Looking at smaller framed revolvers with 3 to 5 inch barrels.

Ruger SP101 4 inch, Smith 3" Model 60 or Model 60 Pro, or Smith 4.25" Model 66 (though maybe bigger than I want).

Any thoughts?

Any others I ought to consider?

quote:

Ruger SP101 4 inch

This I been tempted to add one to my handgun tool box for awhile.

I've played quite a bit with a 60 Pro. Really accurate, really small, great trigger.

Normally I want a bit more horsepower than a .357, but if you want a smaller .357 it's hard to go wrong with a 60 Pro.

X2 but then I always have been a S+W fan.

Can't go wrong with a Ruger. I have been very pleased with mine.

The SP101 is built like a small tank. When in the business, I spoke with numerous ranchers and horse folks who just made sure one was handy to settle virtually all eventualities.

If you run a full octane 357 in any of these small 357, 180 grains 1400 fps out of a 6 inch barrel, you are going to have a bucking horse to hold down.

I had a 357 sp101 with 2 inch barrel. Built like a tank, but with decent 357 mag lids it still was hell to hold. The lighter and smaller Smith’s must be worse.

Out of those options take the Ruger. If you are only going to be shooting 38 special then it does not matter.

Oh, and do not just shoot 38s and carry real 357s. You want to be proficient and accustomed to the stuff you are betting on. Accuracy at intended ranges is not an issue. It is the difference in how the firearms reacts to the magnum and recoil you get that is vast difference.

The 66 is to big for what you need a revolver for. I own both the SP101 and the S&W 60 Pro. Pretty sure the SP is heavier. I don't concern myself with the argument the Ruger will last longer. Been shooting both brands since the middle 1970's and to this date never had to send either back to the factory for being out of time, etc.
Rugers are notorious for mediocre to bad triggers out of the box. S&W's are just the opposite.
My opinion is go with the Pro. It might be a shade more money upfront but you are going to have to spend cash on upgrading the Ruger at some point if you like a precise trigger.

Have you considered the S&W 69 in 44 mag? Its a compact 5 shot. And if you reload pretty easy to load it down.

I think I want a 4" barrel for shooting dynamics and velocity potential. And sight plane. Any thoughts on this? They made the Smith J frame in 5" at one point, didn't they?

Trying to get significantly lighter than my Mountain Gun. Plus I just really like the look and feel of the small frame revolvers.

To be clear on my point, it is not a strength issue with the Smiths. I do not shoot that much. The issue is light guns and sear, wrist torquing recoil.

The only thing worse is my 454 Casuall.

4 inch barrel has to be better than the 2 inch I had. Simply, gets the blast a little further away.

They did make a five inch J frame in the single digit 2000s, maybe before that.

SP101 and Model 60 are about 1/4 pound different for weight (23.2 for 3" Smith, 23.4 oz for 3" Smith Pro, to 27 oz for 3" Ruger and 29oz for 4.2" Ruger). There's a 1/2 to 3/4 pound step up to the K frame (36.9 oz for 4.25" model 66).

I was surprised that the L frame 44 (model 69) is within an ounce (37.4 oz) of the K frame. I think my tapered barrel Model 29 mountain gun is 43.5 oz.

I have an SP101 with a 3" barrel and it's wonderful choice, even with heavy 180gr. loads.

Rnovi, any idea of the velocity you get with the 180's and 3 inch barrel?

S&W guys, any thoughts on the model 60 pro vs the plain vanilla model 60? Slightly prefer the round barrel contour, but like the wood grip and night sights on the 60 pro.

What is a trail gun? Is it something to fend off big bad animals? Finish off wounded animals? Kill small game? If I wanted to shoot accurately I would want something with adjustable sights, but generally these only come with barrels of 4" or so. Is this still a trail gun? Will it be holstered or just stuffed in a back pack?
Peter.

