Good day Taurus & Taurus lovers,
Don't discount my request until you hear me out, please. I would love to see Taurus create a Centennial (concealed hammer) model of their 942M Ultra-lite as a dedicated concealed carry gun. I would like to see the Taurus small revolver orange/tritium front sight pre-installed, perhaps a little trigger work from the factory, and perhaps an improved grip such as the Hogue Bantam one piece grip which is available for the S&W J-frames. Why do I want this revolver? Here are my thoughts.
There are of course people who are recoil sensitive. 22 magnum, though not ideal, is a decent round which I have and would bet my life on in certain circumstances. More importantly, my wife doesn't like recoil or weight, so a lighter, 8 round 22 magnum is a decent weapon that she will carry and can shoot competently. My wife aside, I know others, generally women, older folks, and folks with medical conditions who may not be comfortable with a more powerful round. There are also some folks who cannot afford to practice much with higher priced ammunition. I would rather have my wife and these friends carry a 942M than a sharp stick, stun gun, or pepper spray.
The Centennial (concealed hammer) design is a plus in that it brings simplicity to the revolver. There are basically two controls for a shooter to learn; the trigger and the cylinder release. There is no hammer to snag on clothing or to confuse the shooter under stress; it is a clean, simple design. As a ten year military & 33 year law enforcement veteran, I personally do not subscribe to the mindset that an exposed hammer is a liability in a self-defense shooting. Still, lots of people looking for defensive revolvers do believe this, and yes, lawyers will try to make hay off of it if they can. The Centennial design completely removes that element from the equation.
22 magnum is a reliable, inexpensive, reasonably powerful (22LR rifle-like performance from a snubby) round which allows for more practice. Again, I do not argue that the 22 magnum is an ideal defensive round, but I do argue that it can be an effective round, and if folks will practice, shoot, and carry it, then it is an ideal round for that individual. Shooting my 942M I can unload all eight rounds into a very nice grouping in a short time, due to the lack of recoil; the sights stay on target allowing faster follow-up shots. Also, in my time as a detective, I worked many, many deceased GSW victims. The vast majority of those were hit with a 22LR or a 380, followed by a few 9mm or 38 victims. Most of those were one shot fatalities as well. Yes, even with the 22LR from a handgun; it can be a very effective round.
I have no hesitation in my wife carrying a 942M, or carrying it myself if the mood strikes me. Actually, depending on where we travel, three 942M snubbies are our travel guns. I carry two, she carries the other, and we can pack an extra 100 rounds of ammo in a light, compact package. Praise God we've not needed them yet, but if we should, I know that we're competently armed.
S&W has the 351C, a 22 magnum Centennial J-frame with a seven-shot cylinder. This should be ideal, right? No, it's not. The 351C is a neat concept, but the alloy cylinder causes issues. I bought my 351C brand new. I've fired approximately 20 rounds through it, and it has just come back from it's second trip to S&W for repair due to the spent casings getting bound in the chambers. Tabs break off of the aluminum extraction star, the casings bind in the chambers, it's just a terrible design. It's light as can be, and would be a joy to carry, but a steel cylinder/extractor is needed. I'm not alone. Many reports are out there of similar issues. While I do trust my wife to a Taurus 942M, there is no way on earth that I will trust her life or mine to a 351C; it's just a piece of junk.
S&W and Lipseye's just released the Ultimate Carry revolver line. Personally I think it's a great move. The softer shooting 32 calibers do have a place in the self-defense world with some shooters, and a few design changes to the J-frame are certainly welcomed. The updated trigger, improved sights, and Centennial design all make a revolver that has the potential to be of great use to both seasoned shooters and those considering their first self-defense handgun. Again though, S&W is releasing a product that is having problems right out of the gate. There are plenty of reports, photographs, and video online showing numerous problems....let's call it what it is, shoddy craftsmanship. I've seen enough issues documented that, as much as I'd love to purchase an Ultimate Carry, I'll wait a long while until the bugs are ironed out.
I think that Taurus could jump in here with a Cetennial style 942M, or even perhaps 32 H&R, and give S&W a run for their money in this area. There is a true market out there for small, lighter (steel cylinder please), easily handled revolvers for self-defense. I do hope that those in charge of decisions at Taurus will at least consider this idea.
I fully expect to be roasted in this thread since I've dared to recommend a 22 caliber round for self-defense, and that's okay. Flame away. I can only put forth the thoughts which I've formed through my life experience. If you disagree, I'm okay with that.
God bless.
Edit: I did neglect to mention the Ruger LCR in 22 magnum. Yes, it would fit the need, but I don't recommend it to folks. If I'm going to recommend a 22 magnum revolver for someone, it will be the 942M with eight rounds on board instead of six. I don't think I'd be making this post to Taurus had Ruger released the LCR 22M with an eight round cylinder instead of six.
