Quote:
Originally Posted by commando552
I would disagree with that, as not only does it have the shorter barrel it also has a smaller grip spur, no external hammer spur, narrower (single stack) and shorter grip, weighs about half a pound less and lower profile sights (compared to some other Smiths like the 459). All together, it is smaller, lighter and less snag-able than a full size S&W auto.
|
Hammer snag and the size of the sights are not concerns of physically carrying the gun, but drawing it. I suppose that the 3913 is more snag proof, but my point was that the size reductions of the gun are not enough to make any discernible difference for the actual carrying of the gun, or the comfort in carry.
Aside from the half inch length off the front and the grip, the other reductions are roughly 2/10ths of an inch all around, including the grip width. The window where the 3913 would be permissible where the full size gun would not be is very, very small, and if the full size gun doesn't work when the 3913 does, it's as simple as changing your wardrobe or getting a better holster.
I will concede that perhaps the narrowing of the grip combined with the narrowing of the slide stop may reduce the pressure of the slide stop digging into someone carrying the gun, but this does not address the concealment issues that will still be present. You have to be a very particular person with a very discriminatory body type to where 2/10ths of an inch matters with regard to a gun being seen or not.
I've just come to understand that the "compact" versions of guns are not much smaller than their full size counterparts, and will typically bear the same issues as their bigger brothers. In carrying my P228 off and on, and trying out new methods of carry, I see how it fails in a lot of the ways that its full size counterpart would. I still like it because it's cool, but I still think a P226 would conceal the the exact same level of adequacy, and give me 2 extra rounds.