Pistol vs. revolver

[swopejs]

I wanted to gather some opinions on my buying dilemma:

I've been considering carrying either a Dan Wesson Classic Bobtail in 10mm or a Smith and Wesson Model 686+ with a 3" barrel. The most important factor for my personal carry is reliability, then comes stopping power, then controllability, then capacity.

I would have considered the Model 610 in 10mm, but the N frame is a bit too large to carry.

My plan is to use DoubleTap ammo primarily . . . any suggestions?

 

[CountGlockula]

The 10mm.

 

[Majic]

It is totally your decision which action you prefer. Why listen to someone recommending a revolver when you actually prefer and shoot better with a semi-auto?

 

[swopejs]

Actually, I prefer a revolver, primarily for reliability and the track record of the .357 magnum. Pistols are generally easier to carry, have more capacity, and have less recoil.

But, as my wife always points out (along with some input from Clint Smith), if you can't take of the problem with six rounds, you're probably shooting just to be happy . . .

 

[elChupacabra!]

I know everyone has their own opinion, and their own concerns, and it is important that you feel comfortable with what you choose to carry.

With that being said, I think you are making a mistake placing a higher priority on "stopping power" than controllability. The reality is that all defensive handgun rounds - even the mythical .357 Magnum and 10mm Auto - are ballistically deficient and poor "man stoppers." Google Mark Coates - he shot a man 5 times in the chest with 125gr HP .357 Mag but was killed when the man returned fire with a .22lr derringer. The criminal survived the shooting. I know this is slightly off-base from your question, but I think it's an important point to remember that no handgun is a guaranteed "man stopper."

Extending that logic out, consider that anything worth shooting once is worth shooting twice, or more. You must avoid at all costs the assumption that one shot is going to be sufficient, whether it be with 10mm, .357Mag, ANYTHING. I utterly reject the "it's the first shot that counts" logic as dangerously fallacious.

Keeping this in mind, I believe that, after reliability, controllability / shootability should be the next concern. If you cannot rapidly re-acquire the sights - or control the gun through hammers at closer range - you should shoot a different gun. The ability to make rapid follow-up shots is critically important in a defensive handgun.

Now, with ALL that in mind, I'd go with an Ed Brown in 45 ACP. Still a very potent handgun round, but generally more controllable than 10mm. I think that if you really want a MAJOR caliber, that should be your pick.

However, if you are dedicated to the idea of 10mm Auto, that would probably still be my pick over the revolver due to magazine capacity, concealability (slimmer profile), and very high shootability (with the slick, short, light SA trigger).

Of course this is just my opinion and is worth exactly what you paid for it

 

[sqlbullet]

Get the 10mm.

If the Double Tap ammo is to much recoil for fast follow up shots, go to Hornady. If it is still to much, get Federal, at which point you are actually shooting 40S&W.

I agree with the previous poster that defensive shooting is about power last. Accuracy, then speed, then power. However, I like the 10mm because it offers me the flexibility to exceed 45 acp ballistics once my abilities in accuracy and speed are ready.

--edit
And a 9X25 barrel is an easy add on to your 10mm
--/edit

 

[crebralfix]

Oh, no! Not again! This time it's a compound dilemma: caliber war PLUS revolver versus semi-auto!

This is gonna be good.



The first shot DOES count. It's really important because the first hit will cause the "receiver" to reset his OODA loop. It's not that it will take him out of the fight, but rather that you continue to seize the initiative and continue to shoot until he does quit the fight.

In other words, you'll get to act before he does AND CONTINUE to act.

Back to 10mm versus 357 Magnum versus revolver versus pistol. Now that's an interesting argument:

The N-Frame semi-automatic 357 mm revolver!

By Glock!

 

[elChupacabra!]

sqlbullet makes a good point - you can buy down-loaded 10mm until you get up to speed with the full-power business - I hadn't considered that.

