.38 snub EDC questions

[CindyE]

Yup, those are the large grips. The new boot style grips are pictured here. (And yes, I do have an extra set with nothing to put them on if you are interested.)

The Barami's are low profile--so small, in fact, that they are difficult to hold onto. They need the texture and the added mass on the frontstrap that the DeSantis grip provides.

Thanks for the handgrip! It arrived in the mail yesterday and I changed grips right away. That does make a difference, i think it will be a bit easier to conceal now. I will have to get out and practice with it, hopefully this weekend. I really appreciate you taking the time to help me out!

 

[jamstutz]

Thanks for the handgrip! It arrived in the mail yesterday and I changed grips right away. That does make a difference, i think it will be a bit easier to conceal now. I will have to get out and practice with it, hopefully this weekend. I really appreciate you taking the time to help me out!

That's alright. I look at INGO as a community and we've each got to do our part to offer a helping hand when we can.

 

[Plinkuh]

That's alright. I look at INGO as a community and we've each got to do our part to offer a helping hand when we can.

Rep this man!

 

[figley]

Quote:
Originally Posted by MillieBeast
btw what is the difference between carrying a glock with one in the chamber and a revolver? both are double action

Uh. Not exactly. No, Glock is striker fired while a revolver is not. Now if one carried their snubbie with the hammer cocked then the comparison would be at least close...People don't put a bullet in their groin when they stuff a revolver in their belt without a holster but carrying a holsterless Glock stuffed in your britches is a recipe for a career as a Eunuch in a Mel Brooks flick.

Indiucky

In the case of a S&W J-Frame, being familiar with the mechanics of both, I'd say that it is very similar. My reasoning being, in both guns, the spring that provides the energy that ultimately propels the firing pin toward the primer, is not under load until the shooter causes it to be that way, by an intentional pulling of the trigger in a rearward motion. A minor difference lies in the fact that the energy of the revolver flows in an arc, whereas the energy in the Glock follows a straight line. How do you equate a Glock, with single-action anything?

ETA: I know this is a bit of a thread resurrection, but I had to make this point clear, or get clarification myself, in case I have been foolishly carrying my single-action Glock, in the less-advantageous, double-action mode.

 

[indiucky]

How do you equate a Glock, with single-action anything?

ETA: I know this is a bit of a thread resurrection, but I had to make this point clear, or get clarification myself, in case I have been foolishly carrying my single-action Glock, in the less-advantageous, double-action mode.

I don't.
I stated a Glock is striker fired and folks that use a Glock (chambered) without a holster are putting themselves in danger of shooting themselves in the privates. I equated a cocked J frame being shoved in your britches as similiar because all either would take at that point is something catching on the trigger to cause either firearm to go off. The only similarity is that they could both go off. I have always thought of Glocks as striker fired guns, not single action or double action. Apparently Gaston Glock thought the same thing because they invented a word to describe this new action. That word is "safe action", not single action, not double action, but "safe action". I wasn't saying Glocks are not the greatest gun ever made in all of recorded history. I know Glock guys can be sensitive. I stand by my statement that a Glock and a double action revolver are different and that one can be safely tucked in your britches without a holster and one can not. Again, just because you can't shove a Glock in your britches does not mean that it is not the greatest gun ever made. It's really a wonder people defended themselves before Gaston Moses brought them out of the mould and down from the Mountain. A Glock needs a holster, a revolver doesn't. I hope this helps affirm how great and what a great choice buying the Glock was for you. No one was despariging your glock.

 

[figley]

There is a way to carry a Glock, with the muzzle rested, steel-to-cotton, right against the fly of your Fruit of the Looms, that is 100% safe, and where it would require more steps to fire than a DA revolver. I can show you how to carry the revolver more safely that way, too. As it is, the only thing inherently more safe about the revolver, is the heavier trigger pull. ETA: Neither can be "safely" tucked in your britches, without something to prevent the trigger from being pulled. Not my britches, anyway. On that same note, either can be safely carried that way, with the right precautions.

The reason I searched for this thread though, is that I recently acquired a S&W 642, and I'm in the process of getting to know it. I really like it. There are roles where a small revolver is definitely more suitable than a small semi-auto.

I started out with a Taurus 85, because I held, for many years, an unfounded bias against Glock pistols. The Taurus is long gone, and I've gone back to my roots, albeit at a higher quality level.

I'm a fanboi of facts, and I don't want the OP to be mislead by mis-information, and become an unnecessarily scared ninny.