# Recomendation for a revolver with a light DA trigger



## gilfo (Dec 5, 2007)

Want to get a revolver for myself and possibly to teach my wife with. Requesting any recommendations for one with the lightest DA trigger pull if there is such a thing, or one that a smith could lighten without breaking the bank. 
Thanks


----------



## Guest (May 15, 2009)

Caliber?

Price Range?


----------



## mccoy (Dec 31, 2007)

Out of the box,
the S&W 627-PC 8-shots in 357 magnum (shoots 38s as well of course) is renowned as a light-triggered revolver.

I own it, after 500-1000 rounds it got pretty much soft and everyone else who tries it, accustomed to other popular models like the 686, is impressed.

As far as I know, you can have a trigger job done to just about every revolver, sometimes you may have problems with unfiring primers though, a very light trigger requests federal primers or similar

The S&W 627 sometimes won't fire fiocchi primers in DA, it will do it in SA though (happens 2-3 times out of 100 rounds). Same drawback with others primers brands maybe, I can't remember, I'm using fiocchi right now.

Besides, after you've trained and fired hundreds or thousands of rounds, your trigger finger muscles will get stronger and the trigger will feel softer.


----------



## mikecu (May 22, 2009)

*Da/sa*



mccoy said:


> Out of the box,
> the S&W 627-PC 8-shots in 357 magnum (shoots 38s as well of course) is renowned as a light-triggered revolver.
> 
> I own it, after 500-1000 rounds it got pretty much soft and everyone else who tries it, accustomed to other popular models like the 686, is impressed.
> ...


Why is it different between SA or DA? same spring.


----------



## mccoy (Dec 31, 2007)

mikecu said:


> Why is it different between SA or DA? same spring.


I dunno exactly, probably SA goes a little beyond DA's trigger run.


----------



## mikecu (May 22, 2009)

gilfo said:


> Want to get a revolver for myself and possibly to teach my wife with. Requesting any recommendations for one with the lightest DA trigger pull if there is such a thing, or one that a smith could lighten without breaking the bank.
> Thanks


I went to the range yesterday, and someone let me try out their new Ruger sp101 DA .357 revolver. It was very smooth and a lighter pull than my 686. It was hammerless and now I want one.


----------



## nailer (Apr 26, 2009)

The new Ruger LCR would be ideal for your wife.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

nailer said:


> The new Ruger LCR would be ideal for your wife.


Is that based on actual shooting or marketing hype?


----------



## rx7dryver (Jan 17, 2007)

I would recommend a nice pre lock K frame. Your best bet would be a model 10 IMO.


----------



## kudu61 (Jun 27, 2009)

No trigger or action will every be better than a COLT PYTHON. Later, Bill


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

My S&W 642 has a smooth, but not necessarily light trigger...just the way I like it. With a little practice you can squeeze and hold it right at the break point, simulating single action fire. This makes it easy to shoot well, once you have mastered the art of keeping your trigger finger independent of the rest of your hand. 

Snap caps and dry-fire will help with a DA revolver, as much, if not more, than live fire.


----------



## timrosin (Jul 19, 2009)

*wife gun- good trigger*

My reccomendation is an older K-frame , a 10 or 65 or 66 or 67. 4 inch or as I have trained many wives
with a 3 inch mod 66. I smoothed the trigger and put in a light spring kit. I didn't have to touch the engagement surfaces of the trigger , I just smothed the bosses and frame and sideplate. It is about 5
pounds and buttery smooth. Try to get a round but gun if possible as you can put smaller grips on the
round buts. Use a rubber hogue either full size or the boot grip for small hands. Also the compact
rubber pachmeyer is good for small hands. 
An inexpensive 4 inch mod 10 could be perfect except for the square butt which makes the grip quite a bit
wider.
There is one danger though..... you might like it so much you might take it and buy your wife a brand new
one !

A used 65LS 3 inch or 65 3 inch M+P would be ideal too. both round butt too !

Keep in mind..... a heavier gun is the enemy of recoil....... tiny plastic guns will be the death of
enjoyment ( and further training) for a new shooter who has never experienced recoil. The students attention should be
on learning to shoot, not how loud it is or how much it hurts. Many female first time shooters do so 
well with the K-frame / 38 spcl / smooth trigger combination that they never realise that their boyfrend
or husband told them they needed a 22 !

Thats my experience ! 
Tim


----------



## clanger (Jan 27, 2009)

Small frame snubby's have a stuff trigger pull due to the limited space in which the action has to work. 

