The CCW 'Pistol vs Revolver' Thing Revisited

[Varminterror]

Dental hygiene is indeed paramount, but did he remember the floss? Seriously though, I'm not a wheelgunner yet. Is it for scrubbing the cylinder face and to serve as an emergency ejector?

For (semi) cleaning under the extractor between stages of fire, to prevent your revolver from locking up during a day of sustained firing.

 

[olkowsr]

Its all about comfort in my opinion...

I have a revolver (judge public defender) and a semi auto (p2000SK) that I switch between...

They both are very comfy for ME and I enjoy them.

My advice to anyone is try it before you buy it and you'll be better off.
- I believe they both are probably just as reliable as any other new gun now a days.

- Ron.

 

[Vonderek]

I work from home and don't live in a high-threat area. It's easiest for me to pocket carry an Airweight 442. It disappears in most pants pockets and is the most snag-proof design that I own. I also own and have carried some pocket-9s (specifically an MK9) and have found that they are harder to draw from a pocket because of the squared shape of the back of the slide.

If I am going on a road trip, a questionable or unfamiliar part of town, or a soft target like a shopping mall or theater then I carry a higher-capacity pistol IWB.

 

[JohnBiltz]

Ever time I go to the range with one of my revolvers someone always comes up to me and asks me what I'm shooting and almost always ask if they can fire a round or two, especially if I am shooting one of my magnums. Never happens when I bring my semiauto's to the range. Seems there is still a lot of interest in revolvers. I guess more people don't own one is because they don't understand them (single vs. double action). People always question me about that. Shame they are missing a lot of fun.

If you drive a Model T more people will ask about it than your Honda.

 

[vba]

Ever time I go to the range with one of my revolvers someone always comes up to me and asks me what I'm shooting and almost always ask if they can fire a round or two, especially if I am shooting one of my magnums. Never happens when I bring my semiauto's to the range. Seems there is still a lot of interest in revolvers. I guess more people don't own one is because they don't understand them (single vs. double action). People always question me about that. Shame they are missing a lot of fun.

Exactly! When I go to the range people are interested in my .45 Colt New Vaquero's. Even one of the Range Officers asked if he could try it out and very much liked it. He shot ~50 rounds of my reloads and the next couple of times I went to the range I got in free.

 

[Jack B.]

If you don't shoot a least 1 good revolver you are missing a good part of the hand gun fun. I own and shoot auto's also but I keep looking for and buying revolvers. I guess maybe it's a sickness.

 

[entropy]

Now where is that dead horse emoji.....



I like revolvers and semi-autos. I think one should have at least one of each. Both are pistols. Learn the etymology of the word.

 

[Blkhrt13]

Now where is that dead horse emoji.....



I like revolvers and semi-autos. I think one should have at least one of each. Both are pistols. Learn the etymology of the word.

This emoji...I wish I could use it everywhere.

 

[toivo]

This emoji...I wish I could use it everywhere.

I like this one:

 

[Mark 40]

As an instructor teaching a Basic pistol class, weak strength wise, or otherwise timid new shooters seem a lot more comfortable working with revolvers. Adding a Crimson Trace lasergrip to that gun multiples their confidence and subsequent success ten times over. I have heard hundreds of times, "I don't have the strength to rack the slide" yes, they can be taught how to do it but in a live or die situation and that first limp wristed shot creates a malfunction, only the most well trained will survive. I give the best odds to those people carrying a snubbie over a Glock.

I'm glad to see that you see value in teaching revolver skills to those that prefer them. Had wanted to enroll my wife in a basic defensive firearms skills class. The instructor discouraged me from doing so. Unfortunate. Actually more so for him.

 

[Hokkmike]

If you think about it, revolvers really are outdated technology. But then, I am a train-nut and love steam engines. (more outdated technology) The main reason I prefer semi auto pistols is that their size vs. round ability makes them more well suited to concealed carry. For hunting and purposes afield a revolver may be the better choice.

 

[gonoles_1980]

I prefer revolvers, I carry a LCR 357 16oz, fits well in my jeans pocket with the appropriate holster. My wife prefers a pistol, she carries a LCP 9mm, though she wants to switch to the Berreta Pico, but it's harder for her to rack. I only own one pistol, she owns no revolvers though we share the 44mag.

 

[pblanc]

Obviously, either can work well. I personally prefer semi-auto pistols. They are certainly potentially prone to stoppages and are less ammo tolerant, but I have seen good quality revolvers lock up due to short stroking the trigger as well.

I agree with huntsman. Revolvers are often recommended for individuals who are very infrequent shooters for fear that these individuals will not remember the need for or how to do a chamber check, and will not train to deal with malfunctions. But I strongly suspect that those same individuals will not spend enough time shooting to master a double action revolver trigger pull either. I have also heard revolvers recommended for those with limited hand strength who have difficulty racking the slide of a semi-auto. But will those individuals have sufficient finger strength to deal with a rather stout DA revolver trigger pull?

