[engineer88]

Ok, I had way too much time on my hands today. So while I was sitting around I made up a pros and cons list for the two. I am planning on eventually getting both, but I was not sure which I wanted first. My list did not include things they shared or are obvious, like lifetime warranty on both. So here are the lists, maybe you guys can add to it:


P3AT Pro 642/442 Con
6+1 total capacity 5+0 basically
Spare Mag Reload(faster) Speed Strip(slow), Speed loader(big & bulky)
$280(HC) + $50(couple mags) $400 after tax
.77 width 1.3 width(at cylinder)
5# DAO trigger 12# DAO trigger(iirc)
6+0(Israelli carry, I have a wee one) 5+0(cannot be unchambered, but 12#, /shrug)
11oz. loaded 18oz. loaded
No manual lock caca manual lock on new ones
6+1+6 = 13(with one mag) 5+0+5 = 10(with one strip)


642/442 Pro P3AT Con
No possible mag issues(no mag) Need Spare mag(debatable, I know)
Speed Strip size/print Mag size/print(not a big deal tbh)
Reliability(nothing beats revolver) Slightly less reliable once broken in(auto)
.38 bullet size .380 bullet size
ammo cost(.38 is a bit cheaper) ammo cost(not that big a deal)
penetration(better ballistics) penetration(not too huge a diff here either)
necessary cleanness(see reliable) cleanness(is it a word? LOL) P3AT needs to be more so


I then tallied up how important these various items were to me personally, giving each item 1, 2 or 3 points each. As you can bet the P3AT edged the J-Frame out, but not by as much as I expected. I just wanted to share as my first post and get some of your opinions maybe. I have been lurking for a long while and learning and saving my change for a P3AT as my next pistol. I love all the information here and you guys are great!

 

[riverkeeper]

''''',I am planning on eventually getting both,''''

You already know which one you want first.

If you do not already have a handgun I'd suggest the 642 first ... then you'll appreciate the size weight convenience of the P3. Otherwise either one ... Js are great, we have 2.

 

[sprinter1]

You can't go wrong with either one, they both are good guns, I have both. I used to carry the 642 before I got my P3-AT, now the 642 gathers dust in the safe. The difference in size may not sound like much on paper, but it is huge when you actually have both to compare for your carry gun. So basically it comes down to which one you want to get first

 

[BillK]

Hi,

I don't believe that your scale of 1-3 allows you to effectively rate all the pros and cons - in particular the ability to conceal the gun. The P3AT would IMHO rate a 10 on a scale of 1-10. Where would you put the revolers on said scale?

Is being able to shoot from a jacket pocket important to you? I've read folks bring this up as a plus for revolvers, having a shrouded hammer, over semi-automatics.


Take care ...

 

[adamsesq]

.77 width    1.3 width(at cylinder)
 

When I first looked at the P3ATs I was in the same boat.  On paper I did the same comparison.  Then I put my hands on both and put both in my pocket.  The above numbers say it all, the hands on says even more.  1/2" makes the difference between carry or not carry in most situations.  At least to me it did.

-Scott (who now has more P3ATs than I care to count, but no J Frames)

 

[engineer88]

I guess I should have given better background. I am getting my CCL very soon. I was considering both for EDC. I have a Glock 19 (great gun but often too big and heavy I would think) and a Beretta 21A (.22LR is seriously underpowered). I have gotten my hands on both and like them both, and you are right the P3AT wins hands down here. The way I see it the width makes a wee bit of difference for smart carry, IWB, and ankle, etc. However for pocket it is a HUGE difference. I do plan on pocketing it at least some of the time, so maybe a 3 point scale isn't enough.

I have actually decided on the P3AT, I just wanted to share my little list with you guys. They are both fine pieces, the P3At just edges it out so well with size, weight and price too!! But I will still definitely be getting a j-frame down the line too.

-Engineer88 who doesn't make a ton of money and has to save up for a while to get really fun stuff.

 

[engineer88]

Oh and the jacket pocket thing is about inversely as important to me as the integrated lock hot button is to some people. :

I live in FL so the two weeks a year that jacket fire-ability would be useful...not a big deal tbh. ;D

 

[HardShell]

... I don't believe that your scale of 1-3 allows you to effectively rate all the pros and cons - in particular the ability to conceal the gun. The P3AT would IMHO rate a 10 on a scale of 1-10. Where would you put the revolers on said scale?...

A big +1

NOTHING on the market today of comparable "firepower" (caliber/capacity) is as small/light/thin/concealable as the P3AT.  NOTHING.  There are a few that are close, but the smaller ones have smaller calibers and/or capacities and the more powerful ones are larger. (Yes, I understand that disappearing in the pocket without printing is not everyone's primary criterion for choosing a BUG -- but it is mine.)

