Help decide snubnose purchase.

miscusi · January 19, 2007, 05:48 AM

I will be buying a good quality snubnosed revolver,

I have narrowed it down to the specs as follows...

.38 Special +P rated

at least 5 rounds

around 2" barrel give or take a bit

Matt stainless steel finish, I love the look.

Has a hammer, for SA/DA

Relatively light weight say 15 - 17 oz for comfortable carrying.

priced below $350 with the cheaper the better.

So after a long time of research, I figure the two models

Taurus 85 UL SS at 17oz and $266.00
S&W 637 SS at 15oz and $336.00

I'm leaning towards the taurus for its shrouded ejector rod look, and lower price but the S&W got my eye for it's brand name appeal and USA labor ideals, but the exposed ejector rod bothers me somewhat a little bit.

Is taurus a well respect brand ? Would a S&W be more accepted and respected than a taurus ? vice versa or dont make a difference ?

So what do you guys think ? or if you have a model in mind that fits these specs I never heard of, I would love the hear it !

Thanks bunches..

gunzrfunz · January 19, 2007, 06:07 AM

I have been in your position. I wanted a .38spl that could shoot the +p ammo for self defence. I wanted to go for that blued snub look of the old Humphrey Bogart movies, but wondered whether the old ones would shoot the +p. After searching post after post I found that todays factory loads are much less potent then yesteryears factory loads. So, the advice given was that todays +p factory loads are what yesteryears fl's were, and that the guns designed then[all steel] could handle a light diet of todays +p's. So I bought a S&W model 36 flat latch, circa 1963 for 300 that had been hard chromed and added some grips I bought off ebay. Here she is:

I am now waiting for a holster I bought from a forum classified and a speedloader for it as well. Somebody stop me!

PS: I went to the range and shot a dozen +p's with no problem at all.

miscusi · January 19, 2007, 06:29 AM

thanks for sharing a wonderful story gunszforfunz..

come on ppl, Lets hear your opinions !

treg · January 19, 2007, 10:27 AM

I was in a similar dilema a short time ago, saved up enough for either one. Both are quality pieces, Taurus won. The price difference bought a holster, ammo, reloading supplies etc..

vpjack · January 19, 2007, 12:26 PM

The wife just picked up the Smith a couple of days ago. Very nice little pistol. She said it fits her hand a bit better than the Taurus, which is a good idea. Which one feels best in your hand, thats the one to get.

Jack

dygaar · January 19, 2007, 01:19 PM

I went with the Taurus over the S&W for the price. They are both good weapons but, what can you do with the extra money.

Playboypenguin · January 19, 2007, 02:08 PM

The cost difference is so small that I would go for the S&W.

I own both of these guns and really like them both. But when guns are this similar in price I will almost always go with the S&W.

I like the exposed ejector rod look alot better on the S&W. It makes the gun look more refined to me.

Ichiro · January 19, 2007, 02:25 PM

You might check out the Taurus 617 and 817 -- 7-round snubbies.

cunroe · January 19, 2007, 02:32 PM

Given those options, the price-point & requirements listed and the real and empirical data readily available on both weapons, I would get the S&W. As an aside, fiscal common-sense should always be part of any procurement process but here (and with any weapon purchase IMO) I would eliminate that as a decision point. The real question is; “which do you shoot better?”

Jkwas · January 19, 2007, 03:24 PM

The exposed ejector rod used to get me spooked, and then I got a S&W Model 10 retired police weapon. I'm sure it didn't get babied. The rod is perfect. On the Smith, the rod is like an axle on a car. It locks tight at the front of the barrel and is an integral part of the cylinder action. It's one of the things I've come to appreciate about their design. It controls end-shake as well. They are both good. If you actually compare it to the Taurus CIA (the taurus copy of the 642 enclosed hammer styling) there is really not too much difference in the pricing.

taurus in stainless, not an ultralight
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/p...ducts_id/31864
Smit/Wesson 642
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/p...ducts_id/26498

Kreyzhorse · January 19, 2007, 03:54 PM

I had exactly your same decision once. With it, because I'm cheap, I went with the Taurus M85. Total mistake. Less than 200 rounds into the gun, the cylinder froze up and locked against the frame. This seems to be a fairly common issue with Taurus if you research a little. The solution was to shave the forcing cone. After that - I knew I'd never trust the Taurus with my life and sold it off. As you can imagine, I took a minor beating financially.

