Semi-auto Vs Revolver Reliability
- Thread starter USBP1969
- Start date
- Status
As you can see from my revo malfunctions, this isn't true. I have neither won the lottery nor been struck by lightning. And I did not count the ammo-related malfunctions.
Now I have many semi-autos where full disassembly is difficult. They may have the same issues as my revolvers. But I periodically detail strip my Glocks as part and parcel of normal operation, because it's easy and fast.
Most people suggest you should never open the side plate on a Smith revolver and/or take out the trigger group on a Ruger for normal maintenance. And yet I had to do this on both my revolvers to get them to function. To be fair, my Smith was well used. But my Ruger still had the factory lube on it and less than 200 rounds through it when it failed. (A lot of dryfiring, though!)
Now I have many semi-autos where full disassembly is difficult. They may have the same issues as my revolvers. But I periodically detail strip my Glocks as part and parcel of normal operation, because it's easy and fast.
Most people suggest you should never open the side plate on a Smith revolver and/or take out the trigger group on a Ruger for normal maintenance. And yet I had to do this on both my revolvers to get them to function. To be fair, my Smith was well used. But my Ruger still had the factory lube on it and less than 200 rounds through it when it failed. (A lot of dryfiring, though!)
Last edited:
JohnBiltz
Member
The old saying is revolvers tolerate negligence better, Automatics tolerate abuse better. I think that is true. If you are going to throw a gun in a drawer and 5 years later pull it out to defend yourself you want a revolver in that drawer. If you are going to be dragging a gun across concrete, through sand and debris banging it around as you go you really want an automatic.
The Lone Haranguer
Member
It is dependent more on the individual gun than the type, therefore a blanket statement to say one is more reliable than the other. I've owned and shot autos that were little better than single-shots, but others that will shoot mountains of ammo all day without so much as a bobble. The revolver is not immune to malfunctions either.
1SOW
Member
JMO:
In general--the fewer parts a machine has, the less likely it is to malfunction due mis-aligned or failure of parts.
Semi-autos have way more parts, but the better manufacturers have done a good job making them reliable enough.
In general--the fewer parts a machine has, the less likely it is to malfunction due mis-aligned or failure of parts.
Semi-autos have way more parts, but the better manufacturers have done a good job making them reliable enough.
i'll state my opinion in a different way than most so far.
if you're one of those that doesn't like or never cleans and lubes your weapon at all after already doing so once after shooting it and then leaving it alone for an extremely long time just sitting there,if your intent is to just grab it and shoot it after that,for whatever reason,than the possibility is higher that a revolver is better and possibly more reliable for you when you suddenly need to use it.
if your going to leave your weapon unmolested for a very long time undercover,like underneath the seat of your car,glove compartment or most other places(but not all),than the possibility is higher that a revolver is better and possibly more reliable for you when you suddenly need to use it.
these two circumstances above preclude the cartridges making contact with some elements like water or oil,etc.,depending on the type of exposure.they can also be mitigated to a huge extent by exactly which semi-auto pistol you chose and if certain specific lubes are chosen(both too long and complex to explain here).
if your handgun may possibly be exposed to the elements more,almost any elements,like sprayed water,oil,possibly dropped in the mud,etc.,etc. and without any cleaning and if it's going to possibly get banged(knocked) around more(which imo is always at least a possibility in a SD situation),than the possibility is higher that a semi-auto pistol is better and possibly more reliable for you when you suddenly need to use it.
the choices,techniques and habits that you live by can make all the difference whether you chose one or the other. for me,because of my habits,familiarization,understanding specific details and characteristics,choices i make and clear advantages i see(for me),i will more than likely always choose a pistol in most any kind of SD situation.