J-frame snubbies are very concealable and some people can effectively carry them in a front-pocket holster (where the little KTs really shine IMO), but for my build and usual dress NOTHING disappears completely and without printing like the P3AT.  Does that mean I'll foreswear my primary CCW or get rid of my several small revolvers?  "No" on both counts, emphatically.  All I am saying is that in nearly 25 years of licensed CCW, during which I have always had a pocket/BUG (whether or not I had my primary), I have owned/carried literally dozens of small BUGs and none have come close to the overall utility for my purposes of the P3AT.

YMMV, as always.  

 

[adamsesq]

I was considering both for EDC.

Am usually pretty good at these, but "EDC" escapes me?

-Scott

 

[riverkeeper]

EDC.. every day carry

BTW I have both too

Edit -- another advantage of the wheel gun is the abilitiy to jab or hit the BG with it and fire when in contact. Semis can go out of battery doing this.

 

[Dreadnought]

I have both. I believe that each has its place and purpose. The longer I CC the more I realize that one size does not fit all when it comes to my choice of weapon for any given set of clothes.

IMHO, "The Equation" goes something like this: (a: smallest size weapon) + (b: highest round capacity) + (c: maximum stopping power) / (x: ability to conceal per required clothing configuration)

When at all possible, I carry a GLOCK 30. Eleven rounds of .45ACP is, in my opinion, the best possible answer to The Equation when "x" is the most flexible. Meaning I can wear a sweat shirt, or sweater, or an un-tucked shirt.

When the GLOCK will not work due to "x" factors, I pull the S&W 642. It is significantly lighter, and has a more manageable print pattern. I can pocket carry in a pair of khaki dress casual pants or cargo pants/shorts. I can also easily tuck it into the waistband of a pair of sweatpants/shorts for impromptu trash duties, walk in the yard, etc.

For ALL other times and situations, the P3AT is peerless. Additionally, it will not only work in all of these remaining situations, but it could and has worked INSTEAD of the other two options. Keeping with the math flavor of my post, that makes the P3AT the "lowest common denominator" .

Issues like FTE's, shooting through pants, lint causing misfires, etc., are all considerations...just not for me. Any way you stack it, I carry at least 11 rounds of whatever (GLOCK has a 10rd mag. + 1, P3AT has a 6rd mag. +1 and I carry one extra mag., and 642 has 5 shots in cyl. + I carry one Bianchi SpeedStrip with 6 more). However, I do not imagine ever having to use more than what's in the weapon in any situation. The extra ammunition is carried just because I tend to be obsessive when it comes to preparation.

Bottom line: Each weapon has its use and place. However, the P3AT, being the lowest common denominator, fits EVERY use and place, IMHO.

Oh, and to the OP, you should consider getting a real job at an employer that pays you commensurate to your contribution to the company...maybe at Fidelity or somewhere.

 

[Guest]

''''',I am planning on eventually getting both,''''

You already know which one you want first.

If you do not already have a handgun I'd suggest the 642 first ... then you'll appreciate the size weight convenience of the P3.  Otherwise either one ... Js are great, we have 2.

J frame all the way, IMO no comparison. If u just want the smallest of the smallest the p3At is indeed it, but after that IMO there is no comparison. I can fit a J frame anywhere I can fit a kt380 Firepower big difference, reliability big difference but if price is ur criteria again the winner is kt380, but personally I never put a value on life and what I carry to defend my life. I just sold a J frame pre lock era (NIB) and a J frame #342 super lite scadium pre lock and still have my engraved Model 60 pre lock (and oh yes ported)

 

[Guest]

[quote author=engineer88 link=1199941008/0#5 date=1199974303]I was considering both for EDC.

Am usually pretty good at these, but "EDC" escapes me?

-Scott
[/quote]

thats a new one :-/ :-/ I think it takes the place of ccw, just my SWAG, FWIW, IMO ;D

 

[Dreadnought]

J frame all the way, IMO no comparison. If u just want the smallest of the smallest the p3At is indeed it, but after that IMO there is no comparison. I can fit a J frame anywhere I can fit a kt380 Firepower big difference, reliability big difference but if price is ur criteria again the winner is kt380, but personally I never put a value on life and what I carry to defend my life. I just sold a J frame pre lock era (NIB) and a J frame #342 super lite scadium pre lock and still have my engraved Model 60 pre lock (and oh yes ported)

I cannot argue with you about the superior stopping power of .38SPL+P over .380ACP (though the Cor-Bon DPXs make up a lot, IMO). And I really like my "J" and would not part with it. But the P3AT can go more places, and sometimes that's the difference between "no gun" and "some gun".

And my 642-2 (lock doesn't worry me, and it's the only way they come now) is ported also. Additionally, I just added the Crimson Trace LG-405 laser grips to it...oh, man it is sweet!

 

[Dreadnought]

[quote author=adamsesq link=1199941008/0#8 date=1199976119][quote author=engineer88 link=1199941008/0#5 date=1199974303]I was considering both for EDC.

