[tango3065]

My friend had a serious ? after he shot one of my handguns today. He is going to buy his first handgun, this will be for hd and shtf only, he lives alone and he is very good with handguns because he has to shoot every new one I get:D . Anyhow he ask what would be the best for him a auto or a revolver and what brand. I told him I would go with a auto like a cz75 like im buying this week. So do you guys think I steered him in the right direction.

[tbeb]

mastinson,
I assume "hd" stands for home defense. What is "shtf"? Has he shot revolvers and semi-auto's? Does he have a preference? What is his budget?

[ksnecktieman]

Is he going to get a ccw? Does he want it for home defens only? Is he going to shoot very much?
For at home defense only, size is not important, and firepower is supreme consideration, cheap and good is the browning high power clones, like the FEG, under 250$ and high capacity 9mm.
For ccw, if he is not shooting a lot, and is not highly committed, a keltec P3AT is a good choice. Light, small, easily concealed, (a good chance he will carry it often) and a simple manual of arms. Point and click is about as simple as it can get:)

[tango3065]

this will be for hd and shtf only

hd=home defence shtf = ???? hits the fan, no ccl just home use he prefers a auto but he still kinda scared the auto will fail to be reliable.:rolleyes:

[mmay1]

If reliability is concern #1 and home defense is the only intended use, I would go with a full-size CZ or a Baby Eagle in .45 in a handgun. But whatever he gets he needs to shoot it a lot to make sure it is reliable, as every manufacturer seems to produce a weapon from time to time that is not, and to make sure he is comfortable with that particularbweapon if it has to be used for self defense. My first choice for home defense would actually be something chambered in 12 gauge, either a double barrel or pump.

[BlkHawk73]

If reliability is concern #1 and home defense is the only intended use, I would go with a...

...revolver. Not likely one will ever fail to eject or stovepipe. It should come down to what model within his bidget fits him the best. Any reputable makers shouldn't give any problems. Any gun can malf. Just be sure to buy quaility to lessen the probs encountered with the cheap (price and quality) models.

[tango3065]

He's leaning towards a bersa 380 or 9mm but im not to fond of them, I have never owned one or even held one but for the price its hard to believe its a good reliable tool. Please feel free to change my mind.

[Standing Wolf]

All my main home defense and carry guns are revolvers. I have a hunch I'm probably a few years behind the times, but they're what work for me.

[JoeWang]

Gentlemen, the 18" bbl. 12 ga. pump in the $299 Remington 870 Express or Mossberg 500 Persuader with a pistol grip installed is a great home defense option.

It is much safer than a double-drywall penetrating 9/357/40/45 handgun for home defense. It doesn't require much aim.

[ksnecktieman]

There is a better way to end a "situation" at home than the display or firing of a pistol. Rack the slide on an 870, and most problems are solved. IMHO, the only reason to have a pistol is to delay someone long enough that you can access your shotgun.

[Ala Dan]

Primary home D' should be a 12 gague shotgun, for those
that live in or near urban area's.

1st handgun is very subjective; based on an individuals
taste? But in my way of thinking, it should be a revolver
with a barrel no less than 4", or greater than 6" in length.
Throw out any suggestions for the .22LR caliber as a HD
weapon! Caliber of choice should be at least a .38 Special,
with the .357 magnum being even better. Practice with the
inexpensive .38 Special target load's; and stoked it with 125
grain JHP .357 magnum's for serious HD application's.

If a self-loader is in order, there are a lot of good ones on the
market? MY caliber of choice for a HD self-loader will always
be the .45 ACP. With that said, I load up a couple magazines
with Federal's 230 grain JHP "Hydra-Shok's".

As to make and model, that really depends on how much cash
you are willing to spend? In both circumstances, Ruger makes
good, quality, less expensive firearms; and towards the top
end, you will find Colt. Somewhere in between, one can
usually compromise with a good Smith & Wesson.

*FootNote- Manufactuer's listed make both, revolvers
and semi-auto's.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[MikeJ]

I am a firm believer in revolvers for home defense for the great majority of people. My reasons for this are that they are reliable regardless of shooting position or grip. It is one thing to have a nice firm hold on an auto at the range while you are punching paper but I imagine that it is quite a different story in a real combat situation while your knees, hands and everything else is shaking. I know many people much prefer the auto over the revolver and many are probably quite competent with it but for someone that is not going to train with it extensively I just think the revolver makes more sense. Shoot safely, Mike

[10-Ring]

Pump shotgun for primary HD. IF you need a handgun to serve while you're getting to your primary, the wheelgun is the most simple & most reliable way to go ;)

[tbeb]

A nice used .357 magnum revolver with a 4" barrel is a good choice. Some good ones are S&W Model 13 (blue & fixed sights), S&W Model 65 (stainless & fixed sights), S&W Model 19 (blue & adjustable rear sight), S&W Model 66 (stainless & adjustable rear sight), Ruger Security Six (blue or stainless & adjustable rear sight), Ruger Service Six (blue or stainless, square grip, fixed sights), and Ruger Speed Six (blue or stainless, round grip, fixed sights).

With a .357 magnum revolver you can fire .38 special non+P ammo, .38 special +P ammo, medium velocity .357 magnum ammo, and full power .357 magnum ammo. You can use bullets that weigh from 95 grains to 180 grains. If I had to pick one from the above list it probably would be the Model 66.

[Shooter973]

It would be hard to go wrong with a good high quailty 357 mag revolver. It will do any job ask of it and be 100% reliable from the get go. Plus with the revolver your ability to custom tailor the loads to the purpose is there with every trigger pull. You can't shoot light loads and heavy loads out of the auto with out a certain amount of adjustment. With a revolver just put in the ammo and go. Light loads and different bullet shapes might choke an auto but not the revolver, :) :scrutiny:

[Majic]

The two of you take a trip to the gun store and then see what floats his boat. Allow him to shoot a few revolvers if he hasn't already. It's really a personal choice.

[zahc]

If reliability is concern #1 and home defense is the only intended use, I would go with a...

Shotgun.


As for handguns, revolvers could disappear tomorrrow and I wouldn't care I don't like them.

[Majic]

As for handguns, revolvers could disappear tomorrrow and I wouldn't care I don't like them.

Now Zahc, others may say the same about pistols, but where will that get us? If we don't all stand together, one day none of us may be shooting anything. Just hope that the day don't come that you will have to turn to the ex-revolver shooters to support you and have them say that to you.

[Black Snowman]

Home defense I prefer a long arm, and definately for SHTF. For that role I have a Bushmaster M17S bullpup. A shotgun serves the purpose well too and it doesn't get much more reliable than a pump shotgun. I don't know who the origional source was but I agree with "A handgun is just to get you back to your rifle, which you shouldn't have left in the first place."

[SavannahSteve]

For home defense, any pump action or semi-automatic shotgun, including anything down to a .410 beats any handgun. All of my carry guns are semi-autos, but if I had to choose one handgun for home defense, it would be a 7 or 8 shot .357 revolver with a 4-in barrel.

[Border]

For HD and defense in general: Revolver. .357, maybe a 686. Everyone THINKS they're cool as all that until the SHTF then few if any can reliably predict how they will handle it and simultated training still does not replicate emotionally a real life scenario. I llike semi-autos too but with maximum adrenaline pumping through your veins would you bet your life you remembered to flick the safety off, etc? Well you are! Revolver. Semi-autos are so popular because the cool guy in the movies always has one and the old, fat, partner has the snubbie.

[Sharpie1]

Have your friend visit this site (http://www.shootingisfun.com) for assistance in choosing a proper personal defense handgun.

There are specific articles for both revolvers, semi-autos as well as proper ammo selection.

Take note, the articles on this site only address handgun selection. This will change soon.

He will get some great info here! I know, because I wrote it!! :D

TD :D :D :D

[Mastrogiacomo]

For an auto, I'd recommend a Beretta...but I bet most of you knew I'd say that...:D If he's super sensitive that it may jam, go with a revolver. Depending on what he wants to spend, he could pick up a nice three inch Smith and Wesson. But you could still get a great gun for less with the Ruger GP100. The Ruger would be my first choice.

www.ruger.com

[WT]

Revolver in .38 special or .357 magnum loaded with .38's. 4 inch bbl.

[zahc]

Now Zahc, others may say the same about pistols, but where will that get us? If we don't all stand together, one day none of us may be shooting anything. Just hope that the day don't come that you will have to turn to the ex-revolver shooters to support you and have them say that to you.

*is horrified*


You got the wrong idea dude, I would never not defend revolvers like that. In that way, I do support revolvers, machine guns, pellet guns, ugly guns, pretty guns, cheap guns and expensive guns, and anything else that goes bang.

I was just saying if say hypothetically revolvers were to vanish, it wouldn't bother me personally since I hate them. It would bother me that revolver fans were screwed though.

I hate when hunters are like, "ban the ugly gun, all I need is my deer gun"

shotgunners don't care about handgun bans etc.

[Penforhire]

I recommend revolvers to my 1st-timer friends too. 357 Magnum is the way to go. As said above, 38 Sp ammo to practice with all the way up to hot 357 Mag boomers. Stoke to taste. My only hesitation in that recommendation is the price of 38 Sp is still more $$ than 9 mm when it comes to factory practice ammo.

I agree the 870 is a more functional HD choice but if they can only buy one item and they are interested in a handgun then why poo-poo the choice?

[Majic]

I offer my apologies Zahc. I see we are on the same page. I'm sorry I misread your point and placed you in the wrong camp.

BTW I guess you can see I like spinning cylinders over shell shuckers. :D

[MJRW]

Man, I don't know why semi-autos are even entering into this equation. If he's not going to shoot it much, which is what I gather, I think semi-autos are the absolute worst way to go. I won't carry a semi-auto until after 200 break in rounds and then an additional 500. Then you have to deal with ammo compatibility. I don't think that anyone not willing to make at least that much committment to functionality should even consider a semi-auto. If I'm doing this for a sig, glock, hk, and a few others, I'm nearly positive it will pass. But I still do it just in case.

With a revolver, if I can get the cylinder to turn about 100 times and 100 rounds to fire, I'm certain it will work. I may be wrong about that. Please, correct me if I am.

[chaim]

I agree with the majority here.

For HD a long gun is better as the main gun. A shotgun is reliable, a good stopper, with the right loads it doesn't overpenatrate, and being a long gun (long sight radius) its accuracy is more forgiving under stress. It is also pretty cheap (well under $300 for a pump gun, and often closer to $200). A .223 carbine or pistol caliber carbine (esp. the revolver caliber lever guns) would be good too. More power than a handgun (the revolver calibers really benefit from the longer barrel), the .223 has less penatration than most handgun rounds, longer more forgiving sight radius, etc.

For a HD handgun, the revolver is usually my choice (for myself as well as what I suggest to others). They are simple, if you are awakened at 3am by some noise it is quicker to action to have something you can just pick up and look at and know it is ready to go- no worries about whether you chambered the round, the safety or anything else. They are also usually far more reliable and take to being left sitting for long periods better (the auto has mag springs that will eventually wear out if left sitting, with the revolver, while it isn't a good idea for other reasons, you can leave it sitting for years and you can still be confident it will "go boom" when you need it).

For a first and/or only handgun I also suggest revolvers (and yes, I lived by my advice here too, my first was a .38spl Taurus 82). They are simple to use (fewer levers, safeties, and other things to worry about) so there is less to go wrong. The DA and SA modes are quite obvious and deliberate so it is easier to really get the workings of both. Then, in .357mag chambering, there isn't really anything as versatile. Cheap .38 plinking/practice rounds are available, decent .38spl defensive ammo is out there, good .38+Ps and powerful .357mag defensive rounds through even more powerful .357mag hunting ammo is available. A .357mag really can be adapted to just about any need. Also, should he someday choose to reload it is easier not to have to chase after the brass.

Also, as said before, for HD barrel length isn't as important since concealment isn't an issue. Go with no less than 3" for good performance out of the ammo (short barrels cause it to lose some velocity and power). A 3" is also quite handy and should he ever decide to carry is quite concealable. Still, if he'll never carry the 4" is also a good way to go and you get a little more power (and if he ever changes his mind it is still concealable). I wouldn't go above 4" for a beginner just because it starts to get a bit heavy. I think the 3" or 4" for an only gun is far more versatile than the alternatives. That said, up to a 6" should work fine for a beginner or only gun as well.

[CZ52GUY]

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/BestBuys.htm

Good discussion of Bersa and other "value" handguns.


http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/makarov.htm

My favorite <$200 handgun.


If it's just HD and SHTF, I'm thinkin' Mossy 500

http://www.gunbroker.com/auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=14419939

Something like this...

Good luck!

CZ52'

[Oracle]

I llike semi-autos too but with maximum adrenaline pumping through your veins would you bet your life you remembered to flick the safety off, etc?

You see, this is why most of my semiauto pistols are Glocks :)

In all seriousness, I prefer semiauto pistols, preferably in 9mm. I shoot them better than revolvers, I practice and train more than enough to know how I will perform in a stressful situation. However, that is my personal preference, and does not apply to others. My first handgun was a .357 Magnum revolver, and I think it's an excellent first handgun for everyone, especially the occasional user, as (IMHO) semiauto pistols do require a bit more practice and effort to become proficient with, especially in an emergency situation. I'd suggest a stainless Ruger GP-100 .357 Magnum with a 4-inch barrel. It's a good, simple to operate, and reliable gun, and should work well for your friend.

I agree that shotguns are better for "hd/shtf" uses, but if someone wants a handgun, I'm not going to argue with them.

[355sigfan]

...revolver. Not likely one will ever fail to eject or stovepipe
END

No but they do missfire, go out of time, get cases stuck under the extractor star and have bullets jump crimp.

SNIP
I llike semi-autos too but with maximum adrenaline pumping through your veins would you bet your life you remembered to flick the safety off, etc?
END

Yes I would because I train with what I carry as you should. The safety being flipped on and off should be a conditions response one that is not thought about. The only cognitive decision should be pressing the trigger.

As for mag springs it depends on the gun. I know fo mags loaded for the 1911 in ww2 that still work today. Revolvers can and do work as they did in the old days. But today they are obsolete. The auto is the best choice for a primary ccw, or home defense gun. The revolver does fine as a deep concealment gun such as an airweight smith. But as a full size service weapon it makes little sense when compared to an auto. We no longer ride horses as a primary mode of transportation. Its time to move on.
Pat

[zahc]

My thoughts exactly.

[Deepdiver]

If reliability is concern #1 and home defense is the only intended use, I would go with a...

...as many others have said, a big 'ol 357 Magnum!

[355sigfan]

...as many others have said, a big 'ol 357 Magnum!
END

Its not a bad round but how can you call the smallest of the mainstream magnums big? Now if your talking a 44 mag then you can call that big. But the 357 mag is a wee magnum.
Pat

[Majic]

Revolvers can and do work as they did in the old days. But today they are obsolete.

If so then why are there so many still being built by various companies today? Could it be that they are only obsolete to die hard semi-auto shooters?

[355sigfan]

If so then why are there so many still being built by various companies today? Could it be that they are only obsolete to die hard semi-auto shooters?
END

Well when you compare the number of autos made for police carry/ ccw carry compared to the number of revolvers made for that same market you would see that autos far outnumber revolvers. Flintlock pistols are still being produced as well as cap and ball revolvers but would you consider these as anything but obsolete.
Pat

[jar]

Pat, you still singing that silly song? I thought you might have learned a new note or two by now. :D :D

The semi-automatic has some advantages in the law enforcement and military area because the logistics of the magazine work better for supplying a large force with ammunition. The gun itself exists only as a way to use the ammo carrier system. In a civilian situation the semi has absolutely no real advantage over a revolver and in many, many ways the revolver is far superior to the semi-automatic. When it comes to accuracy, reliability, power, dependability or any other measure, the revolver wins hands down.

Look at the issue of Manuals of Arm. Basically, the MOA of every revolver made is the same with the biggest exception being the location of the cylinder release and whether you pull it back, push it forward or pull it down. And even there, the designs are such that it is usually intuitive even to someone who has never held a handgun. That is certainly not the case in the world of semi-automatics.

Also, consider innovation. While handguns in general reached a pretty much level state sometime around the beginning of WWII, with no major innovations since then, the one exception is the Dan Wesson Revolver (Karl Lewis as the inventor) barrel system. Other than that single exceptions, there have some improvements in materials, some changes in production techniques, some rearrangement of prior works, but no innovation. Only in wheelguns has there been any real innovation since 1938.

So based on the above, I'd say that far from being obsolete, the revolver is the most dynamic and highest developed segment of the handgun world.

[Majic]

The numbers game bear out the fact that they are not obsolete. Enough are made to be included in statistics.
The percussion nor the flintlock is obsolete as they are still in production today. Have you seen a wheellock or matchlock being made today? They are obsolete.
These designs may not meet your approval, but they are far from bein obsolete as they are still produced in numbers today.

Using your thought process of determining usage by the numbers, when you look to the hunters far more revolvers are made to serve this function than any semi-auto. Does that make the semi-auto obsolete for that purpose?

[355sigfan]

Jar buddy. I am going to have to disagree with several of the advantages you listed in the revolver section.

