[amprecon]

I'm interested in your reasons for owning a revolver. As there are so many reliable pistols out there that are more than enough for most encounters, what are your reasons for sticking with the "old faithfuls"?

I currently own only one revolver, a circa '64 S&W 4"bbl Model 10. My reasons for owning it are that it isn't for me primarily, although if it's all that was available when I need it I'd not hesitate to grab it up. But it's primarily for the other members of the household to use if necessary.

You see, as much as I have tried to get my wife and daughters into guns, I just cannot ignite their interest to my level. So upon realizing my futile efforts and testing them on their knowledge and efficiency with auto-loaders time and again I have realized that the safest, simplest most reliable and recoil friendly handgun they could effectively use was the revolver.

I also can't discount the fact that I just have a personal liking towards them, there's just something about them that makes you feel "empty" without one.

Now that I have divulged my reasons for owning a revolver, what are yours?

[SGW42]

I'm not sure why I got a revolver. Just Because for me.

You could go on and on about pros and cons, there is just something intangible about them that made them more appealing to me than an autoloader.

Glad I got one. :)

[DawgFvr]

amprecon: I'm curious...which pistols do you think are reliable? Mine work ok if I just target practice at the range...with only an occassional malfunction or two. Try carrying a pistol in the field for a week or two...the elements take their toll. I have to find that photo of my Dad carrying his .38 special in WWII...

[MrTuffPaws]

You for got "I'm getting older". I still like autos, but as I get older, revolvers just have more "gun" than anything else.

[Rule556]

I bought a revolver because I already had, and know how to use, automatics. I didn't posses any revolvers and hadn't ever practiced with them. Caliber, tradition, looks, etc. didn't really play any part in my choice. I want to be moderately familiar with as many styles and models of firearms as possible. In order to get familiar with a revolver, I had to buy one.

[MCgunner]

All of the above and probably more if I sat and thought about it more.

[Brian Williams]

Six shots from a pocket, moonclip, speedloader even a speed strip...
No magazine for some doofus lead foot to step on...
Ammo goes in, brass comes out into my can or box...
Fixed barrel...
Simple, put in ammo, close cylinder, shoot, empty brass, repeat...
etc...

[Bendutro]

The ergonomics of revolvers are the best if you like big-bores. Sure the Desert Eagle works... but it has no elegance to it. The 'I just like it' factor is in there too.

[GEM]

Concealability of the snubbies in pockets as compared to semis of the same power range with better reliability.

[Bob_P]

Six shots from a pocket, moonclip, speedloader even a speed strip...
No magazine for some doofus lead foot to step on...
Ammo goes in, brass comes out into my can or box...
Fixed barrel...
Simple, put in ammo, close cylinder, shoot, empty brass, repeat...
etc...

+1

Simplicity & Reliability

[DevilDog0402]

Concealability of the snubbies in pockets as compared to semis of the same power range with better reliability.


Ditto.

[Iggy]

I grew up with revolvers, carried one during a LE career, went through my auto phase, and returned to revolvers..

When you get old you start regressing don'tchaknow!!

[Eightball]

"all of the above,", minus the "intimidation factor." I don't care about that, but all the other reasons are spot-on.

[Cloudpeak]

Reliability, simplicity and much more concealable than my 1911. Plus, shooting a double action revolver is a skill that I hadn't acquired, yet, and I looked forward to the "challenge."

So, I bought my first double action revolver in 30+ years, a SP101 and have had a lot of fun shooting it. I can actually hit better and faster with the Ruger than I can my M&P 9mm full size (but still shoot my 1911s better.)

Cloudpeak

[Wedge]

Simple, put in ammo, close cylinder, shoot, empty brass, repeat...

That is too still too complicated with all this cylinder opening and closing...my revolver has a loading gate :-)

[the fool]

i got mine because i got a good deal on it

[Fishman777]

I'm only 35 years old, but I prefer revolvers over autoloaders.

1. Reliability/durability - no need to go into a lot of detail on this. Stainless steel revolvers can last several lifetimes without any reliability issues. Revolvers are a great one-time investment.

2. Simplicity - Revolvers easy to load and operate. My wife is comfortable with revolvers. She doesn't feel comfortable with autoloaders. I wouldn't want to force her to ever use a weapon that she didn't understand and feel comfortable with. She might be more of a danger to herself and other innocent people if she had to use a weapon that she was not intimately familiar with. My wife is pretty damn smart, but she just doesn't want to take the time to learn a lot about guns. It is not very high on her priority list. If a person is a casual shooter, I don't think that they should even own autoloaders. Just my opinion, of course.

3. Ammo Flexibility - .38/.357 and .44 special/.44 magnum. Enough said.

4. Accuracy - I shoot revolvers better than autoloaders.

5. Safety - Several months ago, there was a poll on how many people on this forum have had negligent discharges. I was shocked to see that about 30% of forum members had *at least* one. There are a lot of very experienced, responsible people that admitted to having made at least one mistake leading to a discharge. I recognize that while I'm very careful, I'm not perfect. I think that revolvers are safer than autoloaders, because it is easier to see if a revolver is loaded or not. It would be pretty easy for someone to remove an autoloader's magazine and forget that they had a round chambered if they got distracted. Revolvers also don't have the light triggers that seem to be very popular in auoloaders these days. One mistake is all that it takes to injure, maim, or kill someone that you love (incuding yourself). A former NFL player recently accidently shot and killed himself while cleaning his guns. This can happen to anyone. I personally will always favor reliability and safety over capacity in a home defense gun.

[H2O MAN]

I have a wheel gun for another reason...

My lever gun shoots .357 mag and I wanted a .357 mag pistol to match up with it.
I don't shoot them, I just have them.



I prefer semi auto Glocks :evil:

[nwilliams]

I believe in a well balanced gun collection because I can't seem to convince myself to maintain a well balanced diet!

I want a little bit of everything and even though I may be more partial to autos I still feel it is necessary to have at least one high quality revolver otherwise it just feels like something is missing. Having a massive collection of guns like I do and not having at least one decent revolver just doesn't seem right, besides revolvers are fun to shoot, reliable and accurate, why not own one!

[ArmedBear]

I have semiautos. I shoot them. They're fun toys, and as a relatively frequent recreational shooter, I currently trust one as a HD handgun because I've used it enough to be able to operate it under stress.

However, we bought a revolver for HD, so my wife and I could each use it comfortably and be sure it will work.

The revolver has fewer controls, and they're intuitive if you've tried them once. There's no manual safety, and no DA/SA trigger pull difference to worry about.

There are few variations among brands or models. If you know how to operate a revolver, you're done learning and can start shooting.

Nobody ever jammed a revolver because his/her grip wasn't correct or strong enough, or because the gun was being held in an odd position.

Revolvers don't have a slide that can hit your hand if you don't hold them just right.

You don't have to "clear" a revolver if a round doesn't fire.

Revolvers can be loaded from loose rounds.

The revolver won't fail to work to defend you from an assailant because you forgot to chamber a round, nor do you have to empty the chamber to render the gun safe.

Revolvers don't have magazine catches that can be partially-engaged without you noticing it until it's too late.

Revolvers work when dirty.

It's easy to collect your brass for reloading with a revolver, even at a crowded indoor range with piles of empty cases all over the floor.

That said, I just plain like revolvers, and I always have.

[sloppyjoec]

I voted style, my one and only firearm is a 4" gp100. I chose based only on the way it looked/felt in my hand(and easier sell past the wife). A few months after I had a chance to shoot a m&p .40 and i am very glad i chose a wheel gun, the way all the clockwork comes together to bring up the next cartridge and fire it makes the gun feel almost alive compared to an auto


Oh and I hadn't realized age played a factor, but I am 27 and my wife (who is lusting for a high capacity .22 like a Taurus model 94) is 24

[Boulder]

My main reason is reliability. I have semi-autos that have been 100% so far. But, I feel they are still too dependent on the quality of ammo. Sure, bad ammo can tie up a revolver too, but I think the margin for error is better for the wheelgun.

[Evyl Robot]

All of the above, and...

I hope this doesn't sound stupid, but a good revolver is prettier and more romantic than an auto. Even people who hate guns feel a little more at ease around my .44, even though it would take a leg or head off far easier than a 9mm. Revolvers just have style and class to them that can't be matched by a pistol. --and that's coming from a 29-year old!

[Hawk]

None of the above.

"Easier to keep the brass" isn't listed but is my number one reason for liking the things.

[ArchAngelCD]

SIX-FER-SURR :D

[ArchAngelCD]

Originally Posted By: Evyl Robot
I hope this doesn't sound stupid, but a good revolver is prettier and more romantic than an auto. Even people who hate guns feel a little more at ease around my .44, even though it would take a leg or head off far easier than a 9mm. Revolvers just have style and class to them that can't be matched by a pistol. --and that's coming from a 29-year old!
Very Well Said Sir!

[Cosmoline]

I haven't found many semis that fit my hand. They tend to be designed around the cartridge not the person. While they have greater capacity, I also find them to be slower to draw and fire than a wheelgun. My goal with the short gun is to be first to fire, not to get into a sustained firefight. So capacity isn't as important. I also like the revolver's adaptability and ability to fire a wide range of loads.

Beyond this, yeah they have a class few semis can match. They speak to me.

[mc_coy]

My rational mind keeps telling: reliability, simplicity, easy brass for reloading.

Truth is that I do not know.

Something beyond intellect and reason ...

[Feanaro]

It's not for practical reasons, because I shoot and reload semi-autos faster and more accurately. But damnit, they don't make an autochucker that looks as good as a Smith N-frame.

[possum]

revolvers are like 1911's evryone should have at least one, they round out a collection nicely, and they are just fun too shoot. i am a big fan of .357 not just the performance of that particular rd but also the fact that .38 spl can be used which makes for a good fun to shoot range gun. they are simple, no manual safeties, great for teaching new shooters, and small framed folks that you want to get into the shooting wolrd but not scare them off with some of the other choices out there. they just look awesome, and are all around great guns. i think there is too few people that enjoy the revolver like they should and i believe that especially the young folks these days just go for the high cap polyguns and they think that is the end all be all. now i love a good polygun myself and i love my xd's but i will always shoot revolvers, they are what i was introduced to shooting with and i plan to shoot them forever.

[col_tapiocca]

because a revolver belongs to a gun safe or any gun collection?

[CoRoMo]

.357

[Urbana John]

To the OP----my thoughts----I voted "all the above"
I have several wheel guns----mostly SA 6 shooters,,,,,,,,good to learn on and to teach basic safety skills with,,,,,,,,,,,but IF you are trying to get a new "shooter" interested in shooting,,,,,,,,,,try a good semi auto 22
Less work involved----stick a loaded mag in it----rack the slide-----and pull the "boom switch"----------easier than a SA for sure,,,,,,,,and more fun than a DA.
Once "they" like the idea-------bring out the SA/DA revolver-----show them the difference--------maybe the semi auto will "jam" just once,,,,,,,then you can explain why a revolver is BETTER for HD than a semi auto.
A good poll on here would be---how many "guys" have a semi for CCW and their SO's have a revolver on their side of the bed or in their purse!!
I carry a Beretta 92 9mm, but IF I had a SO, she have a revolver!!!
UJ

[DougDubya]

Revolvers, even the ugly old Webleys, have a beauty and elegance to them that few autoloaders can match. Indeed, I wanted to quote the line about lightsabers and blasters by Sir Alec Guinness, except paraphrasing to insert revolvers and autoloaders.

Revolvers have grip frames HIGHLY ammenable to custom tailoring to your hand.

Even the most pimped out, super heavy duty .357 MAXIMUM can chamber, fire and cycle a puny little .38 S&W. Versatility in power levels on your average .357 Magnum allows rounds for anything smaller than an attacking brown bear, while having ammunition on hand for bagging a squirrel without blasting it apart into stew-meat. The Magnum Research BFR revolver, the Smith and Wesson 460 X-frame, and the Ruger Super Redhawk all not only handle rounds more powerful than the .50 Arts and Entertainment, but can feed and cycle happy, lighter "plinking rounds" like the .44 Russian, .45 Schofield, or whatnot, while subloading a Desert Eagle means you've got a "pump action" semi-auto.

Revolvers often have better names too. Colt Python. Airweight Bodyguard. Combat Magnum. Blackhawk. Cobra. Aesthetic appeal.

[ArmedBear]

Sure, bad ammo can tie up a revolver too, but I think the margin for error is better for the wheelgun.

If you have a misfire, though, you can just pull the trigger again and the next round will advance and fire.

I'd feel a lot better about loading a revolver with whatever ammo I happened to have, than a semiauto. That doesn't mean I think that plinking ammo is ideal for HD, but it'll work a lot better than nothing, or a jammed gun.

[Ala Dan]

Looks like "all of the above" is the correct response for me~! :cool: ;)

[Big Boomer]

Till they offer a 500 or a 460 mag in an auto I guess I am stuck with the them! ;)

[RonC133]

When empty, 48 ounces of solid steel revolver can do a lot more damage when thrown than can 20 ounces of plastic semi.

[boots]

in a semi, if you have a misfire, you have to clear the malf round and rack again...for a revolver, you just go to the next chamber...

[Bellevance]

Looks, functionality, reliability, tradition, and looks.

[Dienekes]

Reliability, practicality, and elegance. Not many modern day tools can claim that today.

And the passage of time only makes it more apparent.

[Elm Creek Smith]

They don't leave brass scattered everywhere for the police to put little plastic markers over for the CSI guys. :what: Sort of ruins "microstamping" for the moron gun controllers.

ECS

[Sgt.Dusk]

I think I actually like more shooting semi-autos.
But because I mostly shoot silhouette the semi-autos just cant beat the revolver.

[Lew]

For DougDubya:

Your father's revolver. This is the weapon of a gentleman. Not as clumsy or random as a semi-auto; an elegant weapon for a more civilized age.

Insert your own nouns as needed.

Cheers.

[FourNineFoxtrot]

I voted other reasons, as only about half of the factors apply. I've got a .357 snubby, so more power and intimidation were not primary concerns. Tradition was part, but a smallish part. I don't really shoot it any better, and while I like the style, it doesn't necessarily have anything over autos in my mind.

There are some other reasons I wanted a revolver. I'd never owned or fired one, so I wanted to become familiar with the feel and manual of arms for a revolver. I also didn't have a concealable pistol at that time, so CCW-capable was a consideration. Above all, it was about variety: A revolver broadened my options and experience.

[H2O MAN]

When empty, 48 ounces of solid steel revolver can do a lot more damage when thrown than can 20 ounces of plastic semi.

:D That's a fact!

[Big Boomer]

Once posted on another thread

It's impossible to pistol whip someone with tupperware

[dagger dog]

i guess my vote is strongly influenced by tradition. in my family pistols, were considered "maypops".

all things even (good ammo, correct maintainence,etc.) i believe the double action revolver has the edge in reliability. another plus is the ease of use (no levers, buttons, slides) a pull on the trigger= bullet out the muzzle.

again i go back to tradition, the S&W mdl.39 was the start of, the end of, the revolvers reign in the U.S.A.
now as more youngsters are introduced to the shooting world, they are introduced to the pistol, which will become their tradition.

[Hawk]

in a semi, if you have a misfire, you have to clear the malf round and rack again...for a revolver, you just go to the next chamber...

And, if it was a squib, you've just exploded your revolver.

I don't find the "reliability" thing at all compelling. My first light strike FTFs were in wheelguns. Obviously, no one here has ever had an extractor back out requiring a business card, length of string and long walk to a volcano to sacrifice an integral lock. Bullets jumping crimps is evidently unheard of as well.

