Wheelgun versus auto: state your case!
- Thread starter Boats
- Start date
- Status
If you keep a revovler clean and use factory ammo, it should never have a problem. It might have a dud primer every couple of thousand rounds but that is it. Autos can have a lot of different things go wrong that is not ammo related.
END
The same can be said for a quality auto keep it clean and feed it good ammo and it will run fine. Revolvers can have logs of things go wrong that are not ammo related. Take a colt trooper I recently bought it skips a chamber from time to time and needs to be retimed. Both designs have their lemons.
PAT
END
The same can be said for a quality auto keep it clean and feed it good ammo and it will run fine. Revolvers can have logs of things go wrong that are not ammo related. Take a colt trooper I recently bought it skips a chamber from time to time and needs to be retimed. Both designs have their lemons.
PAT
Auto... Grew up with them and I'll probably die with an empty one in my hand. I've worked with them for so long that the operation procedures become automatic themselves...
THat being said, revolvers have their place... normally with those whose understanding of firearms dictates the simplest delivery system possible... Like my mother. She's a good shot but she doesn't have time to devote to proper auto training. For two properly trained marksmen, the auto would be favored only due to its recoil compensation, easier reload, and higher ammo count per mag.
THat being said, revolvers have their place... normally with those whose understanding of firearms dictates the simplest delivery system possible... Like my mother. She's a good shot but she doesn't have time to devote to proper auto training. For two properly trained marksmen, the auto would be favored only due to its recoil compensation, easier reload, and higher ammo count per mag.
Prefer the simplicity of revolvers.
In a self-defense situation, I can react automaticallly without haveing to stop and think.
Also prefer the cartridge/caliber selections available.
In a self-defense situation, I can react automaticallly without haveing to stop and think.
Also prefer the cartridge/caliber selections available.
I've never had a revolver jam!
For light clothing days, I've got my Mod 85...for days with a touch more clothing, I've got my Security Six!
Eventually, I'll replace the Mod 85 with a .357 5shot 3" (Ruger sp).
I've got a high level of understanding and experience. For me, it came down to what would be best to have on or near my person 24/7. Dirty, tired, middle of the night and naked...i don't want to be clearing a jam, I want to be putting rounds downrange.
For light clothing days, I've got my Mod 85...for days with a touch more clothing, I've got my Security Six!
Eventually, I'll replace the Mod 85 with a .357 5shot 3" (Ruger sp).
I've got a high level of understanding and experience. For me, it came down to what would be best to have on or near my person 24/7. Dirty, tired, middle of the night and naked...i don't want to be clearing a jam, I want to be putting rounds downrange.
Attachments
Boats, I don't think you are new to revolvers, but if you are make sure you check out enough examples to recognize when they are working properly. Once you have that confidence you will be able to choose wisely whether a revo or auto will fit your needs.
I like the S&Ws because I have not seen or had a lot of trouble with them and I can tell when they are working properly. I agree for 90% of folks, a revo will more than cover their needs. They do for me. Good luck.
I like the S&Ws because I have not seen or had a lot of trouble with them and I can tell when they are working properly. I agree for 90% of folks, a revo will more than cover their needs. They do for me. Good luck.
I keep a Ruger Security Six .357 by my bedside. It is simple to operate and totally reliable. I figure it's best to have something simple if your just waking up because of a disturbance.
However:
Glock-17 with two 20 round mags and one 17 round mag is about $500.
A box of really cheap 9mm ammo is about $5.
Being able to rain lead on somebody who is threatening my life....priceless!
To heck with statistics. Sometimes more is better!
However:
Glock-17 with two 20 round mags and one 17 round mag is about $500.
A box of really cheap 9mm ammo is about $5.
Being able to rain lead on somebody who is threatening my life....priceless!
To heck with statistics. Sometimes more is better!
Stevie-Ray
Member
Just about what I carry; Ultra CDP and G26. My only blood-drawing injury came from an out of time revolver. Rapid fire with a revolver stands a better chance of a blown up gun with squib loads. (Possibly leading to disaster) They generally won't cycle the action of an auto. Score one for safety for the auto, which is unusual since the revolver is generally considered safer. Revolvers are great weapons, but they're just not for everybody.
I'll take autos also.
Real faulty logic here. The auto has been in general LE use for 15 to 20 years, and the DA revolver for 100 years. How about we compare the Washington DC PD's ADs with revolvers for the last two years they were in use and the ADs for Glocks the first two years they were in use?
IMO nothing beats the revolver in reliability and simplicity. The accuracy edge also goes to the revolver - a bone stock SW686 4-6", is definitely no worse at 25 meters than a fine tuned SIG P210.
