Why semi auto handguns are my favorite type of arm...

[mcb]

Lemesee what's so humorous. I carry an M1911 with a round up the spout and an 8-round magazine. That's nine rounds -- 50% more ammunition than a 6-shot revolver and 80% more than a 5-shot revolver. With two spare 10-round magazines, I have 19 rounds with a single reload and 25 shots total, as compared to a 6-shot revolver with two speed loaders (18 rounds.)

Seems significant to me.

But only 1 round more than an 8-shot revolver. I beat all the single stack shooters at the last USPSA match with my 627 despite being down one round.

 

[DDDWho]

I own several in both semi and revolver. A couple of 1911s, a single action Ruger Taurus revolvers, some Ruger and Taurus semi autos. To my mind the one below approaches art. I've owned it for over 30 years. Every time I pick it up I'm impressed all over again like the first time. With a revolver you can "see" it operate.

 

[bannockburn]

I like both revolvers and semi-autos. My first few handguns were revolvers; of the single action and double action variety. And I was happy until...

My brother liked only semi-autos and not only could he carry more rounds in his pistols (of course he had to have a Browning Hi-Power), but he could field strip, clean them, and have them back together again before I could get a bore brush through the first chamber of the cylinder on one of my revolvers. This got me thinking...

Pretty soon I was a faithful convert to the ways of semi-autos, gladly selling or trading away almost all of my revolvers for semi-autos. And I was happy once again until...

I would read something by Elmer Keith, Skeeter Skelton, or John Taffin and I would be yearning for the good ol' days with my revolvers again. So gradually over the years, while still taking care of my semi-auto needs, I have also been looking after my wheelgun interests as well. Still have a ways to go yet but that's part of the fun of it all as well.

 

[rpenmanparker]

I like both a lot, but revolvers are my first love.

I also really enjoy NOT chasing brass around.

Why would you chase brass around? Good riddance.

 

[rpenmanparker]

But only 1 round more than an 8-shot revolver. I beat all the single stack shooters at the last USPSA match with my 627 despite being down one round.

Beat them at what? We aren’t talking g about shooting skill, just reloading speed. Did you reload your revolver faster than the other guys reloaded their semi-autos? If so, that is about you and them, not the guns.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Why would you chase brass around? Good riddance.

I assume you're joking.

 

[cfullgraf]

On any particular day, if I feel like chasing brass, I like semi-autos.

On any particular day, if I don't feel like chasing brass, I like revolvers.

 

[Mad_Max]

My first pistol was/is a stainless 6 shot revolver with a 4" barrel and wood grips... I love the look. In reality, I'm a better shot with my semi auto. I find the semi rather boring to look at though. The revolver is a bear to keep clean and does not run well once it gets dirty. The semi will run for hours and is a breeze to clean. They both have their place... but I shoot alot and the semi trumps the revolver when it comes to actually shooting. Aesthetically, the revolver has it all over the semi.

 

[<*(((><]

I assume you're joking.

I think he’s talking about Army brass, superiors.

 

[mcb]

Beat them at what?

At the last USPSA Match...

We aren’t talking g about shooting skill, just reloading speed. Did you reload your revolver faster than the other guys reloaded their semi-autos? If so, that is about you and them, not the guns.

This part your going to have to expand on or clarify cause I am not following you. First you say we are talking about reload speed then you say its not about the guns but the people. I think I agree with you but not sure.

I was simply pointing out that there are revolvers that are pretty close in capacity to a single stack 1911 and that in a competitive setting that 1 round advantage is not always sufficient to over come the meat-ware behind the trigger. ie its usually the Indian not the arrow that matters.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

I think he’s talking about Army brass, superiors.

Oh, I see. Makes no sense in this topic, but at least I understand his comment now.

 

[rpenmanparker]

I assume you're joking.

Not completely. For me it stays where it falls.

 

[rpenmanparker]

At the last USPSA Match...



This part your going to have to expand on or clarify cause I am not following you. First you say we are talking about reload speed then you say its not about the guns but the people. I think I agree with you but not sure.

I was simply pointing out that there are revolvers that are pretty close in capacity to a single stack 1911 and that in a competitive setting that 1 round advantage is not always sufficient to over come the meat-ware behind the trigger. ie its usually the Indian not the arrow that matters.

