Are revolvers better?

[Rudolph31]

IMHO, this argument is usually made by folks with little revolver experience, special forces or not.

Well opinions are like noses, pick the one you like.

 

[Zerodefect]

Got to disagree, and I suspect Jerry would too. As blazingly fast as his revolver reload is, his magazine feed handgun reload is as fast or faster.

Assuming a given skill level with similar time invested in practice with both handgun types the semi-auto pistol will almost always reload faster and less fumble prone than a revolver to reload.



I spent the past four years shooting revolvers only in USPSA and IDPA competition. I am not Jerry or Travis but can hit a sub 2 sec revolver reload when things go right. I bought a Limited setup earlier this summer and after just a few practice sessions and a match or two sub 2 sec reloads where relatively easy with my R1 Limited.

Semi auto are generally easier and faster to reload and almost more importantly they are less fumble prone than revolvers to reload. Magazines are also more robust than moonclips or speed-loaders. And magazines almost always hold more rounds...

JM would also be the first to tell us that he looks down during a revolver reload. Not the greatest plan in a real fight. And the revolver is way out of the "workspace" and down near his belt.

It's even possible that your instincts could fight you, and force you to keep your eyes on the threat, which will completely jack up a revolver reload. Race techniques don't always match tactical techniques. Nothing wrong with that. But I use competition as training.

I can reload a Glock with my eyes closed, I don't stand a chance doing that with a revolver.

 

[doubleh]

Revolvers are better at bringing a smile to my face when I see them, hold them, and (with some models) fire them.

Semi-autos can make me smile, just not as big.

I'm pretty much with you-------except when it comes to 1911s and Ruger MK pistols. Then I smile just as big as I do at revolvers. The smile lasts until I start hunting my semi-auto brass and then it sorta fades away. Mine seems to hide in the grass and weeds even when there is little of it to hide in.

 

[mcb]

JM would also be the first to tell us that he looks down during a revolver reload. Not the greatest plan in a real fight. And the revolver is way out of the "workspace" and down near his belt.

It's even possible that your instincts could fight you, and force you to keep your eyes on the threat, which will completely jack up a revolver reload. Race techniques don't always match tactical techniques. Nothing wrong with that. But I use competition as training.

I can reload a Glock with my eyes closed, I don't stand a chance doing that with a revolver.

Yep I look down too on my revolver reloads, although I could never master JM's strong hand reload.



I also don't have to look down to reload my mag fed guns. The magazine is grabbed blind and comes up to the gun that stays nearly at shooting height. I'm focused briefly on the bottom of my grip/magwell during my reload to ensure the magazine goes in rather than at the revolver that is going down to the moonclip holder.

 

[ATLDave]

Even Miculek uses semi-autos in 3Gun. Even he shoots and reloads semi's faster (otherwise, he'd use the wheelguns, which are legal... just not very optimal). For shooters of comparable skill, or the same shooter who has spent any time with them, semi-autos are faster and easier to reload. By a lot.

It takes a heck of a lot of work/practice to get to where mcb is.

 

[AlexanderA]

I like revolvers -- as historical artifacts. For practical use, semiautomatics run circles around them.

 

[CraigC]

I like revolvers -- as historical artifacts. For practical use, semiautomatics run circles around them.

For "practical use", can't think of a single purpose where autos run circles around revolvers. Actually quite the opposite.

Of course, it depends on how you define "practical use". Personally, I don't think that endlessly practicing for something that never actually happens, i.e. self defense/concealed carry, is "practical use".

The big disconnect is in the difference between what people need and what they think they need. How much of what people think they need is based on TV, movies and their own perception? How much is based on the realities of actual self defense situations? Seems to me that for the most part it's greatly based on a perceived need to quickly empty and exchange magazines that is completely unfounded in reality. Or have we just convinced ourselves that we need high capacity semi-autos because the anti's don't want us to have them?

Revolvers are not usually a good choice for carry/SD/duty IMHO.

IMHO, concealed carry and duty are two completely different purposes that beg for different tools and different mindsets. A Prius might be great for Manhattan but do you want it as a police interceptor??? Probably not. If I was a uniformed law enforcement officer, I'd carry a high capacity .45ACP. However, I am not and the needs/requirements of concealed carry by non-LEO's are completely different.

 

[Godsgunman]

The sheer versatility of a revolver being able to have a completely different bullet with a mere pull of the trigger. For instance with my 6 shot 357 when in the woods I can have 2 rounds of snake shot, 2 middle of the road swc, and 2 full house HPs. Shoot with a Judge I put 2 bird shot, 2 buck shot, and 2 slug or 45 colt. That would take care of any situation that comes at you. No semi could handle that.

 

[joneb]

Short barreled semi autos have a short recoil spring life.
Semi autos magazine springs can also be a gun stopper, the quality of the materials of the magazine can make all the difference.
The same could be said for a cheap revolver.
If I had the choice to grab one of two 50 year old guns from my safe to defend my life it would be the S&W model 10 instead of the Bulgarian Makarov.

 

[jar]

JM would also be the first to tell us that he looks down during a revolver reload. Not the greatest plan in a real fight. And the revolver is way out of the "workspace" and down near his belt.

It's even possible that your instincts could fight you, and force you to keep your eyes on the threat, which will completely jack up a revolver reload. Race techniques don't always match tactical techniques. Nothing wrong with that. But I use competition as training.

I can reload a Glock with my eyes closed, I don't stand a chance doing that with a revolver.

I never look at the revolver during a speed reload and of course, practice, lots of practice reloading without looking.

It may not be easy being green, but reloading a revolver without looking is not very hard.

It really is that simple.

 

[mcb]

The sheer versatility of a revolver being able to have a completely different bullet with a mere pull of the trigger. For instance with my 6 shot 357 when in the woods I can have 2 rounds of snake shot, 2 middle of the road swc, and 2 full house HPs. Shoot with a Judge I put 2 bird shot, 2 buck shot, and 2 slug or 45 colt. That would take care of any situation that comes at you. No semi could handle that.

How does that work when the first round you need is the full house HP or the 45 Colt when you have 4 other less effective trigger pulls to get to it?

I see that appeal of the mixed revolver load-out but in practice I have found I simply load my revolver with "full power loads" and critters I would have used the less effective loads on die just as easily to the full power loads. (ie the snake dies from full house HP to the head just as well as charge of snake shot)

I never look at the revolver during a speed reload and of course, practice, lots of practice reloading without looking.

It may not be easy being green, but reloading a revolver without looking is not very hard.

It really is that simple.

Would you be faster if you looked?

The important aspect IMHO in this aspect of the discussion is not can you reload a revolver with or without looking. It's about simplicity and return on training time invested. Magazine reloads are simply easier and for the overwhelming majority of shooters, for an equal amount of training time invested, the magazine feed reload will be faster, require less visual attention, and will have a much lower percentage of a fumbled reloads than a revolver reload will.

I don't care if we are talking J-frames and LCPs or X-frames and Desert Eagles. Magazine feed handgun reloads will always be superior (faster, less fumble prone, and utilize more robust reloading devices) to revolver reloads. You can argue a lot of positive things about revolvers for various application but reload speed/robustness for any of those application is IMHO not one of them.

 

[Godsgunman]

''How does that work when the first round you need is the full house HP or the 45 Colt when you have 4 other less effective trigger pulls to get to it?''

It's quite simple, you can put them in any order you want. Open cylinder, rotate to what you want, fire away. With critters even the snake shot sound will scare them away or cause them to pause. Within 2 seconds or less the bigger projectiles will be hitting them anyways.

 

[John Joseph]

I never look at the revolver during a speed reload and of course, practice, lots of practice reloading without looking.

It may not be easy being green, but reloading a revolver without looking is not very hard.

It really is that simple.

Using a speed loader and not wadcutters, I'd agree.

Just to throw a little grease on the fire, consider being disabled in one arm.
Which is easier to reload, revolver or semiauto?

 

[mcb]

''How does that work when the first round you need is the full house HP or the 45 Colt when you have 4 other less effective trigger pulls to get to it?''

It's quite simple, you can put them in any order you want. Open cylinder, rotate to what you want, fire away. With critters even the snake shot sound will scare them away or cause them to pause. Within 2 seconds or less the bigger projectiles will be hitting them anyways.

Getting a bit into the minutia here but in the apparent context of woods carry since we are reference snake shot and critters I have never been a fan of mixed ammunition loads in any firearm, revolver or otherwise. If I am in fear of my life, unlikely but possible and the primary reason I am carrying the revolver, in addition to other more utilitarian applications, then the first round needs to be the right round and in a life or death situation there is no time to open a cylinder and rotate to the right round or fire four ineffective cartridges to get to the one I need. If the first four are ineffective to an actual threat (as opposed to dispatching a nuisance animal) then you have just turned your six shooter into a two shooter with the correct rounds.

Like I said I can see the appeal of the perceived utility of a mixed load-outs in a revolver but in practice I have found that a mixed load-out seems to leave me with the wrong round ready more often than not. The full house rounds work for everything as there is IMHO no such thing as over-kill and a revolver is already capacity limited why limit it more by potentially loading ineffective rounds. If I am in the barn hunting rats then a cylinder full of rat/snake shot is good to go. If I am out and about carry the gun for defense/utility then I am loaded with a cylinder of full house HP. I can kill the nuisance snake or tactical opossum or defend my life with the full house HP I can't defend my life from a two legged critter with the first two shot being snake shot if he is using something more effective than a sharp stick. YMMV

Using a speed loader and not wadcutters, I'd agree.

Just to throw a little grease on the fire, consider being disabled in one arm.
Which is easier to reload, revolver or semiauto?