In the early 70s, I backpacked a lot in the Big Bend area. For a trail gun, I carried a Charter Arms Bulldog in 44 spl. at that time the most knockdown with the least weight.

quote:

Originally posted by skl1:
Rnovi, any idea of the velocity you get with the 180's and 3 inch barrel?

S&W guys, any thoughts on the model 60 pro vs the plain vanilla model 60? Slightly prefer the round barrel contour, but like the wood grip and night sights on the 60 pro.

Honesty, I have no idea. I never clocked them.

I ran them in my 6" GP100 and rang 200 yard steel with them for fun. Out of giggles I decided to try them with the 3" SP101. Snappy! Rang 2 out of 6 shots at 200 - that was a hoot!

https://www.buffalobore.com/in...product_detail&p=100

BuffaloBore claim 1300 fps in a 3" S&W...something tells me that's a little optimistic.

Peter, I'm looking for a small-framed revolver with a barrel 3-5". Probably stainless. Probably in .357.

I called it a trail gun because I want it smaller and lighter. I might bring it instead of a bigger pistol for pig hunting in Texas to finish pigs that crawl into the brush. Might also carry it backpacking. I've got a .44 Mountain Gun or 10mm Glock I'd likely carry if I went into Grizzly country. But I really like small frame revolvers. I think they're versatile, especially in .357. It's not for concealed carry. I'd like a longer or heavier barrel for sight plane, velocity, handling/shooting dynamics. I love the looks, size, and weight of the 3" fixed sights SP101, but I'm leaning towards adjustable sights like on the S&W model 60 or SP101 4" model.

quote:

Originally posted by rnovi:

quote:

Originally posted by skl1:
Rnovi, any idea of the velocity you get with the 180's and 3 inch barrel?

S&W guys, any thoughts on the model 60 pro vs the plain vanilla model 60? Slightly prefer the round barrel contour, but like the wood grip and night sights on the 60 pro.

Honesty, I have no idea. I never clocked them.

I ran them in my 6" GP100 and rang 200 yard steel with them for fun. Out of giggles I decided to try them with the 3" SP101. Snappy! Rang 2 out of 6 shots at 200 - that was a hoot!

https://www.buffalobore.com/in...product_detail&p=100

BuffaloBore claim 1300 fps in a 3" S&W...something tells me that's a little optimistic.

Thanks, rnovi. Even if it's 200 fps optimistic it's better than I expected.

Take a look at the guns listed by First Stop Guns on Guns America. They have a like new gun I think would be perfect.

S&W model 60-18 stainless 357. It is a five shot with a 4&7/8 inch barrel. It appears as new.

Thanks all. LJS, looked at Guns America. Couldn't find the First Stop Guns one you mentioned filtering for their S&W's, but did find -18's.

quote:

Originally posted by Snowwolfe:
The 66 is to big for what you need a revolver for. I own both the SP101 and the S&W 60 Pro. Pretty sure the SP is heavier. I don't concern myself with the argument the Ruger will last longer. Been shooting both brands since the middle 1970's and to this date never had to send either back to the factory for being out of time, etc.
Rugers are notorious for mediocre to bad triggers out of the box. S&W's are just the opposite.
My opinion is go with the Pro. It might be a shade more money upfront but you are going to have to spend cash on upgrading the Ruger at some point if you like a precise trigger.

Have you considered the S&W 69 in 44 mag? Its a compact 5 shot. And if you reload pretty easy to load it down.

Hmm, a model 66 is too big yet the even larger M29 is ok?

I love the 44 Mag and agree with loading it down but the N frame surely isn't small compared to a K frame.

The SP's are nice. My Favorite carrying .357 is an older 4" SS Security Six. Accurate as can be, relatively light.

He does mean the Model 69 44 mag. It is the L frame 44 mag.

quote:

Rugers are notorious for mediocre to bad triggers out of the box. S&W's are just the opposite.

Ruger triggers have gotten a lot better and it has been a long since S@W have been know for great triggers out of the box.

