The Liberal Gun Club Forum

I keep detailed records for my work life constantly. Part of my work is actual applied research on data - so records are key.

I wish I had used the same discipline over the years with firearms. Particularly as it would inform me as I move away from "target plinking" to defensive shooter training.

My current carry weapon is a S&W M&P 340. It can shoot .357 magnums, but that seems like a joke. The small, light j-frame jerks around so much that precision suffers. (Another topic at the bottom of this thread.)

After many boxes of ammo run through in practice fire, I still group poorly with my snub nose. I suspect that the overly long pull and heavy trigger is a big part of it. No attempts to train myself to stage the trigger or dry firing seems to improve precision. My groups (of 5 of course) are usually as big as a paper plate at 7 yards. And that does not include the ever present "stray" (often 1 out of 5). I am practicing with standard pressure .38 special loads. I can't say the recoil is awful - it is simply stout.

Now for the lack of notes I never took ...

So am I a worse shot with this firearm than I was with my Ruger LCR in .38 sp? I really don't know. Memory serves me poorly in this matter.

The 5 shot j-frame is really all I need for defensive carry - I avoid trouble. But it seems dangerous to not be a able to hit with more precision.

I foolishly off boarded my Ruger LCR just when I got my M&P 340. Now I cannot conduct a side by side comparison. My memory is that the Ruger trigger was -much- better on the range than my S&W 340. The firearm was not heavier - the LCR .38 has the polymer frame. A few well kept records would have eliminated my subjective uncertainty.

Now for the controversial part of the thread: How fast does recoil and blast effect the small snub nose? I would need a very high speed camera to know and I cannot find videos on the subject (links to videos would be much appreciated.)

The common consensus is that if one can simply learn to control trigger flinch and keep a steady aim, then the gun will do the rest, regardless of caliber. I am starting to doubt this. The consensus assertion is that any recoil moment of the gun happens after the bullet has left the barrel - thus having no impact on the actual precision.

Here is a simple test I have conducted:

Put a mix of .38 sp and dummy loads into the revolver. I like to use 2 live and 3 dummy loads. And I load them without looking so I cannot tell the order. Then I aim and fire - watching of course to see if my barrel is aligned on a trigger pull for a dummy load. Overall, I do pretty well in this drill. And my precision with the 2 live rounds is identical to my normal groups.

A similar drill is to mix both .357 and .38 in the cylinder. I do this with my bigger 686 and the results are decent. With the 686, you really notice when the .357s go off, but my precision does not suffer. With the smaller j-frame, firing an unexpected .357 results in worse precision than I get with my .38 sp.

After an hour of this stuff, one starts to think of these wide double action groups from a j-frame as 'normal'. Then I get out my Walther PPK .22LR for "fun". Wow, what a surprise to hit with an inch of the bullseye every time for 100 rounds of .22LR.

Trigger flinch? I don't think so. Other than the fact that the very long pull on the 340 with .38 gives a lot of room for end-state error. The trigger on the j-frame does not 'stage' in any easy to determine manner. (I think my Ruger LCR did, but that is subjective.)

So the reason I would like to see some high speed film of short barrel recoil is this: Can this problem be fixed with more practice and perhaps some trigger work? Or is is just in the physics of the gun and the caliber? That is, does the effect of recoil move the barrel before the bullet exits the gun? Opinions and even equations will not help me here. I have looked for gas velocity models but there are too many interactions. Lead bullets travel does the barrel differently than clad bullets. Different powders burn at different rates, etc. The exact mechanics of a particular gun, bullet and charge would make too much variance for there to be a simple physics equation to use.

In essence, I am challenging the concept that it is all in the hold and the trigger pull. If these things are all that matter, then sneaking a few .357s into my mix of .38s should give me a few surprisingly heavy 'bangs' but the bullets should group the same. They do not group the same.

And if my supposition is true, then the entire concept of a potent caliber in a light gun goes out the window, regardless of practice.

I will not claim to have ever been that great a shot. I did get both expert pistol and rifle medals in the military, but the standard for 'expert' would not impress anyone.

With a .22lr pistol, I can drive tacks. With my 686 in single action mode, I can drive tacks with .38 special and have decent groups with .357. With my small j-frame (double action only) my groups do not look safe to me for defensive fire situations.

I would greatly appreciate someone with more expertise than I have enlightening me. I was following the path of 'practice will fix this' and I am simply not converging on decent precision with a small revolver.

(All of the above is the actual driving force for my long trials of the Sig P365, my tests of .380 ACP, etc. - simply looking for a small weapon that I can carry and with which I can hit decent groups .)

Thanks in advance for any insights on whether recoil moves the gun before the bullet exists.

Also - Happy New Year

Max, I've often wandered around the same lines, but you may be overlooking a factor, and that is recoil anticipation. In my case, I knew about it, and thought I had it under control, until one time my Range Officer (.45 ACP) did not fire and it was so glaringly obvious I was compensating for the recoil. Try to have a shooting buddy mix in a dummy round or two in your magazine, and see if that could be an issue.

See above, that was part of my testing. I do mix dummy rounds and live rounds. I usually do it myself, but I have had buddy do it too. I have enough practice fire that I have gotten over typical 'recoil anticipation'.

Now, make me put 20 rounds of full pressure .357 through that j-frame and I WILL develop a flinch :-) That is actually one reason why I mostly practice with standard pressure .38 special.

