[Henry]

Okay everyone,

I'm needing a CCW for the Spring/Summer(less clothing to hide larger framed handguns). Which of these 2 would you choose and why? Any other suggestions are welcome. I just can't seem to hide my Glock 23 or my SA XD9 or Ruger P-90 without a jacket or sweatshirt, so I thought I might go smaller. Henry

[Richard J.]

The smallish round butt of the revo is probably a bit easier to conceal than the more squared, blocky butt of any auto. I've carried Taurus 85's and 605's with a Barami HipGrip during the summer, and they work nicely. I've even found that with a little care, and some practice on the presentation, you can tuck a shirt tail in, blouse it out a little, and tuck the gun into the waistband under the shirt. It does take a bit of practice to get down the draw, though. You have to yank up the shirt tail to get to the gun, and if you yank too vigorously, the gun will fly out with the shirt tail. However, this little problem could be eliminated if you use a Mitch Rosen Workman holster. It allows the shirt to be tucked between the holster and the pants. The holster is attached to the belt with a loop which is disguised as a key ring holder with a snap, so the gun stays secure until you pull it out.
Check it out, look at the inside the waistband holsters here. http://www.mitchrosen.com/product_line/product_line.html

[ 03-22-2002: Message edited by: Richard J. ]

[david]

If a s&w airweight is out of the question, I would go with the taurus mdl 85UL and have the hammer bobbed. The ultralight costs a little more but may make a big difference if weight is a factor. I have generally heard nothing but good things about the mdl 85 from officers who have them.

[Paatch]

It has been my experience that the flat sided semi-auto is a much easier gun to conceal than a revolver with its bulging cylinder, and if lightweight clothing is the style a full width holster belt may be out of place also. The little PT111 would probably ride in a pocket easier, & the lighter weight would definetly be less pull on your pant wasitline.

I'd give the auto a serious look.

[Richard]

Henry, if you have large pockets, like those on Dockers, try a S&W Airweight J Frame in an Uncle Mike's Pocket Holster. Why an Uncle Mike's $8 holster and not a more expensive holster? The Uncle Mike's stays in your pocket when you draw the pistol. My more expensive pocket holsters come out with the pistol. Again, if you don't have large pockets buy a Kel-Tec P32 and make sure it works. If it doesn't work send it back to the factory and the nice people at Kel-Tec will make it work. How do I know? I had to send my P32 back and now it is great. Regards, Richard

[Richard J.]

Paatch wrote: It has been my experience that the flat sided semi-auto is a much easier gun to conceal than a revolver with its bulging cylinder,

This is true, as a general rule. I've measured the cylinder on a Taurus 85, and it's definitely wider than the widest point on my GM .45, but not by too much. However, if you use the HipGrip for carry on a revo, you don't have the additional thickness of the holster to contend with, and that can make a difference.

Patch wrote: and if lightweight clothing is the style a full width holster belt may be out of place also.

I carry my GM daily in a Mitch Rosen rig, consisting of the ARG holster, the SOS mag carrier, and a matching 1.25" belt. If a 1.25" belt can comfortably carry the weight of a 5" GM with 9 rounds of 230 gr. .45, a spare mag with 8 rds. of 200 gr. .45, and a SureFire 6Z Combatlight, then a lighter weight gun could easily be carried with a 1" belt. I've even found that with the M85 or the M605, you can carry easily with just a dress belt (using the HipGrip system.)

However, to each his own. If I had my way, my daily carry gun for most instances would be a Glock 36 in either an ARG or a Workman, and my deep concealment gun would be a Taurus 605 w/HipGrip or Workman holster. I like having options. :)

[Dennis Foote]

I would go with the M85. I'm kinda down on the entire Taurus PT series!!! I have an M85 and my wife has an M85UL. They both are good revolvers. Taurus has more experience with wheel guns and the M85 has been with us for a long time. That means less bugs, IMHO!!! ;)

[Paatch]

My point was that if you wear lightweight shorts or pants, a 1" to 1.5" wide, thick gunbelt may look out of place. This would assume, of course, that you are wearing an overshirt that is open in the front, or your shirt tucked in.

Whwn confronted with that situation, I usually tuck my Colt Mustang Pocketlite (1st choice) or my KelTec P-32 (2nd choice) into a pants pocket & keep moving.

In my lifestyle, there are times that carrying one of my "primary" carry guns - presently, a Taurus PT940 & a Kimber Ultra CDP - is difficult. It may be that I am coming from or going to my job, or my wife & daughter want to do something where the comfortable & appropriate mode of dress will not effectively conceal and/or support secure carry of my primary. In those instances, I have found that a small, lightweight semi-auto fits the bill for me. In fact, I sold my blued, all steel M85 years ago to fund the purchase of my Pocketlite. I liked the little Taurus, but definetly carry the Colt more.

As always: YMMV!

Good luck with your decision!

[Sir Knight]

It has been my experience (http://www.familyfriendsfirearms.com/cgi-bin/fff/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=000099&counterhit=yes) that when you have pistols and revolvers of the same size, despite the larger width of the cylinder, the revolver is still easier to conceal because of the shape of the revolver VS the pistol ...
http://fud-files.netfirms.com/image/private/guns/f81.jpg
... I can definitely conceal the 640 a whole lot easier than the C6.45 (although the C6.45 gives me superior firepower -- seven .45ACPs VS five .357MAGs).

If concealment is the issue, get the 85 -- I have two of them and am looking to acquire a third. If firepower is the issue, than the PT-111 might be a better choice although I've heard some negative things about the gun, I don't have any personal experience with it so I can't really comment about that aspect of the discussion.

[Henry]

David,
I did what you advised and purchased the 85 Ultra Lite in stainless. I'm like Alan Fud, it's hard to give up a round with more Foot Pounds Of Energy(9mm) for the 38 Special. I considered the CIA model for awhile, but I wanted something lighter than 24 ounces. I may bob the hammer later, but for now I will leave it as is. Thanks for the advice. Henry :cool:

[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: Henry ]

[ 03-30-2002: Message edited by: Henry ]

[david]

I believe that you will like it. A favorite load around here is the Federal Nyclad std 125gr hp. Very controlable, easy on the hand, and from some un-scientific tests that some of us did (Shooting into an old vest and also wet sand), very good expansion from a 2" barrel. Most of the various gun rags also seem to like this load for a 2" snub.
The "cia" in an ultralight would be a nice touch if they would ever make it.
Looking forward to a shooting report!

[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: david ]

[Henry]

David,

I agree on the CIA, I looked at it first. Then the weight of 24 ozs., I decided to go with a lighter weight. I believe they will make it lighter some day. I have seen some newer item #'s on the CIA from a wholesaler, so I believe they will some day give us more options on the CIA 650. These gun manufacturers take their dear sweet time on getting new products on the market, some times. Henry :cool:

[OU812]

IMHO, I'd go with the 85 mainly because it is a proven design from the Taurus lineup. I think that a few bugs still have to be worked out of the 111. The 111 does feel great in my hand though. :cool: