Why would anyone choose a revolver over semi auto? [Archive]

Joe the Redneck

April 15, 2008, 10:35 PM

Yes, autos are very reliable. Standing at the gun range in perfect conditions they are.

Now what happend if you hace to shoot in a confine space? Or if you have been thrown to the ground?

What if, when you fire. something comes in contact with the slde.?

It is actually pretty easy to jam up an auto loader if something come in contact with the slide.

You also have stove piping and double feeling to deal with.

And the biggerst complaint I have, dropping the mag in the holster. If you roll over on it and depress the button, you got a single shot. Unless you have a gun that won't fire without the mag. Then you have a club.

Don't even get me started on the "switchable safty.

The revolver is the best choice because it always works. There are damn few thing that can go wrong.

The biggest downside is the fact it only holds six rounds. With the Rambo mantality that runs through the industry today, everything needs to hold fifty rounds, have a lazer and a flash light.

Me? I'm more worried about getting round one off tha round 17. I don't plan on missing a whole lot.

JTR

VirgilCaine

April 15, 2008, 10:49 PM

I was gonna say because the grips can be made to fit really good.

brokencowboy

April 15, 2008, 10:49 PM

I have never had a revolver "stumble" with a FTF, stovepipe, or any of the other maladies that can encountered with a semi-auto, Also, a 44 special with a 240 gr bullet moving at the same velocity as a 45 acp is something to contend with.

Hawk

April 15, 2008, 11:35 PM

I like them because they are simple. They don't have as many parts on them that can mess up like on a semi auto.
I can detail strip my 1911 putting all parts into a pie tin, then reassemble.

The normal mortal can't do with, say, a Python.
The manual of arms may be marginally simpler, the guts were never simpler and never will be.

btg3

April 15, 2008, 11:40 PM

I plink with an elderly fellow whose hands won't let him rack the slide on his Bersa Thunder 380 or put bullets in the mag. He liked my .38spl K-frame on our last outing, and later handed me an old Colt Commando to clean up. After he shoots the Colt, I think he'll forget about the pistol he can't operate.

Also, an acquaintance lost an arm in a tragedy last year. He manages a revolver more easily than a semi-auto.

Hawk

April 15, 2008, 11:44 PM

The revolver is the best choice because it always works. There are damn few thing that can go wrong.

Rim dropping below the extractor star.
S&W extractor rod unscrewing itself.
Bullet pulling forward under recoil, tying up the cylinder.
Any little fiddly part, bolt/cylinder stop, hand, innumerable springs signing off.
Screws backing out.
Case binding on recoil shield.
Timing issues.
Sprung crane.
Crud under extractor.
Gunge build up on cylinder face.

I'm sure I'm missing some.

Pretty much unarguable revolver advantage: easier to keep your brass.
And the ability to shoot nearly any power level and bullet configuration without stressing on feed ramp compatibility.

I was gonna say because the grips can be made to fit really good.
Agreed.

Bezoar

April 15, 2008, 11:45 PM

semi automatic:
-normally dependent upon a certain amount of pressure in order to ensure correct cycling of mechanism
that can eliminate powder puff loads with stock springs.
-not everyone is able to correctly work the slide, ie hands wrists are to weak.
-not always going to work with all brands of hp ammunition as is from the factory.
-some people cant adjust to flying brass
-some people ive read are not able to work the slide without putting the muzzle and bullet trajectory into a direct line up with their internal organs

Revolvers
-tend to have lower capacity, 5-6 rounds standard.
-longer to reload without lots of practice that not everyone can find time for.
-dont really care about what bullet you use as long as it meets SAAMI maximum pressure,
-can be downloaded to weak powder puff loads that some "heman" might be able to catch in a bseball glove safely, theory only.
-easiest operation in an emergency: aim-pull trigger-pull trigger-correct aim-pull trigger.
-misfires are easily corrected, pull trigger again, or pull hammer to move to next chamber then pull trigger if using a singl action.

when you get down to it, you have to figure out the worst situation that you could end up in. If that situation is 6-7 gang bangers trying to kill you, well a high capacity 45 or 40sw would be better then a 5 shot snubnose.
However, if your attacked by a bear or mountain lion, or need to hunt after a plane crash in the wilderness, a 45 colt or 44 spcl, ec, is better then a 3 inch barreled compact frame 9mm.

Cosmoline

April 15, 2008, 11:49 PM

The manual of arms may be marginally simpler, the guts were never simpler and never will be.

Nonsense. I can strip an SP101 or Speed Six as fast as any 1911 by removing a single screw. But the fact is I almost never need to.

As far as reliability, I can count on two hands the number of times a wheelgun has failed me out of many many thousands of rounds and close on 75 platforms. Most all of the semis I've shot, including very nice Glocks, have had some level of jamming trouble even if only stovepipes or FTF from bad magazines. There's simply more that can go wrong with a semi.

Rim dropping below the extractor star. NEVER HAD IT HAPPEN
S&W extractor rod unscrewing itself. NEVER HAD IT HAPPEN
Bullet pulling forward under recoil, tying up the cylinder. HAPPENED ONCE WITH A TAURUS .45 Colt
Any little fiddly part, bolt/cylinder stop, hand, innumerable springs signing off. NOPE. I busted a Single Action Army replica's main spring once, but that's an ancient design using a strip of sheet metal. Coil springs last forever.
Screws backing out. NEVER HAD IT CAUSE A PROBLEM. It's only really an issue on some single actions.
Case binding on recoil shield. NEVER EVEN SEEN IT.
Timing issues. If this is bad enough to cause a jam, it's bad enough to notice long before you shoot it. I've only ever seen one or two very old Colts with timing so bad they would not even function.
Sprung crane. NEVER HAD IT HAPPEN
Crud under extractor. NEVER SEEN IT
Gunge build up on cylinder face. NEVER HAD IT CAUSE A JAM. I had barrel/cylinder gap binding on the same Taurus .45 mentioned above. That's it.

Your list left some issues off. I had a Security Six, rough side of Hell surplus, that would pierce primers with its hammer-mounted pin. Trip to Ruger cured it. I've had a few Nagant handloads seize in the chamber from overpressure when I was figuring out how to handload that weird round.

But as to Semis, the list of major and minor jams is real long. The only one that was pretty much flawless was the P225. Compare that to my main carry pieces--a Detective Special and a Speed Six. Out of thousands of drill rounds of all conceivable types of ammo from shotshells to 200 grain bear loads NEITHER HAS EVER JAMMED, BEEN STUCK, OR FAILED TO FIRE. ZERO PERCENT FAILURE. And one of those dates to the 80's while the other is half a century old. No semi can beat that without religious upkeep and top quality ammo. Even a high end 1911 will choke if fed ratty Russian steel cased crud. My wheelguns LAUGH at that ammo. LAUGH! HA! I can shoot them

UPSIDE DOWN
WITH MY HEAD
IN A BUCKET
OF PIRANHA FISH!

But beyond this many of us find we can conceal, draw, aim and fire a wheelgun better than a semi. For close range defensive firepower they're still perfectly fine. I wouldn't advise using them for offensive work, but then I wouldn't advise going on the offensive with some foolish high cap either. That's rifle work.

Hawk

April 16, 2008, 12:03 AM

But beyond this man of us find we can conceal, draw, aim and fire a wheelgun better than a semi.

Shooting a revolver better is a viable reason. In my opinion, perhaps the best reason.

Not all revolvers are Rugers. They did well getting rid of a number of screws but woe on those that bust up the trigger unit.

Unitized and/or modular !== simpler.

My revolvers have gotten wrapped around the axle more often and more spectacularly than my semis. This says less about revolvers vs semis than the fact that my semi was purchased for "serious" uses as opposed to the revolvers which were purchased used, for fun. The results of such a purchasing history are predictable.

The only reasonable way I can see of getting a semi as complicated as a revolver internally is to pop the grips on a P7 while forgetting all other semis exist, and I'm not sure even that would work.

Personal history will vary. I've had particularly bad luck with revolvers "light striking". Again more to do with questionable previous owner's custodianship, but I've found Pythons to be particularly grim in this regard.

mavracer

April 16, 2008, 12:04 AM

Is there a good reason to choose a revolver over semi auto? Whenever I see people with one as their only gun I think "what is this the Great Train Robbery? Get with the 21st Century!"
I have a Smith 65-2 (former Texas Dept of corrections gun) thats just magic buttery smooth Draw her from the holster and stroke the trigger holes appear one after another COM,gives me a warm fuzzy fealing to carry her or have her stand guard in the nightstand.

Cosmoline

April 16, 2008, 12:12 AM

They did well getting rid of a number of screws but woe on those that bust up the trigger unit.