The tighter confines dictate smaller 'lever's' and subsequesnt camming-action / different geometry than larger frames with more room. Hence, a stiffer pull. Installing lighter springs softens the hit to the primer. Your mileage and results can vary there and stories of same will confirm this. 

The LCR is a revolutionary design and those I know that have shot it love it. The action has been tuned at the factory as since it's side-plateless it gave the engineers some wiggle room. The poly fire-control room and tamer-strip in the grip reduce felt recoil by design and in acutal hands-on. I've yet to fire one but know two that have that shoot snubby's like me and it's two thumbs up, esp for as light as it is. 

A sort-of Rule of Thumb is the larger the frame the more room for longer levers = a lighter trigger pull to cock and set the sear for a given weight of spring.


----------



## nailer (Apr 26, 2009)

Todd said:


> Is that based on actual shooting or marketing hype?


Marketing hype. I bought an S&W 442 instead. It is lighter and smaller. It shoots well for its purpose, meaning close up. I don't know how well a woman will handle it though.


----------



## clanger (Jan 27, 2009)

LCR = 13.5 oz. 

442 = 15.0 oz. 

Cylinder size : LCR is smaller.


----------



## nailer (Apr 26, 2009)

If we are being picky, the 442 is 6 3/8 inches long and the lcr is 6 1/2 inches long. I held both and found the grips on the lcr where in fact longer, wider, bigger, whichever, making it harder to conceal in the pocket. IMHO,the 442 is easier to conceal. Put one in each hand and then in a pocket and the 442 " seems " lighter and smaller.


----------



## clanger (Jan 27, 2009)

Just the facts, not bein' picky. 

I dry-fired them both, again, this weekend. 
The trigger on the LCR was lighter, and, when it cleans it self up (get's 'married'- as they all do) it'll be really nice. 

The LCR TC does have a larger grip. I don't like it and don't need a seeing eye dog. I love the standard grip. 

I'll take 1/8" in lentgh and less weight and lighter trigger v. a fatter cylinder etc. 

Both are simliar in size, completely uncomparable engineering wise and both fine firearms. I can find no real flaw in choosing either one and would be happy with either, or both! 

I also don't think the LCR is a child of market hype anymore than the AW Smith's.


----------



## nailer (Apr 26, 2009)

clanger said:


> Just the facts, not bein' picky.
> 
> I dry-fired them both, again, this weekend.
> The trigger on the LCR was lighter, and, when it cleans it self up (get's 'married'- as they all do) it'll be really nice.
> ...


I agree with you. I chose the 442 because it fit in my pocket better.


----------



## clanger (Jan 27, 2009)

:smt023


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

Todd said:


> Is that based on actual shooting or marketing hype?





nailer said:


> Marketing hype. I bought an S&W 442 instead. It is lighter and smaller. It shoots well for its purpose, meaning close up. I don't know how well a woman will handle it though.


I bought a 642 a few months ago for a CCW . A lady friend bought a LCR the next day for her CCW gun. Each was $400. Neither of us consulted the other before buying. But, we each fondled both guns (and other brands) in gun stores before buying. I put "short" CT LG-405 grips on mine for $219. She has not.

I don't think the 642 is lighter than the LCR ? It spec's 15 ounces to the LCR 13. Two ounces more. You have to go high $$$'s Scandium frame/Titanium cylinder to get a couple of ounces less than the LCR. For about $400 more than the 642 or LCR. I can't tell the weight difference in my hand when the 642 and the LCR are loaded with five rounds. Maybe others can. Two ounces different out of 15 ounces plus ammo is not a lot. Neither of us wanted a .357 at this weight/barrel length.

Different shapes ? A bit, for sure. Put them in my DeSantis "SuperFly" pocket holster, hard to tell.

I think it is a toss-up, mostly just personal preference. Some people don't like plastic. I like the LCR a lot, especially the trigger. But, I'm happy with my 642. It does amazingly accurate "sandbag groups" at 7 yards. That is compliments of the laser sight versus the front ramp/rear notch with 66 year-old eyes. Target stuff, not self-defense.

I haven't tried the LCR for sandbag accuracy. Both guns will do 7 yards "vital organ body hits" on paper just as fast as I can fire them, just like as intended. But, I had to practice.

But, if I had the chance to fire them "before" as much as I have now, I'd go with the LCR with CT grips.
My lady friend loves her LCR. Doesn't like my 642 so much, especially not its trigger pull.

Call all those opinions above "hype" if you will. I've never had any Ruger or S&W guns before.
And, I've never had any double-action revolvers before either.
So, I have no dog in this hunt. Just trying to learn "something new to me". :smt023


----------

