Would (or do) you (pocket) carry this?
>t. 6'4" lanky yankee
>or do i just go for the wiley clapp ii gp100?
>inb4 appendix carry slim 1911 cuz skinny thin

>>63801791 (OP)
That is not a pocket size revolver.

>>63801791 (OP)
>>63801844
You could maybe manage the 2.5" barrel one if you have giant pockets, but itd be heavy in the pocket still. Why not just get the LCR?

>>63801791 (OP)
>327 mag
No. I'd get a caliber that isn't snowflake garbage because regular practice is going to require reloading or spending entirely too much on ammo.
>don't be poor
The absolute cheapest, without shipping, $/rd on ammoseek is just over .60, and that's from places with dogshit shipping rates. Why in the hell would you ever spend over 3 bucks a cylinder to get good when a .38 can do everything that can in a better form factor for what you plan on doing with it?
>personal preference
If you're dead set on it sure, it's your money. But my advice is no, get a 38 or snub 357 if you want to carry a revolver.

>>63801791 (OP)
Nah. Get the LCR if you're dead set on .327. I prefer the Uber lightweight 632UCti or even the 32 h&r version of the LCR. Lighter is always better.

>>63801791 (OP)
No, I carry an LCR in .32 H&R. The SP101 is too heavy to be a pocket gun, and with the 3" barrel it's too long as well.

.327 Federal is not a low recoil cartridge, and has a lot of blast and noise. I do not recommend it in a small revolver.

I found out from a recent thread anon that revolvers chambered for 327 FedMag
are also capable of safely chambering and firing .32 H&R Magnum

>>63802002
Wow, not only can it fire a modern dead-end meme round, it can also fire an old dead-end meme round

>>63802002
They can even fire 32acp, but expect dog shit groupings

>>63801791 (OP)
I like it because “327” just looks like a nice number.

If I'm pocket carrying, I'm sure as hell not pocket carrying something with an exposed hammer.
For me, it's the Swesson 642, in .38, because I've got nothing to prove and will sacrifice nothing on the altar of minmaxxing.

>>63802083
You tell them anon, I'm SICK of all these .32 fuckers coming after .38 Special and based .357 Magnum

>I NEED my revolver to be as contrarian as possible so i can stand out!

>>63802917
>get contrarian guns
>never tell anyone about them
Kino

>>63801902
.327 is excellent; you have apparently never fired it.

>>63802917
If you're going to shoot at someone, might as well do it with some style. Know what I mean?

>>63801850
the 2.5 inch is not that big. I have the .357 version and pocket carry it.

>>63803456
Ive got a 2.5 inch in my pants anyway so i guess its not much worse

>>63801791 (OP)
Taurus has a .327 that's optic ready.

inb4 >Taurus

>>63802083
>>63802204

OP >>63801875 pic = (You)

is this the thread for gentlemen of taste?

>>63801791 (OP)
Fellow lankchad here, the GP100 is way too thicc for aiwb. I really tried to make it work. I can make a model 66 work pretty well though.

T. 6'3" 185lb

>>63802087
I have a 327 lcr and tried 32 auto in it, it fired fine but the rims are too small and some slipped past the ejector star and got pinned under it, was a bitch to get them out. .32 longs work great in it though, like shooting a .22.

>>63801950
blast and noise is awesome
seriously, .327 snubs sound like a .44

>>63802116
they hit the nail on the head with it, but I'm still pissed about them not naming 30 super carry 32 super. They both take .312 bullets.

>>63803863
Taurus is unironically better than S&W these days.

>>63803991
.32 H&R Magnum would work well in a .327 LCR.

>>63801791 (OP)
Daily reminder that any pocket that'll fit a SP101 will also fit a Glock 19 (or 32, if you insist on "muh .357 firepower") and over twice as much ammo
>or do i just go for the wiley clapp ii gp100
Same comparison, but the Ruger is long enough that the Glock can get away with a X300U and extended barrel

>>63802203
638 for me
I've got something to prove and will sacrifice some things for ~vibes~

>>63801791 (OP)
my guy, if I'm carrying a .32, it's going to be a .32s&w top break in my boot.
There are much more powerful rounds in the form factor you're going for

>>63804350
Is this the brain power of glocktards? Look at the form of each of them, you think theyre equivalent in a pocket?

>>63802917
What are you doing with 7 rounds I'm not doing with 5? Besides FTEing and stove-piping?

