Revolvers: Outdated? Obsolete?


PDA






amprecon
May 17, 2006, 04:28 PM
I've been told that no gun collection is complete without at least one revolver regardless of what caliber it is in. I have owned various revolvers in my time, small to large and thought they were, well.......ok. I do not own any at present and every once in awhile my interest is peaked again. So I'll go to the local gunstore look at a few, pick up a few, consider the price, consider what it is and what it does, look at the price again. Remember that I have 9mm and .45acp semi-auto's at home and that I just can't justify spending around $500 for another handgun that doesn't really hold anything over the handgun collection I already have.
They are heavier, hold fewer rounds, harder to clean and have a hard DA trigger pull. Now granted a 9mm or a .45acp is not a .357mag, but is it necessary? Why do I need to spend $500 to have something I already have that does the same thing using a different mechanism? Justify this for me please. 'Cause I really kind of do want another revolver :) .
Now consider this, I have an AK, a Garand, a bolt rifle and a shotgun, yet I want an M1A Scout in a bad way. Now I have rifles, why would I want yet another rifle you might ask? Well, my justification is that it's in a powerful round with a 20 round magazine, but there's improvement there over the other rifles in it's higher magazine capacity and more powerful round. What would I be gaining in performance by getting a revolver I ask aside from nostalgia?

If you enjoyed reading about "Revolvers: Outdated? Obsolete?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Coronach
May 17, 2006, 04:46 PM
Revolvers: Outdated? Obsolete?No and no.

Mike :)

Vern Humphrey
May 17, 2006, 04:47 PM
Why do you want a revolver?

If it's just to complete the decor of your den, get a cheap replica and hang it on the wall.

If it's for self-defense and concealed carry, then a Smith, Colt, or Ruger SP 101 would be good choices. You could, of course, also opt for a small automatic.

If it's for use as a service pistol (military or police), then automatics are the way to go.

If it's for hunting, woods carry and so on, then revolvers have the edge with more powerful cartridges, and generally better precision shooting capability.

Decide what you want a new gun for, and then decide if a revolver is the ideal choice for that purpose.

atlctyslkr
May 17, 2006, 04:49 PM
Do you NEED a revolver? That's up to you. Are they outdated? Ask a cop who carries a snub in an ankle holster or as an off duty. As a handgun hunter. Ask a family man just looking for added peace of mind. What I mean to say is revolvers are still revered by many as the best tool for the job. I carry one as my CCW. I figure my chances of needed it are very small, even smaller chance of firing it. If I was a cop I would probably not carry a revolver unless I was "high up" or in a low profile job. You need the firepower to battle todays better armed criminals. There is just something about that reliability that gets to me.

bluto
May 17, 2006, 04:51 PM
I guess you could argue that what a revolver lacks in round capacity, it makes up in power and reliability. I think revolvers have their place in a collection based solely on their utility.

For instance, there are always topics running about what "handy" weapon would be best to take into bear country. Among handguns it's usually the revolver chambered in a larger, powerful, caliber that tops the list. In that type of situation it is arguable that a revolver will get the job done better than an auto.

I have a few in my collection simply because they're more pleasing to the eye and more interesting as a piece of machinery - verging on art. And if you've ever seen guys like Jerry Miculik use them, you'd be hard pressed to call them obsolete.:D

Carl N. Brown
May 17, 2006, 04:54 PM
Revolvers can accept a wider range of loads than an automatic.
Compare the range of ammunition available for a .357 from
.38 wadcutters to .357 JHP versus most 9mm automatics.

Mad Magyar
May 17, 2006, 04:55 PM
Don't leave home w/o it!:) Even though I lean toward the autoloaders, there are times when it just feels right....;) When you look over the gun rags & what's being pushed now-a-days, I wouldn't be too far off that it is the older population that still cherish & hang-on to their wheelguns. One of the last articles I read about a revolver in a new gun mag made it seem like a history lesson...
http://i4.tinypic.com/zxjrr9.jpg

Boats
May 17, 2006, 04:57 PM
You know something funny? I don't think this type of thread HAS EVER COME UP BEFORE AT EITHER THR OR TFL!

