Are Revolvers inferior to a Glock?

[sm]

Are Semi's inferior to Revolvers?

Forget about the Glock brand name for a second.

I was raised into and spent a long time in a high risk work. Glocks were not even around...

Again, I ask folks to look at the definition of "inferior", and set aside brand names, instead keep in mind what environments they are in, and what they shoot best and other factors.

Me? I most often carried a bone stock Gov't Model of 1911, except for the gold bead front sight. I also carried revolvers.
One thing I learned in "set-ups and lessons" (ya'll call these stages and training now") is I wanted a revolver for "vehicle" use.

-In a close setting, such in a vehicle, I did not want to worry about a slide hanging up on me, the bad guy, or seats, or anything. It did not matter if a 1911 or BHP I carried, I wanted less stuff for Murphy to mess up my day.

-I also kept a .44 mag as a "vehicle gun" with full tilt boogie loads. MY environment, MY needs, MY...etc, included bad guys using guns, including long guns, and forcing me off the road.

So coming up as I did, and my real deal concerns, and lessons shared:

Reliability:
Forget Glocks or any other brand name semi auto for a moment. With a semi one does check their gun AND all the mags they will use for serious carry with loads, for reliability.

The reality is, ammunition may not fire, be it in a semi auto, or revolver. Hence the reason for "tap-rack-bang" and other skill sets in keeping the gun running.

With a revolver, one can pull trigger again and hopefully have a live round fire. Then again being a Southern Boy, I knew about "Southern Reloads"...just pull another gun, and in my case it was most often a revolver.

Internet discussions are great, just keep in mind discussions from those that have been there and done that are useful as well.

 

[armysniper]

QUICK ANSWER:

There is an episode of the First 48 in which two drug dealers get into a shootout in a hotel in Texas. One dealer had a large caliber revolver either a 357 or .44 I cant remember which...the other guy had a 9mm.

The prelim investigation revealed that the drug dealer with the revolver ran out of rounds after his 6th and last shot and was killed by the other shooter with the 9mm.

It really is your personal preference. But common sense will tell you that more bullets in your gun is better in the chance that you get into a shoot out.

People make comments like real man carries a revolver ect...

Your tombstone will read, "Here lies a real man."

 

[oldfool]

one-on-one
Anybody who can't drop somebody with six 357 or 44, doesn't need 15, they need practice
(and they need to quit dealing drugs for a living)

anybody who needs 15 to get it done, needs to quit dealing drugs for a living too,
just in case they meet somebody with six who can get it done

less drugs, more practice, good
macho not required for either six or fifteen, purely optional

gun forum stories are gun forum stories
gun forum stories about trained LEOs not-on-drugs who dumped 15 round mags without even one hit, are no more rare than gang banger stories about druggies who can't hit their butt with both hands in broad daylight

PS
drive by banger shooting stories are scary too
not because of what they try to hit
because of what they hit instead
Army snipers they ain't

 

[Strykervet]

Just out of curiousity what part of the cylinder " is loose" and requires the cylinder be replaced?? Flame cutting stops after a few thousand rounds.

The cylinder stops are worn on the cylinder, thus it needs to be replaced. It seems to have gotten worse. Flame cutting DOES taper off in wear over time, but it never really stops. You notice it with muzzle brakes and suppressors too. It also is exacerbated by firing high power magnums using slow powders. Firing specials, I bet it could go 200 years and need nothing but a spring here or there.

Say with a steady diet of +p in 9mm, the G17 can go a long time if you stay on top of the springs and other odd parts that sometimes go (but not catastrophically, you'll see a crack in a striker sleeve say, and it can go for many thousand rounds before it actually fails). The frame on this one is at least 27 years old, and it looks fine. No cracks. The slide has more wear than the frame does to be honest.

All I'm saying is that over time, given a similar high round count using similar power ammo (comparatively) that the 686 will require more expensive work and parts over the same time vs. the Glock, and that some of that work you can't exactly do yourself. Anybody can learn to replace any part in a Glock themselves, and those parts are usually cheap.

I'm not saying one is better than the other, I'm just answering the OP's question based on my experience, not my guess. Again, short of the very high round count or high round count of high power ammo, one is as reliable parts wise as the other, meaning neither tend to fail. Both can and will need springs from time to time, and again, the springs for the Glocks tend to be cheaper, but not enough to waver the arguement any.

As for which one feels better, I agree, the 686+ round butt with the factory rubber grips, those feel real nice to me. I also like the flat 2nd gen G17 frame better than the finger grooves on that size pistol, but no way it feels nicer than that 686.

 

[JohnBT]

"People make comments like real man carries a revolver ect..."