To replace it I bought a S&W 637. Awesome gun. Light weight and reliable as hell. No issues with it at all. I carry it with me daily and shoot a lot.

Now I'm sure you can get a bad Smith just like I got a bad Taurus, but I think the chances of getting a bad Taurus are higher than getting a bad Smith.

ATW525 · January 19, 2007, 04:01 PM

The lady of the house got a blued Taurus 85UL for Christmas and it's a great little gun. I personally have a Taurus 650 which is also a fantastic weapon. I love my S&W Mountain Gun, but when it comes to snubs I'm not sure what S&W has to offer over Taurus other than a name.

dairycreek · January 19, 2007, 04:01 PM

Based completely on my personal experience with Taurus revolvers I strongly recommend that you go with the Smith and Wesson every time. I don't want to appear to be a Taurus basher but my personal experience with them has been abysmal.

NCHornet · January 19, 2007, 04:02 PM

Have you looked at the S&W model 60? I love mine and I too would always choose the S&W over the Taurus given the price was within $75.00. The Taurus line use to be a lot less than the S&W but as time has gone on they have gotten very close.

Jkwas · January 19, 2007, 04:07 PM

This is probably all you need to know about the 642
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=138658

cunroe · January 19, 2007, 04:22 PM

Quote:

ATW525: "...but when it comes to snubs I'm not sure what S&W has to offer over Taurus other than a name."

I'm not knocking Taurus, period, nor your input (I'm nothing more than a "cut-n-paste" parrot with this response). That said, when I research/read this kind of commentary from industry respected players, I pay attention (just 1 example here). Granted all mfgrs / Smiths have their pros & cons, biases, etc., but thought this may be of interest only in response. I don't own a Taurus but if I chose to , I would be proud of it and would have bought it for a reason/given set of circumstances.

http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_...urus_work.html

Jkwas · January 19, 2007, 04:28 PM

posted in error

natjohnb · January 19, 2007, 04:56 PM

+1 for the Taurus 817.... it's .38sp +p rated, ultra-lite, and holds 7 rounds.

good shooter too...I just got one for the wife and she really likes it.

You should be able to find one for under $300

ronto · January 19, 2007, 05:08 PM

All I can say is a light-weight snubbie is not fun to shoot...That means you won't practice much...And you cannot practice enough if you plan to use it for self-defense.
That being said, I'd go with the S&W if you insist on a light-weight snubbie.

Ichiro · January 19, 2007, 05:18 PM

Quote:

+1 for the Taurus 817.... it's .38sp +p rated, ultra-lite, and holds 7 rounds.

good shooter too...I just got one for the wife and she really likes it.

You should be able to find one for under $300

How thick is the cylinder compared to a j-frame .38? I'm just starting to look into one of these for myself.

ckd · January 19, 2007, 05:20 PM

I think all the comments were on the money and would emphasize that whenever possible borrow/rent the guns in final contention. I shoot the lightweight j-frame comfortably, others do not.

Also, place it wear you will carry it, walk around the gun shop for a 1/2 hour and you'll probably appreciate the weight differences.

Unless you shoot high caliber HGs routinely and enjoy recoil, I agree that a +P rated snubby is the best choice, not much more kick than the practice 38 special rounds.

I would strongly suggest a covered or hammerless only, so you don't end up snagging on clothing -it will happen.

Let us know what you decide on. Good luck.

natjohnb · January 19, 2007, 05:34 PM

not sure on the exact specs...I'm sure that it is slightly wider than a J frame cylinder....it's Taurus' Tracker frame which I believe is considered a mid-size...but on the Taurus web site it is considered a compact I believe...

