S & W J Frame vs Ruger Sp101
Are there any pluses or minuses in choosing either an S & W J Frame .357 vs Ruger SP 101 .357 in a snubbie for concealed carry or is it just choose what feels best?
0
-
The S&W is much lighter than the Ruger. If you have a good belt holster it won't be as much of an issue- but the SP101 is not really a pocket gun. If you are looking for a small 5 shot .38/.357 and comparing guns you might want to compare the S&W J frame and the Ruger LCR as that would be a closer matchup size wise. IMO the S&W J frame makes a lousy .357 mag if you get it in one of the scandium framed guns--recoil is ridiculous. One bonus point for the S&W is in their Pro line--you can get the gun that has a cylinder machined for using moon clips. You can load it with a speedloader, by hand or use moonclips for a fast reload. 0 -
J frame is going to have a much wider variety of grips and other accessories available. J-frame also has a nicer trigger out of the box, though the Ruger one certainly isn't bad, and is amenable to some tuning, if you wanted to do that.
Other than that, what Ruger 41 said. SP101 is a *little* bit heavier and will probably stand up to a longer life with thousands of full strength .357s. If you're going to carry on a belt, and intend to fire a gazillion .357s this is a reasonable consideration.
Note that the weight difference isn't that much. 2-1/4 Ruger weighs 25.5 oz. 2-1/8 Smith model 60 .357 weighs 24 ounces.
In practice, most people fire mostly .38s, the occasional .357 for practice, then carry with .357s. If you're firing mostly .38s, you'll never wear out either gun.
Don't get the Scandium .357 unless you enjoy punishing recoil. Recoil from even the all steel guns with full .357 magnum loads is "brisk", though not "crazy" like with the Scandium guns.
Not incidentally, even though I actually own a steel .357 J frame (as well as a steel .38 J frame), in practice, I *vastly* prefer to carry the aluminum alloy .38+P J frame because of its handy (and pocket carryable) 15 ounce weight. That's my all-time favorite carry gun, as its the best compromise between weight power and reliability I've yet been able to find. Recoil is more than with an all steel gun, but still manageable, especially with "full" three finger grips (rather than the stock boot grips).
All steel J frame (let alone Ruger) is pretty heavy for pocket carry.0 -
Another point, is the alloy "J" frame S & W's aren't nearly as durable as the Ruger's. I've owned both. The Ruger is built like a tank. The Model 37 I owned went out of time very shortly after I bought it, with relatively few rounds fired. The alloy frame Smith's are made to be carried a lot and fired seldom, IMHO. 0 -
I have a matched pair of Sp101's and will admit they aren't lightweights. I chose the Ruger because I wanted a gun that I could shoot as much as I wanted not a toy. 0 -
I carried and used M-36s and SP-101s for years. I found that the 3" versions of both were much easier to control, pointed more naturally, allowed for quicker recovery for follow-up shots and gave a better sight picture if needed. The extra barrel length does not present a problem for concealment, it's the butt outline that "prints" not the barrel. Now that I have entered the 20th century I am carrying a Kahr PM-9 with the Speer +p "short barrel" loads. This gives me 7 rounds with the concealment magazine and 7 more with the longer finger-rest magazine, all for less weight than the steel versions of either revolver. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by 62fuelie
I carried and used M-36s and SP-101s for years. I found that the 3" versions of both were much easier to control, pointed more naturally, allowed for quicker recovery for follow-up shots and gave a better sight picture if needed. The extra barrel length does not present a problem for concealment, it's the butt outline that "prints" not the barrel. Now that I have entered the 20TH CENTURY I am carrying a Kahr PM-9 with the Speer +p "short barrel" loads. This gives me 7 rounds with the concealment magazine and 7 more with the longer finger-rest magazine, all for less weight than the steel versions of either revolver.
You are a hundred years behind, aren't you [?][?][:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by rufe-snow
Another point, is the alloy "J" frame S & W's aren't nearly as durable as the Ruger's. I've owned both. The Ruger is built like a tank. The Model 37 I owned went out of time very shortly after I bought it, with relatively few rounds fired. The alloy frame Smith's are made to be carried a lot and fired seldom, IMHO.
The original question was about .357s, so this is getting off topic a bit. I think everyone agrees that the Scandium alloy frame .357 J frames are for masochists, only.
The original Smith model 37s from the late 1950s had pretty soft frames, as did the original aluminum frame Colts.
Both of these guns were notorious for frame stretching after a relatively small number of rounds. As you say, I'd skip these older models altogether, unless its for a "sit in a drawer and never fire" gun.
In contrast, though, the current crop of "Airweight" alloy Smith J frames are plenty strong.
Not only are they built out of a better quality alloy, but the frames themselves are a beefed-up version of the J frame designed specifically for .357s.
The newer Airweight guns have been "torture tested" with thousands of rounds of +P ammo and they hold up fine.
Anecdotally, my 637-2 probably has about 1000 rounds through it (including multiple boxes of +P ammo) and it locks up as tight as the day I got it. I give it the ultimate compliment, because this is the gun I actually carry the most, and I wouldn't do that if I didn't trust it to hold up. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another one for personal use or recommend one to someone looking for a light carry revolver.0 -
J frame 0 -
For trigger pull and lightweight go with the S&W. For durability go with the Ruger.
If possible, you may want to try both using the method of carry you plan on using and feel the difference in carry weights. That may make up your mind for you.0 -
Have shot both quite a bit. I bought a 642 a couple years ago. Very pleased with it. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments