I’ve been carrying/shooting Glocks for the last 17 years (I’ve dabbled in other makes/models but never committed). The 19 has been my usual carry gun for most of the time.
Last year I noticed, after an extended range day, that my fingers weren’t fairing to well with the cramped grip of the 19. The infamous Glock knuckle hit me hard over the years. Needless to say the 19 was replaced with my 17 for a daily carry gun (Technically not replaced as I carry the 17 quit a bit). The grip on the 17 is much better for me/my hands and doesn’t cause me the pain the 19 does while shooting.
In comes the J-Frame. S&W 642 no-lock, NIB from a recent release of no-locks by S&W. I’m not well versed on revolvers. My experience over the years has been a Ruger SP101 and a Ruger Redhawk single action. Both in .357 and both not what I was really looking for in a carry gun. This 642 though, has been a real eye opener for me in regards to comforting/comfortable carry. Edited to add: I’ve been carrying the S&W for the last 8 months.
Is there a reason to even keep a Glock 19 if there is a gun that can do everything the 19 can sans the capacity?
The 642 is lighter, smaller, has more places it can be carried and better concealed.
So far I’m at 800 rounds out of the 642. My carry load is currently the Speer GDHP 135 Gr. +P. I plan on taking a revolver course in the future to better hone my shooting ability. I’m not sure when it will happen but it is on the schedule.
I become more convinced of this every day. Further, I have noticed a lot of folks have been moving this way. I think people who came up during the mag-ban era became obsessed with the idea of carrying hi-capacity weapons. Now that that time seems to have passed, people are steadily moving towards more rational carry weapons. This trend is mostly towards mini-nines, and that’s fine. I have my own reasons why I think the J-frame is a better choice than any of these, but I still think the basic rationale is the same.
At this point, I am carrying a loaded J-frame that has CT grips and a flashlight built in that weighs exactly the same as an unloaded Glock 43. It can be carried safely with or without a holster, it has no slide release to accidentally hold down or up. It can be fired inside a pocket, under water, etc. The J-frame is almost certainly all you need. But it can’t hurt to have the G19 sitting around just in case you end up in a James Bond movie or something. Most nights I just lay my J-frame beside the bed. I have an 870 with a flashlight for anything else that needs tending.
I often carry my j-frame for all the reasons stated above. But situation dictates. Islamists have already attacked churches and threatened to hit malls and other crowded soft targets. My snubby would be the worst choice in a crowded venue where I might have to shoot beyond 20 feet. I want confidence I can make the shot when Moohamid is spraying from across the room. Not an inconceivable situation these days and I’m afraid more likely in the near future and for a long time.
The sole reason you want to ditch the glock is because of glock knuckle? Why not just undercut and taper the trigger guard? It makes a world of difference.
Not the sole reason. But a very big part. That and the cramped grip of the 19 compared to my 17. I’ve used 19s from various custom places that had the undercut trigger guard. It did nothing for me. You just can’t lengthen the grip and if you do, you ought to just carry a 17.
The 642 is lighter, easier to conceal, much more comfortable to carry. So many different places to carry on the body. Fits my hand well, doesn’t cause me numbness in my fingers while shooting.
There’s other reasons but it’s minute. At least for the intended purpose of this thread.
I use an all steel j frame and it makes a huge difference on the range well worth the extra weight. While five rounds on tap is far from ideal in my state we have a ten ( or seven depending on what legal precedent you hang your hat on ) round cap limit so the difference ( much like the longstanding auto vs revolver debate of the early to mid eighties which I lived through ) is limited. I recently obtained a glock 42 ( couple more rounds capacity and quicker reloads with a marginally less effective cartridge) so it is a toss up. I have easily kept a cylinder full on target at 100 yards with the j frame so I have confidence in it. But the reality is for the vast majority of people autos are easier to hit with.
I often remind people ( auto or wheel gun doesn’t matter) the smaller the gun the harder to hit with.
But rule one is have a gun and a five shot snub ( or even a lowly 25 auto) beats a full size at home or in the car
I just don’t believe the 642 “can do everything the 19 can sans the capacity”? The G19 grip is too short for you but the 642 isn’t? I still have several J frames, but they are not guns I carry anymore. The good thing is we all get to choose what works for us, and if the 642 is your EDC choice, roll with it.
