Is the revolver enough for defense?

Status
Not open for further replies.
.38 Special said:
Sure, but what is the limiting principle? Almost none of us carry all the ammunition we possibly could. At what point do we all agree that a person is now adequately armed?
Click to expand...

I do most of my drills shooting 5 rounds or less. Mostly quick draw/get off the X and fire 1 to 5 shots on target. Always a random number of shots.

Since I carry a Glock 17, I could shoot my drills in real life (if I’m attacked) 3 or more times without worrying about running out of ammo.

I do not think a scenario will play out like that, I’m sure it will be anything and everything all at once. It’s just nice knowing I have 18 rounds on board for whatever might happen. The goal would be to still have 18 rounds in the gun when the dust settles. If that’s not possible, the goal is to have 17 rounds left when the dust settles. If that’s not possible, etc,etc.

I feel 18 is adequate for me but I also understand a crazy situation might leave me out of ammo and dead. Anything could happen.
 
I hear you, brother! Bad knees and age - I just stroll through stages. Some young guys try to run through the stages. Not me.
 
GEM said:
There is no doubt in my mind that for a belt gun, the semi is the way to go. That being said, I love to shoot a revolver in a match. In FOF, with folks on the move - 5 shots go away pretty fast. I like Marty Hayes who says, we train not just for the average but the anomaly. I've seen potential threats of 4 guys in my life.
Click to expand...
I agree. keeping low capacity firearms stoked is valid problem, especially under stress (IMO).
GEM said:
BTW, I love to shoot an oddball revolver in IDPA as outlaw. It's a SW 632 SS 3 inch comp'ed Fiber optic in 327 mag.
Click to expand...
I like shooting weird stuff at matches, too. It's good for the soul.

I've shot a SAA at 3 club uspsa/idpa matches in the past and it is quite the experience. Very educational.
 
I love revolvers and would like to say that I could carry one for SD, but do you ever see Police or Military using them? Pretty rare occurrence these days. Sure you could do it but if you run into an armed bad guy in a shooting situation you are likely to be out gunned. Just like I would never carry a 380 or smaller auto I would not carry a revolver. A hi-cap H&K will always be my choice. If I really felt nostalgic maybe a 1911, just for fun. It doesn't really matter here in Hawaii, CCW while in the state constitution, does not exist.
 
I'm curious about whether the folks who discourage revolver carry still consider the 1911 in .45 ACP to be a viable CCW piece - and how they would compare it to a moonclipped revolver in the same cartridge. Or, for that matter, to an 8 shot moonclipped .357 revolver.
 
1911s are fine guns. With an 8 round mag (so 8+1), you add an extra person so to speak on the number of opponents to be dealt with with one load (that's assuming 3 or so for each - which is a reasonable procedure) and what we were taught in classes. Also, the reload is much faster than a moonclipped revolver UNLESS you are up to top competitor levels. Carrying the extra mags is not as cumbersome as moonclips or speed loaders.

Another to mention is that if you trained for injured shooter drills, reloading a semi is easier.

To return to the 1911, for the same size package you can get almost twice the number of equally efficacious rounds (stopping power flame wars begone!) in a striker gun nowadays.

I wouldn't feel helpless with a 1911 and two extra mags. I would much prefer it to a belt revolver and moonclips and speed loaders. However, if I am serious about an optimal civilian EDC it's a striker gun with two extra mags.

An 8 shot revolver (N Frame) for example, is a big gun for what advantage?

I shoot a 1911 pretty decently quite a bit. Now at the old National Tactical Invitational, a very, very well known trainer mocked the polymer guys. His analysis relied in part on the Miami shoot out and the failure of the 9mm round. He always carried a 1911. Get in the DeLorean to now, he carries a Glock 9 mm. Times change, rounds got better.

However, a 1911 is a better belt choice than a revolver, if you can shoot it. Funny story, I told a guy at work I shoot a 1911. He said he once shot on in the Army and it damn near tore his arm off. He was big over 6 foot guy. I looked at him from my towering 5'6" and said, Wow - I shot 90ish rounds of 230 gr WWB this weekend. Still got my arm.

