Revolver Novice - Advice Wanted. But

[Liberty Sanders]

One of the nice things about revolvers is there's a *ton* of grip/stock options out there. Everything from splinter grips to sticky rubberized grips to custom carved works of art. Since you don't need to fit a magazine in the middle of your fist, you have a lot more options.

I'm move of a Ruger guy, and the popular options there are:

GP100. The Match Champion is a nice gun out of the box. Good sights, decent trigger, and great durability. The factory grip is ginormous, good if you have large hands but not great if you want to conceal and/or can't palm a bowling ball. I put compact grips on mine and it's very easy to carry.
SP101. Sort of the opposite problem. Trigger reach is on the short side, so if you do have bigger hands it can feel cramped and make the trigger feel heavier than it is. Personally, I've no use for the SP101. It's big and heavy enough that if I can carry it, I can carry a GP100.
LCR: Not on your list, but an easy to carry gun with a very nice trigger and that's comfortable to shoot (subjectively of course) with up to 125 gr .357 mags. Full house 158 gr are not fun.

I don't really know much about the Kimber K6S.

S&W, your options are broadly divided up into frame sizes. J, K, L, and N frame all have .357 mag offerings (listed smallest to largest). N-frames will withstand a *lot* of full house magnums. I've been kicking around picking up a 6" Model 28 for awhile now because reasons. Depending on how much you shoot, and how hot a load you shoot, you may want to avoid J and K frames. I'd think of them as .38s you can run some .357s through, but for a dedicated magnum gun I'd go with the GP100 or L/N frame S&W.

If you want to cheap it out, Taurus makes a reasonable quality revolver that mimics the S&W. Again, though, if you intend to shoot a lot of full house loads I don't know I'd go that direction.

I'm also with Liberty on avoiding the lock equipped S&W. It's rare, but they do lock up under recoil. Plus, for me, it ruins the aesthetics and any pride of ownership I would have because of the origins of the lock. Just a reminder of a dark time for gun owners.


Yeah...this too.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Outaide of the political distaste for it, how widespread is the issue of the lock causing problems?

Very very limited. But it exists: Confirmed: Smith & Wesson 686 Internal Lock Failed - The Truth About Guns

Yes, you can remove or disable it. I'd rather not go into a civil trial with a gun with a disabled "safety feature" personally. Others will think this is a non-issue. I've been sued and been through the depo process and I disagree. Anything that can be a hook to try and convince a jury you are irresponsible and dangerous will be pounced on. For a carry gun I would recommend against it.

To quote Massad Ayoob on the topic:

[FONT=&amp]I did not remove the internal lock, for the simple reason that I’ve seen a prosecutor raise hell about a deactivated safety device when trying to establish the element of recklessness that is a key ingredient in a manslaughter conviction. “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the defendant was so reckless that he DEACTIVATED A SAFETY DEVICE ON A LETHAL WEAPON, and so arrogant that he thought he knew more about the gun than the factory that made it!” That’s a mountain I’d rather not have to climb in court, nor debate in front of twelve jurors selected in part by opposing counsel for their lack of knowledge of firearms.[/FONT]

 

[Brad69]

View attachment 67024


If you you get one in Nickel the bad guys will run from the sight of it!
On the down side pimps will try to steal it!

 

[Expat]

View attachment 67024


If you you get one in Nickel the bad guys will run from the sight of it!
On the down side pimps will try to steal it!

You need some pearl handles with that...

 

[Liberty Sanders]

You need some pearl handles with that...

No, no, noooooooo! Don't you remember what Patton said about pearl handles?

 

[Expat]

No, no, noooooooo! Don't you remember what Patton said about pearl handles?

That was why I said it. He referenced a pimp trying to steal it.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

That was why I said it. He referenced a pimp trying to steal it.

 

[mmpsteve]

If you're not totally set on .357, you might consider the Ruger SP101 or GP100 in .327. It's a little softer shooting, yet powerful enough that you know you're shooting a magnum. They can shoot the 32 S&W, the 32 H&R magnum and the 327 magnum, so a lot of flexibility just like the 38/357. It's probably not the most practical in terms of ammo availability, but I just flat-out like it. I have the SP101 in 3" and GP100 in 4", and they're both quality pieces. I plan to eventually have S&W's also, but the Rugers were an affordable way to edge into the quality revolver world. Just recently picked up the new Henry carbine in .327. Life is good! Best of luck with your choices.

 

[mcapo]

......Yes, you can remove or disable it. I'd rather not go into a civil trial with a gun with a disabled "safety feature" personally. Others will think this is a non-issue. I've been sued and been through the depo process and I disagree. Anything that can be a hook to try and convince a jury you are irresponsible and dangerous will be pounced on. For a carry gun I would recommend against it.

I agree with this 100% though your opinion is worth about 1000 times mine. I don't change anything on a CCW.

The OP needs a new production Pro Series 642 no-lock for CC AND a pre-lock 686-3 or 4 for everything else.

Problem solved.

 

[Areoflyer09]

I agree with this 100% though your opinion is worth about 1000 times mine. I don't change anything on a CCW.

The OP needs a new production Pro Series 642 no-lock for CC AND a pre-lock 686-3 or 4 for everything else.

Problem solved.

Ha! Sadly the 642 is an airweight and I really don't have much interest in them. I should go edit that list, as I technically have handled and shot an airweight. Too light for my taste.

I do agree about disabling the lock though, not something I would do for a carry item. If I go the 686 route, I will most likely plan on it being a range gun with a larger barrel. Even with the shorter barrel, it's not a small revolver.

 

[throttletony]

I'm a revolver convert too.
You can find GP100s in 3" variations - wiley clapp versions, etc if that fits your idea.

For me, a 4" revolver is perfect size, but not very concealable.

Face the truth: you'll end up with at least one LARGE and one SMALL revolver eventually. So, I'd say get a 6- or 7-shot .357 w/ 4", 5", or 6" barrel. (GP100 Match Champ, regular GP100, 686, new model 66 etc are all great choices here)
THEN... as soon as budget allows buy a J-frame smith OR a Ruger LCR.

Win-Win!!

 

[Areoflyer09]

If you're not totally set on .357, you might consider the Ruger SP101 or GP100 in .327. It's a little softer shooting, yet powerful enough that you know you're shooting a magnum. They can shoot the 32 S&W, the 32 H&R magnum and the 327 magnum, so a lot of flexibility just like the 38/357. It's probably not the most practical in terms of ammo availability, but I just flat-out like it. I have the SP101 in 3" and GP100 in 4", and they're both quality pieces. I plan to eventually have S&W's also, but the Rugers were an affordable way to edge into the quality revolver world. Just recently picked up the new Henry carbine in .327. Life is good! Best of luck with your choices.

The 327 option would be fun, there is a Coonan in the safe that is the lone 38/357 in there. It needs a friend.

 

[Areoflyer09]

I'm a revolver convert too.
You can find GP100s in 3" variations - wiley clapp versions, etc if that fits your idea.

For me, a 4" revolver is perfect size, but not very concealable.

Face the truth: you'll end up with at least one LARGE and one SMALL revolver eventually. So, I'd say get a 6- or 7-shot .357 w/ 4", 5", or 6" barrel. (GP100 Match Champ, regular GP100, 686, new model 66 etc are all great choices here)
THEN... as soon as budget allows buy a J-frame smith OR a Ruger LCR.

Win-Win!!

The more I talk with people, the more I'm leaning towards this route. Start with a larger model w/a 4-6" barrel and pick up something smaller down the road. Left to my own devices though, could easily end up with one of the Kimbers. They get in your head. Should not have touched that one, not at all.

The 60 & 66 are the wild cards at the moment, they seem to fit right in the middle. Wouldn't be a bad choice either.

 

[Areoflyer09]

That made me chuckle. Value versus quality ratio? I personally prefer Ruger over S&W -

I believe in recent years that may have changed; mass production in both camps have caused some issues. That said, Ruger's customer service cannot be beat.

I'm torn on the Rugers. I like the pricing, but they feel less polished. They don't feel cheap or bad, just chunkier than ideal maybe? I don't think that's the best way to describe it, but I'm failing to find the right way to say it.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I'm torn on the Rugers. I like the pricing, but they feel less polished. They don't feel cheap or bad, just chunkier than ideal maybe? I don't think that's the best way to describe it, but I'm failing to find the right way to say it.

They are heavier, and "golden era" guns they were less polished. S&W and Colt had bluing and attention to detail Ruger didn't touch. Modern production? I disagree. Ruger improved a bit, but the majority of gap closure was from the others coming down to meet them. S&W QC isn't what it used to be and Colt...meh, shame what Colt QC is.

The current production GP100s are very consistent and, IMO, have a better trigger than anything Ruger used to pump out. The Match Champion with it's "polished" (not hand polished, some sort of tumbling process) innards has a nice feel out of the box. SP101s can still be a bit rough, but clean up easily. Not mine, but I own it's identical sibling:

That's a 3" Wiley Clapp. 3" isn't really much easier to carry than 4" for me, but some do prefer the marginal differences in balance and handling. The shorter barrel "feels" quicker on transitions, although I don't know the timer shows a real difference.

 

[Areoflyer09]

All good info BBI! Having not spent time actually shooting them, my current impressions are limited to why I’ve been able to touch at the stores. I believe my LGS has a GP100 on the rental wall so I’ll get to try that this week. I’ve gotten some time with a SW 617, really enjoyed that.

The more I look at it, the more I like that Wiley Clapp though. It’s a pretty one.

 

[Leadeye]

While I'm a Colt guy, for a first revolver it's hard to beat the GP-100.

 

[bgcatty]

Ok, Alex, I’ll take “Revolvers” for $700 +/- Clue - S&W 686 ——
Answer: What is one of the most popular and time tested revolvers in the world? That’s it - you win!!!

 

[mcapo]

Ha! Sadly the 642 is an airweight and I really don't have much interest in them. I should go edit that list, as I technically have handled and shot an airweight. Too light for my taste.

I do agree about disabling the lock though, not something I would do for a carry item. If I go the 686 route, I will most likely plan on it being a range gun with a larger barrel. Even with the shorter barrel, it's not a small revolver.

Did someone say larger?

Ban the fools, not the tools I say. wtburnette

Life's too short to put up with a crappy trigger. Birds Away

 

[Areoflyer09]

Did someone say larger?

Ban the fools, not the tools I say. wtburnette

Life's too short to put up with a crappy trigger. Birds Away

I’ve looked at that on the Smith website multiple times. It’s quite a looker and would be fantastic to shoot!