I've never heard anybody say that and I'm 61. I guess I need to get out more.

John

 

[DTesch357]

Why oh why did all these people obsessed with tactical tupperware invade the revolver forum? Scram!

Everyone knows that wheel guns are real guns.

 

[skt239]

Currently, I only own two revolvers, a S&W 637 and a New Vaquero in .357 magnum. I'd take either of those two any day over the Glock. Don't get me wrong, I've owned Glocks in the past and I find them to be reliable, durable and well made. However, I think that my 637 will last just as long as a Glock and my Ruger will out last them both. All three will certainly outlast me. Provided you get a revolver made by a reputable maker, it will last just as long as your Glock.

 

[MCgunner]

That is like comparing a Yugo to an American muscle car. Real men shoot round guns.

Good one.

I own autos, too, but don't like Glock "safe action" and won't own a gun I can't shoot LEAD out of. I cast, therefore I am.

 

[Trad Archer]

A Ruger revolver will last a lifetime, plus they (unlike your ugly a@@ glock) are American made.

 

[jad0110]

Any handgun that you have really good reason to believe will outlast your ammo budget ought do. If it don't, then complain.

And if you can afford to shoot 10,000 rounds or .38 and .357 ($3500 or so) or 100,000 rounds ($35,000), I don't believe $500 to $800 for a new handgun will be much trouble for you.

One dealer had a large caliber revolver either a 357 or .44 I cant remember which...the other guy had a 9mm.

The prelim investigation revealed that the drug dealer with the revolver ran out of rounds after his 6th and last shot and was killed by the other shooter with the 9mm.

It really is your personal preference. But common sense will tell you that more bullets in your gun is better in the chance that you get into a shoot out.

Common sense says that, all things being equal, more rounds are better. However, all things are rarely equal.

The problem in the story above isn't the number of rounds available, it is a skill (software) problem. If the guy with the revolver had landed a solid shot first, it would be irrelevant how many rounds the other guy had. And that is what it is all about. He who lands the first, fight stopping hit will be the likely survivor. Perp A's wunderauto with a 33 round mag means nothing if perp B, with a 2 shot derriinger, hits Perp A first in a place that takes the fight out of him. Or vice versa.

So, pick the tool that best enables you to do that and you're GTG. I have not found a tool that does a better job for me than a service-sized double action six shooter. But, to each his own.

The whole "shooting though the pocket" ability of the revolver is stretching. OTH, try firing a polymer frame auto with a less than ideal grip at an odd angle (like you might find yourself in when fighting for you life) and see how many FTEs you get. Trust me, its an eye opener, and certainly something to be aware of and consider if you carry such a platform, just as the revolver shooter needs to spend time doing reloads.

 

[MCgunner]

And if you can afford to shoot 10,000 rounds or .38 and .357 ($3500 or so) or 100,000 rounds ($35,000), I don't believe $500 to $800 for a new handgun will be much trouble for you.

Well, if you CAST your own from range scrap (precludes the Glock), you're talkin' 600 dollars or a bit less for 10K rounds. Plus, the brass is easier to find.

 

[Lawdawg45]

Are any police departments or military organizations buying revolvers?

Revolver: not significantly inferior as a tool
Compare 16 oz. hammer and 22 oz. hammer - they both drive nails.

Revolver: significantly inferior as an inventory item
Customers all buying the 22 oz. hammer, 16 oz. hammers gathering dust, and good ones are quite expensive from the distributor.

A majority are not, but the main reason is capacity, not longevity!

LD

 

[JohnBT]

And after buying all those manufacturer-discounted high capacity autoloaders - Glocks for instance - with excellent trade-in terms for the old guns, what did the police departments do next? They bought high capacity rifles and shotguns because they found out they were still outgunned.

I guess owning a Glock isn't quite the solution to the problem.

John

 

[Lawdawg45]

And after buying all those manufacturer-discounted high capacity autoloaders - Glocks for instance - with excellent trade-in terms for the old guns, what did the police departments do next? They bought high capacity rifles and shotguns because they found out they were still outgunned.

I guess owning a Glock isn't quite the solution to the problem.

John

John, even if there was a .50 cal semi auto with a 30 or 50 round capacity, it's still a scenario of bringing a 50 yard weapon to a 150 yard fight with an AR or SKS type weapon. The switch to high capacity semi auto's was a direct response to dozen's of Officer deaths related to empty revolvers and/or slow reloads. Even in my old wheel gun days I felt outgunned with my .357 and .45 Colt, and my 870 had a very limited use, so I purchased a .30 cal carbine for long distance customer service!