 

[toivo]

If you think about it, revolvers really are outdated technology. But then, I am a train-nut and love steam engines. (more outdated technology)

I know what you mean. That's what I like about revolvers. I have to admit that for all my practical purposes (bullseye shooting and concealed carry), I use semi-autos. But there's something really cool about shooting a revolver, seeing how it works, and realizing that it was the result of human ingenuity applied to the problem of how to create a repeating firearm. The revolver is what they came up with, and it worked really well. It still works really well, although other solutions have come along that arguably work better (semi-autos).

 

[Hangingrock]

Reference: Fighting Smarter A Practical Guide For Surviving Violent Confrontations by Tom Givens. Chapter 20 Selecting a Sidearm, gives a balanced approach to selecting a firearm with pro and con information contained with in the fourteen pages. My personal CCW history started with double action revolvers then I transitioned to semiautomatic pistols almost exclusively with the exception of occasional CC of a S&W M640-38Spl which is in the process of being replaced with a S&W Shield 9X19mm but basically either a S&W MP9 or MP9c is employed day to day for CC.

 

[Blkhrt13]

This is redonkulous. They each have their purpose. I love my wheelies because a jframe hammerless in the pocket doesn't have to leave the pocket to go boom. Can't limpwrist a wheelie either. I understand I can't reload only where near as fast. But have you seen a model 29 trail boss? It's beautiful. Just classier than any synthetic semiauto. ( whips horse again)

 

[CraigC]

If you think about it, revolvers really are outdated technology.

They're old technology, dating back to at least the 16th century but I don't know how outdated they are. The modern double action revolver was born but just a couple decades before the semi-auto, which was not really too long after the invention of the metallic cartridge. So it's not like a Glock is cutting edge technology, greatly advanced from its roots. The bolt action rifle was born about the same time, are they outdated too? Seeing as how there is NO better handgun for hunting/outdoor use, I'd say it's not "outdated" at all. It's just no longer optimal for 'some' applications. Those mainly being law enforcement and military use. It's idea for others.

 

[Hokkmike]

I'd say it's not "outdated" at all. It's just no longer optimal for 'some' applications. Those mainly being law enforcement and military use. It's idea for others.

Add home defense and we agree.

 

[CraigC]

I'm not going to add home or self defense. Read my previous posts.

 

[strambo]

...

All that said, I carry an auto more often than a revolver. Why? Strictly because autos come in more concealable packages. My Ruger LC9 covers the same footprint of a 2" J-frame but is considerably thinner. The two extra rounds are just a bonus, reloading irrelevant.

I agree, I think size efficiency is the biggest single reason why the auto is so popular. The combination of overall dimensions and capacity for any given size.

My wife likes "black revolvers with black grips" So, I got her a S&W 386 Nightguard. It is an amazing revolver (7 shots, combat style big-dot tritium sights, fairly light etc.) and after a trip to Clark's Custom has the best DA trigger I have ever felt. She has taken it to a 2 day defensive handgun course and shoots it quite well.

That said, even though it looks fairly compact on its own with the 2.5" barrel...if I place my Sig P226 on top of it, they pretty much have the exact same dimensions except the Sig is thinner. Most people would consider the P226 way too big for carry (I carry it all the time).

So, yes you can throw an airweight snub in your pocket, but something like the LC9 has 2 more rounds of more potent 9mm in a thinner package.

I think revolvers would be a lot more popular if they were on par with autos size-wize at the same capacity levels, but that is just not possible based on how they function.

 

[HexHead]

About half my handguns are revolvers. My favorite carry is my 3" S&W 686+. Walking around with 7 rounds of .357 on my hip, I don't feel undergunned and fear no man.

 

[Bad Ninja]

Ive never felt undergunned with a revolver.

Im not LE, and I dont run towards a gunfight.
Living in CA, my carry firearms dont get caried unless we are in the deep desert or over in nearby AZ.

 

[Coal Dragger]

I wouldn't feel under gunned carrying a revolver, but I carry a semi-auto. Specifically I carry a HK VP9. This pistol is roughly the same size as a K frame S&W with a 3" barrel. This is about the smallest pistol along with a Glock 19, or a K frame that I can shoot well out to distances of 25 yards and beyond without having to work too hard at it. They are also about as large of a pistol as I can reasonably expect to conceal with any degree of success in a good holster with a good belt. I realize that for personal defense ranges beyond 7 yards are probably unlikely, but I like having the capability, and for me an accurate handgun that I know I can shoot well is confidence inspiring. I also appreciate that generally speaking revolvers and semi-autos of this size tend to be more robust, reliable, and durable than their smaller counterparts.

