikes. But I've also had a 1930s Colt that looked like it fought on both sides of WW2 at the same time. It had tons of wear from use. You could see where someone's fingers were by the complete lack of metal finish and smoothed over wooden grips. And that gun kept on running like a champ. Even took it to a revolver class in 2018 and did pretty good all things considered.

Nothing against revolvers, I have a dozen, but compared to modern semi automatics I don't see what a full size revolver brings to the table to chose it for daily carry.

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[SwampDweller]

Not really no. Ruger's are well built but they're not plug and play. S&W is well built and I've had 4 go to the gunsmith. 1 broken firing pin, 3 cylinder had a hard time rotating after less than 6 rounds. One of which also had some light primer strikes. But I've also had a 1930s Colt that looked like it fought on both sides of WW2 at the same time. It had tons of wear from use. You could see where someone's fingers were by the complete lack of metal finish and smoothed over wooden grips. And that gun kept on running like a champ. Even took it to a revolver class in 2018 and did pretty good all things considered.

Nothing against revolvers, I have a dozen, but compared to modern semi automatics I don't see what a full size revolver brings to the table to chose it for daily carry.

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

My thinking refers back to earlier in the thread where it was stated that autoloaders tend to show great reliability at the range, but when put in the chaos of an actual shooting, they seem to have stoppages a lot more often. Police bodycam footage reflects this. Wouldn't revolvers be immune to this? That's my thinking in the potential advantage of a full size revolver over a semi auto.

Would a GP100 really be less reliable than a decent 1911? I just have a hard time wrapping my head around that. Then again, I've had pretty bad luck with 1911s. Even the premium ones like Wilsons I've been able to run have been finicky enough to not trust.