Is the revolver really a practical defensive weapon?

[Newton]

It's difficult to put the full context of this question into the title line. But assuming that size was not an issue, so you could carry any full size revolver you choose, would such a weapon really offer all the advantages of a high capacity semi-automatic pistol.

Six or seven shots of double action .357 Magnum have no place going up against 15 rounds of rapid fire single action .40S&W, or do they?

While I would agree that guns like the S&W 642 are great CCW pieces because of their small size and high reliability with a capable round, the real question is why would I want a Model 19 instead of a Glock 23. Would I not be starting off with a huge disadvantage.

Why would a full size revolver ever make sense over an automatic?

 

[Deer Hunter]

Seeing as how in most self defense scenarios, only 2 to 3 shots are fired, I don't think it would put you at much of a loss.

 

[Legionnaire]

Personal preferences aside, the manual of arms is easier to learn for a revolver than a semi-auto. There are a lot of individuals who want a handgun for defensive purposes, but who are not recreational shooters who practice a lot. So to kick off the discussion, I'll offer that for such individuals, a revolver is a better platform.

Looking forward to seeing what others add.

 

[foghornl]

Revolvers are STILL viable as a defensive weapon. Some folks are not comfortable with an auto-loader, so a revolver makes sense for them.

Now, in "Foggy's Chicken Coop", my bedside table companion is a Springfield 'GI-45' 1911. There have been times, though, that my B.T.C. firearm was a Ruger Blackhawk..a SINGLE-ACTION revolver

 

[Doc Rizzi]

At a car stop in Salinas, CA in 1995 three officers fired a total of 27 rounds in less than five seconds into a suspects vehicle after he brandished a gun during a car stop. The suspect dove back into the front seat of his vehicle and suffered only one wound to a hand he was holding up in an attempt to give up. While it is good to have overwhelming firepower in any scenario.....it helps in theory to be able to hit what one aims at.

 

[MCgunner]

I am plenty happy with a 5 shot .38. I have autos, too. Any self defense scenario I might have to shoot, it ain't going to take 15 shots. One, maybe two. I'm not a cop, just a civilian.

 

[Cosmoline]

Six or seven shots of double action .357 Magnum have no place going up against 15 rounds of rapid fire single action .40S&W, or do

First of all, you have to remove all preconceptions of military style firefights. For a civilian, the handgun should always be a purely defensive weapon. There is no need for suppressive firepower. The primary requirements are:

1--Speed and ease of presentation
2--Speed and ease of target acquisition
3--Destructive or "stopping" power of round
4--Ease of concealment
5--Personal preference

The number of rounds is not a realistic factor in nearly all self defense encounters. But it really comes down to No. 5. I find I can present and aim wheelguns much faster than nearly any semi. And the semis I am good with don't conceal well given my clothes-changing, largely beltless lifestyle. I wear three different sets of clothes every day, most of which have no practical allowance for a duty belt. The pocket carry is best, and the Colt DS is the best pocket handgun ever made.

 

[DougDubya]

More rounds thrown downrange don't mean a thing if they are fired spray and pray.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

the manual of arms is easier to learn for a revolver than a semi-auto.

With one important exception, the combat reload. It is magazine capacity and the ease of rapid reloading under pressure that gives the edge to the automatic for service use.

Now for personal self-defense use, a revolver may be perfectly satisfactory -- but remember, the primary cause of stoppages in actual engagements is running out of ammo.

 

[sm]

Yes.

Cosmoline made great points to which I will add.

Center fire revolvers allow one a lot of quality dry fire practice. The more one is one with the gun, they better they will be with that gun in a stressful situation.

Revolvers in close areas are less prone to malfunction , such as a snub nose while lying in bed, or in the confines of a vehicle where bed, linens, steering wheels, car seats ...etc., might impede the cycling of a slide.

.38spl and .44 spl are low pressure rounds, and in closed environments, muzzle flash and noise is less.

Defensive scenarios, where a law abiding person has been known to defend themselves.

Manual of Arms is simpler and easier to learn. This is especially good for home and office guns. Where one is wise to have guns where anyone in the family can use.

Problem 2 . The worst happens and while jurisdictions vary, that firearm is going to be evidence.
The picture on the outside of that folder with one's name is going to be seen by everyone dealing with the event.
The gun(s) themselves will be inside the folder as well.
The brain remembers and associates.

Jury of one's peers does not mean 12 persons that are exactly like the one on trial.

