Why do/did you choose a revolver as your EDC over a semiauto?

Ammunition problems will shut down a revolver. Twice, over the years I’ve seen it at the range. Once, my pal had a fresh, factory 357mag round squib the bullet half into the forcing cone…done for the day.
Another time, a shooter next to me had a bullet creep far enough forward to tie up the cylinder of his LCR.
Even myself…
I bought two 50rd boxes of Winchester Silvertip 145gn 357mag. Loaded up a couple speedloaders for a range trip.
When I loaded my 3” GP100 with one of the speedloaders, my cylinder wouldn’t close… Turned out one of the cases was slightly too long, keeping the rim from fitting flush. Learned a lesson that day…make sure speedloader ammo carried “for real” fits cylinder.

As to the OP, I like hi-cap autos just fine. But I feel pretty well armed with 6 rounds of 357mag. The key is using a medium sized, combat revolver, not a snub. 3” barrel is the sweet spot for me.
 
Every time the subject of revolver vs pistol comes up, the higher magazine capacity of some pistols seems to be a big issue. But for some of us, when we bought pistols there was a ten round maximum capacity rule in effect. When that rule sunset we generally bought some hicap magazines but still had the ten rounders.

But I decided to look at the last new modern pistols I've bought over the last decade or so and it seems only one came with magazines that hold more than ten rounds. All of the others were nominally 6 or 7 or 8 round magazines with only two pistols, both from Ruger. They came with 10 round and one also a 15 round.

None of the new pistols from Beretta, Tisas, Girsan, Smith & Wesson, Walther, Sig or Rock Island had high cap magazines.

I understand my personal purchases may not be typical except they do show that Ruger, Beretta, Tisas, Girsan, Smith & Wesson, Walther, Sig and Rock Island still see significantly large markets for pistols where the primary selling point is not magazine capacity.
 
Last edited:
From a safety standpoint I am more comfortable with a revolver. I trust a revolver more than a automatic. Also here around my place during warm weather the first 2 chambers in the cylinder of my revolver are loaded with shotshells for snakes.
 
Regarding 10-round magazines, many of them are or were mandated
by state or local laws and for 10 years federal law.
 
I carry a five-inch 1911 in either 45 ACP or 10mm most of the time in the local area. Some days I carry a four-inch Colt Python 357 magnum. When I go in the woods, I often carry a 44 magnum revolver. I am very comfortable with either one.

I have shot revolvers since 1952. The Navy introduced me to the 1911 in 1963.
 
Styx said:
I'm curious to hear why some members choose to EDC a revolver over a semiautos when a semiautos has more capacity, faster reloads, and a shorter/lighter trigger?

[Not a semiautos vs relovers thread. Just a thread for those who chose to carry a revolver over a semiauto to give their reasoning w/o any push back.]
Click to expand...

If you see those features as advantages for your use, that's your prerogative.

I grew up learning to shoot single action revolvers, single action pistols and double action revolvers. The skills required to use each type of handgun was just part of the learning process.

When I entered LE I was issued a .357MAG revolver to carry on-duty, and carried assorted revolvers and 1911's off-duty. Later on I was issued various pistols, in 9, .40 & .45 at various times, in both single and double stack configuration. Capacity was what it was for whatever handgun was being used at the time, and it didn't really change the nature of the training and skillset.

Yes, loading revolvers and pistols involves some different nuances of skills, and replacing a magazine is typically simpler than loading all the charge holes of a cylinder. However, having come from both the revolver and pistol eras of LE duty weapons ... I can say that I saw shooters manage to induce problems for themselves while 'reloading' with magazines at least as often as during the revolvers days, if not more often. (More people handling pistols can elevate the numbers, if nothing else).

Capacity isn't high on my personal list of priorities.

Ease and speed of reloading more rounds isn't as high on my personal list of priorities as working to maintain my skills to make sure accurate and effective hits occur withn the first rounds that may be fired.

Trigger pull weight? It's a training and skill consideration. Both heavy and light trigger pulls can create conditions for shooters to experience - and induce - their own problems, especially under stress and duress. Whether it becomes considered an advantage or disadvantage is dependent on the gear user and their skillset.

FWIW, when I see/read of someone asking these sort of questions, my first thought (from the perspective of a former LE firearms instructor of many years), is to wonder about the nature and extent of their firearms training and familiarity with different handguns. Training can answer a multitude of questions and help resolve many issues.

Regarding my own choice of retirement CCW handguns? I carried all manner of belt scabbarded handguns throughout my career, both revolvers and pistols (single and double stack), and grew to appreciate the option to pocket holster smaller revolvers off-duty. I xstill do in retirement, often carrying one of assorted .38/.357 snubs. When I don't choose to do that, I'm either carrying a pocket-holstered LCP (in shorter and tighter pockets), or one of my larger belt guns (.357MAG, 9, .40 or .45). Just depends. They've all seen their fair share of range work when I served as a firearms instructor, so it's just a matter of variations on a theme for gear selection from my perspective.

Suit yourself. Seeking out some firearms training (both initial and recurrent) can be a good thing to help answer many questions, as well as develop skillsets and help someone learn how to ask new questions over time.
 
Last edited:
Familiarity, pure and simple. The vast majority of my shooting "career" has involved revolvers, and despite some relatively recent - and quite intensive, over the course of six months or so - training, I still have to "think" about a semi-auto, whereas the revolver just does what I want without conscious effort.
 
Dave DeLaurant said:
While it remains on my CCW permit, I've rarely carried my Glock since I shattered my left arm in 2015.

That was when I learned to appreciate how much easier it is to manage a revolver when one hand is out of action.
Click to expand...

I had a similar experience. It turns out that I can operate a nice revolver fairly well with one hand. A semiauto, not so much.
 
fastbolt said:
If you see those features as advantages for your use, that's your prerogative.

FWIW, when I see/read of someone asking these sort of questions, my first thought (from the perspective of a former LE firearms instructor of many years), is to wonder about the nature and extent of their firearms training and familiarity with different handguns. Training can answer a multitude of questions and help resolve many issues.

Suit yourself. Seeking out some firearms training (both initial and recurrent) can be a good thing to help answer many questions, as well as develop skillsets and help someone learn how to ask new questions over time.
Click to expand...
I asked simply to hear personal experience and reasonings for why others made the choice to carry a revolver. Just that's it plain and simple, and there's no other motives or agendas. I didn't ask because I'm questioning their choice because I think semiautos are better or worse for that matter, nor because I'm trying to make a decision between the two for myself.

Thanks for sharing your personal experience.
 
Styx said:
I asked simply to hear personal experience and reasonings for why others made the choice to carry a revolver. Just that's it plain and simple, and there's no other motives or agendas. I didn't ask because I'm questioning their choice because I think semiautos are better or worse for that matter, nor because I'm trying to make a decision between the two for myself.

Thanks for sharing your personal experience.
Click to expand...

De nada. Having been around on various internet gun forums for a while, and having been asked such questions as an instructor by both LE and private owners on training ranges for many years, I've learned to qualify my responses. ;)

Back when I was constantly being asked such questions on ranges, it was often easiest to 'answer' by taking the folks doing the asking downrange and let them answer the questions for themselves with some 1-on-1 training or drills. Their answers were applicable to themselves, which was what mattered. :)

I can offer that training a revolver shooter to learn to use semiauto pistols tends to show that DA revolver skills make for better all-around skills, than in someone who has only picked up a plastic pistol with a short and relatively light trigger pull. Easier to transition revolver shooters to pistols, than 'only' pistol shooters over to being DA revolver shooters, overall. Makes sense, since learning to master a DA revolver usually involves an awkward plowshare handle grip-frame; basic sights (even if adjustable); heavy DA trigger pull; and heavier recoil, especially if .357MAG (and no slide cycling and recoil springs to mitigate recoil).

Just have to teach a revolver shooter to manipulate the slide, any external controls and use a magazine for loading. Granted, sometimes a longtime revolver shooter may find adjusting to operating a 'bottom feeder' a bit frustrating at first. ;)
 
Last edited:
fastbolt said:
De nada. Having been around on various internet gun forums for a while, and having been asked such questions as an instructor by both LE and private owners on training ranges for many years, I've learned to qualify my responses. ;)

Back when I was constantly being asked such questions on ranges, it was often easiest to 'answer' by taking the folks doing the asking downrange and let them answer the questions for themselves with some 1-on-1 training or drills. Their answers were applicable to themselves, which was what mattered. :)

I can offer that training a revolver shooter to learn to use semiauto pistols tends to show that DA revolver skills make for better all-around skills, than in someone who has only picked up a plastic pistol with a short and relatively light trigger pull. Easier to transition revolver shooters to pistols, than 'only' pistol shooters over to being DA revolver shooters, overall. Makes sense, since learning to master a DA revolver usually involves an awkward plowshare handle grip-frame; basic sights (even if adjustable); heavy DA trigger pull; and heavier recoil, especially if .357MAG (and no slide cycling and recoil springs to mitigate recoil).

Just have to reach a revolver shooter to manipulate the slide, any external controls and use a magazine for loading. Granted, sometimes a longtime revolver shooter may find adjusting to operating a 'bottom feeder' a bit frustrating at first. ;)
Click to expand...
And messy. I got yelled at growing up if I threw things all over the place.
 
Dave DeLaurant said:
I remember this scene from Drugs Inc. -- evidently any pistol can be a Glock. I vaguely recall another time in this TV series where a different thug was calling his Hi Point a Ruger.
Click to expand...
thugs now have Glocks with Switches. Wish we can have sub-machine guns off the shelves
 
fastbolt said:
De nada. Having been around on various internet gun forums for a while, and having been asked such questions as an instructor by both LE and private owners on training ranges for many years, I've learned to qualify my responses. ;)

Back when I was constantly being asked such questions on ranges, it was often easiest to 'answer' by taking the folks doing the asking downrange and let them answer the questions for themselves with some 1-on-1 training or drills. Their answers were applicable to themselves, which was what mattered. :)

I can offer that training a revolver shooter to learn to use semiauto pistols tends to show that DA revolver skills make for better all-around skills, than in someone who has only picked up a plastic pistol with a short and relatively light trigger pull. Easier to transition revolver shooters to pistols, than 'only' pistol shooters over to being DA revolver shooters, overall. Makes sense, since learning to master a DA revolver usually involves an awkward plowshare handle grip-frame; basic sights (even if adjustable); heavy DA trigger pull; and heavier recoil, especially if .357MAG (and no slide cycling and recoil springs to mitigate recoil).

Just have to reach a revolver shooter to manipulate the slide, any external controls and use a magazine for loading. Granted, sometimes a longtime revolver shooter may find adjusting to operating a 'bottom feeder' a bit frustrating at first. ;)
Click to expand...
I completely agree👍
 
I'v carried both hammer fired simi autos and revolvers. In the last couple of years iv been leaning towards revolvers. I like the simplicity of them. They can be fired from unconventional positions, ie from inside of a pocket, pushed against an attacker, laying on you back front side, fired from a loose grip without fear of limp wristing. Last but not least I can slip a Smith model 12 or Colt cobra in my pocket and know my XXL size hands have enough gun to hold on to unlike the newer micro 9s. They are just to small for me to grab quick and shoot well.
 
I chose the Single Action revolver because that is the arm with which I am most familiar and proficient. I am very ingrained with using the Single Action and it is much faster, for me, to get into action and get off a well aimed shot. And my choice has been the .45 Colt which is more than adequate for a defense round. Auto loading pistols are clumsy and awkward to me. As to ammunition capacity I fail to see that many rounds are an advantage. I am keenly aware of my surroundings and will not allow myself to be in a situation in which many assailants may lurk.

Bob Wright
 
UncleEd said:
BUT DON'T OVEFRLOOK the summation of this article:

"With just a little effort, you can ensure that your revolver demonstrates
a level of reliability that would make most autopistols jealous." ;););)
Click to expand...
I hear you, and I know that there is no such thing as a perfect world. However, I went through 2 tours in Nam with a M1911 on my belt. It never failed. I have carried semis since 1970, a year after my discharge. I have never had a serious issue with a semi. I have observed that almost all modern militaries have adopter the semi. I have observed that most law enforcement agencies, police departments, and average folks like me have adopted semis. I have noticed that such trends have no signs of being stalled let alone reversed. So I simply cannot squander my time thinking about why I should drop my 15+1 semi for a 6 round revolver. Power is a factor in life that usually proves to be determination of victory. The M1 was unarguably a better battle rifle than the Enfield or the Mauser. Why? Think Semi. Nothing like having 3 more rounds than your enemy has in a fight and being able to use them rapidly.
 
Last edited:
dweis said:
I hear you, and I know that there is no such thing as a perfect world. However, I went through 2 tours in Nam with a M1911 on my belt. It never failed. I have carried semis since 1970, a year after my discharge. I have never had a serious issue with a semi. I have observed that almost all modern militaries have adopter the semi. I have observed that most law enforcement agencies, police departments, and average folks like me have adopted semis. I have noticed that such trends have no signs of being stalled let alone reversed. So I simply cannot squander my time thinking about why I should drop my 15+1 semi for a 6 round revolver. Power is a factor in life that usually proves to be determination of victory. The M1 was unarguably a better battle rifle than the Enfield or the Mauser. Why? Think Semi.
Click to expand...
Maybe start a thread about it in the General Handgun forum? I almost never see people who people personally choose revolvers based on their personal experiences constantly go into the semiauto forum to attempt to convince those who have your opinion they're doing it wrong, but it seems that even with my disclaimer, there's always at least one member who perfers semiautos feels the need to crash these type of threads.