YMMV.
i'll also say that those who say a revolver is better because it's simpler and therefor must always be more reliable,don't know how a revolver actually works,the intricacies or are just patting themselves on the back over the choice they've made. imo,this should be understood and also imo this should have an influence in the choices you make.
i have literally,right in front of me,seen revolvers fall apart and also pistols malfunction. i'll never put full 100% faith in anything mechanical(or biological for that matter) but i will say that,if i do my part,i can at least come close.
if you're one of those that doesn't like or never cleans and lubes your weapon at all after already doing so once after shooting it and then leaving it alone for an extremely long time just sitting there,if your intent is to just grab it and shoot it after that,for whatever reason,than the possibility is higher that a revolver is better and possibly more reliable for you when you suddenly need to use it.
if your going to leave your weapon unmolested for a very long time undercover,like underneath the seat of your car,glove compartment or most other places(but not all),than the possibility is higher that a revolver is better and possibly more reliable for you when you suddenly need to use it.
these two circumstances above preclude the cartridges making contact with some elements like water or oil,etc.,depending on the type of exposure.they can also be mitigated to a huge extent by exactly which semi-auto pistol you chose and if certain specific lubes are chosen(both too long and complex to explain here).
if your handgun may possibly be exposed to the elements more,almost any elements,like sprayed water,oil,possibly dropped in the mud,etc.,etc. and without any cleaning and if it's going to possibly get banged(knocked) around more(which imo is always at least a possibility in a SD situation),than the possibility is higher that a semi-auto pistol is better and possibly more reliable for you when you suddenly need to use it.
the choices,techniques and habits that you live by can make all the difference whether you chose one or the other. for me,because of my habits,familiarization,understanding specific details and characteristics,choices i make and clear advantages i see(for me),i will more than likely always choose a pistol in most any kind of SD situation.
YMMV.
i'll also say that those who say a revolver is better because it's simpler and therefor must always be more reliable,don't know how a revolver actually works,the intricacies or are just patting themselves on the back over the choice they've made. imo,this should be understood and also imo this should have an influence in the choices you make.
i have literally,right in front of me,seen revolvers fall apart and also pistols malfunction. i'll never put full 100% faith in anything mechanical(or biological for that matter) but i will say that,if i do my part,i can at least come close.
MCgunner
Member
Well, with MY luck, I'll win millions in the lotto and be struck by lightening and killed the next day.
scythefwd
Member
A semi auto can be 100 reliable for it's lifetime. I have seen guns that have 10k + rounds in them that never jam, fail to feed, fail to extract, fail to fire, etc. My handguns will probably never see that many rounds from me. I think it is more of a technique thing than a reliability issue with the gun itself.
I have a gun that has failed to feed or eject 2 times total. Both times, the problem was not with the gun but my limp a@# wrist. I corrected my technique and it feels like a totally different gun (I also did a full buff out of the rails, the slide, the feed ramp, and the chamber so that might have had a very small part to do with it).
I have never had a revolver "jam". Due to the way they work, using mechanical linkages vs. inertia, they are technically more reliable. The amount more, with proper technique very well could be theoretical in many instances though since some guns will never jam in the lifetime of the owner.
Revolvers are a compromise between reliability, speed, power and capacity with a bias on reliability. You feel everything though and you won't be as fast on the follow up shot (Jerry Maculik (spelled way wrong, I know) excluded)
Semi's are compromises between power, speed, reliability, and capacity as well. The compromise is biased the exact opposite as a revolver. You get greater follow up speed, lesser recoil for the same round, and higher capacity but with a lesser degree of reliability.
With A LOT of practice, all of these difference become academic though. I've seen 12 aimed shots in less than 2 or 3 seconds from a revolver.
I have a gun that has failed to feed or eject 2 times total. Both times, the problem was not with the gun but my limp a@# wrist. I corrected my technique and it feels like a totally different gun (I also did a full buff out of the rails, the slide, the feed ramp, and the chamber so that might have had a very small part to do with it).
I have never had a revolver "jam". Due to the way they work, using mechanical linkages vs. inertia, they are technically more reliable. The amount more, with proper technique very well could be theoretical in many instances though since some guns will never jam in the lifetime of the owner.
Revolvers are a compromise between reliability, speed, power and capacity with a bias on reliability. You feel everything though and you won't be as fast on the follow up shot (Jerry Maculik (spelled way wrong, I know) excluded)
Semi's are compromises between power, speed, reliability, and capacity as well. The compromise is biased the exact opposite as a revolver. You get greater follow up speed, lesser recoil for the same round, and higher capacity but with a lesser degree of reliability.
With A LOT of practice, all of these difference become academic though. I've seen 12 aimed shots in less than 2 or 3 seconds from a revolver.
mgmorden
Member
Um, a Ruger Security Six has 62 parts. A Colt Python has 56 parts. A S&W Mod 36 has 90 parts. My S&W 64-3 has 88 parts.