I wonder what the answers will be.:rolleyes:

Coronach
May 17, 2006, 04:58 PM
What would I be gaining in performance by getting a revolver I ask aside from nostalgia?The real question is this: what will you be 'gaining' from getting another gun period, pay no heed to its mechanics of action.

If you already have a centerfire rifle of moderate caliber, a common gauge shotgun and a centerfire handgun of moderate caliber (and it sounds like you do), you have all of the bases covered as far as "needs." You can justify a purchase until the cows come home by saying that it fills another niche, but at the end of the day you just want another gun. There's nothing wrong with that.

For what it's worth, I'm a "niche" guy too. I like knowing that I have one (or more) guns that fit into most of the commonly accepted categories ("this is my SHTF rifle, and this is my varmit rifle, and this is my pigeon killer and this is my etc etc etc etc"), but if I have an itch to get something that serves no real purpose whatsoever and I just want it because I want it, I'll stop worrying and just go out and buy it (finances allowing).

This, of course, helps explain why I have about 8 handguns that shoot .38spl- that's about 5 more guns than I have "niches". At first I worried about justifying their presence to myself, then I finally realized that as long as my bank account was balanced and my credit card paid off, I didn't have to justify owning them to anyone, save myself, and that a simple "Because I like it" will suffice for that.

Buy the gun. :cool:

Oh, and if you MUST find a niche for it to fill, buy a .44 magnum and check off your "most powerful handgun in the world, it could blow your head clean off, so do you feel lucky, punk?" niche. :D

Mike

Freddymac
May 17, 2006, 05:02 PM
Why do I need to spend $500 to have something I already have that does the same thing using a different mechanism?

You don't. What are you going to do with it. I have revlovers that I hunt or target shoot with, but have no intention of carring. I'm an auto guy, always have been, always will be, but I also see the place in my collection for wheel guns. If you don have a need for one, don't buy one.

sm
May 17, 2006, 05:03 PM
Nope.

Checkman
May 17, 2006, 05:04 PM
Boats
You know something funny? I don't think this type of thread HAS EVER COME UP BEFORE AT EITHER THR OR TFL!

I wonder what the answers will be.

:D I have no idea.:rolleyes:

lee n. field
May 17, 2006, 05:06 PM
and have a hard DA trigger pull.

Not my Model 19.

JackOfAllTradesMasterAtNone
May 17, 2006, 06:05 PM
I've had my clock cleaned by a guy shooting a revolver when I've shot my Kimber 1911 in a Pin shoot. (and I've turned in the fast time for a stock gun, twice against some tough competition. I'm not all that slow.)

I carry either a small revolver when dirt bike riding, or sometimes a small auto, but the SP101 is much cheaper to lose should it decide to launch itself to the wilderness while I'm riding.

What's in the bedroom for the wife? A small revolver. If she's gonna have to shoot in the dark of night, I don't want her to have to even think about a safety or racking the slide to chamber a round. Do I have DA auto? You bet.

What's my backup or sometimes primary gun when hunting? A big frame magnum revolver! Yes, there's the large auto's that can get the job done hunting, just as well, if not better. Like the 50AE or the .44automag. But you know what? Revolvers don't jam like an Automag can. Even in Single Action, I'll take the revolver when hunting semi-dangerous game.

When I teach a new shooter with small hands... Colt Diamond Back or Cobra .38spl. Great shooters. Accurate and reliable. There's move to the autoloaders, but not until the revolver has been proficiently handled.

And, even though my Kimber is quite accurate at .45acp Bullseye pistol ranges, there's not an autoloader in my safe that can compare to the accuracy of my Dan Wesson 15-2VH in .357mag. (revolver) (OK, the target MKII's should print clover leafs from a Ransom Rest at 50yds, but I doubt it at more than 100yds.)