Don't discount my request until you hear me out, please. I would love to see Taurus create a Centennial (concealed hammer) model of their 942M Ultra-lite as a dedicated concealed carry gun. I would like to see the Taurus small revolver orange/tritium front sight pre-installed, perhaps a little trigger work from the factory, and perhaps an improved grip such as the Hogue Bantam one piece grip which is available for the S&W J-frames. Why do I want this revolver? Here are my thoughts.
There are of course people who are recoil sensitive. 22 magnum, though not ideal, is a decent round which I have and would bet my life on in certain circumstances. More importantly, my wife doesn't like recoil or weight, so a lighter, 8 round 22 magnum is a decent weapon that she will carry and can shoot competently. My wife aside, I know others, generally women, older folks, and folks with medical conditions who may not be comfortable with a more powerful round. There are also some folks who cannot afford to practice much with higher priced ammunition. I would rather have my wife and these friends carry a 942M than a sharp stick, stun gun, or pepper spray.
The Centennial (concealed hammer) design is a plus in that it brings simplicity to the revolver. There are basically two controls for a shooter to learn; the trigger and the cylinder release. There is no hammer to snag on clothing or to confuse the shooter under stress; it is a clean, simple design. As a ten year military & 33 year law enforcement veteran, I personally do not subscribe to the mindset that an exposed hammer is a liability in a self-defense shooting. Still, lots of people looking for defensive revolvers do believe this, and yes, lawyers will try to make hay off of it if they can. The Centennial design completely removes that element from the equation.
22 magnum is a reliable, inexpensive, reasonably powerful (22LR rifle-like performance from a snubby) round which allows for more practice. Again, I do not argue that the 22 magnum is an ideal defensive round, but I do argue that it can be an effective round, and if folks will practice, shoot, and carry it, then it is an ideal round for that individual. Shooting my 942M I can unload all eight rounds into a very nice grouping in a short time, due to the lack of recoil; the sights stay on target allowing faster follow-up shots. Also, in my time as a detective, I worked many, many deceased GSW victims. The vast majority of those were hit with a 22LR or a 380, followed by a few 9mm or 38 victims. Most of those were one shot fatalities as well. Yes, even with the 22LR from a handgun; it can be a very effective round.
I have no hesitation in my wife carrying a 942M, or carrying it myself if the mood strikes me. Actually, depending on where we travel, three 942M snubbies are our travel guns. I carry two, she carries the other, and we can pack an extra 100 rounds of ammo in a light, compact package. Praise God we've not needed them yet, but if we should, I know that we're competently armed.
S&W has the 351C, a 22 magnum Centennial J-frame with a seven-shot cylinder. This should be ideal, right? No, it's not. The 351C is a neat concept, but the alloy cylinder causes issues. I bought my 351C brand new. I've fired approximately 20 rounds through it, and it has just come back from it's second trip to S&W for repair due to the spent casings getting bound in the chambers. Tabs break off of the aluminum extraction star, the casings bind in the chambers, it's just a terrible design. It's light as can be, and would be a joy to carry, but a steel cylinder/extractor is needed. I'm not alone. Many reports are out there of similar issues. While I do trust my wife to a Taurus 942M, there is no way on earth that I will trust her life or mine to a 351C; it's just a piece of junk.
S&W and Lipseye's just released the Ultimate Carry revolver line. Personally I think it's a great move. The softer shooting 32 calibers do have a place in the self-defense world with some shooters, and a few design changes to the J-frame are certainly welcomed. The updated trigger, improved sights, and Centennial design all make a revolver that has the potential to be of great use to both seasoned shooters and those considering their first self-defense handgun. Again though, S&W is releasing a product that is having problems right out of the gate. There are plenty of reports, photographs, and video online showing numerous problems....let's call it what it is, shoddy craftsmanship. I've seen enough issues documented that, as much as I'd love to purchase an Ultimate Carry, I'll wait a long while until the bugs are ironed out.
I think that Taurus could jump in here with a Cetennial style 942M, or even perhaps 32 H&R, and give S&W a run for their money in this area. There is a true market out there for small, lighter (steel cylinder please), easily handled revolvers for self-defense. I do hope that those in charge of decisions at Taurus will at least consider this idea.
I fully expect to be roasted in this thread since I've dared to recommend a 22 caliber round for self-defense, and that's okay. Flame away. I can only put forth the thoughts which I've formed through my life experience. If you disagree, I'm okay with that.
God bless.
Edit: I did neglect to mention the Ruger LCR in 22 magnum. Yes, it would fit the need, but I don't recommend it to folks. If I'm going to recommend a 22 magnum revolver for someone, it will be the 942M with eight rounds on board instead of six. I don't think I'd be making this post to Taurus had Ruger released the LCR 22M with an eight round cylinder instead of six.
