Answer this for me

[herrwalther]

All of my pistols are currently semi-auto (yes, a word with disdain in this sub thread). But I did own a revolver at one point, a Taurus M327, and saw the appeal of revolvers. I do plan on having 1 or 2 revolvers in my collection when I am "done" and feel satisfied.

Question is this, how come there is no love for 7 shot .357Mag revolvers? 7 rounds is about the average for a pocket sized semi auto and offsets the lower capacity "problem" with revolvers. To my knowledge, there are only two models of 7 shot .357s: Taurus 617 which is all but discontinued and S&W 686 in some models. How come there isn't as much demand for a 7shot?

 

[redbullitt]

7 rounds are nice. No question there. 8 rounds are better I suppose.

My sp101 is a great size for CCW and it only carries 5 rounds in 357… it may be quite tough to get 6 or 7 in there.

I would think it is tough to cram all those into a small revolver. the 686 plus is a nice revolver that holds 7. Quite popular from what I have seen.

The 327 is a bigger frame, but it can hold 8 rounds of 357. Personally I do not like this one much… At this size I would opt for a 41 or 44 mag. YMMV of course.

Maybe chamber it in 327 mag lol? THAT would be interesting for capacity, and I would probably buy it...

 

[StrawHat]

...Question is this, how come there is no love for 7 shot .357Mag revolvers? ... How come there isn't as much demand for a 7shot?...

Here is my take on the issue. I grew up with revolvers and learned how to shoot them well enough. I was recently given the opportunity to shoot one of the new 7 shooters on a timed course. At the end of the course, there was a bit of laughing. Not at my shooting but the fact that after each 6th shot, I had instinctively dumpred and reloaded.

And it seems to me that those who are younger than my belt size are enamored with self loaders so the 7 shooter is an answer looking for a question. Neither fish nor fowl.

To me, it really doesn't fit into either shooting group.

 

[Sam1911]

One word:





Ok, a few more words: 6 has historically been a nice balance between size and capacity for in a handy "service sidearm" sized package. (Think "K" frame or Colt DS.) The 7s and the 8s tend to need to fit into larger guns and are pretty recent additions. They don't have the weight/inertia of tradition on their side and may or may not meet folks' expectations for what a revolver should be.

Of course, as mesinge2 once showed, there's something awful cool about that much "firepower" in the wheel:

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Most revolver competitions I know of restrict capacity to 6 rounds, so there's that.

And it seems to me that those who are younger than my belt size are enamored with self loaders so the 7 shooter is an answer looking for a question.

I happen to be 33, enjoy revolvers and semiautos. Revolvers will forever be my passion though of the two. I do think Strawhat is right though. In my experience, most people under 45 (belt size?) years old seem to prefer semiautos. I blame Hollywood. It's neither good nor bad though, it's just personal preference.

As far as 7 shot .357's go, I love my 686+. It is my home defense and trail gun, loaded all the time, and I know it is utterly reliable. If you can open carry, or for home defense, a 7 or 8 shooter makes a lot of sense. If CC, a 5 shooter makes more sense (to me). Tradition will keep the 6 shooters around, but if I'm defending my life, I want the extra round.

 

[Drail]

American consumers of firearms have always had this thing about buying whatever the police/military are currently using in the belief that it must be the best. I have seen this time and time again throughout my life. The funny thing about this is most of the people who believe this have never served in either capacity. I used to believe it myself until I served in the military and learned that most of the stuff we were issued was selected by folks that knew almost nothing about it and always went for the lowest bid. In other words - most of it was junk. M16 rifles and Beretta sidearms and cheap magazines. Don't be deluded by the whole police/military thing. They don't have any choice. You do.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

I'm with StrawHat on this. I've been shooting revolvers for over 40 years. To me, a revolver is a six shooter and that's pretty much the end of the story. Except for a couple of J frame 5 shooters and antiques.

I do have one of those new fangled S&W 617 ten shooters. I don't shoot it much, with the price of 22s these days it burns up too much ammo too fast.

