Are Snub-Nose Revolvers Obsolete in 2026? (Page 5 of 5)
|
Obsolete, Something no longer in use, outdated or replaced by newer more efficient technology. That is the definition in the dictionary. By that definition, yes, they are obsolete, but like so many things, the answer becomes " It depends ". For modern police and military use, yes, they are most certainly obsolete. Modern auto pistols, even the concealable compacts and sub compacts deliver more, faster with faster reloads. They suffer only in that ammunition must be within their operational tolerances, and nearly all commercial ammo is within those tolerances. Police and military more frequently encounter situations and threats may well require quantity over quality to prevail. It really is their job to seek out, find trouble and neutralize it. For the private citizen, probably not obsolete. They are easy to carry, easy to use, and safe in a variety of carry methods common to private citizens. IWB, purse carry, pocket carry etc. No manual safety to worry about, no relying on a dingus that was originally meant only to be a drop safety, generally reliable, and statistically enough rounds to stop an attacker from attacking you. In addition, revolvers work with a wider variety of ammunition anomalies like snake shot if the threat is snakes, or bear loads if the threat is bears and a whole lot of in between, without the need to tweak the gun for the ammo. In this sense, a compact revolver may well be a viable option. The idea that we may face international terrorists and are going to John Wick our way out of it, is a Walter Mitty level fantasy and it's not going to happen. The Powway terrorist attack was stopped with an Arfcommers 2" .38 J frame. I started policing 40 years ago. As a detective in the late 80s, early 90s, I was issued a 2" .38 J frame. I being a gun guy, considered it obsolete, but never encountered a threat that it could not solve. As a patrol officer, and later supervisor, I was pretty glad a couple of times to be carrying that wonder 9 and did encounter situations where that .38 would have been inadequate. It's a matter of tool for the job and what you will likely face in the course of business. Now as a retiree who's days of chasing bad men into dark places are firmly in the rearview mirror, I feel pretty comfortable leaving my Glocks at home and carrying that 2" J sized .357 ( Taurus 605 stainless) most of the time. It's versatile. I may be at the mall in the morning, and finish the day on a bean field frequented by black bears by the afternoon. It's relatively light weight, even though about the same as my 43x, but for reasons unknown to me, does not trip my lower back arthritis the way the Glock does. As to accuracy and the abilities of the revolver, they are as accurate as you are. With training, you should be able to adequately engage any reasonable threat to any distance it is a threat. If you can't do that, it's on you. Train and know your weapon or you've got no business carrying it. I've regularly shoot Ohio's full course of fire with both the 2" .357 and even a keltec P32. Even the old harder course of fire out to 25 yards. That's an objective standard set by the state for peace officers. Could I shoot the Glock with optics better on the same course with faster times and smaller groups, Yes, but with the .357 snubby I am still within the standard ( I think on LEOSA qual I had one hit just on the edge of the preferred area weak hand ). As always, YMMV, you pays your money you takes your chances, but only you can decide what works best for you. |
Trusting your life to the benevolence of an armed criminal is not a strategy, it is stupid!
