Fragility: Revolver vs Semiauto

[JohnBT]

After reading so many posts on how fragile revolvers are, I only have one thing to say.

When Ruger introduced the Speed Six/Security Six/Police Six liine of revolvers their salesmen demonstrated the durability of the guns by throwing them around the range, driving vehicles over them and then shooting them.

All are revolvers this sturdy? I don't know, but to say that all revolvers are sensitive, tempermental, fragile and outdated is inaccurate and just plain wrong.

John

 

[MCgunner]

I agree with JohnBT on this one. I just fail to see the issue here. Beyond that, as a CCW permitted civilian, I really don't CARE what issues the military has with revolvers or about their needs. My needs are not of a military nature and I don't fancy myself as a 21st century ninja or something. Revolvers have advantages in civilian carry that often outweigh any advantages autoloaders have. That said, the majority of my carry is with an auto as a primary.

Regards to hearing about folks that have used a handgun in a fight, unless you go out and have a shoot out twice a week for 20 years, what good is one data point????? I find competition to be a pretty good determiner of reliability, too. Go to an IDPA shoot and you'll see jams, autos jamming. You'll rarely see a revolver ever have a problem. However, take a look at whose guns are jamming. It ain't the expert or master class shooters, it's the marksman class, the lesser experienced guys and gals. The higher skilled shooters know more about feeding and maintaining their guns and they tend to take it a little more seriously. This is why I always recommend a revolver to a new shooter or for long, unmaintained stays in a dresser drawer in a bedroom. You need to know your gun and maintain it and shoot it a lot and know how to feed it if you're going to tote an auto. Borrowing from another thread, you don't just buy magsafe frangibles, stick 'em in your 1911 without ever trying them at the range, and go defend yourself. The gun has to be 100% reliable with the ammo and that you have to test. I have ultimate confidence in my carry autos, just as much as my revolvers, but I do maintain them. They do require a little more attention, but it ain't like I spend one day a week cleaning 'em.

 

[Jim March]

For those with minimal training buying a budget handgun, the DA revolver is king. Period, end of discussion.

In a fight it is "grab and go" and it is impossible to jam it due to limp wristing or failure to feed some funky shaped ammo.

How many newbie shooters are REALLY going to run 200 rounds of their carry ammo through their auto to check for feed compatibility before trusting their lives to it? For that matter, is *every* auto user reading this carrying a round that they've tested 200 of? I rather doubt it. It's possible they're smart enough to use a round with an excellent rep for smooth feeding, like the Cor-Bon Pow'r'ball or Federal EFMJ and that's fine...but is that the norm? Hell no.

How many newbie shooters are going to forget to sweep a safety off in their first fight? It does happen, a lot. "Grab and go" is a damned fine operating drill.

The DA has another huge advantage. The buyer can work their way up in performance as they're comfortable. Newbies with a standard 357 mid-range size gun can shoot 38spl target wadcutters and get felt recoil almost down near 22LR levels, and slowly work up to stomper 180gr full-house magnums, or stop somewhere in between. With modern 38+Ps and a 3" to 4" barrel their net performance level in a fight is at least as good as the 9s and a few I believe exceed it by running much bigget JHP cavities that resist clothes-clogs, including the Speer 135 and the Buffalo Bore 158.

My personal snubbie is a lowly late-70s Charter Arms Undercover I paid less than $200 for. I can hit a torso-sized target at 50 yards 100% of the time. That same range session I embarassed a guy with a full-size Glock 40, he was batting about .500 . It has a small gap down near .002" and yeah, it will get wonky after about 40 rounds. So? I carry it clean, I check the screws after every range session with good hollow-ground screwdriver bits and can trust my life to it no problemo. I see no reason to invest in another daily carry gun, that old Charter is all I need.

At close range the snubbie is the top self defense answer. It is difficult to grab away from you and it can't go out of battery on contact.

There is no way a small autopistol in that price range will be as reliable with quality JHP ammo.

Spend $500+ and test 200 rounds of your carry ammo and sure, you'll approach that level of reliability.

But the street reality is that most CCW guns cost their owner less than $300 - $400 tops, and often a lot less. There are scads of Davis/Lorcin/Jennings class critters in people's pockets, or very old European mini-autos never meant for anything other than hardball. Or Makarovs also made originally for hardball. Or weird stuff like Argentine Hi-Powers and God only knows what else.

It's not the Glocks or Sigs or whatever that I worry about, it's the previously mentioned critters that range from "barely adequate" to "freakshow" that worry me. Their owners would be far better served with a basic revolver from Taurus, used S&W or whatever else that's decent and passes a checkout.

The people on this forum with their CZs, Berettas, Glocks, Sigs, etc. are NOT THE NORM. Most CCW permits don't go to hobbyists, they go to basic people looking for basic self defense with little knowledge to start with. So they go to one of the people here and if that person is into autos and starts singing their praises without asking some real basic questions about skill levels and budgets, they're doing that newbie a very grave disservice.

Possibly literally.

(PS: do recall that I've gone though almost 1,000 California CCW applications via public records inquiry, which list the make/model of gun on the permit. I'm not just blowing smoke regarding what sorts of things are really being carried...and a lot of those permits reviewed were for upper-class folk in places where permits are issued on an elitist basis. I suspect the general class of gun carried is even lower in areas where permits are handled equitably.)

 

[BigG]

Hi guys, back from fishing.

I think Mr. March made some valid points, particularly about the shooting carry ammo to insure reliability of the CCW auto.

I have just read too many threads where guys ask for the "cheapest and best" whatever to believe somebody is going to invest $300 in the gun and burn up close to $200 worth of premium ammo to "prove it reliable." Just don't ring true to me, despite the advice of the "gurus."

 

[SAWBONES]

"So, I guess is sorta depends on your cleaning routine which takes longer."

Not really. To get both both types of guns EQUIVALENTLY clean, regardless of routine, it takes LOTS longer for any revolver than for just about any semiauto, though the HK P7 is one semiauto that is a bear to clean really thoroughly.

Revolvers have many more nooks and crannies and ledges and corners to clean than semiautos. Firing residue accumulates in 5 or 6 (or even 7 or 8) chambers and on the cylinder face in the revolver, the barrel doesn't come out and must be cleaned from the muzzle (don't tell me about "bore snakes"; they're a joke for anything but the most cursory sort of cleaning), and the forcing cone is difficult to clean since it can't be reached as easily as a barrel chamber and breechface on a semiauto.
A semiauto generally disassembles into major separate parts ("field strips") easily, while DA revolvers involve at least the removal of a delicate slot-headed screw in order to even disassemble the cylinder from the frame; not the sort of thing you want to do a hundred times, since you'll eventually bugger the screw.

Which is sturdier? The semiauto, usually, if the comparison involves throwing the guns repeatedly from a truck, letting them sit in mud or banging them against a brick wall.
This is not at all the same thing as general reliability, however, especially if reliability means "likelihood of the gun going bang even when left unattended, unlubricated, uncleaned and loaded in a drawer for 20 years." I'd bet on the average revolver over the average semiauto in that circumstance.

 

[jc2]

Revolvers have many more nooks and crannies and ledges and corners to clean than semiautos.

I detailed stripped enough autoloaders to know that there are all types "nooks and crannies and ledges" in autoloaders that remain filthy because you can't see them and/or reach them to clean them. Most of the fouling in revolvers is surface fouling.

A semiauto generally disassembles into major separate parts ("field strips") easily, while DA revolvers involve at least the removal of a delicate slot-headed screw in order to even disassemble the cylinder from the frame; not the sort of thing you want to do a hundred times, since you'll eventually bugger the screw.

I take it you have rather limited experience with Ruger revolvers. You don't even necessarily need a screw driver to disassemble the cylinder from the (now, of course, with the more antiquated designs, you are correct).