And I in no wise meant to imply that the first shot doesn't count - just railing against the idea that it is the ONLY one that counts. There are plenty of members of this board who say just that all the time, whether they really believe it or not... so just throwing that out there FWIW

And again to put it all in perspective, if you CAN get rapid, accurate hits with 10mm, go for it - just be sure you aren't buying a gun for the supposed benefits of caliber without considering your own capability. I started out with my very first handgun as a 40S&W and probably should have started with 9mm, looking back... a relatively powerful handgun round in a semi-compact and lightweight handgun (HK P2000) coupled with a complete novice (ME!) meant that that extra power really challenged me, giving me one heck of a flinch reflex that I had to work at for YEARS to undo. The best caliber in the world won't make a poor shooter a good one, as I learned the hard way! Just trying to save someone the same grief I had to deal with

 

[swopejs]

If controllability/accuracy was my next concern, I would start with .22 LR and work up. I (believe I) can control a .357 mag better than 10mm, maybe even better than .40 cal.

My intention was not to hope that one shot will suffice; rather, in choosing a round that historically has better one-stop shot percentages, the chances are better to obtain a low count stop.

With regard to the Mark Coates incident, it looks to me that "it was his time to die." One shot with a .22, managing to enter in the only vulnerable spot of a bullet proof vest, vs. five in the chest with a .357? How else can you explain such a discrepancy? This is a statistical anomoly . . .

Also, in talking with many IDPA and IPSC shooters, there is a great tendency for the 1911 to fail; I think that the manufacturer's have gotten these pistols way too tight for combat usage.

 

[elChupacabra!]

Based on your reply, I suspect you may be acquainted with Marshall and Sanow and their alleged "database" of one shot stops... if I'm mistaken, then please disregard the next few paragraphs, but if not...

You may be in danger of taking a good deal of flak on this board if you refer to them, or the so-called "one shot stop," too often... their work is dismissed by most serious shooters as not only inaccurate, but fraudulent... although not all agree. Here are a couple of the more prominent criticisms of their methodology and work:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-discrepancies.htm

http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-statistical-analysis.htm

http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/terminal.html


Ironically, Googling "Marshall and Sanow" comes up with more criticisms of their work than defenses... many people believe they made up their statistics to sell books and make money from certain ammunition manufacturers.

Anyway, I just say this to warn you of hoping for ANYTHING in a gunfight. As you said yourself, sometimes there are statistical anomalies that cannot be explained. In my opinion, the best defense against these "anomalies" is a very controllable handgun rahter than a particular handgun round. I can shoot my 9mm, 40S&W and 45ACP handguns VERY quickly and accurately, so you don't have to start with .22 and work up. I also don't believe that any one of the three is particularly more effective than the others - they each have their strengths and weaknesses, and as long as I am able to employ them properly, I think that's the key. This means practice, and lot's of it - but I do think it's important to practice shooting as much as a whole mag, reload and that mag too, occasionally, since that MAY be what it takes to stop an attack.

Again, just my $0.02

ETA regarding the 1911, I have found mine to be a reliable firearm, when maintained properly. Any gun can fail, be it a revolver, automatic, or single-shot shotgun. The key, there again, is practice. I've heard of some pretty nasty revolver stoppages - squibs lodging a bullet in the forcing cone / cylinder, primer backing out, gun getting out of timing, etc. that can all put a revolver COMPLETELY out of the fight, whereas most auto stoppages are easily and quickly cleared. After all, tight or not, looking at all the go-fast high-speed low-drag types who use the 1911 as their fighting gun (Delta, Force Recon, FBI HRT, etc.), it can't be THAT prone to failure, or none of the guys who really do shoot their guns at people for a living would use it. Just food for thought.

 

[Drgong]

Rent both types of gun, buy what you like best.

 

[Hawk]

I've found certain 1911s to be too high strung but I don't carry a racegun in 9mm "major". "Service" 1911s are plenty reliable.

Similarly, reports of revolver mis-cues are generally a litany of relatively rare anecdotes strung together. I use both platforms and don't really fret about reliability in either case.

Bad news spreads. It's human nature. Try this experiment:
Put the words "Michael", "Bane" and "Lock" into the search engine of your choice and observe the results.

Kinda looks like there's a couple dozen Michael Banes out there and that each one had numerous failures of the lock you're going to get on your revolver option, doesn't it? But the fact is that there's only one Michael Bane writing about IL lock failures and he had a total of one lock issue.

Works the same way when my used AMT or old 3" 1911 mutant gags - I report it here and elsewhere 100 times each. Everything else ran just fine so I haven't felt compelled to make note of it.

Neither platform is reliable to a partison of the opposing platform.

 

[BlindJustice]

Pistol -OR- Handgun are general terms for any handheld firearm.

