After months of hunting we did locate a plating company capable of refinishing a portion of the remaining satin shrouds in an attractive gun blue. I am happy to say that the finished product looks great.

Both the refinished Waller and Sons hammer shrouds and the satin Colt shrouds are available for $42.00 each. Blue and satin shrouds for the S&W J-frame (with the firing pin on the hammer’s nose) are available for $35.00.

To order a hammer shroud please mail either a 3? x 5? or 5? x 8? padded envelope and affix $1.51 in stamps for the return postage. Checks should be made out to NTS/Hammer Shroud.

Be sure to print your return address and add a note indicating whether you are requesting a blue-black or satin color hammer shroud, and specify the revolver.

The mailing address is: SnubTraining.com, Attn: Hammer Shrouds,
8 Kingsbury Lane, North Billerica, MA 01862

If you have any questions or would like to talk about hammer shrouds pros and cons, please feel free to e-mail me at SnubTraining@hotmail.com.

I was asked to submit three items on snub skills for a handgun text due out next year. My submissions included; the snub as primary weapon, the snub as back-up gun, and the snub as a women’s weapon. The section on women and snubs is listed below.

Snubs for Women

 Offering “women specific” shooting advice is viewed as either foolhardy or sexist depending on how charitable the receiver wishes to be to the supplier of the information. A good friend and a great self defense instructor Yelena Pawela of Y-Training once offered that unless a male trainer wears high heels, pantyhose and carries a purse then he should refrain from offering “girl” advice. I would be the last man alive to disregard Yelana’s advice (except when I am about to) but in my defense I probably see more snub shooters of both sexes that most firearms trainers and I have picked up a few training observations courtesy of the women shooters. On the off chance that some of it may be of value I offer it here:

 J-frame guns fit Women

 Men and women come in all imaginable sizes and we all know of women who are larger, taller and stronger than some men. None the less the majority of women remain slightly smaller than the majority of men. In many field – including firearms – this is not necessarily a handicap. Snub revolvers tend to be small guns and common sense tells us that smaller sized weapons fit and shoot in smaller hands better than will larger sized weapons. The average woman’s hand is about one distal joint smaller than a man’s hand. When a woman seizes a small frame revolver with the backstrap sitting square to the center line of the wrist and forearm the crease of her trigger finger’s first distal joint falls naturally across the face of the trigger. This is the optimal location for maximum mechanical leverage against the trigger. In other words the small frame snub and a woman’s hand size is a natural fit.

 Fine motor control favors women – loading and reloading

One of the training elements I note on the range is that if you take two shooters, one male and one female, each with moderate prior shooting experience and set them to reloading against the timer and in an artificially stressed situation often the woman shooter will finish the reload first. This should come as no surprise to students of stress. When properly trained on the correct response skill sets women often out perform the men. Is this because men can’t handle stress? Clearly the answer is no. The reason for better performance by women is that under stress – fright, flight or fight levels of stress – women retain greater control over fine motor skills than do men. For men there is no shame in this. When men evolved (no pun) survival required greater gross motor control. Fine motor control in the face of stress was not a priority. With the advent of fine motor control dependent weapons our evolutionary advances were turned on their head. Reloading the revolver is a much more fine motor control dependent skill than is reloading a pistol. Try to match up five or six rounds with five or six exactingly matching charge holes under pressure and against the clock and you can appreciate why the women shooters often succeed before the men.

 Curves of women and the shape of the snub

 One of the hardest elements for a male instructor to discuss intelligently is concealment carry options for women. Women not only have a distinctive shape but also face practical and personal fashion constrains that are distinct from those of men. Fortunately many of the women shooters who come to the snub classes have made notable choices regarding carry methods and concealment options. When shooters call with equipment questions for the class I regularity push them to avoid bringing “range gear” and instead urge them to bring the gear they actual carry. Better to discover the strengths and limitation of their self defense tools in a controlled environment than to discover them in an uncontrolled environment. As a result several concealment options continue to show up with regularity.

 While many women shooters report to me that they own a purse holster – generally received “as a gift” – few admit (to me) that they carry it with any regularity and none to date have ever brought one the snub class. Alternatively holsters that are disguised as daily planners do show up regularly and the women with them generally display a high degree of proficiency with them. 

A surprisingly large number of our women shooters show up with their snub revolvers in shoulder holsters. While most men have only enough arm reach to get their fingertip around the chest to the point below their armpit most women can get their fingers to reach around nearly to their shoulder blade. This substantial reach advantage makes the shoulder a better choice for women than for men.

Fanny packs are another common carry system; something that I think is a viable option for any shooter. Nylon bags are decidedly more common than leather ones. Several of the women take great pride in pointing out the iron-on appliqués they apply to the bags in order to better disguise the bag’s actual function.

Small of the back (SOB) holsters also make a regular showing although I cringe whenever I think for the spine damage these women risk if they were ever thrown to or slipped on the ground. I do note that the with SOB holsters the women shooters seem to posses draw stroke and reholstering skills to a far greater degree than do the men.

One additional carry method divergence worth noting. A number of men students carry the snub tucked into their waist band sans holster. When they do they are generally using a Barami Hip-Grip with a Tyler T grip adaptor. This carry method is uncommon with our women shooters though not completely unknown. The women who chose to carry without a holster tend to prefer (by a large margin) the Skyline Clip-Draw clip over the Barami Hip-Grip. Whenever question they generally report that the Clip-Draw is markedly more comfortable. It is so common a response that I suspect this is “shape” dependent concession.

 Women, Children and Men Behaving Badly

 There is an element in the subject of snub as women’s gun that most men never consider when recommending the “best gun for the job.” Women (wives) tend to function around our children several thousands times more per year than men (husbands) do. Men can disregard the issue of hot brass ejecting towards or onto our children because we are proportionally less often around them. We ignore the question of how to juggle a bag of groceries, a child on the hip, opening a car door and maintaining situational awareness because we don’t generally juggle children and groceries simultaneously. Consider the stand-off value a laser equipped snub possesses in your wife’s left hand has as she opens the car door with her right hand. We don’t worry about trying to swing a long barreled handgun inside a car with children strapped in behind us in their car seats because our cars generally don’t carry the car seats. We tend to disregard the value of muzzle contact shooting because we are unaware that when a man attacks a woman he will do so with less ego investment. Having nothing to “prove” an attacker will come up fast and from behind a woman, a situation where muzzle contact response training would well serve women shooters. Men forget that a bad guy will generally believe that a man will shoot him when you draw a gun on him but that his disdain for “women with authority” will motivate him to attempt a handgun disarm. And a woman trying to retain control over her handgun is better served with a short barreled weapon with curved surfaces. Perhaps she will also do better with a weapon that she can fire into his hand that won’t be pushed out of battery in the struggle. Is the snub a woman’s weapon? Well being partial to the snub I would suggest that it posses several features that might well suit a women well.

Michael:

Can you give me your opinion of the .327 Federal Magnum in the 3″ J-frame?     

Yours,

Mike from NC

Dear Mike:

Thank you for the questions.

First off anytime I can advocate for the 3-inch J-fame I will. Love the gun!

Re the .327…

On “paper” I love the idea of a 6-round J-frame with *nearly* the same punch as the .357

If it shoots ”flat” enough at unreasonable distances (50 to 100 yards) and will punch through a wide variety of intervening materials I can see lots of situation where it would shine but…

As much as I like it I (currently) think it has three strikes asterisks against it

No. 1 – Finding a variable (not necessary a steady) supply of ammo – Do some, most, all or none of your area gun shops currently carry it?

No. 2 – How is it doing against dangerous bipeds? – Just as with “new” police rounds you don’t want to be “First on your block to test it.” – Remember way-back-when when all the *experts* howled about the mega-man stopper 10mm and spit on the “short-and-weak” S&W .40 cal?

No. 3 – Reasonably priced for regular training – Lets say that you have a large number of ammunition supply sources, and that the rounds is currently stopping bad guys at triple the rate of the .40 cal – Does the rounds’ current cost and/or your training budget permit you to put in the shooting (range) time?

I want to like the round and I want to find the perfect balance between power/control/weapon size/training cost – and maybe (!) the .327 is it – but until at least No’s 2 and 3 are solved I think I’m going to hold off (at least for a little while longer)

On a really positive note – IF – the round really excites you then go for it – You have a flexible caliber and a reliable weapon – You could dust off a variety of .32’s 32 Magnums and 327’s for regular trips to the range.

