If they were "prone" to malfunctions, they would not be used by all military forces, almost all police forces in the world, and most SD carriers.Does not negate the fact that semoautos, Glocks included, are more prone to malfunctions.
If they were "prone" to malfunctions, they would not be used by all military forces, almost all police forces in the world, and most SD carriers.Does not negate the fact that semoautos, Glocks included, are more prone to malfunctions.
I suspect holster options are rather limited.
Not really, but when you compare it to the immediate action drill for a DA revolver that goes 'click', which is simply to just pull the trigger again, and the DA revolver does not require two hands and and A LOT more time to get it back in the fight that the SA does, the learning curve is AT LEAST 4 TO 5 TIMES THAT OF THE REVOLVER. Like I said, just common sense.
Respectfully, I didn't say they were prone to malfunction. I stated, within context, is that they were "more" prone to malfunction compared to revolvers.If they were "prone" to malfunctions, they would not be used by all military forces, almost all police forces in the world, and most SD carriers.
And you have the mean rounds to stoppage and mean rounds to failure data for specific models of both semi-autos and revolvers to back that up? Conjecture is just that without hard data.Respectfully, I didn't say they were prone to malfunction. I stated, within context, is that they were more prone to malfunction compared to revolvers.
There you go!A revolver may be easier to manipulate but it's not easier to master and it's not easier to get good hits with unless you want to put it in a lot of time learning that double action trigger.
My mistake.. I stated, within context, is that they were "more" prone to malfunction compared to revolvers.
Don't need it. The statement that armies and police forces choose semi-autos is not conjecture.And you have the mean rounds to stoppage and mean rounds to failure data for specific models of both semi-autos and revolvers to back that up? Conjecture is just that without hard data.
I do not. I can only speak for my own experiences, and the consensus and experience I've read, heard, or have come across from many others on firearm forums, firearm publications, etc throughout the years. I also recall in another revolver vs semiautomatic thread, a member who was arguing against the capacity of revolvers citing a link to an article from a well respected/knowledgeable member of the firearm community (I can't recall who, but I'll see if I can find that post). In that article, as well as others over the years, the same thing was stated with regards to revolvers being more reliable... It's something that has been conseeded to in this thread as well as other countless discussions without anyone objecting to it... Until now that is...And you have the mean rounds to stoppage and mean rounds to failure data for specific models of both semi-autos and revolvers to back that up? Conjecture is just that without hard data.
I'd you have never had a malfunction on either action type you have not shoot enough or are being dishonest. I have had both revolvers and semiautos malfunction, wear out parts and break parts rendering them non-functional. They are a mechanical system that can and will fail.
That said the reliability of good name brand semiautos and revolvers is so high as to render reliability a secondary selection criteria at best. When I reach in the gun cabinet for a gun for an application reliability is not on my mind all my guns are reliable or I would not own them.
Capacity debate aside, the original debate that was lost stemmed from a member suggesting revolvers can be beneficial for new shooters or those who do not train regularly aka most gun owners. In that regard, malfunctions and being able to clear a malfunction quickly in a gun fight would be more of a concern. In their case especially, I do not think that it's to far fetched to say that it's much more likely that a semiauto has a malfunction vs their revolver suddenly having a stopage in a sudden do or die situation.That semi-autos are more apt to malfunction is really not debatable. The question is one of how much more.
If you go to a two-day defensive shooting course in which each of, say, two dozen students puts around 1200 rounds down range, you are apt to notice a few malfunctions. Most will be cleared more quickly than I can do that.
You cannot make a similar observation about revolvers, because most instructors tell the students to bring semi-autos.
But when revolvers do fail, and they do, it is very rarely possible to put them back into operation very quickly.
If reliability were the only consideration, I would choose a revolver.
But there are other considerations. For me, the ability to put several shots rapidly on target with an appropriate balance of speed and precision is key. I am a whole lot better with a semi-auto.
I much prefer more capacity than most revolvers have. I suppose I could carry two of them, but it's not convenient for me.
Finally, my single column semi-autos are a lot more concealable in an OWB holster than any revolver of any size.
Capacity debate aside, the original debate that was lost stemmed from a member suggesting revolvers can be beneficial for new shooters or those who do not train regularly aka most gun owners. In that regard, malfunctions and being able to clear a malfunction quickly in a gun fight would be more of a concern. In their case especially, I do not think that it's to far fetched to say that it's much more likely that a semiauto has a malfunction vs their revolver suddenly having a stopage in a sudden do or die situation.
Consitent with my observations....From my experience with new shooters, long DA triggers are much, much harder to learn to shoot well, especially rapidly.
So you'd have to factor, in the case of an inexperienced shooter in a life threatening situation, the increased likelyhood of misses combined to the lower ammo count.
Just one example here--doesn't prove anything, but...
A nurse whom we know who is the mother of two decided that she wanted a gun, for good reasons.
Her prior experience was limited to BB guns.
The salespersons in the stores all recommended a S&W 5-shot snub. Reliable, simple and, easy to use, they said.
I was recovering from a major hospital stay, and I could not help personally.
I told her to set up an appointment with an instructor at a local range that rents guns, and to try shooting several. I emphasized the need to fire rapidly. I expressed my concern about capacity.
The first one she rejected was the Model 642. Trigger pull made it a non-starter, and she didn't like the sight radius. She could not hit with it.
She tried several semi-autos. The littlest 9s recoiled too violently and were hard to hit with, and the sight radii were too short. I don't like them, either.
She compared grip, triggers, effort required for racking the slide, her ability to hit with them....and she was shown how to clear malfunctions quickly.
She came home with a .380 Browning that looks like a sub-scale Model 1911.
That would not have been my first choice, but she is happy with it.
For me as a civilian, the capacity issue is only relevant during a violent criminal attack, and cannot see myself being able to reload during such a short interval before being overcome....Paul addresses reload speed and capacity. His video failed to show the revolver reload by which he concluded that revolvers are slower to reload. I assume...
That is an entirely unrealistic plan.If they are after me with a knife, my plan is to shoot them in both knees. If they have a gun, I will probably go for an eye.
You will reload, if necessary, in the time available.I will reload, if necessary, in the time it takes me to reload.
?It is what it is.
For me as a civilian, the capacity issue is only relevant during a violent criminal attack, and cannot see myself being able to reload during such a short interval before being overcome.
Should the attacker(s) break away, my justification for the use of deadly force goes with them.
For police officers, the situation is different, but the civilian has no business continuing battle after the attack had ceased.
I know, after 70+ years on this earth you and others have convinced me that common sense no longer can be found in this world! Thanks for proving that! How many years have you used and/or instructed others in the use of a revolver?No, it's not common sense. You're wrong.
A revolver may be easier to manipulate but it's not easier to master and it's not easier to get good hits with unless you want to put it in a lot of time learning that double action trigger.