-Steve

Mizzle187
May 17, 2006, 06:32 PM
When I came of age to buy guns and had the money to start buying them a few years ago all I cared about was auto's. I wouldnt give any revolver the time of day. They werent "cool" enough for me! Damn I was a ****** back then!:D I had shot revolvers before but I wanted as many rounds as possible. 5 years later for some reason Im drawn to revolvers. I still have 2 or 3 times the autos than I do revolvers but that is changing pretty quick. Im younger than 30 and my generation is one of hi-tech but in the end Ive started to come back to revolvers and love to shoot them. I cant explain why. I carry a P99c 9mm(IWB) as my #1 and a SW 642 w/Laser Grips(pocket carry) as my #2 . Im not even getting in their value in hunting so I say hell no revolvers arent outdated and hell no they arent obsolete.

Ohen Cepel
May 17, 2006, 06:38 PM
If you don't care for them, then don't buy one.

However, there are many great things about them. For me they just feel right. Also, I can change the grip to fit almost anyone's hand. Hard to do that with the polymer guns and not too easy with most pistols.

I don't find them any harder to clean. I think they're easier since I seldom feel the need to remove the sideplate.

One huge gain if you get into the high end is power. No auto's come close to the big revolver rounds. Yes, I have a Desert Eagle, but it's far less managable then a revolver in the same round.

4v50 Gary
May 17, 2006, 07:49 PM
This month's California Rifle And Pistol Association (CRAP-a) newsletter, The Firing Line (not to be mistaken for our sister website), has an article by a former deputy turned radio detective. In it he discusses riding with a rookie to a farm where the wife complained that her husband had armed himself and threatened to shoot people. Armed with revolvers and Ray-o-Vac flashlights (wow, I had at least a Streamlight SL-20), they confronted the old farmer who warned them off. When he pointed his rifle at the deputies, the rookie broke leather, fired one shot from his revolver and hit the farmer in the eye. The farmer fell and they kicked the rifle away, put him in the cage and drove him to the hospital and expected him to die along the way. They managed to get a dying declaration out of him and the doctor said he's a goner. Amazingly, the farmer survived and the deputies declined pressing charges. Still, the revolver worked and removed the threat, thereby saving the lives of both deputies. The writer later learned that his rookie partner was once a champion shot in the Air Force.

Onmilo
May 17, 2006, 08:36 PM
In my home state of Illinois it is illegal to hunt deer with a semi-automatic handgun.
That limits the choices to a revolver or some form of single shot.
My 629 .44 Magnum does a fine job and this in itself tells me revolvers are far from being obsolete, ineffective, or outdated.

Ala Dan
May 17, 2006, 08:40 PM
Quote: by amprecon

Revolvers: Outdated? Obsolete?

Sorry sir, NO WAY Jose:D

Surefire
May 17, 2006, 08:49 PM
Buy and collect what you like. If autoloaders work better for you, more power to you.

For me, revolvers work better for me:

1. Superior ergonomics
2. Reliable with underloaded ammo
3. Great range of power (from cowboy loads up to heavy magnums)
4. Long range accuracy (esp. 6" plus barrels)
5. Comfort (I prefer the way most revolvers recoil)
6. Logistics (no magazines to worry about). If rapid reloads are necessary, and good speedloader can be bought a lot cheaper than a good magazine.


Having said this, my collection contains revolvers AND autoloaders. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. I feel that for me it makes sense to have both.

Sheldon
May 17, 2006, 09:01 PM
When I first got "into" guns I never paid the wheelguns much attention. As time has gone by I have learned to appreciate them more. They are different and I like that about them now. I remember watching guys at the range shoot their double action revolvers like a single action (cocking the hammer before firing the gun) and thinking why bother with a double action when you're going to shoot it single action?? My wife had a S&W 586 and I started to practice with it determined to learn to shoot double action. I'm no Miculek, but I shoot the wheelgun now faster and more accurate than a lot of the automatic guys at the range most times. It's just another aspect of the hobby to explore if one is so inclined. I have since gotten a few S&W revolvers myself.:D It never hurts to have proficiency with as many firearms as possible.

