The Ammo Capacity Question...

[StrikeFire83]

Okay, so over in the revolver forum I had the temerity to suggest that in a FULL SIZE service weapon, a 15-20 round modern semi auto like a Glock or Sig is superior to a 6-7 shot large frame revolver for self-defense carry.

I shouldn’t have been surprised to get pounced on by the guys over there, because even though I admitted that the revolver still sits supreme in terms of hunting and small pocket carry, I was seen as insulting their platform. But a few issues came up that I’d like to explore here, and question some “conventional wisdom” that seems to crop up again and again.

1. To what degree does ammo capacity come into play in typical self-defense situations?

2. We are told that most self defense encounters end in “2 or 3 shots” but is this really the case? It would seem that most police shootings involve many more than 2 or 3 shots, and I understand self defense is very different from police work, but aren’t we potentially going up against the same criminals when they try to do harm to us?

3. How many rounds/reloads do you carry and why.

4. Has the reliability of the modern, service size auto made the large revolver obsolete for concealed carry?

 

[EdLaver]

I carry a Glock 29 10mm with one spare mag for a total of 21 rounds (10rd mags/1 in chamber). I prefer to carry a semi auto over a revolver mainly because in these days and times crimes are being committed in groups, not just one thief or burglar. Therefore I dont want to take a chance running out of ammo or trying to reload a revolver. When I decided on the Glock 29 four years ago, I wanted a powerful semi auto in a small package, I also looked at the .45 GAP Glocks as well but decided on the 10mm.

I recently had to talk my father out of his old ways of keeping an over and under next to the bed at night to switching to a Remington 870. At his age he wont have time trying to juggle shells in the dark while multiple targets close in. Capacity in my book is very important and plays a factor in all my firearms. The only revolver I own is a Ruger GP100 and all I use it for is hog hunting and range fun.

 

[rcmodel]

NO.

Hi-cap makes sense for cops & solders that may be in any kind of encounter, perhaps even with multiple BG's or drawn-out gun battles.

For a civilian?
Not so much.

I feel perfectly well armed with a 6-shot .357, .44 Spl. or .45 ACP S&W revolver and an extra speed-loader or two. Heck, even a 5-shot J-Frame.

I can't even imagine getting myself in a situation where I would need a half-box of ammo in my gun to feel well-armed.

rc

 

[G19x]

Reloading with a revolver takes a lot more practice and skill to master than reloading with a pistol. That have drawing your weapon with 15 bangs right there sure beat 5 - reload-5-reload 5.

Another site had a nice write-up on the pistol vs revolver thread. the end it seemed that while a revolver might be a bit more reliable to if they did happen to break they broke hard and took a lot more to get running than a stove pipe or something on a pistol.

 

[bababooey32]

I can't even imagine getting myself in a situation where I would need a half-box of ammo in my gun to feel well-armed.

Unfiortunately, the situation may be thrust upon you! All else being equal, I'd rather have more ammo then less.

 

[StrikeFire83]

Yeah, and you hear again and again and again and again that "self defense encounters only last 2-3 shots" and I'm left thinking, What happens when you find yourself in a situation that doesn't conform to this...do you tell the bad guys "hold on, this isn't a typical SD situation, please give me a second to reload."

If 6 rounds of good defensive JHPs are good, then how can 15 or 20 be any worse, reliability being largely equal.

Now the J-frame vs. small auto is a different game I think, I'll have to see how reliable my PM9 is now that its broken in.

 

[jimmyraythomason]

The odds of having to defend one's self with a firearm is small(depending on where one lives). Having to reload during such a defense is even smaller. One well placed bullet trumps many poor hits or misses. My P90 .45acp holds 8 rounds,my S&W 686 holds 6,my M44,.44 rem.mag holds 6, my Cz-82 holds 12(9x18mak). Guess which I carry more? My S&W model 36 .38+P which holds 5. Learn to shoot what you have.

 

[RX-178]

I'm going to go with my usual answer to this: Use the hardware that goes with your software. If you've owned, practiced and trained on, and have regularly carried a 6-7 shot large frame revolver, and have little to no experience in full size semi-auto pistols, then the revolver is obviously the superior weapon for you.

However, all else equal, the semi automatic pistol clearly offers many more advantages and benefits than a large frame revolver, and could be considered a superior weapon in that regard.

 

[Shadow 7D]

I like a small, can fit in the pocket, semiauto, over a revolver, because it is so thin that my cell phone hides it.

That I can drop the mag and reload, that the mag can fit in a knife case, and that it has twice the capacity of a J frame, are all nice extras that make it just that much better.

That it will never be a click, pull bang, gun is something I have to live with.
Its all what you want, the reliability of a revolver, versus the capacity of a semi

 

[Oro]

1. To what degree does ammo capacity come into play in typical self-defense situations?

A vanishingly small degree. An older FBI study showed a typical defensive shooting scenario ended in 2.4 rounds with a revolver, 2.8 rounds with an auto, as I recall. The data set was, while smaller than the FBI's, of substantial enough size to be valid as it was longer in duration. The findings also agreed very closely. Six shots should get through two separate SD shooting in a day, with one round left over in the wheel gun for the trip home.

2. We are told that most self defense encounters end in “2 or 3 shots” but is this really the case? It would seem that most police shootings involve many more than 2 or 3 shots, and I understand self defense is very different from police work, but aren’t we potentially going up against the same criminals when they try to do harm to us?

You can google the FBI study for results. Another recent, thorough study was done about 2002 or 2003 by the DC metro police. They found their officers employed on average 2.7 or so rounds per "officer involved" shooting. The data sets were all with the time period they had used double stack autos as duty weapons and not from revolver-issue days. The statistics were well presented by various stratifications - including animal threat, one perp/multiple, one officer/multiple, etc. Again, you can google and locate this. There are a number of thorough studies by LE agencies out there that support this; it's not a myth. Just do the homework.

aren’t we potentially going up against the same criminals when they try to do harm to us?

An easy error to make. SD shootings typcically involve home invasions, workplace robberies, and thwarting personal assaults for the most part. Typical criminals don't prey upon known armed victims; they are usually surprised by the armed response. Likewise, they don't "invade" or rob police stations, or tend to try to rape or mug uniformed peace officers. Regular reading of the NRA's "Armed Citizen" column can give you a good feel for the data and details of these scenarios.

The gunfights that police get in are usually with already hardened, armed criminals fleeing arrest. It's a very different scenario. If I were a cop I would probably want a double stack in .40S&W and I would run various scenarios and drills with it at least twice a month or more. There are depraved individuals out there and if my job put me in direct contact with them I would be paranoid about it. There is an interesting web site called "officer down" or something like that. It is a memorial to officers killed in the line of duty, and not directly about guns. But the sight chronicles every duty fatality of an officer they can find, and they provide the details of the fatal encounter, too. A surprising percentage of them are when the officer stopped a wanted felon unknowingly in a traffic stop and was shot. Another surprising number are were officers were killed via vehicular homicide in a similar scenario and not shot. The number of vehicular homicides on officers was very surprising to me.

Police shooting and civilian shootings are radically different in most regards. But this isn't something that's terribly apparent until you realy dig into the data and details.

3. How many rounds/reloads do you carry and why.

Six shots or seven depending upon the gun, because I've read the studies above and understand the odds and scenarios. Sometimes I will stick a speedloader or extra magazine in a pocket, but usually not.

4. Has the reliability of the modern, service size auto made the large revolver obsolete for concealed carry?

A modern "service size" auto is far too large for routine concealed carry, and it seems has actually highlighted the value of a smaller, more concealable gun. As to large revolvers vs. large autos, that's up for debate. The revolver maintains a reliability and safety advantage despite reduced ammo capacity. Some thinking people will always "do the math" and find that advantage a worth-while trade-off. You can not make a rule that suits everyone, as people have different priorities. While modern autos can be terribly reliable, the fact is they are still dependent upon their ammunition shape and integrity for loading. Revolvers are free from this criteria.

Also, I don't know if there's not a presumptive fallacy in your Question 4. It sounds like you are asking if a large auto has made a large revolver obsolete for concealed carry, correct? I would question whether that presumption is even sound - that large revolvers were popular choices for concealed carry. Large revolvers have historically been duty guns carried openly. Small and medium sized revolvers, and small autos, have historically been the most common concealed carry guns from my observations.

 

[Corporal K]

I know 3 people personally (one is a relative) who have shot attackers in self-defense. Two used 5-shot .38's and one used a .357 (he was LEO and that was back when .357's were the norm).

My relative fired a single .38 at point-blank range into an attacker's chest. He got out of her car, ran few feet and died.

The 2nd person fired 2 shots from .38. The attacker also died at the scene.

The LEO fired 6 shots from his .357, killed one BG and wounded the other.

Personally, I carry a G21 .45, but I'm very comfortable with my wife's .38 snubbie.

 

[StrikeFire83]

Oro, good points, but I've got to take issue with your last one. There's no fallacy in question 4, because I've routinely see/talk to people at the range who concealed carry a 4 inch service revolver IWB with a cover garment, when you could easily conceal a Glock 17 in the same situation.

For pocket carry, like I've said, until the PM9 proves itself, its revolver pocket carry for me.

 

[nofishbob]

I've read that the statistics on rounds fired in "police involved" shootings historically included suicides by police personnel. A suicide is usually one shot.

When the suicides were removed from the statistics, the average round count per incident went up significantly.

Can anybody confirm this, as it puts a different perspective on the above discussion.

Bob

 

[Oro]

There's no fallacy in question 4, because I've routinely see/talk to people at the range who concealed carry a 4 inch service revolver IWB with a cover garment, when you could easily conceal a Glock 17 in the same situation.

Fair enough, I wasn't "insulting" the question, just trying to get the premise right. I think if you practice well with your weapon then it may be a valid point. I don't ever carry a "duty" sized gun (say, 4" K or L frame revolver) concealed - just too big to do so comfortably in my book. If I were going that big, I'd be tempted to sometimes grab a 1911, sure.

I am not against an auto as a carry gun. I have carried all sizes at least as an experiment if not regularly - Beretta 21a, Glock 23, and a 1911. I'm even contemplating getting a S&W 469 this week (compact 9mm, but still 12 rounds) and giving it a whirl just for giggles (I have never had a S&W autoloader, and I generally am underwhelmed with 9mm, so this would be a fun experiment). I try not to stuck in the mud mentally about habits - I owned one (1911) and extensively shot two (Beretta 96 and Daewoo 40) .40 guns and disliked them all. Still, a couple of years later I bought a Glock 23 as a double check, and I really enjoyed shooting it, minor quirks aside. Totally rehabilitated the .40 in my mind by getting it into an appropriate platform.

I certainly don't think there's anything WRONG with having 10, 12, or 15 rounds in a carry gun. It's just not mandatory for a civilian cc gun.

 

[ChaoSS]

1. To what degree does ammo capacity come into play in typical self-defense situations?

Depends on the type, now, doesn't it? If you are in your home, defending it from the roving hordes of zombies/looters/used car salesmen, higher capacity may very well come in handy. If you are out of your house, I find it highly unlikely that you will ever need more than a couple shots, unless you are a poor shot. Most of the time, you will likely be caught in the open, and with luck you will scare the bad guys off (if you are facing multiples) or they will shoot back, and you probably won't get the chance to get off that many rounds anyway.

I'm guessing that the type of thing you see in the movies, shooting around walls and over barricades, using suppressing fire to keep the other guy down, is mostly just movie garbage.

2. We are told that most self defense encounters end in “2 or 3 shots” but is this really the case? It would seem that most police shootings involve many more than 2 or 3 shots, and I understand self defense is very different from police work, but aren’t we potentially going up against the same criminals when they try to do harm to us?

Most police shootings don't, but let's examine the reasons why you believe they do.

One type of police shooting is the type that usually involves a SWAT team forcing entry to something that is barricaded. You should not be involved with this.

Another type is where there are multiple bad guys. This usually ends up being a version of the first scenario, where the police are entering a barricaded area, breaking in, sweeping the building, and may very well need to use suppressing fire. Again, you aren't going to be involved in this.

A third type is where a cop, or multiple cops, simply don't use their best judgment. We've all seen the news stories, 27 rounds fired, 12 of them hit, and it was just a case of an unarmed person making a bad move.

All of these garner news attention in a big way, especially the last one, with cops using serious overkill. These are not the majority of cases, but a well trained person should never be in a self defense scenario outside his/her house that resembles any of these situations.


I'm not going to say that a revolver is better. I will say that I would feel just fine with my 5 shot j-frame.

 

[musick]

1. To what degree does ammo capacity come into play in typical self-defense situations?

There are so many variables to define a "typical" situation that I dont think there is one right answer. That said, I see no drawback in having extra or unused rounds. I DO see a drawback in having too few rounds though.

2. We are told that most self defense encounters end in “2 or 3 shots” but is this really the case? It would seem that most police shootings involve many more than 2 or 3 shots, and I understand self defense is very different from police work, but aren’t we potentially going up against the same criminals when they try to do harm to us?

See above. For me, more is better.

3. How many rounds/reloads do you carry and why.

33 rds in 2 magazines (17+1 and 15)

4. Has the reliability of the modern, service size auto made the large revolver obsolete for concealed carry?

Wow, what a loaded question (pardon the pun )...I aint touching that one!

 

[lamebums]

Rule number one of a gunfight is to not get into a gun fight.

Rule number two is to make sure you bring enough gun, which if you're CC'ing, odds are you aren't anyway. People do put down revolvers because of their lower capacity, but they're also much easier to use and more reliable (reloading is another thing).

Doesn't matter how many bullets you fire if they all miss, though.

 

[Jeff White]

Unless you are conducting a military operation ammunition capacity is almost meaningless. I started my police career with a Smith and Wesson Model 65 .357 revolver. We were issued two speed loaders and I carried a Colt Agent as a BUG. This gave me a total of 30 rounds counting the speed strip in my uniform shirt pocket for the Colt. This combination was adequate for everything I needed as a patrol officer and also for the joint Illinois State Police/Air Force Security Police Tactical Response Team/Emergency Services Team course.

Later my department switched to Smith and Wesson 5906s and I was carrying 46 rounds of 9mm and 12 rounds of .38 Special. Later we switched to Glock 21s.

The last 4 years I worked I was working for a department that required us to supply our own weapons. I finished my career carrying a Kimber Warrior with an 8 round capacity and my BUG.

At no time did I feel inadequately armed. It's all about training and having a realistic perception of the threat you face. As a private citizen the chances you will need a large amount of ammunition to provide suppressive fire so your team mate can flank the bad guys are pretty slim. The chances you will have to hole up and hold off multiple assailants for 30 minutes to an hour are also pretty slim. Not to say you would never face that kind of situation, but it's not likely.

Tailor your load to the situation you are likely to face. Of course this involves some risk, but it's just not practical to go through life carrying an M4 and 400 rounds of 5.56 and a high capacity handgun with 60 or more rounds.

If you are comfortable carrying a revolver after looking at your lifestyle and deciding that it fits your situation, don't worry about what anyone says. They aren't you and they don't know what you face.

I felt the most confident carrying the 8 shot 1911 on duty. Why? Because by the time I started carrying it I had a lot of training and experience under my belt. Training and experience are much more important then equipment and ammunition capacity.

 

[flrfh213]

i carry a rossi snub ss 357. it has never mis-fired or made anything feel out of the ordanry so i use it as hd #1 with 38+p jhp in it,(#2 is my 45) and ccw in public with 357 mag jhp the stainless is more durable than blueing in inclement weather and salt air /water here on the florida coast... and if something were to happento it (droped,scratched ect) it was affordable as a new purchase too....

 

[Makotoseven]

power to weight. i want the most punch per ounce. thats really all there is to it. semi auto's are a time tested superior technology.

but those big huge stainless 357's sure do look awful fierce.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Carry vs Home

For carry I have selected the Kahr P9. The short magazine is 7+1, while the longer mag is 8+1.

It's small, flat, light, and I shoot decent groups with it.

I selected this one because I'm more likely to actually carry it than the other two choices I have: one is a 12-shot sub-compact, the other is a 15-shot compact. I have determined that carrying those would require a substantial wardrobe change.

Now, for nightstand duty, I have three from which to choose: 7-shot 4-inch .357 (plus 2 speed-loaders), 12-shot 4-inch .40 S&W (plus extra mags), and the 15-shot 3-inch 9mm compact (two mags). Currently, I have a lot more practice with the .40 and the 9mm, so I use one of those. As I become more practiced with the .357, it's possible that it could take over.

I'm still biased in favor of the .40 as it has tritium night sights. I also like the 9mm compact because it points naturally & easily and has a fast sight picture.

I'm not worried about capacity.

If I burn through all 15 rounds of the 9mm, it will be because a) I've gone completely spastic, or b) I'm entertaining a party of completely stoked meth-heads.

In general, I should imagine that any of these pistols would git'er done.

With more practice and training my opinion may change.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

For me, three shots per target is the minimum. I don't care what weapon or caliber I'm using. Be it a 9mm or a .50cal M2 mounted on a HMMWV. I'm going to fire my weapon three times at each individual threat. Two to three threats is not unheard of or too out of the question, so for me, that rules out revolvers. I would also like to have rounds left over, so that rules out most .45s. I choose 9mm because I like the low recoil, and high capacity. Everyone talks about how weak 9mm is compared to other calibers like .40 or .45. But they are usually referring to single shots. A big complaint is "you have to put multiple rounds of 9mm into a bad guy to do the same thing 1 round from a 1911 will do". Except I intend on putting multiple rounds into the target anyways. So that nullifies that point. In the end, I think three rounds into the target levels the playing field so to speak between calibers. Maybe there's a big difference between single rounds of 9mm or .45. But with three, I think the probability of a stop is roughly the same. So that being said, I choose to carry a weapon that allows me to engage more threats, and still have ammunition left.

 

[YammyMonkey]

I agree with a lot of what Jeff White had to say. But, more ammo on board the weapon gives you more options. Having a reload gives you more options. Options are good. It really isn't as hard to carry a full size gun & a reload or two on you as some would have us believe.

 

[smithmax]

During my CHL training class, they always said "shoot to stop the threat" which is probably <5rds/threat. But after I got my permit and talked to several family members who are LEO's, they all agreed that should I ever need to fire in defense I should shoot every bullet in the gun. Sure we *could* be fine with less, but why risk it?

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

smithmax: What if there are more threats than you originally were aware of?