Revolver versus Semi-Auto 50 Round Challenge

[tomrkba]

Which do you shoot better, faster, and more accurately?

Inspired by this post: http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=8964114&postcount=64

Here is the overall thread if you want to read the whole thing: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=718615

Rules:

50 shots must be fired from each of one semi-auto pistol and one revolver.

Semi-autos may use fully loaded magazines. Revolvers may use any combination of loose rounds, speed strips, speed loaders and/or moonclips.

Use one standard IDPA target for each gun.

Distance is 10 yards.

Each event should be timed with a timer so the shooter can review overall time, reload times, and overall times.

Only A Zone hits count and are worth one point each. Each miss results in a 5 second penalty.

Results:

Overall time
Overall score
Best time for full string (one full mag or cylinder)
Worst time for full string
Best split time between shots
Worst split time between shots

 

[MrBorland]

I understood the gist of the original challenge to be whether it was quicker to use a revolver or a semi-auto (with 1 magazine) to send a box of 50 rounds downrange. To that end, seems to me the time starts with the 1st shot and ends at the 50th, rather than being the sum of individual strings.

Also, 5 seconds per non-A is harsh - why not use IDPA scoring on an IDPA target? 0.5 second per point down, with a clear miss equaling 5PDs (2.5 seconds)

 

[Archaic Weapon]

You would have to do it from the timer start, since the challenge was thrown down over the issue of starting with an empty gun.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Yea, I don't think you did it right. third base

 

[jmr40]

Your challenge doesn't match up with this post at all.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=8964114&postcount=64

He said

Take a revolver shooter and an autoloader shooter; the revolver with an empty cylinder and the autoloader with one empty magazine.
Give them both 50 rounds each.
No loading devices or tools, just their thumbs and fingers.
Blow the whistle and see who can shoot all 50 of their rounds the quickest.

With his criteria it will be a pretty even match. If someone has to take the time to manually load magazines vs load a revolver manually for 50 shots it will be pretty close.

Your criteria allows for pre loaded magazines. With one 33 round, and one 17 round Glock magazine I can get off 50 shots with only 1 magazine change. Even with three 17 round mags I'll only need 2 reloads. Most 6 shot revolvers would require 7 reloads. Even with 7 speed loaders ready it would be no contest.

And 50 rounds is not a real world scenario. In fact neither challenge is at all relevant to real world scenarios and proves nothing. It might be interesting to see which type of gun could be manually loaded and fire 50 rounds faster. It would be totally irrelevent, but interesting to know.

 

[btg3]

Perhaps the point is that regardless of moon clips or mags, the downtime for reloading can be a determinant of outcome. If you reload proficiently, no worries either way. If not proficient, then a high capacity mag should be considered for SD and HD.

FWIW, top shooters in IDPA post better scores with polymer pistols, followed by 1911s, and lastly by revolvers.

 

[Certaindeaf]

When you're loading any sort of non-revolving repeater, load the chamber first.. in the real world. It'd kinda suck to get capped with a full mag ready to seat home into an empty pistol.. given one magazine.
Ideally, you "reload" before slide lock and barring that, load the chamber first.. think shotgun but they are all the same.

 

[osteodoc08]

If using loaded magazine(s) as indicated in the OP (in this specific thread, not the linked ones) , I'd be fastest and most accurate with my P226 Tac Ops with my 20 round magazines already loaded up.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Yea, I think the op screwed up. It'd be fastest with the largest loaded magazines out of like a Skorpion .32 or somesuch

 

[tomrkba]

Iteration 2

I thought about it some more and reduced the round count due to ammo costs.

"Inspired" not copied. I do not believe in shooting the berm; I prefer somewhat useful practice. If you want to time shooting fifty manually loaded rounds from both guns, have at it but do not post the result here.

IDPA target set at 10 yards.

Only A Zone hits do not incur a penalty since evolver shooters are more accurate shooters and semi-auto shooters spray and pray :banghead:

Use IDPA scoring

Time using a timer that can measure splits.

time + points down = score. Lower is better. There are no penalties unless you shoot birdshot or something silly. Maybe bonus points if you use 454 Casull.

Capacity of the revolver is the limiting factor for semi-auto. Load three mags and three speed loaders for an equal number of rounds. Place two mags/loaders/clips on your belt where you normally carry them (or in a pocket if that is what you do). Place one mag or revolver reloading widget on the table. Close your gun, fully empty and start at low ready with a two handed firing grip. At the sound of the timer, load the gun and fire until empty. Repeat until all rounds have been fired.

Compare overall score. Review split and reload times. How did you do with each gun?

I think this is a better, if unoriginal, test since it limits the rounds to a carry loadout and eliminates capacity advantages in favor of shooting and reloading techniques.

 

[9mmepiphany]

It is interesting how you have tweaked your rules. Limiting the number of rounds per reload really does level the playing field.

It the original test, proposed in the other thread, it has been my experience that the Revolver would dome out ahead. It is easier/faster to load loose rounds into a cylinder than into a magazine. The ability to load more than one rounds at a time...I usually grab two...more than makes up for the greater number of reloads.

In your latest revision, it would really be pretty much a draw.