| I'm a big believer in "don't fix it if it works", and while I would much prefer to carry a high capacity 9mm or 45acp, I would much rather have a snub nose revolver than just a stick, or nothing at all. If it works, it isn't obsolete, and I believe that a snub nose revolver would work just fine at putting holes into a threat. Especially something like a 44 special... |
|
Originally Posted By shotar: Obsolete, Something no longer in use, outdated or replaced by newer more efficient technology. That is the definition in the dictionary. By that definition, yes, they are obsolete, but like so many things, the answer becomes " It depends ". For modern police and military use, yes, they are most certainly obsolete. Modern auto pistols, even the concealable compacts and sub compacts deliver more, faster with faster reloads. They suffer only in that ammunition must be within their operational tolerances, and nearly all commercial ammo is within those tolerances. Police and military more frequently encounter situations and threats may well require quantity over quality to prevail. It really is their job to seek out, find trouble and neutralize it. For the private citizen, probably not obsolete. They are easy to carry, easy to use, and safe in a variety of carry methods common to private citizens. IWB, purse carry, pocket carry etc. No manual safety to worry about, no relying on a dingus that was originally meant only to be a drop safety, generally reliable, and statistically enough rounds to stop an attacker from attacking you. In addition, revolvers work with a wider variety of ammunition anomalies like snake shot if the threat is snakes, or bear loads if the threat is bears and a whole lot of in between, without the need to tweak the gun for the ammo. In this sense, a compact revolver may well be a viable option. The idea that we may face international terrorists and are going to John Wick our way out of it, is a Walter Mitty level fantasy and it's not going to happen. The Powway terrorist attack was stopped with an Arfcommers 2" .38 J frame. I started policing 40 years ago. As a detective in the late 80s, early 90s, I was issued a 2" .38 J frame. I being a gun guy, considered it obsolete, but never encountered a threat that it could not solve. As a patrol officer, and later supervisor, I was pretty glad a couple of times to be carrying that wonder 9 and did encounter situations where that .38 would have been inadequate. It's a matter of tool for the job and what you will likely face in the course of business. Now as a retiree who's days of chasing bad men into dark places are firmly in the rearview mirror, I feel pretty comfortable leaving my Glocks at home and carrying that 2" J sized .357 ( Taurus 605 stainless) most of the time. It's versatile. I may be at the mall in the morning, and finish the day on a bean field frequented by black bears by the afternoon. It's relatively light weight, even though about the same as my 43x, but for reasons unknown to me, does not trip my lower back arthritis the way the Glock does. As to accuracy and the abilities of the revolver, they are as accurate as you are. With training, you should be able to adequately engage any reasonable threat to any distance it is a threat. If you can't do that, it's on you. Train and know your weapon or you've got no business carrying it. I've regularly shoot Ohio's full course of fire with both the 2" .357 and even a keltec P32. Even the old harder course of fire out to 25 yards. That's an objective standard set by the state for peace officers. Could I shoot the Glock with optics better on the same course with faster times and smaller groups, Yes, but with the .357 snubby I am still within the standard ( I think on LEOSA qual I had one hit just on the edge of the preferred area weak hand ). As always, YMMV, you pays your money you takes your chances, but only you can decide what works best for you. Well said. Obsolete is a poor choice of words to ask the question of whether or not it is the best tool for a particular job? It's like this recent trend of describing everything on social media as "insane". We are living in an idiocracy and it's getting worse every day. As a bit of a side story, some agencies teach shooters not to ride the trigger reset. This is because with certain handguns, you can foul the action by doing so. It is universally true that you will not cause your own malfunction by allowing the trigger to travel its full range of motion. You must know the context of the origin of TTPs (techniques, tactics, and procedures) to understand how to apply them. |
"I will leave when I have your wounded." MAJ Kelly
|
Attached File Attached File Old trusty was treated to a new pair of grips. |
Know Guns, Know Peace, Know Safety...No Guns, No Peace, No Safety
Don't like what I see happening in the world.
Joined:
Aug 2010
Posts:
793
EE: 100% (38)
USA
|
Years ago, I talked to an actual hitman for various racketeering organizations at work one night. Old school pro, real guy. I asked "how come I read in the investigation reports, all the serious guys are still using revolvers in this day and age?". He smiles, prosecutor; "Mr Smith, how many shots did you fire at the victim?". "How many shells did yas find?". He went on to say "they're cleaner, cheaper, and if you do your job right you don't need any more bullets than that". It was a fun conversation. |
Something clever belongs here.
| https://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/2842456_No-lock-Smith-J-frame-in-9x19mm.html |
I sell firearms produced by the finest child labor in the world, be it Filipino, Muslim, Mormon, Arizonan, or Texan.
