Is the revolver really a practical defensive weapon?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Posted by DougDubya
Defensory, you obviously fail at logic, or even looking up the facts.

The fight was won with six rounds of .38 Special, in a .357 Magnum chambered revolver.

It was the carpenter, not the tools.

If you prefer to reduce your argument to absurd reductionism, then your points have no more validity in my eyes. The fact that so many lightly armed FBI agents SURVIVED against assault rifles pretty much shows that automatic weapons are no real advantage if you don't have the proper training.
Click to expand...

You're the only one who fails at logic and looking up the facts.

If it's "the carpenter, not the tools", then why were you the one who originally brought up the irrelevant factoid that it was a man with a revolver who "finished off" the "offenders"?

I'm well aware agent Mireles was using .38 Special +P in his .357 Magnum revolver. In my previous post, I never specified what caliber of rounds he was firing when he shot them at near point-blank range. So your irrelevancies continue.

Thanks to the serious injuries to the perps caused by the semi-autos of agents Dove, Grogan and Risner---agent Mireles was fortunate enough to be able to advance on the perps' position and shoot them at near point-blank range. Any semi-auto could've also killed them at near point-blank range.

So the fact that Mireles shot them with a revolver doesn't make revolvers "better" or "as good" in any way, shape or form.

By the way, the perps in the Miami shootout were only in possession of one Ruger Mini-14, not "assault rifles" as you stated. Please get your facts straight.

Also, two FBI agents in that shootout were KILLED and three seriously injured by that semi-automatic Ruger Mini-14 that you claim was "no real advantage". :rolleyes:

One of the perps was unconscious for much of the shootout, so just one perp managed to kill two FBI agents and seriously injure three others with a Ruger Mini-14 that you claim was "no real advantage". :rolleyes:

Bottom Line FACT--It was the Miami shootout that prompted the FBI to retire revolvers as the official sidearm of the agency. They've used semi-autos ever since.
 
Posted by Hawk
I've had revolvers jam more often and more insistently than my semis could ever muster.
Click to expand...

Amen to that!

I was at the range about a week and a half ago. Even though probably at least 80% of the handguns being used were semi-autos, the only semi-auto malfunction was one lone failure to eject, which was promptly cleared without the shooter hardly skipping a beat.

Whereas two revolvers jammed and they had to be taken off the firing line to be attended to.

Six NOT for sure! :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Xl92P_mVDM
 
I have purposely avoided the semi/revolver/caliber wars for some time now. The arguments for/against are basically the same each time around and in the end it really doesn't matter much at this point. I have made my choice based upon years of experience, my current needs and my normal threat environment. My current EDC normally consists of two X42's with BB SP/+P, two speed strips w/4 rounds each, a primary and retention knife, a surefire light, a cell phone, and great deal of situational awareness. I have confidence in my equipment and training and my ability to avoid/manage/reduce (in that order) any threats I am likely to encounter. I have nothing against hicap major caliber semi's, I used them for many years and am well versed in their strengths and weaknesses and would not hesitate to go back to them if I felt the need, but I currently do not. If I knew I was going into a fight and needed one...I would of course...not go :cool:
 
Keep in mind that the key word is "Defense". Also, most gunfights are over in three rounds or less.

When guns, carried by good guys and gals come out, bad guys tend to "Kick Rocks". In short, they run to keep from getting shot. Therefore I find that the Revolver is not a hinderance in a defensive situation. If I need more rounds I probably haven't solved the problem tactically. Your tactics may be different with a Revolver, due to the limited amount of ammo available, but you should never be "spraying and praying" anyways.

The one that scores a decisive hit first is usually the winner. I have confidence in my ability to do that, so the gun doesn't matter as much. It's the person behind the gun more so than the gun. I like the .357 Magnum and carry it frequently. At work I have to carry the issued "bottomfeeder" but if they let me I'd carry a wheelie.