CSA 357
May 17, 2006, 09:03 PM
thats not gona happen! not at my house any way i love wheel guns , yea i have a few autos , i dont like chaseing my brass!;)

Jkwas
May 17, 2006, 09:06 PM
I went into handguns with an open mind. I purchased a revolver, then an auto. I like them both and have had no real problems with either. I can handle both, but I feel more comfortable with the revolver for ccw and the nightstand. I might turn into a moron under stress and press the wrong button or forget to turn the safety off and it might cost me my life. Especially waking up in the middle of the night or taken by surprise. I trust a revolver more with its simple operatioin and it's only safety being the heavy DA trigger. If I knew I was going into trouble and could ready myself beforehand, the auto would have the advantage of higher capacity. For these reasons the revolver will never be obsolete until we go to ray guns.

FIRE COP
May 17, 2006, 09:59 PM
MECHANICALLY SUPERB AND RELIABLE...FINE ENGINEERING WITH THE RIGHT WEAPON...BEAUTIFUL AND DEADLY...I HAVE THREE REVOLVERS...AND THREE SEMI-AUTOS..IS A RENOIR OR MATISSE OBSOLETE?...no more than an older Smith or Colt..When you pull the trigger they go BANG..that is what you want in a hand gun...

CAnnoneer
May 17, 2006, 10:11 PM
For me, revolvers are just a nice piece of history. I do not like their ergonomics, low capacity, long DA trigger, side spitting, and generally larger size.

Load diversity is meaningless to me, because I only shoot factory ammo.

Reliability of good quality semi-autos is more than enough; in fact I would argue that a revolver gets dirty faster and then ejection problems set in. You have to shoot many more rounds through a good semi-auto before you end up with a malfuction due to accrued grime.

Some semi-autos are indeed overcomplicated with extra bells and whistles that may be confusing to a casual user in a stressful situation. But, there are many good ones with a very simple, intuitive, and reliable safety.

Sustained fire and fast reacquiring is easier with semi-autos due to high pivot point in recoil.

Finally, semi-autos allow low trigger pulls, which improves ergonomics, decreases fatigue, and improves accuracy in long shooting sessions.

P.S. I can't wait for plasma guns! Then semi-autos would be antiquated and people will sniff the ammo discharge like wine appreciators smell the cork.

razorburn
May 17, 2006, 10:58 PM
Sure you need one. Look at your collection. You need a high powered handgun for uh... bear country, and whatnot. Only a revolver will fit the bill for a handcannon. What're you going to do if a grizzly spots you, and all you've got is a 9mm or a .45? Why, you'd be lucky to break skin before he eats you. You need some power on the level of the .500 S&W, or a .454 casull, or even just a .44 mag. :D Does that help?

JohnKSa
May 17, 2006, 11:05 PM
Yes, they are, and no they're not.

There are some things that autopistols do much better than revolvers--there's absolutely no denying it.

But there are also some areas where revolvers outclass the autochuckers.

Do you need a good self-defense gun that is small, yet powerful, that is low recoiling, high-capacity and that can be reloaded very quickly with only a modicum of practice? Sorry, there is no revolver that fits that bill and there never will be.

Do you need a very powerful and accurate repeating handgun with absolutely reliability that is suitable for hunting large and dangerous game? Then you need a revolver. Are you trying to pack maximum power into the smallest possible repeating handgun? That's a revolver too.

There are reasons that the military is issuing few, if any revolvers and that the majority of LEOs carry autopistols. But there are also reasons that revolvers are still around and dominate some activities.