Good point! A one armed magazine feed handgun reload is slow but not terribly difficult (especially if your dominate arm is the functional one). A one hand revolver reload is sort of a nightmare.

 

[ugaarguy]

READ BEFORE FURTHER POSTING:

I just cleaned out some posts with trolling and personal attacks. Debate the arguments without attacking others, and without trying to stir things up. I'll not clean this up again, I'll simply close it if things get out of line again.

 

[John Joseph]

[QUOTE="mcb



Good point! A one armed magazine feed handgun reload is slow but not terribly difficult (especially if your dominate arm is the functional one). A one hand revolver reload is sort of a nightmare.[/QUOTE].
We were taught both at the Academy, although more emphasis was placed on this after the FBI shooting in Miami---and both are a nightmare if it's for reals, but I was never overly concerned about the likelihood until I flew a Super Cub in Alaska where a firearm was required survival gear and a broken arm suffered during a forced landing in the bush is pretty common.

 

[luger fan]

Anyone else read the Justice study a few years ago? The AVERAGE number of shots fired in a CIVILIAN gunfight is 2.5. Facts are tough sometimes

 

[Saleen322]

...Capacity aside are revolvers better than semis? ...?

We have about 20 revolvers and nearly twice as many semi-automatic pistols so we shoot both. Given that background, I believe revolvers do some things better. As a rule they can handle more powerful cartridges, can easily handle wide power ranges in a specific cartridges, are more effective at longer range, and are simpler to teach how to use safely to a new shooter. I did LE firearms training for over 30 years and comparing new students with the same amount of training, we had more stoppages and unintended discharges with service semi-automatics (Glock 17s mosty) than service revolvers (S&W 10, 13, 64, 65). It all comes down to what you are looking for.

 

[jar]

How does that work when the first round you need is the full house HP or the 45 Colt when you have 4 other less effective trigger pulls to get to it?

I see that appeal of the mixed revolver load-out but in practice I have found I simply load my revolver with "full power loads" and critters I would have used the less effective loads on die just as easily to the full power loads. (ie the snake dies from full house HP to the head just as well as charge of snake shot)



Would you be faster if you looked?

The important aspect IMHO in this aspect of the discussion is not can you reload a revolver with or without looking. It's about simplicity and return on training time invested. Magazine reloads are simply easier and for the overwhelming majority of shooters, for an equal amount of training time invested, the magazine feed reload will be faster, require less visual attention, and will have a much lower percentage of a fumbled reloads than a revolver reload will.

I don't care if we are talking J-frames and LCPs or X-frames and Desert Eagles. Magazine feed handgun reloads will always be superior (faster, less fumble prone, and utilize more robust reloading devices) to revolver reloads. You can argue a lot of positive things about revolvers for various application but reload speed/robustness for any of those application is IMHO not one of them.

No, about the same. It's just like using a magazine, a matter of muscle memory. But then speed really is less important than keeping your eyes on the threat anyway.

 

[jar]

Using a speed loader and not wadcutters, I'd agree.

Just to throw a little grease on the fire, consider being disabled in one arm.
Which is easier to reload, revolver or semiauto?

Even with wad cutters it's more technique and practice than a visual necessity. Muscle memory, lots and lots of repetition and learning to get one first is the key. Also, as I mentioned above, the really important thing is not speed but keeping eyes on the threat, on situational awareness.

 

[mcb]

No, about the same. It's just like using a magazine, a matter of muscle memory. But then speed really is less important than keeping your eyes on the threat anyway.

I suspect your definition of fast and mine are probably different given you last sentence. There is no way I can reload my revolver as fast without looking but again I am trying for sub 2-second shot-to-shot reloads in competition.

 

[ATLDave]

the really important thing is not speed but keeping eyes on the threat, on situational awareness.

What if my situational awareness tells me that I need to be shooting right now, not in 2 more seconds?

 

[John Joseph]

Anyone else read the Justice study a few years ago? The AVERAGE number of shots fired in a CIVILIAN gunfight is 2.5. Facts are tough sometimes

That was a few years ago and validates the incidents I've studied. As much as legitimate training is geared towards this, the predominant response these days seems to be the "mag dump" even for LEOs who should know better and gang bangers who don't. Civilians with double stack firepower aren't immune. What should be disconcerting is the number of misses compared to hits. There are too many reports of police firing 40+ shots in an urban area and only a handfull connecting with the perp, Gang shootings OTOH seem to nearly always result in collateral death of an innocent sometimes as far as a block away, at least in my town.
My 2 cents anyway.

 

[milemaker13]

Anyone else read the Justice study a few years ago? The AVERAGE number of shots fired in a CIVILIAN gunfight is 2.5. Facts are tough sometimes

Which one shoots half-rounds? Revolver or semi??
Obviously that is the gun to have!

 

[ATLDave]

Does this count?



They're half-somethings.