I'm not sure I understand what the size of the trigger guard has to do with anything...?
In this frame they chambered; 22LR, 38Sp, 357/38, 32H&RMag. Their large frame was chambered in 41Mag, 44Mag, 45LC. I cannot remember what frame they used for the 357 Maximum. There may have been other calibers that I'm not aware of.
The LCR is larger measured from the top of the frame to the bottom of the crane area and even more so from top of the frame to bottom of the trigger guard. In this respect, a holster sized for the J frame will not accept an LCR. However, I have a Don Hume 715 sized for the LCR and my J frame will fit well without any wiggle.
Brady, a buddy just bought a DW 14 2 1/2 barrel. A 686 holster should do the trick for him? Or at least a likely fit?
I have a S&W327 and LCR but now I REALLY want that SP101 :(
Gotta work some overtime :)
Here's a photo of the snub .38s that live here made, back in early days with a digital camera.
Four Smith & Wessons and two Colts and some opinion about each.
Smith & Wessons
Top: A very early production Chief's Special, from before the advent of the Model 36 designation, with a serial number just a whisker over 2000. These early Chief's Specials are known as "Baby Chief's" as their grip frame design was taken from the I-Frame (Smith & Wesson's old .32 frame). It's even more compact than the later familiar J-Frame. The half-moon front sight was only used on a few thousand before it was changed to the more familiar ramp. Other early features of this revolver include the "five-screw" configuration (four side plate screws and an external cylinder stop screw) and a flat cylinder latch. The little bugger is very compact but is a bit of a chore to grasp for someone like me who has long fingers.
Second from top: A Model 642-1 acquired in 1998. This is the lightweight aluminum alloy/stainless steel variation of the J-Frame which is so popular. A modern rendition of the old Smith & Wesson Centennial, this one did away with the curious grip safety sported by the Centennial. Rated for +P ammo (as is tackily emblazoned on the barrel) it offers light weight for those who value such. It also offers recoil quite "lively" but is controllable when fired with the personally favored 158 grain +P lead SWC loadings. Is not something to enjoy shooting a box full of +P through in practice. The J-Frame has the customary Smith & Wesson double-action trigger feel though, when rendered on a smaller scale, the trigger simply isn't quite so fine. This is due to action parts dimensions and their interrelationship, the coil main spring, and the light weight of the small 5-shot cylinder. The revolvers though are still quite useable.
Second from bottom: An early 1950s Military & Police. This K-Frame snub was later termed the Model 10 by the factory when model number designations were introduced. The K-Frame snubs have far better double-action triggers than their J-Frame brethren and this one is as smooth as silk. It is easier to shoot accurate groups at any range with a K-Frame Smith & Wesson snub. The square butt configuration feels both substantial and familiar to me. The revolver weighs in at 30 oz and soaks up recoil of the heaviest .38 Special loads. This revolver still sees some IWB use around here despite nearing 60 years in age.
Bottom: A Model 10 snub. Shown in the round butt configuration, this one was special ordered in December of 1995. By then the 2-inch Model 10 was very difficult to find even though technically still cataloged. Sharing the same shooting traits as the square butt Military & Police mentioned above it has a slightly different feel due to it's round butt configuration which does aid in concealment. I like the round butt with factory stock panels, even with my long fingers. It offers good control for rapid follow-up shots in the double-action mode, nearly equal to the square butt configuration for me. These K-Frame snubs eat the heaviest loads in any quantity one can afford to feed them.
The K-Frame Models 10 and 15 are now discontinued and it's a pity. They are the best kept secret for effective snub shooting. If a fellow is intending to carry his snub holstered then these are superior to smaller guns and may be toted just as readily. Smith & Wesson K-Frame snubs hold six rounds. They even fit in a large pocket if one can find a way to deal with the sagging. Heavy winter coat pockets work well with these but I don't have much opportunity to wear such coats around here.