>>63804424
They're probably pretty close, especially if you're not running boot grips on the Ruger, and the main point was that neither is really "pocket-sized" to begin with—the Glock 26 exists and is still relevant despite more modern options, and obviously a real pocket gun like a LCR >>63802894 J-frame, or basically any microcompact mogs them both

>>63804451
If one is autistically insistent about revolvers like OP(or me) then an airweight j frame or lcr for pocket carry and a 3 inch sp101 or k frame for IWB. An lcr at least for me just disappears in the pocket even with the somewhat large tamer grips that come standard, a glock 26(or shield plus like i have) is much more cumbersome and printing in the pocket. The 2.25 inch sp101 is a fairly retarded pocket carry choice, even if you have the pocket size to accomidate it its gonna be heavy as hell in the pocket

>>63801791 (OP)
>Called Fed Mag
>Isn't Magazine Fed

>>63804502
>federal
>its a private company
>glock 44
>its 22lr

>>63804514
I will die on the hill that the Glock 40 should've been the .22LR, to complete the circle of confusion.

>>63804514
imagine if Glock were based and the Glock 44 had been in .44 AMP

>>63804350
Hell, son. By that logic a Desert Eagle is a pocket pistol.

>>63804690
It'd be dope if Magnum Research made a "subcompact" deagle that was as big as a SP101

>>63804474
>An lcr at least for me
why they must go full retard and make feather-weight five(kek) shooter instead of normal, modern, light, 6-shot .38spl +p.

>>63801791 (OP)
Like others said the 3" barrel is most likely too long for pocket carry. It's more of a belt gun. You definitely won't be pocket carrying a GP100.
>>63805993
Because they have to use a wider cylinder and a taller frame, simple as. Agreed that .38 is not a good caliber for airweights, though.

>>63806253
>Agreed that .38 is not a good caliber for airweights, though.
People aren't buying (small) revolvers because muh .357 magnum powah, they buy them because they like revolvers.

>>63801791 (OP)
bro the sp101 is a nice enough gun and the 327 is a fine cartridge, but i've gone down that road and let suggest, the kimber k6s is a better gun in every conceivable way, it is worth the extra dough, i've owned a bunch of ruger revolvers and k-frames and the k6s is just better, yeah yeah it's a >kimber lmao but whatever its a great little gun

>>63806594
I agree with that as well but I think small frames should be .32’s. The I-Frames were .32’s. The only reason .38 ended up in the J-Frame is because cops wanted ammo interchangeability between their service revolver and their backup gun, which was reasonable for them at the time but not for someone carrying it as a standalone gun.

>>63801791 (OP)
I want a 7 or 8 shot 686 in .327 mag but that seems unlikely. The revamped 632's give some hope, but not much because they didnt do another run of 632 pro in .327, just the .32 h&r models

>>63807276
S&W will never give you what you want

>>63807662
True, theres no FPC in .45 acp or .30 super carry. Ill have to settle with buffalo bore out the .40 s&w

>>63807662
>High-capacity X-frames in normal calibers like .44 Magnum and .22 LR
>optic-ready topstraps
>enlarged trigger guards for use with gloves
>better QC

>>63808222
You can potentially get any of those except better QC

>>63803456
Are you big ass revolver anon?

>>63802203
>airweight with sights
Blasphemy

>>63808222
>better QC
ummmmmmmmmmmmmmm no sir

>>63802116
Better bore-to-stroke ratio than a 350.

>>63804690
Old farts always make the most sense.

>>63807276
Ruger has a 7 shot GP100 in
.327 Federal.

>>63808646
I know, but i want a 686. I may have to cope and just get a gp100 but ill wait like another year still

>>63808310
Nope. At least not that I know of. I do love revolvers, though.

>>63808650
I can understand that. i think it'd be wild if Ruger made a nine or ten shot Redhawk in .327.

>>63803863
>sig red dot on a taurus revolver

>>63801791 (OP)
A roscoe

>>63808225
>>63808369
He's saying those are the things he wants from S&W but can't get, not the things that S&W currently does.
>>63808315
That's the 640 Pro which is steel. They should put low-snag Novak sights on every single snubby. Really no need for gutter sights anymore other than cost.

>>63812315
Either that, or just go full cheapmaxxing and tweak the J-frame forging such that it has a no-bullshit guttersnipe sight, obviating the need for a front sight at all and eliminating countless warranty claims from people whose barrels aren't on straight.