I like Revolvers for their simple manual of arms, cartridge variability and the fact that they can feed any bullet "type". Also, if the gun fails to go BANG, all I have to do is stroke the trigger again. No two handed complicated ritual to go through to get the gun up and running again.

BikerRN
 
Last edited:
Remember that we are talking about a Defensive weapon. A Lawman or Soldier do not need a defensive weapon, they need an offensive weapon. An offensive weapon needs to have a higher capacity, the ability to penetrate many different materials and be practically indestructable. A defensive weapon, something that most Carry Permit users will carry, needs to function easily, quickly and with enough power to stop an attack. Can a revolver do this, absolutely. But so can most Semi-autos.
 
Defensory, I was attacking the inane logic of your original post.

This time, you actually dipped into the facts and came to a conclusion where training was the issue, not the tools.

However, I have no further need to debate you on a moot point as to what the FBI chooses as its sidearm, since their "gun people" went with a rattletrap, inefficient hunk of garbage as the modified 1076, which was nowhere nearly as efficient as any of the over the counter versions put out at that time.
 
The one that scores a decisive hit first is usually the winner.
Click to expand...

Great point. Some say the most common failure in a gunfight is running out of ammo (but with most firefights ending in fewer than 4 shots?). Others (including me) believe it is running out of time, which has a lot more to do with training and situational awareness than equipment.

The average person is going to be able to insert a magazine faster than loading a cylinder.
Click to expand...

Not me. I've always been different though. :p :eek:

I guess I've trained my hands more in the art of the speedloader revolver reload than the reloading of a semi. As a result, I can reload my 642 in about the same time it takes to reload my 1911. And I'm a bit faster with my 686. Though I admit, loading a "single wide" gun like a 1911 is typically not as easy as a "double wide".

If you don't practice the auto reload, it can be screwed up just as badly as a revolver reload. Speedloaders/speedstrips/moon clips and magazines can be dropped/fumbled alike, speedloaders/speedstrips/moon clips can be misaligned with the cylinder, magazines can be shoved in backwards ...

As for malfuction rate, I have owned a total of 11 handguns (9 revolvers, 2 autos). I've experienced problems with 2 revolvers and 1 auto. Percentage wise, I've had more auto problems. But my experiences alone don't count for anything. My problems were:

Taurus 94 (22 revolver): NIB, total lemon. Lemons come with both wheels and slides :D .

S&W K-22 (22 revolver): Had misfires about every 40 rounds. I replaced the 50 yr old mainspring with a new one for $15. Runs great now. Can't call this much of a problem.

Springfield 1911 Mil-Spec: Failure to go into battery once every 100 rounds when new. Break-in and a gunsmith tuneup solved most of the problems, though cheapo Blaser Brass still gives it fits. Loves 230 grain JHPs though.

---

I will add that I was able to induce jams in an Springer XD9 quite readily from limpwristing. I do love the simple manual of arms that comes with a wheelie.

As others have said early, just pick what you shoot best.
 
Last edited:
If you can shoot 6 accurately, then you can shoot 17 accurately.
Click to expand...
+1
You can spray and pray with a revolver as well as with a semi, you'll just (probably) be a tad slower. :p
I believe the "only three shots in a gunfight" statistic is several years old... I'm pretty sure that the numbers have changed since the semis have become dominant. I also get the notion that the "you fire three or less" stat is just an average... some people fired a single shot and the guy ran away, some emptied the cylinder.

I prefer the revolver that I have to the semis that I have. My revolver fits my hand very well, the ammo allows for cheap practice, and I've been able to shoot pretty accurately with it. The Beretta 21A is also a great fit, but the sights on the Smith are faster for me to acquire. The Smith just works the best of all my handguns.
 
Dudes,

We got away from the original post.

Yes, the revolver is still a viable weapon for defense. Obviously the answer is yes. A different question is "is the revolver a viable offensive weapon"? One would have to also say yes. Seal Team Six (according to Richard Marcinko’s autobiography) used revolvers as recently as 1983 for some purposes. With that in mind we can't say that they are passé like blunderbusses

Is an auto better for some applications...absolutely.