First accuracy. Autos hold the lead here if you look across the board. Have you seen any revolvers at a bullseye match lately? I will concede in the service pistol area that service revolvers hold a small edge if the group is taken as a whole. But that edge no longer exists if you compare the most accurate autos with the most accurate revolvers. Say a Colt Python vs. a Sig 210. It’s a draw. Next you said reliability. Well again if you compare the best autos to the best revolvers its a draw again. I have had revolvers malfunction and autos as well. I will give revolvers credit that it’s easier to clear a type one malfunctions with a revolver. (Fail to fire) With the auto it’s slower by about a second. Tap rack access takes about 1 to 1.5 seconds compared to pulling the trigger. The edge is evened out when you consider the malfunctions revolvers often get take a lot more to clear. Ever get a case stuck under the extractor star. It’s a pain to fix. It cost one New York cop his life when he could not clear his revolver of this malfunction during a reload.

Next you said power. Again I would have to say it’s a draw. In the lightweight pocket class the scandium revolvers have the edge. In the service sized pistol class the Glock 10mm is king. Its not until you get to the Scandium 44 mag that you get more power per pound with the revolver again and that’s a much larger weapon size wise. If you compare typical service calibers they are all about even, 357 mag, 357 sig. 40sw, 45 acp ext.

Dependability see comments on reliability its the same thing.

One area the auto clearly wins is durability. Drop your six-gun on its side from 6 feet and see if it’s still in time. Shoot 10000 rounds of full house 357 mags though that Model 19 and see how it’s doing compared to a Glock 31 with the same number of rounds.

Combat accuracy. Fast hits on target. The auto wins in particular sa autos like the 1911. It’s simply harder to shoot da fast and well. It can be done but it takes more work.

Continuity of fire.

Autos wins. Its holds more ammo, is faster to reload and can be reload with a round in the spout. The revolver is dead during the reload period. Tactical load and speed loads are far easier with the revolver.

I believe citizen’s needs the same thing out of a pistol that cops and military officers do. They need a weapon to protect themselves. Handguns are not offensive weapons. We used them when we can't carry larger more powerful long arms. The military does not fight wars with pistols. Cops do not use pistols in gunfights if they can help it. We do only when caught off guard.

SNIP
So based on the above, I'd say that far from being obsolete, the revolver is the most dynamic and highest developed segment of the handgun world.
END

How can you say that? If anything the auto has been more developed. Although there have been efforts in revolvers as well. Polymer for pistols and scandium for revolvers. At the most I would say it’s a draw.

SNIP
Look at the issue of Manuals of Arm. Basically, the MOA of every revolver made is the same with the biggest exception being the location of the cylinder release and whether you pull it back, push it forward or pull it down.
END

This is a non-issue as you should know how to run the firearm you carry to protect your life. You don't need to know how to run every auto and revolver only the one you carry. And some autos are very simple to use and operate like the GLock.

If the revolver wins hands down why is it always a loser in every form of handgun competition where revolvers and auto's compete together? The only exception is Silhouette Shooting. It’s the primary choice of LEO's and Citizen gun carriers.

Majic are you saying that a flintlock and cap and ball revolver is a viable weapon for ccw or home defense use. If so I am having a good laugh. The mere fact that something is produced does not mean it’s not obsolete. Swords are produced today and they are obsolete battle weapons. Single action cowboy guns are produced but most consider them obsolete as well.

As for hunting I never said revolvers were obsolete in that function. We are talking primary leo gun, ccw gun larger than pocket carry and home defense pistols. At least that’s what I am talking about. If I was vague I apologize. For big game hunting revolvers are better suited. I strap on a 5 shot Ruger Redhawk loaded with a 350 grain lead slug at 1350 fps when I go hunting or fishing. It makes more sense than my 1911 does if I am confronted with an angry bear. I am not a revolver hater. I own several in fact here is a list: Smith and Wesson 442 and 610. Colt Python and Cowboy, Ruger Single Six and Redhawk. I love these guns. But when my life is on the line I will pack one of my auto's. It simply makes more sense.
Pat

[1goodshot]

4" 357 mag, Smith&wesson or Ruger

[Brian Dale]

Automatics for Offense, Revolvers for Defense

Police officers are sworn and paid to Go Out And Catch Bad Guys. Home defense is a different situation, with a different objective. Although the primary purpose of a duty weapon is to save the officer’s own life, officers must go into situations where a regular person would never be. Multiple assailants / adversaries, unfamiliar locations, the legal and moral requirement to pursue and capture, and so forth – are not the same for ordinary people defending themselves as they are for an officer in the performance of duty. While a home invasion or street attack might involve multiple attackers, the motivations and actions of the criminals involved are likely to be different than the motivations of somebody who has caused the drawing of an officer’s weapon. Also,

2) Duty weapons are chosen without regard to how well they can be used when the owner is roused from a deep sleep (I’m not trolling for wisecracks here). That should be one of the criteria used in picking a home defense weapon.

3) There are times when it would be sensible for the police to carry rifles. Citizens and city governments are usually not comfortable seeing police officers walking around with rifles, though, so autoloading pistols are carried as a best-available choice.

4) And the big one: autoloaders are Fashionable!

Revolvers for home defense, but my primary HD weapon is a shotgun.

[355sigfan]

Although the primary purpose of a duty weapon is to save the officer’s own life, officers must go into situations where a regular person would never be. Multiple assailants / adversaries, unfamiliar locations
END

When we know there is going to likely be a gun fight we take longguns. We needs pistols for the same reason a citizen with a ccw does. To be there when were caught off guard and don't have a long gun available.

SNIP


Duty weapons are chosen without regard to how well they can be used when the owner is roused from a deep sleep (I’m not trolling for wisecracks here). That should be one of the criteria used in picking a home defense weapon.
END

This has little to do with weapon design. Your training should keep your finger off the trigger of any gun until its time no matter how you woke up. And if you prefer long trigger da type triggers their are plenty of autos out there that can give you that. There are autos with better da pulls than revolvers now. Such as the HK LEM, PARA LDA and SIG K trigger.