Revolvers should be ten times more reliable than semis: they easily take one hundred times longer to clear. (one second for "tap, rack, bang" vs 100 after an extractor backs out).

I like my revolvers fine but I'm relatively new in the hobby. I guess after a few years my glasses will take on a rose-colored tint and I'll develop blind spots as well. I'll look forward to it :D

[wheelgunslinger]

The revolver was engineered in a time when a man's skill with his tools made him a revered expert at his craft. And, a man's shooting skill was expected to be at least good enough to hunt successfully. And, a man that was a poor shot was not much of a man.

Nowadays, people try to make up for their lacking skill with more bullets or ever more neato gadgets and trinkets.

The revolver is a throwback to those days when skill and intelligence defined men. And, these days, most find the double action revolver a harsh teacher that they're content to leave in the safe and show from time to time in preference to the latest and greatest.

But, for those who appreciate the rewards of the discipline of mastering the self through a tool, there's really no substitute in the handgun world.

[Hawk]

The double action revolver as "Zen" can be a fun analogy but it's not like they've been untouched by the passage of time.

The runaway popularity of Crimson Trace laser grips on the 642 and similar presumably makes the DA revolver marginally less "harsh" as a teacher.

Nowadays, people try to make up for their lacking skill with more bullets or ever more neato gadgets and trinkets.

Like this?
http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson/upload/images/firearms/170269a_sm.jpg

I guess it's not exactly the sole province of those with semis.

Oh well, I get the point. Fact is, in archery, I tend to stick with the English longbow - those new fangled compounds remind me of a cat's cradle on a stick - all pulleys and rigging and fiber optics and counterweights ...

[Haywood]

All The Above

[Hokkmike]

Other reason - can also be used for hunting.

[H2O MAN]

But, for those who appreciate the rewards of the discipline of mastering the self through a tool, there's really no substitute in the handgun world.

There are those of us who appreciate the rewards of the discipline of mastering the self through a mag fed semi auto tool :cool:

There's really no substitute for training and practice with your handgun of choice.








But then again . . .

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/3690/9323/217022.jpg :evil:

[bikerdoc]

cant really put it into word but when i pick up my model 19 or my security six my 357's just talks to me. yes i have a bunch of automatics and they also taly to me, but daily carry is a 3 inch 357

on the subject of wife and kids go revolver - 20 years ago my wife didnt like autos, let her try a revolver with a 38 load - instant enthusiasm- she still carries the 38 charter arms i bought her that year and im ashamed to say she is a better shot than i am

[UnTainted]

good for hunting

[Ben Shepherd]

I put "all of the above" but you left out a couple big reasons.

My wheelguns don't give a crap what the nose profile of the projectile is. And they don't spit my brass all over the place.

[P5 Guy]

They look better than pistols.

[Jeff F]

Because theres not much in the line of automatic .357 of .44 magnums.

[Archie]

Revolvers have more elegance. I do shoot them better, and for equal sizes, revolvers have more horsepower.

[medmo]

Becaise my heros have always been cowboys. Plus all of the other reasons previously stated.

[kashton]

I personally love the sound my Stainless Steel Colt Python 2 1/2" makes when I cock the hammer back... you just can't beat that

[flounder22]

I said all of the above, but mainly because you just load it, point it, and pull the trigger. 9 1/2 times out of 10, its a done deal.

[wheelgunslinger]

Hawk and H20man, thanks for posting pictures of the exception that proves the rule.

It's pretty much an accepted truth that anyone who can shoot a double action revolver well can shoot any handgun well. The reverse cannot be said with a straight face. And, any attached tactical whizbangetry still doesn't defeat the fact that you still have to pull that trigger in a disciplined way for the bullet to go where the gps/laser/faerie guidance system directs you to shoot.

[H2O MAN]

.357 Magnums

http://www.athenswater.com/images/357-Mag_small.jpg (http://www.athenswater.com/images/357-Mag.jpg)

[wheelgunslinger]

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff280/wheelgunslinger/wheelgun.jpg

Nice tools, H2Oman!

[Hawk]

It's pretty much an accepted truth that anyone who can shoot a double action revolver well can shoot any handgun well.

We're pretty much in agreement here although I'd hazard a guess that what one of us sees as a "feature" the other sees as a "bug".

If the intent is to hobble oneself with a disagreeable trigger action in order that everything else seem easier to handle well in comparison, I would agree that the typical double action trigger is unbeatable in that regard. Long, heavy and sometimes gritty and inconsistent, once mastered nearly anything else will be easily adapted to.

I would not have guessed that a difficult trigger action could be turned into a perceived advantage but stranger things have happened in some of these "why revolvers are great" threads. I have previously opined that I was uncomfortable with the observation that revolver single action triggers are superb simply because DA only is recommended for defensive work.

It had never occured to me that a revolver's single action trigger is superior because it's superior and the double action trigger is superior because it sucks. Learn something new every day around here.

But time marches on and I'm not certain that revolvers hold any specific advantage in that regard any longer: there is now a good selection of semi-auto pistols with DAO triggers that are perfectly horrible and should suffice to please those that appreciate having to work extra hard against one's own trigger.

In the interest of full disclosure, I like revolvers but enjoy having a little fun with what some might percieve as inconsistencies - no offense is meant. Note the smiley. -> :D

[Monkeybear]

Personally, I just think they are cool.

[BlindJustice]

I retired about 2 years ago. I've been building my collection
since then with - a S & W revolver in N, K, L & J frames, as well as
a 1911 and a few other firearms. I don't buy the reliability argument
about revolvers. I've had light strikes with my S&W 625 as well as
my 686P. The 686P had the main spring screw back off for light strikes.
THe 625 has never had a problem while using .45 Auto Rim but with .45
ACP & Full Moon clips after getting the gun back from S&W for a PC Master
Revolver Action Job.... they lightened the trigger pull by backing off the
main spring. I figured this out at the range - however, I also tried shooting
a .45 shot shell in the 625. It fired, but the primer and firing pin
were stuck as was the cylindeer - can you say Dead in the Water?
I gave the 625 to my Gunsmith to clear the weapon and also had him verify
the main spring was full tension.... I wanted the action job
for smooth, not light strikes. At least with the 1911, you can clear
the chamber, etc. and keep on rolling at the range or in the field.

The 617 is great for double action practice or as a piece to introduce
new shooters to handguns. and just plain fun. The 60 J frame is
handy by the bedside with .38 spcl.+P I got the
L frame 686P for a solid platform & versatility of the
.38 SPcl/357 Magnum.

What gun would I grab? The 1911 - I shoot it the best
the 625 2nd best, but if I was going to be camping with sheep
I'd take the 686P - some sheep just can't wrap their brains
around Cocked & Locked.

I think the top 3 of the next to acquire for the collection:
CZ 75 Compact 9MM
K frame centerfire
J-frame model 63 w/3" Bbl. to match my mdl 60

[Claude Clay]

cause it can be reliably fired from a coat/jacket pocket.
a 642 is one of many carry guns used depending on the season/weather and how i am dressed.

[Hawk]

cause it can be reliably fired from a coat/jacket pocket.

I would submit that if one finds oneself firing from one's pocket, the situation has already gone so thoroughly and profoundly in the tank that the advantage really isn't one.

If one is pinned to the extent that the weapon can't be drawn I'd suspect the chances of shooting oneself rather than the assailant are roughly even. It's not like the thing is being aimed.

To the best of my knowledge and belief none of the various handgun schools teach shooting from one's wardrobe as a viable alternative to anything. At one point I did my utmost to dredge up a documented case of anyone achieving anything worthwhile by firing from one's pocket in real life. I came up empty. This could inidicate that my search-fu is weak or that the scenario is so unlikely that its only manifestation is internet discussions on farfetched uses for revolvers.

