isn't it interesting that when the chips are down

[Vern Humphrey]

Bad primers and broken parts can occur with semi-automatics also. Broken firing pins are one of the most common broken parts failure. Semi-automatics have the added disadvantage of needing a magazine to feed ammunition.

The questions are:

1. How often do the happen?

2. And how serious is the resulting stoppage?

Stick around here and you'll see posts from time to time about revolver failures about as often as automatic failures. But most automatic stoppages can be quickly cleared, most revolver stoppages cannot.

And that's the reason that people who use handguns for real -- military and police -- have generally gone to automatics.

 

[BSA1]

LEO's in many Departments / Agencies have no say in their primary duty handgun. They are either issued their duty gun or have a list of approved handguns to choose from. However with bugs they often have a much wider latitude as these guns are purchased by the officer. When given the freedom to make personal choices a significant number of them choose a small frame revolver.

 

[Haywood]

I only carry and shoot revolvers. I have a 1911 and a Glock. I don't shoot them any more. I like my Snubs.

 

[USSR]

I only carry and shoot revolvers. I have a 1911 and a Glock. I don't shoot them any more. I like my Snubs.

+1. There ain't nothing like a P&R S&W Model 19 or 66 with a 2.5" barrel.

Don

 

[Barry the Bear]

+1. There ain't nothing like a P&R S&W Model 19 or 66 with a 2.5" barrel.

Don

Quite right! Why did I trade mine? :banghead:

 

[shafter]

Semi-automatic handguns are all the rage now days. General issue for most Law Enforcement Agencies, conceal carry and ownership by citizens for target shooting , etc... On many forums mention of revolvers is passé and the poster is something of a dinosaur.

Yet I can't help but notice how many small frame revolvers are carried as bug by Cops. When things are at their worst possible moment a officer reaches for a revolver to save his bacon. Given all of the praises for the semi-auto the officer chooses the gun that is most likely to go bang the first and every time the trigger is pulled.

Then figures released by S&W and Ruger show sales of small handguns are very strong. All of these guns are going somewhere which I suspect is where they are never meant to be seen. This is not to mention duty in a nightstand drawer for the last line (and only for some) of defense when things go bump in the night.

Not discussed much but there when you need it most.

That revolvers are more reliable than semiautos is a myth that needs to die. Semiautos have fewer parts and most malfunctions can be cleared by tap and rack, something that can be done in a gunfight.

Revolvers malfunctions generally aren't gunfight fixable. I've had transfer bars and springs break, and ejector rods back out at inopportune times. This is with Smith and Wessons and Rugers.

In my opinion a properly maintained semi is equally dependable, carries more rounds, and is faster to reload.

Revolvers are great, I own a bunch. But for those of us who carry guns to work everyday as part of the job we know better.

 

[shafter]

Revolvers are near perfect self defense guns - those of us that do carry everyday know that. Guys that carry on the weekends or when it's fashionable are usually the ones that pack an auto.

This is one of the more ignorant posts I've seen in awhile. Guys who carry guns for a living know better.

 

[BSA1]

Why Vern what are you saying...

That I should ignore 40 years of first hand experience carrying a handgun, as a NRA and LEO range instructor, as a Manager of a indoor shooting range, shooting competitions during which I have seen just about every gun malfunction and blow-up possible...

For...

Comments posted on Internet forums?

 

[BSA1]

shafter,

While my topic is about use of a revolver when everything has failed a revolver is more versatile for many different uses than a semi-automatic.

I am not suggesting in any way that you give up your semi-autos. This just isn't the discussion for you.

 

[UltimateGuns]

It's all about capacity nowadays...

 

[Caliper_Mi]

I dunno. He will have to ignore my foot stomps on top of his feet, kicks to his shins and knees, knee blows to his groin, face strikes with my free hand to his nose, eye gouging, hooking my thumb into the corner of his mouth ripping the skin open, twisting his ears, bitting him wherever possible, spitting in his face.

Are you still sure you want to try to prevent my gun from firing by grabbing the cylinder???

Let's see, head butts and groin hits vs a few gunshot holes? What's your choice? Would you let go of the gun? An attacker without a gun doesn't win a gunfight by letting the other guy have control of the gun. Don't forget that you have one hand tied up holding the gun.

Both semis and revolvers have their pros and cons. Maybe folks carry a primary semi and a backup revolver to have the best of both worlds? Most of the revolver benefits mentioned here apply within a few feet. What about at 10+ yards? Do you really want to face off against a 10 or 17 round semi with a six-shooter?

 

[golden]

I like revolvers for the range

BUT WHEN MY LIFE IS ON THE LINE, I USE A SEMI-AUTO.

My agency issued duty gun is a semi-auto. My house gun is a semi-auto. My off duty carry gun is a semi-auto and my car gun is a semi-auto. When it is my life that I am concerned with, a J-frame is either too small or not small enough for the jobs I want my guns to handle.

When I go to the range lately, I like to bring a revolver. A mid size .38 Special with at least a 4 inch barrel is a really nice gun to shoot. I would also have no fear of using it for self defense, if loaded properly.
But my BERETTA or WALTHER hold 16 rounds, my S&W model 15, just 6. So which would I choose for a house gun.

I used to keep a S&W J-frame, either a model 38 Bodyguard or model 60 Chief Special in my car, now I use a BERETTA 84. It is 14 versus 5.
I know that the .38 Special is supposed to be more powerful than a .380ACP, but from a 2 inch barrel, the margin is not enough.
A RUGER SP101 in .357 magnum or CHARTER ARMS Bulldog in .44 Special offers a lot more power, but at the cost of a lot more weight (the RUGER) or a great deal more recoil.

More of the writers defending the .38 Special never seemed to get around to the recoil issue.
My 15 ounce (loaded) GLOCK 42 is not just a great shooter, but an easy gun, at least for me to shoot a 100 rounds through at a range session.

The last time I shot small .38 Special revolvers, a COLT Cobra and CHARTER ARMS Police Undercover, it was hard work when using the load that I would carry, a 125 grain +P JHP.
I later put a set of PACHMAYR Presentation grips on the COLT and shooting became fun again, but the pistol was now too bulky to carry in a pocket, I would need a holster for it. So why not carry my WALTHER P-99 or SIG 225?

I consider recoil to be a serious issue now that I am getting older. If it does not bother you, then you do not need to consider it. For many shooters, it is a serious limiter on what guns they can effectively use for self defense.

It was so hard for my elderly father to shoot a steel framed TAURUS model 85 in .38 Special using wadcutters, I considered getting him a .32 caliber revolver.
He would not consider anything but a snub nosed revolver, but he could barely shoot it anymore.



Just my experience.

Jim

 

[The Alaskan]

Do you really want to face off against a 10 or 17 round semi with a six-shooter?

I certainly would not feel inadequately prepared.

 

[Barry the Bear]

Those are probably some of the most ignorant when dealing with firearms cause they think they know what they're doing.

 

[Rexster]

Quote: "Do you really want to face off against a 10 or 17 round semi with a six-shooter?"

The first decisively-placed shot is what I believe is most important. Trading shots, back and forth, does not solve any problems, and is a hazard for the public. The words "a 10 or 17 round semi" indicate one opponent, with one weapon, and I am not uncomfortable with the idea of using a revolver against one opponent, largely because I shoot my S&W Model 19 or Ruger GP100 more consistently accurately than any other handgun, period. (I can shoot some autos about as accurately, but less consistently so.)

Had the scenario been, instead, a team of armed robbers, then, yes, a Glock, or similar, is going to be a more-desirable weapon, in the hands of someone with the fortitude and training to take advantage of the weapon's capacity. It will not be the weapon that wins the fight, but the fast-thinking, prepared individual, who is able find the decisive moment of advantage. A revolver could be used to prevail in such a situation, but more than six available rounds is desirable. (One could opt for multiple revolvers, of course.)

I reckon that if I really wanted to be prepared for a wide variety of situations, and could not bring a rifle, I should have at least one of my Glocks, plus one of my favored sixguns?

 

[skoro]

In the end, it all comes down to personal preference. And each of has to analyze our personal set of risks and prepare accordingly. In my case, I pocket carry a 38 snub and feel well armed for the very unlikely chance of a critical encounter. Other folks face a lot more hazards and should arm themselves appropriately.

 

[BSA1]

Let's see, head butts and groin hits vs a few gunshot holes? What's your choice?

You obviously don’t have training and experience using unarmed fighting techniques. The point of unarmed kicks, blows, gouging, ear twisting, biting is to free up my gun enough to put a few gunshot holes in my attacker.

Would you let go of the gun?

Why would I do that? The whole point of the thread is to avoid being injured or killed by use of a revolver as a last ditch means of defense.

An attacker without a gun doesn't win a gunfight by letting the other guy have control of the gun. Don't forget that you have one hand tied up holding the gun.

And he will have both of his hands tied up trying to wrestle my gun from me. He doesn’t have to completely let go my revolver. I only need to prevent or break his grip enough to allow the cylinder to rotate all the through. As said in a previous post I have a lot of doubts about a attacker being to wrap his hand(s) tight enough on a small frame revolver to prevent the cylinder from rotating. Once I get that first shot off the blast from the muzzle and barrel/ cylinder will cause a nasty very painful injury along with whatever damage the bullet does.

Maybe folks carry a primary semi and a backup revolver to have the best of both worlds?

Quite possibly.

Most of the revolver benefits mentioned here apply within a few feet. What about at 10+ yards?

What about it? Are you saying it isn't possible to accurately place your shots from distances longer than 10 yards?

You lack of ability doesn't apply to all other shooters.

Do you really want to face off against a 10 or 17 round semi with a six-shooter?

Misses don't count. I am very comfortable shooting revolvers.

 

[X-Rap]

too many people believe the auto loaders higher capacity will forgive them for their lacking accuracy, they believe that even if it's not said or they argue against it.

Time and again we see this premise and it couldn't be more false. It's as though those who promote revolvers with their limited capacity are superior shots in some way while excluding the idea that a semi auto carrier may well be a very good shot with both types. A poor shot is a poor shot and 5 or 6 of them won't make him any better than 13 or 17 will make a good shot worse.
I have more than a few J, K, L, & N frames, of which I can deliver 5 or 6 shots very quickly and accurately but why do I limit myself when I can do the same X 2 or 3 with a semi auto and in less time than I can reload a cylinder I can have another 10-17 rounds ready to fire.
Not saying I will or do not carry a wheelgun from time to time but when I do I know the limitations just as I do with a semi auto.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I admit I have only used a handgun twice when the chips were down. During my first tour in Viet Nam I carried a Colt M357, and it did the job.

But more than 45 years later, I carry an M1911. In my opinion, a good automatic wins hands down over a revolver as a fighting pistol.

 

[X-Rap]

I think you're on to something there Vern, so few of us are ever called upon to use a weapon against another human and those circumstances are probably so varied from one to the other that it is difficult for even seasoned instructors to do more than use scenarios from gunfights that they haven't necessarily encountered.
I think plan for the worst is a much better idea than planning for the least.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I think plan for the worst is a much better idea than planning for the least.

Exactly right. I used to teach that there are two kinds of tactics:

Fragile tactics are tactics based on the assumption that everything is going to go exactly as you plan.

Robust tactics are tactics based on the certain knowledge that things AREN'T going to go as you plan.

 

[shafter]

shafter,

While my topic is about use of a revolver when everything has failed a revolver is more versatile for many different uses than a semi-automatic.

I am not suggesting in any way that you give up your semi-autos. This just isn't the discussion for you.