I hope that helps.

Yours,

Michael de Bethencourt
www.SnubTraining.com
SnubTraining@hotmail.com
978-667-5591

Dear Michael:

Could you elaborate on your satisfaction with Convert-a-Pell for snubby practice? My research, which was confined to a cursory search of the internet, suggests that Convert-a-Pell is a disappointing training system.

http://thepackingrat.net/2010/10/24/5692/

http://www.go2gbo.com/forums/index.php?topic=201159.0

http://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2006/03/convert-pell-any-good.html

On the positive side:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4w33dD9FAUU

Thanks.

George C – Basehor, KS

.

.

Dear George:

Thank you for your question.

I read through the posts you were kind enough too sent along and I have no reason the doubt the reactions to the fellows who wrote them.

For me though, my experience has only been very positive – but I may be after different goals and using different criteria.

First, I am not looking for tack driver accuracy.  So much so that I use the Convert-A-Pell (CAP) in every class (5 to 10 guys per class / 1 class every 2 to 3 weeks / year round) without the barrel inserts. I use the CAPs to teach the shooters to recognize squib rounds and to STOP! shooting the instant they encounter one. In that capacity – as a safety training tool – the CAP’s are worth their weight in pure gold.

Second, when teaching shooter who have NEVER shot a gun before or trying to re-introduce someone who had a very un-pleasant experience with guns (anti-gun folks, victims, etc.,) I usually start them with the CAP rounds and then work them up to the magnum guns – Yes, .22 shorts! – By the time they are done shooting (the first class) they walking away thinking:

1) What was all the fuss about?!?

2) I can do this safely

3) That was a hell of a lot of fun! (.177’s and .22’s vs. reactive targets) and

4) When do I move up to the Mega-guns (.32’s and (maybe) .38’s with wad cutters?)

My goal in these classes obviously does not require pin-point accuracy – only fun guns that teach good safe FUNdamentals.

Third – Unlike all the other Primer Only Propelled (POP) rounds (rubber, plastic, wax, etc.) the CAP rounds are fun to load (a great intro to “real” reloading) easier to clean, and I don’t have to pick through the filthy down range bullet trap to pick out the spent “bullets” (Common with rubber and plastic POP rounds)

Forth – CAPs are a fun way (for me) to practice my fundamentals. I put in (roughly):

4 times as many hours on draw stroke practice,

3 times as many hours on dry fire drills

2 times as many hours on dummy round reloading exercises

And barely a few hours (cumulative) of live fire shooting a month

Subsequently CAP rounds let me do practical “fighting with a gun” training drills in my home and/or back yard without troubling the neighbors and without needing to drive to a range daily.

Literally – I shot yesterday for my department and was top shooter – All thanks to draw stroke pratice, dry fire training and improved hand strengthening tools – and with zero (0) live fire practice with the duty weapon (mid-sized GLOCK .40) – BTY, the last time I actually shot the duty handgun was 12 months ago

Two last observations regarding something I noted in the other fellows blog posts:

1) Do the primers move the brass sleeve forward after each shot – Sometimes, but in my experience it is about 1/10 of and inch after each cylinder, so all I do is touch check/press it before I reload the next cylinder.

2) Are the CAP’s accurate? In my 2-inch snub guns with GAMCO “round” rounds – Yes, very! I shoot them (almost daily) at 3 to 15 feet as part of my “draw stroke and fire” drills and more often than not I can cover the group (on a good day) with a dime and on a bad day, with a ½ dollar. That may not be good for target shooters but for someone teaching the use of a handgun as a lethal assault rescue tool when already under attack by an armed individual or violent group it’s excellent.

It is all perspective – I am no fan of “pure” target shooting because I make my living with a gun and I train (exercise, run, life weights, study the involved law, etc.) anticipating events occuring a different environment. For the range queen (can I say that?) the CAP may not be the tool they want, need or appreciate. For me and my goals, the CAP is an awesome tool in my training-to-stay-alive kit.

I hope that helps a little.