SNIP
And the big one: autoloaders are Fashionable!
END

Most of the serious firearms instructors at the best schools who have been there and done it and seen the elephant like Clint Smith seem to prefer autos. Its not a matter of fashion but rather function. A glock is a very ugly but functional weapon. A 4 inch royal blue python is much better looking but its not as functional. Fashion loses to function with serious shooters.
Pat

[4thHorseman]

All good points made.

[Penforhire]

I don't buy the use of the term "obsolete" when comparing wheelguns to autos. Similar to saying the 1911 design is obsolete when it is clearly not (or saying 12 ga is out of style). I know you've posted some specific points which I personally do not have the data to statistically dispute.

However, anecdotally me and everyone I know who shoots has had malfunctions with autos and NONE of the ugly revo malfunctions that are possible. Too many of these auto malfunctions were NOT cleared by a fast sweep-tap-rack drill (and FYI even that does NOT compare to just pulling the trigger again while the sights never left the target). I'm not saying they are common. I am saying I trust my 686+ just a little more than any auto I've ever seen.

One of the two designs MIGHT be considered superior for specific applications (e.g. auto's are easier to reload and hold more rounds) but "obsolete" is too extreme of a word. A hot 357 magnum round will cure what ails you. That's just about all that matters, along with getting six-for-six (or seven with my Plus model). Nothing obsolete about that.

[355sigfan]

Penforhire

As a firearms instructor I have seen autos fail and revolvers as well. The most typical revolver failure is a misfire and its easy to fix. Just pull the trigger again. The most common auto malfunctions I have seen are type one malfunctions that are clear with a simple tap rack access. Double feed or feed way malfunctions are very rare in my experience. Now I am used to dealing with quality guns. I have personally had a load jump crimp in a pistol match tying up my python. I have also seen people get cases stuck under the extrator star. This is a reloading error. But then again so is limp wristing an auto. You can trust your 686. I trust my Kimber 1911. You can say you have heard and seen 1911 and other autos fail. I know the State troopers had tons of problems with their 686's prior to going to Smith 40 autos then to GLocks. All guns fail some more than others. Its less of a design issue of revolvers vs auto and more of a quality control issue from manufacture to manufacture.
Pat

[megatronrules]

My home defense gun is my beretta 92fs which also serves as my daily ccw gun as well,I feel with an auto loader it don't get any more reliable than the beretta 92fs. It will eat anything marked 9mm or mine does anyways come to think of it I've nver seen a bereta 92 jam. Now Iam sure it happens ofocurse but if you get a new or used beretta 92fs and fire it extensively as you should with any gun you plan to use for defenseive purposes you will have one great handgun.

I'am sure there are pleny here who will agree with my thoughts on this great gun . At any rate I also agree with other here who say get a shotgun I plan to pick up a remington 870 home defense model with the ext. mag tube soon. Then my beretta will serve as its back up.

[pwrtool45]

355sigfan

To address some of your concerns:

Accuracy: How about a Ron Power custom S&W versus a SIG P210. The 210 is a custom job. They're built by hand, one at a time. They're no more factory than a Wilson Combat. For every penny you invest in an accurized auto, you can invest as much in an accurized revolver and have it shoot tighter groups. It may be an exercise in imperceptible extremes, but the mechanical advantage goes to the revolver.

Durability: Dropping a modern, mechanically sound revolver from 6 feet on its side is not going to damage it. I've done this multiple times from waist level with my carry L-frame. It's also not going to knock it out of time. For a revolver to go out of time, the contact areas on the extractor or the hand itself has to be worn. This isn't physically possible by dropping it. The center pin is entirely too short and too wide to be bent by dropping it from any distance short of those reached by helicopter. It's simply an issue of leverage.

As far as excessive round count goes, well, the Model 19 S&W isn't coparable to a Glock. An L-frame or GP-100 is and will quite easily accomplish the feats you suggest with a similar level of maintenance as the autos you would pit it against. While I have no doubts that a 9mm Glock will run until the end of time, I do have doubts about a .40/.357Sig doing the same.

"Combat Accuracy": Not everybody can take advantage of the mechanical superiority (as you see it) offered by the auto. I'm glad I still have the option to use a revolver other than a J-frame hideout.

Malfunctions: I've only had a case under the extractor once; with a .38 in a .357 Ruger SP-101. Don't limp wrist your autos and they won't malf. Don't hold your revolvers muzzle down and the cases won't jump the extractor (of course, this doesn't happen in all revolver models; I've never had it happen with .357 ammo). If it does happen, well, it's not exactly like it requires hand tools to fix. Tear the case out of there. Unless you're shooting a cast iron-framed H&R .22, the extractor can take a little bit of a beating. If your weapon is mechanically sound, you can do this, reload and be back in the fight.

Revolvers aren't as fragile as you make them out to be. I'm sure some of the LEOs you've met had problems with their 686s. I'm sure some you've met some who were snapping the cylinders shut like Humphrey Bogart. I'm sure some you've met who weren't doing routine maintenance on their revolvers, either. It happens to everybody. These are machines. You don't run your vehicle without oil (regardless if its a Hummer or a Porche). You shouldn't run your weapons without maintenance, either.

I'm also not sure where you get a Glock 20 is appreciably smaller than a 4" N-frame. Having owned both a Glock 21 and a 629 MG, I opine that on the belt it's moot. Personally, I'd take a .44 magnum over a 10mm any day of the week.

Autos are easier to reload while injured. Autos are generally faster to reload, though a dedicated shooter can reduce the temporal differences well into the 'negligable' category. Autos can carry more ammo kept at the ready than a revolver given similar space constraints. The list of advantages for the autopistol goes on and on. Same for the revolver. They have their places. You argue that the revolver no longer has a place as a primary sidearm. Other people who are equally intelligent and/or experienced disagree. Quote Clint Smith, Massad Ayoob or anyone else you like. I'd like a million bullets in my weapon. I'd like a force field. So on and so forth. There is a point where a resonable person has to draw the line. We're all reasonable people (even us revolver shooters) and we've simply picked a different spot.

You know, judging by your previous posts on GT/SF/THR/etc, for someone that doesn't hate revolvers, you certainly pursue every negative avenue available with a fiery passion.

edited for two spelling errors

[Sunray]

Your buddy had a serious question mark? '?' is not a word. It's a puctuation mark.
"...home defense only, size is not important, and firepower is supreme..." Nope. Size is everything. If a handgun doesn't fit your hand you will not be able to shoot it properly. Firepower is totally irrelevant.
A handgun in the hands of an FNG is more dangerous to the neighbours than any bad guy. In the heat of the moment, bullets tend to be sent in every direction by untrained people. Defending the hearth with a handgun is not the best idea anyway. It takes a seasoned, trained shooter to do so. Your buddy should go get some training and try as many handguns on for size as he can. CZ's are nice but they don' t fit everyone. Too big for me. Shooting every handgun you get has nothing to do with your buddy's shooting. Nor does living alone. Especially if he's in an apartment building. Not many home invasions in apartment buildings.

[355sigfan]

pwrtool45

The 210 was a military sidearm issued in mass to the troops. Its not a custom pistol. Besides lets compare a Les Baer to a Ron Power. And autos are mechanically more accurate. Hence the reason they rule in events like bullseye.

Durability If you shoot an L Frame enough it will go out of time. It also needs to be tightened or checked often. Some 686's I have seen would shoot their screws loose after a day of training. Autos have proved to be more durable over all and have proved to have longer service lifes. The problems the troopers had with the 686 was the cylinders were locking after a few rounds of magnums were fired. Smith had to fix them all.

The Glock 20 is about half as light as the steel framed 629 with a 4 inch tube. And its far easier to fire with full house loads. The 329 weighs about the same as the Glock but its a pain literally to shoot. Both revolvers are a lot thicker due to their cylinders. A Glock 20 is tough to conceal the 629 is about impossible outside of a winter coat.

Reloading speed even when you get fast with a revolver is still going to be longer than a new shooter with an auto. Yes there are champion revolver shooters that can reload faster than me with an auto. But there are champion auto shooters that do so even faster.

I don't hate revolvers as I said. I just like them for tasks other than as a primary self defense weapon. You disagree. Thats fine.
Pat:)

[pwrtool45]

The P210 may have been a military sidearm, but it's also a $2000 USD pistol. The fact that it was a military sidearm doesn't diminish this. They are fitted by hand, one at a time. The catalog even states that one needs to inquire as to current price and availability of the 210. That stipulation doesn't exist for any other product in their line of pistols.

You severely underestimate the L-frame. I've only got 8,000 rounds though my single most used (centerfire) revolver, but that's still by and large mostly handloaded magnums. The gun isn't loose, it doesn't need to be repaired and the screws aren't falling out of it. Many 686/GP-100 shooters report similar results.

The vanilla 629 is heavier than a G21, yes, but you'll notice I said 629 MG (Mountain Gun). They're not hard to find and they are palpably lighter while still being controllable. As far as being hard to hide outside of winter garb, well, try a good IWB, pants that fit properly and a proper grips for the round butt configuration. If you can hide a G21 IWB, I know you can hide a 4" 629. Yeah, the cylinder girth is a present concern, but it isn't any worse than the G21 being almost as thick as a brick the whole length of the weapon.

A skilled revolver shooter slower than a newbie with an auto? This is simply not the case, unless you're using Robbie Leatham as the yardstick for your newbie. Go to any IDPA or IPSC match and time reloads from Master class revolver shooters and sharpshooter/D-class auto shooters.

In all, I concur that it's best we just agree to disagree. However, please reconsider some of your claims. You state them as absolute truth and while it may be your experience, other people have had contrsting experiences.

[355sigfan]

You severely underestimate the L-frame. I've only got 8,000 rounds though my single most used (centerfire) revolver, but that's still by and large mostly handloaded magnums. The gun isn't loose, it doesn't need to be repaired and the screws aren't falling out of it. Many 686/GP-100 shooters report similar results
END

My estimation is based on my experience and the experience of those whose word I trust. I agree on the GP100 its built like a tank and is the Glock of the revolver world.

The Smith Mountain gun weighs in at about 35 ounces. The Glock 20 comes in at 25 ounces or so. Personally I don't care for either. I prefer the 21 to the 20 as a duty weapon and I would prefer the 625 to the 629 if I had to carry a revolver for personal protection. The 629 would make a better woods gun and be more versatile. But the 625 loads faster and would be better for personal defense work.

SNIP
You state them as absolute truth and while it may be your experience, other people have had contrsting experiences.
END

In fairness your doing the same. You stated that revolvers were more accurate and I showed examples where they are not and you seemed to gloss over that point. (bullseye shooting) I would say this some revolvers are more accurate than autos and some autos are more accurate than some revolvers.

On the reloading time lets just say that given an equal level of skill amount shooters the auto will always win this speed contest.
Pat

[pwrtool45]

And my estimation of their performance is also based on both my own experience and the word of those I believe. Mine differs. I guess we'll leave it at that.

I "glossed" over the auto/revolver accuracy example you gave about as much as you "glossed" over the P210 custom/factory example I gave. Largely because there's just no point in continuing either one. They were both anecdotal to an greater hierarchical point, and that point has either been addressed or is not going to get addressed.

Nope, I stil haven't addressed how most Bullseye shooters use autos. :neener: Probably, I would guess, for the same reason most IPSC shooters use 1911s. Probably for the same reasons that IPSC shooters no longer start hands-over-heart or use chest holsters. Being competitive, being fashionable (are the modern-art paint jobs SVI offers superior to regular blued steel? they're getting quite common...) and a host of other reasons would be my best guess. Maybe because finding smiths to work on bullseye 1911s is easier to find than smiths to work on bullseye Model 15s. Those are high-maintenance critters. Truth is, I just don't know. I understand the purpose of your question (popularity of autos over revolvers in one accuracy-based sport). I suppose I could counter with "how many autos do you see in IMHSA?" What about longer-range accuracy? To wit, you could counter that most autos aren't chambered in competitive cartridges. To wit I could counter that IMHSA uses regular ol' magnum revolver rounds, pistols should use regular ol' pistol rounds, and that accuracy is accuracy. To wit you could counter... ad nauseum. I don't think we're going to accomplish anything at this point; why continue?

Yeah, I'm basically doing the same thing you are. Yeah, I recognize that. My point was simply that your experience isn't necessarily gospel. I suppose I should have explicitly stated mine isn't either. I should have offered qualifiers I figured they were assumed. You may have made the same assumption. Either way, my original point was simply that a revolver isn't necessarily going to go out of time if you drop it. It isn't necessarily going to go out of time after you put a few thousand magnum rounds though it. My point is that revolvers aren't necessarily as weak or inadequate as you appear to insist. That's more or less it. Maybe I should have phrased it like that to start with; probably would have saved the bandwidth of us going back and forth.

[355sigfan]

pwrtool45

Stay safe with your wheelguns this Christmas and happy new year. The truth is even if I am wrong and your right or if I am right and your wrong its not likely to matter that much. The most inportant factor is the shooter not the gun.
Pat

[Oracle]

my original point was simply that a revolver isn't necessarily going to go out of time if you drop it. It isn't necessarily going to go out of time after you put a few thousand magnum rounds though it.

And not all autos are going to jam, or require more than a "tap, rang, bang" drill to clear a jam, or many of the various other arguments against revolvers. The point is: use a gun that you have proven to yourself to be reliable. That's what matters more than anything else, that your gun go bang when you need it to most.

[pwrtool45]

355Sig

I reckon we'd agree on that. Enjoy the holidays.



Oracle

I certainly hope not. I've been carrying an automatic as I've added to this thread throughout the day, and I'll be carrying an automatic as I travel tonight. :p

[BluesBear]

Could the reason that most bullseye shooters now use semi-autos be because of the trigger pull?
With the semi-auto you have a short single action trigger pull for each shot and there is no change in grip needed to cock the hammer.
It has nothing to do with the mechanical accuracy of the two types.

But getting back to the original premise of this thread, before it was hijacked by competeing personalities, hone defense.

My first choice is my short barreled Mossberg. While I CCW a Colt .45 semi-auto for, as Jeff Cooper used to say - serious social intercourse, on my nightstand is a revolver. S&W 6". Elegant simplicity, no muss, no fuss.
"Now I lay me down to sleep. I pray the Lord my soul to keep but I rely on S&W to protect the body where it resides."

As for the .357 being the "smallest of the mainstream magnums"...
You say that like it's a bad thing? 158gr LHP .357 magnum trumps ANY 9mm JHP in defense against homo sapiens.
As for .44 magnum power. Show me a reliable semi-auto with the same power as a .44 magnum that can be made to equal weight.

For those of us who have invested literally years in training a semi-auto is great. For those who haven't yet had the chance to "become as one" with their weapons then the double action revolver is what I reccomend.

If I recall from studying history I believe William Hickcock carried a brace of .36 caliber 1858 Colt Navy revolvers quite a while after cartridge revolvers became available. Why? Because he was intimate with them. He trusted them and he knew exactly what they were capable of in his hands.
Of course I am also quite sure that somebody felt that his choices were obsolete. For him they weren't.

Any carpenter or machinist or mechanic will tell you to use the right tool for the job.

I know some people who feel my Mossberg pump shotgun is obsolete. But I know two Viet Nam vets who ditched their M-16s for Winchester 1897 pumps. Obsolence had nothing to do with it.

When I have a flat tire on my automobile I'd much prefer to be able to use a nice hydraulic jack to raise the car and an air-wrench to remove the lugs. But my bumper jack and 4-way will get the job done just fine.


But then maybe it's me that obsolete? After all, every single one of my 18 basses have only 4 strings. :neener:

[355sigfan]

158gr LHP .357 magnum trumps ANY 9mm JHP in defense against homo sapiens.
END

In pure energy and momentium yes. But Will it expand to .70 caliber and go 14 inches like the +p+ 127 grian Ranger. Sometimes less is more.

Also in accuracy at least in 22 rimfires autos are more accurate due to having a fixed barrel and one firing chamber. Thats why they are preferred in bullseye. The trigger pull issue you mention is also worth note. Its why autos are easier to shoot well.

When it comes to the heavy mags that is revolver territory. If I need to go hunting or fishing in bear country I strap on a revolver. But if the predator is man armed with a gun give me a semi auto.

You don't need years to become proficient with a semi auto. The time it takes to learn both the revolver and the auto are simular. Yes the auto takes a bit more time but that time is measured in days perhaps not years.

One thing I do recomend is to keep your actions type as simular as possible. Its better to stick with one type. For example if you like Smith revolvers a Good house gun would be a 629 while a good ccw gun may be a 19. What you don't want to do is carry a revolver most of the time and then try a gun with a safety like a 1911 part of the time.
Pat

[BluesBear]

What you don't want to do is carry a revolver most of the time and then try a gun with a safety like a 1911 part of the time. Well now, for some of us old guys, who have been doing this for 30 or more years, have no problem switching back and forth from one platform to the other.

Since my brain has no problem knowing the difference in grip between a 1911 type pistol and a double action revolver my muscle memory kinda takes over and everything works fine for me. Of course I have practiced and trained excessively over the years and have accused of being somewhat open-minded on more than one occasion.


Anyway it works just fine for me. Your methods may vary and I am sure you'll preach a little more about it.

