Accuracy: Revolver vs Semi-Auto

[Pete D.]

accuracy

Quote:
in Bullseye match competition, where a premium is placed on precision/accuracy, the semi-auto rules the roost. It is rare that one sees a revolver on the line.
It is rare you see a combat grade semi-auto either.

The guns that win Bullseye matches are for the most part, hand fitted match grade pistols.

A box stock S&W revolver will out shoot a box stock combat grade auto just about every time.

I have little trouble accepting that a well made stock revolver is mechanically more accurate than a stock semi-auto. Operational accuracy...? That's another ball game. A semi-auto is easier to shoot well (accurately) than a revolver (I don't often make unqualified comments like that). I base that premise on what I mentioned before....that one rarely sees revolvers at matches that require precision shooting. While it may well be true that a well made stock revolver will shoot as well or better than an "accurized" semi-auto from a rest, that ignores the practical aspects of accuracy. If revolvers produced better scores in, for instance, Bullseye matches, shooters would be still using them. They aren't using them - and these are men and women who know their way around guns and who can shoot both revolvers and semis well - because they get better scores with the semis. "Better scores" is another way of evaluating accuracy.
There is no argument that revolvers are available in chamberings and configurations that render them more accurate at long range....that is yet another way of evaluating accuracy.
Pete

 

[CodyWayne718]

No proof but it seems as if I'm more accurate with my revolver than my semi.

 

[451 Detonics]

For the same amount of money the revolver will probably win every time. Whenever I buy a revolver I check it with a range rod, if it won't take a match rod I don't buy it or I sell it off. The purpose of this is to insure perfect alignment of the cylinder and barrel which in turn helps accuracy.

Many folks do better with a SA semi auto simply because the trigger can be tuned very lightly, this is the reason the Action Pistol crowd made the change from revolvers to semi autos. The hammer fall is shorter and faster with a semi auto as well and you don't have the long double action trigger pull to contend with especially on stages like the mover.

In custom guns they are equal for the most part. These are my two NRA Action Pistol guns, the revolver is a S&W 686 built by Glenn Customs and the 1911 is a 38 Super I built myself. Both will shoot into an inch at 50 yards.

 

[CraigC]

I base that premise on what I mentioned before....that one rarely sees revolvers at matches that require precision shooting.

PPC??? You have to look at it broader. Are folks using autos because they are more accurate or because they are accurate enough but better suited to the course of fire?

As far as autos being easier to shoot accurately, that really depends on your situation. If you're shooting quickly and at shorter ranges, I would agree that mastering an auto, especially a single action auto, is "easier" than mastering a DA revolver. However, dollar for dollar and shot for shot, if precision is the name of the game then a good revolver has it all over an auto. Not many centerfire autos are capable of 2lb triggers and as stated above, a good revolver will be twice as accurate at any given range.....or better.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

I assume this refers to its inherent, mechanical accuracy, with human elements taken out of play.

Conversely, are there other factors that make revolvers more accurate than auto-loaders?

The fixed barrel is the biggest one. A typical auto pistol, to maintain accuracy, is dependent on all the moving parts coming back into the same position each and every time it is fired.

 

[BAGTIC]

"Is the non use of revolvers because of an assumed inaccuracy, or because of lack of revolvers of equal quality to the target grade semi autos? chicken or egg? "

It is because it is harder to 'spray and pray' with a revolver.

 

[Canuck-IL]

What I do know is that in Bullseye match competition, where a premium is placed on precision/accuracy, the semi-auto rules the roost. It is rare that one sees a revolver on the line. It is also true that much higher scores have been and continue to be shot with semi-autos than with revolvers.

That's not because of accuracy - it's the difficulty most people have in cocking a revolver to single action in the timed and rapid stages.

Nonsense on the "much higher scores" - check the NRA record books for COnventional Pistol (Bullseye) - there are still records held by revolvers DESPITE cocking the hammer in rapid strings.
/Bryan

 

[RickMD]

The American Rifleman in it's latest issue did an accuracy test of a $939 Springfield Range Officer M1911 in .45 ACP. 25 yard groups averaged 3.10 inches. From years of shooting both revolvers and semi's this is about par for the course for the average quality factory handgun. My.45 70 Series Goldcup worked over by Don Williams of the Action Works will do around 1.5" off a Ransom Rest with Remington Match Ammo.

I view those claiming 4" groups at 100 yards from any factory revolver or semi with more than a bit of skepticism.

NRA Endowment Life Member

 

[Pete D.]

Oh?

Mr Canuck:

That's not because of accuracy - it's the difficulty most people have in cocking a revolver to single action in the timed and rapid

I believe that I accommodated that idea in my previous note. In a practical sense, anything that renders a firearm hard to shoot under a given circumstance is a factor in determining the practical accuracy of the weapon.

And

Nonsense on the "much higher scores" - check the NRA record books for COnventional Pistol (Bullseye) - there are still records held by revolvers DESPITE cocking the hammer in rapid strings.

If you have that info, please forward it to me. I am open to correction. I did check the Conventional Pistol records. There is no information as to what type of firearm was used to set a particular record. There are a couple of records (Krelstein and Hilden and Hurst from the early to middle 1960's that may have been set with revolvers - Police and Civilian) All of the other records were pretty surely shot with Semis.
http://www.nrahq.org/compete/natl_records.asp
Partly, I based my comment on my own time in the sport and the fact that I have rarely seen a revolver at a match and never seen one used to win. I repeat what I said before....if revolvers were superior then the winners would be using them. They aren't and haven't been for a generation.
I stand by that observation. Remember that I am not saying that semis are more accurate than revolvers; I am saying that semis are easier to shoot accurately than revolvers are in competitions that place a premium on precision.
Pete

 

[918v]

They are about the same. Find a well made revolver, such as Freedom Arms, and it will shoot inside 2" at 50 yards. So will a well made 1911 or German target gun such as a X-5 or 210. David Sams Berettas shoot 1" 10 shot groups at 50 yards.

The other day I shot a .6" group at 100 yards from my Freedom Arms 22LR. I'm sure it's a fluke.

 

[RickMD]

The other day I shot a .6" group at 100 yards from my Freedom Arms 22LR. I'm sure it's a fluke.

Me too.

 

[918v]

What ammo? I used RWS Match Rifle.

 

[DWFan]

RickMD, the standard of accuracy for the Dan Wesson revolver was an inch to an inch and a half at 100 yards. This has been verified by numerous writers and in nearly every caliber. Todd Spotti's test of the M360 revolver with handloads resulted in eleven loads that went under 2" at 100 yards and four loads that were under one and one half inches. Not one load tested was over 2.2". John Taffin's test of an identical revolver produced similar results with a half dozen handloads that went under an inch, plus a factory load that produced a .875" group.
Even if the revolvers were specially selected for those writers to test, that still rivals rifle accuracy and is far beyond anything a semi-auto can do.

 

[Pete D.]

that still rivals rifle accuracy and is far beyond anything a semi-auto can do.

It sure does. A .875" group from a pistol at 100 yards. I am interested to know what cartridge that was and the particulars about the gun. It is better than any semi that I know of at 100 yards.
On the other hand, how about using it to shoot clean targets rapid fire at 25 yards (one hand, unsupported, two strings of five shots, each string fired in ten seconds)? Of course it can do that......how often does it happen? Happens multiple times any any championship match with a semi auto. It'll be happening multiple times this summer at Camp Perry.
So..what exactly do we mean when we say a gun is accurate? Is it what the gun will do from a Ransom rest (or any rest) when the human factor is virtually eliminated/minimized or is it what the gun will do in the hands of a human? Is it what the gun will allow me to do when holding it supported with two hands or when shooting with only one hand on the gun?
Pete

 

[LTR shooter]

I have little trouble accepting that a well made stock revolver is mechanically more accurate than a stock semi-auto.

If the semi autos were so darn accurate out of the box they would not need to be accurized to compete in NRA Bullseye. It seems clear you consider NRA Bullseye to be the final word in handgun accuracy yet how many there at Camp Perry this year will shoot out of the box Kimbers , Colts or Springfield Armory 1911s. My Springfield was worked on by Clark Custom before it could be used a bullseye gun.

Yeah I know , "How many shoot bullseye revolvers?" -the advantage of semi-auto in timed and rapid is obvious to anyone who shoots.

I could not shoot timed or rapid with an Olympic free pistol either , does that qualify it as inaccurate?

 

[918v]

I think people need to compare apples to apples. You can't compare pre-war or early post-war Colts and S&Ws to the crap offered today. Your typical S&W nowadays will not shoot 2" or better at 50 yards. Today, autos and revolvers both typically 2-3" groups at 25 yards with factory ammo. Yes, there may be exceptional examples, but on average they are equal.

 

[Prosser]

918V:

Sounds like a typical FA, with a trigger job

Sold a 252 to a guy in the midwest. He said after finding the right ammo, it was shooting under a 1/4" at 50 yards. I sold it because the chambers were so darn tight, and, I needed the money.

My FA 83 .475 Custom by JRH ADV gunsmithing shoots cloverleafs at 50 yards, as does the .500JRH FA83 he converted.

John Linebaugh's conversions regularly shot 2-3" at 100 yards, if you can.

Custom tuned 1911's aren't exactly inaccurate, but, the cartridge starts letting folks down past 50 yards...

 

[CraigC]

I wouldn't keep a revolver that didn't do better than 2" - 3"@25yds. Except, of course, for those I don't expect to do better than that but they don't even have topstraps.

I expect a good S&W or Ruger to do 2"@50yds, an FA better halve that.

 

[451 Detonics]

Your typical S&W nowadays will not shoot 2" or better at 50 yards.

I disagree...my 625 out of a Ransom Rest will easily shoot into 1 1/2 inches at that distance. I suspect many other new S&W revolvers would do equally as well if you remove the human element from the equation. My P7M8 will do it as well. I try to group every gun I buy in the Ransom Rest...let's me know what the gun is capable of. Those I don't have inserts for I bench.

Magazine capacity is the biggest factor in many competitions today. Even when using full moon clips having to do 3-4 reloads in a revolver for every 1 reload in a semi auto is going to be slower. And with the exception of games like Bullseye, PPC, and Action Pistol the A zones on targets for many of these competitions are relatively huge. Those latter games also restrict courses of fire to much lower rounds counts as well. I shot my first 1920 in Action Pistol with a revolver.

Lastly cost is almost always going to play a role. I would expect a $1000 dollar gun to do better than a $500 dollar gun in most cases. For example I would expect a 686 to outshoot a Rossi and a Colt Gold Cup to best a Rock Island FS. Oddly enough some of the really inexpensive semi autos do quite well if they use a fixed barrel.

 

[Pete D.]

accuracy

I could not shoot timed or rapid with an Olympic free pistol either , does that qualify it as inaccurate?

I see your point. I don't believe, though, that my point has been that revolvers are inaccurate. The point that I have been trying to make is that there are qualities of revolvers that make them more difficult to use than a semi-auto; it is not as easy to make full use of their potential. Sustained fire in a Bullseye match is one of those circumstances where it shows.
Related to that.....considering the Free Pistol and the limitations of other very accurate pistols. There have been a number of posts about absolutely marvelous accuracy from .22 revolvers.....tiny, rifle-like groups at 100 yards. Does anyone seriously think that one of those revolvers will outshoot a Free Pistol in a match at 50 meters, even though they shoot as well or maybe better from a bench at 100 yards? Might be a project worth trying.

As far as autos being easier to shoot accurately, that really depends on your situation. If you're shooting quickly and at shorter ranges, I would agree that mastering an auto, especially a single action auto, is "easier" than mastering a DA revolver. However, dollar for dollar and shot for shot, if precision is the name of the game then a good revolver has it all over an auto. Not many centerfire autos are capable of 2lb triggers and as stated above, a good revolver will be twice as accurate at any given range.....or better.

Can't disagree with that. The sweetest triggers - at least on CF guns - that I have used have been on revolvers. (those, though, required "accurizing" to get that way).
Pete
Pete

 

[Prosser]

Free pistols are governed by how good their barrels are. Same with pretty much any hyper-accurate gun. After that, it's how good the trigger is, and, how good are you with the gun?

When you spend 2500 for a Freedom Arms Match Grade Revolver, with trigger job, it's going to be premium stuff, and if it isn't, they stand behind their guns.

Wilson will also do something similar with some of their guns, and I think Ed Brown does as well.

It would seem to me to be easier to get a short rifle, or long barreled pistol to shoot well then a regular rifle. Barrel flex, and whip are minimized. Site radius doesn't matter with a scope.

Also it would seem that the shorter the barrel, the more chance the bullet has of getting out of the gun before it's affected by physics on the gun, action, etc.

 

[Pete D.]

Free pistols are really a step away from the revolver/semi-auto accuracy idea. Marvelous machines, though.

Free pistols are governed by how good their barrels are.

And how good their triggers are......hard to compete against a two ounce trigger.....and those wonderful sights, wraparound grips, superfast lock times.
Not good for much except match shooting; though, I suppose a person could hunt squirrels with one.
Pete

 

[USSR]

How do you guys manage to get Free Pistols - I always have to pay for mine.

Don

 

[918v]

I disagree...my 625 out of a Ransom Rest will easily shoot into 1 1/2 inches at that distance. I suspect many other new S&W revolvers would do equally as well if you remove the human element from the equation. My P7M8 will do it as well. I try to group every gun I buy in the Ransom Rest...let's me know what the gun is capable of. Those I don't have inserts for I bench.

Having owned three PC625's and a P7M8, I can safely say your ransom rest claims are untrue. As I said before, you may run into an exceptional example, but in general the accuracy just isn't there.

 

[CraigC]

Having owned three PC625's and a P7M8, I can safely say your ransom rest claims are untrue. As I said before, you may run into an exceptional example, but in general the accuracy just isn't there.

Maybe the problem ain't your guns?