testtest

Best 9mm Revolver: Everyday Carry Options

Talyn

Talyn

SAINT
Founding Member

What do you get when you cross a time-tested platform with the most popular centerfire handgun cartridge? The 9mm revolver. Here are five that are fit to cover your six.​

gundigest.com

Best 9mm Revolver: Everyday Carry Options (2024)

Find out the best 9mm revolver to cover your six as we delve into the top models tailored for concealed carry.
gundigest.com gundigest.com
1707793145997.png
 
I have a 9mm LCR. Its alright, but I shoot my buddy's identical LCR better. I think that keeps me from liking it more.

People question a 9mm revolver. I did too. I got one because I always have at least some 9mm practice ammo with me in the car. Snubs require lots of practice, and having a big container of reloaded ammo within reach anytime I'm at the range encourages practicing. I usually don't have any .38 practice ammo along unless I'm planning a revolver-centric range trip.

One revolver I'd like to see in 9mm is the Kimber. I think it would be just about right.

Maybe i should add this, for anyone thinking of getting one:
Don't buy a 9mm snub to get lower recoil than a .38, because you won't get it.
 
I love revolvers and have a bunch of them. But I've never really understood the appeal for defensive revolvers in auto pistol calibers. :rolleyes:
Ok, 9mm is a very popular caliber. I get that. But there are semi-auto pistols that are smaller and have more capacity. You gain nothing by putting it in a revolver.
.45acp revolvers at least have some credibility. The old Colt & S&W 1917s were a necessary wartime expedient. The S&W Model 25-2 was designed as a target/competition gun and does so extremely well. But for self defense and carry, I much prefer the .45 in a semi-auto. Preferably the 1911.
So, other than just being different, what's the point? :rolleyes:
 
While I love my 45 acp 625 the 9mm is eeh for me.

if I did a 9mm wheelgun it would be a service size and The discontinued S&W 547 would be hard to beat.

Only problem they didn’t make a whole lot of them.
 
Grayfox said:
I love revolvers and have a bunch of them. But I've never really understood the appeal for defensive revolvers in auto pistol calibers. :rolleyes:
Ok, 9mm is a very popular caliber. I get that. But there are semi-auto pistols that are smaller and have more capacity. You gain nothing by putting it in a revolver.
.45acp revolvers at least have some credibility. The old Colt & S&W 1917s were a necessary wartime expedient. The S&W Model 25-2 was designed as a target/competition gun and does so extremely well. But for self defense and carry, I much prefer the .45 in a semi-auto. Preferably the 1911.
So, other than just being different, what's the point? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
For me:

Ammo is more available in the common auto calibers.

Same for reloading components.

I can keep one type of ammo around and always be ready for a range trip.
 
I understand the concept of cheap ammo that can be used in a revolver, but it doesn't translate to EDC for me. Once I eliminate the included candidates because of weight, trigger, reputation and/or cost I see I am better off using a semi-auto for EDC. I have a Shield 2.0, a Shield Plus and a Ruger Max 9 that were all under $400 new that are suitable for my carry.
A better argument would be for range use. Even though I roll my own, I just saw an ad for $10/box 9mm FMJ.
It's America, do what you want.
 
youngolddude said:
I understand the concept of cheap ammo that can be used in a revolver, but it doesn't translate to EDC for me. Once I eliminate the included candidates because of weight, trigger, reputation and/or cost I see I am better off using a semi-auto for EDC. I have a Shield 2.0, a Shield Plus and a Ruger Max 9 that were all under $400 new that are suitable for my carry.
A better argument would be for range use. Even though I roll my own, I just saw an ad for $10/box 9mm FMJ.
It's America, do what you want.
Click to expand...

That’s a revolver vs semiauto decision then, rather than a conventional vs auto caliber revolver. And I fully understand it.

The last revolver I bought fit a specific niche, so it doesn’t grow on trees. It hasn’t been made in over 35 years, and I hadn’t seen any in a long time. It cost $500, although that was less than the going rate.
The last semiauto I bought was a Shield that cost a little more than half that- $270- also used. If I go into that same shop today, they very well might have another. If not, they will definitely have a new one. Several of them.

You have to want a revolver.

For some specific uses, I prefer them. For other uses, and honestly most of them, I prefer an auto.
And for some uses, I want a revolver that shoots an auto cartridge. Isn’t it great we have them?
 
BarryinIN said:
The last revolver I bought fit a specific niche, so it doesn’t grow on trees. It hasn’t been made in over 35 years, and I hadn’t seen any in a long time. It cost $500, although that was less than the going rate.
Click to expand...
If you don't mind my asking, what was it? (My WAGs: S&W Model 12, or maybe a 2.5" Colt Diamondback .38.)
 