[kmrcstintn]

a few major deciding factors...

comfort with platform, multifaceted usage w/ one gun (hunting, defense, fun, etc), multiple calibers for one gun (.357 mag/.38 spl; .44 mag/.44 spl; .454 casull/.45 colt), reliability, simplicity, longevity, more powerful ammo (mag revolvers vs traditional semiautos), ergonomics, aesthetics, :evil: pistol whipping ability :evil: (just kidding)

[shooter429]

Tradition: My first handgun was a Ruger revo. My first service handgun was a S&W Revo neither were special in any particular way, but they both were well balanced, totally reliable and just felt "right" ergonomically in my hand or in leather on my hip.

My favorite caliber is the .44 Mag/Spl. so that precludes all autos I would own.

And there is something to "six for sure" or for some now 7 or 8 for sure. For sure, to me does not just describe reliable ignition, but reliable stopping.

Oh I have carried many autos over the years and the big-bores would have protected me had they worked,but there was always "stovepipe" or "FTF" in the back of my mind, nagging at me. No such question with a GP100, Redhawk, 686 or 629. I knew it would go bang and in a big way :)

Shooter429

[shooter429]

Hawk says If the intent is to hobble oneself with a disagreeable trigger action in order that everything else seem easier to handle well in comparison, I would agree that the typical double action trigger is unbeatable in that regard. Long, heavy and sometimes gritty and inconsistent, once mastered nearly anything else will be easily adapted to.

To which I reply a good revolver (which means custom Ruger or S&W PC) will have a smooth, light and consistent pull (not light like a 2# SA) But lighter than many DAO autos and hardly disagreeable. No mystery there. If it is gritty or inconsistent, you have a problem (or are shooting a Taurus). :)

Shooter429

[wheelgunslinger]

Hawk:This could inidicate that my search-fu is weak

Yeah, but your sarcasm-fu and irony-fu are really stout.

Tomaytoe tomahtow. One man's trigger that sucks is another man's trigger that requires developed fine motor skills and muscle memory- which lead to better mastery of any handgun.

And, wow you couldn't find an instance of someone firing a weapon from a coatpocket on the web? I guess it must not have ever happened or have been a viable tactic in the days of the snub.

:D

[Cron]

This:

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g92/RonJ_2006/SWs003-1.jpg

vs this:

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g92/RonJ_2006/Range011.jpg

No comparison! I'd never give up my model 19 which I purchased new in 1977.

[jh9x18ky]

Just because I enjoy a revolver...

[Whirlwind06]

I'm a hi-cap wonder 9 guy. But I'm seriously considering a J-frame or and Sp-101 right now. Revolvers are just cool looking. And at belly button range, they seem the best possible compromise of power and reliability.

[Hawk]

Yeah, but your sarcasm-fu and irony-fu are really stout.

Sometimes I treat their development as a goal of sorts. :)

But, I'd be willing to bet that the "firing from coat pocket" canard is both a spectacularly bad tactic and likely hasn't happened (intentionally and with a happy outcome) outside of gross conjecture. Even digging into what paper I have on DGUs, I have never seen the scenario invoked outside the confines of internet fora - specifically those threads extolling the virtues of revolvers. Probably not surprising as the scenario involves both contact close enough to preclude drawing the weapon but with sufficient distance that it may be pointed in the proper direction - these two distances are not generally seen occuring at the same time. If distance presents itself, the weapon should be drawn.

But, quite unlike the good fun we enjoy debating other points, the "pocket shot" IMHO actually offers a small but real potential of being read by people that might actually believe it and think that grappling with one hand while grasping a firearm in one's pocket is a servicable idea. Assuming the encounter is survived, he might well find he's been turned from a rooster to a hen.

I simply can not conceive of a situation where firing from one's pocket would be anything other than an enormous blunder. Whether this is a triumph of common sense or a failure of imagination on my part is up for grabs.

[Checkman]

MrTuffPaws

You for got "I'm getting older". I still like autos, but as I get older, revolvers just have more "gun" than anything else.

Amen. I used to be all about autos. Then a few years ago I found myself going towards revolvers. At first I just wanted a S&W Model 28. Told myself that would be enough. Little did I know.

I may carry a Glock for my duty weapon, but at home it's all about wheelies.

[peetee32]

I chose a S&W 686 7 shot revolver as my first handgun for home protection/worst case scenario protection. I have it loaded in my locked gun safe...and i feel like i can leave it there for 100 years, and in a moments notice unlock the safe and pull the trigger and not have a doubt in my mind that it will fire.

I have been told that leaving clips loaded with ammo for long periods of time can cause the springs to lose tension and lead to misfires...i don't know if thats true or not...but it crept in my mind that if i had a loaded mag sitting around for a while, it may not be reliable.

when i think of the word 'handgun', a revolver pops up in my head.

[budiceman]

http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t158/mrbudiceman/model629classic.jpg
FOR ME! Reliable, can shoot light to heavy loads and spl to magnum! Cleaning, single or double action. SAVING your empties! If a shell dont go bang, just pull the trigger again.

[2ndamd]

Nothing wrong with an auto.
I went to the range yesterday and rented an XD and a Taurus 24/7 both 9mm. I shot them both very well.
But I did not like shooting them as much as my GP100s and SP101s.

You just have to find what YOU like. Then practice and train with that set-up you choose. If you do that; you'll be fine when the baloon goes up.

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k49/2ndamd/Stag.jpg

I can't find any stag grips for the polymer autos though :D

[Bob79]

Reliability and Simplicity and Power are the main reasons revolvers are so great.

[Hawk]

Simplicity is one of those things so often applied to revolvers, one rarely sees the assertion questioned.

Revolvers are no doubt simpler in operation. But just picking two schematics at random:

1911 (http://www.brownells.com/aspx/ns/schematics/schemmfg.aspx?schemid=141&m=3&mn=Colt%c2%ae&model=1911+Government+Models+)
and
Python (http://www.brownells.com/aspx/ns/schematics/schemmfg.aspx?schemid=149&m=3&mn=Colt%c2%ae&model=Python+)

Are they really simpler?

Do any mere mortals perform maintenance on their Python?

Do revolvers really exempt one from fretting about magazines or is a revolver's magazine simply stouter, rounder and attached to the firearm by means of a pivot? As example:

Python:
release magazine (unlatch cylinder)
load barrel-shaped magazine
insert magazine (latch cylinder)
pull trigger - bang!

Kahr:
release magazine
load magazine
insert magazine
rack slide (Aha! here's the extra step)
pull trigger - bang!

Is the omission of the "operate slide" step made up for by the complexity of working on the guts of the revolver? Which is simpler when all aspects are considered?

Is a Ruger way simpler than a Python, a Kahr easier than an STI racegun? Time to reevaluate the revolver's claim to simplicity or does it remain valid for the foreseeable future?

Just wonderin...

[ArmedBear]

Here's another one...

There is ZERO possibility of a discharge due to loading a revolver.

Around the house, that is worth getting a revolver right there.

[Hawk]

There is ZERO possibility of a discharge due to loading a revolver.
Agreed, but what weapons have a non-zero liklihood of discharge due to simply being loaded?

I have heard of Garands lighting off the top round of an en-bloc clip if repeatedly loaded with the same round on top - apparently something to do with the floating firing pin although the tales are apocryphal.

Are there handguns that function similarly? I thought most had FPBs or, at minimum, a spring return on the firing pin that would inhibit a Garand-like "dent accumulation".

I'm just asking - haven't heard of loading-related ADs and now I'm curious.

[MikePGS]

Simplicity is one of those things so often applied to revolvers, one rarely sees the assertion questioned.
Very true. Just the other day I was looking at something or other (No idea if it was in a magazine or on the internet) that showed that the trigger for a revolver is actually more complex than it is for a pistol. That blew my mind. I just hope it was real and not something that happened in a dream :D (I had a dream about me with half a dozen or so revolvers a few nights ago... it was awesome)

[Snubby 38]

Have many of both, but prefer the wheel guns. No specific reason other than you've got to like what you shoot....

