"Hunting" with a Snub Nose .38

[Badge54]

Didn't bother to read the entire thread. Had a thought and jumped to the end, so forgive me if it's been stated...

Youtube "Snubby Summit" it's a three part series of old timers and new talking about the snubby. Crimson trace has some videos' on there too.

A few thoughts.
-38 vs .357 = only gain 50-100fps and a bunch of fireball..not worth it.
-Snubbys are way more accurate than most shooters.
-Snubbys that kick will make a good shooter a novice again.
-And as Clint Smith says, "J-frames are expert guns."
-Amazing things can be done with one in the right hands.

That said I took my Minister (he has a CCW permit) shooting this week. He was missing the paper at 15 feet and hands came apart when he shot my 340PD. At the end of the hour and half I had him hitting the size of a coffe cup.

Someone took a crimson trace laser and a steel plate at 50 yards and made ever shot hit. They are accurate, just not easy.

Badge54
(now that I posted and subscribed I'll go back and read.)

 

[Shotgun]

The 642 is my carry gun. I have no problems hitting a rabbit size target at 15-20 yards so for hunting it's fine. As far as using it to take small game I wouldn't worry about going with non-defensive ammo if you're just thinking last ditch survival hunting. Just eat around the hole.

As for your ammo choice, that's a whole seperate issue. I personally wouldn't touch Cor-bons. A few years ago when I was researching ammo testing on the net, Cor-bons were usually at the bottom of the lists. If you're going to choose a defensive load stick with Federal HST, Winchester Ranger, or Speer Gold Dot. For the .38 I use Speer's short barrel ammo. 135 grain I think.

 

[BlackHills]

I personally wouldn't touch Cor-bons. A few years ago when I was researching ammo testing on the net, Cor-bons were usually at the bottom of the lists.

Can you point me towards those? I'd be very interested to read them, as that's 180° from what I've read about CorBon ammo.

 

[David E]

The 642 and other S&W's that have a fully enclosed hammer benefit from the open-back grips. Why? Because it allows you to get a higher hold on the gun.

The web of the hand should be even with the bottom of the slope that is over the concealed hammer.

While it won't keep the kick down, it will keep the muzzle flip down. It's just a matter of physics. The closer the bore is to the forearm, the less leverage the gun has to torque upward at the shot.

This seems to be an oft over looked element of effective snubby shooting, especially at speed.

.

 

[Erasmus]

The acid test is to hunt with it. Try it out in the hunting fields. If it works fine, then great.

But if it cannot be made to work (for you) in the hunting fields, don't expect it to suddenly start working in a desperate situation.

Let us know how it goes.

 

[jim in ohio]

i have used a snub.38 as a "walkin' around gun" for about 7 years. i've killed a few rabbits,about a dozen copperheads and one fox squirrel i shot off the side of an oak.i picked this gun up in a trade and it had less than a box of shells thru it.it isn't a j-frame,but a k-frame model10 s&w.i do hunt,but i also spend time doing other things outdoors like cutting firewood,berry picking,fishing,etc.this gun has itself proved ideal for me.its still concealable when carried in a front pocket,its easier to shoot than the j-frames and i can place 6 quick shots(double action) into a 5-inch circle at 25 feet.i can shoot it much more accurately in single action mode. if i lived in bear or cougar country i would definatly choose something larger,but in my neck of the woods this has worked for me.for those who find the 642 j-frame too small try a mdl 10 ,i think you might be surprised.

 

[Scott Free]

I'm pretty confident with the Corbon DPX load. After a lot of research, for me it came down to the Corbon or Speer Short Barrel +P. Both seemed to perform adequately in any test I could find. Supposedly, the Corbon has less recoil so I chose that. I have yet to shoot the Speer load, so things may change.

I am really looking forward to getting good with this gun.

 

[Wildone39]

My Uncle died a few years ago and left me a Colt Lawman MK III 357 Magnum. I think it has about a 3 to 3 1/2 inch barrel on it. I use it to carry in the woods alot just for larger animals that may try to attack me,(which has never happend) but you never know. I dont know if it would be a bear stopper or not but I feel that it would not hurt to have it. Its a heavy gun and strong as a bull. I would like to get some Houge grips put on it but I cant find any for that perticular gun.

 

[Revolvergeek]

Can you point me towards those? I'd be very interested to read them, as that's 180° from what I've read about CorBon ammo.

I suspect that these would have been tests run against the FBI protocols. Corbon's tend to favor violent expansion (used to be towards explosive expansion and fragmentation) with reduced penetration. The FBI protocols emphasized deep penetration (min. 12 inches, ideally 14-16 inches, I think) and controlled, minimal expansion. Thus, XTPs and early Gold Dots did scored high and Corbons (and most anything +P+ and light weight) scored low.

 

[Quirt]

Because I'm in the firearms industry I have access to not only manufacturer's data and research but also street performance which is often not published.

I've been priviliaged to be part of some ballistics testing. I don't know where you got your information on Corbon - the Corbon DPX is stir'n the market up considerably as both a reliable opener and meeting the penetration requirement even through glass. There is quite a bit of performance testing going on with that particular product and it has some street success as well. The DPX is using the very popular and effective Barnes bullets.

LEO's have been wanting something that will penetrate windshield and/or car doors. In 2005 we were involved in some testing in which nine "major" brands of 38, 9, 40 & 45 hollow points didn't make it though the double layer of 16 gauge metal, two layers of denim and ballistic gel. Most just bounced off. Then when the .45 DPX was shot in a shorty .45 1911 it easily passed through all layers and rested somewhere between 9 to 10" in the gel.

In subsequent testing the DPX and Power Ball were the only two that would penetrate through 4 layers of denim and deep into the gel block. The round expanded symmetrically and completely. The others were plugged by the denim. Leather and denim and other similar materials have frustrated LEO's in the past because they are not getting the handgun performance they need.

Now for those of you thinking a snubby .38 revolver is "just the ticket" for two legged and four legged preditors...you're all discussing hollow points as your round of choice. Most people and animals in the wild wear clothes - fur, fat, and heavy skin on critters and coats, sweaters, soft shells, denim, carhartts, and other similar covering on the peeps. You might want to do some serious soul searching about your carry options and round selections. I have in my possession a .40 S&W Speer Gold Dot bullet shot into a small bear attacking a garbage can in an yuppie neighborhood. The yuppies were scared and tired of the bear hass'ln the neighborhood. So the deputy fired this bullet from a full size GLOCK 22 (not some snubby) at very close distance. The 40 is a high pressure handgun round. The bullet was found lodged plugged up with bear hair and still residing in the bear's outer layer of fat. The bear was eventually killed with a 12 gauge slug. The handgun round only upset the bear requiring the deputy to tactically withdrawl back to his car to retrieve the shotgun. He then shot the bear again with the 12 gauge using OO buck and now the bear is really ticked off...he immedately transitioned to a slug and the bear was DRT.

Note to self: OO Buck along with handgun rounds don't effectively penetrate small black bears at 7 yards when they are not attacking humans...hum...I must ponder this!

 

[Revolvergeek]

Quirt,

Blackhills asked about this comment:

A few years ago when I was researching ammo testing on the net, Cor-bons were usually at the bottom of the lists.

I was offering a possible explanation why Shotgun would have read negative tests of Corbon *a few years ago*, not indicting the current products. I remain impressed with everything that I have seen/tested/read regarding the Powerball and DPX, and have mainly stayed with Gold Dots for my personal use because they are profoundly less expensive.

I don't think anybody suggested that the .38 snubby was the ultimate defensive weapon (I surely didn't mean to if anybody took that impression!). I personally have tried to stick, as much as possible, to addressing the original question, i.e. could you if you had to.

 

[BlackHills]

I suspect that these would have been tests run against the FBI protocols. Corbon's tend to favor violent expansion (used to be towards explosive expansion and fragmentation) with reduced penetration. The FBI protocols emphasized deep penetration (min. 12 inches, ideally 14-16 inches, I think) and controlled, minimal expansion. Thus, XTPs and early Gold Dots did scored high and Corbons (and most anything +P+ and light weight) scored low.

Thanks. I found his statement interesting because several years ago I read an article in a magazine regarding the South Bend, IN PD switching to .45s. They tested all the available HP ammo and the 185gr Corbon was the winner with the 165gr coming in a close second.

Now for those of you thinking a snubby .38 revolver is "just the ticket" for two legged and four legged preditors...you're all discussing hollow points as your round of choice. Most people and animals in the wild wear clothes - fur, fat, and heavy skin on critters and coats, sweaters, soft shells, denim, carhartts, and other similar covering on the peeps. You might want to do some serious soul searching about your carry options and round selections.

I do carry a .38 on occasion though it's not my first choice. When I do it's loaded with Glasers, partly for the reasons you mentioned.

 

[Andrew Colglazier]

Generally speaking, the main complaints some had with Corbon products had to do with poor accuracy and inconsistent velocities.

