Better for new shooters?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mike1966ga

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
44
we have always been taught that revolvers are better for new shooters than autos. safer, simpler, etc. my question is why?
My first handgun was a glock 17 back in 1988, loved it, shot the crap out of it, no problems, my second was a SA blackhawk in .44 cal. loved it, shot the crap out of it, no problems.
other than having to rack the slide to chamber a round on the glock (not exactly brain surgery) not a hole lot of diffrence tween the two.
well you might say that it would be eaiser to maintain the relvover, but to that I say, I have seen pictures of the workings of some relvolvers that would give a swiss watch maker a run for his money :eek:
anyway, hope everybody has a great day :)
mike1966ga
 
I believe that the reason may be one of temperence...a normal revolver has only 6 rounds. A new shooter will be less likely to burn through that than a 15 rnd hi-cap. It is also nice to learn on a weapon that is both SA and DA. Emphasis can be placed on trigger queeze and sight picture and the shooter is forced to learn the limitations of a smaller capacity. I'm not advocating one type being superior to the other, simply saying that one may be better for beginners to firearms. Ideally you'd want to get one of each anyway ;)
 
I don't see much advantage to learning with either. Usually people learn on what ever the person teaching them thinks is best.

I taught my grand daughter on my Ruger 22/45 and she loved it. Next time out I took several different weapons, she had a real problem with DA revolvers, the trigger pull was too much. She loved SA .22, and my Ruger P90, the DA in the Ruger worked ok for her.

I don't think it matters as long as the student has fun.

DM
 
A revolver is much easier to teach to a new shooter than an auto. You can "see" everything that is going on. Pull the trigger, the cylinder rotates, the hammer comes back and then falls. Gives the student a sense that there is no "mystery" to how it works. Very logical. You don't have to explain "Well, when the gun goes bang, this part here comes back AT YOUR HEAD AND EYE, but don't worry because it will then stop really quickly (unless its a Beretta :neener: ) then it will go forward really quickly, picking up another round, so be really careful, because you can't really tell from looking at it if it has a round in it, course their all loaded anyway all the time, etc".
The new shooter can unload the revolver, see easily that it is unloaded, practice dry fires in a safe environment without having to rack the slide or thumb back the hammer (hard to do on a Glockamatic) everytime to "pretend" that the gun went off.
I have taught a number of women including my daughter to shoot. She was handling a .44 Special Model 24 very well, then we went to a 9mm Sig. She hated the Sig, called it "that obnoxious gun", mostly because there were so many things going on and moving when she fired it.

Revolvers are just easier to start out with, then graduate to a Glock or Sig, then a HiPower or 1911.

Just my opinion.
 
Also, at least in my experiance, the sigts on revolvers are usually much larger and easier to see then on autos, an argument could be made that it helps the student get a better idea of the correct sight picture.
Just pulled that outta my ass though, i much prefer autos to wheelguns ;)
 
Unless you do someting after firing a revolver it won't be ready to fire again. Not like its sitting there racked with safety off like a semi. I taught my then 19 year old daughter how to shoot, by alternating rounds in the cylinder we could see mistakes in trigger, sights, jerk, ect. Low load .38s in a full sized revolver are great to learn centerfire with.

rk
 
As a new shooter who, at 19, recently learned on both a semi auto (22/45) and a wheelgun (S&W .38 [something]), I can saw that I vastly prefered the wheelgun.

Why?

Because both of these once-fine guns were terribly abused rental things, and frankly, I quickly got tired of clearing jam after jam on the 22/45.

Weak mag springs, dirty action, dubious slide-lock, there are just so many more things that can go wrong with a slide design when compared to the beautiful simplicity of the revolver.

It may not matter for a well maintained personal firearm, but if you are taking a new shooter to a rental range... pick a nice 22 revolver. If the shooter does not like the long DA pull, simply cock the hammer. Also, a 4- or 6 inch model grants a longer sight radius than most semi autos, and as we know, things are more fun when bullets go where you want them to! =)

And when the time has come to leave 22s behind, low-power .38 wadcutters give you a LOT more boom, and put a distinctly-viewable large hole in the target - all without too much more recoil.


Six for sure.



-mike
 
Having watched hundreds of people learn to shoot, I can say with a fair amount of confidence that it doesn't so much matter what they learn to shoot first. Whether it's a revolver or a semiauto of whatever type, each system has its own benefits, drawbacks, and learning points. It is my firm opinion that most shooters should start out on whichever system they are most likely to stay with -- and that's as individual as the shooter is.

One usual claim is that a revolver is better because it is easier for the instructor to see what the trigger pull is like. But an experienced instructor can easily watch the student's trigger finger and know what's going on.

Another usual claim is that revolvers are "simple" and semiautos are "complicated." In terms of actual use, they both work about the same: point it where you want the bullet to go and pull the trigger. A DAO or a Glock is used exactly like that. But even a more "complicated" semiauto isn't exactly rocket science. I doubt there is a single person on the planet so stupid that it takes more than one second to explain the function of a safety to them ("It's like a lock on the door. Some stop the handle from turning, others block the door from opening. Most safeties like this one stop the trigger from moving, but other types block parts inside the gun from moving"). Decockers are harder to explain, but not impossible. Training 'em to use the levers every time takes time and attention, but it isn't hard to achieve.

There's a safety issue with revolvers that is rarely talked about but is quite real all the same. That is, the long double-action pull is sometimes difficult for a new shooter or someone who has weak hands. So it's tempting to tell such folks, "just pull the hammer back" because that makes the pull shorter and easier to manage. The problem is -- how do you safely lower that hammer without firing? I see a surprising number of people who shoot DA revolvers in SA mode, but who have no idea how to safely lower the hammer without firing. That's okay on the range (just point it downrange and pull the trigger), but if any of these folks ever picked up a gun to use in real life & then didn't need to shoot after all ... well, it doesn't bear thinking about.

Physically, it's true that semiautos generally require a bit more hand strength than revolvers generally do. But it is not true in every specific case. I have met new shooters whose trigger fingers literally did not have the strength for the DA pull of a revolver, but who had plenty of hand strength to rack the slide of a semiauto. I've met people who thought they were too weak to rack a slide but who when shown the proper technique had no trouble at all. I've met people with arthritis who were still able to load a magazine or rack a slide, but who could not handle the typically stiffer recoil of a revolver in a comparable caliber. And of course I've met people for whom the opposite of all these things is true. Hand strength and recoil tolerance are both very individual things!

So my opinion is that most folks benefit from starting on a gun they like, that they will be likely to practice with, and with an instructor who is willing to help them learn how to use the gun properly & safely.

pax
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top