The revolver is more apt to be associated with grandma, grandpa, dad, uncle, aunt, or even Mayberry RFD.

In fear of life...
What a prudent person would do...
Beyond an reasonable doubt...

The ability to dry fire, even shoot plastic training bullets, that are primer only, to instruct the youngest person, the physically limited, or elderly in a home or business setting. To allow one to shoot indoors with these plastic bullets in a barn or warehouse following safe rules...

Revolvers are not antiquated, in fact the more time goes on, the more one finds out how advanced they really are.

 

[Legionnaire]

With one important exception, the combat reload. It is magazine capacity and the ease of rapid reloading under pressure that gives the edge to the automatic for service use.

Agreed. My point was the manual of arms was easier to learn -- not faster to execute. The combat reload is something that needs to be practiced to achieve proficiency, and only those willing to practice a lot can do so.

 

[btg3]

If firing from concealment, I'd choose a revolver with no hammer. Semi-autos need to be free and clear to avoid snagging clothing. (Mine got fouled with a cord on an IDPA stage -- which is a far better place to learn that some other places.) But with that lesson behind me, I still carry a semi-auto.

My preference for semi-auto (9mm M&Pc)mainly relates to easier trigger pull...because it's harder for me (at my present level of experience) to keep the sight picture with a revolver. Under pressure, I'm more confident of shot placement with the 9mm. For target practice, cock-aim-fire-repeat with my model 64 would prevail.

As to manual of arms, well let's just say in a tough situation, I'd rather hand my wife a loaded M&P for defense that a loaded revolver with the heavy trigger and fewer shots.

Regarding the above comment on Colt DS, here's another opinion. According to Dave Anderson (American Handgunner) "For pocket carry I prefer the Airweight S&W J-frames, notably the 442/642 Centennials. The Colt DS revolvers are a bit heavy for pocket carry, and even my light alloy-framed Colt Cobra with hammer shroud is a bit bulky. In size and handling the DS falls between the S&W J- and K-frame snubbies."
The DS is comparable to SP101 for pocket carry -- both are a bit much.

 

[ravencon]

With one important exception, the combat reload. It is magazine capacity and the ease of rapid reloading under pressure that gives the edge to the automatic for service use.

With a revolver that uses moonclips the combat reload advantage of the semi diminishes considerably.

 

[mnw42]

I'd say you should use what ever you are proficient with.

I'd also say that few things are faster to reload (with practice) than a .45 ACP revolver and full moon clips.

 

[rgs1975]

When the bad guys bottom feeder stovepipes after the first round I'll be able to keep going with the seven .357's in my wheelie.

 

[M2 Carbine]

Six or seven shots of double action .357 Magnum have no place going up against 15 rounds of rapid fire single action .40S&W, or do they?

The first couple rounds fired are a lot more important than how many rounds are in the gun.

If you can't quickly put the first couple shots in the center of the target then it doesn't matter how many shots you have left.

Why would a full size revolver ever make sense over an automatic?

Just how fast and accurate is that guy with the revolver and how fast and accurate are you with your 15 rounds?

Consider this.
I'm a slow 70 year old fart, so how much good are your extra 9 rounds going to do you if you couldn't make the first several shots effective against a young fast shooter?


Having a large magazine capaciity is great but quickly, accurately putting the first rounds on target is the most important thing, no matter what gun you are shooting.

 

[Cosmoline]

The DS is comparable to SP101 for pocket carry -- both are a bit much.

It comes down to preference, but I've used both extensively, along with J frames. The DS, at 21 oz, is just about the perfect weight for .38 specials and .38 +p FBI loads. Much lighter than that and you have too much muzzle flip and delay between shots.

The SP 101 weighs upwards of 26 oz and is not as trim in profile, though it only holds five rounds.

The J frames are good, but even there I prefer the steel frame versions that weigh about 19 to 20 oz over the airweight.

A steel K frame, in contrast, is over 30 oz.

 

[btg3]

The first couple rounds fired are a lot more important than how many rounds are in the gun.

Dang it, they never hold still for my first 2 shots!

 

[Technosavant]

If you can hit what you're shooting at due to regular practice, a revolver gives up nothing but capacity to a semiauto. Even then, unless you're facing multiple attackers (as in 3+), I wouldn't be terribly concerned about running out of ammo and needing to reload.

