thetoad45
Member
First off I like all handguns but revolvers are my favorite. I have owned many over the decades but at the moment all I have is a Taurus 65 in .357 magnum. It seems to be a solid no frills gun. Works good.
Awhile back I decided I would like another handgun. I have read ALL of the "survivalist" sites and while most appear to lean towards semi auto guns I am still, and alway will be, a revolver fan. Some of the concerns brought up by the semi auto crowd was that the revolver is too fragile. One guy said a good drop could mess up the timing of the cylinder. I suppose an argument could be made for that point of view. But when one compares a double action and single action revolver is there one that could be considered more "sturdy" than the other? I have owned Ruger single actions in the past and "stout" would be an understatement. The double action Smiths, Colts and Taurus revolvers I have owned in the past all seemed robust. These are not combat guns and comparing them that way is a bit unfair in my opinion. I look at a revolver as a basic defensive type of tool. I have decided my next gun will again be another .357 magnum due to the fact that I have one already and also a rifle in the same caliber and tons of reloading equipment and components. But I am wondering which to buy. Another double or a single action. (I am unconcered with reloading speed. I know that always comes up) I am more interested in opinions on design. Thank you..
Awhile back I decided I would like another handgun. I have read ALL of the "survivalist" sites and while most appear to lean towards semi auto guns I am still, and alway will be, a revolver fan. Some of the concerns brought up by the semi auto crowd was that the revolver is too fragile. One guy said a good drop could mess up the timing of the cylinder. I suppose an argument could be made for that point of view. But when one compares a double action and single action revolver is there one that could be considered more "sturdy" than the other? I have owned Ruger single actions in the past and "stout" would be an understatement. The double action Smiths, Colts and Taurus revolvers I have owned in the past all seemed robust. These are not combat guns and comparing them that way is a bit unfair in my opinion. I look at a revolver as a basic defensive type of tool. I have decided my next gun will again be another .357 magnum due to the fact that I have one already and also a rifle in the same caliber and tons of reloading equipment and components. But I am wondering which to buy. Another double or a single action. (I am unconcered with reloading speed. I know that always comes up) I am more interested in opinions on design. Thank you..