Chosen a gun for a fighting arm is for real and not to be cool with something less than optimal. We see folks proclaiming they carry a single action (not for hunting with a large caliber) or even a black powder gun - because blah, blah. Yeah, they are guns but optimal carry guns aren't for being cool. Fun in matches, sure. If Joe bans the hi caps because he believes 5 is enough, that would be different.
 
.38 Special said:
I'm curious about whether the folks who discourage revolver carry still consider the 1911 in .45 ACP to be a viable CCW piece - and how they would compare it to a moonclipped revolver in the same cartridge. Or, for that matter, to an 8 shot moonclipped .357 revolver.
Click to expand...

For the first 8-rounds they are pretty close to the same, the 1911 likely still has one more shot in it (8+1 is pretty common for a 1911) as the revolver shooter has to start a reload. I personally can hit a 2-second reload with my 627 when I try real hard and the fingers work right, I can hit a 1.5 second reload with a 1911 without trying nearly as hard, it's a lot less demanding on the fine motor control and I don't have to take my eyes off the target to do it. It also took a lot more practice to be able to reload that fast with the revolver than it did with the 1911. And finally that is both from a competition rig. With a concealed carry rig those reload times gets worst for both, but due to the difficulties of concealed carrying a moonclip the revolver is going to take a bigger time hit.
 
Last edited:
GEM said:
1911s are fine guns. With an 8 round mag (so 8+1), you add an extra person so to speak on the number of opponents to be dealt with with one load (that's assuming 3 or so for each - which is a reasonable procedure) and what we were taught in classes. Also, the reload is much faster than a moonclipped revolver UNLESS you are up to top competitor levels. Carrying the extra mags is not as cumbersome as moonclips or speed loaders.

Another to mention is that if you trained for injured shooter drills, reloading a semi is easier.

To return to the 1911, for the same size package you can get almost twice the number of equally efficacious rounds (stopping power flame wars begone!) in a striker gun nowadays.

I wouldn't feel helpless with a 1911 and two extra mags. I would much prefer it to a belt revolver and moonclips and speed loaders. However, if I am serious about an optimal civilian EDC it's a striker gun with two extra mags.

An 8 shot revolver (N Frame) for example, is a big gun for what advantage?

I shoot a 1911 pretty decently quite a bit. Now at the old National Tactical Invitational, a very, very well known trainer mocked the polymer guys. His analysis relied in part on the Miami shoot out and the failure of the 9mm round. He always carried a 1911. Get in the DeLorean to now, he carries a Glock 9 mm. Times change, rounds got better.

However, a 1911 is a better belt choice than a revolver, if you can shoot it. Funny story, I told a guy at work I shoot a 1911. He said he once shot on in the Army and it damn near tore his arm off. He was big over 6 foot guy. I looked at him from my towering 5'6" and said, Wow - I shot 90ish rounds of 230 gr WWB this weekend. Still got my arm.

Chosen a gun for a fighting arm is for real and not to be cool with something less than optimal. We see folks proclaiming they carry a single action (not for hunting with a large caliber) or even a black powder gun - because blah, blah. Yeah, they are guns but optimal carry guns aren't for being cool. Fun in matches, sure. If Joe bans the hi caps because he believes 5 is enough, that would be different.
Click to expand...

What would you say to the fellow who has got more rounds in his auto than you do in yours, and therefore believes you are not adequately armed?
 
Right now, I'm carrying a Ruger EC9s 7+1 with a 9 round spare magazine due to back and hip issues. Once they resolve, I'll return to carrying my S&W Model 65-1 w/2 speedloaders and my S&W Model 12-2 with 2 speedstrips. I don't feel outgunned.
 
.38 Special said:
What would you say to the fellow who has got more rounds in his auto than you do in yours, and therefore believes you are not adequately armed?
Click to expand...
"I suppose that it might turn out some day that you were right, but round count is but one of the variables."
 
.38 Special said:
What would you say to the fellow who has got more rounds in his auto than you do in yours, and therefore believes you are not adequately armed?
Click to expand...

Now what fellow is that? Since I have interacted with the professional trainer community quite a bit, my EDC is a striker semi and an extra mag or two. That load is pretty well accepted as a reasonable set up for the civilian up to and including a rampage. Such folks analyze the carry world as follows:

1. The J frame is a one or two opponent gun and carried because of NPE, dress requirements, bugs or sloth. They accept the risk of lower capacity and, importantly, do not deny its limitations. They also train with these guns.

