Should I even be worried? revolver

[Vern Humphrey]

John Farnham has pointed out that the primary cause of stoppages in actual gunfights -- for either revolvers or automatics -- is running out of ammunition.

That being the case, the most reliable gun would be the one that holds the most ammunition, and can quickly be reloaded, A quality automatic, with quality ammo and quality magazines has the edge here.

 

[xtralogic]

thanks everyone this has helped me in many ways with many thoughts

 

[Revolver Ocelot]

though a revolver can be harder to fix yourself should it fail I have found they are significantly less likely to fail then a semi auto

 

[CorpITGuy]

I believe in managing risk. If someone wants to kill me, they're going to snipe me and I'll never see it coming. For those of us who know that the great LEOs out there can't protect us all the time, it's tough to know that we also cannot protect ourselves 100% of the time. I'm happy with my revolver. There's a slight chance it'll fail, but a relatively HUGE chance that I'll be shot before ever pulling it out, or die in a car wreck, or die in a plane crash, or... (well, you get the point).

Just my two cents.

 

[gmh1013]

I have some fine Auto's ...SIG"S
Colts and one Smith BUT
I carry a revolver.
Only problem I ever had with one is bad round ...not the revolvers fault.
The only low end revolver I have is a .38 Rossi which has never had problem but i would not trust my life with it.
The one I do trust my life is my Ruger Sp101
I think you could drop it from a jet at
30000 ft and it would still fire.
The only production revolvers that look like they are well made are Ruger...IMHO

 

[HippieMagic]

lol if the definition of "mid-grade" is a Glock or XD I find it very hard to say there is a flaw staying in the middle of the road for carry... I have never personally seen or experienced a failure in a glock or xd handgun and while I really dislike the XD it isn't because of it malfunctioning. I have never seen a revolver that malfunctioned either... I mean I wouldn't trust my life on a low end semi OR revolver... I personally think if you spend over $500 the gun should normally go bang...

Reliability has nothing to do with cost anyway... The ONLY price tag on a gun that means squat to me is the price you spent in ammo before your gun failed to go bang... now if we discuss those numbers the actual "worth" of handguns might suddenly DRASTICALLY change.

 

[Virginian]

Out of maybe 25 revolvers, I have had one malfunction in an unmodified revolver. If you cock it single action slowly, my Grandaddy's Colt Police Positive would not lock up before pulling the trigger. Worn hand. I called Colt and the guy told me what to do.
In about 45 semiautos, I only ever had one (1), repeat one, that never malfunctioned with anything I ever fed it, a Sig P230 .380 I bought for my ex-wife to carry. She didn't like it an appropriated my Smith 65. These were not junk semi autos. Included Beretta, Colt, S&W, Walther, Sig, and Taurus in 45, 9mm, 10mm, and .380. Most worked okay with FMJ, but I did not want to shoot FMJ for self defense. After gunsmithing, polished ramp, etc., most would function okay with one specific ammo. I gave up on semis.

 

[savit260]

Parts breaking (catastrophic failure) can happen to either a Revolver or Auto loader.

This happening in either platform will put your gun out of commision.

Stove pipes
Failure to feed
Failure to eject
Boogered up magazines
not fully in battery
Limp wristing.

are all things that can and do happen with Autoloaders that just aren't going to happen with a revolver.

So.... IMO the chances of parts breaking and putting the weapon out of service are equaly likely for either platform. So there you have a draw. I've seen more Autoloaders with broken ejectors (out of commision) than I've ever seen revolvers broken to the point of being inoperable.

Seems to me that the odds of failure are heavier with the auto.

 

[hemiram]

Duke- When I said "junk" guns, I was talking about midlevel guns like DW/SA/S&W etc, like those, not RG's/Jennings, etc. I have a friend who has way more money than he knows what to do with, and he was buying high end 1911's like some folks buy ice cream cones, and many of them had problems my "junk" guns just didn't have. I would take a revolver over any semiauto, if I wanted to be as sure as was possible in this universe.

 

[Eb1]

I carry a Revolver, but I have to tell you that my Springfield XD9 Service has thousands of round through it, and it is reliable. I cannot remember every having a failure. Be it cheap ammo, handloads, or premium defense. The XD is my night stand gun.

Now my carry is a 32 H&R Magnum Taurus. It is light. I forget I have it most of the time, and that is why I carry it. If I had to carry the 9mm, I probably would not carry a gun. I trust my XD more, but out of the 150 rounds or so from the Taurus 731UL. I have never had a failure.