We put a 100 rounds thru it at the range and it was comfortable to shoot...It came with the "ribber" rubber grips which don't look that great but really reduce felt recoil

care-less · January 19, 2007, 06:00 PM

Based on your specs, how about a S&W 638? Lightweight, shrouded hammer that won't snag, can fire it from within a pocket, yet the action can still be cocked for single action shooting.

skeeter1 · January 19, 2007, 06:00 PM

All I can tell you is that I've had a Smith M60 since 1980, and I wouldn't give it up for anything.

Diamondback · January 19, 2007, 06:05 PM

Either one, you can't go wrong. Unboubtedly, however, the Smith with have a higher resale value. I own the little Taurus M85 SS UL and she is a pleasure in every way and often accompanies me on my daily rounds. I also own many S&W J frames in nearly every configuration. If you throw an older, used, well maintained S&W (without the internal lock) into the mix I would say, hands down buy one......the're classic. If we are talking new S&W J frame or new Taurus small frame......six of one......half a dozen of the other !

-Regards

January 19, 2007, 05:48 AM	#1
miscusi Junior member Join Date: April 2, 2006 Location: New York City Posts: 217	Help decide snubnose purchase. I will be buying a good quality snubnosed revolver, I have narrowed it down to the specs as follows... .38 Special +P rated at least 5 rounds around 2" barrel give or take a bit Matt stainless steel finish, I love the look. Has a hammer, for SA/DA Relatively light weight say 15 - 17 oz for comfortable carrying. priced below $350 with the cheaper the better. So after a long time of research, I figure the two models Taurus 85 UL SS at 17oz and $266.00 S&W 637 SS at 15oz and $336.00 I'm leaning towards the taurus for its shrouded ejector rod look, and lower price but the S&W got my eye for it's brand name appeal and USA labor ideals, but the exposed ejector rod bothers me somewhat a little bit. Is taurus a well respect brand ? Would a S&W be more accepted and respected than a taurus ? vice versa or dont make a difference ? So what do you guys think ? or if you have a model in mind that fits these specs I never heard of, I would love the hear it ! Thanks bunches..

January 19, 2007, 06:29 AM	#3
miscusi Junior member Join Date: April 2, 2006 Location: New York City Posts: 217	thanks for sharing a wonderful story gunszforfunz.. come on ppl, Lets hear your opinions ! Last edited by miscusi; January 19, 2007 at 10:29 AM.

January 19, 2007, 10:27 AM	#4
treg Senior Member Join Date: November 26, 2006 Posts: 1,102	I was in a similar dilema a short time ago, saved up enough for either one. Both are quality pieces, Taurus won. The price difference bought a holster, ammo, reloading supplies etc.. __________________ .44 Special: For those who get it, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't, no explanation is possible.

January 19, 2007, 03:24 PM	#10
Jkwas Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 2005 Location: Mouth of the Rat, Florida Posts: 1,778	The exposed ejector rod used to get me spooked, and then I got a S&W Model 10 retired police weapon. I'm sure it didn't get babied. The rod is perfect. On the Smith, the rod is like an axle on a car. It locks tight at the front of the barrel and is an integral part of the cylinder action. It's one of the things I've come to appreciate about their design. It controls end-shake as well. They are both good. If you actually compare it to the Taurus CIA (the taurus copy of the 642 enclosed hammer styling) there is really not too much difference in the pricing. taurus in stainless, not an ultralight http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/p...ducts_id/31864 Smit/Wesson 642 http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/p...ducts_id/26498 __________________ I grew up in New Jersey, but later moved to Florida and made a complete recovery. Keltec: The BIC lighter of handguns http://jkwasblog.blogspot.com/