LD

 

[azrn]

it all comes down to using your sidearm to get to your rifle. the bigger the better. azrn

 

[LouisianaGunslinger]

There's still Smith and Wessons from 1900 still running strong today. Will Glocks from 1986 still be around in 2086? I doubt it. Plastic doesn't age well.

I've seen far more cracked Glock frames and breakages than in all steel revolvers.

Now these new Smith and Wessons with the ultra-light wonder metals? I think I'd prefer a Glock. But a Model 28 is probably going to last longer than a Glock 17 as far as round count. I don't run across Glocks from 1986 very often as it is.

That said, you'd have to shoot a lot, I mean A LOT, of rounds out of a Glock before it kicks the bucket.

 

[CraigC]

I've never wanted to shoot a Glock 100,000 times.

Amen!

And before anyone decides that the only folks who don't think Glocks are "perfection" have never owned one, I owned and shot Glocks for 15yrs and still keep a Springfield XD .45 around.

 

[atlanticfire]

This thread made me LOL.

 

[JohnBT]

"The switch to high capacity semi auto's was a direct responseto dozen's of Officer deaths related to empty revolvers and/or slow reloads."

Do tell, did you miss the part where I said I was 61? To rephrase your statement, the change was a response to police officers missing all 6 shots and their poor training on doing a fast reload. A lot of them are still missing shots. And then they bought them long guns with large mags.

My father was a state trooper and a cousin was a long time county sheriff fwiw.

 

[Cosmoline]

Which Glock? Which revolver? The best Rugers are tough, but they're also shooting more punishing rounds than a 9x19 Glock. The comparison would need to be between a G20 shooting 10mm and a GP100 shooting .357.

 

[Fiv3r]

Given the time to degrade the materials and the round count needed to wear out a firearm, I think we're in mountain out of a molehill territory.

I switch back and forth nearly daily between carrying a light weight LCR and a Glock 21 just for variety. I have no doubt in my mind that I will never wear out the Ruger. I simply don't make enough money nor have enough free time to shoot it loose. Likewise, the G21's polymer may ONLY last 100 years, but does that really matter? In that period of time, I feel that we are going to be shooting at each other with caseless ammo or be nuked back to beating each other to death with bone clubs.

I do NOT think a revolver is inferior to a Glock as far as a blanket statement goes. Will the Glock generally run longer than a revolver if tortured into such an exercise? yeah, I think so. Those fugly plastic brutes just go and go and go. That said, I own more wheel guns than I do Glocks. I've got a Nagant revolver that is older than my grandfather that still shoots fine. My dad has a 35 year old .22 no-name revolver that has been cleaned maybe twice in that time that has fired God knows how many rounds through it (well into the 10,000 range).

Different applications for both Variety is the spice of life and I don't want to give up either. I don't think I would give up my revolver in an TEOTWAWKI situation in favor of a Glock. Not because I think the Glock would fail, just that I don't like relying on magazines (ie losing them). Actually, I don't even think I would want a DA revolver lest I bend the crane. Nope, I think a nice SA .38/.357/.44 or even a cap and ball would be just fine Because by that time, i would have shot my AR loose and would be scrounging ammo as I could find it

 

[Lawdawg45]

"The switch to high capacity semi auto's was a direct responseto dozen's of Officer deaths related to empty revolvers and/or slow reloads."

Do tell, did you miss the part where I said I was 61? To rephrase your statement, the change was a response to police officers missing all 6 shots and their poor training on doing a fast reload. A lot of them are still missing shots. And then they bought them long guns with large mags.

My father was a state trooper and a cousin was a long time county sheriff fwiw.

I can appreciate your anecdotal personal experience, but it doesn't change the historical facts. Did the military switch to the high capacity M-9 from the revolver and/or 1911 because of the same problems in accuracy and reloads?

LD

 

[cougar1717]

This thread has been great! It's an election year - it's high time to fire up all the end of the world & total gun control scenarios that will never happen. BTW, if I had to choose, a S&W or Ruger revolver would be my choice.

 

[sixgunner455]

I have a S&W M&P that was built in 1930, and was a police department tool for the bulk of its service life. It was both shot, and carried, a lot. I bought it in 2000.

Though heavily worn, it is still quite a gun, and perfectly serviceable.

A friend of mine has his grandfather's issue 1911 from when he was made an Army General. It has been fired quite a bit, but only by family members. It was built sometime between 1915 and 1920. It is still perfectly serviceable.

Get back to me when a Glock turns 100, and we might have something to talk about.

 

[fatcat4620]

When a wheel gun can take this and keep rockin get back to me.
http://theprepared.com/content/view/90//administrator/