It's solid state, you don't have to "bust up" the trigger unit. That's the whole point of it. The only reason to unpack it is to swap springs, and as smithing goes that's still a very elementary project. You squirt some CLP on the springs, wipe them down, and stick them back in. Frankly you don't even need to do that.

Again more to do with questionable previous owner's custodianship, but I've found Pythons to be particularly grim in this regard.

?? Then GIVE ME THAT PYTHON, boyo. They're old fashioned and really you don't want one. Never mind all this talk of the "finest handgun ever made." Clearly that's just old timers with some brain problems.

WinchesterAA

April 16, 2008, 12:19 AM

SKU: item_163687

Model: 386
Caliber: .357MAG/.38+P
Capacity: 7 Rounds
Barrel Length: 3 1/8"
Front Sight: "Light Gathering" HIVIZ®

Rear Sight: Adjustable V-Notch
Grip: Rubber Grips
Frame: Medium
Finish: Matte
Overall Length: 8 1/8"
Material: Alloy
Weight Empty: 18.5 oz.

http://www.adjunct.diodon349.com/Attack_on_USA/model_386_revolver__hiviz_files/image001.jpg

My dad always comes home laughing after his PD makes him qualify. He's an old fashioned old guy who still uses a revolver when no one else does. Outshoots them for speed and accuracy habitually. Gets em on the reloads too with full moon clips.

When it comes down to it, a guy well versed in autos will stomp on just about anybody period for all of the above, but as a consequence of most autos looking so cool.. dumb people get them thinking they're better and don't know how to use them.

Autos vs revolvers? Skill, experience, practice. There's your pistol. I can pop singles out of a bolt gun faster than an idiot can work the controls of whatever he's shooting. Sad as that may be.

Hawk

April 16, 2008, 12:30 AM

Then GIVE ME THAT PYTHON, boyo. They're old fashioned and really you don't want one. Never mind all this talk of the "finest handgun ever made." Clearly that's just old timers with some brain problems.

I wish you were around a couple months ago.

My quote from another thread:
Nobody that manages to spend 2,500.00 on two Pythons to recover only 1,300.00 several weeks later after discovering they barked at the moon should be bidding on something with a "good luck with that" condition of sale. I've managed to lose more money, faster, with revolvers than I was able to ever do previously outside a casino or gentlemen's club. And, the memories from both the casino and gentlemen's club are more pleasant than those provided by the Pythons.

Nevertheless, you may be misinterpreting my remarks. Revolver are fine. Revolvers are a better choice for some folks. In fact, they're so fine there's less than no reason to make up stuff about advantages they don't, in fact, possess. The real ones should suffice.

The thread is about revolvers. If we want to make it "Rugers vs all semis" I'd guess that would be a new thread.

The Pythons rather hammered home the "reliability" thing for me. Ever try to find someone to work on one? (that hasn't closed his waiting list)?

azimuth

April 16, 2008, 01:25 AM

I like to shoot revolvers because I don't have to bend at the waist to recover my brass...

btg3

April 16, 2008, 08:27 AM

Pretty much unarguable revolver advantage: easier to keep your brass.
I don't think folks who CC and have speed-loaders are conerned with keeping their brass. Perhaps there's an opportunity for a creative person to invent speed-unloaders to do this?

Ash

April 16, 2008, 08:35 AM

I have an EAA Witness, 45ACP, which I have traditionally used in the woods and often times at home (especially after Katrina). But, I have also used a Trooper Mk III (my first handgun was a Trooper Mk III given to me by my grandfather). 357 is always comfortable in the woods, and is becoming more and more of something I use at home.

Ash

Dismantler

April 16, 2008, 08:57 AM

The original poster states that "Semi autos are just as reliable nowadays."

If that is true...why do I keep seeing magazine articles instructing people on how to "Get out of a jam and get back into the fight." or other such titles on clearing jams. There are two of these on the news stands right now. One is in Guns and Ammo Handguns, the other in Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement.

When the local PD went from Ruger revolvers to whatever auto they chose, the training included clearing jams and handling malfunctions. So I ask you...is that a step in the right direction? Personally, I don't think so.

vanilla_gorilla

April 16, 2008, 09:06 AM

You gonna tell Clint he shouldn't be shooting a revolver because it's archaic and outdated?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOVWwOahGf8

Eventually, I'll be headed to Thunder Ranch to get a revolver and auto class in, myself. I carry both, and shoot reasonably well with both. Were I headed to South Africa or another similar dangerous spot, I'd be sporting my Glock 17 and all the ammo I could get on my bat-belt. Much more rarely does one have to deal with packs of more than 3-4 dirtbags, domestically, so I'm more comfortable with six rounds and several reloads.

Mad Magyar

April 16, 2008, 09:58 AM

failures I've had when shooting have been with autos and that is always in the back of my mind.

I think that lurks in every auto owners mind....With my K-frames, I use my revolver in a shoulder rig...

El Tejon

April 16, 2008, 10:10 AM

newbie, because it is carried for self-defense.

Understand that use of a firearm will not be done on a square range on a bright sunny day. When you use the weapon, especially a bug, it will likely be done in a position of duress.

You may find yourself on the ground, rolling about in an impromtu jiujitsu match. The prospect of a self-loading pistol unlocking because of lack of resistance and inducing a Type III malf can transpire down there.

You may find yourself at body to body range. The pistol may be pressed up against the threat which will unlock a self-loader.

Understand that there are pros and cons of all weapons. However, those are the reasons trained people carry revolvers (still).

bakert

April 16, 2008, 10:17 AM

Is there a good reason to choose a revolver over semi auto? Whenever I see people with one as their only gun I think "what is this the Great Train Robbery? Get with the 21st Century!"

I Do carry an auto most days but also at times carry this old well worn model 10, probably made before he was born, and feel pretty well protected.:p

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f241/brumanj/Picture354.jpg

1911 guy

April 16, 2008, 10:40 AM

I'm a big believer in using what you shoot best.

Anybody care to tell Jerry Miculek that his S&W wheelgun isn't good enough? That man can fire and reload a revolver faster than I can an autoloader. He's accurate, to boot.

DawgFvr

April 16, 2008, 11:45 AM

nothing wrong with auto pistols...but I usually carry a 642 in my pocket for all the reasons posted daily, monthly and yearly on the THR forum and others...which a simple "search" expand upon. This will then lead you to the question, "Why is a revolver preferable to carry in the pocket instead of an auto? Again, I would say search...this has been gone over and over.

bigmike45

April 16, 2008, 11:45 AM

tipoc somewhat gave a good reason......there are calibers that are available in revolvers that are not easily found in a semi-auto, or found at all in a semi-auto. I carry both and feel equally protected with either the revolver or semi-auto I am carrying.

Okiecruffler

April 16, 2008, 06:07 PM

I think my wife give a real good reason, They don't make a 357mag compact auto.

Also, with her hammerless snubby you can shoot 5 rounds without ever taking it from the pocket. Trust me, I've done it.:D

tipoc

April 16, 2008, 06:12 PM

I carry both and feel equally protected with either the revolver or semi-auto I am carrying.

I agree.

We could debate for a long time which is more reliable and both sides would be right, mostly.

We could debate the strengths and weaknesses one over the other and both sides would have made points.

But it comes down to the shooter and the task. Your needs, preferences and skills play the deciding role. You match the gun and caliber to the task.

I also think, if we're honest with ourselves, that Doug Dubyas on spot. I like a gun that strikes my fancy, that looks and feels good to me. That I enjoy shooting and that is fun, yep fun. If we didn't like 'em we wouldn't have as many as most of us do. More choices.

tipoc

Glockman17366

April 16, 2008, 07:29 PM

I pocket carry most the time. I've found those small snubbies are more reliable and can carry a better round (.38 +P) the pocket semi-autos. I do have a Beretta Tomcat...pretty reliable too. But I very rarely carry this little gun. Maybe that's a bad thing.

So, when I go out, my little Taurus always goes with me. I may carry another gun too (on the belt).

When I do carry a semi-auto, it's a glock 19. That's on a belt slide holster.

But pocket carry is so convenient, so that's my preference.

lee n. field

April 16, 2008, 07:58 PM

They don't have as many parts on them that can mess up like on a semi auto.

Ever had one open?

Suggest you read over Kuhnhausen's S&W Revolver, A Shop Manual.

CountGlockula

April 16, 2008, 08:12 PM

I'm a semi auto fan...but you should always have the other platform in your collection.

jdc1244

April 16, 2008, 08:16 PM

To me it’s not a matter of choosing one over the other – all handguns are great and one should own both.