|
I think obsolete is a little bit strong. They are still useful for sure and better than not being armed. But I hate to admit it they really dont make any sense objectively. I think there is basically only two scenarios where a small snub nose has an advantage. If you REALLY need these two benefits then one might make sense for you. One of the only really arguments is that they can be fired from inside a pocket. It wont fail if it is in contact with something while being fired. But if someone grabs it during a struggle and the cylinder wont turn and you wont even get one shot off. There are so many ways to argue both sides of this. A semi auto in a struggle you get one shot off but then fails to cycle. If you get it free for a moment you now have to clear a malfunction which average people (me included) probably wont be able to do under stress. The revolver MIGHT be unusable in a struggle if someone clamps their hand around it. But the moment it is free it functions fine and isnt "jamed". The only other advantage of a snub nose is that they do pocket carry OK. Kind of big but a nice round shape rather than a brick. One more advantage that a revolver has,(not just snubby) is that you can hand it to anyone and they can shoot it. Not well, but it will go bang. In a bad situation, if you HAD to hand it to your wife and say "point it and pull the trigger" a revolver will make sense to a untrained person. No mag releases to bump, no slide to hit your hand and miss cycle, no slide lock to bump. But this is a unusual case and really a revolver/semi discussion. But I will say that I personally had to do this with my 642 that was in my center consoled one time with my wife. After that incident my wife asked to learned to shoot and preferred the G19/G26. She HATED the 642. Also revolvers are not ALWAYS 100% reliable. I carried a 642 pocket carry for years in a kydex pocket holster. I also carried a 686 in a chest holster in the woods. Both are dirty environments. Both guns were 100% reliable for me. But both guns would get a fair amount of dirt and junk in them over time in all the small workings. They both took more time to clean than my Glocks. They have a lot of small moving parts inside that wouldn't do well with junk in them. I carried the 686 while fly fishing. If I took a swim in the river I would have broken that gun down ASAP and totally cleaned it. If i fell in the river with my glock I would have felt fine with a field strip and a good soaking in CLP. After years of pocket carry my 642 finish looked like crap. it did work fine but it didnt like the moisture and sweet. I stripped it often and cleaned the insides often. In contrast, in my youth I kept a G19 in my trunk as a back up. Left it there for years. At one point I found out my trunk was leaking and the G19 had been sitting in a wet towel for a 6 moths. Laterally one small internal spring had a slight brown color to it. Just trying to describe how I FEEL that a snub nose can be reliable but still have maintenance needs different from a modern semi. The new semis are so reliable they work fine in dirty environments. Most of the dirt stays on the outsides of a semi. Some how I alwasy fint dust, dirt and grit on the inside of a carried revolver. Probably finding its way in around the hammer or the hand. Modern semi autos have gotten very very reliable, very small, cheap and very shootable. 9mm ammo has also gotten very good. They are also so much easier to shoot, lighter and hold double the capacity. A five shot gun with DOA trigger and no rear sight just doesnt make sense. Take all this with a grain of salt. Back before all the good small 9mms came out, yes the snub nose made sense. There were a lot of good shooters that took the time to practice with a snubby and become very good. Those guys are amazing and should probably stick with a snubby because they are comfortable with it and deadly with it. A guy that is skilled with a snubby is no joke. But if you are starting from scratch today and put in the same practice with a snubby or a small 9mm I think you would get much better quicker with a semi. I just got another snubby to add back into the rotation. I still like them and they have a place. But I think it is a very small case scenario. Even for my needs if I would probably have been better served if i could have found a sub compact, hammer fired DOA 9mm. But I just wanted a snubby. PS, another benefit is that some peoples hands are too weak or old to manipulate a slide. then a revolver or tip up barrel like a Beretta 21/950 has merit. PPS, Let me also say this. I used to "collect guns". Had all sorts of fun C&R stuff along with practical stuff. Then I got smart and trimmed it all down to only practical stuff i needed. Now as I have gotten older I got "smart" again (sarcasm). I realized you need the practical stuff and you need to practice with it. But there is no harm at all in owning something just because you want it. Life is short. If you want a revolver just because it is fun get it. I dont even try to convince my self it is a rational option. I am happy to simple say it makes me smile. |