Yours,

Michael

One of our readers had a few questions regarding the first posting on Snubs and Girls – I thought you might like to look at the note and my thoughts:

Michael,

Your post on March 19 addressed the appropriateness of a snubby for females who’ve never shot before. You noted that the double-action-only snub would work well for all shooters with limited experience at realistic distances which you defined as anything from zero to 3, 6, 9, and 12 feet.

Some of the “buts” you alluded to (reasons why the snubby wouldn’t be appropriate for the inexperienced or causal user) include the snub’s short sight radius, heavy trigger (as least in comparison to most semiauto’s’), and light frame. These are the usual reasons why the snubby is described as being difficult to learn to shoot well. I would not say “wouldn’t be appropriate” or “difficult,” but I would say not as “easy” as a single action pistol

The snub is often referred to as an “expert’s gun.” (Not by me!) Even Chic Gaylord, the famous holster maker, in his Handgunner’s Guide, says: “No one should carry a snub-nosed revolver having a barrel of two inches or less without shooting an average of one hundred rounds a week in practice. Anyone unable to practice his shooting to this extent should carry a gun having a barrel three inches or over, preferably one with a four-inch barrel.” [Paladin Press, Boulder, Colorado, p. 36] I love Chic’s work and have used a great deal of it as the starting point for my research – but “100 rounds a week” wouldn’t be my though – Daily draw stroke exercises (because usually the good guy has to start by getting his gun out) – Dry fire exercises against a safe backstop (I think the Academy pad from Safe Aim is excellent) and regular shooting practice with POP (Primer only Propelled) training rounds (Spear, C & R , Saf-T-Shot, Speer, X-Ring, etc) and .22 snub (I have .22 training snubs in J- K- and D-frames – each set up to match my carry snubs) – On an aside – Three inch snub are awesome but uncommon so I try not to push what the “market” isn’t buying

If the expenditure of that many rounds really was necessary to be proficient with the snubby, ammo costs alone would have put the snubby out of business decades ago. So what do you think is a sufficient amount of ammo/practice to:

1. Be able to protect yourself at the practical distances you referred to in your previous post (i.e., zero to 12 feet).
2. And, if it’s different from the first point, what is sufficient for the experienced shooter who enjoys shooting and wants to be able to make center-of-mass  hits out to seven, maybe even 10, yards?

Proficient! – Now you hit on the question – proficient is not the same a mastery – Remember that in WWII the OSI would “train” spies on less than 50 rounds (TOTAL!) and send them off “trained” – The trick is not in the number of rounds but the distance, the stance, the grip and body (arm) alignment and the willingness to close on an enemy. But to answer your questions (again – I will expand on this later this week and give you the “long” post:

Rounds to shoot in practice to be self-defense proficient – Well … Every week I shoot 10 to 20 live rounds mixed in with 50 to 100 dummy rounds – carried loose, in speedloaders and speed strips – I practice drawing, moving and shooting drills on the range and it usually take me about 1- to 1-1/2 hours to “shoot” the 10 to 20 rounds – So you tell me … is it the 20 rounds a week or the 1-1/2 hours of training a week?

For the experience shooter who wants fun and training results – Buy a .22 snub and a left handed holster – then shoot your 100 rounds a week in the .22 until you master (equal your right hand shooting skills) with it – Focusing on the draw, sight picture, trigger stroke and manual-of-arms – You can shoot 100 rounds a week, have a lot of fun and improve your right hand shooting by re-discovering the fundamentals of proper shooting mechanics.

Bottom lines:

You can hire some one to shoot – it is not the “shooting” – it is making the time to practice (master) the mechanics involved in shooting – and that requires time over ammo

I hope that helps a little – Get back to me in a few days.

Thank you again for some great questions!

Yours,

Michael

978-667-6691

Dear Michael:

Is the snub the wrong weapon for women shooters who have never shot before?
Steve in Tennessee

Dear Steve:

Thank you for the great question.
 
They teach men and women in the military (many with no prior shooting experience) to shoot everything from 9mm pistols to 50 cal M2’s. A *skilled* instructor can teach a person of normal intelligence and moderate interest how to do almost anything.
 
Re snub specifically – I would say the snub is a good gun for a shooter with limited experience and has limited desire to advance but need a working solution to a realistic threat.
 
Converted to double action only, using light to moderate kicking ammo (their idea of moderate – not the gun guy’s idea) and working against realistic distances (0 – 3 – 6 – 9 and 12 feet) it would work well.
 