Top: A Detective Special from 1966. Hate to have to assert this but there is no superior snub to a Colt Detective Special! A perfect "tweener" size between the small J-Frame Smith and Wessons and the larger K-Frame Smith & Wessons. The Detective Special is all-steel and, despite it's compactness, holds 6 rounds. It weighs 22 oz. Due to it's grip frame design it is easy to shoot with control and recoil is manageable. It handles +P ammunition despite the bleatings of the "Chicken Little" types on internet forums who raise a hue and cry against the practice of shooting +P in it. For me the downside to the Detective Special is its inferior Colt double-action trigger which stacks more than I could like. This is partially due to long familiarity with the Smith & Wesson DA trigger but the Colt trigger is not quite "up to snuff" in my view. It's entirely useable though and good work may be done with it. The Detective Special turns in a shooting performance more akin to the larger Smith & Wesson K-Frame service revolvers yet is more compact. My Detective Special has risen to the forefront of snubby carry for me in recent years.
Bottom: A Colt Banker's Special from 1932. This is not a .38 Special revolver but rather is chambered for the older and milder .38 S&W cartridge. Perhaps it was so chambered for wimpy bankers who couldn't stomach the recoil of the .38 Special-chambered Detective Special. Note the short frame and cylinder of this revolver. Nobody but I would carry such a revolver but I've done so on occasion. This plucky little all-steel revolver can handle some more "enthusiastic" handloads than the current factory .38 S&W loadings can meekly offer. Stoked with a 158 grain lead SWC handload, the compact Banker's Special hides in a pocket and handily whips any .380 ACP load around. It's very easy to gain double-action accuracy with the Banker's Special which can rapidly stitch up a practice target with .38 holes. Having the same basic action design, the Banker's Special has the same double-action trigger feel as the Detective Special. It's square-butt grip frame affords a very ergonomic hold from the shooter.
Just a personal opinion but there is no way in the world some plastic and aluminum alloy snub will work its way into the menagerie here. After some years with the alloy-framed Model 642 I'm convinced that the light weight touted for .38 snubs is much overrated. Though they may be perfectly serviceable, both the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard .38 Special and the Ruger LCR revolvers are very unsatisfying in design and construction for an old geezer like me. They give every appearance of being designed to be manufactured inexpensively and they look cheap. Additionally despite the rave reviews of the LCR's trigger seen here on the Forum, it is a particular flavor of "yuck" in my view. Its trigger feels imprecise and has far too much over-travel to be considered an excellent double-action trigger. It feels more like my Arrow stapler used to put up targets. I've not tried the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard trigger but the revolver is unappealing. I enjoy firearms and it's more fun to use effective older designs that can accomplish the task just as readily and with more elegance and élan. With snubs, newer is not always superior.
This is only one view on the subject.
I have tried several snubs. Ruger and S&W, poly, ScTi, Sp101. Now I have a 640 Pro, with a 442 Pro on the list.
Have to agree that the S&W K-frame Round Butt snub is a pure peach. IMHO, better control & trigger-feel than any j-frame, plus an extra round per fill-up. My M10 & M12 (lightweight) snubs still get lots of carry time.
"Though they may be perfectly serviceable, both the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard .38 Special and the Ruger LCR revolvers are very unsatisfying in design and construction for an old geezer like me. They give every appearance of being designed to be manufactured inexpensively and they look cheap."
Sounds exactly like what was said about Glock by those "in-the-know" back in the day. We all know how that turned out... :wink:
Sitting level on the topstraps and front sights:
J-frame on top (like I really needed to clarify that):
LCR on top:
Usually people say that the j-frame is thinner,I think the lcr might win slightly:
Heyyyyy. Old geezers get to say stuff like that 'cause we're...old geezers! We forget that 1911 variants are better & cheaper today than they have EVER been. We disregard the fact that a Colt Python would cost ~$3000 to build from scratch tomorrow morning. We don't recall how fragile that deep, rich blue job was to holster-wear, blood or a wet holster. We just like blued carbon steel guns with walnut grips, period! You new-fangled, polymer-pistol, tactical tupperware, sissified upstarts are just WRONG! Next thing ya' know, you'll be wishin' for plastic football helmets & phones you don't have to dial! :wink:
I yam what I yam...
Sounds like you've been talking to people that go by shape, and forget about "size" ...... unfortunately.
I don't know what a Dan Wesson frame is.... but I have a J, K, L & N frame revolvers, and none of them are going to work in the same holsters....