View Single Post
Old March 21, 2013, 09:04 AM   #17
Senior Member
Join Date: September 20, 2009
Location: SC Missouri
Posts: 511

That to me would first be the 2" Model 10, 2" Model 15, and 2" Model 64. The all steel K frames are way more shootable than a J Frame. Also way more pleasant to shoot.
Another K Frame option would be a 2" Model 12, and the now discontinued 315 Night Guard with a 2.5" Barrel.

In a J Frame Shootable to me means STEEL. The Model 60, 36, 49, 649, and 640 come to mind. I would probably put the 640 on the toip of my list. As a matter of fact it is, because I do not own a steel J Frame at the moment either.

In an airweight J Frame I like the PRO Model 442's the best in a current production model. I could live with a 438 also. After owning the SS Looking Airweight J, an sell as the Black version, I am of the opinion the finish is more durable on the current production Black J Frame Airweights.

My all purpose 38 Load is a 158 Round Nose Lead over 5.0 off Unique. This is my Defensive Pistol/Steel Challange Load.
I do not shoot this load in my 442 at all.

My 442 load is a 125 Round Nose lead over a Minimum Book Load (2.7 grains) of Clays. This is my BUG Match Load. It shoots close enough to point of aim in a Defensive Pistol Match to get the job done.

Shooting the BUG Match has brought it to my attention that I need a more shootable J Frame, or an SP101 (STEEL). I guess I could also go the Snub K Route also. I have J Frame Jet Loaders, as well as K Frame Safariland Comp III Speed Loaders, so I can make either option work. I also make Kydex Speed Loader carriers for the J Jet Loader, as well as K and L Safariland Comp III's. So J Frame Carriers are not an issue either.

In My Opiniom:
So either a J or K Frame Steel Snub should work for you. In a good holster either will carry very well. The real issue is what are you going to use it for? As a Range Gun the K Snub is way ahead. If Concealed Carry is a big priority the J Frame is ahead by a little.

Good Hunting

Viper225 is offline  
Page generated in 0.04158 seconds with 7 queries