Obviously the decision that I make as a CCL holder is different than a SWAT guy about to kick a door in.

I carry a NAA Guardian 380 80% of the time as I usually dress in a polo. A Colt Detective Special .38 15% of the time when I can wear heavier clothes. On those few cold Texas days where I am going to put on a thick coat all day I carry a Springfield XD45. Hiking or working in snake country I carry my Python with the first two cylinders loaded with snake shot.

Different tools for different conditions.
 
I've been to ranges a bunch of times.
I've fired a bunch of shots at birds, squirrels, rabbits ...

All were offensive shots: I was looking for dinner
rather than defending myself against kamikaze birds or psycho squirrels.

But I've never been in a firefight.

Honestly, I hope never to be in one.

If push comes to shove, in an SD situation, would I?
You bet. In a heart beat.

I like life, and intend to continue this one as long as possible.
(Just in case those promises about after life are wrong. :uhoh: )

And, given that I don't own a bottomfeeder (see sig line),
I'll do it with a revolver of one flavor or another.

I like my revolvers.
I shoot them well.
Not as well as my levers,
but well enough to increase the probability that
if I was in a firefight with one,
I'd still be breathing the next day,
as long as I practice situational awareness
which is far more important than
revolvers v whatever.

If I hit that low probability end and die instead,
then, oh well. Life was good. And I enjoyed the simplicity and elegance of my revolvers.

And I need neither parametric nor nonparametric statistical analysis to feel OK about that.

Heteroscedasticity.png
 
Last edited:
Is the revolver really a practical defensive weapon?
Click to expand...

I've always thought so.

I no longer carry a single action revolver as an occasional off-duty weapon (I can hear the raised eye brows), but I frequently carry one or another DA/DAO revolver as an off-duty weapon.

However, I'm never quite sure everyone is actually speaking to the same subject when it comes to this topic. There are some different perspectives from which to debate a 'preference' regarding this subject.

Some folks seem to shoot revolvers better ... and some folks seem to shoot semi-auto pistols better. Fine.

There are subdivisions within each platform, as well, generally being DA/DAO for the revolvers ... and traditional double action (TDA, or DA/SA is you prefer), DAO and SA for the pistol users. (DAO is starting to cover a lot of interesting designs nowadays, too, and is sort of becoming a 'catch-all' category in some respects when someone doesn't know what else to call one of the new designs.)

Some folks like some calibers better than others. Lots of caliber choices in both platforms.

Reliability? Under what conditions and circumstances? Adverse/harsh environments? Lack of preventive maintenance? How about grip stability sensitivity (limp wristing/gripping or an unlocked wrist) in pistols? How about powder getting caught under the extractor star of a revolver? High primer hanging up on recoil shield? Short-stroked extraction/ejection of fired revolver cartridge cases? Double-feeds in pistols? Ammunition design/bullet nose profile sensitivity in pistols? Short-stroking a DA/DAO revolver trigger? Thumbing a pistol slide and causing a malfunction when cycling speed is affected? Thumbing a slide stop lever and either causing a premature slide-lock condition or preventing slide lock when the magazine runs empty? Magazine body/lip damage in pistols? Not closing a revolver cylinder and properly indexing it? Ease of reloading if only able to do so 1-handed? Resolving a bad/insert primer in either platform?

Ammunition choice? Well, pistol ammunition has certainly seemed to have received the lion's share of attention in recent years, but that's probably because it's been rather market-driven for LE application when it comes to defensive ammunition's "performance characteristics", at least to some degree. Revolver ammunition seems to have been receiving some increasing attention, though? Maybe because revolvers are becoming increasingly popular as defensive choices once again? S&W has been selling a ton of revolvers, and has been bring out new models. Hmmm. Wonder why theys eem to be selling so well?

Weight? Polymer pistols frames and ultra lightweight revolver frames seem to have made for really lightweight choices in both platforms.

Felt recoil? Subjective. Everyone's correct from their perspective.

