Revolver or Semi-Auto for EDC?

[Kleanbore]

Does not negate the fact that semoautos, Glocks included, are more prone to malfunctions.

If they were "prone" to malfunctions, they would not be used by all military forces, almost all police forces in the world, and most SD carriers.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

I suspect holster options are rather limited.

Uncle Mike's

 

[Trunk Monkey]

Not really, but when you compare it to the immediate action drill for a DA revolver that goes 'click', which is simply to just pull the trigger again, and the DA revolver does not require two hands and and A LOT more time to get it back in the fight that the SA does, the learning curve is AT LEAST 4 TO 5 TIMES THAT OF THE REVOLVER. Like I said, just common sense.

No, it's not common sense. You're wrong.

A revolver may be easier to manipulate but it's not easier to master and it's not easier to get good hits with unless you want to put it in a lot of time learning that double action trigger.

 

[Styx]

If they were "prone" to malfunctions, they would not be used by all military forces, almost all police forces in the world, and most SD carriers.

Respectfully, I didn't say they were prone to malfunction. I stated, within context, is that they were "more" prone to malfunction compared to revolvers.

 

[mcb]

Respectfully, I didn't say they were prone to malfunction. I stated, within context, is that they were more prone to malfunction compared to revolvers.

And you have the mean rounds to stoppage and mean rounds to failure data for specific models of both semi-autos and revolvers to back that up? Conjecture is just that without hard data.

 

[Kleanbore]

A revolver may be easier to manipulate but it's not easier to master and it's not easier to get good hits with unless you want to put it in a lot of time learning that double action trigger.

There you go!

. I stated, within context, is that they were "more" prone to malfunction compared to revolvers.

My mistake.

And you have the mean rounds to stoppage and mean rounds to failure data for specific models of both semi-autos and revolvers to back that up? Conjecture is just that without hard data.

Don't need it. The statement that armies and police forces choose semi-autos is not conjecture.

 

[Styx]

And you have the mean rounds to stoppage and mean rounds to failure data for specific models of both semi-autos and revolvers to back that up? Conjecture is just that without hard data.

I do not. I can only speak for my own experiences, and the consensus and experience I've read, heard, or have come across from many others on firearm forums, firearm publications, etc throughout the years. I also recall in another revolver vs semiautomatic thread, a member who was arguing against the capacity of revolvers citing a link to an article from a well respected/knowledgeable member of the firearm community (I can't recall who, but I'll see if I can find that post). In that article, as well as others over the years, the same thing was stated with regards to revolvers being more reliable... It's something that has been conseeded to in this thread as well as other countless discussions without anyone objecting to it... Until now that is...

No magazines, doesn't depend on ammo, less complicated (less actions that have to happen in relation to one another to be successful), not prone to limp wristing, etc. I've seen and heard of these issues happening on the internet and in person over the years vs the rare occasions that a revolver has a stopage... Granted, there are more semoautos vs revolvers out there, but there are still millions of revolvers in circulation. They've been used for decades. I haven't heard anything from any source that would lead me to revolver concluded that revolver stopages are common. It's something that's possible and arguably more prevalent with revolvers, but it's something that appears to be very rare.

 

[JR24]

I'd you have never had a malfunction on either action type you have not shoot enough or are being dishonest. I have had both revolvers and semiautos malfunction, wear out parts and break parts rendering them non-functional. They are a mechanical system that can and will fail.

That said the reliability of good name brand semiautos and revolvers is so high as to render reliability a secondary selection criteria at best. When I reach in the gun cabinet for a gun for an application reliability is not on my mind all my guns are reliable or I would not own them.

I swear I'm about the only person in the gun world who will admit to having revolvers bind the cylinder up in the field. Stuck tight, no second click, no move. IIRC a small stick worked its way into my holster and wedged the cylinder tight, fixable but it required some work, certainly more than tap rack bang.

I've also had my Vaquero bind up a few times from dirty cylinder holes stopping the round from fully seating, learned to ensure it spins free after reloading quick and to double/triple check my primers are perfectly flush, also another point that's caused failure to me.

Then again, FWIW my various carry guns have never once failed with quality carry ammo, I burn through a few hundred probably twice a year. Not nearly as many as my practice ammo (and even then failures are quite rare and usually easily identifiable as ammo issues).

So, in my experience, perhaps revolvers are more reliable but when they go down, they go down hard and become a sweet rock in the moment.

Ah, yeah also that stupid cap on the crane of my FILs Model 19 that works loose under recoil and stops th cylinder from swinging out without a few minutes of careful rescrewing.

 

[Kleanbore]

That semi-autos are more apt to malfunction is really not debatable. The question is one of how much more.

If you go to a two-day defensive shooting course in which each of, say, two dozen students puts around 1200 rounds down range, you are apt to notice a few malfunctions. Most will be cleared more quickly than I can do that.

You cannot make a similar observation about revolvers, because most instructors tell the students to bring semi-autos.

But when revolvers do fail, and they do, it is very rarely possible to put them back into operation very quickly.

If reliability were the only consideration, I would choose a revolver.

But there are other considerations. For me, the ability to put several shots rapidly on target with an appropriate balance of speed and precision is key. I am a whole lot better with a semi-auto.

I much prefer more capacity than most revolvers have. I suppose I could carry two of them, but it's not convenient for me.

Finally, my single column semi-autos are a lot more concealable in an OWB holster than any revolver of any size.

 

[Styx]

That semi-autos are more apt to malfunction is really not debatable. The question is one of how much more.

If you go to a two-day defensive shooting course in which each of, say, two dozen students puts around 1200 rounds down range, you are apt to notice a few malfunctions. Most will be cleared more quickly than I can do that.

You cannot make a similar observation about revolvers, because most instructors tell the students to bring semi-autos.

But when revolvers do fail, and they do, it is very rarely possible to put them back into operation very quickly.

If reliability were the only consideration, I would choose a revolver.

But there are other considerations. For me, the ability to put several shots rapidly on target with an appropriate balance of speed and precision is key. I am a whole lot better with a semi-auto.

I much prefer more capacity than most revolvers have. I suppose I could carry two of them, but it's not convenient for me.

Finally, my single column semi-autos are a lot more concealable in an OWB holster than any revolver of any size.

Capacity debate aside, the original debate that was lost stemmed from a member suggesting revolvers can be beneficial for new shooters or those who do not train regularly aka most gun owners. In that regard, malfunctions and being able to clear a malfunction quickly in a gun fight would be more of a concern. In their case especially, I do not think that it's to far fetched to say that it's much more likely that a semiauto has a malfunction vs their revolver suddenly having a stopage in a sudden do or die situation.

 

[JR24]

Capacity debate aside, the original debate that was lost stemmed from a member suggesting revolvers can be beneficial for new shooters or those who do not train regularly aka most gun owners. In that regard, malfunctions and being able to clear a malfunction quickly in a gun fight would be more of a concern. In their case especially, I do not think that it's to far fetched to say that it's much more likely that a semiauto has a malfunction vs their revolver suddenly having a stopage in a sudden do or die situation.

From my experience with new shooters, long DA triggers are much, much harder to learn to shoot well, especially rapidly.

So you'd have to factor, in the case of an inexperienced shooter in a life threatening situation, the increased likelyhood of misses combined to the lower ammo count.

 

[Kleanbore]

From my experience with new shooters, long DA triggers are much, much harder to learn to shoot well, especially rapidly.

So you'd have to factor, in the case of an inexperienced shooter in a life threatening situation, the increased likelyhood of misses combined to the lower ammo count.

Consitent with my observations....

It also applies to me, and I'm not a new shooter.

I have some friends who strongly prefer revolvers. They are very experienced former LEO from the old days. They can use them.

 

[John Joseph]

IMHO, the propensity of a given action to malfunction really only comes into play with your own CC carry piece and you.
What quality firearm did you opt for?
What do you feed it?
How do you maintain it?
How functional are requisite accessories(magazines, holster, etc...) you selected?

 

[WrongHanded]

Double action revolvers are easier to learn to use.

Semi-autos are easier to learn to shoot.

If Semi-autos are more likely to fail, it is only a failure to cycle correctly, and not mechanical failure. This can be due to ammunition, or due to user error.

Some semi-autos are a of such a robust and simplistic design that they are less likely to have a mechanical failure than various designs of DA revolver.