I know all the “buts” but would YOU give your grandmother a 1911 or .38 snub if you had to leave her a gun in an ugly situation?
 
The willingness of the shooter to use a gun they know ENOUGH about so that they can (and will) work it reliability has stopped more attracters than actual gunfire ever did.
 
So here is my short answer – IF you plan to shoot a lot and IF you will train regularly and IF you don’t mind the size issues with larger gun – then get a 9mm or .40 Glock and find a trainer that will make to the next Bill Hickok/Annie Oakley – Your training and your gun will serve you very well.
 
If you need a deep concealment (small) gun but have very limited training opportunities consider a DAO snub, shoot at practical distances (50% at 3-6 feet – 30% at 6-9 20% at 9-12 feet) with moderate rounds – Used your free time to get very familiar with the gun and its characteristics via dummy rounds, dry firing and a safe backstop (SafeAim is a great choice)
 
For everything in between let the shooter shoot both guns and decided which serves them best and will answer the specific issues they are addressing.
 
I hope that heaps a little.
 
Thank you for the great question.
 
Yours,
 
Michael de Bethencourt
978-667-5591

David Kenik, author of Armed Response  was kind enough to forward to me these video clips from THE TRUTH ABOUT GUNS – here and here.  Near the end of the first clip the revolver appears to experience a malfunction. In the second clip the shooter’s gunsmith attempts to diagnosed the situation. Until the occurrence is officially confirmed or refuted we should all keep an open mind. The event is worth knowing of and might be worth discussing. Remember though this is currently a lone video clip.   

Good evening Mike,

I have a couple of questions:

1. What are your thoughts regarding a wadcutter vs. Falderal’s

Nyclad for an airweight snub?

2. What are your thoughts on Bianchi’s 55L Lightenin’ holster? I have seen a couple of articles that recommend against it because of the retaining strap interfering with the draw.

Thanks, Chris

Dear Chris:

 Thank you for the questions.

Re: Wadcutter vs. Nyclad

I put a premium on accuracy (after reliability!) – You can’t *stop* what you can’t hit so I would start with a test for accuracy.

If one offers great accuracy and the other does not, then that would solve the question – unless you can adjust the sights, and most snubs can’t.

If both hit point of aim then recoil would be the next issue – and who will be doing the shooting. I enjoy shooting everything but I have to work with the assumption that at least *some* of the time my wife might be near at hand and she may be doing the fighting (I hand her the 2nd gun, she is the first to reach the gun, I’m out of action, etc) so it does me no good to be the only one who can handle the recoil.

For example if the gun/ammo combo would be going to a non-gun (new) shooter/friend and they could cover a dime with wad cutter but needed a dinner plate for the Nyclad, I would give the tip to the wad cutter.

There is also a vocal crowd that swears by the wadcutter. They will tell you that it cuts nice full size holes leaving lots of air going in and lots of blood going out, there is never a risk that the hollow point will get plugged and, is 100% legal even in area where hollow points and not.

Re: Bianchi’s 55L Lightenin’ holster

I find two problems with the holster. Yes, the retaining strap will interfere with the grip and draw stroke but if you have a hammerless or a shrouded snub it might still be an option. Unfortunately, the strap is designed to work only with a very small (classic) stock. If you have any material between the front strap and the rear of the trigger guard (Tyler T, Spegel stocks, etc.,) The strap will not work. In combination then excluding the option of fighting sized stocks and the reduction in draw stroke reliability I have to say the Lightnin’ is not a top choice.

Alternatively any properly boned snub holster would keep the gun in place, offer you a great draw stroke and give you the option of practical stocks. Try www.BobMacs.com – He make some of the best practical/fighting snub holster in the world.

I hope that info helps a little.

If I missed anything, let me know.

Yours,

Michael

info@SnubTraining.com

S & W 640

Michael,

How are you? I really want to use my S&W 640 .38SPL as my EDC but am reluctant to do so at times because in today’s society it seems like a dated tool. I enjoy the convenience of carry and I am quite proficient with a snub nose revolver. Please share some of your wealth of experience on this matter with me.

Thank you,

Albert

Dear Albert:

I hope this note finds you well.

Thank you for your e-mail.