The simple fact is, with most handguns, revolver or semi-auto, when shooting at the range I usually only put 5 rounds into them, even my double stack hi-cap semi-autos. Most ammo boxes arrange the ammo in rows of five. That's why I usually only shoot five shot strings. To keep things straight in the box, and to keep from blasting away a couple of boxes of ammo in ten minutes.

 

[Master Blaster]

I like my 7 shot 686+ I also have a 686 6 shot I like the 7 shot better.....

Why? It holds one more round and being a 4" its better balanced.

 

[BobWright]

My ammunition boxes/cases hold fifty round in ten rows. Loading five keeps the box neat.

Yeah, I leave an empty chamber under the hammer even in my Smiths.

Bob Wright

 

[BobWright]

Drail said:

American consumers of firearms have always had this thing about buying whatever the police/military are currently using in the belief that it must be the best. I have seen this time and time again

The police/military are using Single Actions?

Bob Wright

 

[herrwalther]

I can't see how size is an issue. I like the Taurus 617 much more than the 686 as it is a full inch shorter. I found a 617 at a local store and thought I won the lottery. I handled it and it felt no bigger than the Taurus M327 6 shot I had at the time. Unfortunately the 617 went to someone else.

 

[CraigC]

I'm as "traditional" as they come but as with all else, perception is everything. Tradition is a funny thing. Historically speaking, there have been plenty of revolvers that held more or less than six rounds. The oldest known revolver, dating 1597, was an eight shot.



Still predating Colt, the Elisha Collier-designed revolvers of the early 1800's held seven shots.



All of the original Paterson handgun models were five-shot. The very first Paterson was an eight-shot rifle. Only the Paterson shotgun was a six-shot. It wasn't until the Walker and Dragoons that Colt made six shot revolving pistols. Colt's best selling percussion model was still a five-shot .31 model 1849 and they sold the hell out of the 1862 Pocket Navy and Police models, all five-shots.

In the cartridge era, lots of European guns held more than six rounds, some a lot more. Like the 20-shot Lefaucheux.



So with all that in mind, it's difficult for me to say that six shots is more "traditional" than seven. It's really only been in the last 100yrs of the revolver's 400yr history that manufacturers have settled on six shots. Although small five-shot revolvers have proliferated and there are plenty of rimfires that hold more than six. I was first in line when USFA announced the 12-shot 12/22. IMHO, the more the merrier. My disdain for the .357 cartridge has more to do with my lack of a seven or eight shot revolver in that chambering. Were I to buy a new S&W in .357, I'd probably look real hard at the eight-shot 627.

 

[MrBorland]

Most revolver competitions I know of restrict capacity to 6 rounds, so there's that.

You can use 8-shot revolvers in ICORE Limited and Open divisions, and now in USPSA as well. In these cases, though, moonclips, rather than speedloaders, are used.

IDPA is limited to shooting 6 rounds. You can use a 7-shot revolver, but you can only shoot 6. If you're using speedloaders, the 6-shot gives you a better choice of better speedloaders. And speedloaders aside, shooting a 7-shot in a competition where you're only allowed to load/shoot 6 would be a serious PITA and a poor choice.

If competition is in the cards, then, get a 6-shot if you plan on using speedloaders and an 8-shot if you are planning on using moons. The 7-shot is simply the odd gun out.

I'm defending my life, I want the extra round.

Understandable, but in my case, it'd be the only use I'd have for a 7-shot, and it doesn't make sense to rely on a 7-shot (that also happens to use different speedloaders) in a stressful situation when my brain is wired for a 6-shot.

All in all, then, I've had no interest in a 7-shot.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

So with all that in mind, it's difficult for me to say that six shots is more "traditional" than seven. It's really only been in the last 100yrs of the revolver's 400yr history that manufacturers have settled on six shots. Although small five-shot revolvers have proliferated and there are plenty of rimfires that hold more than six. I was first in line when USFA announced the 12-shot 12/22. IMHO, the more the merrier. My disdain for the .357 cartridge has more to do with my lack of a seven or eight shot revolver in that chambering. Were I to buy a new S&W in .357, I'd probably look real hard at the eight-shot 627.

