Massad Ayoob: "Are revolvers still relevant?"

[old lady new shooter]

Ive worked on the ground, in and around the public most of my life, and a fair amount of it in some not so nice inner cities, and places where we had to "try" and do our jobs and constantly pay attention to some of the craziness thats going on around you at the same time. A lot of those places we had to decicate people to just guard our work trucks and equipment while we tried to work.

It all sounds really good to say you can pay attention to everything going on around you, even just 90% of the time. Reality is, you arent paying anywhere even close to that, and still living/dealing with your life.

I agree that paying attention to everything all the time is not really feasible.

I do make a point of explicitly paying careful attention in what I believe are called "transitional spaces", like going between my car and a store. In either direction I first look around for any potential problems, if in the car just drive away, if in the store wait inside for the problem to go away. If nothing spotted, stay very alert while walking between.

 

[old lady new shooter]

People can think anything they want. That's what <used to> make this country great. I know I can draw and hit what I need to hit with my 3" King Cobra. I know it works and I know it will not fail.

That's my carry gun also.

 

[fastbolt]

And over on RevolverGuy.com a new article was
started Saturday on the many things that can go
wrong with a revolver.

Want a list of everything that may fail to work normally on a motor vehicle?

 

[PapaG]

Never seen one of those. Revolver people are like vegans. At least around other shooters, you will absolutely know who carries a revolver.

Why did the vegan cross the road? Because he saw someone he hadn’t told he was vegan yet.

 

[trackskippy]

Want a list of everything that may fail to work normally on a motor vehicle?

Want a list of what to do with a locked up revolver when you get one at a bad moment?

 

[fastbolt]

Want a list of what to do with a locked up revolver when you get one at a bad moment?

If someone is going to realize all the things that might cause a firearm not to function, the obvious solution is not to carry one.

Over the course of completing more than a couple of dozen armorer classes, and having served as a LE firearms trainer for more than 25 years, I've acquired a passing familiarity of the potential issues that might occur with a variety of firearms. None of which keeps awake at night. Granted, the potential for environmental conditions causing problems, as well as shooter & ammunition-induced issues to occur, are always a possibility, but that's life. You do what you can to try to minimize the potential (different than possibility), and then you drive on.

Over the years of watching a lot of folks bring revolvers and pistols through both LE and private person (CCW) range sessions, I've seen far, far more problems involving pistols, than revolvers.

Yep, there are some types of problems that may occur with both pistols and revolvers that aren't going to be resolved without some bench time.

 

[UncleEd]

Want a list of everything that may fail to work normally on a motor vehicle?

Want a list of everything that can fail in a marriage, in a Hoola-Hoop or a merry-go-round?
Or shall we stick to guns? If you read it, no doubt nothing was new to you
or maybe something was. I know I don't know everything about revolvers.

I see you are an armorer. But perhaps, just perhaps, a number of members
here are not as conversant with the revolver and an article which I cited might
be of some help.

 

[Styx]

These both are older post of mine that I'm quoting where I mentioned the issues I've experienced with both a revolver and semiauto at the range:

I have a taurus pt7338 jammed with a live round in the chamber the slide will not close completely and will not open any advise

Had the same thing happen with my Springfield XD Mod 2 9mm at the range. Range officer had to use a copper punch and a mallet to get it unjammed... What ammo where you shooting?

I have fired factory 357 out of my LCR. The recoil was so bad that the factory WWB ammo I was shooter jumped crimp, and cause it to lock up in the cylinder. Was a PITA to fix.

I had to deal with the dreaded crimp jump with my Ruger LCR which is really almost an exclusive issue with 357 out of light weight revolvers. That took the gun out of the fight. I reckon with 357 self defense ammo that would not have happened.

My XD Mod 2 had a somewhat similar issue with a live round of factory brass ammo being jammed in the gun to where the slide would not budge to go forward to chamber the round nor could I get the slide to open. It took 2 or 3 range officers working together to finally clear that jam. That semiautos was just as out of the fight as my LCR was. I've heard of others having simular jams with their semiautos over the years on firearm forums.

My point is the notion that revolvers that fail are generally out of the fight and when semiautos fail they can get back into the fight is a false equivalent. On extremely rear occasions both semi-autos and revolvers can malfunction to where they're out of the fight; however, a semiautos will still have more non out of service malfunctions vs revolvers.

 

[Tallball]

The operator is more or less the magazine and ammo tester of a revolver. The operator loads the rounds into the chambers by hand. This is slower, but rounds that don't fit correctly will be discarded, and every round in the first (and probably only) cylinder will be loaded at the operator's leisure, not while the handgun is being fired.

IMHO, that's why revolvers have fewer malfunctions than semiautos. The revolver does fewer things, and the main thing that it skips is loading and unloading individual rounds into/from the chambers. Those are things that causes a lot of errors in semiautomatic pistols. Having the operator do that instead makes for a slower but more reliable operating system.

Law enforcement and military didn't dump revolvers because they were malfunctioning and locking up all over the place. The technology dates from the 1850's and it's well-proven. LE and military adopted semiauto pistols because they shoot a lot faster. People with jobs like that need to have enough firepower for a real gunfight. A service pistol with three 15-round magazines is a very good choice for them. They can get off 45 rounds in less than a minute. If their extremely low malfunction rate is a little bit higher than that of a revolver, it's a worthwhile tradeoff.

Whether or not a civilian is better off with a revolver is up to them. I happen to shoot them better and like them better, so I prefer them for CC and HD. Other people choose semiautos. It's nice to have choices.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

If someone is going to realize all the things that might cause a firearm not to function, the obvious solution is not to carry one.

Or to carry two.

 

[aaaaa]

If someone is going to realize all the things that might cause a firearm not to function, the obvious solution is not to carry one.

Well, not carrying one is a sure way to get it to not function.

 

[Gun-Reck]

I love revolvers and use them when appropriate but the technology is largely obsolete

Antiquated.

 

[Pat Riot]

I get a kick out of these types of discussions.

All they are is arguing, discussing, debating about one’s favorite system over another’s favorite system.
Comparing revolvers to semiautos is like comparing gasoline and diesel engines. PCs and Apples. Androids and iPhones. Snap-On and Mac tools. And on…and on…and on.
They all do the same jobs, they just do it differently.

 

[21H40]

I get a kick out of these types of discussions.

All they are is arguing, discussing, debating about one’s favorite system over another’s favorite system.
Comparing revolvers to semiautos is like comparing gasoline and diesel engines. PCs and Apples. Androids and iPhones. Snap-On and Mac tools. And on…and on…and on.
They all do the same jobs, they just do it differently.

But the one I choose is the correct one.

I do wonder, if you knew you were going into a gunfight, would you still only bring a 5-shot snub? I don't have experience with gunfights as a civilian, but on the military side, I never once encountered a situation where having extra, unused ammunition after the firefight was seen as a problem.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

But the one I choose is the correct one.

I do wonder, if you knew you were going into a gunfight, would you still only bring a 5-shot snub? I don't have experience with gunfights as a civilian, but on the military side, I never once encountered a situation where having extra, unused ammunition after the firefight was seen as a problem.

That's the key question -- if you KNEW what was going to happen, what would you choose? Answer that honestly and the whole debate goes away.

 

[Gun-Reck]

That's the key question -- if you KNEW what was going to happen, what would you choose? Answer that honestly and the whole debate goes away.

Reasonable expectations.

Why you don't see a lot of drivers wearing helmets and four-point harnesses on the street.

 

[Tallball]

If I knew for a fact that sometime in the next year someone was going to jump out of concealment and start beating me, I would carry a snub revolver. IMHO it's the best firearm for that situation.

If I knew for a fact that sometime in the next year someone was going to start shooting at me, I would wear a vest and carry a long gun.

 

[Pat Riot]

But the one I choose is the correct one.

I do wonder, if you knew you were going into a gunfight, would you still only bring a 5-shot snub? I don't have experience with gunfights as a civilian, but on the military side, I never once encountered a situation where having extra, unused ammunition after the firefight was seen as a problem.

I would take Option C: I would not go to a gunfight.

 

[SwampWolf]

Seems to me Mas has never been in a fire fight.

I’d rather follow Bill Jordan’s advice.

I'd rather be hanging out with Mas-at least I probably wouldn't get shot; his experience and training would make for a great personal bodyguard. Concerning advice, actions speak louder than words and most people don't have to participate in a "fire fight" in order to become proficient in self-defense.

 

[defjon]

Antiquated.

I say that depends on the purpose.

 

[Styx]

But the one I choose is the correct one.

I do wonder, if you knew you were going into a gunfight, would you still only bring a 5-shot snub? I don't have experience with gunfights as a civilian, but on the military side, I never once encountered a situation where having extra, unused ammunition after the firefight was seen as a problem.