19-3Ben

April 16, 2008, 08:19 PM

I shoot revolvers better than semi-autos. A compact revolver is more comfortable for me to carry. Therefore, my SP101 is the primary carry.
Now, if I KNEW i was headed into a gun battle, would I carry a wheelgun? no. It would be my M&P. nothing like 18 rounds of 9mm HP on tap. But then again, as someone once said, a wheelgun has enough ammo to get you into trouble, or out of trouble, but not both.
I don't plan on getting myself into trouble. If 5 rounds of well placed .357mag are not enough to stop the threat I need to:
A) call in for close air support, or
B) learn not to piss the target off in the first place!!!

Sato Ord

April 16, 2008, 08:22 PM

Opinions are like... and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.

This whole debate has been done to death. Use what you are comfortable with.

bdjansen

April 16, 2008, 08:33 PM

The only problem I've had with a revolver is weak primer strikes on my 637. As for autos I've had failures with them all at some time. Glock, M&P, XD, 1911. It was probably ammo issues but it was still a failure.

That's why I use revolvers. Doesn't mean I have a problem with autos. They both have their limitations.

Average Joe

April 16, 2008, 08:41 PM

Because they are so "pretty"

Hawk

April 16, 2008, 08:50 PM

Revolvers are, at least for the moment, apparently exempt from the microstamping madness. I expect a pretty good spike in sales in California in the not too distant future. Who knows? Maybe microstamping will do for the wheelgun what the '94 magazine capacity restrictions did for single stack .45s.

They're definitely already the right choice for those who shoot them better than semis or for those that keep waking up in the middle of the night worrying over their semi's next show-stopping glitch. It simply wouldn't do to not have confidence in one's choice of weapon.

But.

Reliability - enh. If they tie up less often, they tie up better. Most of my wheelgun jams have taken a fair amount of time to clear. Not to be confused with "tap rack bang".

Simplicity - feh. Open one up. As the other poster noted, get the Kuhnhausen manual - I did. It's interesting.

Shoot from pocket. Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done and the former does not necessarily an "advantage" make. If it's too close (moderately tight jeans, say) you get to, at once, get off a shot as likely as not to take out your own femoral artery and / or simultaneously cut and cauterize parts you'd rather keep from cylinder / barrel blast. If it's in a James Bond trench coat and aimed, it's held far enough from the body you probably look like an asymmetrical Batman and will likely be answering a lot of pointed questions about why you fired from concealment rather than drawing and possibly benefiting from the deterrent factor we're constantly yammering about.

Semi pushed out of battery - this, I submit is about as likely as body contact resulting in the cylinder getting jammed up with a load of belly-button lint, rendering the thing inoperable. Miscellaneous pocket detritus getting between the cylinder and top strap is pretty effective at ending the festivities.

Revolvers have advantages. Some, I submit, are more far-fetched than they need to be.

I'll grant this may simply be a failure of imagination on my part.
:)

searcher451

April 16, 2008, 08:59 PM

Here's one reason:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=356595

19-3Ben

April 16, 2008, 11:43 PM

Searcher- that's a crazy story. Wow.

txoilman

April 17, 2008, 12:54 AM

My son the cop took one look at my S/W 13 and said whoa..The puppy is great - 38's in the house and 145/158 grain when on the road...:)

paul105

April 17, 2008, 01:03 AM

For practice self defense use?

Everyone's situation is different. I live in the northern rockies and am out woods bumming, hunting, or fishing everyday. I don't live in a big city and am not likely to encounter multiple attackers in town. It is not out of the realm of possibility to encounter bear (both black and griz), moose, wolf, mtn lion, etc during one of my daily outings. My gun of choice is a S&W Model 329 PD in .44 Mag. It's easy to carry, and has a power to weight ratio that is ideal for my purposes. I don't take it off or change it for a different gun if I stop to pickup some groceries on the way home, or if I'm running some other errands.

FWIW,

Paul

theotherwaldo

April 17, 2008, 02:40 PM

I have just introduced one of my co-workers to the joys of shooting revolvers.

He can't use semi-autos.

His left hand is gone, just above the wrist.

btg3

April 17, 2008, 02:47 PM

It may be easier to use a revolver with one hand, but it's certainly possible to shoot, reload, and clear jams single-handedly with an autoloader. If you CC an autoloader, it's a good idea to learn and practice the techniques as they could save your life.

bulbboy

April 17, 2008, 02:52 PM

My wife doesn't have enough strength to pull back some slides of autos

btg3

April 17, 2008, 03:34 PM

A technique recommended for females to rack the slide is to:

1. Grip the gun normally with the strong-hand.
2. Lay the off-hand palm on the slide with thumb pointed down the barrel.
3. Close off-hand onto the slide such that the slide is gripped with 4 fingers along one side and the heel of the hand on the other side. (Do not just pinch the slide between fingers and thumb).
4. Hold both arms straight. Do not bend elbows.
5. Keep arms straight and PUSH the gun with the strong hand by slightly rotating your shoulders.

Keys are:
-- Proper grip on slide with off-hand.
-- Arms straight.
-- PUSH the gun, rather than PULL the slide.

Warner

April 17, 2008, 04:54 PM

Animation please?

:)

Mr. Designer

April 17, 2008, 05:04 PM

Find me an autoloader that weighs 12 ounces and can shoot a round as powerful as the 357 magnum. Once you do, I'll switch.:) As of now, I carry a S&W 360sc

FranklyTodd

April 17, 2008, 06:10 PM

Find me an autoloader that weighs 12 ounces and can shoot a round as powerful as the 357 magnum. Once you do, I'll switch. As of now, I carry a S&W 360sc
+1
S&W M&P340 w/CT

Hawk

April 17, 2008, 06:56 PM

.41Dave

April 17, 2008, 07:22 PM

Semi autos are just as reliable nowadays
Not in my experience. I have had significantly more failures with semis than with any of my wheelguns.

...hold way more ammo
a 1911 holds only 1 more round than my 686 Mountain Gun. Frankly, I'm not sure having 15+ rounds on tap isn't a disadvantage. When ammo is limited, you try to make each shot count. Many people tend to miss a lot really fast when they think their ammo supply is nearly limitless. A number of studies back in the late 80s & early 90s have shown that when different police agencies switched from revolvers to semis, their hit:miss ratio got significantly worse. As for me, I am not an uber-kommando nor a tactical SWAT ninja. If I'm still in trouble after firing six rounds, having 11 more in gun probably isn't going to get me out of it.

...much more customizable
A look at some of the gun rags from the 80s will disabuse you of that notion. Not to mention that the grip, which is arguably the most crucial bit of ergonomics and can make the difference between a natural shooter and minute-of-barn is vastly more customizable on a revolver than a semi

...much easier to actually shoot
Personally, I find revolvers much easier to shoot quickly and/or accurately.

less recoil, etc. etc.
Recoil is a personal issue. Some people are more put off by the slide banging around than the straight push of a revolver.

And as DougDubya said, "Style, baby, style". Here in Texas, you gotta have a Barbeque gun. With the exception of a very few classics like the 1911, trying to make a semi into a barbeque gun is like putting lipstick and jewelry on a pig and calling it a hot date.

Hawk

April 17, 2008, 07:50 PM

I have just introduced one of my co-workers to the joys of shooting revolvers.

He can't use semi-autos.

His left hand is gone, just above the wrist.

I'd guess a lot of that has to do with what one is used to. A traditional 1911 (FLGR need not apply) with or without 10-8 sights is amenable to one handed operation.

Also, both revolvers and semis are represented by a wide array of product. As noted above, single stack 1911s don't have much of a capacity advantage. On the other hand, I can't offhand think of a more difficult firearm to one-hand than the Taurus revolver that incorporates both the Dan Wesson and S&W type cylinder releases on the same firearm.

Much like semis can't be said to have a higher capacity than revolvers as a blanket statement, revolvers aren't always easier to one-hand. One in particular would appear next to impossible.

DougDubya

April 17, 2008, 07:56 PM

BTG - or she could just use a revolver.

mavracer

April 17, 2008, 09:24 PM

Does one practice with .357s or is the practice with .38 Spcl with the .357 carried?
I've shot plenty of both through my M&P340 even shot some 145 silvertips, not fun but no crying either.I've setteled on 357mag 125 golden sabers they shoot minute of pie plate to 25 yards and are the hottest I can shoot without adjusting my grip between shots.

btg3

April 17, 2008, 09:32 PM

or she could just use a revolver.
DougDubya--I've seen plenty of ladies shoot IDPA, but none with a revolver. A few may exist, but if so, they're relatively lonely. Since their choice seems not to favor revolvers, the better response may be to support their preference with good instruction rather than select a different gun for them.

DougDubya

April 17, 2008, 09:58 PM

We're talking people who need self defense, but are not physically fit. Grandmothers with arthritis, not gameswomen who engage in playtime at the local range, where, if they can't manipulate their weapons, they only lose points, not their lives.