Gary A
May 17, 2006, 11:14 PM
Amprecon stated, "So I'll go to the local gunstore look at a few, pick up a few, consider the price, consider what it is and what it does, look at the price again. Remember that I have 9mm and .45acp semi-auto's at home and that I just can't justify spending around $500 for another handgun that doesn't really hold anything over the handgun collection I already have."
____________________________________________________________

Your reasons for thinking the above notwithstanding, if I replaced the phrase "9mm and .45acp semi-auto's" with "revolvers", our sentiments are the same.
Anyway, after the bare necessities, how many purchases are due to "need"? :)

fiVe
May 17, 2006, 11:57 PM
I just like the simplicity and elegance of the revolver. I've found that the S&W 642 in a Robert Mica pocket holster is the perfect CCW configuration for me. I see revolvers as VERY up-to-date and light years for obsolete.

Regards,
fiVe

cosine
May 18, 2006, 12:04 AM
Well if they are, I'm planning to buy an outdated, obsolete firearm for my first handgun purchase. ;)

bouis
May 18, 2006, 12:04 AM
I can't believe nobody's said this yet -- because I don't have to hunt for ejected cases!

Sistema1927
May 18, 2006, 12:22 AM
Yes, revolvers are outdated, obsolete, and totally useless. You don't want one, and neither does anyone else.

(That way, there will be more for those of us who appreciate them.) :neener:

razorburn
May 18, 2006, 12:45 AM
I really do hate the heavy double action of my gun though. Hopefully, there exists some way to get a trigger job to lighten this thing down to a 5-7lb double action pull. Right now, I'm estimating the DA pull is 12-15 lbs. When the trigger is 3-5 times heavier than the gun, it's practically impossible to shoot quickly and accurately. The DA trigger pulls the gun off target if squeezed quickly.

Jenrick
May 18, 2006, 10:09 AM
razorburn: Yeah know I was right there with yeah for a while. My normal shooter is a G34 w/ polished internals and a 3.5lb connector. Probably right around a 4.5lb trigger.

I looked at getting a revolver for a while just to have one, and all the new one's I looked at had heavy "stiff" triggers. Then I started hitting pawnshops, finding 30+ year old guns that had been fired/dry fired thousands of times let me feel how a good "worn in" DA trigger feels. Probably 8lbs, maybe 9, smooth and buttery take up, then a better break then my glock.

So there is hope, just shot/dry fire the heck out of it.

-Jenrick

RGL01
May 18, 2006, 10:28 AM
Or get Blackhawk/Super-Blackhawk.

Waywardmonk
May 18, 2006, 11:02 AM
I have three revolvers ( two .44 Trail bosses and .357 SP101 ) and my wife has a nice little Scandium S&W .32mag and never have I felt " under protected " when carrying them versus an auto ( though the .32 seems kinda tiny which is why it isn't my gun :rolleyes: ) but what I appreciate most for revolvers is the " load it and forget it " aspect. Unlike I would with an auto I can load up my revolvers and not worry about spring fatigue in the magazine or having to deal with any safeties or racking the slide, it's nice to know that barring anything unforeseen you can put a loaded revolver in a drawer and come back in 5 years and it will still shoot. Besides, variety is the spice of life, why not have as many different guns as possible?

amprecon
May 18, 2006, 11:56 AM
I've seen some interesting replies and you guys are right, it just comes down to "want" more than need. Great being an American isn't it? :D Geeze we're spoiled. My very first handgun was a Ruger GP100, stainless steel .357, 4" full-lugged barrel, cost less than the auto-loaders, it was a good gun and probably should still have it today if I had any sense at the time. Water under the bridge now though.
But as I ponder the thought of a new revolver, based on my previous revolver experience, I think I want just a medium sized one, not for concealment primarily, just a utilitiy gun. I had considered .38spl only, like a model 10, then thought about SA only maybe .45lc or for economical reasons the .357. Then there is the new S&W 619, a fixed sight 7-round .357, but I don't know. I've owned a S&W 625 once and thought maybe a large caliber would be fitting and considered one in .44spl. I've owned .44mags before and don't have a use for them as I don't hunt with handguns and they are expensive and harder to shoot. I actually prefer blued handguns over stainless, just personal preference. But size is a consideration, a K-frame would be pretty much perfect for my "want's".

