[AL Bundy's Dodge]

I would like to get a small, pocketable pistol to ccw, maybe carry it IWB sometimes. Basically, something to carry from time to time when a larger pistol is unpractical or a hassle.

I would prefer a Glock for many reasons, but the loaded weight and size keep pointing me towards the J- frame.

My question to those of you who retired their J-frame in favor of a g42 or g43 is why did you do so? Is it the better sights? More rounds? Durability? More enjoyable to shoot?

Also, would a g26 have retired your J-frame?

 

[1-2man]

I like the slimmer profile for pocket carry and the added rounds is a plus as well.

 

[tx gunrunner]

I like the slimmer profile for pocket carry and the added rounds is a plus as well.

Here is some of mine .

 

[cgff]

OP
I retired my 442 and 640 and went to a G26 basically for all of the reasons you asked about and for one more compatability with coworkers. Try shooting a J frame at a 7-10yard target then do the same with a G26/27/33 accuracy? shootability, reloads etc. Jframes are great but today there are a lot of options. nice thing about the shrouded hammer revolvers is you can fire them from a coat pocket if need be.

 

[Buckeye63]

Sorry sir .. But I will never retire any of my 38spl five shooters

 

[Rankor]

My 642 hasn't been put out to pasture, but it does get less carry time while I'm out.

Sometimes, I used to carry the 26 with the 642 as a b/u. But the 43's been getting bug time (even primary carry time) since I got it.

(The 43) is pocketable, it's 9mm, carries 6+1 rounds, and it's a Glock, the same as the 26. But the 642 is still very pocketable. I am always armed when at home, with the 642 in the pocket at the very least.

 

[Rocky7]

In the 90's and with the introduction of the 26/27 platform, the small revolvers were set aside. Capacity, accuracy, eaze of use and maintenance were the reasons. Perceived weight and size were no longer an issue abd because of my size pocket carry attainable. Revolvers were sold and I never looked back.

 

[BuckyP]

Not entirely retired, but for the most part I set aside my 642. Although did so for a P938, not the G43 as it didn't exist at the time.

 

[XPD]

I carried department mandated revolvers, both 4" and 2" for many years but after retirement I went to semi-autos for EDC. These days for my pants pocket a G43 rides in a DeSantis Nemesis. For coat pocket a G26 in the same holster. Also, both of these guns disappear in a Kusiak Leather IWB holster under a T-shirt.

Why? Ammunition capacity, power of the ammunition and low recoil. I found a lightweight J-frame rather nasty with +P ammunition and did not enjoy practicing with it.

 

[TeaDub]

My 642 hasn't been put out to pasture, but it does get less carry time while I'm out.

That's about where I am since picking up my 43. I have carried airweight J-frames for a long time and I'm too comfortable with their performance to ever retire them completely. In warmer weather I pocket carry a good bit. Weight is the key for that mode of carry, IMO. An airweight has been the upper limit in weight for my pocket. The new 43 is pushing that a bit, but I may get used to it. The 26/27? No way for me. In cooler weather the 642 also really shines in a coat pocket.

Nope. I'm holding on to my ancient wheel guns. :wavey:

 

[dbarn]

I've tried to carry a Glock 26 in the pocket and did not like the bulk. Same with the G43 that belonged to someone else. The perfect pocket pistol in the Glock line is a G42 .380. Am I willing to give up a scandium, titanium S&W J frame model 340SC that weighs 11 oz? No. I have crimson trace grips on it and carry .38 +P Speer GD. Though rated for .357, the +P rounds are tolerable for an up close and personal pistol.

From this point I can transition to a G19 IWB carry (according to dress) and call it good.

 

[boone10]

dbarn mentioned Crimson Trace so I'll chase that squirrel a moment. I installed CT grips on a 642 a few years ago and WOW what a difference. Even when I block the laser with tape (to simulate malfunction, etc.) accuracy is much better with my Jframes than all the years prior. A quality, proper installed laser (nothing but Crimson Trace for me) that is passively activated (nothing to turn on) is a wonderful thing on the small revolvers--AND it will greatly improve your accuracy with regular dry and occasional live fire. YMMV

My "almost" EDC is a 43. Other guns are carried--especially while working outside (tractor work, etc.) when I opt for a larger revolver. IWB and OWB are great with the 43--its just a little too large for my pocket and didn't purchase it for that anyway. Again, YMMV

 

[tx gunrunner]

Here is my Kahr CW 45 I cut the grip frame to take CM45 mags to pocket carry with a laser and it super thin .