The IDPA shooters are more likely to be fit and well-trained. Utilization of autopistols for defense is not a problematic issue for them.

btg3

April 17, 2008, 10:10 PM

Grandmothers with arthritis, not gameswomen who engage in playtime at the local range
uhm...I think that's YOUR assumption, which I have no problem with other than you waited until now to say so.
:rolleyes:

mavracer

April 17, 2008, 10:32 PM

OP
Why would anyone choose a revolver over semi auto?
Bulbboy's answer
My wife doesn't have enough strength to pull back some slides of autos
BTG3
A technique recommended for females to rack the slide is to:..............................ETC

take your own advice
the better response may be to support their preference with good instruction rather than select a different gun for them.

Confederate

April 17, 2008, 11:14 PM

Well, it depends on what kind of auto you're talking about. If I were a police chief, I wouldn't let my guys carry Glocks. Not that they couldn't learn to carry them safely, it's just that accidental discharges tend to be more of a problem with them. There will always be cops who can be trusted with them, but there will always be cops that can't.

Here's one of my favorite articles, taken from the Associate Press:

SAN ANTONIO Apr 21, 2005 — This is one story they'll be telling around the San Antonio Police Department for a long time. An off-duty officer was at a San Antonio auto auction house yesterday when nature called, a police spokesman said.

Officer Craig Clancy strolled to the appropriate facility and was lowering his trousers when his pistol fell from his waistband. When Clancy fumbled for the falling firearm, it went off, twice.

One of the bullets nicked a bit of floor tile into the leg of a man who was washing his hands nearby. That man was taken to a nearby hospital for treatment.

Police internal affairs [department] is investigating.

And who can forget that DEA agent in Washington who explained how he was an "expert" in the use of the Glock, then proceeded to almost blow his foot off by accidentally discharging the gun? Another officer lost his life when his Glock fell off of a table as he was preparing to clean it. He fumbled for it (a purely instinctive reaction one does without thinking) and his finger hit the trigger. It fired once and he was dead.

In Washington, D.C., they're still having accidental discharges, and the D.C. police changed to the Glock a few years ago. When Glocks first appeared, they had stiff trigger pulls and that's why I wouldn't have anything to do with them. Then they lightened the triggers so that having a cocked Glock was like having a cocked revolver. Sure it won't go off if the trigger isn't pulled, but putting a safety on a trigger is like putting a brake on an accelerator. What's the logic in that? Anyway, they make me nervous. I don't like the idea of carrying them or even being around them.

As far as out-of-the-box 1911s, I haven't seen too many that I would feel comfortable betting my life on. The design was good for it's day, but most 1911s need substantial work to get up to the standards of today's auto pistols. I've shot my S&W autos enough to make me trust them thoroughly, but I'd still take my Ruger Speed-Six 3-inch with me if I knew I was going to get into trouble. There's no really good reason except that it's the one I'm most familiar with and most comfortable with.

There are other great autos. Sig Saur and others have really surprised me at making autos that are virtually flawless. But there are still a number of good reasons to go with revolvers. Automatics are getting awfully expensive, but this is mitigated somewhat by the fact that one can still pick up used Smiths and other guns for much less than what a new auto would cost.

btg3

April 17, 2008, 11:30 PM

mavracer -- consider the possibility that you have confused ability with preference regarding Bulbboy's post

MarkDido

April 18, 2008, 06:51 AM

None of you should have revolvers. You should leap into the 21st Century and only carry autoloaders!

You can send your antiquated old revolvers to me, Markdido at P. O. Box.....

;)

Jkwas

April 18, 2008, 10:51 AM

When I hold a revolver, it becomes part of me, like an extension of my arm. When I shoot an autoloader, I have more of the sense I'm operating a machine. I have both, and each has their place.
Recently I was torn between purchasing a Beretta 92, an elegant pistol I've always admired, and a Used S&W M64-1 revolver. I just had to go with the revolver. For me they are a joy to shoot and for nightstand duty they are superb. Anyone in my house can pick it up and shoot it with it's simple manual of arms and low recoil. And they won't get "happy finger" and spray the whole house down with bullets.
I use my autos mostly as CCW guns for reasons of capacity and concealability.

mavracer

April 18, 2008, 11:13 AM

mavracer -- consider the possibility that you have confused ability with preference regarding Bulbboy's post
ya silly me I thought he was replying to the op as the reason hi wife chose a revolver.apperently I missread the part where he wanted sombody to tell him he needs to make her shoot an auto because other women use autos for IDPA.
sorry won't let it happen again

Dirtypacman

April 18, 2008, 12:13 PM

I think everything the OP wrote is just personal opinion other then the "holds more ammo" statement.

I personally prefer a revolver for carry purposes.

Mr. Designer

April 18, 2008, 12:48 PM

Find me an autoloader that weighs 12 ounces and can shoot a round as powerful as the 357 magnum. Once you do, I'll switch. As of now, I carry a S&W 360sc
Makes me hurt just thinking about it.
Does one practice with .357s or is the practice with .38 Spcl with the .357 carried?
I've shot plenty of both but I mainly practice with 38s. I have shot 158gr full power 357s and those do jump. I carry loaded with 125gr 357 Golden Sabers.

Sato Ord

April 18, 2008, 01:05 PM

With the exception of a very few classics like the 1911, trying to make a semi into a barbeque gun is like putting lipstick and jewelry on a pig and calling it a hot date.

Hey, is that crack about the pig because you've been to a few parties in Columbia County Florida? It's scary what passes for a hot date in some places.

vanilla_gorilla

April 18, 2008, 01:23 PM

That's just wrong, man. There's nothing wrong with the women in Lake City

...if you're bigfoot. :D

April 18, 2008, 01:40 PM

Reason number 13:

They never have to bother with "Do you top off your mag ?" Threads.

*snark*

Cosmoline

April 18, 2008, 02:03 PM

I've managed to lose more money, faster, with revolvers than I was able to ever do previously outside a casino or gentlemen's club. And, the memories from both the casino and gentlemen's club are more pleasant than those provided by the Pythons.

Hawk, it sounds like your problem is a lack of experience in recognizing and grabbing good deals. Consult me first next time ;-)

jimmyraythomason

April 18, 2008, 02:10 PM

Because I want to.

Hawk

April 18, 2008, 03:01 PM

Hawk, it sounds like your problem is a lack of experience in recognizing and grabbing good deals. Consult me first next time ;-)

Thanks, but I think I've got Fuff on board for some pre-purchase advice.

Besides, even with my hard luck history I did manage to get one very good Python out of the episode. A local Colt afficianado declares it to have the "factory trigger job".

Still, I'm going to avoid Pythons due to one "gotcha": I can't get them (competently) worked on. If they go a little bit south, they're down for the count. I've gotten a S&W that wasn't any better than the two nasty snakes but the difference was that the S&W was easy, fast and inexpensive to get repaired properly.

Pythons were hand-fitted which means I can't just drop parts in ala a 1911.

Man's gotta know his limitations. Pythons and I don't mix. At least not the ones sold over the internet that don't have inspection and "fire and return" priveleges.

DougDubya

April 18, 2008, 03:23 PM

btg3 - I'm just saying, slide racking is one particular reason to choose a revolver.

Plus, you say IDPA female shooters seem to prefer autoloaders, though IDPA, like all shooting competitions, is getting into game-ness. Revolvers are limited to specific barrel lengths, meaning that people who get along perfectly well with 6 inch revolvers for home defense are now suddenly disenfranchised.

I'm an autoloader lover, so I'm not saying they don't have advantages - manual safety catches and faster reloads in general. But revolvers work. They've been working for the past two centuries.

If it ain't broke...

DougDubya

April 18, 2008, 03:24 PM

Man's gotta know his limitations. Pythons and I don't mix. At least not the ones sold over the internet that don't have inspection and "fire and return" priveleges.

Caveat emptor. I'd be more likely to take one over the counter than the interwebs.

Trouble is finding one "over the counter."

BigO01

April 18, 2008, 03:30 PM

Is there a good reason to choose a revolver over semi auto?

Yes for me there sure is , despite the fact that my auto's have all been very reliable they have had stoppages or "Jams" and every single one is one more than I have ever had with a revolver .

brigadier

April 18, 2008, 06:20 PM

Believe you me, semi-autos don't look like it but they are FAR more complex (internally) then revolvers, this having to do with the recoil process. If you try scratch building a semi-auto handgun using basic gun mechanics knowledge, that gun will more likely then not break apart on you, lock up on you or even KB on you. Read up on WHY the newer Beretta M-9 series handguns have a factory made crack in the back of the slide and you will get a glimpse of what kind of science and math is really put in to those designs. It took me years to come up with my own design in working out all the fine details, and if I were to make a list of all the people who helped me with it, it'd look like movie credits.