So why the semi-auto instead of the revolver? Well for one given the same size (more or less) the HK will hold 16 rounds on board with standard magazines. That is 10 more chances to solve my problem before reloading if the first 6 attempts fail for some reason. While I hope it doesn't come down to needing those extra chances, or even one for that matter, I can't ignore the advantage of having more chances to solve the problem already loaded in the pistol. I never once lamented having too much ammo on my person or in the gun while I was in Iraq, especially the few times I saw combat... I don't imagine I would regret having too much ammo in my CCW if I ever had to use it either.

The semi-auto for me is also easier to shoot quickly while maintaining good hits. This is a training issue, as I don't train with a DA revolver enough to have the same level of proficiency, I don't hold this against the DA revolver but it is what it is for me at this time. Bolstering the practical accuracy advantages of the semi-auto is the fact that it already has night sights, which is a bonus since it makes the sights effective in poor light, something revolver manufacturers don't seem to bother with much (not sure why). The semi-auto is also much much easier to mount a light to, with the advent of the Surefire XC-1 I am having a hard time coming up with reasons aside from cost to not have a weapon mounted light.

I won't tell any of you that there is a right or wrong answer here, this is of course a highly personal decision. As long as your choice works, and you can run it effectively then you're good to go.

 

[fastbolt]

All mechanical equipment subjected to heavy use & abuse will eventually demonstrate the potential for problems, some sooner rather than later, depending on the equipment user and the amount of user-level attention and reasonable maintenance.

I've carried issued revolvers and semiauto pistols over the course of my career.

I've owned and used both on my own time, and continue to do so now that I'm retired.

I've been trained as a factory armorer for a number of different makes/models of pistols, but I've only been through one S&W revolver armorer class.

I've fired, and observed the firing of, many rounds through both revolvers and pistols over the course of having worked as a LE firearms instructor for 26 years.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both. Some are more shooter-related than gun-related, some have to do with loading/unloading/reloading, some with the manipulative aspects of running a gun during a fast & frantic situation, some are user-level maintenance issues and some are ammunition-related.

One of the major advantages often expressed for the use of magazine-fed pistols is the magazine, itself. Unfortunately, the magazine is also at the very heart of normal feeding and functioning of pistols. A pistol magazine is an "assembly" of parts, and that introduces the potential for one or more of the parts/components to contribute to a "problem". A problem with any particular magazine can render the pistol inop for critical moments (the shooter's recognition and diagnosis can be the longest several seconds experienced in the shortest time ).

It's not uncommon to see someone panic and start pressing the slide stop lever and mag catch (or decocking lever or manual safety, if so equipped) when some shooter starts going through some litany of "corrective measures" to try and get a pistol back up and running. I've even watched a few people try to grab a small folding knife or mini light off their belt when trying to get another magazine. Training issues, to be fair, but still, more controls mean more opportunities to try and "use" those controls, in the wrong order, for the wrong reasons, as thumbs and fingers start grasping "TO DO SOMETHING" to get a pistol going again.

Ammunition capacity considerations for service/duty use can be somewhat of a different thing than for personal defensive use. (Yes, I know there will likely be people who vehemently disagree, and that doesn't bother me. )

I personally only own ONE pistol that uses "hi-cap" mags, and those are 12-rd mags. The rest of my pistols use 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10-rd mags ... and I'm very comfortable carrying retirement weapons that only have 6, 7 or 8-rd mags. As a matter of fact, my choice for a "large" LEOSA weapon on our last out-of-state road trip was a CS45, which is a subcompact .45 pistol that uses 6-rd mags. I left my 1911's (7-8rds) and my M&P 45 (10rds) at home in the safe. A "secondary" option I took along was one of my 642-1's (5-shot Airweight snub .38).

I usually only carry one of my 5-shot snubs and/or one of my LCP's (6-rd .380 mags) for our road trips, but this time I decided to bring a larger caliber (heavier bullets) along for all the time we were going to be driving. The last time it was my 4013TSW (compact 9-rd .40) that served as the larger option, but it's a bit larger than the CS45. Maybe next time I might pull my well-worn Ruger Service-Six 4" .357 for that role.

Over time, overall, I tend to suspect that a reasonably skilled revolver shooter is probably a better all around handgun shooter than someone who learned their handgun foundation skillset only using a pistol. It requires a bit more comprehensive skillset to properly and effectively use a DA revolver. I'd much rather transition a revolver shooter over to pistols, than a pistol shooter over to revolvers.

 

[Hangingrock]

Over time, overall, I tend to suspect that a reasonably skilled revolver shooter is probably a better all around handgun shooter than someone who learned their handgun foundation skillset only using a pistol. It requires a bit more comprehensive skillset to properly and effectively use a DA revolver. I'd much rather transition a revolver shooter over to pistols, than a pistol shooter over to revolvers.

The first center handgun I fired was the 1911A1 at Parris Island in the summer of 1964. Surviving my enlistment thus returning to citizen status my first acquired handgun was a S&W M15 followed by a M17 and so on. At some point acquired a Colt Combat Commander and Government model both 70 series that I sent to Jim Clark. I believe what made a good shooter was the double action revolver.