I wouldn't pick my 642 as my "go to" gun in an emergency, but sometimes that's just what will go with me when I'm out and about. If I needed a revolver at home, my 327 would be more than capable, but I'm just better with my 1911s. Both hold about the same amount of ammo (8 in the 327, 8+1 in the 1911s), and both are VERY accurate. If it takes more rounds than that, some serious crap has started going down at my place, and I'd probably better have some New York reloads right with me.

 

[redneckrepairs]

I am not a big fan of the " Hurtyourhandieum " line of super lightweight j frames due to recoil control issues with full power loads . With that being said on a personal level i would prefer almost any revolver to almost any glock . The glocks are fine firearms but simply do not work well for me and i refuse to try and retrain myself just to shoot one ( i mention glock not to bash the gun just to point out that not all autos are created equal for all shooters and glock is one that does not work for me ) . I cut my teeth so to speak on double action revolvers as a duty weapon tho and get along fine with them . Until double stack autos, and budgetary cuts for firearms training became prevailant spray and pray gunfights were uncommon at least on the LE side . The auto does offer advantages on reload time should a reload be necessary and on some action types a better trigger pull .
My carry gun(s) are either Kahr single stacks , P7 HK , or 1911 , Note that they are all single stack autos . This is because to me the utility of a slim pistol far outweighs any possible use for a half a box of ammo in the grip .

 

[ArmedBear]

Think of the concept of Diminishing Marginal Utility from economics. Each available round matters less than the previous one, since, if you miss the target, you may not get the chance to use it, and if you hit the target, you won't need to use it.

Assuming that you can hit your target fairly well, and that you aren't battling many assailants,

Shot #1 matters MOST.
Shot #2 matters A LOT.
Shot #3 matters SOME.
Shot #4 matters A LITTLE, since you probably won't use it.
Shot #5 matters very little, since you almost certainly won't use it.
Shot #6 probably doesn't matter much. If you haven't stopped the guy by now, you've probably taken multiple hits, yourself.

Consider, also, that the first shot or two are most likely to be shot accurately, and that accuracy diminishes as you start firing repeatedly under stress. Even when you shoot beer cans, you know that pausing and taking a breath between shots results in far more hits! However, when you are being attacked, and you miss 2 or 3 times, do you really think you will be more calm and collected than when you took the first shot?

Now, assume that you might not hit your target. Shift everything down one:

1. MOST
2. MOST
3. A LOT
4. SOME
5. A LITTLE
6. VERY LITTLE
7. NOT MUCH

Now, consider the psychological factor.

If you know you have 15+ rounds, you might get sloppy. And sloppy shots are missed shots. This buys time for the bad guy to shoot you, stab you, or do whatever horrible thing he was doing that prompted you to shoot him in the first place.

Revolver shooters might be a bit more deliberate, since there's no illusion of a bottomless supply of ammunition. Or not. But if a shooter is deliberate, most likely he/she will hit the target, especially a large target at close range.

And any hunter knows that, if you miss the first few shots, your odds of connecting with the next ones become miniscule.

Now does all this mean that, if I were being attacked by three armed gangbangers intent on killing me, that I'd want to be armed only with the household Airweight? No. I'd want a group of people, all armed with semiauto carbines. However, a revolver is still a practical defensive weapon, even if it's not the only defensive weapon you might ever want.

 

[GRIZ22]

Six or seven shots of double action .357 Magnum have no place going up against 15 rounds of rapid fire single action .40S&W, or do they?


If you are of the spray and pray school 15 shots may not be enough. I don't feel undergunned when I carry a revolver. If you hit the BG with your first round in the right place his 15 rounds or 100 rds won't matter.

 

[redneckrepairs]

ArmedBear That sir is a brilliant summation, in fact i plan to coopt it ( with attrib ) for later use on other forums .

 

[Vern Humphrey]

if a shooter is deliberate, most likely he/she will hit the target, especially a large target at close range.

That's a big if. My experience is, expect a 90% degradation in performance in actual combat (and I know guys who think I'm an optimist.)

 

[Virginian]

The revolver served very well in that capacity for over 100 years. I do not see that the wondernine or it's kin has changed much, other than the number of misses exchanged.
One in the ten ring beats 17 in the ceiling, no matter where the one came from.
Any of the real aces like Leatham or Munden is going to punch your ticket, no matter what you are carrying. If you are semi good, you ought to be able to punch some sideways gun pointing punk's ticket. With whatever you are carrying.
I am with ArmedBear.