Revolvers have quite a few advantages over semi-autos. The most obvious is that they are not ammo sensitive (unless made too week for max loads) and can often be made more durable then most semi-autos. They are also obviously more reliable on average. I have seen nothing that convinces me that the reliability difference between semi-autos and revolvers today is any different then it was 90 years ago.
Revolvers also have more stable barrels and kick then semi-autos and heavy barrel revolvers tend to have less kick then equal size and caliber semi-autos.

Hawk

April 18, 2008, 07:45 PM

Simpler?
If one were to put a bank of supercomputers to the task of designing and optimizing an anvil the result would still be an anvil. A simple anvil.

Similarly, the math behind a semi, or one's ability to fabricate one from scratch is generally only of academic interest (although I certainly offer kudos to anyone that's managed the task). If the end product has fewer parts and/or those parts are more interchangable and user servicable it's simpler.

Some revolvers might be simpler than some semis but, on average, a semi is easier to strip and reassemble. A simple perusal of the jigs and fixtures available for use on several revolver types would bear mute testimony to that.

Revolvers also have more stable barrels
And, apart from Dan Wessons, require an act of congress to change.

Anybody can call Bar-Sto and refresh his semi's barrel with minimum fuss. As always, there are exceptions: a revolver barrel isn't more stable than the one on H&K P7's or most straight blow-back semis (or any Hi-Point, for that matter).

...heavy barrel revolvers tend to have less kick then equal size and caliber semi-autos.
TANSTAAFL
If it weighs more it kicks less, if it weighs the same it kicks the same, etc. Nothing about revolvers allow the repeal of Newtonian laws. Revolvers enjoy a little wriggle room by having more grip options, but that's not the same thing as actually having less recoil.

btg3

April 18, 2008, 07:49 PM

So who thinks our armed forces should be issued revolvers for a fire fight?

mavracer

April 18, 2008, 08:12 PM

So who thinks our armed forces should be issued revolvers for a fire fight?

great arguement
A. most dont have a handgun at all.
B. we're talkin SD not firefight

mavracer

April 18, 2008, 08:16 PM

heavy barrel revolvers tend to have less kick then equal size and caliber semi-autos.
actually since an auto uses recoil to operate less gets to you therefore less felt recoil.

brigadier

April 18, 2008, 11:26 PM

actually since an auto uses recoil to operate less gets to you therefore less felt recoil.

TANSTAAFL
If it weighs more it kicks less, if it weighs the same it kicks the same, etc. Nothing about revolvers allow the repeal of Newtonian laws. Revolvers enjoy a little wriggle room by having more grip options, but that's not the same thing as actually having less recoil.

Actually, it's not that simple. If it were, the Sig 220ST would be notably worse then the 1911A1 yet it's considerably less despite being smaller and lighter.

First off, recoil draw is a double edged sword. On one hand, the drawing of the action can reduce the battering. On the other hand, the draw it's self is a contributing factor to the kick and when it impacts, you have a whole slide delivering the punch. Allot of things affect recoil in odd ways. For instance, if you take a Beretta M-9, get a 3 recoil spring kit from Wilson Combat and install the lightest one, recoil on Winchester bulk ammo will be fairly mild. If you take out the light recoil spring and install the heaviest, the recoil will be noticeably WORSE! This is in part because the recoil draw happens so fast that the kick and tug feel the same and because of the heavier recoil spring, much more of the energy is delivered in to the tug which lasts longer then the punch giving more for the shooter to feel.
Another factor is balance and weight displacement, which gets so complex that I don't know where to start, though some of the basics are that if you have more lasting overhang (weight in front of the trigger guard), you can expect the gun to not punch as hard. This is one of the important differences that a revolver makes as bull barrel revolvers have allot of stationary overhang.
Another is slide draw. The longer the slide draw, the more room it has to disburse the recoil. A short and fast slide draw can very easily result in as much as DOUBLE the amount of recoil from a semi-auto then a revolver. The Bryco Jennings 9 is a prime example of this, having recoil comparable to medium .44 Magnum loads out of a standard size revolver.
I can really go on all day about how different factors in a gun affect recoil. Semi-Autos have a higher potential for reducing kick without adding to the bulk of the gun, but these resources are rarely taken advantage of from my experience.

ceadermtnboy

April 19, 2008, 12:11 AM

I would like to respond to the initial question ( why would someone choose a revolver over a semi-auto pistol ). I have to say that is an easy question for me to answer. I own both pistols and revolvers because guns are fun! However, If I had to pick one handgun to carry it would be my S&W 386 357 magnum. It basically comes down to the fact that for protecting myself or my family the revolver works best for me. some of the following reasons:

I shoot the revolver better than an auto of the same size.

I feel like in a close quarters situation the revolver will be more reliable ( no slide to cycle ).

If a primer fails I just keep firing.

A seven round speed loader or moon clip feels more comfortable in my coat/vest pocket than a spare mag on my belt.

If I get lazy or dont have time to practice at range, I dont have to sweat rotating mags.

Like Clint says ( wheelguns are real guns!).

Now, If my situation changed to protcting my country instead of my family, then give me that auto pistol.

mavracer

April 19, 2008, 12:47 AM

Actually, it's not that simple. If it were, the Sig 220ST would be notably worse then the 1911A1 yet it's considerably less despite being smaller and lighter.
no, actually free recoil(the only recoil you can quantify) is the same reguardless of action type.
the total amount of free recoil transfered to your hand will be the same but transfered over a longer time with an automatic because recoil is used to cycle the action.
now percieved recoil what you think you feel well that can be anything grip material,recoil spring or preconcieved notion you have.
A short and fast slide draw can very easily result in as much as DOUBLE the amount of recoil from a semi-auto then a revolver.
this is a physical impossibility as free recoil is the same and no mater how fast the slide functions it CAN NOT return to position as fast as the recoil shield on the revolver (cause it dosn't move with respect to the grip)

now this is enough of a thread hijack
there are plenty of reasons to carry a revolver "I like to" is one nobody can dispute.

Wheeler44

April 19, 2008, 12:50 AM

Why would someone choose a revolver over an auto?

Why N-frame S&Ws of course.

Wheeler44

DougDubya

April 19, 2008, 01:47 AM

So who thinks our armed forces should be issued revolvers for a fire fight?

You mean the Colt 1911 or the Beretta 92 is a deciding factor in any serious combat?

Well, what do we need rifles, machine guns and grenade launchers for?

Handguns are not carried by a lot of troops (though, I'll bet those in the know in the sandbox have a J-frame or Makarov stuffed away in concealment).

Frankly, I'd rather see most of the REMFs and support staff packing revolvers. In Vietnam, helicopter gun crews and Navy Pilots carried quite a few revolvers with them for personal protection. Totally against military regs, but hey, if the brass didn't give them 1911's, they got .38's and .357's.

Funderb

April 19, 2008, 01:51 AM

Who would need a semi-auto anyway? those are for gangbangers and murderers!

I guess I'd have to pick gangbanger, because murderer just doesn't ring well.

I like semiautos, but a revolver is nice to have in the collection.

brigadier

April 19, 2008, 02:43 AM

now percieved recoil what you think you feel well that can be anything grip material,recoil spring or preconcieved notion you have.

And isn't that what's important?

this is a physical impossibility as free recoil is the same and no mater how fast the slide functions it CAN NOT return to position as fast as the recoil shield on the revolver (cause it dosn't move with respect to the grip)

I have no idea what you just said. When you talk about revolver recoil VS automatic, it compares to holding a ball in your hand and having someone shove it VS having someone throw the ball at you at speed. The sheer weight may be the same, or even lighter if thrown, but it'll still hit you allot harder. Now, the difference is it's a little easier to tinker with the recoil process to ease the impact. How you can judge recoil by weight alone is beyond me. Imagine a martial artist judging someones punching technique by weight alone. These things should be and are known by the total effect they have, weight just being one factor.

LawofThirds

April 19, 2008, 03:27 AM

Revolvers really shine at the ends of the spectrum, not at the middle.

Go small and you really cannot get more proven effective firepower in a smaller platform than one of the .357 J frames. Autoloaders of equivalent size generally are .380 or smaller calibre, with only 1 or 2 more rounds than the revolver and because of size, a reload for either will take roughly the same time in trained hands.

Go large in calibre and a revolver will be able to handle much hotter loads than an autoloader in a more user friendly manner. Most of this is a result of not being recoil driven.

That's not to say that a revolver is a bad choice in a mid sized gun, only a different choice. You are losing some speed of reload and magazine capacity but you gain more customizable grips and an indifference to limp wristing.

For the most part, other claims simply are based on either bias or incomplete information. The claims that a revolver is more reliable is not true as reliability stems from manufacturing tolerances and quality of design. A well made automatic will function just as well as a well made revolver, there are plenty of examples on the market. Felt recoil is a personal thing and as such must be decided by the person using the weapon. Calibre selection is also a personal choice as today it is possible to get a quality well proven self defense round from 9mm to .44 Magnum.