I once watched, during a class, two shooters going head-to-head in a similar test. One shooter was shooting a 1911 with 8 round magazines and the other was shooting a S&W M627 8 shot .357Mag loading with moonclips.

The test was 3 targets for each shooter at 7 yards, with each shooter placing 2 shots on each, reloading and placing an additional 2 shots on each (a modified Vice-Presidente). The revolver took 2 out of 3 runs by a narrow margin (the N-frame Ti cylinder is reputed to cycle faster)...I understood that it was because of the constant trigger movement during followup shots and transitions that made the difference

 

[beatledog7]

Interesting thread, as was the inspiration thread.

But in the end, I would note that since we can't know exactly what sort of scenario we may face, becoming overly focused on any particular aspect of shooting, such as getting as many rounds on target as quickly as possible, is only going to be as useful as its applicability to the situation we actually face.

The debate over which can get more rounds on target, a revolver or a semi-auto, has much more to do with the shooters involved and the design of the test than with inherent characteristics of the firearms. We can rather easily design a test that gives us the results we want, and the guys who don't like the result can challenge the test's validity and design a different test, and so on. The hair-splitting exercise never ends.

The practical reason why you can't pick a winner and get agreement, therefore, is because you can't achieve agreement on the test parameters. And part of that reason is that a diehard revolver guy will never be able to concede that a test in which the wheelgun lost to the semi-auto was a fair and valid test, and vice versa. The two basic designs are so different, and their proficient operation is so different, that a truly fair test cannot be devised.

In the end, it will never be solved and doesn't really matter. Just be as good as you can be with whatever you're carrying, and by good I don't mean just fast to get lots of rounds on target. Be smart first--ensure you can make good decisions regarding whether to shoot before you become overly focused on how fast and accurate you are. And then, stop caring about what other people say regarding your choice of an SD firearm.

 

[45_auto]

I understood that it was because of the constant trigger movement during followup shots and transitions that made the difference

You really believe that both shooters had perfectly equal skill levels? If they had both been shooting the same type of gun, what would you conclude about the winner's gun?

 

[tomrkba]

I agree that it will never be really solved. McGivern wrote about SA revolver versus DA revolver versus 1911. Apparently, there were some serious flame wars in the gun magazines in the 1920's and 1930's. He spent the first half of Fast and Fancy Revolver Shooting demonstrating why the DA revolver is superior to the SA revolver. The 1911 was discarded as "too slow"!

McGivern's mentality was far different from the "tactical" mindset of today. I am not sure we have evolved in our thinking because they certainly got the job done with what they had. McGivern was entirely focused upon presentation and shooting speed. The vast majority of his book was spent upon the two topics. Jelly Bryce was likely the most feared gunman in the civilian side of the US at the time and he used revolvers. He is known to have practiced his presentation and shooting daily. My thought is that the "tactical" mindset is really an expression of materialistic American culture where we tend to prefer "the best" stuff over proficiency in the generic civilian gun culture. Maybe we need to strip away the gear and "add-ons" and focus upon speed shooting in the civilian context before adding all sorts of "stuff" to the mix. The good news is that the old mentality is alive and well with some trainers.

What will be resolved is the individual shooter will know which gun he or she fires better. Hopefully, he or she will notice at least one flaw in his or her technique and be able to correct it. This is my personal goal besides a fun time on the range.

 

[HexHead]

Reading that first post, there's always some guy that feels like he needs to re-invent the wheel. The original challenge was very simple. Two boxes of fifty rounds, two empty guns. first one to shoot them all wins.

Now there's timer strings, scoring and all other kinds of crap.

 

[tomrkba]

HexHead,

The original idea was not a good one. It was just sending bullets into the berm. Anyone can do that quickly. It forgot the actual point of all this is to put ******bags in the dirt! The second test presented is designed to show the shooter his strengths and weaknesses with common carry gear with the timer acting as a stressor.

 

[btg3]

...a truly fair test cannot be devised.

So it would seem. Yet there is actual data from IDPA (and perhaps other venues) where a comparison can be made between revolvers and polymers.

The assumption would be that the top shooters have equivalent proficiency with their chosen platforms... what does this data look like?

My view of IDPA data is from 2 different monthly club matches over a period of a few years. For a while, I was in the habit of plotting the data from each match to show ranked scores for each division. Looking only at master and expert shooters, revolvers always came in last. (Even so, I very much enjoyed watching the revolvers -- being dazzled by a display of skill is increasingly uncommon.)

The rebuttal of course is that IDPA is not fair to revolvers. Regardless, it's a lot of data and to get a different result, I'm confident that a test can be devised which is not fair to polymers.

Has anyone else looked at IDPA data for their club/region/state and found otherwise?

 

[dogtown tom]

HexHead Reading that first post, there's always some guy that feels like he needs to re-invent the wheel. The original challenge was very simple. Two boxes of fifty rounds, two empty guns. first one to shoot them all wins.

Wins what exactly?
Worlds fastest loader?

Why not give two guys each a cartridge case, primer, powder, bullet and a Lee Loader..........first guy to size, prime, powder, crimp his bullet and fire a round WINS!!!!!!!!!

