Revolver Question - Cross posted in Wheel Gun group.

[McMail]

Currently, my sole revolver is a Ruger LCR .357 which I use for alternate cc in colder months and when hiking. I have been looking at the SP101 in 3" and 4" for a better woods gun. I have relatively thick/small hands so this seems the best frame size for me.

Does anyone have any practical comparison experience with these guns for shoot-ability, holsters, conceal-ability, ballistics etc. How much practical advantage will the 4" barrel provide. Downsides to the 4"?

Thanks in advance for the help.

 

[NYwill15]

Sir, The SP 101 is a good gun. It sounds to me like you're looking for a "do it all" gun. There's really no such gun. There's always a give and take on every handgun. If your hiking, and think you may be confronted by a animal, the 4" barrel would be better. However the 3" barrel would be better for concealment. Did you happen to look at the Ruger GP 100 ? That's a 6 round revolver, and with a 4" barrel, would be as good if not better as a hiking gun. You could also look at the Smith & Wesson revolver's. They have some good choice's too. If you have your heart set on the SP 101, and you really want it for concealment, then go for the 3" barrel. It's a lot more comfortable, and easier to conceal than the 4" barrel. It may lose a little veloscity with the rounds, but it should still be enough to stop a animal at close range. I hope this helps. Take care.

 

[Pir8fan]

I use a GP100 with the 4 inch barrel. I replaced the factory sights with Williams Firesights. It is very accurate, easy to control and just plain fun to shoot. I too have smaller hands and this fits very well. I also have a Service Six which is the predecessor to the SP101. I got it for the smaller grip. Since I got the GP100, the Service Six has seen very little use.

 

[coachdb18]

My biggest concern in the woods are bears, a very tough animal. My favorite gun has always been the GP100, in 4" barrel, and I trust it under all the conditions of backpacking I've encountered. What I also consider is that, as tough as .357 magnum is, I also have a RedHawk in 4" barrel, and have come to feel more comfortable carrying in those areas where these critters are my most likely run-in. I have not been attacked by bears to date, and do not seek to disturb them as long as they leave me alone too. But I carry for my own defense, and simply want to ensure if it comes to me or the bears, I'm the one who gets to go home. Both guns are a handful, and I practice regularly with both, so that's also my recommendation, whatever you have, feel comfortable and be practiced with it.

 

[snatale42]

Currently, my sole revolver is a Ruger LCR .357 which I use for alternate cc in colder months and when hiking. I have been looking at the SP101 in 3" and 4" for a better woods gun. I have relatively thick/small hands so this seems the best frame size for me.

Does anyone have any practical comparison experience with these guns for shoot-ability, holsters, conceal-ability, ballistics etc. How much practical advantage will the 4" barrel provide. Downsides to the 4"?

Thanks in advance for the help.

I don't own a LCR, but have shot my buddies a lot. I own a S&W 642 and I used to have a SP101. I also have thick/small hands, The LCR's stock grip is better than the other two, But I put Hogue's on both my SP101 and my 642, so that fixes that. I see no advantage to a 4" barrel. Makes the gun hard to hide and heavier, and having a snubby doesn't make it any less accurate at any normal distance you'd shoot it at assuming it's a defensive gun. I think the 642 hides the best, but I do miss my SP101, their friggen tanks! If I had to have one of the 3 and it had to be a defensive carry gun it would be the 642 (with the springs swapped out) and hogue. If an open carry gun or house gun, the SP101.

 

[McMail]

Thanks for the input...

Sir, The SP 101 is a good gun. It sounds to me like you're looking for a "do it all" gun. There's really no such gun. There's always a give and take on every handgun. If your hiking, and think you may be confronted by a animal, the 4" barrel would be better. However the 3" barrel would be better for concealment. Did you happen to look at the Ruger GP 100 ? That's a 6 round revolver, and with a 4" barrel, would be as good if not better as a hiking gun. You could also look at the Smith & Wesson revolver's. They have some good choice's too. If you have your heart set on the SP 101, and you really want it for concealment, then go for the 3" barrel. It's a lot more comfortable, and easier to conceal than the 4" barrel. It may lose a little veloscity with the rounds, but it should still be enough to stop a animal at close range. I hope this helps. Take care.

I have held the GP 100, and unfortunately it is just too large for my hands. The other gun I have looked at is the Alaskan. It fits my hand better, but I have not shot one as yet. I was also trying to not add another caliber and limited purpose gun to the collection. But as many have truly said, there is no one size fits all answer.

Thanks for the input.

 

[McMail]

My biggest concern in the woods are bears, a very tough animal. My favorite gun has always been the GP100, in 4" barrel, and I trust it under all the conditions of backpacking I've encountered. What I also consider is that, as tough as .357 magnum is, I also have a RedHawk in 4" barrel, and have come to feel more comfortable carrying in those areas where these critters are my most likely run-in. I have not been attacked by bears to date, and do not seek to disturb them as long as they leave me alone too. But I carry for my own defense, and simply want to ensure if it comes to me or the bears, I'm the one who gets to go home. Both guns are a handful, and I practice regularly with both, so that's also my recommendation, whatever you have, feel comfortable and be practiced with it.

I have held the GP 100, and unfortunately it is just too large for my hands. I have not tried any of the Redhawk's as I have not found them in my area. Fortunately I have time to look around.

Thanks for the input.