[cp1969]

A revolver is equally or more complex on the inside but those insides are very durable. Most people could own a revolver for their entire lifetime and never have to take the sideplate off.

The simplicity is in the operation. There is only one piece, not two (gun & magazine, which can get separated). There are no safeties, slide locks, or magazine releases to learn how to use. There is no need for two hands to clear a misfire or jam--just pull the trigger again. Any power level of ammo can be used interchangeably with no modifications required.

[cp1969]

One other thing--if you reload, the empties are right there in your hand, not scattered all over creation.

[bps3040]

Because it fits my pocket nicely and always goes bang. :)

[colubrid]

Here's why.



http://www.fototime.com/ftweb/bin/ft.dll/standard?pictid={0432D111-61A1-4495-A344-AFF6B10C6FCC}&exp=f&moddt=39159.0010638773&ssdyn=1

Reliabilty and simplicity. Just pull the trigger. No jams and if a misfire, just opull the trigger again.

[beemerphile]

Strategic advantages.

You can pull a Jack Ruby and push it into the perp before firing.

You can fire it (the right one) from within your pocket.

It don't care if you weak hand limp wrist it.

It don't care what shape the bullet is.

It is more concealable (the right one) than a similarly powered pistol.

It doesn't know what a "stovepipe", FTF, or FTE is.

[JeremySmith]

The first gun I ever saw and said - I have to have that gun was a Super Redhawk. I was 13 at the time. My wife bought me one for my birthday a few years ago. Here's what I like:

It just feels right in my hand Simple, no extra pieces. I hat to think how much I have wrapped up in 1911 mags If I ever have to shoot someone, and miss, the muzzle flash and concussion may scare them to death If I run out of cartriges, It'd make a nice club It just looks cool!

[jr4521]

Theres that milisecond before you pull the trigger of a 44 mag. When the trigger breaks at 2.5 pounds and you are as still and solid as a marble statue.
BANG, then I get to do it 5 more times. I just dont get that same kind of love from my autos, I love my 1911s , deadly accurate but i do get something magical from the wheelguns.

[tblt]

just keeppulling the trigger bang everytime.Only drawback not as many shots

[Hawk]

I just dont get that same kind of love from my autos, I love my 1911s , deadly accurate but i do get something magical from the wheelguns.

I nominate this for best thread necromancy for February of '08.

Revolvers are an end in themselves, there's no need to invent reasons that don't stand up to even cursory scrutiny.

They're not appreciably more reliable if the degree of tie-up is factored against the frequency.

Nobody trains to shoot from one's pocket. No one in one's right mind would propose it as sound tactics.

They're not simpler. Magazine releases are no more complicated than cylinder releases. The innards are a nightmare.

"Just pulling the trigger again" isn't always a good idea (squib).

But they do have something...
And whatever it is, IMHO, doesn't need gilding by inventing "advantages" that aren't really there. They're plenty good enough taken on their own terms.

[KelTecian]

Reliability + Classy

[wuchak]

Nobody trains to shoot from one's pocket. No one in one's right mind would propose it as sound tactics.

Sure they do. There is a defensive shooting course coming up in my area that will have this as part of it. They will provide the jacket. It's a perfectly valid tactic for very close quarters.

One other good thing about revolvers is that they tend to give you some warning before fail. Seldom does a revolver just stop working.

[Hawk]

Sure they do. There is a defensive shooting course coming up in my area that will have this as part of it. They will provide the jacket. It's a perfectly valid tactic for very close quarters.

I'd be interested in who's teaching this.

[Cowtown Cop]

If you check the Thunder Ranch Defensive Revolver course offered by Clint Smith you will find that they ask that you bring an old coat to shoot through the pocket. I have not taken this course but have taken the tactical handgun course put on by Clint Smith. He is a no nonsense, practical instructor who doesnt get all wound up in wild "tactics". I dont think he would teach it if it was a worthless and unsound pratice that should never be attempted.

[diesel83]

Semi-autos are beautiful tools in trained and practiced hands, but not everyone has the time and the mind to understand all the buttons (magazine release, safeties, slide release, etc.). The double-action revolver is convenient and simple. Pretty much everyone can figure it out. Though not everyone can print well in double-action, most everyone can get a good shot off in single action mode at close yardage. It's good for the dad, mom, the kids and grandma.

[Hawk]

If you check the Thunder Ranch Defensive Revolver course offered by Clint Smith you will find that they ask that you bring an old coat to shoot through the pocket.

I'm not doubting you but I can't find it.
How 'bout a link for those of us with weak search-fu?

[houseofdon]

Just found this on Google. http://www.thunderranchinc.com/

Maybe Cowtown Cop can confirm that's the place.

[Hawk]

Found that. Plus an abbreviated equipment list here:
http://www.thunderranchinc.com/courses.html

This "old coat for pocket shooting practice" may be in a more detailed listing that I missed.

I'll grant the "pocket scenario" if Clint is on board but it still strikes me as a situation where everything has already tanked and I'm still having problems with how one can simultaneously have room to point the thing while one is being grappled. And, if you're not being grappled, why not draw the thing?

A "pre-emptive" shot from concealment (assuming one isn't grappled) looks like lawyer food to me as one has forfeited any deterrent value a drawn firearm might provide.

Just seems like an incredibly strained situation.

[DougDubya]

The thing with the "pocket shot" is that it allows you to be surreptitiously armed and indexed on your opponent without appearing to do so.

I believe one of the Virginias' State Patrols had specially designed jackets with built in pocket holsters where the trooper could do a traffic stop without the overly aggressive appearance of having his hand on his service pistol.

It's NOT a strained situation, it's not a grappling situation, it's the "just in case" scenario where you want to be ready without appearing ready. It's not a grapple/weapon retention issue.

[Hawk]

The thing with the "pocket shot" is that it allows you to be surreptitiously armed and indexed on your opponent without appearing to do so.

This doesn't ring any "civil suit" bells for you?

It's hard to go 10 minutes into any conversation about lawful carry without hearing that the vast majority of DGUs are resolved without a shot being fired. Shooting from concealment pretty much clobbers that, doesn't it?

Speaking only for myself, I'm not a member of any state patrol. I'm pretty much back to thinking the entire idea is profoundly bad, at least in the context of CHLs as opposed to LEOs making hazardous stops, and makes a poor excuse for a reason revolvers rule - although it makes for entertaining debate and conjecture.

Perhaps someone should kick off a thread in "Tactics". I'll keep an open mind and who knows what fresh stuff might come up?

I'll admit I hadn't given much thought to intentionally shooting from concealment but now that I have... it still doesn't seem right. Especially in light of the numerous cases where presenting resolved the problem.

As a reason to favor a revolver, shooting from concealment, for me, ranks right up there with being able to remove the cylinder and use it for an emergency pencil holder.

[Mac45]

Why do I own one?
My wife says it's because I want at least one of every gun ever made.
My wife is pretty smart!:)

[DougDubya]

This doesn't ring any "civil suit" bells for you?

As an option to restrain the use of force to the absolute last moment before violence occurs, it's more a safety blanket. After all, the numbers of car stops that resulted in violence has been reportedly infinitessimal.

I'm not saying that I would use it. I'm just pointing out that there is support for this particular tactic out there, Hawk.

My only "superior pocket revolver" tactic would be the ease and safety of putting a revolver in an inobtrusive pocket after answering the door and determining a safe visitor. The latest "Complete Book Of Handguns" has SEVERAL cited cases where putting your handgun back into concealment lessened the chances of adverse reactions from neighbors or responding police officers than "answering the door with a shotgun."

Given a choice between stuffing various autoloaders into a waistband (Mexican carry style) or pocket or using a more streamlined, less prone to trigger actuation DA revolver, I'll go with the revolver EVERY time. Especially after some Glock Mexican Carry horror stories I've heard.

[Vacek]

I have a VAquero in 45 Colt. I can load it with so many different types of rounds and know that 25 years from now, I still will be able to.

