Revolvers still have their place?

[BullRunBear]

I'm a revolver guy for many of the reasons already mentioned. My wife prefers autos for target shooting. But for SD and HD we use revolvers (and a Browning pump shotgun). She sometimes has arthritic-like symptoms, especially in her hands. Cocking a semiauto or clearing a jam, very rare with our autos, can be a problem then but she can always manage a revolver trigger even at her worst. (We tested that.)

Having said that, I'm looking into one of the smaller 9mm autos like the M&P Shield or Ruger SR9. Our area is changing and it would be nice to have more than 5 rounds as an option.

Jeff

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by BullRunBear: Having said that [reasons for having revolvers], I'm looking into one of the smaller 9mm autos like the M&P Shield or Ruger SR9. Our area is changing and it would be nice to have more than 5 rounds as an option.

I have an SR9c, and I like it.

Revolvers do have their advantages, and while it may sound outlandish at first, having two of them (that's often called a "New York reload") can be an effective solution.

I do not like the DA pull of a J-frame, and the sights on most are atrocious. So the SR9c has more to offer than greater capacity.

 

[Guillermo]

a)No matter what, for the first shot a DA revolver is faster than a pistol.

A striker fire or single action have less mechanical movement to fire the first shot

 

[Old Fuff]

Ed McGivern gave up on pistols because his trigger finger was so fast that he'd pull a second time before the slide could cycle...

Concerning the first shot. Even among those that draw and fire in a fraction of one second, it takes so long to clear leather and level (point) the gun. Bill Jordan I noticed, had things down to the point where his trigger finger was actually starting to squeeze as his revolver was being lifted out of the holster, and by the time it was leveled it didn't have much further to go.

No, I didn't try this, which is the reason he could beat me any day of the week.

Anyway, I think this business about which is faster for the first shot is a moot point. It depends on how the gun is being carried, and the skill of the individual using it. Also maximum speed is useless if the intended target isn't hit exactly where it's supposed to be.

 

[skidder]

My wife is afraid of autos. She thinks they're too complicated and different from one another (no idea where she got that idea? ). I could honestly say, I do not know how to properly cycle and fire "reliably" a Glock, CZ, M&P, Sigmond, SRwhatever, etc..., you get the point . But DA revolvers are so similar that, no matter the brand, I feel at home.
I do have one Auto... a hi-point 45 (got it next to nothing), but it stays in the firewood truck. I've shot it once, and what I like about it is the crappy trigger pull. I'm so used to DA double action and this trigger feels somewhere in between a DA and SA on a revolver. I would probably shoot my foot off with one of those "light" triggers the expensive ones claim to have. I've heard people say revolvers are out dated, clunky, bulky, and the triggers are tough. Well that pretty much describes me. Maybe that's why we get along so good .

 

[Guillermo]

Of course Ed McGivern ( or others) could shoot faster than a hummingbird can flap its wings.

I understand that he shot so fast you couldn't hear a pause between ignition, making a long roaring boom.

But mechanically speaking, a revolver has a lot more to do than a 1911 (c&l) or a striker fire as they r already cocked.

 

[Old Fuff]

But mechanically speaking, a revolver has a lot more to do than a 1911 (c&l) or a striker fire as they r already cocked.

True, but in the real world does this make any practical difference?

I could carry my pet Colt Detective Special holstered with the hammer cocked, and if the hammer fell the trigger would follow down and the hammer block would prevent a discharge.

That way I (might) be a bit faster, and each time I drew I'd get a some extra excitement.

Especially if I'd cut away the front of the trigger guard.

Speed does have its price you know.

 

[Water-Man]

I've been carrying one since 1967 so I'm kind of comfortable with doing so.

Now, it's a Ruger LCR and I like it.

 

[fastbolt]

Revolvers still have their place?

I'd think so.

The 5-shot S&W J-frames are selling as fast as they can produce them. They can make for an excellent secondary/backup weapon ... providing the user has a very good grasp of properly & effectively using a DA or DAO revolver.

Granted, there seems to be fewer folks who learn and master their handgun skillset using a DA revolver nowadays, so that probably has an influence on the acceptance of revolvers.

Also, the very attributes that make the diminutive 5-shot revolvers so versatile and useful for lawful concealed carry generally also makes them harder for many people to shoot accurately, controllably & effectively. (I miss the days when cops learned their handgun marksmanship skills using DA revolvers.)

They still work for a lot of folks, though.

I favor my J's over .22, .25, .32 & .380 pocket pistols. I like the range of available bullet weights & designs of the venerable .38 S&W Special over the smaller pocket pistol calibers. I like the development of some of the newer hollowpoints & loadings made for use in the short-barreled snubs.