This was quite a while ago, I never found such issues with any Corbon load I tested, and I don't know if anybody is still complaining about such things.

Andy

 

[Shotgun]

Thanks. I found his statement interesting because several years ago I read an article in a magazine regarding the South Bend, IN PD switching to .45s. They tested all the available HP ammo and the 185gr Corbon was the winner with the 165gr coming in a close second.



I do carry a .38 on occasion though it's not my first choice. When I do it's loaded with Glasers, partly for the reasons you mentioned.

You guys are right on. It's been awhile since I researched it but was with the FBI protocols. Poor penetration and inconsistant velocities and expansion. It's totally possible that they've improved in the past few years. The tests I saw just really turned my off of them.

As for a .38 as a woods carrying gun...I only carry a gun for defense against people. True it's minimal at best but it's the only platform I'm willing to carry as far as weight and size. As far as bears...I'd rather be eaten by a bear than die of colon cancer and which one is more likely?

 

[Wildone39]

Wow, I always thought OObuck shot would pretty much take care of anything, even a Black bear. I am glad you told me that. Ill buy some slugs for my 12 guage now just to have. How about a 357, is that any good at all? My colt has a 3 1/2 inch barall.

 

[jill jackson]

I love small frame revolvers, they are reliable, compact and pack a punch. If i feel the need to carry one though the one I most often reach for is the S&W Airweight, it's just so much lighter, makes it a joy to carry over the all steel .357, model 640 Smith or the SP-101 .357, 3" Ruger. Plus, it just has a very classy look about it.

[/IMG]

 

[jill jackson]

OO buck can be devastating if the range is close enough that most, or all of the projectiles strike the target. It's carried in Africa to kill wounded big game such as leopards, that are commonly tracked in very thick cover. The problem with it is when the range is stretched and it loses it's velocity, plus only a few of the projectiles strike the target. Up close (within 25 yards) it's known to be very lethal.
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-114677.html
http://www.gunshopfinder.com/articles/buckshot.html
Of course when used on thick-skinned animals it's not so effective, but on thin-skinned like a man or leopard, at close range it is deadly.
Hemingway even writes about the use of bird-shot for stopping close range charging leopards-
In 1934, Hemingway reported on the hazards of leopard-hunting for Esquire in the following dramatic terms: "Philip Percival [who lead him on his second safari] ranks leopard as more dangerous than lion for these reasons. They are nearly always met unexpectedly, usually when you are hunting impala or buck. They usually give you only a running shot, which means more of a chance of wounding than killing. They will charge nine times out of 10 when wounded, and they come so fast that no man can be sure of stopping them with a rifle.

"They use their claws, both fore and hind, when mauling, and make for the face so that the eyes are endangered, whereas the lion grabs with the claws and bites, usually for the arm, shoulders or thigh. The most effective stopper for a leopard is a shotgun and you should not fire until the animal is within 10 yards. It does not matter what size shot is used at that range. Birdshot is even more effective than buckshot as it hangs together to blow a solid hole. (Mr P took the top of the head off one once with a load of number sevens, and the leopard came right on by and on for 15 yards. Didn't know he was dead, it seems. Tripped on a blade of grass or something, finally.)"

 

[David E]

OO buck can be devastating if the range is close enough .... Up close (within 25 yards) it's known to be very lethal.....

This depends on the choke and load.

Some shotguns can't keep all 9 pellets on a human torso @ 25 yds. If you're going to rely on 00 Buck, check the pattern your chosen load throws at different ranges. Change chokes accordingly, if need be.

.

 

[David E]

How about a 357, is that any good at all? My colt has a 3 1/2 inch barall.

The .357 also depends on the load. A 110 grain JHP isn't going to penetrate enough to reach the vitals. I'd start with a bullet designed for penetration that weights at least 158 grains or heavier.

Also, it's unlikely your Colt has a 3.5" barrel. It's probably a 4" barrel. Measure from the cylinder face, to include that part of the barrel that's screwed into the frame, to the end of the barrel and there you go.

.

 

[jill jackson]

This depends on the choke and load.

Some shotguns can't keep all 9 pellets on a human torso @ 25 yds. If you're going to rely on 00 Buck, check the pattern your chosen load throws at different ranges. Change chokes accordingly, if need be.

.

That's true and full chokes are the ones that "blow the pattern" in most cases. A improved cylinder is recommended for buckshot. Still as you state a little work to see how your shotgun patterns is always good thinking.