Pointless "contest" as is the "50 Round Challenge".

tomrkba .....It forgot the actual point of all this is to put ******bags in the dirt!....

I disagree.
The premise of the revolver vs semi auto "50 Round Challenge" is to show that the revolver can win one "contest" vs a semi automatic. It doesn't matter one bit that it's silly, pointless and not in the least bit a practical exercise in shooting proficiency or practical skills with a handgun.

If the "50 Round Challenge" WAS about putting ****bags in the dirt then it would allow the user of the semi auto to have his fifty rounds already loaded into magazines.......but THAT wouldn't be fair would it?

It is common to see a police officer with a semi auto and MORE than fifty rounds on his person (Glock 17+ 2 spare mags=51)..........how many revolver toters carry that many in speedloaders, loops, speedstrips or loose in their pocket?

 

[easyg]

It is common to see a police officer with a semi auto and MORE than fifty rounds on his person (Glock 17+ 2 spare mags=51)..

There are 3 reasons they carry so much ammo:


1) It is a result of the militarization of our police agencies.

2) Extra magazines might be needed when the pistol jams, or when the magazine in the pistol craps out.

3) Because most cops are just mediocre shooters at best (read: they miss their target with frightening frequency).

 

[CoRoMo]

I'm partial to the original version.

I also don't think as much can be learned from two shooters 'competing' in this race as can be from one shooter trying his hand at both platforms; racing himself. That's why I'm going to give it a go with the handguns I have so I can see which one I'M quickest with, and for no other reason I suppose. I've got plenty of handloads that I can burn 100 rounds each of a few different types.

If I only had .22lr though! I could race my MkIII against my LCR22.

 

[tomrkba]

CoRoMo...it is the shooter against himself, at least how I envisioned it.


Quote:
It is common to see a police officer with a semi auto and MORE than fifty rounds on his person (Glock 17+ 2 spare mags=51)..
There are 3 reasons they carry so much ammo:


1) It is a result of the militarization of our police agencies.

2) Extra magazines might be needed when the pistol jams, or when the magazine in the pistol craps out.

3) Because most cops are just mediocre shooters at best (read: they miss their target with frightening frequency).


Or maybe they do not want to die in a gunfight for lack of ammo. Or..perhaps the department mandated the number of mags carried.

 

[tomrkba]

Again, I made the challenge with my biases, which are: 1) shoot in a useful way such that my skill increases and 2) everything is oriented toward self-defense. I used the word "inspired" on purpose.

For me, this challenge will allow me to compare my shooting skills between the platforms.

 

[David E]

This isn't a challenge, it's a comparison.

The original challenge had someone making a claim and someone else disagreeing with their conclusion.

Your comparison is too accuracy and detail intensive for most, so I doubt you'll have many participants.

You say it's oriented towards self defense, yet you require "A" zone hits at an unrealistic self defense distance. IRL, I'd take a good hit NOW over a "perfect" hit 1/2 second later. (During that 1/2 second, I'd get 2-4 more rounds into the bad guy, which would surely help my cause)

But if I can make it to the range this week, I'll give it a go. But on an IPSC target. My IDPA targets are long gone.

 

[tomrkba]

David,

We are on the same page for the most part, but I do not subscribe to the notion that 10 yards is an unrealistic distance for a gun fight. There are many examples of fights past five yards, including a recent one out to 165 yards. Stats may tell us the average confrontation may occur at under ten feet, but training to that standard would not have benefitted Vic Stacy. They certainly may not describe the next gun fight someone gets into. The point is that training and practicing to 25 yards using a four inch standard is a good thing. The reason we use 4" is that it demonstrates sufficient control of the weapon such that the 33-50% loss of hand-eye coordination due to adrenaline will still result in reasonable hits.

I have taken ECQC and "Point Shooting Progressions", as well as numerous courses that are similar to those offered by Gunsite, and am very familiar with the concepts you mention. The problem with your blanket statement that you will achieve 2-4 additional hits is that the bad guy gets a say in the outcome. We may get those shots off, but hits are not guaranteed.

I will try to get this done this weekend. I need to see if my timer will work accurately on an indoor range. Any pointers for handling a timer when others are shooting? Mine is over 15 years old. Do newer timers differentiate better? If so, which one works best?

 

[David E]

You can always cite anomalies such as the 165 yd shot, but the majority of confrontations are much closer, as the stats show.

Accuracy is good and is a worthy pursuit, but some people do so at the expense of practical speed. This only matters if one is focused on self defense skills.

Shooting for your life is a highly competitive activity. You better be able to deliver good hits quickly. If you take the time to fire the "perfect hit," then you may never get the shot off because the bad guy didn't wait for the perfect hit. Instead, he killed you with a good hit delivered faster.

You say the bad guy will "have a say in the matter," but if I make a good hit on him first, then he may not have as much to say about the matter as he did a split second before I hit him. In most plausible situations, follow up hits wouldn't be a problem. But if I fire 3 and "only" make one more good hit in that 1/2 second, I then have landed two good hits to his zero. I'd much rather HE sustain the hits instead of me. Good accuracy with speed is what makes that happen.