That's the key question -- if you KNEW what was going to happen, what would you choose? Answer that honestly and the whole debate goes away.

I wouldn't bring a handgun period. I'd bring a rifle, and on the military side, a rifle is the primary fighting weapon. I wouldn't carry 5-7, 10, 15, or 17 rounds if I knew for a fact that I'd be in a gun fight, but had no other details about the logistics. I'd probably would also walk around dressed in full body armor as well.

Another point someone also brought up, would you wear a helmet, four-point harness, fire retardant suit, gloves, etc if you KNEW you were going to be in a car accident? If the answer is "yes," then why don't you do that everyday being that the risk of being in a car accident is much higher than being in a gun fight?

 

[35 Whelen]

That's the key question -- if you KNEW what was going to happen, what would you choose? Answer that honestly and the whole debate goes away.

I wouldn't bring a handgun period. I'd bring a rifle, and on the military side, a rifle is the primary fighting weapon. <snip>

Exactly. One of my son-in-laws serves in a Special Forces unit of the U.S. Army and was here for a few days this week. We were shooting handguns here at the house yesterday and he told me very flatly and in no uncertain terms that the only reason they train with and carry handguns (Currently the Glock MK27) is in case something happens to their rifle.

The operator is more or less the magazine and ammo tester of a revolver. The operator loads the rounds into the chambers by hand. This is slower, but rounds that don't fit correctly will be discarded, and every round in the first (and probably only) cylinder will be loaded at the operator's leisure, not while the handgun is being fired.

IMHO, that's why revolvers have fewer malfunctions than semiautos. The revolver does fewer things, and the main thing that it skips is loading and unloading individual rounds into/from the chambers. Those are things that causes a lot of errors in semiautomatic pistols. Having the operator do that instead makes for a slower but more reliable operating system.

Law enforcement and military didn't dump revolvers because they were malfunctioning and locking up all over the place. The technology dates from the 1850's and it's well-proven. LE and military adopted semiauto pistols because they shoot a lot faster. People with jobs like that need to have enough firepower for a real gunfight. A service pistol with three 15-round magazines is a very good choice for them. They can get off 45 rounds in less than a minute. If their extremely low malfunction rate is a little bit higher than that of a revolver, it's a worthwhile tradeoff.

Whether or not a civilian is better off with a revolver is up to them. I happen to shoot them better and like them better, so I prefer them for CC and HD. Other people choose semiautos. It's nice to have choices.

When said SIL stays at the house, his favorite activity is playing H-O-R-S-E with handguns on my shooting range, which we did yesterday. Target sizes range from business card-size steel hangers to a 6" round swinger and a full size IDPA silhouette at 25 yds. to a 12" round steel gong and an 18" x 24" silhouette at 100 yds. He used his personal handgun, a SIG P320 and I started out with my Tisas 1911A1 45 ACP, then switched to my Colt Series 70 Gov't Model 45 ACP. Shooting the small targets at 25 yds. with these handguns wasn't easy, but occasionally we'd hit one. But when we began challenging at 100 yds., hits even on the 18" x 24" silhouette were difficult and infrequent. I retrieved one of my .44 Special revolvers and things changed dramatically. Hitting the tiny swingers became much easier and the 100 yd. silhouette became easy to hit as well. I even managed to hit the 12" steel once (All shooting was offhand, BTW).

I live in a rural area and over the last 20 years have had many opportunities to shoot everything from rattlesnakes at 10' to hogs, javelina and deer as far as 50 yds. Most semi autos, in most cases, simply don't have the power nor precision for such tasks. I carry revolvers 100% of the time whether I'm at home or running errands in town and shoot them probably 50X more frequently than I do semi-autos. Since I'm far, far more likely to need to shoot an animal from 25 yds. on than I am to need to defend myself, and since I shoot a revolver much better than I do a semi-auto, I choose to carry a revolver.

I think it was Bill Jordan who said that in self defense situations the most important shot is the first one.

35W

 

[AUhiker]

If I knew I was gonna be in a gunfight I wouldn’t go!

 

[aaaaa]

Somewhere I remember a video where the gun expert said if a person is going to carry a semi-auto without one in the chamber, they would be better of with a revolver.

Also, just read that if you don't have one in the chamber and get in a self defense situation you will have the rest of your life to try to rack one in.

 

[Gun-Reck]

I say that depends on the purpose.

Thought the topic was RE: Self Defense.