For self-defense it boils down to rock solid reliability.
The only auto I trust nearly as much as a revolver is the P7... But over the years even the P7 produced more "problems" (read: an occasional FTF every couple thousand rounds (bad ammo), broken firing pin bushing) than any revolver I ever shot.
For self-defense it boils down to rock solid reliability.
The only auto I trust nearly as much as a revolver is the P7...
But over the years even the P7 produced more "problems" (read: an occasional FTF every couple thousand rounds (bad ammo), broken firing pin bushing) than any revolver I ever shot.Real faulty logic here. The auto has been in general LE use for 15 to 20 years, and the DA revolver for 100 years. How about we compare the Washington DC PD's ADs with revolvers for the last two years they were in use and the ADs for Glocks the first two years they were in use?
END
Point is that ND's happen with both designs. Its not the design its the idiot behind the gun that is responsible for an ND. Give a moron a revolver and a ND will happen. I just bought a Colt Trooper than has some reliability issue because it needs to be retimed. I have a sig 239 that I have put thousands of rounds though and I have yet to see a malfunction. It even fired 9mm ammo and its a 357 sig. Idiot friend loaded the gun and I started firing. Gun worked and cycled fine however. Smith revolvers have never given me a problem either.
PAT
END
Point is that ND's happen with both designs. Its not the design its the idiot behind the gun that is responsible for an ND. Give a moron a revolver and a ND will happen. I just bought a Colt Trooper than has some reliability issue because it needs to be retimed. I have a sig 239 that I have put thousands of rounds though and I have yet to see a malfunction. It even fired 9mm ammo and its a 357 sig. Idiot friend loaded the gun and I started firing. Gun worked and cycled fine however. Smith revolvers have never given me a problem either.
PAT
"Point is that ND's happen with both designs," but that's not what you said PAT. You said, "I will have to disagree with one posters comments about revolvers and nd's. More nd [sic] have been logged with police revolvers than have been logged with police auto's [sic]."
It is also does not not address is more likely to cause problems in relatively untrained hands (and unpracticed hands--there's a difference). The Glock is a prime example of an automatic more prone (note: not "less safe") than a revolver--particularly with lack of training and practice. It fires like a revolver--just pull the trigger, but:
(1) the trigger stroke is much shorter (therefore less time to think);
(2) the trigger stroke is much lighter (therefore less conscious effort to fire it);
(3) there is no tactile or visual "feedback"--you can't see the hammer cock, the cylinder rotate or hear the action (no warning--just a little pressure on the trigger and boom);
(4) you can see whether a revolver is loaded--you can't see whether a Glock is loaded;
(5) you can unload a Glock (drop the magazine), and it can still fire;
(6) you don't have to pull the trigger to clean a revolver (see 4 and 5 above);
(7) you can shove a revolver in your waistband (just like on TV) and chances are you'll be OK--you can shove a Glock in your waistband and chances are you'll be singing soprano.
So, yes, you can AD a revolver, but you can AD a pistol a whole lot easier (and I do think the Washington DC PD proved that without a doubt). And yes, they are all "operator errors," but there are potential for a lot more "operator errors" with an automatic.
As to reliability, both are equally subject mechanical failures common to pieces of machinery. Some designs (e.g., S&W revolvers versus Colt revolvers) are more prone to mechanical failure than others. There's also QC and cost-cutting issues involved (e.g., Glocks' infamous slide rails). As a whole, the automatic is far more vulnerable to the far more common ammunition problems than a revolver (and generally a revolver will be quicker back into action again). The automatic's biggest weakness, however, is the magazine. The vast majority of the automatic's reliability problems are traced the magazine--a problem the revolver does not have. Didn't you just experience some serious magazine (and potentially fatal given your line of work) problems with your Glock 33?
It is also does not not address is more likely to cause problems in relatively untrained hands (and unpracticed hands--there's a difference). The Glock is a prime example of an automatic more prone (note: not "less safe") than a revolver--particularly with lack of training and practice. It fires like a revolver--just pull the trigger, but:
(1) the trigger stroke is much shorter (therefore less time to think);
(2) the trigger stroke is much lighter (therefore less conscious effort to fire it);
(3) there is no tactile or visual "feedback"--you can't see the hammer cock, the cylinder rotate or hear the action (no warning--just a little pressure on the trigger and boom);
(4) you can see whether a revolver is loaded--you can't see whether a Glock is loaded;
(5) you can unload a Glock (drop the magazine), and it can still fire;
(6) you don't have to pull the trigger to clean a revolver (see 4 and 5 above);
(7) you can shove a revolver in your waistband (just like on TV) and chances are you'll be OK--you can shove a Glock in your waistband and chances are you'll be singing soprano.
