Ruger LCP vs. Smith J-Frame: Pros & Cons?

[johnnyrem]

No cloak and dagger whatsoever. Verifiable with a phone call. Nothing odd about stating something anyone can confirm by asking. It’s not me you’re disbelieving but rather the manufacturers of the gun itself. This is about the message, not me.

I’ve said that all along....give them a call and believe them, not me. It is important the the manufacturer stated it, and the emphasis was on their credentials, not mine. I’m not sure how suggesting verifying my information with a call and minimizing my “credentials” made the discussion here odd. They are the relevant party here.

What started the convo was a discussion about possibilities for a lightweight 9mm revolver, incidentally.

For my part, I am sure a discussion between Smith and Wesson engineers and whoever supposedly owns or supposedly modifies aluminum Smith and Wesson revolvers to 9mm would be very entertaining to hear.

[JimCunn]

"For my part, I am sure a discussion between Smith and Wesson engineers and whoever supposedly owns or supposedly modifies aluminum Smith and Wesson revolvers to 9mm would be very entertaining to hear".

Being an engineer myself, I don't always put a lot of weight on what engineers have to say. Sometimes they know what they are talking about, sometimes they don't.

I have three aluminum airweight 637-2 .38Sp J-frames converted to .357Mag and 9mm by way of titanium cylinder conversions.
No problems with any of them.

[titsonritz]

For what it is worth, I personally have had the bullet pulling thing mentioned above happen to me with a S&W 342 using Corbon 110gr ammo. I can totally see 9mm doing the same thing or worse given the lack of/minimal crimp.

[JimCunn]

It could. It hasn't happened to me using 147gr 9mm.

[Screwball]

It could. It hasn't happened to me using 147gr 9mm.

Same here, as well as the 115 grain UMC which is my practice ammo (has same POI as my Hornady XTP 147 grain).

Gun still works fine... carry it pretty much daily. Starting to get colder out, and might jump up to my Glock 30S.

And being it was a major topic on here, here are screenshots of the Standard Catalog of S&W (Supica and Nahas). Has info and a picture of the 942.

[halfmoonclip]

I've a 340SC, a 640 Mag, and a 940. In terms of recoil with magnum loads, the 340 can only be described as brutal. Mags in the 640 get your attention, but are tolerable in small doses. The 9 is a puzzlement; recoil isn't as bad as magnums in the other two, but it is pretty damned rappy all the same, and that's with my standard range load. (1140'sec/115 in an auto)
In fact, were I a betting man, I'd bet that recoil is what sank the 9mm for production. Let's not have this turn into a manhood whizzing contest, but the 9 is sharp enough to discourage some customers.
For the PP who has an alloy framed 9, good on ya'. Not for me.
BTW, fun fact. Scandium, as used in my 340SC, derives its name from the ancient Latin word for "mean kicking little slut".
Moon

[Screwball]

Let's not have this turn into a manhood whizzing contest, but the 9 is sharp enough to discourage some customers.

It’s not really a pissing contest, but just because you view something as brutal doesn’t mean everyone does. I’m not going to argue with you, but I don’t agree with much of your post. Before it turns into a fight for the internet... it is ok to disagree with people.

I know people who feel .38 +P out of a 642 is too much. A lot is psychological. Some is also body/hand physicality, not to mention any sort of issues the shooter may have (arthritis, for example).

I’ve mentioned it a few times on this forum, but I started shooting a 629-1 with Magnum loads back when I was 12 or 13. Was in my 20s when I first tried .44 Specials in it. I never had an issue. But there are adults who will not shoot it. Who is right/wrong? Nobody... but people shoot them without issue. I just qualified with our P2000, in .40... getting 150 out of 150. We are moving to 9mm Glocks partly because of “issues” with recoil (costs, newer bullet designs, and firearm attrition rate also played). How does that work? It wasn’t luck, as we had a good number of high/perfect scores. Recoil is subjective, and varies between people. Broad stroking it never works out well, as it creates that “pissing contest” you alluded to.

Standard pressure 147 grain isn’t a problem for me. I put it somewhere between standard pressure .38 and +P. What I can tell you is that I’m sending a heavier bullet down range at a similar speed as I did with a lighter bullet. That is a good thing, in my eyes... and doesn’t add in the extra benefits I see with 9mm. My LCP isn’t as bad of a shooter as other people make them out to be. No issue shooting it.

If we all felt recoil the same across the board, we all would be shooting .22s...

[JimCunn]

Mine is a bit sharper than with .38Sp+P, but not nearly as brisk as my Super Blackhawk.

[halfmoonclip]

Okay, screwball, you're immune to recoil, and I applaud your manhood. Come back and talk to me when you're my age (north of 70); fifty years of shooting, and some arthur, have taken the joy out of hardkickers for me.
Anyone who claims to enjoy shooting a 340SC with magnum loads (please note I said magnums, not +Ps) is either a masochist or a liar. There is absolutely, positively nothing psychological about it. The damned thing kicks, a lot.
I have taken the King's deer with a 629, BTW. It's neat to have that kind of power at your command, but, again, an afternoon of it is more fun than I care to have.
And maybe reread my previous post. There's really not that much to argue with.
Best,
Moon

[JimCunn]

I'm well north of seventy - I've been shooting handguns for seventy. No trace so far of arthritis or stiffening, knock wood.
I've been avoiding magnums in my aluminum/titanium (not scandium) J-frames. Now, out of curiosity, I'm gonna have to try it.