Am usually pretty good at these, but "EDC" escapes me?

-Scott
[/quote]

thats a new one :-/ :-/ I think it takes the place of ccw, just my SWAG, FWIW, IMO ;D
[/quote]

"EDC" comes from the OP's experience on pocket knife forums. That is a common abbreviation on those boards.

 

[wheelguy]

You really need both - 2 different purposes I think - based on carry location, and the situation you are in when you need to solve a problem. However, your first should be the revolver because it'll treat you much more nicely by always working, and has better accuracy. The P3AT is best suited to those who have "been there, done that" - because they know all the tricks to making it work at its peak performance all the time.

The 357 in particular has legendary "stopping power", and even the super light S&W scandium frame models easily handle the highest power 357 loads available (I like Buffalo Bore or Black Tallon). J-frames do fit many places on the body in spite of their width, and weigh 0.8 lbs compared to the P3AT 0.6 lbs when fully loaded.

The main reason I carry the P3AT instead of my top-o-the-line J-frame is that I haven't found a great holster for it. It's the gun+holster combination that makes the team - not just the gun alone. So, here is a shot of 2 of my carry choices - both with lasers, both with Buffalo Bore ammo...
S&W: 0.8 lbs KT: 0.6 lbs, S&W: 400+ ft-lbs KT: 200 ft-lbs, S&W: 11 rounds, KT: 13 rounds

 

[engineer88]

[quote author=engineer88 link=1199941008/0#5 date=1199974303]I was considering both for EDC.

Am usually pretty good at these, but "EDC" escapes me?

-Scott
[/quote]

It is funny how different forums use different abbreviations or whatever more frequently. On thehighroad and thefiringline they use EDC to denote that no matter what else they tote, they at least have that gun as a BUG or even main. Some people however use EDC more broadly to include your flashlight, blade/s, PDA, Leatherman, Wallet, keys, etc.

I specifically chose to use EDC over CCW because I do have other options atm, they are just not as viable for all times and purposes. As Dread said: "lowest common denominator". Or one that ALWAYS works. Which is what is great about the pocket-able pistols.

Nice setup Wheelguy! Not sure which is the backup, but would not want to get shot with either!!

P.S. That recoil has got to be a mutha with 357 in that itty bitty package. The .38 bucks quite a bit even, gotta imagine the 357 is significantly more so...

 

[Guest]

to the chagrin (sp?) of many here, the J frame is of far better quality than the P3-AT...et cetera....

sure they will guarentee it for life...fix it for free....

but what good is awsome customer service and a life time warranty if your gun craps out when somebody is trying to murder you?

Kel-Tec makes a descent product, but dont blind yourself....

get the 642/442 if you can only pick one.....if you can get both, get the J frame first, then the Kel-Tec.


i too would like to know what "EDC" stands for....is that for "Every Day Carry"?

 

[adamsesq]

to the chagrin (sp?) of many here, the J frame is of far better quality than the P3-AT...et cetera....

sure they will guarentee it for life...fix it for free....

but what good is awsome customer service and a life time warranty if your gun craps out when somebody is trying to murder you?

Kel-Tec makes a descent product, but dont blind yourself....

get the 642/442 if you can only pick one.....if you can get both, get the J frame first, then the Kel-Tec.


i too would like to know what "EDC" stands for....is that for "Every Day Carry"?

I suppose everybody is entitled to their opinions. I have never heard of a KT crapping out when someone was being murdered. Have you?

And my thoughts are that if you can only get one you should get the one that you can carry ALL of the time. Then if you want to get a gun that cost more, has less capability and can't be carried as often, go for it.

-Scott

 

[Guest]

[quote author=JERRY-S. link=1199941008/15#17 date=1200025739]to the chagrin (sp?) of many here, the J frame is of far better quality than the P3-AT...et cetera....

sure they will guarentee it for life...fix it for free....

but what good is awsome customer service and a life time warranty if your gun craps out when somebody is trying to murder you?

Kel-Tec makes a descent product, but dont blind yourself....

get the 642/442 if you can only pick one.....if you can get both, get the J frame first, then the Kel-Tec.


i too would like to know what "EDC" stands for....is that for "Every Day Carry"?

I suppose everybody is entitled to their opinions.  I have never heard of a KT crapping out when someone was being murdered.  Have you?

And my thoughts are that if you can only get one you should get the one that you can carry ALL of the time.  Then if you want to get a gun that cost more, has less capability and can't be carried as often, go for it.

-Scott

[/quote]

I kinda think Jerry was using a "figure of speech" on the crapping out thing, Meaning which of the two could crap out first.  I can say my 380 once when riding in my front pocket the hammer spring broke now that is crapping out. It was the 3rd hammer spring for that one 380 also, the other two broke while range shooting :-/
357 vs 380????