So, yes, you can AD a revolver, but you can AD a pistol a whole lot easier (and I do think the Washington DC PD proved that without a doubt). And yes, they are all "operator errors," but there are potential for a lot more "operator errors" with an automatic.
As to reliability, both are equally subject mechanical failures common to pieces of machinery. Some designs (e.g., S&W revolvers versus Colt revolvers) are more prone to mechanical failure than others. There's also QC and cost-cutting issues involved (e.g., Glocks' infamous slide rails). As a whole, the automatic is far more vulnerable to the far more common ammunition problems than a revolver (and generally a revolver will be quicker back into action again). The automatic's biggest weakness, however, is the magazine. The vast majority of the automatic's reliability problems are traced the magazine--a problem the revolver does not have. Didn't you just experience some serious magazine (and potentially fatal given your line of work) problems with your Glock 33?
Revolver
Mostly for the peace of mind that I KNOW it will fire with each squeeze of the trigger.
However as a long-term wheel-man I must admit that revolvers DO jam. It's rare but it can happen AT THE RANGE.
I had a Colt Anaconda .45 Colt that had a very tight barrel-cylinder gap. It would start to bind after about 30 rounds or so due to crud build-up. It wasn't a big deal as I just cannot see needing to fire that many times with a hand-gun in a defensive situation. As for LEOs...I guess that many rounds COULD be required (doubtful). And if so the gap could be enlarged and/or cleaner ammo selected.
On the other hand I have a new S&W 686 that has a wide gap (-.008) and it starts to bind after about 60 rounds. And this was with FACTORY SJHP ammo.
It has been suggested that this is due to the heat generated by hot magnums. I'm not sure at this point.
So I suppose the question should come down to:
How many rounds are required BEFORE a cleaning?
If the answer is less than 30 than certainly a wheelgun can do the job and with GREAT reliability.
Mostly for the peace of mind that I KNOW it will fire with each squeeze of the trigger.
However as a long-term wheel-man I must admit that revolvers DO jam. It's rare but it can happen AT THE RANGE.
I had a Colt Anaconda .45 Colt that had a very tight barrel-cylinder gap. It would start to bind after about 30 rounds or so due to crud build-up. It wasn't a big deal as I just cannot see needing to fire that many times with a hand-gun in a defensive situation. As for LEOs...I guess that many rounds COULD be required (doubtful). And if so the gap could be enlarged and/or cleaner ammo selected.
On the other hand I have a new S&W 686 that has a wide gap (-.008) and it starts to bind after about 60 rounds. And this was with FACTORY SJHP ammo.
It has been suggested that this is due to the heat generated by hot magnums. I'm not sure at this point.So I suppose the question should come down to:
How many rounds are required BEFORE a cleaning?
If the answer is less than 30 than certainly a wheelgun can do the job and with GREAT reliability.
I also used to think revolvers were 100% reliable. Then my Colt revolver binded up. The cylinder moves just out of play enough for the base of the cartridges to get jammed on the hand. It still cycles with an empty cylinder but is completely jammed when loaded. I would sure hate that to happen in a CCW weapon.
I would go with a highly reliable weapons such as Sig, Glock or Beretta and not sweat it. Most of my failures have been due to bad ammo or weak mag springs or dirty mags. With high-quality ammo and well-maintained mags, I have never had a problem.
I would go with a highly reliable weapons such as Sig, Glock or Beretta and not sweat it. Most of my failures have been due to bad ammo or weak mag springs or dirty mags. With high-quality ammo and well-maintained mags, I have never had a problem.
i like autos,they offer more capacity and sometimes faster followup shots.on the other hand,revolvers dont have mag springs to worry about,you can leave them indefinatly full of ammo,dont have to swap mags,rotate the ammo ect.you have 5 or 6 shots in a revolver depending on make and model.chances are for us homeowners,the first 2 shots are the ones that count as its doubtful a large group of badguys are going to forcably enter.6 will be enough.the other thing about revolvers,you can mix 38 special and 357 mag in the same cylinder,cant mix bullet lengths in an auto.you can use moon clips to quickly reload your revolvers.a sig as a primary gun and backup 3"snubby in 357.
Well, here's my take....and this is from personal observations over four years of working with a revolver on my hip.
1: The Smith 686 4" is probably the finest combat revolver ever designed. The only drawback to the serious user would be the fragile rear sight. Of all the thirty-plus revolvers in our weapons locker, the only visible damage is to the rear sight leaf and the rubber combat grips. All of the weapons are tested annually for function and they always pass, regardless of cleanliness.