Reloading? Easier to load more ammunition into a pistol with a high capacity magazine. No argument. Not everyone who chooses a service or defensive pistol chooses a 'high capacity' model, though. Lots of folks still claim a preference for 7-8 round .45 ACP pistols, and there are now 7-8 round service caliber revolvers on the market. Let's call that a wash in some instances.

Revolvers seem to be enjoying a resurgence in popularity, and a lot of the models being marketed and bought up seem to reflect personal defense as one of the potential reasons for interest.

Interesting. Could it be revolvers are still considered viable choices for some folks for this reason?

You know, I've carried a number of revolvers and pistols for both service and off-duty usage over the years of my career in LE.

I'd be comfortable with returning to carrying a revolver as a service weapon. Yep, you can stare aghast if you want to. :what: I wouldn't mind carrying one of the 8-shot .357 magnum S&W revolvers as a uniform choice, or a 6-7 shot .357 Magnum revolver for plainclothes. I managed to stay alive carrying a couple of different 6-shot revolvers back as a young cop. I practiced a lot. Focused on accuracy. Practiced a lot of reloading. Even carried my 6-shot service revolvers off-duty from time to time, too ... when I wasn't carrying a 7+1 capacity Colt Combat Commander (EXTRA CAPACITY!!!) or a S&W J-frame. ;)

I still carry one of my S&W J-frames more often off-duty than one of my 9mm, .40 S&W or .45 ACP pistols ... and I own pistols ranging from subcompact to compact to full-size.

I practice with them, though. All of them. Revolvers included.

Some folks don't shoot small-framed revolvers well, so they may not be optimal choices for them. Choose wisely.

Hey, some folks who carry diminutive pocket pistols don't actually shoot them as well as they think they do, or would like to be able to do, either. :uhoh: Again, choose wisely.

I like to ask folks to consider for themselves what they would really want to be carrying if they found themselves in an unavoidable defensive shooting situation.

Like that little 'watch fob' pistol, do you? Think you'll actually be able to find it, access it, grasp it and shoot it well in an unexpected life-threatening, rapidly changing, evolving, highly stressful (physically & physiologically) and possibly physically demanding (close range, fending off the attacker) circumstances which may occur?

How about that big 'ol bulky, hard-recoiling handgun that you really can't comfortably grasp and control well with just one hand on the range? Think it'll do any better for you?

One thing I'll offer, as someone who teaches/trains LE and started my career carrying an issued .357 Magnum revolver ... and that is that in some ways I do miss the days when cops learned a good foundation of handgun shooting skills, focusing on a good grip, necessary sight picture/alignment and good trigger control when shooting a DA revolver.

High capacity was never intended to replace accurately aimed fire in civilian (LE & non-LE) situations, you know. :eek:

Choosing a defensive handgun is often a matter of limited/no choice for some folks. You get what you're given, or what you're permitted to receive/choose. Other folks have the luxury of choosing anything they desire.

If it's a personal choice, choose wisely, and for all the right reasons.

Just because you like the appearance of a handgun it doesn't mean that you'll necessarily be able to shoot it as well another one which you don't like as much, appearance-wise.

One of the other instructors with whom I often teach CCW classes sometimes looks at the different qualification targets of licensees after they're completed a course-of-fire ... using more than one of their selected CCW handguns ... and will simply say to them, "Carry that one. You shoot it much better." Sometimes he's talking about a pistol the licensee just used, and sometimes he's talking about a revolver they just used. Sometimes the response he receives is, "But I like the other gun better." My partner just shrugs and lets them go on their way, since they qualified with all their permitted choices (unless they didn't, of course). Their choice, their lives ... or the lives of their loved ones.

Just my thoughts.

I've been doing this long enough to have gained a some small amount of experience and to have formed my own opinions for my own needs. I've reviewed the number of rounds fired in a number of shooting situations, and I'm content to carry my currently issued 7+1 .45 pistol and my 5,6,7,8,9 & 10-rd capacity off-duty weapons. Other folks may have studied the same, or similar, things and have arrived at a different decision. That's fine for them. I won't presume to tell them they're 'wrong'.

