Colt heavy underlug barrel puts more weight at muzzle, helps dampen recoil compared to Ruger’s partially-lugged barrel.

      A full underlug, especially on a longer barrel, adds a lot of weight at the front of the gun. That’s because the underlugs are part of the barrel itself – made of the same material, usually steel. Having a solid piece of steel at the end of the barrel changes the balance dramatically, and most people find that the extra weight reduces recoil and muzzle flip.

      There is such a thing as ‘too much’, however – my aforementioned Dan Wesson barrel is a fully lugged example, and is quite heavy. I can’t actually keep the gun on target one handed, and even with two hands it’s not easy holding all that weight at the end of my arms!

      My Dan Wesson notwithstanding, I’m partial to full underlugs for their help in keeping the gun on target between shots. Some people don’t like the muzzle-heavy feeling than an underlug provides, which is why partials are still offered on some guns.

      One of the reasons many people like a three-inch revolver is because they usually have fully lugged barrels. That extra bit of weight at the muzzle helps control the shorter barrel. The three-inch combines some of the easy carrying of a true snubnose along with a little of the recoil control of a four-inch. They make a good compromise between carryability and shootability.

      While I don’t wish to sound unduly fashionable, the full underlug also adds a certain look to a revolver that I find appealing. The Colt Python was as admired for its appearance as much as its performance, as its heavy lugged barrel gave it a purposeful air. When the S&W Model 686 was introduced it copied that profile, and I think the aesthetics had much to do with the model’s popularity.

      Of the revolvers I’ve owned, the overwhelming majority have had fully lugged barrels. I’m not sure if that makes me pragmatic for appreciating their functionality, or shallow for lusting after their appearance.

      Frame materials

      While it may not seem to be exactly a matter of fit, the material from which the gun is made does make a big difference in how it feels and performs in the hand. Comfort, I think, is certainly part of fitting the shooter.

      The traditional material for revolver construction is good old steel. Originally plain high-carbon steel, in 1959 Smith & Wesson made a special run of their Model 15 Combat Masterpiece in highly polished stainless steel. The gun proved to be a hit, and in 1965 the stainless Model 60 Chief’s Special became a regular item in their revolver catalog. Though there is a slight weight difference between carbon (blued) steel and stainless, we generally accept them as having the same effective weight.

      Aluminum-framed revolvers actually pre-date stainless steel, the first of them appearing in 1950. The lightweight metal was used wherever possible to reduce the load that the gun owner had to carry. The cylinders and internal parts were made of steel, though the military did experiment with guns whose cylinders were made from aluminum. (They proved to be unsafe in long term use, and the experiment ended in the early 1960s.)

      In the late 1990s gun manufacturers started producing revolvers made of titanium, and a few years later S&W incorporated scandium into an aluminum alloy mix for the ultimate in light weight and strength. Now into the 21st century we have lightweight revolvers made of plastic composites – all with one goal: make the guns lighter.

      LIghtweight revolvers are great to carry around. On a belt they’re nearly unnoticeable, in a pocket they carry like a wallet, and they make ankle holsters practical. The downside (isn’t there always a downside?) is that they have increased recoil – substantially increased recoil.

      These ultra-lightweight revolvers have recoil that varies from unpleasant (with Special-class loads) to downright vicious (for those guns chambered in Magnum cartridges). This increase in recoil impulse makes them difficult to practice with, and drastically alters the shooter’s balance of speed and precision. Though I carry one myself occasionally, I’m not at all fond of shooting the thing.

      If you’re tempted by a lightweight revolver, I suggest that you try one before you put down your money. Shoot it with the ammo that you expect to carry, and see if you can handle the gun. Given the level of recoil, will you actually do the necessary practice to maintain your proficiency with this, the hardest of all guns to handle? If not, get yourself a steel revolver.

      One thing to remember is that if they’re shot regularly, the lightweight guns will have a shorter service life and require more maintenance than their heavier counterparts. The increased recoil impulse stretches lightweight frames more than the steel varieties, and light alloys are generally not as resistant to friction-related wear. Cylinders become loose in their frames, and timing becomes harder to maintain. Of course this doesn’t apply to those guns that are carried much and shot little, but haven’t I already made the case for regular practice?

      My general rule of thumb: unless you have a compelling need for a lightweight gun, pick a steel model.

      To the men in the audience: A word about relational harmony

      Guys, I know you want to buy your wife or girlfriend a gun. I appreciate that you want to get her something light so that she’ll actually carry it. I know that you think this will get her ‘into guns.’ I also know that this is a path fraught with danger!

      As an instructor I’ve counseled a number of women who were given the gift of a lightweight revolver by a well-meaning significant other. The scene is repeated time and again: she shoots a few cylinders (sometimes just a few rounds) and puts the gun down, vowing never to shoot it again. It hurts, and even with proper recoil technique she finds it difficult to control. I commiserate with her, because I’m of the same opinion.

      A gun that she won’t shoot, and won’t practice with, does nothing to bring her into the fold. If she doesn’t get good, professional instruction the fierce recoil may even scare her enough that she won’t carry that particular gun. Neither outcome meets the goal of getting her interested in protecting herself.

      Take it from a guy who’s managed to stay happily married to one gal for a quarter century: don’t choose her gun. Take her to a range where they rent guns (yes, even if it’s a long drive from home. Make a weekend adventure of it!). Let her shoot what she’s interested in, and let her decide based upon her likes, dislikes, and tolerance. She may still pick a lightweight revolver, and if so more power to her. If she decides on a steel model because of the shooting comfort, realize that she’ll be more apt to get the very necessary training and practice she’ll need to use it effectively.

      Though this book is all about revolvers, if she decides she doesn’t like them and picks an autoloader instead, that’s fine too. It’s more important that she get something she likes rather than trying to please either of us.

      To the ladies in the audience: Don’t be coerced

      I’ve lost count of the number of women who’ve contacted me about the lightweight revolver a gun store employee pushed her to buy. For some reason there is a persistent subculture of men working behind counters who are convinced that the perfect