Jenrick
May 18, 2006, 01:47 PM
amprecon: Since you like the K frame, go pawnshopping. In one day and 7 pawnshops (in less then 4 hrs), I saw probably 50-60 K frames and their Colt brethren. Most places price them around $200-$250. Bring cash, and be prepared to bargin, can probably walk out for less then $200 (got a Combat Masterpiece with Target grips for $215 cash).

Best of luck,

-Jenrick

Matt King
May 18, 2006, 05:57 PM
Revolvers, outdated, never. :) Revolvers are in my opinion the best kind of gun in the world, because of their reliability, and simiplictiy.

Nightcrawler
May 18, 2006, 10:32 PM
I keep hearing how revolvers are obsolete and how they just don't cut it anymore. Most of the guards I work with are pining for the rumored switch to semiautos next year. I guess they feel underarmed with our Model 19s and only six rounds (plus two speedloaders). The fact that not one guard has ever needed to fire a shot in anger at my work site is entirely irrelevant, of course. Gotta have those extra rounds! :D

Other people say revolvers are no good for service use. I would've happily carried a good (preferably seven shot, just to get the most out of the L-Frame size) .357 in Qatar. Again, it was pretty quiet there, but a revolver would've worked well enough for my needs. I'd've been much happier with seven rounds of .357 LSWC over 15 rounds of 9mm ball. In any case, the handgun was but a backup to my rifle, for which I had plenty of ammunition.

If I were a cop on patrol...it'd depend on the nature of my beat. If your ONLY weapon is a handgun and your job is to go right into harm's way, the extra ammo would be nice. But for most situations, I think a .357 would suffice anyway. What's the national average for shots fired in a police encountered? Two or three? Maybe ten or eleven now; you always seem to hear about the ones that just go nuts on the trigger, but I'm sure they're a minority and get undue press.

If I were to take another contracting job in the Middle East, going to someplace hazardous, like Iraq, this time? I'd still be intersted in taking a .357, personally. A fine cleaning regimen would be necessary, but if the M16 can be kept running in the desert sand a S&W certainly can.

But that's ME. For large militaries, where parts commonality and ease of training is a necessity, an autopistol is probably better. Since the military is considering switching from a 15+1 9mm pistol to an 8-10+1 .45, high capacity doesn't seem to be their primary concern.

Revolers are simpler to learn, but are much more difficult to master. (The main reason, I think, most of my fellow guards don't like the M19s is because they can't shoot them for crap, on average. There're only a couple of us that shoot revolvers frequently. LOL)

The revolver is one of those things, like zippo lighters and manual transmission cars, that just hangs in there despite newer things coming along. How many drivers swear by manual transmissions? "I like the control!", they say. Then they can't maintain a steady speed on the Interstate because they don't have cruise control. (Utah drivers, I swear...:cuss: ) The average driver probably can't shift a stick more efficiently than a modern automatic transmission can change gears, but lordy, don't tell the motorheads that! LOL

But the stick shift isn't going away, and neither is the revolver. If you like one, buy one, shoot it, and to hell with what's on the cover of "COMBAT HANDGUNS" or "GUNS AND WEAPONS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT" magazines. If you don't like one, there's a plethora of fine self-loaders out there, so you've got your pick!

Personally, I'm glad that being a revolver shooter makes me part of some sort of counter-culture movement. It's like being a beatnik or a hippie, but with more bathing and less communisim...

MCgunner
May 18, 2006, 10:38 PM
Only a revolver will fit the bill for a handcannon.

Just because I like to argue, but lets say you have a 1911. What about the .308 Winchester caliber Pachmayr dominator??? And, I'm not even mentioning Thompson-Center arms, the company for whom the term "hand cannon" was coined. :D

Nightcrawler
May 18, 2006, 10:41 PM
Just because I like to argue, but lets say you have a 1911. What about the .308 Winchester caliber Pachmayr dominator???

