Ohioans For Concealed Carry Discussion Forums

If a woman is going to use purse carry, the S&W 442 is the weapon of choice as it has no external hammer and it can be fired multiple times while still in the purse. Using a purse like you described, she would just have to point the end of the purse toward him and pull the trigger. Nikki Groesser and my wife both carry this way sometimes.

I think the shape of the 442 and similar make them very nice pocket guns. In larger sizes though, I don't really see a reason to choose a revolver over a semiautomatic for carry, other than for something like a bear gun, or maybe calibers for hunting, or anything that would need a 410.

I've carried a Glock 43, I think it had 7 round cap., A Ruger LC9s, also 7 rounds, I had a S&W Shield that I liked but it was 6 rounds, I tried a Kel-Tec and also a Ruger in .380 both had 6 round cap. I keep going back to my trusty S&W 442 hammerless in .38 Special. It's only 1 or 2 rounds short of the other carry guns I've had and it's reliable and a .38 special has some knock down power. To each his own but I do not feel underarmed with my revolver!

A 642 or a SP101 are my choice

AzRanger wrote:I've carried a Glock 43, I think it had 7 round cap., A Ruger LC9s, also 7 rounds, I had a S&W Shield that I liked but it was 6 rounds, I tried a Kel-Tec and also a Ruger in .380 both had 6 round cap. I keep going back to my trusty S&W 442 hammerless in .38 Special. It's only 1 or 2 rounds short of the other carry guns I've had and it's reliable and a .38 special has some knock down power. To each his own but I do not feel underarmed with my revolver!

What did you like better about the 442 than the glock 43? I was thinking of making the opposite switch eventually, so I'm curious.

BadCrosshairDay wrote:

AzRanger wrote:I've carried a Glock 43, I think it had 7 round cap., A Ruger LC9s, also 7 rounds, I had a S&W Shield that I liked but it was 6 rounds, I tried a Kel-Tec and also a Ruger in .380 both had 6 round cap. I keep going back to my trusty S&W 442 hammerless in .38 Special. It's only 1 or 2 rounds short of the other carry guns I've had and it's reliable and a .38 special has some knock down power. To each his own but I do not feel underarmed with my revolver!

What did you like better about the 442 than the glock 43? I was thinking of making the opposite switch eventually, so I'm curious.

I can't answer for AZRanger...but if I had to guess, I'd guess that 5 sure-fire rounds of .38 Special +P ...beats maybe 6 rounds of .380. I'm borrowing some old reasoning from Massad Ayoob here.

{Whispers so as to not embarrass glocksmith}: The Glock model 43 is 9mm parabellum not .380.

9mm kurz ?

curmudgeon3 wrote:9mm kurz ?

.380 acp a/k/a 9mm Kurz, 9mm Corto, 9x17, 9mm Browning, and probably a few other names, is what the Glock model 42 is chambered for. G-43 is in 9mm Parabellum, 9mm Luger, 9x19, among other aliases. Don't get me started..oops, too late.

Brian D. wrote:{Whispers so as to not embarrass glocksmith}: The Glock model 43 is 9mm parabellum not .380.

No, not at all. In fact I'm proud to admit that my knowledge of autopistols - especially newfangled models - gets less and less with every passing day. Like I said, I'm now a revolver guy. But the argument still stands...just re-word it to "5 sure-fire shots of .38 Special +P beats 6 maybe shots of 9mm"...Ayoob would probably agree.

For a bunch of years Ayoob's opinions were all over the place, often it seemed that he never met a free-to-him product he didn't enjoy praising in print. Auto loaders have become very reliable, even many of the subcompacts. But I suppose a revolver is still a little more of a sure thing. Assuming the 10 lb double action trigger on a 1 lb airweight is learned well, people might even be able to make hits beyond bad breath distance.

While I liked his comments about revolver reliability vs. semi-auto...let it be said I'm not, nor have I ever been a big fan of Ayoob's. I've always though he was a self-professed expert (sort of like Lenny Magill). Though I will grudgingly admit that Ayoob is a member of the uber-elite Grantham, New Hampshire Police Department

Brian D. wrote:For a bunch of years Ayoob's opinions were all over the place, often it seemed that he never met a free-to-him product he didn't enjoy praising in print. Auto loaders have become very reliable, even many of the subcompacts. But I suppose a revolver is still a little more of a sure thing. Assuming the 10 lb double action trigger on a 1 lb airweight is learned well, people might even be able to make hits beyond bad breath distance.

It must be possible with practice. I'm no expert, but I qualified with one back in the day, along with my on duty open carry handgun, using dept. issued +p ammo.

Oh it can be done, like you say, with practice. However, judging by observation by myself and friends who do practice a good bit, we're in some sort of 5-10% ers club among the carrying community at large.

That's a topic for another thread though.

I realized that I wouldn't really replace the 442 with a 43: the 43 would only be carried iwb, and not in pocket.

The reason I am considering it is I think I'd shoot the glock 43 better than I shoot a 442. And there's a chance at reloading if needed. Speedloaders don't work well with my 442,the fit is too tight.