|
Originally Posted By 18B30: Yes, just as the 1911 is obsolete for cops and military use....... I think the 1911 is a good analogy to the revolver. Is there any GOOD PRACTICOL reason in the world to choose a 1911 over a good modern pistol at this point? No. But if you shoot it well, enjoy it, are comfortable with it or like it then it will 100% get the job done. But I think it is silly for people to try to pretend the revolver or 1911 is a logical equivalent. Not saying that you were or were not saying that. All I am really saying is that apples to apples. Take 100 people that have not shot and give them a 1911 or 686, and give them a G17. Which gun are they going to score better with and be able to better defend themselves with. Obviously if you personally shoot a 1911 well then that is what you should use. I love my 1911 and shoot it very well. I would personally be VERY happy with it if it was my one and only gun. But I cant say that really makes it equal to a modern striker fired high capacity pistol. |
|
Originally Posted By airgunner: Define “obsolete”? In 2026 can a snub nose revolver still be an effective tool for those that choose to carry them and know how to use them? Yes. in 2026 are there arguably better options? Generally speaking... also yes IMO. well put |
|
Originally Posted By dfariswheel: I've carried a Kahr Arms K9 since the 90's as my all the time CCW, but I still keep these Model 66's always in reserve. They can more then still deliver the goods. An old homicide cop once told me that these were known as "water guns", because when the bad guy saw what you were aiming at him, his insides turned to water..... https://i.imgur.com/b3AxgPl.jpg I want a Model 66 with a 3" (2.75" or whatever it is) barrel so bad. It has no practical use in my collection compared to what I already have. But I just want one. I think it is the last of the revolvers that really calls to me. I wanted a stainless J frame for years and finally picked up a Model 60. it makes no sense to have a 5 shot revolver that weights as much as my G26. But i love it. |
|
Originally Posted By dana: I think there is basically only two scenarios where a small snub nose has an advantage. If you REALLY need these two benefits then one might make sense for you. One of the only really arguments is that they can be fired from inside a pocket. The only other advantage of a snub nose is that they do pocket carry OK. Kind of big but a nice round shape rather than a brick. These have been mentioned by other people in this thread but you've ignored them. 1) Shotshells, this time of year and the place I live and the places I work, 1 or 2 shotshells are always in the gun. I killed one rattler right beside a lady's house last month. Shotshells with eye protection is about as harmless yet deadly as we can have for under the porch, cars, etc. I carried and used shot shells in semi's for a long time but now, when I go inside and want real ammo in the gun a revolver is so easy to change out those 1 or 2 rounds. 2) Top end non expanding ammo for animals. A revolver cares not a bit about blunt, large meplat bullet designs intended for deep penetration on larger animals. And will digest it right after a wimpy shot shell because the shooter cycles the gun not the ammo. Those things matter none to the majority of city dwellers but a lot of us are out here in the sticks. |
|
Originally Posted By dana: I think the 1911 is a good analogy to the revolver. Is there any GOOD PRACTICOL reason in the world to choose a 1911 over a good modern pistol at this point? No. But if you shoot it well, enjoy it, are comfortable with it or like it then it will 100% get the job done. But I think it is silly for people to try to pretend the revolver or 1911 is a logical equivalent. Not saying that you were or were not saying that. All I am really saying is that apples to apples. Take 100 people that have not shot and give them a 1911 or 686, and give them a G17. Which gun are they going to score better with and be able to better defend themselves with. Obviously if you personally shoot a 1911 well then that is what you should use. I love my 1911 and shoot it very well. I would personally be VERY happy with it if it was my one and only gun. But I cant say that really makes it equal to a modern striker fired high capacity pistol. Originally Posted By dana: Originally Posted By 18B30: Yes, just as the 1911 is obsolete for cops and military use....... I think the 1911 is a good analogy to the revolver. Is there any GOOD PRACTICOL reason in the world to choose a 1911 over a good modern pistol at this point? No. But if you shoot it well, enjoy it, are comfortable with it or like it then it will 100% get the job done. But I think it is silly for people to try to pretend the revolver or 1911 is a logical equivalent. Not saying that you were or were not saying that. All I am really saying is that apples to apples. Take 100 people that have not shot and give them a 1911 or 686, and give them a G17. Which gun are they going to score better with and be able to better defend themselves with. Obviously if you personally shoot a 1911 well then that is what you should use. I love my 1911 and shoot it very well. I would personally be VERY happy with it if it was my one and only gun. But I cant say that really makes it equal to a modern striker fired high capacity pistol. I think you will find folks will shoot a heavy 9mm single action 1911 at a range better than they will the staple gun trigger of a G17 - and will shoot a G17 better than a DAO 9mm revolver of any size. Not to say someone isn't better armed w/ a G17 - but scores depend on practice and good triggers. |
I forgot if I posted  But no. They're not  M66-8 aiwb revolver drils |
Do Good
Be Dangerous
Live Free
Be Dangerous
Live Free
|
And for those that don't want to add a caliber you can get the Ruger LCR in 9mm. I don't trust reloads in moon clips to not be bent while carrying so I carry a speed strip for my reload. I don't carry more than one reload so the fact that second set of cases have to be hand picked out of the cylinder is irrelevant to me. The cool thing about the initial load being in a moon clip is that you don't have to worry about a case being stuck under the ejection star or even sticking really. In my experience, and everyone is different, 9mm carry ammo, I have 124 Gold Dots in mine, feels about like 38 P+ and 9mm 115 training ammo is pleasant to shoot. By sticking with 9mm you are also at the peak of defensive handgun ammo development. I'm perfectly happy carrying 38 P+ 135 Gold Dots or 158 LSWHP (the old FBI load) but I think we can agree that 38 and 357 defensive ammo hasn't had the same attention as 9mm by the major manufactures for quite a while. |
|
Originally Posted By sharps54: And for those that don't want to add a caliber you can get the Ruger LCR in 9mm. I don't trust reloads in moon clips to not be bent while carrying so I carry a speed strip for my reload. I don't carry more than one reload so the fact that second set of cases have to be hand picked out of the cylinder is irrelevant to me. The cool thing about the initial load being in a moon clip is that you don't have to worry about a case being stuck under the ejection star or even sticking really. In my experience, and everyone is different, 9mm carry ammo, I have 124 Gold Dots in mine, feels about like 38 P+ and 9mm 115 training ammo is pleasant to shoot. By sticking with 9mm you are also at the peak of defensive handgun ammo development. I'm perfectly happy carrying 38 P+ 135 Gold Dots or 158 LSWHP (the old FBI load) but I think we can agree that 38 and 357 defensive ammo hasn't had the same attention as 9mm by the major manufactures for quite a while. Try steel case - it'll stick. .38 Special, even +P, just doesn't seem to have the energy budget to get reliable expansion & penetration to 12" in calibrated organic ballistic gel from a 2" barrel. 4" .38 & 2" .357 does fine. The recoil from my all steel SP101 was enough that after 5 cylinders of practice I was done w/ that revolver for the day. I am recoil sensitive, I don't see how someone enjoys 9x19mm from a lightweight LCR. |
|
Originally Posted By sharps54: And for those that don't want to add a caliber you can get the Ruger LCR in 9mm. I don't trust reloads in moon clips to not be bent while carrying so I carry a speed strip for my reload. I don't carry more than one reload so the fact that second set of cases have to be hand picked out of the cylinder is irrelevant to me. The cool thing about the initial load being in a moon clip is that you don't have to worry about a case being stuck under the ejection star or even sticking really. In my experience, and everyone is different, 9mm carry ammo, I have 124 Gold Dots in mine, feels about like 38 P+ and 9mm 115 training ammo is pleasant to shoot. By sticking with 9mm you are also at the peak of defensive handgun ammo development. I'm perfectly happy carrying 38 P+ 135 Gold Dots or 158 LSWHP (the old FBI load) but I think we can agree that 38 and 357 defensive ammo hasn't had the same attention as 9mm by the major manufactures for quite a while. .357 doesn't need any more development.................choose any decent .357 full power SJHP and it'll do the job if you do your job in making a good CM hit. Now .38 SPL, yes, I'd love to see more development but I have multiple boxes of treasury load [Winchester] +P+ ammo and I'd bet it would work just fine if, God forbid, I had to use it in self defense. |
Liberals are a curious mix of communism and fascism, they want to destroy you but want to use your own money to do it.