Both can be fixed Rugers being easier to work on.

quote:

Originally posted by z1r:

quote:

Originally posted by Snowwolfe:
The 66 is to big for what you need a revolver for. I own both the SP101 and the S&W 60 Pro. Pretty sure the SP is heavier. I don't concern myself with the argument the Ruger will last longer. Been shooting both brands since the middle 1970's and to this date never had to send either back to the factory for being out of time, etc.
Rugers are notorious for mediocre to bad triggers out of the box. S&W's are just the opposite.
My opinion is go with the Pro. It might be a shade more money upfront but you are going to have to spend cash on upgrading the Ruger at some point if you like a precise trigger.

Have you considered the S&W 69 in 44 mag? Its a compact 5 shot. And if you reload pretty easy to load it down.

Hmm, a model 66 is too big yet the even larger M29 is ok?

I love the 44 Mag and agree with loading it down but the N frame surely isn't small compared to a K frame.

The SP's are nice. My Favorite carrying .357 is an older 4" SS Security Six. Accurate as can be, relatively light.

Never said M29. I said 69, pay attention buckwheat

Ski 1, I just checked on TexasGunTrader.com in the Austin locale + there is a guy with an S/S Ruger 357 w/ 3.5" bbl. 1981 mfg. that he wants to trade for an S+W model 60. He probably would go for cash as well. Want me to get a phone # for you?

I pulled it back just for grins. It is a security six w/ adjustable sights, looks in really good shape. Has a 2.75" bbl. He would be interested in trading for other compact revolvers, not just S+W. His posted # is 361-765-8720. Hope this helps

quote:

It is a security six w/ adjustable sights

A security six would make a great trail gun.

But like a model 19 a bit bigger then the OP wants.

Smith and Wesson model 65 in three inch. Perfect gun for your needs. Small enough for concealed carry but heavy enough to handle full 357 mag loads. They are hard to find but only because they are so sought after.

Oh well, it never hurts to try to help out.

My local guy didn't have either in stock. I ordered a Smith Model 60 Pro Series. Not in love with the look of the slab sided barrel, but I like tritium front sight and the wood grip. And theoretically the trigger has been worked.

quote:

Originally posted by skl1:
My local guy didn't have either in stock. I ordered a Smith Model 60 Pro Series. Not in love with the look of the slab sided barrel, but I like tritium front sight and the wood grip. And theoretically the trigger has been worked.

You will like it. They are a classy looking revolver with a really good trigger pull.
Congratulations

I selected a S&W Model 686+ (7 shot) for a trail gun. 3" barrel. A bit bigger than what you wanted.

I also carry a S&W Model 60 Pro Series and really like it. I have a Model 60-4 that is older, and is a .38 Special with 3" barrel and adjustable sights. The .38 seems to be a little more accurate than the .357 also. Sometimes I carry a Model 63 in .22 with a 4" barrel. They are all great guns and are not too heavy.

I have a Smith M60 in .357 with a 5" BBL. I carry it just about all the time over my big frame guns.One of my favorites.

I think the ideal 357 all around gun is the K frame round but SS Model 65 with three inch barrel, IF you can find one. Accurate, powerful, easily concealed when needed.

I got one....hheeee heee. Might sell it. But it will cost you. Box, papers, everything. Almost mint. Perfect size carry gun.

quote:

Originally posted by clayman216:
I think the ideal 357 all around gun is the K frame round but SS Model 65 with three inch barrel, IF you can find one. Accurate, powerful, easily concealed when needed.

quote:

Originally posted by skl1:
Looking at smaller framed revolvers with 3 to 5 inch barrels.

The new Colt King Cobra is a fairly small framed 6 shot. By looks it seems a little smaller than a K frame.

I’m old and so is my “trail gun”... like z1r, I carry a stainless Ruger Service-Six. That’s the fixed sight version of the Security Six. It been my favorite for close to 30 years.

Does anyone but me carry a single action? How about a stainless vaquero in 357?

I have a Keith # 5 in 44 mag. that I'm comfortable carrying. I find the single-action feature to be much more accurate.