Got any ammo for that 20 shot pinfire? The others you mention are all muzzle stuffers of one sort or another. Since the cartridge era, the vast majority of revolvers have been six shooters. Yeah, I have a few S&W Top Break 5 shooters, but other than that, I'd say six shots is pretty traditional.

I'm so used to only firing five shots, that if I had one of those 7 or 8 shooters in competition I would probably be dumping live rounds out after five shots too.

 

[CajunBass]

I used to have a Taurus 66 (I think it was) that was a seven shooter. It was a nice gun, but the extra round wasn't a big deal. I didn't see any real advantage to it, or any real disadvantage. It was just different.

 

[45_auto]

Synopsis:

If you practice enough to get seriously proficient with your revolver (RE Mr Borland and Strawhat - "unconcious competence" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_competence) then the oddball number of shots will screw you up.

If you're like the vast majority of non-competitive shooters out there, you're going to unconsciously shoot the gun to empty anyway in a stressful situation. In that case, you might as well have as many bullets as possible in the gun!

 

[Hondo 60]

OK, seems we're gettin kinda silly here. (a 20 shot as a carry gun??????)

The J-frame is beloved due to it's size.
For me, I pocket carry & just don't see how a 7 or 8 shot 357 would fit.
Whereas my S&W Model 38 is very comforting.
It doesn't print & isn't too heavy.

A 6-8 shot 357 would be considerably larger & heavier.

Is the J-frame enough?
That's gonna depend on each person.
Can you hit what you're aiming at?

 

[CraigC]

It's not about 20-shot carry guns, it's about how "tradition" relates to the OP's question: "Question is this, how come there is no love for 7 shot .357Mag revolvers?"

 

[george29]

American consumers of firearms have always had this thing about buying whatever the police/military are currently using in the belief that it must be the best. I have seen this time and time again throughout my life. The funny thing about this is most of the people who believe this have never served in either capacity. I used to believe it myself until I served in the military and learned that most of the stuff we were issued was selected by folks that knew almost nothing about it and always went for the lowest bid. In other words - most of it was junk. M16 rifles and Beretta sidearms and cheap magazines. Don't be deluded by the whole police/military thing. They don't have any choice. You do.

I was going to give you an argument about American Consumers etc., but I took a breath and thought for a second and it occurred to me that other than WE Americans Still allowed the freedom to choose our fancies in weapons, whether following a certain trend or not, no other country exists on Planet Earth where this freedom to follow a gun fashion exists other than here. Even Switzerland does not allow the freedom to go into a gun store everyday and buy a gun or two nor do they sell M4geries, Kalachnikov's or Uzi's, not even in Semiautomatic mode. American's are the very last holdout in this respect, and so, we cannot be held to a different standard of Gun-buying fashion when we are the only one's allowed to do so.
Lastly, the Military made a fine choice in choosing the Beretta, the fact that most M9's in stock are beat up by non-caring soldiers doesn't detract from how well made it is.

 

[herrwalther]

A 6-8 shot 357 would be considerably larger & heavier.

The alloys exist to make better .357s. Lets look at some numbers. Take the S&W model 60 for example. 5 rounds .357 revolver at 22.6 oz and 6.56 inches overall. Numbers from S&W website.

Now a look at my "dream revolver" the Taurus 617T, the T denoting the Titanium frame. 6.625" overall length and 19.9 ounces. Less weight than a S&W 60 and .1" longer for 2 extra rounds of .357. Unfortunately the T model is all but gone since there was not enough demand for it to continue production. The Stainless Steel model of the 617 still only weighs 28.3 ounces.

Other than tradition of 5 and 6 round .357s, I am not really seeing a reason not to have higher capacity revolvers.