I grew up with a Colt Revolver (actually a German revolver in the Colt Style). I got it when I was 16 and still have it at 56. Over the years it has shot everthing possible in 22 rimfire from BB caps, birdshot, Stingers, you name it. How handy is that.

Today I just loaded up some medium loads (250 grain with Titegroup), some lightweight Scholfields with a little Bullseye, and some shot capsules....All for my 45. I plan on some full-boat 300 grain Speers in the near future.

I like being able to shoot the entire wavelength.

[SmithSwede]

I agree with what most of the other revolver fans have already said. Here's my Top Ten list of some other advantages of a revolver that may not have been touched upon. In no particular order of importance:

1) Day to day "administrative" tasks are far easier with a revolver. I'm constantly unloading and re-loading my handguns, usually to practice drawing, dry-firing, etc. That's easy with a revolver. It's easy to dump the ammo, easy to re-load it, easy to see that you have unloaded it, easy to see you have properly re-loaded it, etc.

All this is harder to do with an auto, since you are always messing with that first cartridge, making sure the OAL isn't shortened when you re-chamber that round, etc. Plus, with an auto, I'm always fretting about the magazine springs taking a set, etc.

2) Dry-firing is wonderful with a revolver. Not just single-action precision fire. What's neat about a revolver is that you can simulate rapid-fire shooting just by dry-firing. Hard to replicate with an auto since you have to manually recock the hammer.

This to me is a HUGE advantage. I'm a firm believer that if you really want to get good, you need to do a lot of dry firing, on a very regular basis. A good revolver practically begs to be taken out and dry-fired. An auto tends to be a pain, and you really need to shoot live ammo in an auto to see how it works "at speed."

3) With live ammo, a good revolver, shot at speed, has a "rhythm" to it that I've never experienced with an auto. To me, this is one of the best highs in handgun shooting.

E.g., when I've shot steel plates, my fastest times are with a wheel gun. That long, smoooooth trigger stroke gets me back on target faster than an auto, and I'm prepping that trigger during recoil and while I'm moving the piece. With an auto, I'm out of sync, and tend to jerk that short trigger when I'm trying for time.

4) I find the general "upchuck" and vomiting of an auto objectionable. One of the things I don't like about a center-fire auto is that when I shoot it, the slide slams back, brass gets spit out into the air (perhaps flying into my face or down my shirt), the slide slams forward, etc. Lots of jarring and commotion. With a revolver, the hammer falls and the bullet heads off to its target. That's it. The prep work for the next shot happens well after the previous one has been launched, at a time of your choosing.

5) Ultimate accuracy strongly favors the revolver. I have many old Smith revolvers that will launch a .38 Special. .44 Special, or .45 ACP round **exactly** where I want it to go. Not just in the general vicinity. Not just pretty close. Nope......right smack dab into the X-ring, with a perfection that brings a smile to your face as you view that hole through the spotting scope. That's the best high of handgun shooting, that feeling that your mind caused that hole to appear in that distant target.

A revolver seems to facilitate that process. It doesn't "get in your way" as you try to do this.

Sure, a highly tuned and tight auto can be made to do this as well, but not as easily as a wheel gun. A target grade .22 auto is a fine machine, but once you get to the center-fire autos, the target grade capabilities are tougher to find. Certainly hard to combine accuracy with stone-cold reliability in a centerfire auto. Easy to do in a center-fire revolver. A Smith K-38 is simultaneouly a match grade handgun, a decent self-defense or service weapon. and a small to medium size hunting weapon. What auto can compare?

6) There is an elegance, finesse, and beauty to a revolver that just seems to be lacking in an auto. With a revolver, there is a feeling that well honed and oiled precision parts are snicking into place as you manipulate the piece. Your own muscle power is what makes it work; that's how it was designed. That is a joy unto itself.

You can "bond" with a revolver, both mentally and physically, in a way you can't with an auto. To me, shooting a revolver is like riding a fine motorcycle; it can become an extension of your mind. Shooting an auto can be like driving an SUV.

I read once that people tend to bequeath revolvers to their surviving kin, but not their autos. Again, that suggests that a good revolver can become a treasured, intimate object in a way that a bottom feeder can't match.

7) Not sure I'm describing this right, but revolvers have curves and grace. The human body, and the human hand, has curves. It has always been easier for me to comfortably carry and conceal a revolver, precisely because it is not an angular block of steel. The wide cylinder, combined with a thinner frame and barrel, make the wheel gun ride easy against the body, and makes it easy to draw.

Likewise, when I hold and shoot a revolver with a good, custom grip, it melts into my hand, unlike the "blocky" feel of most autos.

8) To my mind, the only clear-cut advantage of an auto is ammo capacity. The 6 shot capacity of a revolver used to bother me, and sometimes it still does. Gosh, why settle for 6 rounds, when you can have a Glock with 17 or even more on tap?

But, in the real world, I'm not sure this makes any difference. You will surely settle the affair with 3, 4, or 5 rounds. If not, you'd better be behind cover--in which case you can easily reload the revolver. A Glock with 17+ rounds does not really give you the ability to confront 10 well-armed and determined opponents, out in the open, without cover.

9) Revolvers and reloading go together like apple pie and vanilla ice cream. You don't have to chase brass. You can pick whatever power level you want in your ammo. And it's easy to shoot cheap, cast lead bullets you make yourself. For .38Spl, I cast round nose bullets out of plain wheel weights, and such seemingly ordinary ammo features match grade accuracy for pennies a round. No muss, no fuss--unlike reloading for many autos.

10) Finally, I think a lot of the advantages of a revolver only become apparent once you are older, or have shot a lot of other guns. When I was younger, I was all about autos. I thought the mechanisms of an auto were cool, and a revolver was boring.

Now, I see it differently. Maybe that makes me a geezer. Or maybe I've just gotten wiser, and figured out what I really, really want a handgun to do for me.

[DougDubya]

Another thing about revolvers - they populate the popular culture of my youth!

From Tony Baretta's twin Model 10 snubs to Hutch's six inch Python, the cool cats all had some sweet six-shooters.

How much influence did the revolver have? I enjoyed Get Smart (Don Adams and Barbara Feldman packing sweet Model 10 snubs) more than Man from UNCLE (all manner of European autos). :X

[hoptob]

Why a revolver??? Do they make any other guns or something? :evil:

Mike

[abrink]

All of the above!

And i like how small the snubby's are. They're the most reliable pocket guns.

[usmccpl]

Cuz i can nuff said

[mtmuley]

This is an interesting thread. I like revolvers because they tend to fit my large hands with good grips. Also, maybe it's an old west kind of thing. Cowboys, horses, six guns. And Dirty Harry would have looked stupid with a pistol. LOL mtmuley

[papajohn]

I own several of both, but I like shooting the revolvers more. Speed of reloading and ammo capacity are the only knocks I can think of. One can be helped with training, the other can't. But there are lots of good things about revolvers. Just off the top of my head........

Ammo from light target wadcutters to full magnums, makes no difference!

No slide to yank on every time something goes wrong. Hand strength is rarely an issue. That matters most to kids, small statured folks, and the elderly.

In teaching those new to handguns, 95% prefer the revolver. Its grip can be modified to accomodate nearly any hand, regardless of size or geometry.

There is rarely ANY doubt if a revolver is loaded or not.

Fixed barrels tend to shoot better than those that bob, weave or wiggle.

Better trigger pulls right out of the box.

No safety to forget at the worst possible time.

There are LOTS of ugly autos, but few ugly revolvers. :)

Papajohn

[crebralfix]

FUN!

[sargenv]

I pikced all the above, but one I didn't see was... Not having to chase your brass all over the range.. and if you use moon clipped revolvers like me (610, 627) you can pick them up 6 or 8 at a time.. :)

[Guillermo]

Pick the right gun for the right job

A slim auto is easier to conceal
A hi cap auto is outstanding for an entry team
An auto is easier to suppress

A revolver is more versatile if slimness, sound suppression and capacity are not primary concerns.