I own and carry a G19 and own and have carried J frames as well. The capacity difference, 16 rounds VS 5, is a huge advantage for the G19, but you are aware of that. The striker fired gun has a better, lighter trigger, especially with one of many replacement connector options that smooth them out. There are better, faster to get on target sight options for the Glock than the rudimentary sights on a J frame. The longer sight radius of the glock is an advantage. Carrying extra ammo and reloading is far easier and faster with the Glock. There are many more good defensive loads available in 9mm than 38 Spl. You can mount a light on the G19 rail which is not an option for the 642. True, the J frame is easier to carry and can go easily in a front pocket. The 19 is too big for pocket carry but with a good holster it certainly isn’t difficult.
The biggest drawback for me involves the theory that if you reach the point where you have to shoot a threat to defend your life, keep shooting until the threat is down. Many case studies show that multiple shots were required to stop the bad guy. Five rounds of 38 Spl doesn’t leave me feeling confident to be able to do that against one threat, let alone two or more.
I know, this is the revolver forum and I can feel the heat coming. I will still be carrying my 19 and extra mag when I leave the house today.
Yep, between the grip being too short and where the trigger guard comes in to meet the grip. Hard to describe but easy to show.
The 642 has a small grip, but it’s different in the way it fits my hand. Again, it needs to be seen rather than explained.
I’ve never been a capacity worried person. Don’t get me wrong, the thought is there. But it isn’t my main focus. Usually that’s reserved for; places I should and shouldn’t be, good/bad parts of town, time of day/night etc. I also choose to focus on ability to hit and also the ability to move.
To each their own really. Everyone’s thought process is different and opinions are just that, opinions. You’ll get no heat from me for that. Everything is a learnable lesson.
Well I am certainly not saying that a J-frame would be preferable to G19 in a shootout (except in a few specialized circumstances). And while it is true that there have been many instances where 1,2 5, 10, 15, etc rounds haven’t been effective, there have been many, many more instances where people had left their gun at home because it was too much hassle. If you live the kind of life where you can carry a G19 with 150 rounds of ammo (like the guy in the link) more power to you I guess. Most folks simply can’t do that. In my experience, most folks start out like that and either (1) find themselves excusing not carrying more and more or (2) move to more practical weapons for EDC. It is a trade-off, no doubt. It is hard for me to get past the convienience of simply dropping my pistol in my pocket and going. I am unarmed (1) in courthouses, (2) while asleep (beside the bed). That was not practically possible back when I carried compact pistols.
BTW, just recently it is much easier to put a easily portable light on a J-frame than even a Glock now.
The light fits in normal pocket holster and adds exactly 1 oz to the gun. The gun, loaded with laser and light weight 18 oz. That is the same weight as an unloaded Glock 43. It is pretty neat and handy.
The 43 still carries two more rounds and can be reloaded quickly with spare magazines. I am in the process of working out how I will carry mine with two spare mags. People who leave the gun home because it was too much hassle haven’t developed the mindset to carry, IMO. With a proper belt, holster, and mag pouch it is not difficult to carry a 19 with 31 rounds.
That is a nice little light. Is it bright enough to really be useful indoors?
It has nothing to do with mindset. It has to do with it being physically impossible to carry a lot of gear while dressed for summer in 105 degree heat.
The 43 still carries two more rounds and can be reloaded quickly with spare magazines. I am in the process of working out how I will carry mine with two spare mags. People who leave the gun home because it was too much hassle haven’t developed the mindset to carry, IMO. With a proper belt, holster, and mag pouch it is not difficult to carry a 19 with 31 rounds.
Gonna be tough carrying 145 rounds for that 43, but with the proper mindset, rock on. Not sure why you even have a 43 since the 19 is such a dream to carry.
That is a nice little light. Is it bright enough to really be useful indoors?
Like most modern handgun lights it is too powerful IMHO. 125 lumens. Which, if you have ever done any night training, is borderline too bright for indoor work. I prefer the old X200s. The light is available for the G43. I would be hesitant trusting hanging anything off the front of an untested Glock autoloader though.