[355sigfan]

Anyway it works just fine for me. Your methods may vary and I am sure you'll preach a little more about it.
END

No preaching just common sense that is also taught by most mainstream firearms instructors. At least we had a civil exchange of ideas.
Pat

[Majic]

Just an historical observation, but not meant to step on toes or frost one's you know whats.
The semi-auto has been adopted by militaries since the turn of the 20th century. It was adopted by European LEOs in the 1930's. So it has been an accurate and reliable platform for many decades.
Now most of the "mainstream instructors" (a borrowed phrase) did not teach the use of the semi-auto untill the day the "wondernine" became "fashionable" (other borrowed words). Revolver tactics were taught and used throughout the world. Exactly what caused the drastic shift in training hardware to a platform that had been around for 80 years or so? Could it possibly be the sudden exposure the platform gained from the entertainment industry? Why all of a sudden the revolver become "obsolete" overnight to a nearly century old design? Even though the revolver was considered not worthy of sustaining a battle, it has always received recommendations as a back-up piece to the pistol. That gives the impression that if the pistol fails for some reason, the reliable revolver is called upon to save the day.
Instructors never cease to amaze me in teaching just their personal philosophy on a very flexible subject such as firearms.

[Oracle]

Majic,

I think that it's mainly because a younger crop of firearms instructors came along, and they were primarily interested in using/training others to use the most popular handguns of their day, which were high capacity autos. They also saw the advantage of the high capacity autos over revolvers (as nearly every police department has as well). There also seems to be quite a bit of "kit bashing" that goes on, finding out which guns work best with the tactics and strategies that the instructors are teaching. With most modern gun schools, this seems to be automatics, more specifically, 1911's and Glocks. Those are the guns you see at most advanced or intermediate handgun training schools or courses. Is it because they are the most fashionable, or because they work best with the training given? You have to decide that for yourself, but I believe it's the latter.

[Majic]

That is my point Oracle. The training has centered itself around just one platform. The other platform is largely ignored in training, but still recommended for carrying as a back-up. A good instructor should include all platforms, but unfortunately they ignore some. Flexibility should be given in the training to include SA pistols, DA/SA pistols, the various named safe action pistols, and the DA/SA revolver. They all have viable uses in defensive needs, but alot of instructors choose and focus only on one design. That forces a person to find a school that teaches the platform and action he/she personally chose. Exposure should be given to all types and limitations should be lifted. Alot of instructors need more training themselves as they really are behind the learning curve by specializing in just one platform. You fight with what you brought to the party. How many have trained with a wondernine, but just slip a little single stack pistol or revolver in their pocket to just run down to the corner store?

[Penforhire]

With regard to different manuals of arms, mentioned further above, that is one of the big reasons I picked a P99 to sit with my 686 in the Gunvault where I sleep. I like that it has no switched safety, similar to the 686, and a long first DA pull like the 686 (figuring I'll be under LOTS of stress if I have to present it).

Both guns are kept in "pull trigger to go bang" condition, loaded with high quality ammo. I love my Gunvault since I do have visitors, including rug rats, but I don't want to disarm myself for those occasions.

I'll agree this much with you, 355Sigfan, I don't really care which firearm I pull out 1st. They will both get the job done and whatever becomes the 2nd gun makes a darn fine NY reload for the 1st.

[355sigfan]

think that it's mainly because a younger crop of firearms instructors came along, and they were primarily interested in using/training others to use the most popular handguns of their day, which were high capacity autos.
END
Actually the firearms instrutors that shifted everyone one to semi autos were people Like Cooper, Taylor and more recently Clint Smith. They are not preching high capacity but rather the 1911. The reason was it simple could be shot better and faster than the revolvers and other autos of the day and it still can be.
Pat

[Oracle]

he training has centered itself around just one platform. The other platform is largely ignored in training, but still recommended for carrying as a back-up. A good instructor should include all platforms, but unfortunately they ignore some. Flexibility should be given in the training to include SA pistols, DA/SA pistols, the various named safe action pistols, and the DA/SA revolver. They all have viable uses in defensive needs, but alot of instructors choose and focus only on one design. That forces a person to find a school that teaches the platform and action he/she personally chose.

I disagree, I think it is a good thing that the instructors tend to focus on one design or platform, because they (usually) teach the best tactics and strategies to use with that platform. Your knowledge gained from that school/instructor may not have the breadth to include a number of different action types, but it has the depth needed to make you very effective with the platform type taught by that school, and thusly, you get the best, most in-depth instruction, geared toward your chosen platform.

I think that the problem you're noticing is that there are few schools out there that teach combat/defensive revolver shooting, and there are a whole lot that teach combat/defensive pistol shooting. That's just the way it is, the semiauto pistol has proven to be a more popular shooting platform for serious shooters (i.e. the ones that go and get defensive/combat training) than revolvers have. I suspect that this is heavily influenced by the fact that most police departments issue semiauto pistols now, and either departments or individual police officers comprise a large amount of those that go and get handgun training.

As for the "what do you grab when you are heading out to the corner store?", I grab what I've trained with the most, and what I shoot the best, a Glock. Others may do differently, but I prefer to carry the platform that I've trained the most on, even on "trips down to the corner store."

Actually the firearms instrutors that shifted everyone one to semi autos were people Like Cooper, Taylor and more recently Clint Smith. They are not preching high capacity but rather the 1911.

Actually, I've seen Clint Smith recommend the Glock 9mm's more often than I've seen him recommend anything else, in the stuff that I've read. I saw a quote not too long ago that if you were going to recieve training from him, had never used a firearm before, and wanted to know what to get, to get a Glock 9mm, either a 17 or a 19, both "high capacity guns".

[355sigfan]

Actually I was talking about what Clint himself preferred and it seems to be a 1911. Many very knowledgeable people recommend Glocks to new shooters and police because they work great and are simple to train on. I still love my Glocks.
Pat