QUICK_DRAW_McGRAW

April 19, 2008, 01:48 PM

sorry, but what a stupid question. you are trying to defend auto's when no one is attacking them. a revolver is smaller and lighter then most auto's, have just as much punch.

now don't get me wrong, i carry both, but prefer my .357mag snubbie, recoil is not a problem if you hold the weapon properly. capacity, i dont care ether, thats why they make speed loaders.

LawofThirds, couldn't have said it better

Dienekes

April 19, 2008, 11:35 PM

Did then. Still do. I had the option of carrying a Glock or a SIG my last few years of work, and stuck with the wheelgun. By then I was pretty handy with the latter, and as an instructor got to see enough inexplicable malfunctions with the semiautos to keep what I had ("six for sure"). If 1911s had been authorized--fat chance--I would have gone to that as I had used them on duty before.

I still shoot the revolver better on a bad day than I do other semiautos on a good day, and no one laughs at a .357/125 out of a 4" barrel.

I don't think the old formula of 3 feet, 3 seconds, and 3 rounds has changed too much.

doc2rn

April 20, 2008, 01:29 AM

Until today I would have disagreed with you. I am partial to my '62 S&W 10-4. Today I got my FN9 and I can shoot a 3" group at 15 yds. with 17 rds. I cant wait to actually find a holster that fits it as well as my Galco high rise fits with my S&W.

Maximum1

April 20, 2008, 01:43 AM

Compared to MODERN QUALITY semi-autos revolvers simply don't cut it.

Major Revolver Negatives
- Limited capacity
- Trigger (hey let's not only have the trigger engage the hammer but it’ll also rotate the cylinder that should make it easy to pull the trigger, NOT!)
- Ergonomics are TERRIBLE compared to a semi-auto
- Revolvers of simpler caliber to a semi-auto have a much greater kick
- Oh did I mention limited capacity?

And they don’t look cool ;-)

And all this "talk" of unreliable semi-autos...Just don't see it....Haven't had one malfunction in ANY of my semi-autos and after going to the range CONSISTENTLY for the last seven years haven't seen any malfunctions by fellow shooters.

Maximum1

April 20, 2008, 01:51 AM

"Yes, autos are very reliable. Standing at the gun range in perfect conditions they are. from JTR"

That's just plain non-sense...So the army issues semi-autos insead of revolvers in Iraq because Iraq has perfect conditions? Give me a break.

LOL

Funderb

April 20, 2008, 01:56 AM

maximum, I think the reliability issue with semiautos is not derived from seven years of pampered treatment at the range, but in the precious seconds n combat in mud, dirt, sand, and debris.

Granted, revolvers can jam too.
Trigger pull is also very low in single action revolvers.

I'd imagine revolvers being good to pilots, when stuck in a downed aircraft, not having hot brass bouncing into your flight suit is nice.

Ergonomics are really not terrible at all.
And, finally, you don't get screwed when your mag fails to function properly.

Simple answer, fewer moving parts can be nice some times.

I prefer the semiauto.

DougDubya

April 20, 2008, 02:00 AM

And they don’t look cool ;-)

Of course, you know, this means war!

Or at least someone quoting Groucho Marx.

Then again, anyone saying revolvers don't look great might be quoting Karl Marx. ;)

jimmyraythomason

April 20, 2008, 10:06 AM

Own both,shoot both,be happy!

jad0110

April 20, 2008, 11:46 AM

Own both,shoot both,be happy!

Agreed!

Major Revolver Negatives

- Limited capacity

As a revolver guy, I'll be the first to admit that more rounds is never a bad thing. It can only be a plus. However, there other features that I place significantly higher on the priority list. Priority one is hitting the target. I've heard it said that the most common failure in a gunfight is running out of ammo. But as the average fight only lasts 3 seconds (give or take a second), only Jerry Miculek could dump 6 rounds in that amount of time. So it would appear to me that running out of time is the most critical failure element. Therefore, I have concluded that the first shot is by far the most critical. Therefore, I carry what I personally can get the most accurate shot of quickly. For me, that equates to DA revolvers and 1911s. YMMV.

- Trigger (hey let's not only have the trigger engage the hammer but it’ll also rotate the cylinder that should make it easy to pull the trigger, NOT!)

A matter of preference. I love the long firm pull of my wheelies. Can't stand Glock triggers. Lots of us shoot DA wheelguns best in DA. I sometimes shoot my bone stock DAO S&W 642 better than my tweaked SA 1911 with it's 4.5# pull. What a DA revolver does is highlight poor trigger control. I have witnessed many a shooter at the range fire 3 rounds DA and throw their hands up in the air, saying it can't be done. When I first started, I took it as a challenge :D .

- Ergonomics are TERRIBLE compared to a semi-auto

A rather broad statement, especially when considering that there are for more choices in grip designs/shapes/materials for revolvers. I've switched grips on all but one of my revolvers to get that perfect fit. Regardless, they still may not feel right to you, which is totally fine.

- Revolvers of simpler caliber to a semi-auto have a much greater kick

As for the actual impulse energy, revolvers will transmit a bit more energy to the shooter. How much, I am uncertain, but I don't suspect it is a massive amount. Ergonomics (fit to hand) can basically erase this difference. An improperly fitting auto in 45ACP will transmit more felt recoil to the shooter than a 45 ACP revolver of the same weight with ideal fitting grips.

---

In the end, it's like picking out a pair of shoes - what feels right on my feet may not work for you ;) .

ceadermtnboy

April 20, 2008, 07:36 PM

Revolvers and autos make owning handguns and shooting them fun. I say give me either one and I feel like I can defend myself. Arguing about which one is better is just plain opinion period. I think this thread started by asking why would someone use a revolver over an auto. Not why would an army or police force choose a revolver. In that case an auto makes sense. But for an idividual, there could be many reasons a person is deadlier carrying a revolver.

Fishman777

April 20, 2008, 08:24 PM

I don't own any autoloaders right now. My wife is not a shooter and I wanted to make sure that we had self defense choices that she could potentially shoot effectively without a lot practise.

Here are the reasons why I favor revolvers:

1. It is impoosible to limp wrist a revolver. Six for sure.
2. No magazine springs, so the guns could potentially be kept loaded for a long, long time without impacting the guns reliability. I don't store them loaded, but it is one less thing to worry about if I ever do.
3. I find stainless steel revolvers easier to shoot accurately than almost any autoloaders. The grips and the weight make the recoil very light. My wife agrees with this assessment and doesn't feel comfortable shooting autoloaders.
4. Simple manual of arms.
5. Ammo insensitivity.
6. Ammo flexibillity (special rounds and magnum rounds out of the same gun).

I don't dislike autoloaders. If I was a cop or a soldier, I would use autoloaders excusively. I don't think that civilians really *need* high capacity guns. Doesn't mean that I don't want to get an autoloader eventually, but it is not a priority for me right now.

Dismantler

April 20, 2008, 08:44 PM

Another reason that somebody (read that ME) might choose a revolver over an auto is that they grew up shooting revolvers and do
not want to change.

I am not part of a police department where somebody (or group of somebodies) decided that my revolver was obsolete. I am just plain happy with my revolvers and do not want to learn a new system.

Also, as others have mentioned, my wife has had basic instruction with the revolver, and can make it work without the safeties, decockers, magazine releases, etc., on an auto. For people that want a basic familiarity, but will not practice often, a revolver is a better choice.

yakkingallover

April 20, 2008, 10:06 PM

I am fairly new to carrying but view my options this way. For day to day life in stores,restaurants and at friends houses I carry my S&W 340 because I am a tall, lanky character and can carry it without notice, and if i need more than five rounds grilling burgers at a friends I will make new friends. I work in a machine shop and stay late and play and if locking up by myself late at night I take my 1911 and a spare mag. This is because a friend at the business next door was jumped by four guys and one extra round in my revolver does not suit me well. So I carry for the situation, but rest assured I do carry....

docmagnum357

August 28, 2008, 12:10 AM

For me, It is revolver all the way. Let me qualIfy that, Magnum revolver allthe way. In n.c., you can't hunt gig game with anything less than a 357 magnum and a six inch barrel. Big game here is basically less than three hundred pounds. All three magnum revolver calibers ar in a quasi pistol carbine class. Other rounds, sucha as the common "service " rounds are much less effective. They will kill, sure. But as for putting something down as fast as possible, a magnum is hard to beat, even with 7.62x39 30-30 type cartridges. If you practice enought to get good enough, then recoil isn't really an issue. Remember, only hits count. You can miss as many times as you want to, just as fast as you want to, but I want to hit them with something that will put them down. Do you really think someone is going to stand there and let you shoot at them 17 times? Crooks are dumd, but not that dumb.

woad_yurt

August 28, 2008, 08:58 AM

I use a semi-auto for day to day. I alwats have a p3AT with me. But, next to the bed, I have a 4" barrelled .38 SPL S&W M&P. I have that one ready because it points so well. If I had to use a gun in the dark after being awakened from a dead sleep, I want the S&W. It's very user friendly and I can point shoot well with it.

calaverasslim

August 28, 2008, 09:37 AM

I sold my only Glock, hated it. Own 2 semi's in 45acp and love them. 4" Kimber and 3.5 compact. Great carry guns. Love them....