What about it? I'd much rather get shot with a .308, especially out of, what, an eight or ten inch barrel? than a .500 S&W....that much bore diameter, that much velocity, and that much mass is going to hurt...

:neener:

MCgunner
May 18, 2006, 10:43 PM
I'm sure if they shot you in the head with it, even with a NATO armor penetrating round, it'd bounce off. :neener:

I don't lack power in my .30-30 Contender for what I hunt, frankly, and it's 1 moa accurate. If I wanted more power, I could get an Encore. I think it comes in .300 Win Mag? I don't know, but some really hot rifle calibers.

.308 is quite good out of shorter barrels, BTW.

Nightcrawler
May 18, 2006, 10:50 PM
Yes, but with a single shot, the whole "faster to reload" and "higher capacity" arguments kind of go out the window, don't they?

Besides. This is a revolvers vs. autopistols debate. You single-shot iconoclasts can take your blaspheming somewhere else. :D

MCgunner
May 18, 2006, 10:53 PM
Yeah, that's why I mentioned the Pachmayr Dominator. Just take your autochucker slide off and install it, two guns in one. Neat concept.

Besides, it's smaller, lighter, and easier to carry than either a M1A or similar sized Smith .50 cal revolver, even with optics!:D And, at 200 yards I can hit it with one shot.

Harve Curry
May 19, 2006, 12:07 AM
Revolvers are PC they don't litter, autos do. Any enviromentalist should NO that. :evil: Auto's polute and miss or miss fire:neener: unless it is a fine tuned Colt 1911:)

RyanM
May 19, 2006, 12:52 AM
Revolvers are about as outdated as walking.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=40158&stc=1&d=1148010678

dogngun
May 19, 2006, 07:05 AM
You are obviously not a revolver guy, no offence intended. Don't buy one if you are happy without one. That's one more that a revolver guy will be able to buy and enjoy.
Why buy a revolver (or any other type of gun) just because other people say you "should have" one ? Why spend the money on something you won't enjoy having ?

And no, revolvers are not obsolete - they are still being developed, carried daily by many people, and in demand. They still work, too.
I currently have 7 of them, going back to 1917.

Mark

Buy another Auto.

Coronach
May 19, 2006, 03:05 PM
If I were a cop on patrol...it'd depend on the nature of my beat. If your ONLY weapon is a handgun and your job is to go right into harm's way, the extra ammo would be nice. But for most situations, I think a .357 would suffice anyway. What's the national average for shots fired in a police encountered? Two or three? Maybe ten or eleven now; you always seem to hear about the ones that just go nuts on the trigger, but I'm sure they're a minority and get undue press.The majority of shootings still have pretty low round-counts, but it is climbing. There are several reasons for this. One is the fact that cops are now trained to shoot until the threat is stopped (none of this shoot-two-and-reevaluate stuff), another is the fact that you have more rounds on tap to do so. And, of course, as PDs continue to slash training budgets, you pretty much ensure a high round count by making the first few shots misses. :rolleyes: I know a lot of cops who are stellar shots, and I know a lot of cops who fall into the category of "I only shoot when I have to qualify." The latter group will continue to crank off rounds because the BG will continue to be unhit. But hey, at least they're following half of their training. :neener:

I would not feel under-gunned with a quality revo...in fact I carry one OD sometimes. But I train with it. Training is expensive. Buying hardware solutions to software problems is cheap- if you ignore the costs of lawsuits, burials, insurance, etc...which government entities routinely do. It's maddening. You can say things like "wrongful death suit waiting to happen" and the paper pushers look at you like you're speaking Klingon. Then, when the lawsuit comes down the pike, their eyes bug out and they ask "how could this happen????"

Gee, I dunno, Einstein. But I think I know why you couldn't keep a job in private industry. :scrutiny:

/threadveer

Revos work just fine, but you need to be proficient with them. They are, oddly enough, a perfect beginnner's gun (Dead simple to use), and a perfect expert's gun.

