Scandium?

[BlackieChan]

Does anyone have any opinions on guns made with scandium aluminum alloy?

It seems like it might just be hype but I don't have one.

Has anyone put a lot of rounds through some of these guns? Are they worth it? Do they break? never break? Thanks!

 

[FN1910]

I have a S&W 340PD that weighs 11 oz or so and in chambered for .357. I love it as it is so light until I can stick it in my pocket and hardly know it is there. The problem with it is that it is so light until the recoil while shooting .357 has to be felt to be understood. It cannot be described. That is the only problem with the scandium guns. Their advantage actually is almost a disadvantage. Other than that they are fine.

 

[BlackieChan]

The problem with it is that it is so light until the recoil while shooting .357 has to be felt to be understood. It cannot be described. That is the only problem with the scandium guns. Their advantage actually is almost a disadvantage. Other than that they are fine.

That's what I was thinking. My mom and I were looking for a self defense gun for hiking and the salesman put one of these guns in her hand. My first reaction was, great, a gun that is going to kick so hard she won't want to practice with it. Kind of a frustrating experience, so I voiced my opinion and led her to the steel guns.

I think she wants at least a .357 for wild animals, and at least a four inch barrel to start with.

Off topic

The whole "You're a woman, you want a revolver" dogma is rather frustrating to me to begin with. It should be, "You're a person, you want a gun that you are comfortable shooting".

 

[SC Tiger]

I would avoid Scandium or Titanium in anything other than a snubbie simply because you will be paying a lot extra for something you won't be able to utilize. A 4" .357 in scandium would be difficult to carry concealed because of it's dimensions (just like any other 4" revolver), and if it is for the house then a stainless steel one will do just as well. Also, as you note it will help with the recoil.

Something else on the scandium revolvers is that they have such a violent recoil that you can't (or couldn't - this could have changed) shoot any .357 loads with bullets smaller than 125 grains because of the limited amount of grip the case has on the bullet. Basically the bullets would jar loose and either come out altogether or jam up the gun. That should put the recoil of one of these things in perspective.

 

[wjh2657]

I carry a S&W 642 Airweight (which is aluminum alloy) and it is light enough for daily carry without discomfort. I really don't understand wanting to go any lighter in weight. If you are going to a full sized gun (686 or Ruger) with a 4"bbl than you are going to want weight to allow the use of more powerful ammo. I have always felt that Scandium and the like guns are a gimmicky answer to a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[doublebarr]

Fired one at the range the other day. I am a woman, but have great arm strength, and I only managed to fire 3 times before it was more than enough for me. It was a .38 and I wasn't even firing +P ammo :fie: I'll pass and keep the steel. A tiny bit more weight is WELL worth the increased useability and multiple shot accuracy, IMO.

 

[BlackieChan]

Fired one at the range the other day. I am a woman, but have great arm strength, and I only managed to fire 3 times before it was more than enough for me. It was a .38 and I wasn't even firing +P ammo :fie: I'll pass and keep the steel. A tiny bit more weight is WELL worth the increased useability and multiple shot accuracy, IMO.

Thanks for the feedback all. I don't really know why anyone would recommend these guns to a new shooters with an honest heart.

The reason I posted this is because salesman at Sportman's was pushing the scandium frames. They might be great to carry but we were looking for something that was great to shoot.:angry:

Anyhow, your opinions have been extremely valuable, thank you very much!