 

[meef]

In terms of fragility, how do revolvers and semiautos compare?

About the same as apples and oranges.



Which revolver? Which semiauto?

Blanket statement question with no useful points of reference.

Who would win in a fight between a boxer and a wrestler?

Same question.

 

[4v50 Gary]

In the days before revolvers were replaced as the standard sidearm of most police agencies, one Texas agency tied a rope to a S&W, a Colt and a Ruger. Only the Ruger revolver survived and could be fired (all 6 cylinders) after being dragged across the dirt (rocks, brush, dirt, etc.). Not that a P-08 could survive such a test, but I would hazard to guess that most modern service pistols would hold up much better than a revolver. Why? Fewer critical parts are exposed. I'm thinking of cylinder, crane, sideplate (with screws coming loose), cylinder stop, ejector rod (especially if not shrouded) the hand/pawl or even the star extractor/ejector.

However, I still love shooting revolvers and even taught one fellow how to open the cylinder to reload when his ejector rod (on his S&W) starting working itself loose.

 

[Croyance]

How do you open up a cylinder when the ejector rod works itself loose?

If a semi-auto is being dragged in the dirt, isn't a large concern any denting of the slide on the parts opposite the frame rails? Get that out of alignment and I bet there are problems.

 

[Blacklabman]

I own currently four semi-auto's and have bought/sold/traded more than a few over the years. I also currently own 7 S&W revolvers of various calibers. The Sig's are used for fun range time, IDPA.and USPSA.
The revolvers are used for the range, IDPA,USPSA, ICORE, CCW, and hunting.
Both have been, and are reliable. The revolvers more so. They have never, let me down.
If I had to choose one hadgun, it would be the 4" 686P with speedloaders.
I'm 38. Like others here, I shot my Fathers, Uncles etc hadguns, before I owned my own.
Revolvers for the last 25 years have earned my trust. They have worked dirty or clean, wet or dry, with good anmmo or not.
The same cannot be said, for the semi-auto.

 

[MCgunner]

Revolvers for the last 25 years have earned my trust. They have worked dirty or clean, wet or dry, with good anmmo or not.
The same cannot be said, for the semi-auto.

Yeah, but if your main mode of transporting them is to tie 'em to your bumper and drag 'em to the range, you'd better stick with the autoloaders.

 

[jungle]

Good points from all posters.

Here is my question, anyone with a very high round count on a revolver? I have seen quite a few autos with high to VERY high round counts but no revolvers. I am talking 50K plus rounds with no repairs.
This is unlikely for most, but does speak to the durability/fragility issue.

 

[MCgunner]

I don't think my M10 has that many round though it though it was built in the 50s. I know my grandpa didn't shoot it much at all and I've probably got no more'n 5K in it, mostly wadcutter loads. It belonged to a Sheriff in Fort Bend county Texas, friend of my grandpas. It was probably carried a lot and shot a little.

I had probably around 20K in my old Ruger Security Six when it started to loosen up a bit. It was still functioning fine, had a little head shake, not bad. I fired a LOT of HOT .357s in that thing. It was never that accurate with .38s. I could have just sent it to Ruger to tighten up (I hear that's not expensive), but I traded it for a Blackhawk in .357 because I was in a quest for a .357 that would shoot .38s AND .357 hot loads accurately. The Blackhawk and a certain Taurus M66 fit that bill.

I think you could put 50K rounds of hot loads through that Blackhawk and it'd STILL be tight, but I haven't done it, sorry. It probably has no more'n a thousand rounds total through it and most are .38s. I haven't shot it in quite a while, but it is a very nice gun. I need to get it out and play with it again next range trip, just thinkin' about it.

 

[jungle]

Maybe some PPC shooters have done it. Has anyone here put 50k+ rounds through a revolver without having to retime, adjust endshake, or other repairs?



It got awful quiet after this question was asked.