I went the .357 lcrx direction, myself. Comfy enough to carry in any clothing, enough recoil absorption to make followup shots a realistic notion, and cheap ammo everywhere
>pic related, my usual EDC

>>63813629
Gotta have that wave rake in case you unexpectedly need to show a Master lock who's boss.

>>63801791 (OP)
I wish .327 was more mainstream as the ability to carry that many different calibers is cool

>>63813636
desu I use it as a fidget toy more often than not. Because people get nervous in public when you start doing that cylender clicky spinny thing that makes my nipples hard

Snubbyanons: how do I not get my thumb cut up by the cylinder release on a j frame? I've been shooting them for years, but whenever I shoot without gloves, the cylinder release always cuts up my right thumb's first joint.
>>63812315
>Really no need for gutter sights anymore other than cost.
Novak rear sights rub a hole in my pockets with their sharp edges. OG j frame sights don't.

>>63813701
Sounds like you might need different grips and better pants

>>63813717
>grips
I've tried a number of them, only Pachmayr Compacs don't cause this, but they're not as concealable (or look as nice) as boot grips or grip panels + adapters.
>pants
I've got big thighs, even when I was an otherwise hungry skeleton teenager. Any sharp things in my pockets will be pushed against the outer pocket, hence rubbing a hole.

>>63813701
How are you holding it?

>>63801791 (OP)
With appropriate loads - and the additional round - sure. But you'd have to have some pocket carry use case when literally any semi-auto option (Bodyguard 2.0) would be better when windup toys lone-ssri wolves are less the prospective issue than Gaza Gliders popping up in some distributed horseshit, in which it will have been too late for it to dawn upon you that these pieces are fudd tech beyond the narrowest (and most selfish) of application. Having only crackheads and jogging muggers or road rage to worry about is a luxury, in which case you absolutely can afford something that won't have you caught out as useless rather than in position to proactively intercede on the no gunz public in their hour of need.

>>63813789
Like this:

>>63813824
You will never be the main character. You are not a sheep dawg. ND’ing into your kneecap is statistically more likely than you stopping a terrorist attack, let alone a mass shooter. Who thought a 5 pound striker trigger was a good idea for a pocket gun?
>>63814834
Maybe Hamre Forge AFR Undercover would increase length of pull and give you better purchase in the process. Could also look at the VZ High Horns.

>>63815737
>ND’ing into your kneecap is statistically more likely than you stopping a terrorist attack, let alone a mass shooter.
A "mass shooting" happens any time 4+ people are shot in one incident, so if you loiter in Chicago long enough you'll get a chance to stop one (but why would you?)

>>63814834
You know, there’s times I feel self-conscious about having small womanish hands despite being an otherwise big-framed 6’1” guy. Firing micro compacts and j-frames isn’t one of those times. I feel bad for guys with ogre hands who carry tiny pistols.

I think you already answered your own question in that you’re gonna have to sacrifice some concealability for more beefy grips, or change how you hold it. I also think the Ruger release won’t do that, so maybe rent an LCR and see if you like it?

>>63814834
You think that cylinder latch is rough on your thumb? Try using a Smith with the older flat latch.

Your only solution is to get a Ruger LCR. If the LCR's cylinder release cuts up your thumb, then you might as well give up on small snubs.

>>63802002
It can also chamber and fire 32 s&w long, if you've got an old top break h&r lying around

>>63817082
>if you've got an old top break h&r lying around
Isn't .32 S&W Long one of those fancy target shooting cartridges, mainly?

>>63808675
>when all you've wanted since this round hit market is a fuck huge revolver that can hold an absurd number of rounds that still looks normal
Is that really too much to ask?

>>63817694
>me when I'm asking S&W for a 10" X-frame that holds 16 rounds of .22 LR and has zero recoil

>>63801791 (OP)
I pocket carry a 642 because its cheap enough that i wont feel bad having it sit in a police locker for a few months, doesnt print too much and i had a ton of options for ammo selection.

>>63813824
>in which it will have been too late for it to dawn upon you that these pieces are fudd tech beyond the narrowest (and most selfish) of application.
Skill issue.

>>63817711
If they can make a S&W500 with a 3.5in barrel there is nothing stopping them.

>>63818462
Devil's advocate: a .22LR X-frame would require a substantially shorter cylinder and a barrel/forcing cone extending significantly into the cylinder window compared to normal X-frame chamberings,and it's not like S&W has ever done anything like that before

>>63804754
cut the barrel to 4" and shorten the grip frame down maybe 2" or so.

>>63815737
>>63815931
>>63816185
I guess I'll bite the bullet and use the bigger grips.