You’re in the ballpark with the 2” M12.
It was a 2” model 15.

I already have the 2” 12, and that is indeed another niche gun.
 
Snake45 said:
Okay, I gotta ask: What possible "niche" does a 2" Smith 15 fit? To me, it just seems to check all the WRONG boxes. :confused:
Click to expand...
I can see that. The gun makes no damn sense at all. I grabbed it mostly because the 2” seems to bring more money right now.

I had always read owners say they loved them. I couldn’t imagine why. I had to buy one to see it, but now I do.

First, it isn’t much different to conceal than a RB model. I never realized the grips were a different profile, and are rounded on the sides at the bottom.

That’s a 4” M15 next to it. The square butt “point” at the bottom rear is still there, but that rounding of the sides helps a lot more than one might think.

Second, something about it makes it easier to shoot than it should be. It is probably the sights of course, but it does seem to “hang” steadier than other 2” K-frames I’ve handled or shot. Strangely, it has the smoothest (not the lightest) DA trigger of my K-frames, but that’s just me getting lucky rather than a trait of 2” 15s.

The adjustable sights are debatable. They have that sharp blade standing up, but if I were to keep it, I’d stone the top corners round. That should take care of most potential problems. The hammer spur would be a bigger concern for me anyway.
But it sure is nice to have a snub nose shoot to point of aim with whatever I want. That’s a new experience for me.

The short version is it’s easier to shoot and after messing with it some, looks like I’m not giving up much to get it. Not as much as I always thought anyway.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4128.jpeg
    IMG_4128.jpeg
    1.5 MB · Views: 60
BarryinIN said:
I can see that. The gun makes no damn sense at all. I grabbed it mostly because the 2” seems to bring more money right now.

I had always read owners say they loved them. I couldn’t imagine why. I had to buy one to see it, but now I do.

First, it isn’t much different to conceal than a RB model. I never realized the grips were a different profile, and are rounded on the sides at the bottom.

That’s a 4” M15 next to it. The square butt “point” at the bottom rear is still there, but that rounding of the sides helps a lot more than one might think.

Second, something about it makes it easier to shoot than it should be. It is probably the sights of course, but it does seem to “hang” steadier than other 2” K-frames I’ve handled or shot. Strangely, it has the smoothest (not the lightest) DA trigger of my K-frames, but that’s just me getting lucky rather than a trait of 2” 15s.

The adjustable sights are debatable. They have that sharp blade standing up, but if I were to keep it, I’d stone the top corners round. That should take care of most potential problems. The hammer spur would be a bigger concern for me anyway.
But it sure is nice to have a snub nose shoot to point of aim with whatever I want. That’s a new experience for me.

The short version is it’s easier to shoot and after messing with it some, looks like I’m not giving up much to get it. Not as much as I always thought anyway.
Click to expand...
My round butt 3” 65 and 2.75” & 3” 686’s are just perfectly pointable…more so than square butt examples.
 
BarryinIN said:
I can see that. The gun makes no damn sense at all. I grabbed it mostly because the 2” seems to bring more money right now.

I had always read owners say they loved them. I couldn’t imagine why. I had to buy one to see it, but now I do.

First, it isn’t much different to conceal than a RB model. I never realized the grips were a different profile, and are rounded on the sides at the bottom.

That’s a 4” M15 next to it. The square butt “point” at the bottom rear is still there, but that rounding of the sides helps a lot more than one might think.

Second, something about it makes it easier to shoot than it should be. It is probably the sights of course, but it does seem to “hang” steadier than other 2” K-frames I’ve handled or shot. Strangely, it has the smoothest (not the lightest) DA trigger of my K-frames, but that’s just me getting lucky rather than a trait of 2” 15s.

The adjustable sights are debatable. They have that sharp blade standing up, but if I were to keep it, I’d stone the top corners round. That should take care of most potential problems. The hammer spur would be a bigger concern for me anyway.
But it sure is nice to have a snub nose shoot to point of aim with whatever I want. That’s a new experience for me.

The short version is it’s easier to shoot and after messing with it some, looks like I’m not giving up much to get it. Not as much as I always thought anyway.
Click to expand...
Thanks for trying to make the case. I appreciate the effort. I really do.

But rounding the butt would make it better looking (and slightly more concealable/carryable). And just a silly 3/4" more barrel would get you a full-length ejector rod.

1707918073314.png


I like my 2.5" M19--sometimes, anyway. But I LOVE my 3" M66.

1707918322387.jpeg


1707918463254.jpeg
 
the only "benefit" i see in a 9mm revolver, is the extra rounds

no thanks, i'll take my Ruger snubby with 7 rounds of .357 magnum, just a "wee bit" more powerful round.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top