[borntwice]

I used to have a Ruger Blackhawk .357 Mag. revolver, many years ago (single action). I purchased it as a "bear defense weapon", when I lived in bear country.

That revolver had "class", especially after I added rubber grips to it. Unfortunately, I don't think it had been taken care of very well by its prior owner (I bought it from a Pawn shop). Still, that was my first handgun.

Now, I own a CZ 75 P-01, and really love the thing - it is a work of art, and mechanically sound. It is also "frighteningly" accurate.

[loneviking]

There's just something about that 'click,click' as you ear the hammer back on a big revolver and then sight down the barrel. For us cowboy types out west, that hooks us up with a whole lot of history. I have a pretty good idea of what it took to defend oneself with a Colt and it gives me a lot of appreciation for the skills of the old time gunfighters, lawmen and cowboys.

My Colt 357 is stone cold reliable. Never jams, no FTE's, not fussy about ammo, no 'limp wrist' problem, will fire even it it's jammed into someones ribs--all things that the autos have problems with. It gives me great peace of mind to carry something that I know will fire every time I need it too.

And finally, revolvers are just more elegant than pistols. There's a character and beauty to them that autos have a hard time matching. I figure that someday, one of my kids will inherit this Colt that I bought new and have carried for 22 years so far. They will treasure it, care for it and pass it on to one of their kids as a link to the past.

[papajohn]

Well said, Mr Viking!

My first revolver was a Colt Single-action, and I almost wore it out as I slowly thumbed the hammer back, listening to it spell out C-O-L-T as the cylinder turned and locked and the hammer thunked into place, ready to fire. There is NOTHING else that sounds quite like that.

I was talking to a co-worker the other day, we carry revolvers on duty but she was gushing about how much she liked her Glock, which she carries as a reserve cop. I was trying to get her to appreciate the beauty and simplicity of the revolver, while she tried to convince me what a technical marvel her Combat Tupperware was. It finally dawned on me that she was too young to see my point, and I was too old to see hers. So be it.......when I start gushing about a polymer bullet launcher, it's time for the rubber room! :p

Papajohn

[indie]

i like a revolver in a handgun because of simplicity, reliability, power, versatility(357 mag & 38 special and +p in one gun), ease of maintenance.

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I'd say:

1. Accuracy - for some reason I'm more accurate than with semis
2. Reliability - obvious
3. Durability - they're big ol hunks o' steel! Long-lasting makes them good values, and I love a good value.
4. Intimidation factor - Nothing says "I'm gonna jack you up if you don't straighten up and fly right" quite like a revolver.

So I voted 'Shoot them Better'.

[loneviking]

Nothing says "I'm gonna jack you up if you don't straighten up and fly right" quite like a revolver.


:eek::D I just spit coffee all over the monitor screen!! ROFLMAO!!

[dairycreek]

I find myself carrying a revolver more and more these days. I have nothing against semi auto pistols but the simplicity, reliability, and larger more powerful rounds that are afforded by revolvers just tip the scale for me.

[Big B]

I'm in my twenties, and chose a revolver for my first handgun, because I like the look of them. I wouldn't want to be looking down the business end of my 357. Besides, you can't beat their reliability, easy maintenance, and larger ammo selection. Lets not forget that many of the wheel guns have a lot of history behind their making.
For me, all of this is worth giving up a few extra rounds in the chamber. I'll make up for them with plenty of practice.

[240GMAN]

I would have to say I chose a revolver for two reasons. One would be the size. I have an SP 101 in 357. There are certainly smaller guns than that but I like the power of a 357, and I'm all about concealability. The second would be reliability. There are much less moving parts and all the springs are at rest. Don't get me wrong I love pistols, but after much research I chose to carry a revolver. But this is only for CCW. Autoloaders have their place in this world too.

[1/7GRUNT]

For me it is reliability, for sure. To be able to tell the wife "pick it up, aim it at the bad guy, pull the trigger" is pure simplicity.
My .357 is a S&W 63 that was carried by my dad in LE so there is a nostalgia i feel for revolvers also.
My new 442 is alot of fun as well. I can never load a magazine right anyway! Always stub my thumb!!!

[okeybug]

I just like revolvers better to shoot at the range. I can hit an oil can consistantly with my Smith 629 at 50 yards. I sure can't do that with my 9mms. The 629 is the most accurate handgun I've ever shot. I like my autos for a CCW though. I like the firepower. I have a Glock 26 that will take the Glock 17 clip as a backup when needed. I also have a Smith 6906 that's been a nice piece for CCW.

[steveracer]

I hate picking up brass.
Steve

[Vibe]

It's the only thing currently legal in DC.

[steveracer]

Good point, Vibe!

[medmo]

All of the above plus it is the quickest most accurately way I can get 2 rounds on target. It is with a tuned S&W Mod 19 2.5"bbl. I was raised shooting all kinds of handguns and own/shoot quite a few semis and revolvers.
I still think Bill Jordan got it mostly correct.

I thought the post was to find out why folks shoot/carry/own a revolver not to find out why other folks disagree with them.

Hawk - My father retired from the NYCPD and told a story that sometime in the 60's a plain clothes detective fired through his over coat saving his life. The revolver got snagged in the coat when he tried to draw it from a concealed holster. After the incident officers were trained that if this occurred don't waste time on freeing the revolver go ahead and shoot through it. I'm offiering this info as it looked like you were asking for a real life situation where something like this occurred.

[Imaginos]

When I'm old and crippled by arthritis, I may not be able to run the manual of arms on the semi of the day, but I bet I can still tape the trigger of my SA revolver back and fan the hammer pretty effectively.

[Confederate]

My, my, look how long this thread it!

I picked "All of the above." Autos require changing springs on occasion, they scatter brass indiscriminately, you have to worry about magazine fatigue when you leave them in drawers. You put a revolver and an auto in a drawer. Four years later, your autoloader may work, but will you have confidence in it? How about ten years? Take both out in the biting cold and are you sure the autoloader is going to function flawlessly? I'm not.

I recall that situation some years back when some cops and bad guys were emptying their guns at each other and none of the shots was connecting. I think autos are just more instinctive. Also, if I'm armed, I'm not sure how well I could concentrate if someone was firing full throttle .357s at me! Even standing behind them gets your attention.

[Hawk]

Hawk - My father retired from the NYCPD and told a story that sometime in the 60's a plain clothes detective fired through his over coat saving his life. The revolver got snagged in the coat when he tried to draw it from a concealed holster. After the incident officers were trained that if this occurred don't waste time on freeing the revolver go ahead and shoot through it. I'm offiering this info as it looked like you were asking for a real life situation where something like this occurred.

I'll remember that one, but it's an emergency recovery from finding that the thing can't be drawn, not something done in preference to drawing the firearm.

It was a response to a snag (malf) - not a tactic.

From back in the day when the NYCPD carried revolvers.

Between the time of my post and necromancy being performed on the thread, I actually started a "shoot from pocket" thread to flush out the comments. The general consensus was:

1. It was a dumb thread and
2. Not a valid primary tactic. If someone derives comfort from the scenario, fine, but trying to sell it as a wheelgun advantage to a disinterested third party - not so much.

There's a world of difference between recovering from a "holy rats! it's stuck in my pocket!" and "I think I'll just shoot it from my pocket because it's a real smooth idea." The first is analagous to clearing a malf the second is still an idea marketed by my Cajun buddy, Mr. Beau Gus.

[Old School]

I like revolvers for accuracy and simplicity. I feel like I could shoot the wisker off of a running wildcat using a revolver with the hammer drawn.

[bhp9mm]

because they work and are easy to use and clean and if u have a miss fire u just keep pulling the trigger u dont have to clear it like and auto

[medmo]

Hawk - I read the post and it stated that "because" you "can" shoot from the pocket is why that individual prefers a revolver. If for what ever reason someone would have to do it... yes a revolver would be the best choice. That doesn't make it "dumb". It is just an answer as to one of the reasons why that individual prefers a revolver.

