There are currently several revolvers are now produced with internal locks. These include Ruger, Taurus and others. Some revolvers feature a built-in locking mechanism with the keyway located just above and behind the cylinder release on the left side of the frame. Once inserted the key can be rotates 90 degrees to either lock or unlock the weapon. In some revolver models featuring an exposed hammer, when you activate the lock a small metal tab will protrude from the frame adjacent to the hammer to indicate the status of the locking device. Currently some hammerless models have no such external indicator. There are two common questions posed regarding internal locks. First, are they a valuable feature and second, if not, what actual risks if any are associated with internal locks.
I don’t like ported barrels on self-defense guns nor do I care for them on range training guns. The clearest danger is the risk of hot, explosive gases vented up into the shooters eyes and face. It is true that a ported barrel will let a shooter shoot faster because it will reduce muzzle jump. And unlike the barrel porting on majority of semi-auto pistols, a ported revolver barrel generally adds nothing to the barrel’s length that could reduces concealability. And yes some shooters who praise barrel porting argue that since they neither plan to shoot from a “close in” retention position where the gun is held close to the floating rib nor practice the growingly uncommon “speed rock” draw-and-fire drills they are never going to have the gun directly below their eyes, and can therefore benefit from the advantages porting offers. Regardless, I believe a ported barrel on a self-defense gun remains a poor idea.
First, porting reduces velocity which in turn makes bullet expansion out of a short barrel even more unlikely. Diverting 5-, 10- or 15% of the already limited velocity cannot possibly advance the goal of rapidly incapacitation of an attacker.
Second, redirecting some portion of the muzzle flash in front of, behind or on both sides of the front sight blade only adds to the difficulty of locating the front sight between low light shots.
Third, there always remains the risk of venting gasses into the shooter’s eyes. It may be true that the shooter never plans to have the gun in a position where the gasses can be vented up toward his face, but his attacker may not be so obliging. If the gun owner hear a 2 a.m. noise he may just decide to check it out, and he may do it with that snub tucked in close to his ribs. Then if he has to fire, the vents are positioned in a line beneath his face and eyes. Even if he does keep his arms extended while he peeks around the halls looking his a.m. guest, the dressed, alert and awake attacker might lunge for the gun owner’s gun. Might that gun owner not reflexively retract the gun and end up in the same close in shooting position described above. And if he doesn’t retract the gun back in time and both the gun owner and the intruder start fighting over control for the gun, well then that bad guy may just decide to live-test the “walk-through” disarming technique commonly practiced by bad guys in prison. Just before the gun comes ripping up and out of the gun owner’s hand the walk-through will positions the top of the snub’s barrel inches in front of the owner’s eyes. Now you have 200-plus pounds of home owner and 200-plus pounds of attacker fighting over a weapon designed to discharge with at maximum 14-pounds of pressure. Might the gun now inches in front of the gun owner’s eyes discharge? Did he plan on wearing his safety glasses during his house search? Even if he commonly wears prescription glasses, can he expect to keep them in place during a violent fight over that gun?
Sometimes the risk from the ported barrel doesn’t come from choosing to keep the gun tucked close in. J.H. FitzGerald wrote decades ago in his book Shooting about the advantages of the short barreled revolver in close confines such as an automobile. Swinging the snub from inside the automobile invariably keeps the barrel and any barrel porting close to the defender’s face. I would rather not have to factor in defending myself from a driver’s side carjacker (when I’m driving) while I have the ported vents directly below my face. Nor do I wish to have to defend against a passenger side carjacker when my wife is riding next to me and the vents will be directly under her eyes.
I favor harnessing all of the available expanding gas to drive the bullet at maximum velocity and into my attacker rather than diverting some portion of that gas away from my attacker and venting it into the eyes of someone I love. Armed self-defense is challenging enough when you have working vision. It can hardly be any less challenging when you willingly choose to either temporarily or permanently injure your vision at the opening bell of the fight.
Some shooters counter with “I only use it as a range gun.” While almost any range training is better than no range training and I can and will argue for the many benefits of training with smaller caliber, reduced caliber and Primer Only Propelled (POP) substitution ammunition. I am at best leery about earmarking gunsmithing funds for a “feature” that does not enhance the snub’s effectiveness as a self-defense weapon. The amount of money spent on porting is better spent on other more effective and practical features that clearly enhance self-defense.
I am under impressed with the popular ultra-lightweight titanium and scandium snubs. They may be a joy to carry but they suffer several disadvantages as self-defense weapons.
First, responsible gun carrying requires competence and a simple measure of competence is range qualification. A basic qualification score against a standardized range exam can be extremely challenging with these ultra-light guns. Recoil is often severe due to the gun’s light weight. A majority of shooters find a fifty round qualification exam with an Airweight snub challenging but not punishing. That same fifty round exam with an ultra light snub can be something between unpleasant to a downright brutal experience. Doing well against a life-threatening assault would be made even more difficult by using a weapon that taxes low-stress range exam standards.
Second, in order to continue to minimize weight many of the traditional solid one-piece barrels were replaced with a two piece barrel consisting of an outer shell and an inner sleeve. While lighter, the resulting two piece barrel generally does not produce the accuracy normally expected with the traditional barrel. How bad a spread? I know of one very skilled shooter who could not get his ultra-light weight gun to group smaller than 8-inches at 15 feet. Maybe it was a fluke. Was it only one gun out of tens of thousands? Maybe. A portion of the folks who come the snub program and shoot ultra-light snub tend to shoot poorer groups by the end of the day rather than better. Of course it could be just poor instruction (mine) but if it was, I would expect to see the same results with the Airweight, blue steel and stainless steel shooters and I don’t. I suspect it is more a problem with the punishing recoil adding up over 100 or 150 rounds. Some shooters either swap out the light guns early in the class or dismiss the whole problem by claiming that in a “real” fight they will only need (or have) five rounds or ten rounds. Again maybe, but if I had a gun that I would not or could not shoot responsibility over a 100-round training course would I want to rely on the same gun as my primary summer access weapon or my final last ditch uber–emergency back-up gun?
Third, ultra-lightweight snubs can occasionally prove less than 100% reliable with the classic plus-P lead semi-wadcutter self-defense hollow points. The sudden violent recoil is known to pull cases away from the unjacketed bullets while in the cylinder’s charge holes. The cases can be pulled so far rearward and away from the bullet that the freed bullet nose will sometimes move forward enough to block the rotation of the cylinder, seizing up the gun. It is also not unknown that under recoil that some rounds will actually disassemble while still in the cylinder. This is not known to me to ever have happed with Airweight or all-steel snubs. If a shooter insists in loading plus-P pressure rounds in his ultra-light snub he should consider limiting his ammunition to a round with a jacketed bullet.
Studying, training and teaching snub skills has lead me to believe that there are a few common features that do little or nothing to enhance the snub as a self-defense weapon. While almost all features have some value my experience is that there are three features in particular have passed the point of diminishing returns. These include ultra-light frames, ported barrels, and “that-what-must-not-be-named.”
Reloading the revolver is an exercise in precision. Trying to insert small uniformly sized cases into exactly measured charge holes is a task onto itself. Add stress and the task becomes a challenge. One of the things that will slow down reloading the revolver is the outer edge of the cartridge’s shoulder contacting the inner edges of the cylinder’s charge hole. When using a five or six round speed loader the shoulder of any single round can prevent the whole set being reloaded into the cylinder.
A simple solution is to slightly bevel or chamfer the edges of the cylinder’s charge holes. Removing just enough of the inner edge of the charge holes to give them a funnel shape in microcosm and will go a long way in speeding up reloads. The edges of the charge holes need to be beveled only slightly and the work should be performed only by a competent gunsmith. A skilled gunsmith will know exactly how much material to remove and at what angle the chamfer should be made. He will also know how much material to leave because if the chamfering is cut to larger it will leave insufficient material at the mouth of the charge hole to support the rim.
A snub with a properly chamfered cylinder is easier to reload and could well turn out to be a life saver. Note that if you own a titanium cylinder snub you have to spend more time either practicing your reloads or your second snub draw skills as chamfering a titanium cylinder is a difficult if not an impossible task.
I have had several occasions to see and handle XS Sights, in particular their “Big Dot” front sight and I will admit that at first I was a little underwhelmed. The sight and sight picture were not in keeping with any sighting style I had shot with in the past. Even though the system offered some promise I couldn’t see how it anything substantial over a traditional sight picture. Then I had a chance to work with several handguns fitted with them at Khyber Training’s annual 1-Inch to 100-Yard conference in Nevada. On the live fire range there were multiple drills against variable sized targets at unknown distances and under lighting conditions that varied from dimming light to night. In the low light the XS sights did everything I expected from night sights. The Big Dot front sight was easy to see, and easy to align on every target. Hits were consistent at distances out to twenty feet. The Big Dot made each shooting drill and test I could work up it a snap to perform. But the biggest and most pleasant surprise came when a shooter offered to loan to me his J-frame sporting a Big Dot front sight and what XS Sights euphemistically refers to as an unauthorized modification. In lieu of the their traditional V-style rear sight this J-frame sported a distinctive U-shaped rear channel cut into the rear of the top strap. To align the snub the Big Dot is put on the target and the rear sight straddles under the Big Dot. After five quick snap shots at various targets I had only a one word reaction. WOW! I found that the natural alignment of the Big Dot on the target and the U-channel was stunningly quick. Were the shot-groups bulls-eye tight? No, but I was not trying for bull’s eyes results. Were the shot-groups gun-fight tight? Yes, in fact better than that. The shot-groups at the speed I was pushing the sight alignment were wonderfully smaller than I could have expected. I did note that when shooting in the night and working with a preferred jaw-line style flashlight technique that I had to cant the snub slightly inboard to avoid casting a shadow into the U-cut channel, but the cant was so shallow it was almost instinctive. By the time I had run out of ammunition they had to pry that snub out of my hand or more acutely pry that snub with those sights out. I will definitely be applying the Big Dot XS sights and U-cut channel grove to several of my personal protection snubs and at least one of my teaching snubs. For long range shooting the XS may have its limitations. The actual proof or disproof of that will have to wait for a detailed range test. But under stress-drills and force on force exercises, I think the XS Big Dot site advantages sell themselves and on a self-defense gun, this XS Sights can be a literal life saver.
Dear Fellow Snub Shooters:
I hope this note finds you well.
I will be away on a range training event until Monday, June 22.
I will be back on the keyboard on the 22nd.
Until then, I hope you will enjoy your Father’s Day!
Michael de Bethencourt