Revolver or Semi-Auto for EDC?

[huntsman]

For me there is no choice, it’s semi-auto for SD.

Size and weight matter most followed by capacity, factor in ammo pricing and I can’t see any other option.

I’m a practical guy so I have to follow what I consider the practical path.

 

[jstert]

i’m a retired civilian who thankfully can avoid after dark ventures, sketchy locales, apex predator habitats. my generation grew up with wheelguns. i don’t enjoy recoil and believe in alot of range practice with a ccw. so generally revolvers for me. a naa mini 22lr goes anywhere. a taurus or s&w snubbie loaded with 38 wadcutters is soft shooting but effective. i can put 8 stingers from a ruger lcr 22lr consistently on target.

 

[GEM]

There is a difference between putting rounds on a stationary target at a square range and a moving target while you move under some stress. I suggest folks try their EDC in a serious training class or competition venue such as USPSA or IDPA. Moving beyond the square range might give you pause. Dealing with > 2 or 3 targets might make you think. Yes, you are most likely to face the single mugger - so what. You may not. If you adopt that attitude, you acknowledge that you limit yourself - unless you have to because of concealment and dress restrictions.

I note that in two mass shootings, the good guy participants commented that they were stupid not to have carried more ammo.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Wheelgun ... because I know I am not John Wick.

Huh. Funny thing is I tend to carry autos exactly because I’m not John Wick. Give me more ammo and faster reloads.

If only we all had the ability to expertly use anything on hand to defend ourselves. Wouldn’t that be wonderful.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

There is a difference between putting rounds on a stationary target at a square range and a moving target while you move under some stress. I suggest folks try their EDC in a serious training class or competition venue such as USPSA or IDPA. Moving beyond the square range might give you pause. Dealing with > 2 or 3 targets might make you think. Yes, you are most likely to face the single mugger - so what. You may not. If you adopt that attitude, you acknowledge that you limit yourself - unless you have to because of concealment and dress restrictions.

I note that in two mass shootings, the good guy participants commented that they were stupid not to have carried more ammo.

That is good advice. I think at the very least a person, if shooting in a place that they can do it, would at least be wise to set up multiple targets and practice transitioning between targets from different positions.

I’m incorporating multiple steel swingers now at different distances, and starting to practice shooting from cover, and transitioning to different firing points around that cover.

I’m fortunate to have a National Forest where I can go do this and not bother anyone or violate range rules. Trigger discipline, keeping your finger off the trigger when not firing and moving between positions, and safety manipulation while moving, if you have a safety, really should all be practiced.

It’s not as good as competition to push you, but it’s better IMO than just shooting at a stationary target set up to give you a perfect scenario.

I suppose this is tangential though. So the simple answer to me is do people want to have enough ammo or not? None of us know what will occur in a bad situation.

 

[Thibaut]

View attachment 862411 View attachment 862412 View attachment 862413

i’m a retired civilian who thankfully can avoid after dark ventures, sketchy locales, apex predator habitats. my generation grew up with wheelguns. i don’t enjoy recoil and believe in alot of range practice with a ccw. so generally revolvers for me. a naa mini 22lr goes anywhere. a taurus or s&w snubbie loaded with 38 wadcutters is soft shooting but effective. i can put 8 stingers from a ruger lcr 22lr consistently on target.

"Apex predator habitats." I like that. I'm thinking that a somewhat weighty snubbie will work just fine for me, as well.

 

[JERRY]

99% of the time its a semi auto. the 1% when its a revolver, its two.

 

[Apuesto]

Huh. Funny thing is I tend to carry autos exactly because I’m not John Wick. Give me more ammo and faster reloads.

If only we all had the ability to expertly use anything on hand to defend ourselves. Wouldn’t that be wonderful.

Well more than John Wick's "Hollywood expertise" which indeed would be great, I'm referring to a John Wick style protracted shootout. I'm Joe average; the most contentious situation I am ever involved in is taking the wrong sandwich at the deli counter. The probability of me ever needing to use my firearm is just about zero, and my chances of then needing to shoot more than one round when it actually happens, almost zero again. IOW, a probability of nearly zero on top of another probability of nearly zero.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

That is good advice. I think at the very least a person, if shooting in a place that they can do it, would at least be wise to set up multiple targets and practice transitioning between targets from different positions.

I’m incorporating multiple steel swingers now at different distances, and starting to practice shooting from cover, and transitioning to different firing points around that cover.

I’m fortunate to have a National Forest where I can go do this and not bother anyone or violate range rules. Trigger discipline, keeping your finger off the trigger when not firing and moving between positions, and safety manipulation while moving, if you have a safety, really should all be practiced.

It’s not as good as competition to push you, but it’s better IMO than just shooting at a stationary target set up to give you a perfect scenario.

I suppose this is tangential though. So the simple answer to me is do people want to have enough ammo or not? None of us know what will occur in a bad situation.

All of that is good, but absolutely no one can prepare for every possible scenario or possibility.

 

[Jonesy814]

I have an SR9c with a great custom made holster. Shield with Desantis holster, and LCP with pocket holster, a 2.5 inch 686 with nice Galco holster all suitable for carry and a couple more. I have serious back issues and can't always belt carry, so it's usually a J frame in my pocket. I am in a very low threat area and feel safe with 5 rounds onboard. I do always carry though because even in a safe area, a bad case of Crazy could pop up . Statistically we are probably way over due, so ever vigilant
Also, I practice a lot. Not just range time, I practice self defense drills. I have a target that runs down a zip line to shoot moving targetsa, and another that rocks back and forth. I shoot on the move, shoot 1 handed. Have shot through old coat pockets. Simulated a trip/shove and threw myself in the ground and had to fight from there Its a low threat area, but I still take it seriously

 

[Armored farmer]

I like revolvers, but generally carry an auto for a few reasons:
* Thinner gun
* Convenience of reloads
* better sight radius
* better capacity
* lighter weight

 

[If1HitU]

I carry both,not at the same time but both handguns. 380,.38+P & 9mm.

 

[The Evangelist Cowboy]

I carry both. Revolvers traditionally work better under various conditions such as inside clothing or when dust and dirt get into it vs a semi auto, (James Yeager actually does a great series of vids in which the revolver seems to win mostly) I can reload faster than the average shooter with a revolver, I shoot them better however I dont kid myself as to fact that I can reload a semi auto faster than any revolver. 9mm is also the cheapest pistol round you can shoot without reloading. There are pros and cons to both. I am not a cop and no longer in the military so the capacity argument to me is nil what isn't nil is reloading speed (auto) and accuracy (revolver for ME not in general).

 

[SharpDog]

Semi-Auto Revolver: 2 Designs That Aimed for the Best of Both Worlds:
https://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2018/01/semi-auto-revolver/

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Keltec P32,Beretta Pico, Kahr CW380,Beretta Nano, Kahr CM9, LCR9mm,Smith 642.
ALL DAO, all small, all light weight. all easy to carry.dependable, reliable.
All I need
Depends on which day it is.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

All of that is good, but absolutely no one can prepare for every possible scenario or possibility.

No, of course not. All I was saying is incorporating some variety is a good thing if possible. But it’s not really possible for everyone.

Well more than John Wick's "Hollywood expertise" which indeed would be great, I'm referring to a John Wick style protracted shootout. I'm Joe average; the most contentious situation I am ever involved in is taking the wrong sandwich at the deli counter. The probability of me ever needing to use my firearm is just about zero, and my chances of then needing to shoot more than one round when it actually happens, almost zero again. IOW, a probability of nearly zero on top of another probability of nearly zero.

Sure thing, and we all have to weigh our own risk levels. Yours sounds quite low.

 

[FL-NC]

A semi auto. More rounds in a trimmer package, easier reloads, cheaper practice ammo - within reason, no matter the caliber or design comparison. Very few downsides, assuming there are no true "junk guns" in the comparative analyses. For example- comparing a pot metal Lorcin 9mm auto to a S&W scadium 38 snub is not a fair comparison, because we are comparing something that most likely will malfunction to something that almost surely will work as advertised.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

If you cannot draw, fire and accurately hit the bad guy with one round, before he does, then you are most likely dead anyway. If you are dead, then you just wasted money on extra ammo.

 

[Spats McGee]

If you cannot draw, fire and accurately hit the bad guy with one round, before he does, then you are most likely dead anyway. If you are dead, then you just wasted money on extra ammo.

If I'm dead, I'm probably also not concerned with wasting money.

 

[Kleanbore]

If you cannot draw, fire and accurately hit the bad guy with one round, before he does, then you are most likely dead anyway.

The real questions are (1) how many rounds, fired with sufficient speed and precision, will it take to prevent a rapidly moving assailant from harming you, whether the assailant is using a firearm or an edged weapon, and (2) which firearm will better enable success.

No one can know the former before it happens.

I wouldn't bet on one round.

 

[Apuesto]

The fact is that the variance in how and where a threat can present itself is so broad that it's impossible to claim that one firearm is an optimal platform.

Our best option is to be aware of our own abilities and behavior patterns and the potential risks we face as a result of those. Lowering your personal risk by avoiding situations that may present danger and good situational awareness is significantly more important than the choice of firearm.

 

[OrangePwrx9]

Revolver mostly. Currently a CA Undercover, but I have revolvers ranging from Airweight M37 to Security 6 Service revolvers to choose from. I Like revolver accuracy, simplicity, single hand operation, ability to move on to next round with a second trigger pull, no issues with limp-wresting (a broken wrist might be limp) and ability to withstand neglect. And being shoved in a pocket day-after-day, neglect is what it gets.

Power is not a big issue as I feel 38 Spcl should be enough if I do my job...but I'm retired and the most dangerous place I go is WalMart. My larger revolvers can handle .357, but I'd worry about the trouble a pass-thru or a miss might cause, to say nothing of the blast and noise. Mostly I'm more comfortable with revolvers.

I have a few SA's that work for CC. The Glock 43 is my favorite and does get carried from time-to-time. The Shield 40 is good too, but a little too powerful for the settings I frequent. But I'm just a retired guy out to pick up some groceries, not John Wick and no one has shot my dog, so what do I know.

 

[FL-NC]

If you cannot draw, fire and accurately hit the bad guy with one round, before he does, then you are most likely dead anyway. If you are dead, then you just wasted money on extra ammo.

Gunfights are often (almost always) asymmetric in nature, and never go as planned in scenario based training. Also, it is typical for most shooters (regardless of training level) to not perform as well in a real gunfight as they do in training. I have witnessed this first hand many times, and even been the guy who performed at this decreased level of proficiency. By your logic, carrying anything besides a derringer is folly.

 

[fastbolt]

As a young cop I carried a revolver on-duty and either a revolver or pistol off-duty.

When we transitioned from service revolvers to issued pistols I carried either a pistol or revolver off-duty.

As one of the firearms instructors I used pistols and revolvers on our range.

Now that I'm retired I carry either a revolver or pistol as a retirement weapon. (I no longer have the inclination to carry a N-frame or Redhawk IWB, though, preferring to carry my smaller revolvers. )

 

[labnoti]

The real questions are (1) how many rounds, fired with sufficient speed and precision, will it take to prevent a rapidly moving assailant from harming you, whether the assailant is using a firearm or an edged weapon, and (2) which firearm will better enable success.

No one can know the former before it happens.

I wouldn't bet on one round.

Your point and everything we collectively know about handgun "stopping power" makes it clear it's ill-advised to depend on one round to end a lethal threat. Because lethal force incidents start before they become lethal, I take into consideration something else I heard. The way I heard it was the more or better training you have, the farther you can let a situation deteriorate before you have to shoot. I believe that statement was made from a LEO perspective where disengagement is often not an option. The way I understand it: a person who is poorly trained, poorly equipped, and who perceives themselves at greater disadvantage and greater inability is more likely to shoot sooner, and shoot more often. Under extreme duress, they're going to reach their personal last resort quickly. That could mean shoot, or shoot again. "When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." Contrast this with someone who has more extensive training, who is comfortable working with multiple skills, who has many more options. They have verbal de-escalation skills, are practiced in command and control presence, moving and shooting are familiar to them rather than something they've never done before. They're adept at a variety of distances and in different lighting conditions. Shooting in buildings and around vehicles is something they've practiced. They have the skills and equipment that give them confidence -- not confidence to get into or stay longer in high-risk situations -- but to get out of them quickly without losing control and immediately going to the last resort.

For the person who lacks training and skill, the last round in their pistol is the last resort. It needs to come as late as possible for them, and they're likely to prefer equipment that will put that out farther. They're aware that they'll shoot sooner and longer. That's not to say the person with skill will always choose a lower capacity gun, but that they're focused on problems that are more challenging than how soon their first reload will come.