Kind of like trying to argue which caliber is 'better'.

It's just handgun, though, you know ...
 
Last edited:
Great post, fastbolt!

I believe the "only three shots in a gunfight" statistic is several years old... I'm pretty sure that the numbers have changed since the semis have become dominant.
Click to expand...

I wish I could remember the source (or the exact numbers), but I did see a stat recently that found that the average number of rounds fired for revolver and pistol are:

Revolver: 2.4
Semi: 2.7

Those aren't exact figures, but the spread is about right IIRC. Could have started with a "3".

Maybe someone could help me out here.

I agree though, averages are just averages. As others have said, he/she who places the critical shot first wins. Which has a heck of a lot more to do with training/tactics/awareness, not platform.

I say that knowing that I could benefit from a lot more training myself, so I don't mean to be a hypocrit.
 
Two points, one about ammo power between autos and wheelguns and the other about the Miami '86 shootout.

On ammo: revolver ammo doesn't need to compromise it's nose shape for feed ramp reliability. So we see bullet shapes in the revolver world that flat wouldn't fly in autos. As one glaring example: the 38+P Lead Semi-Wadcutter Hollowpoints (LSWC-HP) slugs as used by Winchester (4" or more barrels only please due to harder lead), Remington (2" compatible) or Buffalo Bore (standard pressure similar to Remmie, +P like nothing else on Earth) have reputations as "stoppers" that exceed their actual bullet energy. 250ft/lbs worth of the Remmie load is to me as useful on a per-round basis as 350ft/lbs of 9mm Luger and is worlds ahead of anything in 380 or 9mmMakarov (9x18). Once you hit the 357 the hottest loads leave everything but the 10mm in the dust and even that's hard-pressed to keep up with the best - and it's not a double-column mag round. And as one gent noted from a real shootout, three of his 44Mag rounds from a packable gun beat a swarm of sprayed autoloader "stuff" of unknown type.

Let's not even start with the "flying ashtray" Speer 200gr .44cal and 250gr .45cal slugs. There's not a feed ramp in the world that could eat those things 100% and they're near the top of the list of things I don't want to get hit with along with the Gold Dot 125gr 357 doing 1,500+ (which also has a funky nose shape).

On Miami: what I meant by "tactical screwups" had nothing to do with gun types, nor do I read the Miami shootout as an indictment of any one gun/ammo type. I don't blame the 9mm Silvertip for it's "failure" - the dang thing went through over 14" worth of *arm* before entering the goblin's chest cavity, while expanding perfectly.

No, the screwups involved:

* Tac vests left in trunks - yeah it was hot out, but they *knew* what sort of psychos they were hunting.

* Main sidearms pulled out and left on seats - once the chase came to a screeching halt all the decent guns went sliding down to hang out near the gas pedal or similar and most of the shooting then had to happen with backup guns that needed to be drawn first. Those crucial initial seconds lost were killers.

* Finally, pulling the goblins over in the dirt at close range raised a cloud of dust that rendered the first few seconds a blind firefight. The goblins in the center, being surrounded and equipped with at least one high-cap rifle had a "target rich environment" and then some.

The only solution to the resulting hideous tactical situation was the application of a "metric buttload" of fire.

Even then, they got lucky: in the first seconds one goblin managed to take out the other by blowing his eardrums out with a magnum revolver fired across his partner's lap while still in the car.

The FBI didn't want to admit all this and blamed the 9mm.

Now...I'm willing to trust my life to good 38+P, and I consider most 9mm fodder to be at least that good if not a tad better (more energy for starters). Like the 38+P, I think the 9mm shooter should pick their ammo carefully. But it'll git'r'done. The long sashay towards the 40S&W by way of a bastardized 10mm was a bit of a joke, but worked out mostly OK in the end except that some smaller (and often female) cops seem to be overwhelmed by the 40. But I think they'd have done better focusing on training, buying DAO 9s with *good* triggers, sights and 5" barrels for more bullet speed.