Mike

R127
May 19, 2006, 03:31 PM
At least half of all violent encounters involve more than one attacker. As fear and stress go up your accuracy will go down. Capacity is your friend.

With that said, I do believe there is still a niche for revolvers. I would love to see a 7 or 8 shot multicaliber a la Medusa revolver, styled ofter the old 1860 Army blackpowder revolver, but double action. I think it would make a very beautiful survivalist piece that would also be worthy as a primary carry. .357mag is plenty powerful enough for self defense and many hunting applications.

Deer Hunter
May 19, 2006, 03:39 PM
Razer, what revolver is that?! My 625 has a 7 pound pull, every time. :confused:

skydelta34
May 19, 2006, 03:45 PM
I would rather know the first shot is going to go bang. If the first one doesnt, the other shots in a high capacity mag may not even matter.

There are very few semi autos that match a decent revolver for that kind of reliability.

RonJon
May 19, 2006, 05:29 PM
When I got my carry permit I went out and bought a real spiffy 8-rounds to the magazine pocket auto (I determined that pocket carry was best for me).

I also heeded all advice to practice, practice, practice at the range with the firearm that I carry.

Only thing was - everytime I practiced with my real spiffy 8-rounds to the magazine pocket auto - I got lots of jams! Some of which took a lot of time and fuss to get cleared.

I got to thinking: What would become of me if this were to happen if I were under a real & serious attack from BGs?

I lost my confidence in the real spiffy 8-rounds to the magazine pocket auto.

The real spiffy 8-rounds to the magazine pocket auto went back to the dealer and was replaced with a S&W model 642 pocket revolver (5 rounds of +P .38 special). It carries real lightly and easily in a DeSantis Nemisis front pocket holster.

Now when I go to the range to practice, practice, practice ALL of the shots go bang and I NEVER have had a single jam!

Sure, it's only 5 rounds, but 5 rounds that you can count on are better than 8 rounds that you can't! (I do carry 6 more rounds in a Bianchi speed-strip - just in case they're ever needed).:cool:

That's my case for the revolver for whatever you think it's worth.

Ron :o

Jenrick
May 19, 2006, 06:17 PM
Another advantage wheel guns have in LE, is the cartridge they're cambered for. A modern 9mm round is plenty effective, especially if you've got 10-17 on tap. However I figure a modern .357 (gold dot and the like), is more effective then the 9mm. Sure you've only got 6 of them on tap normally, but I'd be heading back to my car to get my rifle at that point.


-Jenrick

Nightcrawler
May 19, 2006, 10:29 PM
Carrying my analogy a bit further, with a few exceptions, just about every single car, light truck, and van used by police and the military these days is an automatic transmission.

Guess that means stick shifts are obsolete, because police don't use them anymore. Right?

stevekl
May 20, 2006, 04:57 PM
Does anyone else just not like magazines? All other arguments aside, I enjoy owning revolvers because when I go to the range, I don't have to worry about forgeting or losing magazines which, depending on the gun, can cost anywhere from $10-$30 apiece. I want my gun to have two neccessary components to it: the gun and its ammunition. That's it. I don't like to keep track of accessories or magazines. Now speedloaders are different of course because a) they're alot cheaper than box magazines and b) if you lose a speedloader or forget to bring one to the range, it doesn't render the gun functionless.

Vern Humphrey
May 20, 2006, 05:14 PM
One of the great things about revolvers is you don't have to get down on your hands and knees and look for the empties.:p

Karate
May 23, 2006, 12:18 AM
I just shoot a revolver better than an auto

I have a Kimber, BHP, Browning BDA .380, Walther P22

I have owned CZ's SIG's, Glock and a Walther P99

But I still shoot my Pre 81, 2 1/2 inch model 66 better and does it have a smooth trigger or what...and I shoot almost exclusively in DA now..

I am sure it is because I have more trigger time on the 66 than the others

I also just love the look of a wheel gun

Never had a jam either

If you enjoyed reading about "Revolvers: Outdated? Obsolete?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!