 

[AL Bundy's Dodge]

Thanks for the thorough responses.

I asked because i figured most j-frame guys would probably have a lot of experience in ccw/off duty carry(which I don't!) and i was curious what was working best for everyone.

Ive owned a couple snubs over the years and sold almost all of them. Todays semi autos just offer more versatility and performance.

Sometimes, its just hard to let go of the past and things you are comfortable with. I just need to get over the blocky design and slightly more weight for things like pocket carry.

 

[JJM]

My EDC is the G42, great pocket pistol. I also have a Ruger LCR and like it fine but the G42 handles better (for me).

 

[153]

I never liked the S&W J frame for pocket carry, it's shape just didn't work for me. Much prefer nice flat semi-autos. I used to carry an LCP, it was very nice. But the Glock 42 is a dream pistol. It's just a little longer than the LCP, but it's got real nice XS sights, a good trigger (Ghost Edge) as is a way better shooter. My 42 has been 100% reliable with any ammo.

After being spoiled by the 42, I doubt I could ever go back to my S&W 37 or 640-1 for EDC.

 

[jaredshs]

mark me down as the heretic here----I am old---really old----have been a S&W fan boy all my life---have always been a wheel gun lover. Having said this I have changed from carrying a SV9 inside the waistband with a 642 in the
front pocket for backup to only carrying a Gen4-G27 in ;the pocket with two extra mags in the other pocket. Now instead of 16 rounds of 9 mm backed iup with 5 rounds of 38 sp, I have 27 rounds of 40 S&W, much more carryable
and much more conceilable. with less weight. Not saying I am completely down on S&W but there were issues on the 642 finish that I just could not accept, and the SV9 did little to impress me. Anyway now I am happy and Glock-I am here to stay.

 

[AL Bundy's Dodge]

mark me down as the heretic here----I am old---really old----have been a S&W fan boy all my life---have always been a wheel gun lover. Having said this I have changed from carrying a SV9 inside the waistband with a 642 in the
front pocket for backup to only carrying a Gen4-G27 in ;the pocket with two extra mags in the other pocket. Now instead of 16 rounds of 9 mm backed iup with 5 rounds of 38 sp, I have 27 rounds of 40 S&W, much more carryable
and much more conceilable. with less weight. Not saying I am completely down on S&W but there were issues on the 642 finish that I just could not accept, and the SV9 did little to impress me. Anyway now I am happy and Glock-I am here to stay.

This says alot

 

[fastbolt]

Haven't yet felt interested in adding a G43 (or Shield 9) to my retirement CCW collection. I have several subcompact pistols that serve me for mostly "belt gun" roles, although under some circumstances, depending on the clothing being worn, I've used pocket-holster carry. My "subcompact" size pistols include a pair of G26's, a G27, CS9, CS45 & a SW999c.

I also, however, continue to use several J-frames (I own more than half a dozen of them), as well as the truly "pocketable" (holstered) pair of LCP's I own. FWIW, when comparing overall size & weight I ended up buying a second LCP instead of a G42 (which I could've bought for less than the stainless LCP at my local cop shop), but that's simply when considering the size/weight of what I normally consider practical for my needs for pocket-holstered retirement weapons.

If the G43 & Shield were just a bit smaller/lighter, and I was still in my youthful "collecting" mode, I'd have probably bought one of each by now ... but I'd still be using one of my J's from time to time, as they fit in pockets that won't hold my subcompact 9/.40/.45 pistols.

Just depends on the individual user and his/her perceived needs and preferences.

I looked at the G43 again yesterday, when I was doing the paperwork for a different firearm at one of the cop shops. The LE price was $380 (plus tax & transfer) at that store, which seems pretty reasonable (but more than the Shield through a S&W LE dealer, last time I heard).

Nice to have choices.

 

[Rock2411]

A G26/27 has far greater firepower and accuracy but I went back to a S&W 642 because it's light and easy to carry. Still have the G27 but for a quick trip to the store my J-frame is my go to firearm.