Stay on the High Road please.

[Shade00]

What can you say? Revolvers are just beautiful. A lot more fun to own.... I own both semi-autos and revolvers, but I own quite a few more revolvers than semi-autos. Any gun purchase I plan on making in the foreseeable future is a revolver.... my short list is mostly revolvers. There are one or two semi-autos I want to have, including a Walther P38, a Walther TPH, and perhaps a 1911 variant of some sort, but I can't stop wanting more revolvers. :evil: Got to get a Python, a S&W Mod. 17, a Ruger x Six stainless, and the list goes on....

[Hawk]

Hawk - I read the post and it stated that "because" you "can" shoot from the pocket is why that individual prefers a revolver. If for what ever reason someone would have to do it... yes a revolver would be the best choice. That doesn't make it "dumb". It is just an answer as to one of the reasons why that individual prefers a revolver.

Stay on the High Road please.

"Dumb" was what my thread on "pocket shooting" was called. Not what I called the reason, such as it is.

I do have some minor concern that a throwaway observation that "shoot from the pocket" is a valid (intentional) tactic is often thrown in with "needs less training" in the "why revolver" threads. Sooner or later, some newbie is going to think "pocket shooting" is a spiffy idea and turn himself from a rooster to a hen - or worse.

But, in deference to the OP, I'll throw in my favorite revolver attribute: cheaper to shoot - I get to keep the brass and reload.

[bflobill_69]

Because they are RIGHT SEXY =P

...OH and reliable

Bflobill_69

[rockcutter]

And because at heart I'm a western man, or to some just a drugstore cowboy, your pick.

[Hawk]

Revolvers also appear to be a good value - for whatever reason, a top shelf wheelgun generally costs less than a high end semi-auto.

Freedom Arms is competitive with not-quite-custom 1911s.
Korth's base model is only 25% more than a Nighthawk Heinie.
A Colt's SAA or Turnbull Classic is the same as some pricier Kimbers.

Might just be me but it seems one's dollar still goes a bit farther with round guns.

[shdwfx]

If you live in DC, a revolver is your only "approved" handgun choice.
For now (the policy violates Heller v DC in a big way).

[MedWheeler]

No real choice in the poll that fits me, or many of us, since a lot of us own both wheels and flats. So, I went with "traditional" because, at the time I purchased my first one, they were still the standard for law enforcement, and I was entering the field.

[10-Ring]

I've noticed my revolvers increase in number recently mostly out of "because I can!" :D

[KBintheSLC]

I picked "more power" because I see no reason to use one in a small caliber... if thats the case, a hi-cap auto will do the job. However, for my wilderness excursions, I like the 44 mag or bigger out of a wheel gun.

[FEG]

Revolvers are environmentally friendly. Well, at least they don't litter.

[RPCVYemen]

I was looking to spend less than $500 on a new handgun. In that price range, no other handgun I rented had a trigger as nice as a Blackhawk.

Actually, that's what opened my eyes. Then I realized that I could shoot a traditional caliber like 45 LC.

Then I realized that I would be able reload a wider range of power in revolver cartridges than in an autoloader - the Blackhawk will function correctly with anything from powder puff loads to a lot powerful than I want to shoot.

The trigger is what piqued my interest - it takes a pretty high end 1911 to have as nice a trigger as a stock Blackhawk. But then everything else fell into place.

Evil

[JackCrow]

I have owned and used revolvers more than any other type of handgun.

Because of that I am much more comfortable and proficient with a revolver. I have always felt well armed with a revolver.

I like autoloaders and hope to add a few more to my collection (I only have 1 right now).

[skoro]

I have both autos and revolvers. But I have to admit my preference for wheelguns. Sure, reliability and simplicity enter into it, but the real reason I prefer revolvers centers on the aesthetics. I just like the looks of a S&W revolver better than just about any other handgun. Especially K-frames. ;)

http://www.rjholloway.co.uk/sw10-5b.jpg

There's just something about the combination of wood grips and fine blued metal...

[Virginian]

Because it is not a semiauto. I must have owned 40 centerfire semis and 10 22s, and never found one I really liked other than a High Standard Sharpshooter, a Ruger Mark II, and a Colt Woodsman. Of all the centerfires, I almost liked a S&W 1006 and a Sig 230.
I have liked every revolver I ever had, and love some of them.

[RandomMan]

Because real guns are steel guns and wheel guns are steel guns. ;)

Because of the following factors:

Traditional
I Shoot Them Well
Simplicity
Reliability
Power (in terms of magnum loadings)
Cool Factor
Grin Factor
They ain't Glocks

The only other handguns I buy now that aren't revolvers are 1911s. Again, traditional, wood and steel, blued.

-Rob

[GingerGuy]

http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm157/GingerGuy_photos/Colt/Colt019.jpg

[markh]

It's my bug because unlike an auto, a contact shot won't induce a malfunction.

[Reddbecca]

Why a revolver?

In simplest terms, why the hell not?

[lee n. field]

Why a Revolver?


Brass retention, if you do your part, is 100%. No fruitless grubbing in the weeds behind you and to your right.

[ceadermtnboy]

Why I like revolvers? You can leave them in your dresser, nightstand , or vechicle for years if desired and not worry abount springs being worn out under tension and feel confident that when you pull the trigger they will work. Also there are no mags to loose or replace.

[Reddbecca]

Tension doesn't wear out springs. Working them does.

[ceadermtnboy]

If you leave a magazine loaded for several months with the springs under tension, they could weaken resulting in FTF. I would also think a cocked and locked auto would have spring tension on the hammer that could possibly weaken the hammer strike. However a revolver loaded and set aside has no springs under tension and would be more reliable.

[Hawk]

If you leave a magazine loaded for several months with the springs under tension, they could weaken resulting in FTF. I would also think a cocked and locked auto would have spring tension on the hammer that could possibly weaken the hammer strike.

No. Springs wear out from use, not from compression.

There are some anecdotes about springs wearing out from overcompression - those magazines that require a grip that would shatter a coconut to get the last round in. A 1911 magazine loaded in the 1920s will work fine in 2008 if it hasn't been allowed to rust. Ditto a 1911 that was cocked and locked while your great grand uncle was wearing a zoot suit.

It's all well and good to prefer revolvers due to a problem they don't have that little else does either, but there's no need to ascribe problems that don't exist to firearms that aren't your preference.

[ceadermtnboy]

Hawk, Im not saying you are wrong and then again Im not saying your right. I just offered my opinion on why a revolver would be more dependable, and I stick to that opinion. However I like and own auto pistols as well and really cant decide my prefernce. I do know that my truck gun which I rarely clean shoot etc is a revolver. My bedside gun is a S&W M&P and you had better believe that I rotate the Mags. Maybe others can offer some insight on overcompressed mag springs?

[Hawk]

My recollection on springs was "myth with a couple exceptions".

Found it:
http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2007/04/boomsticks-download-errors.html

HTH

[GunTech]

Any bullet, any load, no problem.

[rdoggsilva]

Started out with a revolver (52 years ago). Just love firing them, but I like my pt1911 also.

[Hawk]

Any bullet, any load, no problem.

I expect that would be the case with factory loads and most handloads.

In the interest of noting offbeat exceptions, I saw a post on SASSWire that a .38 Special load with a charge of Clays between min and mid would back out the primers thus tieing up an Uberti replica.

Oddly enough, the same load didn't tie up a Ruger.
http://sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=103022

I'd heard of primers binding up on the recoil shield when "primer only wax bullet" rounds were fired (if one neglected to "waller out" the flash hole) but hadn't heard of it happening with "powder puff" loads until yesterday.

Not a practical exception to the "any load" assertion but interesting. I suppose there's a lower limit on the "any load" wisdom but I doubt too many would find it apart from the SASS crowd and they would probably be less likely to find more once the "power factor", such as it is, goes into effect.