Quantcast
Why Arent 9mm Revolvers More Popular? - Page 8 - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Tools and Technologies > Handguns: Revolvers

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 23, 2013, 07:24 AM   #176
45_auto
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 3, 2011
Location: Southern Louisiana
Posts: 1,013
Quote:
if a situation calls for a .38 SPL revolver, how can the 9mm revolver be a bad choice?
Maybe because the 9mm requires moonclips and has a narrower range of bullet/weight/velocity options as compared to a .38/.357?

Quote:
Loading up magazines isn't much fun for anyone either.
Can't remember the last time I loaded a revolver magazine for a .38/.357. Still remember loading moonclips for 9mm though.

Quote:
You can have 9mm pretty much any way you want it short of a wadcutter.
Why would anyone want to give up the option of wadcutters? You don't like the option of cheap lead plinking ammo? Maybe that lets you justify jacketed 9mm prices?

Quote:
On what trail head, or should I say planet?
Until the Sandy Hook shortage started, there were always more options in .38/.357 around here than in 9mm. Both been pretty equal since then, nothing at all of either one.

Quote:
before this madness began you could buy factory 9mm ammo for much, much cheaper than .38SPL.
On what trailhead, or should I say planet? Never saw factory lead 9mm anywhere, but cheap factory lead .38 (wadcutters) was available all over the place.
45_auto is offline  
Old April 23, 2013, 08:16 AM   #177
35 Whelen
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 10, 2008
Location: North Texas
Posts: 1,780
One thing I've never seen mentioned is the flexibility that the .38 Special has over the 9mm. Folks tend to regurgitate paper ballistics and price over and over and over.

By flexibility I mean the .38 can be loaded, and I suppose bought with bullet weights from 90 to 200 grs., but more importantly, the .38 can be and is more often than not loaded with SWC's, a luxury the 9mm simply doesn't enjoy. Someone in an earlier post showed a picture of a 158 gr. RN 9mm load. That's nice, but I don't think there's any argument to the fact that for hunting and defense a SWC has it all over a RN bullet.

35W
__________________
Your deep affection for, and loyalty to your favorite cartridge does not increase its effectiveness.
35 Whelen is offline  
Old April 23, 2013, 08:34 PM   #178
Pointshoot
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 8, 2005
Location: WA state
Posts: 180
I prefer wheel-guns for all sorts of reasons that most here already understand.

That said, if I'm going to shoot 9mm I go with the Glock 17. That and a spare mag pretty much ends my interest in a 9mm revolver.
Pointshoot is offline  
Old April 24, 2013, 07:21 AM   #179
boricua9mm
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Posts: 606
Quote:
Maybe because the 9mm requires moonclips and has a narrower range of bullet/weight/velocity options as compared to a .38/.357?
You might want to try telling that to S&W and the many, many Model 547 owners. Oh wait, they don't use moonclips! Reading is fundamental. Therein you'd likely find that I never once compared the 9mm to the .357, but rather the 9mm to the .38, a comparison which drastically favors the 9mm.

Quote:
Can't remember the last time I loaded a revolver magazine for a .38/.357. Still remember loading moonclips for 9mm though.
Where exactly did I say that revolvers use magazines? The point is that if you want to load quickly, you'll be loading a speedloading device or a magazine no matter which choice you make. I don't remember ever loading a moonclip; the 547 doesn't use em. If someone is going to complain about loading moonclips, they're the type to complain about loading magazines for a semi-auto 9mm. It must be dealt with or discarded as an argument.

Quote:
Why would anyone want to give up the option of wadcutters? You don't like the option of cheap lead plinking ammo? Maybe that lets you justify jacketed 9mm prices?
When comparing .38 to 9mm, the only benefit of wadcutters is "Hey! Look at those clean holes!" The notion of "cheap wadcutters" in .38 or .357 is a myth, unless you are casting your own lead bullets for reloading. Factory 9mm FMJ has been cheaper than factory .38s for over two decades now.

Quote:
Until the Sandy Hook shortage started, there were always more options in .38/.357 around here than in 9mm. Both been pretty equal since then, nothing at all of either one.
Again, my arguments are based on the concept that if a 9mm revolver is pointless, than a .38SPL revolver has even less utility. The 9mm can't be fairly compared to the .357MAG b/c the .357 will almost always outperform it. Comparing 9mm to .38s, the 9mm has the edge across the spectrum when it comes to cost and performance.

Quote:
On what trailhead, or should I say planet? Never saw factory lead 9mm anywhere, but cheap factory lead .38 (wadcutters) was available all over the place.
I've never found factory lead 9mm anywhere either; there's no need for it when ammo is 12-20 cents/round. On the other hand I haven't seen any factory .38SPL in that price range in the past 15-20 years. We're talking FACTORY loads, right, not Bubba's "remanufactured" loads...

Last edited by boricua9mm; April 24, 2013 at 07:58 AM.
boricua9mm is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.