Yes, the revolver cylinder is a bit thick compared to most pistol slides, but the rest of the revolver isn't that thick. That makes my pocket (holstered) carry method more easily accomplished with my J's than with my little 9's, .40's & .45's.




The snubs are also lighter than my small 9's, .40's & .45's.

Yes, the capacity is reduced compared to 6, 7 & 8-shot pistols. I tend to look at capacity as a consideration after other factors, though. (Besides, I was fine with carrying an issued or personally-owned 6-shot revolver for some years, and I finished my LE career carrying an issues 7+1 shot .45 pistol. )

Sure, loading a revolver requires a bit more training & skill than a semiauto pistol. No argument. However, having watched any number of cops & non-LE folks try to load their pistols under just the minimal stress of qual courses-of-fire and range drills over the years, most of them don't experience much (or any) "advantage" when it comes to being able to load (reload) their pistols.

When it comes tight down to it, I'd not lose sleep at night if i were to return to active duty and was told I'd be carrying a revolver as a service weapon. They make some pretty decent 6, 7 & even 8-shot medium bore revolvers nowadays.

I'll be carrying one of my J's when I go out to enjoy some activities around town a bit later this morning.

 

[Eb1]

I carry a Rossi M720 3" bobbed .44 Special 5 shot with speed loaders or speed strips.
I also carry a Taurus J frame 731 UL .32 H&R Magnum 6 shot with speed loader.

I have a 9mm Springfield XD9 Servie from 2007 that is the house pistol per say. She actually picked the XD9 over a Glock or Ruger. She picked the 9mm over a .40 or .45 because she could handle the gun easier.
I don't have an issue with Auto loaders at all, but for me I like the revolver to be with me at all times. Preferably the Rossi .44 Special, even though it only has 5 shots. They make 5 big holes, and with practice can be reloaded quickly. Would I want to get into a gun fight with someone with a Glock that has a 30 round mag? NO! Do I feel protected traveling in my everyday travels knowing that I do not frequent areas that generally, or should I say shouldn't have people with this mentality carrying such firearms. Yes.

When we travel away from home on trips the XD9 gets the call, and the two revolvers come also. Then there is the .44 Magnum in the case loaded up for the barrier buster.

 

[Stainz]

I feel safe - and adequately protected - with my 642, stoked with my protection round of choice for .38/.357M: 158gr LHPSWC .38 Spc +P, in my pocket. At home I keep a 2 5/8" PC627 UDR (x8) for me and a 2" 10 for my wife similarly loaded. My 296, a 5-shot .44 Special, carries Speer 200gr Gold Dots and fits my jeans pocket for woods walking - often with a first-up 240gr LSWC. My wife CC's a Seecamp .32 because it fits her jeans.



I came from self-feeders - and am much happier with revolvers.Stainz

 

[Kleanbore]

It's been so long I can't remember. Can anyone comment on the DA pull of a Colt Agent compared to a 642?

The 2+ MM difference in cylinder diameter does not seem to present much of a disadvantage, and the sixth shot provides more of an advantage than one might think. So, how about the trigger pull?

Seems like the Colt would make a very nice back-up piece.

 

[Old Fuff]

As a rule of thumb the Colt D-frame revolvers will have a smoother and lighter double-action trigger pull then a S&W J-frame. Part of the reason is that the hammer is larger, heavier and rotates over a greater arc then its S&W counterpart. Also if it doesn't stack the leaf mainspring tends to get lighter toward the end of the stroke. The hammer and trigger pivot points on the Colt are furthur apart so the trigger has more leverage.

On the negative side, the Colt has a stiffer cylinder bolt spring, and when the bolt is released and pops up against the cylinder you can feel something is different. Some use this to stage the pull, and see it as a sign the hammer is about to be released.

 

[shepsan]

Many of you have much more practical experience carrying a weapon due to your vocations than I do. My experience is based specifically on more than six decades of revolver and pistol ownership and target practice. The last time I sent a bullet towards another person was during the Korean war.

The semi-automatic, especially the 1911 is most pleasing to me of all handguns because of its visual beauty and the mechanical precision of its many components working together. In comparison, the revolver to me displays a historic beauty and is simplicity itself in operation and maintenance.

The primary purpose for me to carry a handgun is self-protection and the protection of my wife. Although I truly enjoy shooting a fine 1911 at the target range, I do not trust that it will not suffer one failure or another when needed to confront an attacker; even though I religiously clean, lube and maintain it in prime operating order.

On the other hand, whether I am armed with a S&W 686 or smaller S&W 60 or a Ruger GP100, I am confident that the revolver will fire when the trigger is squeezed. Then too, my accuracy at my farthest effective distance (15 yards) with these three revolvers is as good as it is with the finest 1911 I have owned.

I do not contest that others may favor the semi-automatic over the revolver. But for me, I carry a revolver whenever I leave home.

 

[Guillermo]

Old Fuff,

Of course u are right about Not mattering in the real world. I was just questioning the assertion that a revolver is quicker 1st shot.

 

[Old Fuff]

Yup, and it all depends on who is doing the shooting...

 

[Mac Attack]

Another vote for a Colt Detective Special. I carry mine pretty frequently when I want to drop (into a pocket) and go. I have mine stoked with 158gr LHPSWC .38 Specials. I haven't found a comfortable way to carry reloads so I only carry the 6 in the cylinder.

 

[velo99]

I don't have a carry revolver. I have a 7 1/2 Vaquero in 45 lc. I usually take it to the range with me and at some point go John Wayne running at my target shooting two fisted. Let's out some frustration and gives me a big smile when I compare the damage done compared to my puny li'l 9mm. Last time the B27 took two 250 gn hot loads to the forehead during my charge. The natural point of aim is a ton better with a long barreled revolver. I can hit all six in the 9 from 40 yards. I can't do that with my 9mm. Both have their advantages but if it was a no holds barred gunfight I would rather have my revolver with the 9mm as a bug.

 

[steve s]

J frame types are so nice when slipped into the front pocket.

 

[winfried]

Ed McGivern gave up on pistols because his trigger finger was so fast that he'd pull a second time before the slide could cycle...

Concerning the first shot. Even among those that draw and fire in a fraction of one second, it takes so long to clear leather and level (point) the gun. Bill Jordan I noticed, had things down to the point where his trigger finger was actually starting to squeeze as his revolver was being lifted out of the holster, and by the time it was leveled it didn't have much further to go.

No, I didn't try this, which is the reason he could beat me any day of the week.

Anyway, I think this business about which is faster for the first shot is a moot point. It depends on how the gun is being carried, and the skill of the individual using it. Also maximum speed is useless if the intended target isn't hit exactly where it's supposed to be.

Hi as far as speed goes, it is most importance for self defense, not only for the actual survival but for the following enquiry after somebody gets killed.

If you are defending yourself, it means there had to be thread before you act. Witnesses may confuse (actually will) the first thread with the first shot fired and then you are in trouble.

However, if you can demonstrate to a court that you can draw and shoot within about .3 of a second it becomes believable that you did not start it.

Naturally it all depends on the equipment you have, therefore, you should only carry with what you have practiced and practice only with what you carry.

Ed Mc Givern gave up on pistols because they were not accurate enough technically and most importantly, he could pull the trigger and fire while the pistol was in recoil before being lined up on target. That is why I prefer a pump action to a semi auto shot gun, cycling a pump allows me to line up before I can pull the trigger again.

On pistols being too slow to fire fast, without spending too much time on proving what I say (I could prove to you the exact time to a 1/millionth of a second how long a pistol cycles from shot ot shot) I give you the following. A 9mm submachine gun has a cyclic rate of 600rds/min, this means 10 rds/sec which is not that fast. The cyclic rate of a submachine gun is actually slower than a pistol cycles. The reason for this is the longer barrel (usually 250mm against 100mm) of the blowback system. The longer barrel requires a heavier bolt (often about 600gramm against 400gramm of a pistol). This alone should indicate that the statement of pistol is too slow is wrong. Ed McGivern could shoot at the rate of 5rds per second and that thing about a constant roar must be a myth because an MG42 at 1800rds/min = 30rds/sec one can still hear individual muzle reports.

Regards

WAH

 

[wheelyfun66]

Not only does the revolver still have it's place..........
the single action still has it's place!

 

[Bubba613]

I carry a Ruger Security snub loaded with Silver tips and a 638 in the pocket. I would have to look awfully hard for an auto loader that provided the same amount of power in a package that size that was as reliable. I've carried plenty of autos, and still do on occasion.

 

[Clark]

My grandfather carried an Iver Johnson 38S&W break top 5 shot hammerless revolver in the Alaskan Gold Rush. He had Lead bullets and black powder.

I now carry a Kel-Tec P3AT 380 with my hollow point hot hand loads. I also carry a Fenix LD12 flashlight with a single AA battery.

But next to my bed, I have a 357 mag revolver and a Maglite flashlight with (2) C batteries and an LED mod.

What I carry has trade off with size and weight. I would rather shoot a revolver, but I can't find a powerful one that weighs 10 ounces loaded and fits in my shirt pocket.

 

[BrainOnSigs]

Just traveled thru O'Hare Airport. Almost every LEO I saw was carrying a revo as their duty gun. I found that most interesting.

 

[CraigC]

This alone should indicate that the statement of pistol is too slow is wrong.

Semi-auto pistols are not machineguns. Bob Munden has well proven that an auto pistol cannot be fired as quickly as a revolver. Even a single action. Ed McGivern found this out long ago.