The parts count on my Makrov is 26 parts. A Glock 17 has 35. Even the 1911 is showing 58 parts, which is less than most of the revolvers.
scythefwd
Member
mgm - yet my rami has 61.
MCgunner
Member
How many parts does my Toyota Echo have? It's stone reliable at 162K miles with only routine maintenance. Parts count means SQUAT.
Fishslayer
Member
Yup. Two have happened to me. I've since learned to reload properly. That problem went away. I don't over oil in that area anymore either.
Lo strength LocTite on the extractor rod. No more backing out.
The first string wheelgun gets cleaned when it comes back from the range & goes to the bedside. I would have 100% confidence in it working. There is no sand or muck in the bedside safe.
There's also a bottom feeder in there to keep it company tho.
I have 4 real handguns, and one made in Italy. The 3 S&W's and the Ruger were purchased new between 1979 and 1997. I don't know how many rounds have been through them, but I've bought pounds of different powders and boxes of 500 bullets.
Not one of those 4 revolvers has ever malfunctioned.
Does anybody have a similar record with autos? Please note, I am not saying that modern autos are not capable of this. Years ago, I believed that revolvers were more reliable. Now, I'm curious.
Not one of those 4 revolvers has ever malfunctioned.
Does anybody have a similar record with autos? Please note, I am not saying that modern autos are not capable of this. Years ago, I believed that revolvers were more reliable. Now, I'm curious.
I currently own 2 Glocks. Each has malfunctioned. I am waiting on a 3rd Glock to get back from Glock, Inc because the first one refused to reliably feed JHP...even after I sent it back to them the first time. I had a P3AT I sold for failing to feed. However, IIRC the 3rd Gen G19 has only failed in my hands using KCI brand magazines and cheap steel cased Russian FMJ, and even then they are somewhat rare. I vaguely recall the G26 failing at some point some how years ago but cannot remember, it has been awhile.
I have been issued or purchased a couple of Glocks I no longer have that never malfunctioned...but I only put about 1k rounds through each.
Usertag
Member
Ahhhhhhhhhh, in this age old argument. I will say, I like Self-Loaders more. But trust a Revolver more.
jad0110
Member
I've been saying the same thing myself for years. It's not the number of parts, but the quality of materials, design manufacture, etc that really matter.
Both platforms, if in good shape and properly cared for, should give years of trouble free service. I would say though that as the size of the gun shrinks, revolver reliability stays about the same whereas tiny pocket autos can be pretty finicky.
The biases go both ways.
Revolver guys are ingrained to believe that brass chucker choke every few rounds as a given.
OTH, some auto shooters think that ejector rods backing out is something that happens every few cylinder fulls.
BTW, the only revolver this happens on (about every 200 rounds) is my K-22 / M17-0 .22 LR, with it's right hand thread ejector rod - S&W reversed the thread around around 1959, so the act of the cylinder turning would generally act to tighten the ejector rod. I think that is one of the few changes S&W made over the years that all S&W traditionalists would acknowledge as being a real improvement in design.
As for stoppages, gun per gun, round per round I have had more auto failures. I can also induce failures in polymer guns very regularly with a "limp forearm". And most of the revolver failures were ammo related (dud primer in my reloads mainly, but a couple of times with factory ammo too).
I've experienced only one failure that turned the gun into a club, and it happened with an auto (ejector broke off and and jammed the slide in the partially open position - the slide and frame may as well have been welded together). I had a turd of a Taurus 94 (.22 revolver) that almost tied up completely; the gun could not be fired DA but the SA function worked. Gawd, that gun was a pile.
All in all, I'm most confident and comfortable with revolvers, but that did not stop me from buying a CZ-75 a few weeks back. I may even carry it one day if it proves reliable and I can shoot it well.