2: The position of the grip on a revolver positions it at the highest point on the weapon as it sits in a holster. This means the path to the grip is not obscured beavertails/tangs. Whether your hand travels up to the grip or down to the grip, it is far faster to access than on 99% of the autos out there.
3: My personal weapon has seen very little cleaning in four years of use. At first, I was anal about cleaning it, but I got curious about how dirty it could get and still function. Right now it sits in my duty-belt holster covered in soot from several hundred rounds fired on Sunday. Dry-firing shows that everything is working as it should.
4: Accuracy is what you make of it. To say that you can't shoot a revolver for squat is to state simply that you haven't spent enough time behind the trigger of one. I can keep all of my rounds inside of a cardboard target (16"x16") when shooting rapid free-hand at 25yd. That's roughly the size of the average ribcage and isn't too bad. From a rest, my groups are tighter because a lot of me is taken out of the equation.
5: Trying to transition to a Colt 1991 for reasons of capacity and such has shown me recently that there really is a lot to the Revolver. Trying to snake my thumb around the beavertail to engage the thumbreak is slower...to say the least.
6: The various grips out there for a revolver can greatly change the feeling it gives to the shooter and, therefore, the way it shoots. Hogue wraparounds might be too big for the smaller shooters, but the same gun with cheap wood slabs might turn into a tackdriver. I've seen it happen countless times.
Make the most of it, folks. If you "can't shoot a wheelie for beans", get out there and spend more quality time with one. Look at it like a challenge. I dare ya!
1: The Smith 686 4" is probably the finest combat revolver ever designed. The only drawback to the serious user would be the fragile rear sight. Of all the thirty-plus revolvers in our weapons locker, the only visible damage is to the rear sight leaf and the rubber combat grips. All of the weapons are tested annually for function and they always pass, regardless of cleanliness.
2: The position of the grip on a revolver positions it at the highest point on the weapon as it sits in a holster. This means the path to the grip is not obscured beavertails/tangs. Whether your hand travels up to the grip or down to the grip, it is far faster to access than on 99% of the autos out there.
3: My personal weapon has seen very little cleaning in four years of use. At first, I was anal about cleaning it, but I got curious about how dirty it could get and still function. Right now it sits in my duty-belt holster covered in soot from several hundred rounds fired on Sunday. Dry-firing shows that everything is working as it should.
4: Accuracy is what you make of it. To say that you can't shoot a revolver for squat is to state simply that you haven't spent enough time behind the trigger of one. I can keep all of my rounds inside of a cardboard target (16"x16") when shooting rapid free-hand at 25yd. That's roughly the size of the average ribcage and isn't too bad. From a rest, my groups are tighter because a lot of me is taken out of the equation.
5: Trying to transition to a Colt 1991 for reasons of capacity and such has shown me recently that there really is a lot to the Revolver. Trying to snake my thumb around the beavertail to engage the thumbreak is slower...to say the least.
6: The various grips out there for a revolver can greatly change the feeling it gives to the shooter and, therefore, the way it shoots. Hogue wraparounds might be too big for the smaller shooters, but the same gun with cheap wood slabs might turn into a tackdriver. I've seen it happen countless times.
Make the most of it, folks. If you "can't shoot a wheelie for beans", get out there and spend more quality time with one. Look at it like a challenge. I dare ya!
Hmmm, good question. Revolvers do tend to be more accurate in my hands than autos...What helped me a lot with revolver shooting was laying a dime on top of the gun and dry firing double action trying to hold it still enough while cycing it to not let it fall off. Don't watch the dime, watch the sight. If you feel froggy, try stacking two or three dimes!
Alas, my favorite revolver is 53 ounces, and my auto is only 39 oz, and a lot flatter, and reloads faster, and clearing jams is possible in the field where a revolver would be out of commision...
My heart says revolver but my head says auto. Maybe just cause I live in the city though.
Alas, my favorite revolver is 53 ounces, and my auto is only 39 oz, and a lot flatter, and reloads faster, and clearing jams is possible in the field where a revolver would be out of commision...
My heart says revolver but my head says auto. Maybe just cause I live in the city though.
"How about we compare the Washington DC PD's ADs with revolvers for the last two years they were in use and the ADs for Glocks the first two years they were in use?"
Washington Post did just that about 5 or 6 years ago.
You don't want to know the results.
But it's not as cut and dried as you would think that it would be.
At the time the Glock was adopted, DC was under a court-mandated hiring program to get more officers on the streets.*
Because of that pressure, as well as financial pressure, training was, to put it mildly, cursory at best, potentially criminally lax, at worst.