January 19, 2007, 04:01 PM	#13
dairycreek Senior Member Join Date: November 30, 1998 Location: North Plains, Oregon, USA Posts: 1,867	Based completely on my personal experience with Taurus revolvers I strongly recommend that you go with the Smith and Wesson every time. I don't want to appear to be a Taurus basher but my personal experience with them has been abysmal. __________________ ALWAYS PROTECT YOUR HEARING AND VISION GOOD SHOOTING

January 19, 2007, 06:07 AM	#2
gunzrfunz Junior member Join Date: November 11, 2006 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 120	I have been in your position. I wanted a .38spl that could shoot the +p ammo for self defence. I wanted to go for that blued snub look of the old Humphrey Bogart movies, but wondered whether the old ones would shoot the +p. After searching post after post I found that todays factory loads are much less potent then yesteryears factory loads. So, the advice given was that todays +p factory loads are what yesteryears fl's were, and that the guns designed then[all steel] could handle a light diet of todays +p's. So I bought a S&W model 36 flat latch, circa 1963 for 300 that had been hard chromed and added some grips I bought off ebay. Here she is: I am now waiting for a holster I bought from a forum classified and a speedloader for it as well. Somebody stop me! PS: I went to the range and shot a dozen +p's with no problem at all.

January 19, 2007, 12:26 PM	#5
vpjack Member Join Date: July 14, 2006 Posts: 43	The wife just picked up the Smith a couple of days ago. Very nice little pistol. She said it fits her hand a bit better than the Taurus, which is a good idea. Which one feels best in your hand, thats the one to get. Jack

January 19, 2007, 01:19 PM	#6
dygaar Junior Member Join Date: February 22, 2006 Posts: 2	I went with the Taurus over the S&W for the price. They are both good weapons but, what can you do with the extra money.

January 19, 2007, 02:08 PM	#7
Playboypenguin Junior member Join Date: February 27, 2006 Location: Great Pacific Northwest Posts: 11,515	The cost difference is so small that I would go for the S&W. I own both of these guns and really like them both. But when guns are this similar in price I will almost always go with the S&W. I like the exposed ejector rod look alot better on the S&W. It makes the gun look more refined to me.

January 19, 2007, 02:25 PM	#8
Ichiro Senior Member Join Date: July 16, 2005 Location: Minnesota Posts: 888	You might check out the Taurus 617 and 817 -- 7-round snubbies.

January 19, 2007, 02:32 PM	#9
cunroe Member Join Date: January 15, 2007 Posts: 39	Given those options, the price-point & requirements listed and the real and empirical data readily available on both weapons, I would get the S&W. As an aside, fiscal common-sense should always be part of any procurement process but here (and with any weapon purchase IMO) I would eliminate that as a decision point. The real question is; “which do you shoot better?”

January 19, 2007, 03:54 PM	#11
Kreyzhorse Senior Member Join Date: April 12, 2006 Location: NKY Posts: 12,463	I had exactly your same decision once. With it, because I'm cheap, I went with the Taurus M85. Total mistake. Less than 200 rounds into the gun, the cylinder froze up and locked against the frame. This seems to be a fairly common issue with Taurus if you research a little. The solution was to shave the forcing cone. After that - I knew I'd never trust the Taurus with my life and sold it off. As you can imagine, I took a minor beating financially. To replace it I bought a S&W 637. Awesome gun. Light weight and reliable as hell. No issues with it at all. I carry it with me daily and shoot a lot. Now I'm sure you can get a bad Smith just like I got a bad Taurus, but I think the chances of getting a bad Taurus are higher than getting a bad Smith.

January 19, 2007, 04:01 PM	#12
ATW525 Senior Member Join Date: March 14, 2005 Location: Concord, NH Posts: 2,723	The lady of the house got a blued Taurus 85UL for Christmas and it's a great little gun. I personally have a Taurus 650 which is also a fantastic weapon. I love my S&W Mountain Gun, but when it comes to snubs I'm not sure what S&W has to offer over Taurus other than a name.