Last edited:
I would agree with this. The only really small auto I own is a Kel Tec P11 & it is the only gun I have really had problems with. My XD did FTE once. It was my fault I was shooting fast moving back & forth between multiple targets & limp wristed it. That just taught me a lesson about what not to do. My Ruger has malfunctioned twice. The first time was ammunition related, the second I had changed lubes & overlubed it. The grease had spread through the whole gun. I took it home, cleaned it & lubed it properly & it has been fine since. I don't keep exact records but both the XD & Ruger have around 3000 rounds through them. I have never had any problem with either using quality defensive ammunition. With the exception of the Kel Tec every malfunction I have had with an auto could be corrected with a tap, rack, bang.
I have never had a malfunction with either of my revolvers but to be honest I don't shoot them as much as I do the semi's. I just like semi's better.
I don't think either one is more inherently reliable than the other. Both can have issues. The revolver seems to be more susceptible to filth binding the cylinder, but is less picky about ammo. People who say revolvers won't jam or malfunction on you have very little experience with them. Several things can go wrong with a revolver, for example: broken ejection star, bend ejection rod, broken crane, bound cylinder stuck to a dirty forcing cone.
That said, reliability is more a product of quality and proper maintenance than whether it's a revolver or automatic.
That said, reliability is more a product of quality and proper maintenance than whether it's a revolver or automatic.
I only have experience with 3 centerfire auto loaders
2 of which are old guns and old designs..and I've only fired ball ammo through them
Walther P38
Lllama 1911
and 1 modern FNP 40
I've had more "catastrophic" failures with my revolvers than with my semi-autos. I am talking about the cylinder being jammed so badly it requires a gunsmith to take it apart and fix it. In a defensive situation, that leaves you with a heavy chunk of metal to throw instead of a gun to shoot, in a recreational setting, it possibly leaves you with loaded chambers that you can't unload.
Most of those problems came from SAA clones, but I have had a problem with a failed case jamming up my Ruger Security 6 before as well.
2 of which are old guns and old designs..and I've only fired ball ammo through them
Walther P38
Lllama 1911
and 1 modern FNP 40
I've had more "catastrophic" failures with my revolvers than with my semi-autos. I am talking about the cylinder being jammed so badly it requires a gunsmith to take it apart and fix it. In a defensive situation, that leaves you with a heavy chunk of metal to throw instead of a gun to shoot, in a recreational setting, it possibly leaves you with loaded chambers that you can't unload.
Most of those problems came from SAA clones, but I have had a problem with a failed case jamming up my Ruger Security 6 before as well.
Last edited:
harmon rabb
Member
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2009
- Messages
- 2,699
Semi-auto is probably more likely to malfunction, Revolver is probably more likely to malfunction catastrophically (i.e. become unusuable) when it malfunctions.
woad_yurt
Member
Although I much prefer shooting revolvers and have had far, far less gun-related failures (only one) as compared with my semi-autos, my Makarov is quite the glaring exception. I've owned three and still have one and those things are stone-cold reliable as any revolver. Although I'm pretty good with the Mak, I shoot the revolvers much better so, it's a good ol' K-frame next to me at night. These days, it's a no-dash Model 67 which seems to aim itself; I can't miss with that thing.
I also own a 9MM Star MOD 30MI and I think it has only jammed once in many thousands of rounds. At least, I can only remember the one time.
I also own a 9MM Star MOD 30MI and I think it has only jammed once in many thousands of rounds. At least, I can only remember the one time.
harmon rabb
Member
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2009
- Messages
- 2,699
Eh, any good semi-auto is boringly reliable. Doesn't even take a high end one (I'm excluding commie surplus for the moment). I even have some really cheap arse ones that refuse to malfunction -- a Bersa 380, a RIA 1911, a Ruger LCP.
As far as commie surplus goes, well, as you know, one thing the soviets didn't muck around with were guns that didn't work. I own at least one of each 9x18 pistol, and none of them have malfunctioned.
Glock 21, 1k flawless rounds straight out of the box... up until I ran into a factory round with a folded over mouth that wouldn't fully chamber.
Glock 19 - minus an experiment with cheap aftermarket mags, not a single hiccup through 2-3k rounds, up until I experienced my first and only stovepipe using weak, cast handloads.
Cougar and FNX have yet to hiccup, but haven't shot enough to really mean anything.
HP22A- strangely, after an initial tuning, this pot metal pocket gun also cuts the mustard. Hasn't hiccupped in probably the last 1k rounds of Federal. It feeds more reliably than my mkIII.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