Many of these recruits were handling guns really for the first time, and were starting out with a gun that is not at all forgiving to those who don't know how to handle firearms.
The light Glock trigger, poor oversight, even poorer training, and the number of NDs skyrocketed.
What is more telling, though, were that even officers with many years on the job were having NDs at rates much higer than normal.
Why?
Largely because of poor transitional training.
The situation is getting better, and the rate of NDs with the DC police is dropping.
*Those court-ordered hiring classes were among the dregs of DC "society." Many of the officers hired under the mandate later ended up being charged with crimes, ranging from drug offenses all the way to murder.
Washington Post did just that about 5 or 6 years ago.
You don't want to know the results.
But it's not as cut and dried as you would think that it would be.
At the time the Glock was adopted, DC was under a court-mandated hiring program to get more officers on the streets.*
Because of that pressure, as well as financial pressure, training was, to put it mildly, cursory at best, potentially criminally lax, at worst.
Many of these recruits were handling guns really for the first time, and were starting out with a gun that is not at all forgiving to those who don't know how to handle firearms.
The light Glock trigger, poor oversight, even poorer training, and the number of NDs skyrocketed.
What is more telling, though, were that even officers with many years on the job were having NDs at rates much higer than normal.
Why?
Largely because of poor transitional training.
The situation is getting better, and the rate of NDs with the DC police is dropping.
*Those court-ordered hiring classes were among the dregs of DC "society." Many of the officers hired under the mandate later ended up being charged with crimes, ranging from drug offenses all the way to murder.
Anyone who knows me knows where I stand on this issue -- the same place I've stood for going on 30 years.
I'll pick a revolver for just about all occasions.
I'll pick a revolver for just about all occasions.
You guys that are shooting the revolver more accurately than an auto...are you pulling the hammer back or shooting double action? I can't come close to the accuracy of my autos with a double action revolver in rapid fire drills, that's one of the reasons I got rid of my 608. I sold it to my uncle, and he has the office next to mine. Maybe I should buy that thing back!
jc2, I agree with some of your statements about the Glock. Check out the Springfield XD!
jc2, I agree with some of your statements about the Glock. Check out the Springfield XD!
"You guys that are shooting the revolver more accurately than an auto...are you pulling the hammer back or shooting double action?"
There are some semi-autos I shoot more accurately than revolvers, and vice versa.
For revolver shooting, though, I shoot double action almost exclusively.
It takes a LOT of practice.
There are some semi-autos I shoot more accurately than revolvers, and vice versa.
For revolver shooting, though, I shoot double action almost exclusively.
It takes a LOT of practice.
Single action with the wheelies is easier than DA, but to (I'm tryin and aint there yet) be the master of wheelguns means to master double action so yeah, it takes practice, and so thats the way I shoot my wheelguns, out to defensive distances at least which is most of it. Dryfire with snapcaps and a dime on the barrell out behind the front sight, it helped me alot. One shot at a time and just tiger that front sight to stay in place through the stroke. Don't try to be fast, just go for smoothness and the speed will come by itself.
I've always had a slight fear of the magazine spring taking a set and resulting in a jam. But I know, I know, rotate your magazines. I just feel there's less to go wrong with a revolver.
I'm in the auto camp. Provided it is an auto with a good trigger pull. I'm not knocking revolvers, I have them and use them. I just shoot autos much better.
1. Trigger. I have just never been able to master a DA trigger. I know that with a lot of practice you can get really good, but I figure the same amount of practice on a SA will get me to Master class. I hate DA/SA the most though.
2. Revolvers jam too. Only from what I've seen shooting in various matches revolver jams usually mean something broke and you are screwed. Auto jams can usually be cleared on the spot. Unless of course something broke on it, so you are screwed. So neither one is perfect, but it just seems like revolver jams are a real pain to fix.
3. Slower reloads, unless you are a moon clip mac daddy.
4. More ammo. How can that be a bad thing?
Don't get me wrong, I love my S&W 1917. It makes me feel like Indiana Jones.
1. Trigger. I have just never been able to master a DA trigger. I know that with a lot of practice you can get really good, but I figure the same amount of practice on a SA will get me to Master class.
I hate DA/SA the most though.2. Revolvers jam too. Only from what I've seen shooting in various matches revolver jams usually mean something broke and you are screwed. Auto jams can usually be cleared on the spot. Unless of course something broke on it, so you are screwed. So neither one is perfect, but it just seems like revolver jams are a real pain to fix.
3. Slower reloads, unless you are a moon clip mac daddy.
4. More ammo. How can that be a bad thing?
Don't get me wrong, I love my S&W 1917. It makes me feel like Indiana Jones.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked