Why no new, old revolvers?

[Stophel]

Even if the manufacturers could build high quality revolvers at a profit, it wouldn't be ENOUGH profit for them. If they made a million a year in profits off of said gun, why devote a production line to making a gun that brings you a million a year, when you could devote that production line to making a cheap plastic thing and make four million a year? This is why. (and this is why we see a great number of quality American made products of all kinds disappearing from the marketplace. They were making money, but in the heads of the business owners, not ENOUGH money...)

And, of course, today's shooting market just would not support such a business anyway, except on a relatively small scale. As was said, most people want plastic fantastic. The latest, the most "high tech", with lasers, accessory rails, flashlights, bipods, radar, FLIR, and invisibility stealth. The modern shooting/hunting market is VERY militarized in general. There is very little "class" left. Few want nice looking guns, or even have the knowledge to appreciate fine quality, fit or finish.

 

[Sam1911]

I wil go a step further. Most of us don't have the skills for semi-auto competition, either. Without the requisite skills, the semi-auto becomes just so much spray and pray.

Well, I guess.

But does that inform the discussion at hand? Folks don't have skills with either gun, so they'll "spray and pray" (whatever that really means). Ok. Should they choose a revolver because then they're limited with how many rounds they can "spray" between reloads? What good does that do, and why would that be a selling point? "Well, you're not going to hit anything, but at least it will take longer!"

Should they choose a revolver because it is even harder for most folks to shoot well as a new shooter? That seems to be going in the opposite direction from "good."

I'm afraid the whole "autoloaders = spray and pray" contention just comes off as the crotchety, out of touch whine of fading curmudgeons. ([Grandpa Simpson]That toy is a tool of the devil!"[/Grandpa Simpson]) It doesn't seem to offer any useful advice or constructive criticism. I don't want to be a fading curmudgeon!

 

[Sam1911]

You do understand that there is a whole world of shooting outside of competition and self defense, don't you?

Do you even know the meaning of the word "obsolete"???

As I got into back up in post 18, calling something "obsolete" implies some things to many people that might go beyond what is intended.

Obsolete doesn't mean the item no longer WORKS, or doesn't work exactly as well as it did when invented. It simply means other options have superseded that design for whatever reason.

It is too emotionally charged, though and we should probably come up with another word that doesn't carry all the negativity.

 

[W.E.G.]

how come no one makes the older style revolvers today

Ever heard of Uberti?

http://www.uberti.com/firearms/images/top_break_no3_2nd_pearl_nickel_lg.jpg

http://www.uberti.com/firearms/stallion_bisley_and_cattleman_bird_head.php

 

[Sam1911]

Manufacturers will make what they percieve their market wants and will buy. If everybody wants a Glock then they will all make Glocks. And here we are. If S&W or Colt started producing revolvers exactly like they made them 50 years ago the majority of the market would look at them and say they're overpriced, obsolete, and too heavy. They just wouldn't "get it". I put all of the blame for this state of conditions on TV. Especially MTV. Few people learn to "think" today. They want to follow the "in" crowd". Just like a herd of lemmings.

A ha! But as I said before...

But, as good capitalists here (right? ) we understand that market forces do eventually, over time, boil down matters into measurable trends and empirical "truth." We do seem to be homing in on a type of gun that does the most, for the widest variety of shooter, with the least significant negative trade-offs, for the least cost. Outside of the niches of the very large, the very small, and the enthusiast market, the revolver isn't it.

It isn't just the stupid, worthless, ignorant, pathetic lemmings that make up 99.9% of civilization who are driving the direction of gun development. There are some very experienced, very skilled, and very intelligent people who study metallurgy, polymers, industrial engineering, ergonomics, motion efficiency, economics, and also things like competition scores, and police and military training, success rates, and feedback to distill -- to engineer -- optimized designs.

Even though we like to think sometimes that lowest cost drives the greatest developments of the world inexorably into poo, that isn't really so. Manufacturers make the products they do because they will sell. Those products sell because they allow the most shooters to succeed (achieve their goals) with the least trouble.

Holding out that a design that is less accessible, heavier, bulkier, slower for all but a tiny (minuscule) percentage of shooters, and harder to shoot accurately is more worthy than the "plastic fantastic crap" most shooters are buying is reminiscent of a pal of mine who used to rail against computers that featured any kind of graphical user interface. Surely this was simply ruining computing. He sounded like an elitist curmudgeon then, and today ... well today most folks wouldn't even understand what he meant.

 

[nickn10]

This may not be germaine to this thread's point BUT.. I have autos (Ruger & XD ) and revolvers ( S&Ws ) I carry my S&W .357 in my truck and the autos in my home and at the range. I am ex military police and retired correctional officer. My exposure to some of these perps made me realize THAT THERE MAY BE A SITUATION WHEN YOU MUST DEFEND YOURSELF AND BECOME INVISIBLE! Leaving spent brass on the ground is not a smart thing to do if this is the case. PLEASE I know the law but I have also seen too many innocents pay a hefty price defending themselves in a court of law. THIS IS NOT ADVICE BUT MY OPINION, the circumstances will dictate my actions.
Fortunetly I live in a state that is reasonable about self defensive use of a firearm.

 

[sig220mw]

As others said, they are still made but just not in the same labor intensive ways of old. As far as being obsolete. Not now and not for a long time to come.

Until I read earplug's last post, I wondered why he was even on the revolvers section.

 

[Stophel]

I'm wondering why some others are here too.

Well, actually, I think I know...

 

[Sam1911]

Why are any of us here, in a forum devoted to a concept which is in some ways obsolescent?

Because we LIKE them! It doesn't have to be the greatest thing in the world, or even the tool you'd choose to meet your most pressing needs. You can still really appreciate a great revolver. Try as I might, I never could get the rest of the Staff to go along with the idea of requiring a blood oath of loyalty and fidelity to Sam Walker, Sam Colt, Horace Smith, Daniel Wesson (and, uh...Mssrs. Tom Rossi, Dick Charter, and Harry Taurus, er...I think those were their names) and all they stood for in order to post in 'Handguns: Revolvers'!

Heck, we have a blackpowder section, too!

 

[leadcounsel]

Revolvers are obsolete

A .38 or .357 magnum will kill you just as dead as it killed a man 40 years ago.

I dare say they are, and never will be, obsolete until humans aren't killed by bullets.

While it is true they may require more work to learn to use, reload quickly, etc., they also require LESS work to learn to use because of their simplicity, and for home defense they are nearly ideal.

I think the reason for lack of production is clearly cost and interest. I'm not the first to identify it, but yes most shooters have drifted to plastic guns. I like plastic guns, but also like wheelguns.

Keep in mind that people that compete in shooting competitions OFTEN use tricked out race gun and downloaded pressure on their ammunition.

 

[Lonerider357]

I shoot Cowboy Action and we have Cowboys vs Cops pretty often, We use single action pistols, lever rifles and double shotguns, the cops use whatever "Plastic" pistols, AR's and tactical pump shotguns. I have never seen a cop win any of those matches!!

 

[El Guero]

My exposure to some of these perps made me realize THAT THERE MAY BE A SITUATION WHEN YOU MUST DEFEND YOURSELF AND BECOME INVISIBLE! Leaving spent brass on the ground is not a smart thing to do if this is the case. PLEASE I know the law but I have also seen too many innocents pay a hefty price defending themselves in a court of law. THIS IS NOT ADVICE BUT MY OPINION, the circumstances will dictate my actions.

Wowzers! That's a reason for owning a revolver I never heard before!

 

[Sam1911]

I have never seen a cop win any of those matches!!

Hmmm... How would you expect the results to be if you did a SASS vs. USPSA shootout using a course of fire acceptable to both?

I know Randi Rogers ('Holy Terror') competes at a very high level in both. I wonder if there's any way to compare her scores across disciplines.

 

[Jim Watson]

While it is true they may require more work to learn to use, reload quickly, etc., they also require LESS work to learn to use because of their simplicity,

Therein lies the problem.
The DA revolver is simple to operate - for what M. Ayoob calls "administrative loading."
It is simple to fire - just haul the trigger through a half inch of travel against a 10 pound spring.
Unfortunately it is rather demanding to shoot, in the sense of getting hits. That 10 pound long travel double action so easy to describe and "remember" is pretty hard to do well.

 

[bikemutt]

Wowzers! That's a reason for owning a revolver I never heard before!

Same here, gonna have to think about that one a bit.

 

[Fishslayer]

Unfortunately it is rather demanding to shoot, in the sense of getting hits. That 10 pound long travel double action so easy to describe and "remember" is pretty hard to do well.

Advocates of a certain style of hammerless handguns have even been known to whine that mastering a DA/SA semiauto is "too hard."

 

[Sam1911]

Advocates of a certain style of hammerless handguns have even been known to whine that mastering a DA/SA semiauto is "too hard."

Yes!

Back to post 18:

But, as good capitalists here (right? ) we understand that market forces do eventually, over time, boil down matters into measurable trends and empirical "truth." We do seem to be homing in on a type of gun that does the most, for the widest variety of shooter, with the least significant negative trade-offs, for the least cost. Outside of the niches of the very large, the very small, and the enthusiast market, the revolver isn't it.

The DA/SA system is closer, but it isn't "IT", either.

 

[mjackson]

The laws of the free market is what answers the OP's question. A study of the market (gunsmithing and aftermarket parts included with manufacturers) would suggest the 1911 as the overwhelming classic American semi-auto. The public has already decided that Mr. Browning's design satisfies every niche in the pistol world. But in contrast, the buying public has not established a dominant revolver equivalent. The Colt SAA is the closest, I think. When we (buyers, shooters, armchair pisoleros) do focus on one design, the manufacturers will step up. But I won't hold my breath. It is this variability that makes the revolver unique, at least in my opinion.

 

[skidder]

I never cared for reloading autos. They are more ammo sensitive and they throw your brass from here to Christmas.

 

[Guillermo]

If they made a million a year in profits off of said gun, why devote a production line to making a gun that brings you a million a year, when you could devote that production line to making a cheap plastic thing and make four million a year?

^^^^^^^^this is the answer

So few people care to buy a quality revolver. If they can sell the crap they sell at premium prices, why spend more to make less?

those of us that care about purchasing good quality revolvers are happy in the used market.

If you shop you can get some great guns.

In the past couple of years I have picked up several Colt and Smith revolvers (4 Diamondbacks, an Officers Target, a K22, a Cobra). The most expensive was cheaper than a "performance" center Smith.

So speaking for myself, due to price considerations, I am happier in the used market than I would be in the new market.

 

[bikemutt]

Throwing a bit of grease on the fire, I went to every single gun store within reasonable driving distance for a guy who still works, looking for a 6", quality, old revolver chambered in .357 magnum.

I found one, a nice Trooper Mk III, which they wanted more than an F-150 payment for. I say nice to be kind; if rounds down the pipe were conquests, this one's a porn star.

And this is quite unusual. I can always find very nice wheel guns to peruse at the local shops.

My best guess: it's the holiday shopping season and the guns the crowd wants get first place on the sales shelf.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

While it is true they may require more work to learn to use, reload quickly, etc., they also require LESS work to learn to use because of their simplicity,

Therein lies the problem.
The DA revolver is simple to operate - for what M. Ayoob calls "administrative loading."
It is simple to fire - just haul the trigger through a half inch of travel against a 10 pound spring.
Unfortunately it is rather demanding to shoot, in the sense of getting hits. That 10 pound long travel double action so easy to describe and "remember" is pretty hard to do well.

Just takes a little commitment at the beginning. Once learned, it's largely like riding a bike. I can shoot the heck out of a good medium frame double action revolver.

 

[jad0110]

Quote:
They are harder to shoot quickly.

Not for Jerry Miculek!!! Um, but for the rest of the shooting public, like 99.99% of the rest of the shooting public, yes, they are harder to shoot quickly. Not that those people couldn't learn, but that it takes A LOT -- decades -- of practice to develop the skill to surpass with a revolver the rate of accurate fire that a given shooter can put out with an automatic. C'est la vie.

Well, I guess put me into the .01% category. Can I shoot a 1911 faster than a S&W revolver, when just considering speed? Yes, but my group would look like a shotgun pattern at 50 yards . However, in fairly rapid fire I do FAR better with a DA revolver than any other platform. Am I weird? Perhaps, and though I may be in the minority there are probably more of us wierdos than you think .

Service-sized revolvers are obsolescent. That doesn't mean they are not still cool, and highly valued, nor that some enthusiasts do not still choose them over other options. But they are surpassed in the role for which they were designed.

A blanket statement, IMHO. In the service size category, I'm consistently a heck of a lot better with something like a S&W Model 19 than a Glock 19. So for me, the Glock is obsolete .

There is an individual component to the term "obsolete". Manual transmissions may be obsolete for most folks, but not for me - I consider myself a better driver when I have direct control over what gear the car is in at all times, but again, that's just me. Sadly, I don't own a car with a manual at the moment .

I also prefer analog watches and dash gauges to their digital counterparts. They (IMO) tell me more information at a glance and are easier to interpret than digitals. All around, they are better for me, so there again the digital watches and gauges are obsolete for me because they don't perform their function as well as the analogs.

Just takes a little commitment at the beginning. Once learned, it's largely like riding a bike. I can shoot the heck out of a good medium frame double action revolver.

Yep, it didn't take me long and I didn't find it all that hard either. It only took a couple hundred rounds and dry firing to get it down to the point that it is second nature to me now.


---

To get back to the OP, we don't see many equivalents of the grand old revolvers of old built today because of supply and demand. Demand is relatively low, while the supply of used, older classic revolvers is relatively plentiful. That may change one day (demand may hold steady and the supply dries up), which may change things. We'll see.

 

[Cowboy011]

I shoot Cowboy Action and we have Cowboys vs Cops pretty often, We use single action pistols, lever rifles and double shotguns, the cops use whatever "Plastic" pistols, AR's and tactical pump shotguns. I have never seen a cop win any of those matches!!

Not necessarily the entire reason the cops are using but they are using full power loads, not mouse fart loads.

 

[Cowboy011]

Hmmm... How would you expect the results to be if you did a SASS vs. USPSA shootout using a course of fire acceptable to both?

I know Randi Rogers ('Holy Terror') competes at a very high level in both. I wonder if there's any way to compare her scores across disciplines.

USPSA has a revolver division. The revolver guys and gals don't win the overall (even Jerry) but some of them do very well. This is really a better comparison then the SASS shooters vs USPSA as the USPSA revolver shooter still have to meet power factors and they must reload after 6 shots. The SASS guns can't practically be reloaded on the clock. I shoot SASS as well as USPSA, these games are simply too different to compare head to head.

By the way Jerry usually beats me with his revolver, against me with an open gun.