What I mean is, the bullet shapes we take for granted in wheelguns would cause most semi-autos to choke hard unless they've had major gunsmithing and feed ramp polishing done. And some would be impossible regardless.
There is no 9mm semi-auto round that I'm aware of that has a huge gaping JHP cavity the size of the Speer 135. And there's a reason for that: they would hang up on the feed ramps of most slideguns if it was tried.
S&W did successfully make a semi-auto in 38Spl years ago that would feed target wadcutters. But that's ALL it would eat - it was specially tuned for that bullet shape.
Ammo for semi-autos needs to be as close to "ball nose profile" as possible even if it's hollowpoint, so as to cause as few jams as possible.
We need no such compromises for our wheelguns, so the ammo makers brew up projectile shapes meant to work at the target rather than inside the gun.
I've got no desire to start a revolver vs. semi auto battle, specially since I own many revolvers and pocket carry one also. But your comments don't properly reflect modern autoloaders or modern ammo.
Large open cavity hollow points have been available for autoloaders for a long time. One that comes to mind that's been around about 20 years or longer is the CCI/Speer 200 grain .45 caliber "flying ashtray". The cavity was huge and both my Sig P220 and my Glock 21 fed them with 100% reliability. That bullet has been far surpassed by more modern bullet designs but they're still available in the Blazer line. There have been similar large cavity bullets for other autoloading calibers as well.
But the real reason you don't see many large cavity hollow point bullets for autoloaders isn't that the guns can't chamber them, no the real reason is that such huge hollow cavities are no longer required to make the bullet expand and perform properly just as high velocity isn't required any longer either.
Bullets like the Ranger, Gold Dot, Golden Saber and Silvertip rely on bullet design, scored jackets and computer shaped cavities more than they rely on cavity size or velocity to expand. The cavity no longer needs to be huge, making it smaller and shaping it properly not only aids reliability but also aids in ballistics and expansion. And they expand quite reliably, testing, both real world and gelatin, shows that they expand to nearly double their starting size, almost every time. Why continue to make huge cavities when it's not necessary and would be more reliable in questionable guns without them?
I love revolvers too, but let's not kid ourselves as to the functionality of autoloaders or the efficiency of their ammo. It's every bit as good as a revolver in most cases.
Where autoloaders begin to have reliability problems is with the very small, very light guns. I've yet to find an autoloader that's smaller and lighter than a Glock 26 that's reliable and powerful enough to bet my life on. And bullet design seems to have little to do with it, with the sole exception of a .32 Kel-Tec I had my tiny autos aren't totally reliable even with FMJ ammo. And I ain't betting my live on a .32. Very small, very light autos just aren't extremely reliable, at least that's been my experience and I've had a bunch of them. There are several I'm still working with, but I don't get my hopes too high.
Which is why my pocket gun is a J frame revolver.