Massad Ayoob: "Are revolvers still relevant?"

[Corpral_Agarn]

Everyone should learn to shoot and work a DA revolver properly. As he said, it will help you with pretty much everything else you might shoot.

It will also show you why the autos are where they are in the hierarchy of things these days too.

I have said for years that anyone who can shoot a DA revolver well can pretty much pick up any handgun and shoot it well

 

[Corpral_Agarn]

My son’s 1969 Camaro is obsolete, but it is still badass….

View attachment 1150182

This is a perfect example of what I meant.

 

[LimaCharlie]

My current carry gun.

 

[Rule3]

I started with revolvers and still love them. The only issue I have is that a revolver like the Python or a large N frame SW is heavy. Hee in Fl it is difficult to carry one wearing a t shirt and shorts!

 

[jdc1244]

I started with revolvers and still love them. The only issue I have is that a revolver like the Python or a large N frame SW is heavy. Hee in Fl it is difficult to carry one wearing a t shirt and shorts!

True, hence the J frame.

 

[nofendertom]

Revolvers obsolete ?
Why is it that SO many people, even here on THR, carry a revolver as a back up gun, when they could carry a semi-auto of the same size (+or-), that
is more concealable and holds more ammo?

 

[trackskippy]

I know! You really have to wonder, eh?

 

[jstert]

all the non-gunners who rushed out to panic-buy a 9mm polymer wonder-blaster during the george floyd memorial “mostly peaceful” summer, and then promptly tucked it away in a safe somewhere, would probably be better served with grampa’s humble 38sp “sock-drawer” revolver.

 

[mcb]

In my experience most shooters with a given time/ammunition budget will be more proficient in the alotted time/rounds using a modern striker fired handgun than the same time/ammo spent with a revolver. And in this context I am talking about skills beyond fundamental marksmanship, ie standing in a range booth shooting a static target. I am talking about shooting on the move, shooting moving targets, shooting very fast, shooting in bad awkward positions, reloading quickly under pressure etc. I spent many years shooting USPSA and IDPA with a revolver and there is no pretending that revolvers are on par with semi-auto in that or similar settings. The revolver is at a slight disadvantage with the double-action trigger and starts to fall well behind when most shooters hits the first reload.

 

[nugi]

The revolver is at a slight disadvantage with the double-action trigger and starts to fall well behind when most shooters hits the first reload.

Based on statistics shared elsewhere on THR and places like ASP about how often citizens actually reload in a gunfight, I'm starting to think that calling quick reloads an advantage of semis is sort of like calling shooting out of a coat pocket an advantage of revolvers - it's true but is it really applicable?

 

[Skribs]

I think with any choice you make in a firearm, the two most important questions are:

1. What is the most ideal?
2. How far away am I from that?

When you're talking about a full-size gun (i.e. Glock 17 vs. Ruger GP100), I think there's a few degrees of separation. When you're talking about a pocket gun (i.e. LCP vs. LCR), the difference is less. In my opinion, both are better than a single-action handgun, whether we're talking 1911 or Ruger Blackhawk, and for different reasons). Both are way better than a derringer. Or a push dagger.

That G17 has a greater capacity than the GP100. In a fight where you use 6 or less shots, the GP100 may have the slight edge. In the event you need more shots, the G17 has a significant edge. And, if it takes twice as many shots from the G17, you still have some leftover.

 

[plainsdrifter]

Since the wife adopted my new Ruger Max-9 I'm back to my SP-101. I actually feel more comfortable carrying a wheel gun.

 

[JERRY]

Relevant yes. Limited application probably.

Reloading is generally not an issue because it's the ammo that you have on tap that's more likely than not going to save the day. Because of the comparatively limited capacity of a revolver compared to a semiauto accuracy accuracy is paramount.

 

[mcb]

Based on statistics shared elsewhere on THR and places like ASP about how often citizens actually reload in a gunfight, I'm starting to think that calling quick reloads an advantage of semis is sort of like calling shooting out of a coat pocket an advantage of revolvers - it's true but is it really applicable?

We can completely ignore the reload factor and the semi-auto still comes out ahead for most shooters that are willing to put some time into training. If we are setting reloads aside then capacity become even more critical. The only time I see the revolver being an advantage is with the people that refuse to do more than the simplest initial basic safety & marksmanship and in those cases those people are probably better off without any gun.

 

[UncleEd]

The auto is absolutely tops in the world of all the
fantasy competitions where premiums are placed
on many multiple targets, numerous reloads and
physical acrobatics while going through scenarios
that would challenge the reality of even the most
extended military combat operations.

Nothing real world is present.

But it helps gun and ammo sales tremendously.

 

[nugi]

We can completely ignore the reload factor and the semi-auto still comes out ahead for most shooters that are willing to put some time into training. If we are setting reloads aside then capacity become even more critical. The only time I see the revolver being an advantage is with the people that refuse to do more than the simplest initial basic safety & marksmanship and in those cases those people are probably better off without any gun.

