25 ways a revolver beats a semi auto

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rogelio

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2003
Messages
288
Location
Lima,Peru
Hi there!

A couple days ago I was browsing THR and found reference to a magazine article that was on this topic..I IIRC it was handguns and something magazine..we don´t get those here, so I would really appreciate if any of you could post a link or give me your very own thoughts about this topic...

I'll start

1.- Reliability
2.- Power (here in Peru we can carry either .380 acp or .38 spl, so it is a
no brainer)
3.- Ease of deployment
4.- Gives Mr Murphy less possibilities of F###ing stuff up

You guys go on!
 
No tap,rack and bang drills, simply pull the trigger.

Can put the barrle directly against the adversary, gun won't unlock from battery.
 
No retreiving your brass from hither and yon.
More ammunition versatility in the sense that revolvers do not require certain recoil characteristics with mild loads in order to function properly.
 
Boats: Why do a herd of lemmings rush of a cliff together only to fall and drown in the sea? Thinking folks are never without a revolver! Dennis
 
Many double-action revolvers are actually more mechanically complex than an autoloader. They are just outwardly simpler in operation.

On the upside, they don't have any issues with feeding certain bullet shapes like an autoloader does. You tend to get more accuracy for the dollar with a revolver. Revolvers can handle wild variations in ballistics without any functional issues; as long as it has enough power to get out of the barrel, and not so much that it starts jolting the gun to bits, the revolver generally won't have functional issues with it. Revolvers simply work beter as a solution for launching truly powerful handgun cartridges.
 
On the down side - when a revolver malfunctions it generally takes a gunsmith to fix it. No you can't "tap, rack, bang" and that is the problem. As someone above said, the revolver is a more complicated design, depending on more hand fitted parts that must be timed almost perfectly to function properly.

I read that article mentioned in the original post. About half the "truths" listed were bogus. This argument will go on and on and never be resolved.
 
Given the choice of a 38 revolver or a .380 pistol, I'd go revolver too.
 
25. Good for starting a flame war on a cold night.

I'm not sure if I want to hang around for this one. ;)

To save others the trouble:

Revolves get cases under the extractor and require a fully-staffed machine shop to fix. I've always been able to just tear the offending case out from under the star (only happens on my old man's SP101), but I can see the machine shop angle. I mean, it's a case. And it's *under* the *star*. Whoa.

They have more parts. They're also more robust parts, by and large, but there are more of them. You want a low parts count, check out a Raven .25. This isn't necessarily a good or bad point for either side. Other factors (e.g., redundancy, macro-level design parameters, etc.) reduce the validity of a "less parts is better" mentality among a lot of mechanical engineers who work with critical systems.

Timing. If you take a revolver near a concrete surface, it will lose time on two chambers for every five minutes you are on said surface. Heaven forbid, if you actually drop it... Now, I've dropped (actually lightly thrown) my 681 at the floor (no, not carpeted) to prove that this is silliness, but I read on the internet these things happen, so I guess they must. It was never explained to me how the timing can be damaged by this happening. The only things that could be damaged are the center pin (way too short and fat for anything short of a one way ride down from a helicopter) and the front lock (not going anywhere unless the center pin does). I'll also not mention that autos are basically timed by their recoil spring, and that if the recoil spring is improperly weighted to the gun, the auto will "go out of time" and malfunction as well. Both require maintenance that you cannot offer in the midst of a heated exchange.

There was something else. Oh yeah. If you ever fire your weapon in anger, you'll need at least 16 rounds. Maybe more. I hear mutant spiders require a mozambique drill (two to the thorax, one to the brain) to put down. I'll just avoid mutant spiders and hope for the best. (I know, bad practice).

So, ah, do you go straight to hell for precipitating a flame war, or do you just get purgatory for your first one?
 
Ammo testing in a pistol first deals with the ability to function in the pistol.
Ammo testing in a revolver is for accuracy.
 
A revolver shooter's detached perspective: As a group revolver shooters are older, more mature, wiser, kinder, gentler, more thoughtful, less prone to spray and pray, more accurate shooters, more patient, reliable and calmer than jamomatic bottomfeeder shooters. Those shooters that try to have it both ways are of course much more prone to mood swings, fits of anxiety and occasion bouts of semiautomatic depression. LOL! Dennis
 
Impossible to leave the safety on. I have watched the videos of the store owners yanking away on the trigger of their auto (which has the safety on) while the bad guy blows their brains out.
 
No limp wristing problems.

No flying hot brass to burn or cut. No brass left at crime scene.

Shoots better from inside a coat pocket or purse than an auto.

Barrel has more functional length than an auto barrel of the same stated length.

No safety to break or switch off.

No parts or springs under stress while idle.

Nearly zero learning curve. Can pass a revolver to a newbie in a SHTF scenario without having to give instruction. Better chance for others to continue fight with my gun if I get hit.

No slide to hit support hand, especially for weak newbie.

No forgotten round in the chamber when mag removed, for those who forget such things. :rolleyes:

Multiple calibers with no barrel swap - .38 in a .357, etc...

No feeding issues (HP, FMJ).

Reloading is more flexible with revolver ammo.

Ballshot, snakeshot, etc... can be used in a revolver.

Very large calibers and very small calibers favor revolvers.

Revolvers can be adapted to shoot auto ammo, reliably. Very few autos can shoot revolver ammo, and those that do are usually not reliable.

Grips are more customizable.

Doesn't feel right saying "Go ahead, make my day" with an auto. :neener:
 
1. Generally less expensive than an auto.
2. Prettier (compare 6" Colt Python in Royal Blue vs ugly Glock 19)
3. Doesn't need a press check to determine loading condition.
4. Simpler manual of arms for grandma to learn.
 
Andrew wyatt wrote:
I prefer autos for most applications, as they're thinner and have better triggers.
Click to expand...
I've never heard that revolvers, as a group, have worse triggers than bottomfeeders (thanks for that term C.R.Sam!). Care to back that statement up?
 
Well, most revolvers are double-action with long, heavy pulls. Some autoloaders are the same way, and some have much shorter, lighter pulls. Of course, you can shoot revolvers single-action, but then you have to cock the hammer for each shot. And revolvers that have had a good action job can have pure joy for triggers.
 
One attribute of a revolver skipped thus far is the ability to start fires parallel to the barrel... and behind the muzzle! Ha, try that with a semi-auto! I did once leave the sound deadening in an indoor booth smoldering where my cylinder/forcing cone blast got it it.. shouldn't have been shooting that SRH so close to the wall...

Revolvers are good... evil-bottom-feeders are bad. They are just bad...

Well, that should stir up more dust...

Another old guy who has 'seen the light' - and gone to revolvers!

Stainz
 
Given the two cartridge choices, I would pick the 38 spl over the 380. I would pick the gun capable of firing the bullet with the most momentum.

If I did not have the ability to shoot often to verify functionality, I would pick the revolver over the autoloader.

That all goes to the 38 spl.

Just glad I can carry my .45 auto here in the states.
 
Single action,

With a six inch barrel, a revolver cocked to single action doubles my effective range over an auto.
Magnum power,
longer sight radius,
point and shoot simple,
beautiful weapon!
 
Easier to teach the manual of arms to a newbie, former anti-gun person so they become pro-2A...:cool:

Easier to handload ammo for (ask me about loading .45ACP sometime :banghead: )...

Easier to find a reliable & inexpensive used revolver at the local gun store/show than a similar shellshucker...:D

John Wayne & Clint Eastwood just don't look right totin' shellshuckers...:scrutiny:

Ever try shooting blackpowder in a shellshucker?...:what:

Glock don't make revolvers...:evil:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
.38 super??
Replies
17
Views
1K
Matthew_Q
M
O
  • Locked
THR Legal Board Guidelines: Read Before Posting
Replies
1
Views
34K
Coronach
C
R
  • Locked
My two cents on the .25 Auto after being shot by one.
2 3 4
Replies
80
Views
11K
sgt127
sgt127
P
  • Locked
George Hill Reviews the P3AT in CC Magazine
Replies
7
Views
2K
George Hill
G
D
  • Locked
AWB ban article - he WANTS mag restrictions
Replies
13
Views
1K
Kamicosmos
K
Back
Top