What do I carry? A 3" 44 special revolver. Only one I carry. Slides into my front pants pocket with little effort to draw, little notice. I was in Academy and was talking with a LEO and he asked if I carried. I replied yes and he asked if I was carrying at that time and I replied yes. He looked me over and thought my cell was the carry. I showed him the cell and he asked where I carried. I showed him the butt of the pistol and he remarked he wouldn't have guessed in the pocket.

Small, compact, powerful, 44 special with factory 200gr GDHP's, 5 rounds. Can't do it in 5, then I would be in trouble with 7 or 8 in the auto anyway.

All in favor of revolvers?

Say AYE!

Drgong

August 28, 2008, 10:13 AM

I have a BHP, I really do like it a ton. but you know what, I will by carrying a Model 15 S&W and/or SP101. I am scarily accurate with a revolver and I am a firm beliver in Location, Location, Location. I may on occassion carry a PA-63 or BHP when I cannot CC a revolver do to my clothing choices. They both have good things and bad things, so I shoot both.

crankshop1000

August 28, 2008, 10:16 AM

Handle a 642 and you will know why.

Carl Levitian

August 28, 2008, 10:48 AM

I got my first revolver in 1961.

In 47 years of shooting handguns, I've had one revolver among many, fail me one time. An old model 10 that was over 50 years old and had a hard life. By comparison, I've had Colt 1911's, a Glock 17, Browning High Power, Smith and Wesson 39, Smith and wesson 59, all fail at some point with a stove pipe, or failure to feed. its the nature of the best. A revolver and a double barrel shotgun don't have the rounds moving around, and for a split nano second, totally unsuported.

These days I only have revolvers and break open shotguns.

When you get down to the pocket pistol class of guns, I don't think any of the .380 or small 9mm's are going to be as reliable as a small J-frame 38 revolver. Particularly with large hollow points.

Hawk

August 28, 2008, 12:54 PM

I would submit that reasons why one would carry a revolver or a semi needn't be objectively rational to be good.

If someone has no faith that a semiauto will run right and/or clear malfs quickly one should go with the alternative. No amount of well running semis will provide the confidence that the individual has in the revolver and it's probably not advisable to carry something one has no confidence in. One's personal experience with a recalcatrant semi will supersede all other evidence. That's just human nature.

But it does go both ways.

If most of one's experience with revolvers consists of used product the quality of that former use will figure prominently in one's assessment of the product. This doesn't objectively reflect on the product as the manufacturer has no control over the used market but impressions will still be made. For those of us hunting pre-lock S&Ws and the rare Colt DA, the only option is used and the reliablity of those things vary wildly.

A surprisingly large percentage of those I've bought suffered from light strikes. There must be some immutable rule that people will tinker with springs and strain screws until the piece will no longer reliably light Fiocchi or S&B product.

If something needs Fed primers to get reliability it's not "six for sure" it isn't even close. "Just pull the trigger again" doesn't work either - you'll generally only be rewarded with another "click". Sometimes they'll light the third time around or the first time if single action is used - it's kinda like a box of chocolats - you never know what you're going to get.

Anacondas will show up that had been reassembled with the crane spring and plunger upside down and backwards.

640s will unscrew their ejector rod binding the thing up.

A new Uberti sent its ejector housing sailing downrange. As if to prove that paying more doesn't absolve one of the need to check screws, a new Turnbull Classic spit out its trigger pivot screw in the first 50 rounds.

A couple of Bangor Punta 'Nam era pinned and recessed articles bear mute testimony to the spotty QC of the time (though several from that time are quite nice).

I still like revolvers but I've learned to limit internet purchases that can't be thouroughly checked. My bench now has a selection of Brownell's S&W-specific bits and cup punches. I've recently added a half dozen near-factory strength mainsprings and a couple unmolested strain screws. There's a couple Kuhnhausen manuals that weren't there a few years ago. I buy the larger size container of blue thread locking compound. Nothing about these recent purchases screams "reliability" to me. I've been known to laugh out loud when reading "six for sure".

Is it "right" to believe that revolver reliability is a myth based on previously molested product? Probably not but it's at least as "right" as thinking semis don't run based on one's experiences in 1977 - when disco was still alive. Much like the ancient prejudice against semis will not be swayed by assurances that they run now, I won't be swayed by anecdotes (which I believe, by the way) that folks have shot revolvers since before Oklahoma was a state with nary a hitch. Mine have hitched up plenty.

But they're still fun.

MJRW

August 28, 2008, 02:11 PM

I've had several friends ask for recommendations on handguns for personal defense. Without getting into all aspects on how I go about this, one point comes up from time to time; how often are you or the people that will use it for a defensive purpose going to practice with it? If the answer is "not very often," then I recommend revolvers without hesitation and recommend they NOT get a semi-auto.

There are responsibilities that come with owning a semi-auto, and if you're not practicing them, you're unprepared:

1. You must verify that your magazines work with the ammo you have loaded. You can't do this in a 50 round box. You might be able to do it in a 100 rounds. But if the person buying is just going to put 50 rounds down range so they can say they've done it, they haven't adequately verified magazine, gun, and ammo compatibility. You cannot assume it just works with a semi-auto. Most of the time it will, but sometimes they just don't work together.

2. You must be able to clear failures...in the dark...quickly...under stress. That means tap-rack-bang so that your response is automatic. And that means practice. And that means more time at the range. And that means if you're doing 50 rounds once, the semi-auto isn't right for you.

So if the owner isn't going to prepare themselves with appropriate training and hardware verification, then the owner should have something more appropriate to their actual needs. As much as I would like every gun owner to regularly practice with their gun, the reality is that not all of them will. And for those that won't regularly practice, but will still choose to own, then I believe the semi-auto is actually the wrong choice for them.

LoneSniper3

August 28, 2008, 02:19 PM

I think it's really just a matter of preference. People should rely on whatever firearm they are comfortable with. In my opinion revolvers generally are more reliable due to less moving parts. My S&W model 15 .38 to this day is the most comfortable and accurate handgun in my collection. You also can't forget the intimidation factor of a large revolver being pointed at you and hammer cocked. Psychologically it seems more intimidating than a pistol. I don't know, maybe I've just watched too much Dirty Harry.

Hawk

August 28, 2008, 02:50 PM

In my opinion revolvers generally are more reliable due to less moving parts.
Gotta pick that nit:
(credit to Numrich)
http://www.e-gunparts.com/images/schematic/0660zPYTHON.jpg
http://www.e-gunparts.com/images/schematic/2440z17.jpg

Even adjusting for the parts count in the Python adjustable rear sight, it still sails handily past that particular semi in moving parts count.

May not pertain to all revolvers and all semis but on average the revolvers I'm familiar with have more moving parts than my semis.

jad0110

August 28, 2008, 05:49 PM

Parts count doesn't matter as much as people think. At first thought, fewer parts means fewer parts to break. While that is true, there are a lot of other factors to consider. What materials are the parts made from, how are they designed and how well do they fit together and interact. Just these examples far outweigh the actual # of components, IMHO.

If number of parts was the only factor in determining reliability, then a Ford Fairmont or Chevy Citation should be much more reliable than a modern Toyota Camry or Honda Accord.

Hawk

August 28, 2008, 07:17 PM

I'm agnostic on parts count but I do appreciate accuracy.

Hence, I could easily refrain from hitting the "reply" button if I saw something like:

"In my opinion revolvers generally are more reliable despite having more moving parts."

or even:

"In my opinion revolvers generally are more reliable."

But there seems to be a common misconception that revolvers generally have a parts count advantage and that just isn't so.

Snapping Twig

August 28, 2008, 09:15 PM

I hunt with a revolver because they are more powerful and I can shoot them better at distance. For the rare times that I carry for SD (very rare, but it's happened) I choose and auto in .45acp.

Piraticalbob

August 29, 2008, 12:31 AM

The one time I was in a situation where it was necessary to draw my weapon (S&W 640 in .38, one of the pre-.357 models) was in a robbery situation where the robber attacked me behind the desk of the hotel where I worked. Drawing the revolver I ordered him back, instead he grabbed at the gun. I twisted it out of his hand, pressed it against his chest, and pulled the trigger once. The bullet, a 148-grain lead wadcutter round, entered his spleen and stopped the attack as he doubled over in pain.