I meant beat them at DOING what. Reloading a gun or shooting a gun or the sum of all the activities together? Let's assume you won a competition that included drawing, shooting, reloading and repeat, etc. Well and good...and congratulations. But your ability to overcome the drawbacks of a revolver doesn't justify those drawbacks in general. That was just you that could deal with it. Suppose I come along and shoot just the same speed and accuracy as you, but with a faster-to-handle gun. We both shoot the same, but that time you go down. My point is that you being able to overcome the disadvantages in one instance enough to win doesn't negate them for all time. The revolver is still inferior to the semi-auto pistol over the entire population of shooters who might be involved in a multi-round shootout.

Oh, and of course the obvious: if you can do that well with a revolver, how much better could you do with a semi-auto pistol? Don't you ever lose to someone when a bit more reloading speed would make the difference? I mean, after all, you don't beat everybody, do you?

 

[Hasaf]

I know the source of my preference for Semi-Autos; even though it is also true that I like percussion revolvers. The source of my preference has a lot to do with my age. In the late 70s' and 80s' the transition to semi-autos was well underway. This was when I was a kid and was reading a large amount of "gun media" which was mostly magazines at that time.

The magazines were packed with articles about semi-autos'. They commonly featured torture tests, or other articles focused on highlighting the advantages of the semi-autos.

Then I had my academy experience. What I saw there was that the semi-autos were more reliable than the revolvers. This was due to the cheap ammunition we were using, leaving lead behind, causing binding between the barrel and the cylinder.

Sure, I can go on about the various contrasting technical merits; but I know those were the two things that shaped my preference. Frankly, as little as it should matter, I think the first, media coverage at the time, had the largest impact in my preference.

So, why percussion revolvers? Because they are supposed to be antiquated!


The first cartridge pistol I purchased; and yes, I still have it.

 

[Hokkmike]

I am probably in the small percentage that does not reload, so except for keeping my club range tidy - which I do, chasing brass is not much of an issue. There is no revolver made that will hold 10 - 12 rounds and fit in my front pocket like my 365.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Not completely. For me it stays where it falls.

A few thoughts.

I reload, so I pick mine up. Revolvers are a lot handier in that regard.

I shoot outdoors on National Forest land, and I don't believe in leaving a mess out there. So even if I didn't reload I'd still pick it up, and I do pick up other people's trash and brass while out shooting.

My 9's and 45's mostly deposit my brass in easy to find consistent piles. My 10mm's do not. Considering the cost of a lot of 10mm ammo, and the fact that I can reload it for about 25% of the cost of factory new, finding my brass is important to me.

If you're a reloader, and a shooter who believes in not leaving a mess, revolvers win hands down.

But I still love semi auto handguns as well. The two have their own advantages and excel in different areas given a particular application.

 

[mcb]

I meant beat them at DOING what. Reloading a gun or shooting a gun or the sum of all the activities together?

All those activities together... Draw, shooting, reloading and moving are all part of a USPSA match. I will make the assumption that you are unfamiliar with USPSA in light of your questions. USPSA is a practical pistol sport. Stages involve a bunch of props that simulate walls and other obstacles the competitor must move and shoot around. The targets are a mix of cardboard silhouettes and a variety of steel targets. Either target type may be moving targets. A stage is upwards of 32 required rounds (you might shoot more if you miss ). The cool part (IMHO) is that your score determined by both you hits and your time. Your score on each stage is basically your Points per Second, call Hit Factor in the sport. The points you score for your hits on targets (minus penalties) divided by the time it took you to shoot the stage. Since its the total time any time you spent during the stage reloading lowers your score so fast reloads are a must.

Let's assume you won a competition that included drawing, shooting, reloading and repeat, etc. Well and good...and congratulations. But your ability to overcome the drawbacks of a revolver doesn't justify those drawbacks in general. That was just you that could deal with it. Suppose I come along and shoot just the same speed and accuracy as you, but with a faster-to-handle gun. We both shoot the same, but that time you go down. My point is that you being able to overcome the disadvantages in one instance enough to win doesn't negate them for all time. The revolver is still inferior to the semi-auto pistol over the entire population of shooters who might be involved in a multi-round shootout.

Oh, and of course the obvious: if you can do that well with a revolver, how much better could you do with a semi-auto pistol? Don't you ever lose to someone when a bit more reloading speed would make the difference? I mean, after all, you don't beat everybody, do you?

I agree with the idea the revolver is inferior to the semi-atuo in just about anyway that it can be meaningfully measured in the context of a practical-pistol-competition/self-defense/LEO application.

And yet after a bit over 12 years of shooting USPSA and IDPA competition much of that time with a Revolver I am left with the realization that skill matters far more than equipment. When the Revolver guy come in ahead of not only all the guys shooting single stack but many of the guys shooting handguns with 20-29 round magazines you realize the equipment is nice but the Shooter's skill makes a bigger difference. Good equipment can make a good shooter better it cannot make a bad shooter less bad.

 

[Jack B.]

I have my favorite revolver and my favorite semi-auto. Like them both the same. However I don't like plastic. I know I'm passing up some great guns. Guess I'm just old fashioned.

 

[rpenmanparker]

I am probably in the small percentage that does not reload, so except for keeping my club range tidy - which I do, chasing brass is not much of an issue. There is no revolver made that will hold 10 - 12 rounds and fit in my front pocket like my 365.

I think you are in the majority of shooters by far, but maybe not on this forum. Hard to say.

 

[rpenmanparker]

All those activities together... Draw, shooting, reloading and moving are all part of a USPSA match. I will make the assumption that you are unfamiliar with USPSA in light of your questions. USPSA is a practical pistol sport. Stages involve a bunch of props that simulate walls and other obstacles the competitor must move and shoot around. The targets are a mix of cardboard silhouettes and a variety of steel targets. Either target type may be moving targets. A stage is upwards of 32 required rounds (you might shoot more if you miss ). The cool part (IMHO) is that your score determined by both you hits and your time. Your score on each stage is basically your Points per Second, call Hit Factor in the sport. The points you score for your hits on targets (minus penalties) divided by the time it took you to shoot the stage. Since its the total time any time you spent during the stage reloading lowers your score so fast reloads are a must.



I agree with the idea the revolver is inferior to the semi-atuo in just about anyway that it can be meaningfully measured in the context of a practical-pistol-competition/self-defense/LEO application.

And yet after a bit over 12 years of shooting USPSA and IDPA competition much of that time with a Revolver I am left with the realization that skill matters far more than equipment. When the Revolver guy come in ahead of not only all the guys shooting single stack but many of the guys shooting handguns with 20-29 round magazines you realize the equipment is nice but the Shooter's skill makes a bigger difference. Good equipment can make a good shooter better it cannot make a bad shooter less bad.

I appreciate the explanation. Thanks. Regarding the speed handicap of revolvers, I am just trying to make the point: if you are very fast with a revolver, think how fast you would be with a semi-auto pistol. You may come up against a formidable competitor and need to be a little better. Every little bit helps.

 

[HPCadm17]

I also have always had an affinity for semi-auto handguns. I find their mechanical operation ingenious. Concealable, portable, controllable, and just plain fun to shoot. What's not to like?

...Well, regarding aesthetics, I definitely have to give the win to revolvers. I enjoy looking at them, just not a fan of shooting them.

Now rifles, I wouldn't even know where to begin...

 

[stchman]

Not completely. For me it stays where it falls.

For a reloader, chasing brass seems to be most of the fun for them.

When it comes to semi-auto pistols, I don't pick casings up because I mostly shoot cheap steel cased 9mm, .40S&W, and .45ACP. Even the brass I leave laying around for others to scavenge.

My revolver brass(.357 and .44) I keep as it is easy to collect it up.

 

[SwampWolf]

A D was a bit harsh. I probably should have gone with a C -

Nope; following your reasoning I thought you were being generous. He would have gotten a D- from me. Of course, I'm not a college professor...

 

[JR24]

Lemesee what's so humorous. I carry an M1911 with a round up the spout and an 8-round magazine. That's nine rounds -- 50% more ammunition than a 6-shot revolver and 80% more than a 5-shot revolver. With two spare 10-round magazines, I have 19 rounds with a single reload and 25 shots total, as compared to a 6-shot revolver with two speed loaders (18 rounds.)

Seems significant to me.

Well, I was more thinking of the 8 shot .357s over the six. And many folk I know who CCW 1911s prefer the flush fitting 7 round mags vs the 8 rounders. Myself I like flush fitting 8 rounders in my VBob with 47ds as a backup.

So yeah, with an 8 round revolver you get a single round more at best and, yes, faster reloads.

But it's not that significant, like the 19+1 9mm I've got on my hip now.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Well, I was more thinking of the 8 shot .357s over the six. And many folk I know who CCW 1911s prefer the flush fitting 7 round mags vs the 8 rounders. Myself I like flush fitting 8 rounders in my VBob with 47ds as a backup.

So yeah, with an 8 round revolver you get a single round more at best and, yes, faster reloads.

But it's not that significant, like the 19+1 9mm I've got on my hip now.

My 8-round magazines fir flush. I carry one 8-rounder in the gun and two 10-rounders on my belt.