Who does revolver "combat" training?

Status
Not open for further replies.

D.B. Cooper

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
4,380
I hear a lot of guys talk about Gun Sight, Front Sight, etc., but only in the context of semi-autos. Does anyone (anyone well renowned like the aforementioned) still do combat revolver training? Or am I about 3 decades too late for this? (And maybe not "combat" training per se, but something that would help me improve in USPSA/IDPA type shooting.)
 
You can do Front Sight with a revolver. A friend in CA has done it several times.

They have to adjust the course of fire for reloads, etc, but they don’t hamstring it. Same demanding requirements as the semi-auto course.
 
https://www.gunsite.com/classes/250-defensive-revolver-class-2/

I don't see a Front Sight class that's explicitly for revolvers, but there is information in their handgun class information that suggests revolvers are a valid option for their handgun classes.
Yes, one woman in my Front Sight class used a 5-shot concealed hammer snubbie. Not sure make/model. She struggled with that damn thing for the entire 4 days. The SD routines are just so ammo-intensive that a 5-shot cyclinder simply can't stand up to it. She carried several speed loaders but simply couldn't keep up. She was forced to make a "tactical reload" after almost every controlled pair of shots. And her reloading technique was less than stellar. Maybe a 7-rounder could have worked, but the 5-rounder was totally out of its element.

And that doesn't even begin to consider the crappy sights. She was totally outclassed at 15 yards.

With a double stack semi-auto or even a 7 or 10-shot single stack our partially depleted mags could be pocketed for emergency use of the remaining rounds. Her leftover rounds when making a reload had to be dumped straight to the ground.

Let's face it, unless you are Jerry Miculek, you are better off with a semi-auto loading at least 7 rounds.
 
Last edited:
Sadly too many of today's trainers and even competition match designers are caught up in the "street gang", "narco hit squad", "gang of terrorists" mind set when developing training/match scenarios. In reality very practical and realistic training can be conducted with one, two, or three targets, which can indeed be engaged with a revolver, even a 5-shot if you are competent. Designing exercises around a Glock 19 or 17 is entertaining but not really necessary.

YMMV,
Dave
 
Sadly too many of today's trainers and even competition match designers are caught up in the "street gang", "narco hit squad", "gang of terrorists" mind set when developing training/match scenarios. In reality very practical and realistic training can be conducted with one, two, or three targets, which can indeed be engaged with a revolver, even a 5-shot if you are competent. Designing exercises around a Glock 19 or 17 is entertaining but not really necessary.

YMMV,
Dave
What is necessary is what is necessary at the time, and there is no way to know what that is going to be. If you are going to go to the trouble of carrying a CCW, why would it not be the most capable you can readily conceal and comfortably carry? That just isn't a revolver.
 
If you are going to go to the trouble of carrying a CCW, why would it not be the most capable you can readily conceal and comfortably carry? That just isn't a revolver.

Then the thousands of people around the country, including a lot of cops, who carry a 5-shot S&W in their pocket should give up and go unarmed? In the 10 years I trained civilians self defense and CCW certification one of the most often asked questions was, "What is the best gun for concealed carry". My answer was and remains, "The one you have with you." For a large segment of the CCW world that is a revolver in the pocket. I don't like J-frames or LCRs and don't carry one but I would hate to have to guess how many people do. You go tell them they are all wrong. I'm old and out of the business. It isn't really my problem anymore.

Dave
 
Recoil gunworks had 340 pd revolvers that were police trade in this week. They sold out in about a day. But somewhere they are issued, I assume as a back up.
 
Does anyone (anyone well renowned like the aforementioned) still do combat revolver training?
Something to keep in mind is that weapon manipulation classes and tactics classes are not the same thing. They're often combined, but they're not the same. As others have mentioned, the logistics of loading a revolver can make it tedious to use for many classes, something that I have personally observed a number of times. If you're looking for a weapons manipulation class and intend to carry a revolver, then by all means, find a revolver specific class. If you're looking for a class the teaches techniques for fighting with a handgun, then my recommendation would be to take the class with a semi auto and consider how you would adapt the techniques to a revolver, if you still choose to carry one.
 
What is necessary is what is necessary at the time, and there is no way to know what that is going to be. If you are going to go to the trouble of carrying a CCW, why would it not be the most capable you can readily conceal and comfortably carry? That just isn't a revolver.

You sound like a candidate for my argument to trade your double-stack autoloader in for submachine gun that holds twice as many rounds. There's only a little more bulk in the gun and you can carry more ammo without all the extra magazines. Those tactical and speed reload drills are less important when you've got 30, 40 or even 50 to go. I carry a revolver that's more than 44 ounces every day, so I don't really see a reason why anyone needs a gun half that weight when they could carry one that's just the weight of a couple of spare magazines more, and get six or seven times as many rounds as my revolver without even a single reload. If you're going to go to the trouble of carrying the weight of an extra magazine, you might as well have all those rounds ready to go. Carrying half the ammo you might need outside the gun leaves you almost as unprepared as carrying with an empty chamber.
 
my argument to trade your double-stack autoloader in for submachine gun that holds twice as many rounds. There's only a little more bulk in the gun and you can carry more ammo without all the extra magazines.
What kind of submachine gun is concealable while wearing normal clothing and conducting normal day to day activities?
 
You sound like a candidate for my argument to trade your double-stack autoloader in for submachine gun that holds twice as many rounds. There's only a little more bulk in the gun and you can carry more ammo without all the extra magazines. Those tactical and speed reload drills are less important when you've got 30, 40 or even 50 to go. I carry a revolver that's more than 44 ounces every day, so I don't really see a reason why anyone needs a gun half that weight when they could carry one that's just the weight of a couple of spare magazines more, and get six or seven times as many rounds as my revolver without even a single reload. If you're going to go to the trouble of carrying the weight of an extra magazine, you might as well have all those rounds ready to go. Carrying half the ammo you might need outside the gun leaves you almost as unprepared as carrying with an empty chamber.
You are such a joker.
 
Then the thousands of people around the country, including a lot of cops, who carry a 5-shot S&W in their pocket should give up and go unarmed? In the 10 years I trained civilians self defense and CCW certification one of the most often asked questions was, "What is the best gun for concealed carry". My answer was and remains, "The one you have with you." For a large segment of the CCW world that is a revolver in the pocket. I don't like J-frames or LCRs and don't carry one but I would hate to have to guess how many people do. You go tell them they are all wrong. I'm old and out of the business. It isn't really my problem anymore.

Dave
Why should they go unarmed? How do you come up with that? They should go better armed.
 
Something to keep in mind is that weapon manipulation classes and tactics classes are not the same thing. They're often combined, but they're not the same. As others have mentioned, the logistics of loading a revolver can make it tedious to use for many classes, something that I have personally observed a number of times. If you're looking for a weapons manipulation class and intend to carry a revolver, then by all means, find a revolver specific class. If you're looking for a class the teaches techniques for fighting with a handgun, then my recommendation would be to take the class with a semi auto and consider how you would adapt the techniques to a revolver, if you still choose to carry one.

I'm actually not a CCW person, for a few reasons. However, I've pretty much hit a plateau in USPSA with my revolver, so I'm really looking for additional training to improve or add skill sets. (And if that ever translates into a real life scenario, it certainly won't hurt.)
 
You sound like a candidate for my argument to trade your double-stack autoloader in for submachine gun that holds twice as many rounds. There's only a little more bulk in the gun and you can carry more ammo without all the extra magazines. Those tactical and speed reload drills are less important when you've got 30, 40 or even 50 to go. I carry a revolver that's more than 44 ounces every day, so I don't really see a reason why anyone needs a gun half that weight when they could carry one that's just the weight of a couple of spare magazines more, and get six or seven times as many rounds as my revolver without even a single reload. If you're going to go to the trouble of carrying the weight of an extra magazine, you might as well have all those rounds ready to go. Carrying half the ammo you might need outside the gun leaves you almost as unprepared as carrying with an empty chamber.

Hey man do me a favor. Take this idea somewhere else. You started this over in the now closed "revolver for police work" thread, and it wasn't very well received there, either. I'm not interested in any submachine talk, and you're going to end up getting this thread closed, too. Much obliged.
 
Sadly too many of today's trainers and even competition match designers are caught up in the "street gang", "narco hit squad", "gang of terrorists" mind set...

And Spec Ops. But then again, I suppose Spec Ops has been mostly caught up in the narco hit squad thing for a few decades too, but that's another topic. I was watching this video the other day:



and wondering, what are they shooting at? Now to be fair here, I'm not suggesting the academies mentioned in this thread teach this kind of thing -- at least not until you proceed to their "advanced" classes for vehicle tactics, sniper training, breaching and the shoot house. But I suspect that some portion of the students or would-be students aspire to a persona where this is a suitable repertoire. They are the ones who would deeply resent any suggestion that the appropriate equipment for them as civilian self-defender is something they see as "less" than what cops carry (lower capacity). They have a desperate need to know that the firepower they carry is no less, regardless of the fact that they never do police work, much less SWAT work. Having equipment and training befitting a "Spec Ops dude" is gratifying to their ego and self-image. To defend their self-image they will argue that any advice about the suitability of a revolver for self-defense is coming from a position that would attempt to restrict their rights to standard capacity pistols and even put them at disparity with criminals on the street that carry high round counts.

Let me make it clear that I unequivocally support the civil right to carry any gun you like. I mean, dude, I'm pro sub-machine gun. But revolvers are awesome and I don't neglect to carry one.

There are two different types of revolver courses I've seen offered. One is for small pocket guns (j frame and LCP) and the other for duty-size revolvers. I have not been to any of the famous-name academies, but I am sure you could run a duty-size revolver in any of the handgun classes they offer. But I am just as sure that a J frame is best left for a course intended to accommodate its characteristics.

For duty-size Revolver-specific courses I can suggest (not recommending since I haven't been)

ITTS
http://internationaltactical.com/revolver.html

Gunsite
https://www.gunsite.com/classes/250-defensive-revolver-class-2/


For J-frame:

Gunsite
https://www.gunsite.com/classes/pocket-pistol/
 
I carry a semi auto. I prefer the flat profile, and the fact that most of the time when someone brings me a broken revolver it's out of service. Usually a broken semi auto can function in a limited capacity at least. With a revolver it's not tap And rack. It's typically tools And a bench and some hand fitting.

In a war zone a revolver is obsolete. But for carry or hunting? Nothing wrong with it at all imo. Thousands of pocket autos are carried that have 6+1 capacity. Many revolvers match that. Reloading with speed loaders isn't much slower, and with most untrained people reloading can easily be faster with the revolver. Hell the 1911 (and some swat And even FBI HRT carry one of those) isn't exactly high capacity. And for a revolver competition....I'd expect nothing else than a revolver and that's what the op is doing
As far as the run and gun competition videos on YouTube..... have you ever watched bullseye or Olympic shooting. If any trainer or competing body posted videos of that as their niche noone would come or show interest. Its kind of like playing rook or pool or bowling. Most people enjoy it but it's not exactly fun to watch.

Maybe if you give a general area people would chime in about who is training in those areas.
 
(And if that ever translates into a real life scenario, it certainly won't hurt.)
Depends actually. A lot of the stuff that you see in competition could hurt very much in a real life scenario. Just something to keep in mind. Anyway, good luck with your search.
 
As far as this topic can wander...

On topic, yes, there are still good revolver classes out there. IMHO, the best of them is the Gunsite 250 class.

That said, there are fewer and fewer each year as the number of good instructors that have legit revolver know how and teaching chops is dropping rapidly. I would recommend looking into anyone offering a revolver course to make sure they actually know what they are doing.
 
For the ops need I'd almost recommend finding a competitor rather than a real combat course. Jerry Miculek would be about as good as one could get for his needing to get better at USPSA. Would it matter that he didn't teach "combat" . More speed and proficiency with the gun and reloading rather than combat tactics etc.

ETA not saying anything about Mr Miculek. Just that the op is wanting to get better at the competition side which isn't 100% the same. In many cases it's actually pretty far off.
 
Maybe if you give a general area people would chime in about who is training in those areas.

I'm in Alaska, so I'll have to travel somewhere. While there are a few places in the area that do training, as near as I can tell, it's all high capacity autoloader, para-military type stuff. So my thought on this is I would travel somewhere for up to a week as a sort of hobby vacation thing. (Preferably in winter - it was so cold las tnight my truck dashboard said "Turn off power to save battery." LOL)
 
I would recommend looking into anyone offering a revolver course to make sure they actually know what they are doing.

Agreed. I'm not interested in traveling out of state and paying a bunch of money for a Glock guru to tell me how to shoot a revolver.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top