Had I used an automatic it's very possible that the pistol being in contact with the perpetrator would have caused a malfunction after the first shot. As it was, the revolver was immediately ready for a follow-up shot, which fortunately I didn't have to fire.

And yah, I had to find a new job after that. :(

buttrap

August 29, 2008, 01:42 AM

For one reasion they dont make a 39 oz .44 mag in a auto while smith does in a revolver.

Gator

August 29, 2008, 02:01 AM

Why would anyone choose a revolver over semi auto?

Because they have style. :neener:

Arcticfox

August 29, 2008, 02:23 AM

I realize this thread is a few month old, but I have my own two cents to offer. You say semis are just as reliable as revolvers? hmmmmm?

Went shooting a few weeks ago, and brought my GF's glock. It jammed every other round. My two revolvers fired every round. Bad ammo? gun needed cleaning? Say what you want, it jammed, mine didn't! :neener:

Hawk

August 29, 2008, 08:19 AM

...and my newly acquired 686 no-dash got off 2 rounds in 18 trigger pulls - that's 2 "bangs" interspersed randomly with 16 "clicks".

Filed strain screw you say? Whatever. It didn't work.
:neener:

florida1098

August 29, 2008, 08:54 AM

Went shooting a few weeks ago, and brought my GF's glock. It jammed every other round.

Can you please articulate on this? Maybe you should have Glock check the gun out?

Drgong

August 29, 2008, 09:21 AM

actually the one time I fired a Glock it jammed or stovepiped at least one time a magazine load. (Yes, I know that glock are known for flawless fuctioning) could rent one to prove that it was a fluke, but I don't want a glock, and if I was to go to the Plastic gun route, I would pick up a XD. There are a couple of bad glocks out in the wild.

tekarra

August 29, 2008, 08:58 PM

Where I used to live I carried a 640 or 940 S&W in the pocket of my parka in winter. Easy to shoot through the pocket, if need be, and no binding of a slide for the second shot.

Stevie-Ray

August 30, 2008, 12:50 AM

I have no idea

Rexster

August 30, 2008, 03:59 PM

Hmm, this being an old thread, I thought I would have already posted a reply, but it seems not so. I do choose to carry revolvers, and my 24/7 gun is a Ruger SP101. At work, I must carry a .40 autoloader, selected from a list of approved models, and purchased with my own money. I went with a Glock G22, when I had to switch from a .45 1911 in 2002, but that was temporary, as I purchased a DAK SIG P229 when they became locally available in 2004. I have since aquired a second DAK P229, and both of my DAK SIGs have been 100% reliable. The one 1911 I do still own has also been 100% reliable.

I have nothing against autos, assuming they are proven reliable. I also expect a revolver to be reliable, and some of mine have been a bit problematic, so even a sixgun must prove itself.

So, I prefer revolvers for their handling qualities, which encompasses everything from carry comfort, ease/speed of draw, balance, pointability, shootability, and long-range accuracy. Notably, I like the SIG P229 because it shares so many of the handling qualities of my sixguns.

On my own time, my SP101 snubby may be accompanied by one of my duty SIGs, a second SP101, a 4" Ruger Speed Six, a 3" or 4" GP100, or even a 1911. Life is good. :)

CM Rich

August 30, 2008, 04:24 PM

Its just a matter of preference, I'd say. If you're more comfortable with one over the other, that's just your preference. I can see the merits in either one, as well as the weaknesses, and knowing that I say I'd be comfortable carrying either type.

When I get my CCW, I'll probably be carrying an auto the vast majority of the time, but that's just because of my preference. Can't see why I should pick apart someone else because they like their Anaconda or Smith.

I'm just thankful that the majority of Americans are still able to choose, and I will enjoy this right for as long as I can, hopefully indefinately.

RDak

August 30, 2008, 05:15 PM

I like both!!

I grew up with revolvers (I'm old now) but have absolutely no aversions towards pistols.

It's like many members have said, the revolver is more "idiot" proof IMHO. And sometimes I can be an IDIOT!!:D:D:o

scythefwd

August 30, 2008, 08:31 PM

newbie4help,
The reason my SD gun is a revolver is simple. I shoot better and more comfortably with my revolver than my 9mm (my other gun that is of sufficient power to stop someone fairly consistantly). I figure 6 .38 sp hydrashoks will pretty much drop anyone. Now the reverse question must be applied. Why do people feel that a semi auto makes a better SD gun? If you can't drop your BG in 6 shots, what makes you think you can do it in 15? I can reload my wheel with another 6 in just about the same amount of time it takes you to do your semi, I'm about a 1/2 sec. behind you.

AZ SIG Shooter

September 1, 2008, 02:41 PM

my preference is revolvers.
When I was a firearms instructor in the Air Force back in the 1970's, I saw many hundreds of individuals shooting our M15 revolvers many thousands of rounds. Most of these people had no experience shooting or very little. I bet if there were six cases of brass under the extractor the whole time it was a lot; you dump your brass with the back of the cylinder facing the ground.
We never had a mechanical malfunction and none of the revolvers were EVER detail stripped...they were cleaned normally and put away for the next day. Some of these revolvers were the older type with the screw in the front of the trigger guard and these had never been gone over by a gunsmith. No problem with bent cranes; even with guns occasionally dropped with the cylinder open, no spring problems, no broken "nitpickey" little parts. No timing issues.
An extractor backing out is simply fixed nowadays...Lock tite! And that's assuming it actually happens at all.
A tuned double action trigger on a revolver is infinitely better than the double action pull on any semiauto I ever fired; especially the absolutely horrendous "no compromise" HK's! I'll put my Nelson Ford trigger jobbed N frames against any semauto DA.
I was in an attempted armed robbery at a motel in Pomona Ca. back in the days of the Great Western gunshow. I opened the door and there was this fellow with a pistol pushed against my forehead! I grabbed his gun and we danced in the doorway, but he managed to get the gun out of my grip and he tried to shoot me..the gun malfunctioned. Then he tried to shoot my wife who had been knocked down on the ground..the gun malfunctioned. He ran off. about 30 seconds later we heard a shot off in the bushes a short distance away. We guessed he ran off and fiddled the gun to make it operational and test fired it. If he had had a revolver, both my wife and I might be dead now.
Shooting a revolver is different than shooting an auto. With autos I feel the slam! slam! of the slide reciprocating; it is a very piston-like, hard and "angular" machine feeling. With revolvers, the gun moves back and up and down in an organic circular movement when fired. The cylinder begins to turn it's own circle as you prep the next shot. Your trigger finger describes the same circle as the gun as it recoils...it's wheels within wheels; very organic and almost poetic; and very fast.
Back about 1990 or so I had the chance to shoot in the National Tactical Invitational (NTI) that was held at the Gunsite range near Prescott Arizona. My friend, affiliated with the AG's office here got us in. We were about the only civilians there. Most were SWAT officers and other policemen and sheriff's deputies etc. I carried the only revolver I saw there that day. Most of the officers carried high capacity 9 mm semiautos. We shot in small groups (each scenarios was one at a time) so I didn't see everyone shoot every scenarios. However, there were two individuals who ran out of ammo half way through some the scenarios! The rule was with hicaps, one mag in the gun, one more on the belt. For single stacks you could have two extra mags. For revolvers you could have two speed loaders. I carried two Smith 629's; a six and a four inch and six more rounds in a 2X2X2 holder. These two trained individuals each used up 32 or so rounds apiece going through scenarios I did with less than 12 rounds. Through the entire event, I never used up my second load (which came from the 2X2X2 holder on my belt). That means less than 12 rounds. The last scenario I was in, I faced four "assailants". These were specially designed targets of foam with hard plates inside to simulate vital areas; brain, heart/lung area. The whole thing was held upright with the tension of a large rope inside. When you hit that vital area, the target would collapse on itself in a surprisingly realistic manner. If you missed the vital area, the target remained standing. Pretty cool!
Anyway, these four bad guys were right in front of me, all armed. the one directly in front had his hand on a gun stuck in his belt. The others were at a distance of maybe six to eight feet; realistic attack range. At the timer, I grabbed the hand of the close guy to keep the gun in his pants, pulled my six inch Smith and with one hand, and shooting DA put four headshots on the four targets. After they all went down, the moderators who were overseeing me said, "Not too bad; 1.5 seconds!" (That was from first to last shot) With traversing etc. I do not believe I could have done any faster with a semiauto; even an SA auto.
Now all this does not mean I don't carry autos at times; I do. I think though that any percieved ammo issues, reloading times etc are more issues of tactics and training rather than capacity; ask the "hosemasters" as we called those two guys who were always running their Glock 17's dry half way through a scenario!