Many cops including myself are switching from revolvers to autos for a BUG. I'm not bashing revolvers at all. I own a bunch and think they're great. Most of the time a revolver probably would still be sufficient to handle most deadly force incidents. What bothers me is when people insist they are more reliable than an automatic and I'm especially bothered when people assume everyone who carries a high capacity weapon plans to "spray and pray".

 

[BSA1]

X-Rap,

You make a good point about if a person is a good shot with a revolver they will be a good shot with a semi-automatic. However in doing so you unintentionally are making a case for use of a revolver. If the shooter is a good enough shot with a revolver to place all of the shots where it matters than why does he need a high capacity semi-automatic?

The usual answer is for protection in the event of multiple attackers. However very often the attackers lose interest in the original plan and become much more interested in saving themselves when bullets start flying their way. Generally most attackers are committed by a single individual but things could be different in your community.

It is well documented that very often shooters will fire more rounds than they thought they did when under attack. The shooter may think they only fired 2 or 3 shots when in fact they have expended all of the ammunition in their gun.

For Police Departments and Law Enforcement Agencies this is becoming a huge public relations disaster leading to mistrust and civil unrest as citizens are questioning the need to fire so many multiple rounds at one suspect.

For us as citizens in our lawsuit happy country every bullet has our name on it. The more rounds we fire simply increases the risk of hitting an unintended target with the possibility of criminal charges and /or civil lawsuit.

Big Police Departments have deep pockets to defend themselves in civil lawsuit whereas most of us have very limited resources.

As keep it mind there are other “when the chips are down” situations. How about in a hunting camp when a bear decides to come in your tent while you are warm and snug in your sleeping bag?

Revolvers are by far the overwhelming choice as a field gun most often as back-up to a more powerful rifle.

It is hard for a semi-auto to match the simplicity of operation and the versatility of a revolver and impossible to match the wide range of power and type of ammunition it can use.

With all of Internet discussions and magazine articles about semi-automatics it is easy to conclude that revolvers are passé and their owners ignorant. I don’t know if that is true. If it is then I am along with a lot of other gun buyers are too ignorant to know better also.

 

[BSA1]

What bothers me is when people insist they are more reliable than an automatic and I'm especially bothered when people assume everyone who carries a high capacity weapon plans to "spray and pray".

Every new generation thinks it knows more than the old one. Then as they get older the more and more wise the old generation becomes.

As for high capacity semi-autos that is what most Law Enforcement Agencies have switched too and now are discovering the disadvantages that comes with so much firepower. From the above post;

"It is well documented that very often shooters will fire more rounds than they thought they did when under attack. The shooter may think they only fired 2 or 3 shots when in fact they have expended all of the ammunition in their gun.

For Police Departments and Law Enforcement Agencies this is becoming a huge public relations disaster leading to mistrust and civil unrest as citizens are questioning the need to fire so many multiple rounds at one suspect."

 

[Panzerschwein]

I'm especially bothered when people assume everyone who carries a high capacity weapon plans to "spray and pray".

I agree. I can't think of how many times I've read on this forum and others something to this effect: "It doesn't matter how much ammo you have in your gun if you just spray them all over the room" or "It doesn't matter if you can't make your shots count".

It's as if everybody who owns and uses semi-autos for defense are somehow automatically terrible shots, and it's only those cool handed revolver slingers from the internet who know how to shoot straight.

Anybody who thinks revolver shooters somehow magically can't "spray n' pray" in a gunfight need to research a little something known as the Newhall Massacre. They might also want to read about the incident in New York City where an NYPD cop ran his S&W Model 10 dry while firing at a perp in a dark alley one night. While the officer was frantically trying to reload his revolver (from belt loops, insane) the perp calmly walked up to him and blew his brains all over the pavement. This is cited in literature by Massad Ayoob.

I like revolvers as much as anybody else, and used to be a died in the wool defensive revolver shooter, but these days, especially with current events, I've been drawn to semi-autos... and I have yet to have one let me down.