 

[jbech123]

I'd define "mid-grade" as something like a Ruger... As compared to Smiths and Colts on the high end

Now that is funny. I know guys that do the cowboy mounted shooting, and they say the $1200 Colts are constantly breaking, Rugers are far and away more reliable in their rough and tumble environment.
Also, I wonder why place like cor-bon, etc...have high pressure "ruger only" loads, but not Smith only or colt only?
I'm not saying a nice new colt SAA or nice smith aren't great and would not work well, but for reliability and toughness, rugers are known for being "overbuilt".

 

[PhrankKastle]

In my experiences I would agree that Ruger is mid-grade to a Smith or Colt in price and aestethics.
But in function and reliability I'd put it as an equal to either and in durability I'd put it ahead of the other 2.
Now I think all 3 are excellent firearms (if you can find a Colt nowadays anyway). But if I want to play around with the absolute top end of any caliber ballistically I'll do that with my Rugers.

 

[Stainz]

I never have seen a Glock jam, except in competition - and only after the owners had 'improved' them. My G21, sold nearly eleven years ago, was 100% reliable - and way too big to CC. Basic 1911s are quite dependable - until you make a 'race gun' from it's basic parts. I've see too many older KelTec pocket .32/.380s jam or just go click. Oddly, I've never seen a Seecamp not work (I got one for my wife... gonna miss her!).

I have never seen a 442, 637, 638, or 642 fail to fire - repeatedly discharging their chambers until empty. Same with my 296. I carry either a 642 or 296. Now, don't get me wrong - my 'fun' plinker revolvers have had ftfs (Light springs and non-Federal primers.) - and I even had two fouled reloads poof a bullet into the forcing cone, jamming two different revolvers (WD40 overspray by the reloading press - big no-no!). My 'carry' revolvers remain box-stock and tote commercial ammo for CCW status.

Proper maintenance in a decent handgun will continue it's dependable function. Diligence in ammo-making helps, too. I hate to admit it, as I am revolver-only these days, but there are evil-bottom-feeders that are just as dependable as revolvers. Still, I'll stick with revolvers. I have had a commercial round ftf - another pull of the trigger presented a live round that functioned perfectly - harder to do that in a hurry with a rude-case-tosser. That bad round had a defective primer - it happens. I doubt commercial loaders spritz tools with WD40 near their reloading equipment, so that fault is unlikely.

Stainz

 

[ojibweindian]

Generally, when a semi-auto chokes, clearing it and getting back into the game only takes a second or so. Pretty much a tap-rack-bang and you're back in business.

I've had a few revolvers, and there was a significant number of fewer malfunctions. As a matter of fact, only three over a 10 year period. However, those three malfs, two improper crimps and a shell case underneath the ejector, put an end to each day's activities at the range with the revolver. Were I in a gunfight when any one of those three stoppages occurred, it would've been a bad day to be me.

 

[KBintheSLC]

I no longer believe that there is a difference in the reliability of revolvers vs autos. A quality auto will generally be totally reliable, and a lousy revolver will be about as predictable as a roulette wheel. That being said, if you get a quality specimen from a good manufacturer, which has proven itself to you on the range, either gun type should do.

I like them both... an auto as a primary, and a snubbie as a backup.

 

[nitetrane98]

Reading this thread kind of made me realize that the debate is truly a matter of odds and percentages.

My LE career spanned the time from 1980-2000. When I started almost everybody carried a wheelgun. When I retired literally everybody carried a semi auto.
I can think back on all of the qualifying sessions with 20-30 officers on the line firing. We used turning targets and everybody had to be ready at the same time. Invariably, somebody would have a stoppage of some sort whether revolver or semi. I can remember that usually if a revolver went down the guy would have to borrow another gun to finish unless it was something llike a extractor rod loose or such. It used to take us just a couple of hours to Q during the revolver era. It was a half day affair by the time I retired.
Department policy in the old days specified Colt, S&W or Ruger, .38spl or larger as acceptable guns.
But mainly my point is, you can put one person out on the line with a good gun and he might be able to fire for days without a stoppage. You put 30 folks out there and something will go wrong.
Final thought. It was almost always the same guys with the malfs. And ALWAYS one particular female holding up the drill. I think she just liked the attention.