I also think making every cop in any department, local or Fed, use the *same* gun is nuts. Human hand sizes vary. Both the 10mm single-stack and 40 double-stack bottomfeeders ignore this completely and overall...it's a mess.

All because the Feebs couldn't admit to a lethal series of blunders.

Meh.

One guy with a magnum sixgun, some smarts, some patience and some tactics, none of which needed to be superhuman, could have dropped Platt and Matix like yesterday's newspaper ads. Jelly Brice, Bill Jordan, Rex Applegate or any number of others could have chopped 'em up and served 'em as sushi with 50+ year old guns.

Ghaaa.
 
Nematocyst ,fastbolt ,Jim March
WOW three great posts to bad they're burried on page 6 they should be required reading


Thanks guys
 
Thanks for the complements. We all have our better days.

I'm honored to be recognized along with two others who have FAR more experience and expertise than me.
 
Revolvers are LAME. :neener: ;) Unless they're big bore, they just aren't cool IMO. I just can't ever feel comfortable with the variety of revolvers I've tried, however semi-auto's usually feel right at home in my hands. From a technical standpoint, they work. From a defense standpoint, the more rounds you can get on target accurately and more quickly the better. Revolvers can't hold as many rounds as most semi-autos, therefore from a technical standpoint I would tend to think semi's are "superior" in that regard. Revolver people don't even bother posting a video of Jerry Miculek. I'm familiar with him and his awe-inspiring feats with revolvers. That guy is the BEST at what he does, more so than probably ~99% of revolver shooters out there so most people can't expect to ever be nearly that fast putting rounds down range and reloading. Auto's make it much easier for the average individual (and lets face it, I'm sure most of us are) to put lots of rounds down range more quickly while still maintaining accuracy compared to the same average individual with a revolver.

From a self defense standpoint though, I feel that comfort is a major factor and whatever firearm you feel most comfortable with is probably better in that aspect as you won't have to waste any time/effort operating the controls, adjusting your grip, etc. In a self defense situation I would no more wish a revolver on myself than an 'auto on a revolver guy so don't get me wrong. ;)
 
Revolvers Work Fine but its really up to the operator

My Opinion. Yes A revolver is practical for self defence. For open security carry, I can carry whatever I am qualified on unless a client specifies a preference. When I have a choice I usually go with a revolver because that seems to be what I shoot a bit better with. Dont get me wrong I like Glocks and feel totally comfortable with one for self defence but I have never had an old lady ask me if I was carrying a "Real" gun when the GP100 is in the holster...

I was going to mention that I reload can thus afford shoot my revolver more than any semi but fact is I was shooting rented smiths and rugers better than a Glock I have owned for years long before I ever bought my GP...That's Just me
 
Posted by Nematocyst
Did somebody mentioned Jerry Miculek?
Click to expand...

What Nematocyst conveniently neglected to mention regarding the youtube video he posted, is that Jerry Miculek's firearm was a specially made custom race revolver, built specifically for competition in the Smith & Wesson custom shop.

It has a heavily doctored trigger with about a one pound pull, and Miculek was using very light target loads that would be pretty much worthless in a self-defense situation.

Let's see ol' Jerry shoot that fast and accurate using a stock production S&W 686 off a dealer's shelf, with an 8 to 9 pound trigger pull and firing full .357 magnum defensive loads. :evil:

It ain't gonna happen! :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
revolver vs. autoloader cc
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
crebralfix
C
B
  • Locked
Do you really think there is that much advantage to carrying a full sized pistol?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
146
Views
9K
Robert
Robert
aaaaa
  • Locked
My Next Gun
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
Tallball
Tallball
R
  • Locked
"Why would anyone buy a revolver?"
2 3 4 5
Replies
102
Views
7K
Rexster
Rexster
M
  • Locked
Proficiency in one platform/gun vs having multiple options
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
EddieNFL
E
Back
Top