You are welcome to your opinion, but maybe this thread isn't for you? It's for those who choose to carry revolvers and their reasoning for making that decision that shouldn't be up for debate.

"So I simply cannot squander my time thinking about why I should drop my 15+1 semi for a 6 round revolver."

To answer your question, no one here said YOU had to. I support your decision to carry whatever you feel is best for you.
 
Last edited:
Manual of Arms. I am not a former soldier or cop. I think if I have to use a gun for defense, it will be one of the worst days of my life. I may be very nervous and scared. I may have tunnel vision, some loss of coordination, etc. A double action high quality revolver is just draw and aim and pull the trigger. Also, loading and unloading, though tedious, is obvious. Is the gun loaded? Easy to check with a revolver. I think I am more likely to be able to run a revolver. And the great reliability due to no magazine problems, failures to extract or whatever, increases confidence and reduces stress that might help me when I am in a very dark place.
 
Most of the time, I carry a 3" bbl'd, Smith M-60 loaded with 135 Speer Gold Dots. While I own and do carry a Sig P365 on occasion, I find that the Smith suits me and my environment better. Retired, my wife and I live in rural KY, on a small farm and do our shopping in a town with a population of < 8000. Her choice is a M-36 Smith, with the same ammunition that I carry in my M-60.

The reasons are fairly simple: simplicity of operation, adequate power and capacity for the anticipated risk factors, and long familiarity with a revolver. Well over 30 years in her case and 50+ in mine.

We've both taken training in defensive shooting out a Front Sight in Nevada; she using a Glock for two classes and I went with a Sig P229, Glock 19 & a Ruger 1911 in three. This is to say that we're both well qualified to carry either type; revolver or auto. The thinking at the time was to make the change to the bigger capacity of the autos. In truth, that's their only advantage in our opinion...and staying current with an auto's controls, reloading and stoppage clearance procedures is a mark against them.

So over the years, we stayed with the Smith's. For practice sessions, I've got a Smith M- 63 that provides a good simulation of the heavy DA trigger pull necessary for defensive shooting with the larger caliber carry pieces. They save on ammunition costs and offer cheap live fire practice. For the large caliber guns, I load my own cast LSWC's to the same recoil level as our Gold Dot carry loads and finish up each practice session with them...it works for us, YMMv.

Posted this before but here's a pic of hers and mine with the M-63 in the 2nd photo. Best regards, Rod







​
 
Hello. We can't carry where I live, but if we could:
Before I hit about 45 I was a pistol-only kind of guy, and that's what I would have carried.
More than a decade later I prefer revolvers, simply because I don't have to pick up the brass for reloading, as well as just preference and historical reasons. Revolvers also allow the use of a wider meplat bullet that might not feed in an auto. Also, my .41 Mag beats most auto calibers, and the .357 Mag is pretty darn efficient too.
In the winter, wearing a coat, I'd carry a revolver, backed by a small Glock like a 43X.
In the summer, a small Glock would do, maybe a 19, or better, a 10mm.
These days I practice almost exclusively with revolvers, so that would be my priority.
As to reliability, auto incidents are usually very fast to clear with training. When a revolver fails, it usually isn't fixable right then and there, and yes, it happens, albeit rarely. Modern autos, especially Glocks, are very reliable.
Revolvers, well, they're also very reliable, cooler and pack a punch :cool:
I'd even go as far as saying that blasting away with a hi-cap 9mm might be more dangerous to bystanders, as opposed to more careful shots with a revolver, maybe..
I am no expert with no LE experience so this is just my uninformed opinion.
Gil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Law enforcement transition to semi-autos... What took them so long?
Replies
20
Views
1K
918v
9
M
  • Locked
Advantage.... Revolver!
Replies
0
Views
479
MacTech
M
M
  • Locked
Why my "Nightstand Gun" is a revolver...
2 3 4
Replies
81
Views
6K
pmwizard
P
G
Semiauto vs. revolver for home defense - Interesting day at the range, and a question
2 3
Replies
62
Views
2K
.38 Special
.38 Special
D
  • Locked
Help choosing a trigger system for CCW
Replies
15
Views
919
Dollar An Hour
D
Back
Top