So, I think you meant to say Semi-Auto or Revolver, which begs
the question what is the O.P.'s handgun experience?

FWIW - I have a 1911 full size .45 ACP, CZ 75B 9MM Luger,
a S&W 625 5" Bbl. .45 ACP, S&W 60 3" Bbl. .357 Mag but limit it
to .38 SPecial +P and.... a S&W 686P 4" Bbl.

I llisted those in the order I would grab them if SHTF. The 686P
with full .357 Mag loads has big recoil so recovery for
followup shots are slower, my shooting partner describes the
muzzle flash as a long bolt of lightening... and it just doesn't fit
ME so, it's on my trade block. Oh, it also has Guy Hogue
finger grooves/checkered grip in Rosewood, a great example of an
L-frame - it's just not for ME.

I'm confident in the .45 ACP for HD/SD and my CZ with 9mmx19
147 gr. sub sonic - both for controllability, sufficient with the loads/bullets
I choose and accuracy/speed I have with them. THe60 is a backup.

& No platform is 100% reliable I've had to take revolvers to a gunsmith
to unjam a cylinder or check the mainspring if a screw backed off, I pay
the pros to fix em as I'm not skilled in that area. I've never left the range
without having the ability to clear a semi-auto, load it and take it home.

Randall

 

[RustyShackelford]

AZ v Fish, 10mm, magnums...

I'd do some research first on AZ v Fish before you start to carry the 10mm for protection/CC use, .

Noted weapons expert and sworn LEO Massad Ayoob wrote a good item about this incident and the use of 10mm pistols by armed citizens.

Magnum revolvers are not a great idea either in some ways for lawful self defense/protection but the .357magnum has been in use for many, many years in the US.

Between the 2 I would pick the S&W .357magnum revolver. It offers more choices in rounds, .38spl or .357mag. It can also be made DA only by a trained gunsmith. . This would be a good carry weapon for concealed use or home protection. The 10mm is very powerful but the .357magnum would be a better choice.
Rusty

 

[swopejs]

With respect to pistol or handgun: I've never heard anyone (who knows what they're talking about) refer to a "revolver pistol." On the other hand, everyone has heard of a semi-automatic pistol. So when I say "pistol vs. revolver," I mean (semi-automatic) pistol vs. revolver.

On this thing with Harold Fish vs. Arizona, has anyone else been prosecuted for carrying "too much gun?" I understand the implications of the word "magnum" in a trial . . .

 

[ronto]

Assumming you can comfortably conceal either one...

Which one can you consistantly hit COM at 7 yards?...The answer should be either one.
The next question, which one is the least likely to malfunction when the chips are down?...The answer is obvious.

 

[swopejs]

After reading several comments on various boards, I'm not so sure that the answer to which is least likely to malfunction is obvious . . .

Also, Arizona has now reversed its stance on the burden of proof for self defense: it is no longer on the defendant, but rather the state.

 

[BlindJustice]

I've been corrected on the Pistol/Handgun def. so I googled
the def. and pistol is a generic term for any handheld firearm

ALso the O.P. specified two different CARTRIDGES which have a
specific CALIBER - if he had said a 10MM cal. Semi-Auto and not
specified the Dan Wesson platform, responders could go with .40 S&W
10MM Auto or even the rarer 10MM Magnum Auto, or .400 CorBon.
whereas .357 Magnum was named for it's bore diameter that being a
correction to it's parent cartridge the mis-named .38 Special which was
so named because it's a lengthened .38 Long Colt and Special sounds
better than Long COlt Improved eh?

Anyhoo, O.P. What is your handgun experience in terms of platforms
and years?

Randall

 

[swopejs]

I started out shooting my dad's 1911 that he got from military service about 35 years ago. In the Marine Corps, I took range record with the M-16 and was immediately offered the opportunity to become a scout-sniper; I stayed with my original MOS which was computer programming and operations.

About 20 years ago, I briefly got into shooting with some work buddies; shot a Gold Cup and a Model 686 for a couple of years. Got out of shooting until about five years ago, when I started "formally" buying and trading guns. During that time, I've had my gunsmith work on all my revolvers (no .357's yet, just .38 and .45), and have really enjoyed the action jobs that have been done.

All that said, the Sig P220 SAO fits my hand the absolute best, followed by the Springfield Champion Loaded. But in terms of sheer accuracy, I am better with a revolver.

Now, I'm getting into the 10mm arena, and I have an EAA Witness Elite Match, but it's just too large to carry (and I don't know what the reliability of said platform would be).

 

[contenderman]

Find a range that has rentals and has both available, go shoot them and go with the one that feels the best to you. Or amongst folks you shoot with you can hopefully find and shoot each and again go with what feels right to you.

Someone that has never seen you, don't know you, etc., etc., can not tell you via internet what is going to work for you.

 

[Hawk]

I've been corrected on the Pistol/Handgun def. so I googled
the def. and pistol is a generic term for any handheld firearm

This thread could soon be in the running for the "Gun Forum Trifecta" including cartridge wars, platform debates and rounding off with a nice terminology donneybrook.

I believe "pistol" is currently taken as "semi-auto" if the following forms a consensus of sorts:
Sundry definitions

However, I believe that "A hand-held firearm in which the ammunition is chambered in the breech of the barrel." is a relatively modern construct. Early Colt revolvers were called pistols and the term "pistol whipped" was in use before the widespread availability of semiautos.

Cooper would be happy with the OP's description so I'm pleased to go along as well.

Where were we?

 

[tblt]

I would asume you mean revolver or auto,they are both pistols in my opinion.
Revolver I would get a SP101 in 357 w/no hammer
Auto there are so many good ones on the market CZ,SIG,Glock,XD,Kahr if you want a thin auto(reliability ??)
I like my new pocket pistol(LCP)

 

[weisse52]

Pistol vs. revolver

Moving off base....

I was raised to believe that a pistol was a semi / full auto fed by a clip/magazine. A revolver had a cylinder which "revolved" as it was fired.
Wikipedia has a defintion that supports that, but does include single shot "pistols" and multiple barrel "pistols".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistol

So, we may want to say that a revolver is a pistol, in definition it is not. Just because we all do it, does not make it so. We use the term "Kleenex" as a generic classification of tissue, but it is a brand name.

But hey, who cares.

And one more thing. If you prefer the revolver, then that is what you should carry.

 

[Loosedhorse]

"Lose that nickle-plated sissy pistol...

and get yourself a Glock."--Sam Gerard, US Marshals

I own a few (!) .357 revolvers, and I love to get them out of the safe for training purposes (with .38 loads) for newbies. I also own a Glock 20, and it is my everyday carry piece. So, I think you can see where I'd steer you for a carry gun (I think that's what you're after).

I have shot the 10 in 1911 and S&W platforms as well as Glock. The Glock transmits the least felt recoil to me, which I have assumed is due to flex of the plastic (sorry, POLYMER!) frame. It's a wider gun at the grip than the 1911, so it's not for all hands.

I like the Double-Tap 135s a lot (but I might like the CorBons a bit better). See which run in your pistol, and give you fast, accurate shots.

A few other comments:

Regarding Harold Fish (please search topic here, there's LOTS of comments): We have here a guy who shot (justifiably, in my view) an unarmed man but REFUSED to take the stand in his own defese to explain what happened. He made an eloquent, moving statement about why he fired--to the judge at sentencing, after it was too late. Massad Ayoob's articles in Combat Hanguns magazine (June and September 08) stress that anyone who uses a non-local-police-issue caliber had best be ready to articulate why he did so (if necessary after a shooting), but Mas stated that the 10 mm is a clearly defensible choice and that downscaling your firepower just to avoid litigation can get you in trouble, too.

Besides, what's the usual advice for a defensive gun--use the most powerful gun you can shoot well (and conceal, when that applies).

Pistol is a generic term for handgun, but since the 1968 Gun Control Act it has had a secondary, legalese-technical meaning of semi-automatic handgun (the Act discusses "revolvers" versus "pistols."

A 1911 has a tendency to disappoint, like any other semi-auto, when you ask to do something it can't: ask a pistol tuned for ball ammo to digest hollow-points, ask a tight-tolerances accuracy gun to run without stoppage like a looser tolerance "dependability" gun, etc.

All said and done: if I was an attacker, I wouldn't want to get hit with either a .357 or a 10, so you can't go wrong--as long as you put the shot where it needs to go.

Good luck!

 

[tpaw]

Shot placement is of the essence along with a fast recovery so you can get off more rounds as quickly and accurately as necessary. Shoot what you feel comfortable with and practice, practice and practice.