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
Joined:
Dec 2022
Posts:
8054
EE: 0% (0)
USA
|
Originally Posted By dfariswheel: I've carried a Kahr Arms K9 since the 90's as my all the time CCW, but I still keep these Model 66's always in reserve. They can more then still deliver the goods. An old homicide cop once told me that these were known as "water guns", because when the bad guy saw what you were aiming at him, his insides turned to water..... https://i.imgur.com/b3AxgPl.jpg The Model 66 I had in 1986 was the Easiest carry piece I ever had!! I loved that Pistol!! |
|
Originally Posted By sharps54: By sticking with 9mm you are also at the peak of defensive handgun ammo development. I'm perfectly happy carrying 38 P+ 135 Gold Dots or 158 LSWHP (the old FBI load) but I think we can agree that 38 and 357 defensive ammo hasn't had the same attention as 9mm by the major manufactures for quite a while. I really wouldn't agree with that. 357 mag, available now, ranges from hard cast non expanding, Barnes XPB, the old (but great) XTP, Federal HST, Swift A frames....... Jackrabbits to big bears and everything in between  . |
|
An autoloader has to feed the bullet into the mechanism. A revolver does not. A flying can of soup-shaped wadcutter in 38 special at 700 fps does a whole lot more of effective killing than a round nose FMJ 9mm does at 1000 fps. But a cylinder shaped bullet will not feed in an autoloader (except for the Smith 52). I would argue that the revolver does not need as much bullet technology development as an auto. The right load matched to the right barrel length usually is enough. FWIW I don't like snubs in 357 or 327. Nuclear overkill. |
Don't be so open-minded that your brains fall out.
General education should not be mere job training, but training in how to be fully human.
General education should not be mere job training, but training in how to be fully human.
|
Originally Posted By sharps54: And for those that don't want to add a caliber you can get the Ruger LCR in 9mm. I don't trust reloads in moon clips to not be bent while carrying so I carry a speed strip for my reload. I don't carry more than one reload so the fact that second set of cases have to be hand picked out of the cylinder is irrelevant to me. The cool thing about the initial load being in a moon clip is that you don't have to worry about a case being stuck under the ejection star or even sticking really. In my experience, and everyone is different, 9mm carry ammo, I have 124 Gold Dots in mine, feels about like 38 P+ and 9mm 115 training ammo is pleasant to shoot. By sticking with 9mm you are also at the peak of defensive handgun ammo development. I'm perfectly happy carrying 38 P+ 135 Gold Dots or 158 LSWHP (the old FBI load) but I think we can agree that 38 and 357 defensive ammo hasn't had the same attention as 9mm by the major manufactures for quite a while. Good moon clips are plenty rugged. Just carry them in a good case. Good 9mm isnt peak at anything. Its barely marginal and good enough. .357 didn't need the attention. It was always awesome. |
Do Good
Be Dangerous
Live Free
Be Dangerous
Live Free
|
Originally Posted By Fordtough25: Snubbies are great, my 642 is so easy for a quick trip in town. And when it’s nasty hot and wearing shorts the 340pd feels like nothing in the pocket! Ran my 351C yesterday in pants pocket, played back up to a Super 38 but I’d have no quals relying on a snubby, |