2. There is no major advantage to a belt based revolver in the larger sizes except for field applications. A SW 66 is a fine gun. Yes, you should have a speed loader but it gives you no advantage over a 15 to 17 round semi of the same belt size and the extra rounds in a carried mag or two.

3. The idea that you carry something limited in an area because it is 'nice', is not reality. A gun fight is a gun fight. It is not nicer in the suburbs. You might say it is less likely but if it happens, it is not nice. My more that one opponent experiences were in very upscale venues.

Saw a guy run an IDPA style rifle match with a bolt gun. He was really good. I wouldn't want to be in his sights. But was it optimal given modern choices - NO.
 
Kleanbore said:
How would the setting in which one lives influence the adequacy of a defensive weapon?
Click to expand...
Idk about adequacy...

In a rural setting things like snake shot can be relevant. Easier to change out 1 or 2 rounds (then back) on a revolver IMO.

I also rank barrier penetration and the ability to shoot longer than typical distances a little higher on the list of important things you and your chosen firearm need to do.

I think that your operating environment should be considered when selecting a "belt gun".
 
For years, revolvers road on the belts of lawmen, and they provided exactly what those folks needed, all the way back to Wyatt Earp. I will indeed carry my favorite revolver along, and NEVER second guess that choice. I have confidence in my S&W, the ammunition I use in it, and my shooting abilities under normal circumstances.
Now, I do hope, when under duress, that I will be able to control my nerves, but then again, I hope no situation needing Clint Eastwood's steadiness when shooting blanks ever arises:
mqfp5pfl.jpg
 
Electricmo said:
The last guy I had to shoot laughed at me when I pulled out my .357 revolver. He said son your going to need more than 6 rounds to do me in. You should have brought a 19 round auto with you. I unloaded my 6 shots into him and he was correct. I needed more bullets. He proceeded to kill me and I am now writing this from heaven.
Click to expand...
Could you ask my daddy when he hid the money and get back to me?
 
SGW Gunsmith said:
For years, revolvers road on the belts of lawmen, and they provided exactly what those folks needed, all the way back to Wyatt Earp. I will indeed carry my favorite revolver along, and NEVER second guess that choice. I have confidence in my S&W, the ammunition I use in it, and my shooting abilities under normal circumstances.
Now, I do hope, when under duress, that I will be able to control my nerves, but then again, I hope no situation needing Clint Eastwood's steadiness when shooting blanks ever arises:
View attachment 908710
Click to expand...

By this logic, one should carry a pair of 1851 Navy cap & ball revolvers. That's all that none other than the Prince of Pistoleers himself, James Butler Hickock, needed.
 
I carried a DAO 5 shot snub nose for a few years and shot it regularly and got pretty good with it. My problem with a revolver is that it is more difficult to shoot accurately quickly than with my semi-autos. That is why I have been carrying a semi-auto for a long time now. Is the revolver adequate? IMHO yes, but the semi-auto is just a bit more adequate.
 
SGW Gunsmith said:
For years, revolvers road on the belts of lawmen, and they provided exactly what those folks needed, all the way back to Wyatt Earp. I
Click to expand...
For years, cavalry men carried two single shot muzzle-loading pistols. And sabers. That's what they had.

The last non-mechanized US Cavalry carried Model 1911 pistols, Browning Automatic Rifles, and machine guns.

H
 
GEM said:
Think if you went back in time to Wyatt and offered him a Glock 19 or some M&P, he would turn it down?
Click to expand...
LOL
I don't think he would and I see your point, but I don't think he'd turn down a 1911, glock 18, FN5.7, or tech9

and his law enforcement perspective/requirements remain a little different from the private citizen, no?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

357smallbore
  • Locked
Is "six" still enough for defense?
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Replies
189
Views
7K
Robert
Robert
357smallbore
  • Locked
My 44 Special or my 357 Magnum
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
diyj98
D
A
  • Locked
Ole Reliable. My 44 Special.
Replies
11
Views
915
303 hunter
303 hunter
A
  • Locked
Show your BIG BORE 44 Specials (no magnums)
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
Tony_the_tiger
Tony_the_tiger
H
  • Locked
my 357 or my 44 Special?
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Paladin7
P
Back
Top