My Wife and I head a small concealed carry support group here and over the last few years we (and the group) have shared guns and helped each other learn to shoot defensively and supported each other. Lots of novice shooters, lots of abused (spouses picked their guns and "mentored" them into being terrified) shooters and lots of questions. Here's what I have discovered being a person who learned to shoot on a .357 revolver and having a FIL that was a cop/farmer - a .38/.357 snubbie is about the hardest gun to shoot of them all. They kick like mules, muzzle blast is formidable, and they are hard to hold, control, and group with. Snubbie revolvers are *experts* guns and nor for aging folks nor folks who practice once a month.

In a blind test of these opinions we took half a dozen folks who were dyed in the wool DA Revolver aficionados (I was one of them) and had them shoot "combat style"/self defense style at 15' with .38 Special snub revolvers with +P ammo (and some .357) with a variety of guns like a Ruger LCR, S&W snubbies in various models, Colt Detectives, etc. Some of them were shocked to find that they couldn't really hit shit drawing from concealment and shooting center mass on a standard target at 15'. The same folks to a person (me included) scored instantly with a subcompact 9mm or .380 subcompact holding 2 more rounds and having a reload time of less than 3 seconds.

I dearly love Revolvers but for concealed carry they have been massively superseded by small 9mm and .380 pistols. Lower recoil, better recovery, more rounds, faster reloads, more accuracy - at least 2 of the folks in the study who were hard core snubbie revolver advocates shucked their S&W revolvers for 9mm subcompacts after the test. They hit much better, much faster, and had 2 more rounds and a 3 second reload as compared to a "this ain't gonna happen" reload with a .38 revolver.

I can shoot serious shit with a 2.5" Dan Wesson .357 with full house loads...scares the kids with the muzzle blast and the loud ringing. Then I pick up my 9mm Sig Sauer P290RS or my Beretta Px4 SC and pound the shit out of a silhouette target at 15' and my Wife hammers the same with a Browning 1911 .380 or Sig P238 or a Glock 42 and it all become fairly clear. The .38 special or .357 mag Revolver has been superseded by subcompact auto pistols.

Snubbie Revolvers are arguably the hardest handguns to master. I love the simplicity and all that but they are guns for experts that practice weekly and seriously. I'll take a 13+1 round 9mm subcompact any day over a 5 shot .357 revolver stoked with .38 Special +P. The profile of the pistol and rapid fire control and hot/reload probability dwarf my revolvers. I think the OP is experiencing the limitations of a revolver. In close combat they fail outside of 6' shooting...most folks can't hit shit with them and become a liability in a gunfight beyond arms length. Snubbie revolvers are belly guns best shot at arms length thru a coat pocket and at this they excel.

VooDoo

VodoundaVinci said:

Some of them were shocked to find that they couldn't really hit shit drawing from concealment and shooting center mass on a standard target at 15'.

This is about where I am. I find it as a bit of a surprise because I love revolvers, but bigger ones. I assumed that with practice, I would get to be a decent shot with a sub nose. It has not happened. I am migrating towards a smaller .380 semi-auto, but I got a Mulligan on my first attempt. It turns out that the trigger on the S&W Bodyguard .380 is roughly as bad as the trigger on my j-frame.

I am going to rent a P238 and see how I shoot with it.

Thanks for your detailed feedback - it confirms what I am experiencing. And congrats to you on your support group!

I have to agree with Voo
Doo on the snubnose as a belly gun. That is even when I carry my 686plus 3inch or the Ruger Alaskan. I don’t use full house mag loads in ether gun when I carry. A good wadcutter or semi wadcutter at close range causes devastating wounds.

We have been very happy with our 238. It’s easy enough for my wife to rack and small enough to pocket easily. Both of us shoot it well.

I killed any flinch by shooting revolvers loaded "load one, skip one, load two" then spin the cylinder without looking before closing. When the hammer drops on an empty chamber you can see the flinch. Your technique of using dummies does the same thing.

It might help to do what I do, which is to say "bang" when I'm practicing with snap caps. I say that the first several rounds at the range as well.

You can do it. You can eliminate flinch.

CDFingers

I have an lcr in 327. Bought it in part for the trigger, but more to the point, I have a bunch of choices in ammo, and shooting 32 long has really helped when it comes to shooting full on 327, which is nothing to sneeze at. Haven’t shot it lately though. Need to get it out to the range.

max129 wrote: Tue Jan 01, 2019 8:39 pm

VodoundaVinci said:

Some of them were shocked to find that they couldn't really hit shit drawing from concealment and shooting center mass on a standard target at 15'.

This is about where I am. I find it as a bit of a surprise because I love revolvers, but bigger ones. I assumed that with practice, I would get to be a decent shot with a sub nose. It has not happened. I am migrating towards a smaller .380 semi-auto, but I got a Mulligan on my first attempt. It turns out that the trigger on the S&W Bodyguard .380 is roughly as bad as the trigger on my j-frame.

I am going to rent a P238 and see how I shoot with it.

Thanks for your detailed feedback - it confirms what I am experiencing. And congrats to you on your support group!

I recently rented a bunch of .380's. I also found the S&W Bodyguard to have a horrible trigger. Additionally I found, much to my surprise considering its size, that the Ruger LCP handled well and was much more accurate then all of the other subcompact .380's I tried that day. Of course, just because it worked well for me doesn't guarantee it will work well for everyone, but it might be worth looking at.