Ok but I’ll add one more scenario and that’s everyone who isn’t dressing like they’re making a pajama run to wal-mart or attending a formal function. If you’re not wearing a big un-tucked shirt or a sport jacket, ie if you like to dress well but still expect to be able to protect yourself anywhere, I think there’s another advantage of a revolver in there

 

[UncleEd]

Revolvers obsolete ?
Why is it that SO many people, even here on THR, carry a revolver as a back up gun, when they could carry a semi-auto of the same size (+or-), that
is more concealable and holds more ammo?

What are you, some kind of wise guy?

 

[FL-NC]

They are definitely not for me. I could never see myself carrying one unless I needed a ginormous caliber that doesn't come in an auto, and there is nothing I may encounter that a 45 ACP or lesser could not adequately address.

 

[Pudge]

Don't miss understand my meaning.

An 1851 cap and ball revolver will deliver the projectile quite well and it will absolutely kill someone.

But the technology being used is obsolete.

And obsolete is largely associated with "bad". I don't mean it that way.

I mean: "technology offers us better" is all.

Revolvers are the best when you need to hit something with as much power as you can fit in a handgun or if you need the absolute in small 5 shot guns.

Other than those two extremes, they are largely overtaken by modern offerings.

I'm not trying to bring the revolver down, I'm only recognizing how far "up" the semi auto has come.

Suggesting that the calculator on your phone makes doing math in your head obsolete is an argument that can be made, but you can lose a lot of quite beneficial utility by relegating something functional to obsolescence. I've got a chainsaw and an axe, neither is obsolete.

 

[JCooperfan1911]

Don't miss understand my meaning.

An 1851 cap and ball revolver will deliver the projectile quite well and it will absolutely kill someone.

But the technology being used is obsolete.

And obsolete is largely associated with "bad". I don't mean it that way.

I mean: "technology offers us better" is all.

Revolvers are the best when you need to hit something with as much power as you can fit in a handgun or if you need the absolute in small 5 shot guns.

Other than those two extremes, they are largely overtaken by modern offerings.

I'm not trying to bring the revolver down, I'm only recognizing how far "up" the semi auto has come.

I wouldn’t dismiss a cap and ball revolver so easily.

My .44 caliber Remington is extremely reliable when loaded and cared for properly. It hits with the same authority as an average .44 special, and six rounds will solve the vast majority of social issues statistically speaking.

I’ve taken the time to learn the black powder revolver inside and out. The same applies to my Colt .36 and .44.

I wouldn’t feel unarmed with one at all.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Within the first minute he says revolvers aren't obsolete then it turns into a CZ revolver advertisement. I made it two minutes before turning it off. Did I miss anything?

CZ revolver? I don't remember that. He did talk a lot about the new Colt Python with the 3" barrel. After that he talks about the generic advantages of a revolver.

 

[somethingbenign]

CZ revolver? I don't remember that. He did talk a lot about the new Colt Python with the 3" barrel. After that he talks about the advantages of a revolver.

CZ recently purchased Colt. Took me a bit to put that together and I pay attention to the CZ product line.

 

[mcb]

Ok but I’ll add one more scenario and that’s everyone who isn’t dressing like they’re making a pajama run to wal-mart or attending a formal function. If you’re not wearing a big un-tucked shirt or a sport jacket, ie if you like to dress well but still expect to be able to protect yourself anywhere, I think there’s another advantage of a revolver in there

That is a good application for a small revolver but my RM380 (or any of the micro 380 ACP and 9mms) works for that application equally well as my S&W 442. Anything bigger than a J-frame and the comparable size and weight semi-auto trumps it for CCW.

I am not against revolvers I have used a revolver of some type for pretty much everything I do with a handgun (CCW, woods, hunting, & competition) for the past decade. That said there are only a few niches where the revolver beats the semi-auto. ie for hunting the revolver brings some serious advantages but for CCW and LEO applications those advantages are almost non-existence except for some small niches like deep concealment or BUG. I love revolvers but I am honest enough with myself to admit I am leaving some capability at home carrying a revolver compared to most semi-autos.

 

[old lady new shooter]

CZ recently purchased Colt. Took me a bit to put that together and I pay attention to the CZ product line.

CZ purchased Colt?! Oh my goodness. I gotta go find out more about that. Thanks for the information.

 

[Corpral_Agarn]

I wouldn’t dismiss a cap and ball revolver so easily.

My .44 caliber Remington is extremely reliable when loaded and cared for properly. It hits with the same authority as an average .44 special, and six rounds will solve the vast majority of social issues statistically speaking.

I’ve taken the time to learn the black powder revolver inside and out. The same applies to my Colt .36 and .44.

I wouldn’t feel unarmed with one at all.

View attachment 1150340

I tried but I feel like you went out of your way to miss understand my post LOL


If you were forced to choose a handgun for defense this minute, with all the modern options available would you choose a cap and ball revolver?

If you answer 'yes' you are either desperate to prove a point you know is lost, or you need your head examined.


It's like chosing a 1955 Ford to win NASCAR today.
Was it good once? Sure.
Are there better? Duh.