Regarding your question, yes the snub is a very limited self-defense weapon.

Its great virtue is in that it can be brought into action with little or (ideally) no warning when your bad-guy believes you are unarmed and unlikely to defend yourself.

As an “ace-in-the-hole” I think the snub has great value – but I add this caveat a weapon has to engender in the owner/defender confident that it is the appropriate tool for the anticipated task.

If a shooter believes it is inherently an insufficient tool – to use your words “a dated tool” – then it is on its face the wrong weapon.

No criticism meant, but as the great fellow said – The gun has to be comforting, not comfortable. A weapon that does not inspire confidence is an inadequate tool for that specific gun owner.

If your most common carry is (by example) a Glock 17 then maybe a micro Glock would be a better deep concealment weapon.

I would think a smaller version of what you currently carry would supply you with a better tactical and physiological edge – Both important aspects when considering an EDC weapon.

If you go with a class mouse gun (.22, .25, and .32 ACP) consider contacting Claude Werner in GA - he does a great program on “Maximizing the Mouse Gun”

If you go for a slightly larger weapon consider contacting Tom Givens in TN – He does a great course on micro pistols (.380 and up range)

Please know though that I am NOT disparaging the small calibers and/or the micro pistols – I know several shooters who saved their lives and or family members using very small caliber pistols and revolvers.

Regardless of caliber the gun has to be appropriate to the user because *sometimes* confidence will go a long way in getting the job done – i.e. confidence with a .25 can beat terror trying to use a .45.

You might rightly say that under those circumstances maybe neither gun would get the job done – True – but if your grandmother were trying to fend off an attacker would you give her better odds with a 8-shot .22 revolver or an 8-shot .45?

Thank you again for the great question. Let me know what weapon you decide on.

Yours,

Michael de Bethencourt

info@SnubTraining.com

Michael,

Can you tell me anything about hammer functionality if I were to cut off the thumb tang to create a snag free hammer? I would lose single action capability but that’s okay as I would only fire in double action.

Thanks,

Mark K

Dear Mark K:
 
Thank you for the great questions.
 
First, if you do bob the hammer spur, that will not render the gun double action only (DAO)

 
A hammer spur “bob job” and the DAO are two separate gunsmithing options.
 
Taking the DAO first, it is a very good idea for a self-defense gun. Many a man has risked his self-defense claim when the *question* of whether he did or did not cock the weapon in the fight comes up in court.

Remember it is the job of the prosecutor to put you in a cell. “It’s nothing personal, it’s just business.” If he can get an advantage by suggesting that you cocked the gun and set up the situation that led to a negligent discharge, he will.  A DAO gun removes that argument and will save you the grief of otherwise having to prove that you didn’t cock the weapon.
 
Re the hammer spur; excluding class demo guns, any self-defense gun I own that can’t “hammer shroud” I like to bob the hammer.  To sound like I’m repeating myself, many a man reached for his snub in an emergence and fouled the draw stroke when the spur got caught on something, (jacket, pocket, etc.,) I can think of one case where the fellow was drawing out of a jacket, hooked the hammer spur, and was shot to death before he could clear the weapon.
 
Re the gunsmithing work; Almost any skilled gunsmith should be able to remove the spur without reducing ignition reliability … *almost any.*
 
Remember though that different ammo uses different primers. Some primers that are “soft” (easy firing) and other feature primers that are hard (harder to fire off)  After you get the spur bobbed off, be sure to test your carry ammo so you know that your hammer will consistently set off the rounds.
 
You may also want to find some ammo that uses particularly hard primer and also test your new snub against that.
 
If I tested the gun with 50 rounds of “hard” primers and 50 rounds with my soft-primer self-defense ammo and all 100 rounds want off – first time, every time – I would be reasonable secure in believing the new hammer job was reliable.

 
 
On an aside, you will have to hunt around for a holster that won’t need the hammer spur to secure the holster’s security snap. There are several holsters that will work will with a snub set up in the fashion we are describing (i.e. bobbed hammer.) Bianchi’s 55L “Lightnin” is a good example.
 
I think you question is an important one. Thank you for asking it. I hope this info helps a little.
 
If I missed anything please feel free to follow up or just give me a call.
 
Good luck and safe shooting.
 
Yours,
 
Michael