Revolvers are less likely to be effected by ammunition failure, or improper operation.

I don't think there is a clear winner for self defense. So carry what you like. The OP was not regarding which is a better choice, but why you choose to carry what you carry.

 

[Kleanbore]

Just one example here--doesn't prove anything, but...

A nurse whom we know who is the mother of two decided that she wanted a gun, for good reasons.

Her prior experience was limited to BB guns.

The salespersons in the stores all recommended a S&W 5-shot snub. Reliable, simple and, easy to use, they said.

I was recovering from a major hospital stay, and I could not help personally.

I told her to set up an appointment with an instructor at a local range that rents guns, and to try shooting several. I emphasized the need to fire rapidly. I expressed my concern about capacity.

The first one she rejected was the Model 642. Trigger pull made it a non-starter, and she didn't like the sight radius. She could not hit with it.

She tried several semi-autos. The littlest 9s recoiled too violently and were hard to hit with, and the sight radii were too short. I don't like them, either.

She compared grip, triggers, effort required for racking the slide, her ability to hit with them....and she was shown how to clear malfunctions quickly.

She came home with a .380 Browning that looks like a sub-scale Model 1911.

That would not have been my first choice, but she is happy with it.

 

[mcb]

Just one example here--doesn't prove anything, but...

A nurse whom we know who is the mother of two decided that she wanted a gun, for good reasons.

Her prior experience was limited to BB guns.

The salespersons in the stores all recommended a S&W 5-shot snub. Reliable, simple and, easy to use, they said.

I was recovering from a major hospital stay, and I could not help personally.

I told her to set up an appointment with an instructor at a local range that rents guns, and to try shooting several. I emphasized the need to fire rapidly. I expressed my concern about capacity.

The first one she rejected was the Model 642. Trigger pull made it a non-starter, and she didn't like the sight radius. She could not hit with it.

She tried several semi-autos. The littlest 9s recoiled too violently and were hard to hit with, and the sight radii were too short. I don't like them, either.

She compared grip, triggers, effort required for racking the slide, her ability to hit with them....and she was shown how to clear malfunctions quickly.

She came home with a .380 Browning that looks like a sub-scale Model 1911.

That would not have been my first choice, but she is happy with it.

This is aways a good plan, rent or borrow as many guns as you can find for the application you need one for and try them. This almost always leads to a better choice for the individual.

 

[sparkyfender]

I own and carry both. I don't feel under gunned with either.

Lots of good points being made in this thread, pointing out strengths and weaknesses of BOTH semi autos and revolvers. Carry what works for you.

 

[Thibaut]

Nevermind.

 

[labnoti]

Third part in a series about revolvers:

and it probably touches on the most popular contrasts in Revolver vs. Semi-Auto for EDC.

Particularly, Paul addresses reload speed and capacity. His video failed to show the revolver reload by which he concluded that revolvers are slower to reload. I assume he did not even use a speedloader or clip. We've already made the same reference to Jerry Miculek in this thread -- that is that his performance is not indicative of what we can expect from our own. Nevertheless, I remain convinced that with a reasonable amount of diligence in practice, reloading a revolver with a clip is not practically slower than reloading a magazine.

Paul approaches the capacity issue by illustrating the diminishing returns of greater capacity. Although he argues that six or less is most often enough, he describes several exceptions where significantly more capacity is certainly better. He does not go as far as attempting to qualify whether that extra capacity could be addressed with a reload or not. Certainly, the exceptional circumstances where a self-defender needs 11 rounds without a chance for a reload are less frequent than the exceptional circumstances where a self-defender needs 11 rounds but has time for a reload.

Where I feel he falls short is in describing some of the drawbacks of a higher capacity semi-automatic versus a revolver. He uses two examples: where there are legal magazine capacity limits; and for whom the additional on-gun capacity might cause an excess number of rounds to be fired. Let me describe some other reasons that someone might find it compelling to prefer an alternative to high capacity semi-automatics. Staying focused on the issue of capacity, a capacity of greater than about 8 rounds is almost always achieved with a double-stack magazine. Double-stacks are usually very wide in the hand. A semi-automatic is already limited to very short cartridges to avoid an excessively long (front to back) grip. In other words, that greater capacity is obtained at the expense of small cartridges and fat grips.

On the subject of small cartridges, notice that Paul's collection of compact semiautos were mostly .380 ACP. But even if we accept that there are lots of good 9mm pistols with meaningfully more capacity than a revolver, we still have to reckon that 9x19mm can be considered the minimum standard for effectiveness. Some people do not consider it effective enough. If we look at .45ACP, 10mm, and other more effective cartridges, either our capacity is not much greater than a revolver or our double-stack grips are getting pretty fat indeed. So some other reasons not to have a higher-capacity semi-automatic is that it requires a smaller, less effective cartridge or fatter grips that can be harder for some people to shoot effectively.

I've never heard anyone complain they brought too much ammo to a gunfight. But I've also never heard anyone wish it took two bullets to stop an attacker instead of one or even three instead of two.

Now I know there is a prevailing theory that all handgun cartridges from 9mm to .45 are "equally" effective or that there is no practical difference in their effectiveness. For one thing, I can tell you the meat target doesn't agree with that theory. The foundation of that theory is the FBI gel test protocol, and one thing that protocol, at least as far as it has been simplified for internet keyboard ballisticians, does not consider is effectiveness after barrier penetration, or as Paul has demonstrated in another video, the effectiveness through a low-angle windshield.

 

[Kleanbore]

...Paul addresses reload speed and capacity. His video failed to show the revolver reload by which he concluded that revolvers are slower to reload. I assume...

For me as a civilian, the capacity issue is only relevant during a violent criminal attack, and cannot see myself being able to reload during such a short interval before being overcome.

Should the attacker(s) break away, my justification for the use of deadly force goes with them.

For police officers, the situation is different, but the civilian has no business continuing battle after the attack had ceased.

 

[Thibaut]

If they are after me with a knife, my plan is to shoot them in both knees. If they have a gun, I will probably go for an eye. My master plan being the ability to do either expertly with my revolver or my semi auto; one of which I will be carrying much of the time. Lord knows I am spending enough money making it so. Alas.

I will reload, if necessary, in the time it takes me to reload. It is what it is.

 

[Kleanbore]

If they are after me with a knife, my plan is to shoot them in both knees. If they have a gun, I will probably go for an eye.

That is an entirely unrealistic plan.

Most trained defenders will be well served if they can consistently hit the upper chest area of an attacher closing at five meters per second from close range in a high-stress situation, before it is too late.

I suggest that you avail your self of some good defensive training.

I will reload, if necessary, in the time it takes me to reload.

You will reload, if necessary, in the time available.

It is what it is.

?

 

[labnoti]

For me as a civilian, the capacity issue is only relevant during a violent criminal attack, and cannot see myself being able to reload during such a short interval before being overcome.

Should the attacker(s) break away, my justification for the use of deadly force goes with them.

For police officers, the situation is different, but the civilian has no business continuing battle after the attack had ceased.

Unless it begins again. I see your point about reloading being less likely for a civilian. In fact, I'm not aware of a civilian self-defense incident where a civilian executed a reload. On the other hand, I can see a multiple home invader situation calling for and providing time and cover for a reload. I can also see the situation Paul mentions as demanding greater capacity -- being in the wilderness alone and subject to an extended attack -- calling for a reload.

 

[Jim Rau]

No, it's not common sense. You're wrong.

A revolver may be easier to manipulate but it's not easier to master and it's not easier to get good hits with unless you want to put it in a lot of time learning that double action trigger.

I know, after 70+ years on this earth you and others have convinced me that common sense no longer can be found in this world! Thanks for proving that! How many years have you used and/or instructed others in the use of a revolver?

 

[Thibaut]

I will edc my revolver or my semi auto depending on my outfit and my circumstance and whether or not I feel like carrying that particular day or night. I trained yesterday with two leo's. Nobody; no matter how adept or knowledgeable they are with firearms can tell me what situation, if any, I will find myself wherein I will need my gun and what exactly that would entail, including reload, etc....

My preference for city edc is the revolver. My bump-in-the-night preference is either and both. I am comfortable with one or the other and pleased with my progress, especially so; considering my inexperienced start.