January 19, 2007, 04:02 PM	#14
NCHornet Senior Member Join Date: December 20, 2006 Posts: 1,001	Have you looked at the S&W model 60? I love mine and I too would always choose the S&W over the Taurus given the price was within $75.00. The Taurus line use to be a lot less than the S&W but as time has gone on they have gotten very close. __________________ When seconds count, the cops are just minutes away!! Carry ON!! NCHornet

January 19, 2007, 04:07 PM	#15
Jkwas Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 2005 Location: Mouth of the Rat, Florida Posts: 1,778	This is probably all you need to know about the 642 http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=138658 __________________ I grew up in New Jersey, but later moved to Florida and made a complete recovery. Keltec: The BIC lighter of handguns http://jkwasblog.blogspot.com/

January 19, 2007, 04:28 PM	#17
Jkwas Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 2005 Location: Mouth of the Rat, Florida Posts: 1,778	posted in error __________________ I grew up in New Jersey, but later moved to Florida and made a complete recovery. Keltec: The BIC lighter of handguns http://jkwasblog.blogspot.com/

January 19, 2007, 04:56 PM	#18
natjohnb Senior Member Join Date: December 18, 2006 Location: Michigan Posts: 508	+1 for the Taurus 817.... it's .38sp +p rated, ultra-lite, and holds 7 rounds. good shooter too...I just got one for the wife and she really likes it. You should be able to find one for under $300

January 19, 2007, 05:08 PM	#19
ronto Senior Member Join Date: January 5, 2007 Location: Smack Dab in the Middle of Nowhere. Posts: 505	All I can say is a light-weight snubbie is not fun to shoot...That means you won't practice much...And you cannot practice enough if you plan to use it for self-defense. That being said, I'd go with the S&W if you insist on a light-weight snubbie.

January 19, 2007, 05:20 PM	#21
ckd Senior Member Join Date: January 17, 2007 Posts: 249	I think all the comments were on the money and would emphasize that whenever possible borrow/rent the guns in final contention. I shoot the lightweight j-frame comfortably, others do not. Also, place it wear you will carry it, walk around the gun shop for a 1/2 hour and you'll probably appreciate the weight differences. Unless you shoot high caliber HGs routinely and enjoy recoil, I agree that a +P rated snubby is the best choice, not much more kick than the practice 38 special rounds. I would strongly suggest a covered or hammerless only, so you don't end up snagging on clothing -it will happen. Let us know what you decide on. Good luck.

January 19, 2007, 05:34 PM	#22
natjohnb Senior Member Join Date: December 18, 2006 Location: Michigan Posts: 508	not sure on the exact specs...I'm sure that it is slightly wider than a J frame cylinder....it's Taurus' Tracker frame which I believe is considered a mid-size...but on the Taurus web site it is considered a compact I believe... We put a 100 rounds thru it at the range and it was comfortable to shoot...It came with the "ribber" rubber grips which don't look that great but really reduce felt recoil

January 19, 2007, 06:00 PM	#23
care-less Senior Member Join Date: June 6, 2004 Posts: 127	Based on your specs, how about a S&W 638? Lightweight, shrouded hammer that won't snag, can fire it from within a pocket, yet the action can still be cocked for single action shooting.

January 19, 2007, 06:00 PM	#24
skeeter1 Senior Member Join Date: April 11, 2006 Location: Northeast Ohio Posts: 3,403	All I can tell you is that I've had a Smith M60 since 1980, and I wouldn't give it up for anything.

January 19, 2007, 06:05 PM	#25
Diamondback Member Join Date: May 20, 2004 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 91	Either one, you can't go wrong. Unboubtedly, however, the Smith with have a higher resale value. I own the little Taurus M85 SS UL and she is a pleasure in every way and often accompanies me on my daily rounds. I also own many S&W J frames in nearly every configuration. If you throw an older, used, well maintained S&W (without the internal lock) into the mix I would say, hands down buy one......the're classic. If we are talking new S&W J frame or new Taurus small frame......six of one......half a dozen of the other ! -Regards