why do so many people say revolvers are more reliable than autoloaders?

[Cosmoline]

If you shoot enough wheelguns you'll find out they can fail. And when they do it's often a really BAD failure that requires work and maybe a new part.

Semis tend to fail more often but the failure are usually nothing too serious and can be cleared in a few seconds. Jams at the extraction point are most common.

Everything with moving parts will fail eventually. If you want nearly fool-proof go with a Thompson Center, where your hands are the moving parts.

 

[zeke707]

This may have been already posted. A few years back I watched a video on TV showing the "fastest draw point and shoot". Yep, the guy was using a revolver.

 

[RevolvingGarbage]

Overall, if I had to fight with a handgun, and I had my pick, it would be my Colt 1911 for sure. It reloads faster and easier, it throws big heavy bullets, and Its just the platform I shoot the best.

That said, I have been carrying my 4" .38 spl instead of my 1911 almost exclusively. It's enough gun, it carries a little easier, and its just as dependable. As a big bonus, if I am ever forced to use it to defend myself and I loose the gun to a police evidence locker for a while, I'm only out a $200 revolver instead ofe an $800 semi auto that I have a lot of sentimentality involved with.

 

[fatcat4620]

fatcat - care to use something like .. you know evidence to back up that claim? I know a glock has done a 20,000 round with no cleaning torture test... got anything that shows that has even been attempted on a revolver? I think you're working with an incomplete data set and making an inference that there is no data to back up.

If you want to buy me 20,000 rounds of 32 H&R magnum, I'll gladly test my ruger without cleaning it. Right now it has in the neighborhood of 50 through it since the last cleaning.

Wow, first you missed the sarc by a lot in that and second we have been over this like 6 times this year. This IS the most reliable revolver http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manurhin_MR_73 but you average smith or ruger will go down before the glock. Of course we would need about 100k rounds to find out though I'm sure the 50 rounds you put through your gun means it would never fail.
Watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_vu2xEN7kA
Read this http://www.tactical-life.com/online/combat-handguns/glock-17-9mm-torture-test/

 

[45_auto]

Sigh. Are you making stuff up as you go? The facts are clear. The 1911 has never been considered a high capacity handgun. The BHP with 13 rounds, yes. The 1911, no.

Are you really that dense or are you just trying to keep the thread interesting?

You consider the BHP with 13 rounds to be high capacity, but the Springfield, Para, Caspian, etc 1911's that hold 17 rounds of 9mm or 14 rounds of 45ACP are not high capacity?

Try doing a search on "high capacity 1911" if you're really interested in learning, you might be surprised at how many people are selling "high capacity" 1911's, frames and magazines for something that according to you has "never" been considered high capacity.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

If you hang around here long enough, you will read first hand accounts of plenty of failures of revolvers -- broken transfer bars, locking up due to bullet creep, primers backing out, crud under the ejector star, ejector rod unscrewing, base pin creeping out, and on and on.

A good automatic with good magazines -- my choice is my Kimber Classic (MK I) and Chip McCormic 8-rounders -- is as reliable as any revolver I own.

 

[wheelgunslinger]

Yeah, people tend to feel safer with revolvers, when they've never seen one fail.

I like them, but they're machines. All machines break. Some spectacularly, like a Pinto in a rear collision, and some less so, like a computer with a bad power supply.

Shoot and carry what you like or want.

 

[JRH6856]

Revolvers are more reliable than semi-autos because they suffer less from the mechanical problems that plague semi-autos.

Semi-autos are more reliable than revolvers because they suffer less from the mechanical problems that plague revolvers.


Both can suffer from problems of ammo failures but to different degrees. Aside from the fact that the function of both is to discharge ammuntion and send a bullet toward a target, the semi-auto is partially dependent on the proper functioning of the ammunition for its operation. A revolver is not. If a round fails to fire in a semi-auto, pulling the trigger a second time either does nothing (SA) or drops the hammer a second time on the same round (DA) which may or may not fail to fire a second time. If a round fails to fire in a revolver, pulling the trigger a second time brings up a fresh round. The semi-auto can be manually cycled to overcome the failure. But manual cycling is required to operate the revolver in any case so the only disadvantage to the semi-auto is that the manual cycling is more involved than just pulling the trigger.

Quality of manufacture being equal, I don't see that either has an advantage in reliability.

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

The double-action shooter with the 12 rounds in 3 seconds is Jerry Miculek.

You can, apparently, attempt to "prove" whatever you want by cherry picking statistics...ready?

Todd Jarrett - 16 shots, 3.47 seconds with a 1911.

Jerry - 1 shot every 0.249 seconds, Todd - 1 shot every 0.216 seconds.

1911 speed totally blows the revolver out of the shooting range, ergo, revolvers are junk.

Please people, personal anecdotal data and cherry picked statistics don't "prove" anything. I always read the posts about the IDPA etc. shooters who note that ALL of the failures and clearance drills required were done by people shooting 1911's.

That's not my experience. I've seen one of the best shooters where I shoot action pistol consistently have trouble with his Glocks. But, he "tricks them out" to shoot better....(no comment).

The problem with 1911's is that they really do require more PM than any of the modern automatics. Most of the critical PM requirement being with the springs. The most sensitive being the recoil spring AND the magazine springs. My experience with my 1911's is that they run 100% of the time - but, I'm careful with making sure the springs get checked and changed at regular intervals.

I keep a box of new 1911 springs on my gun shelf. Having a number of them always on hand makes sure I'm never deterred from replacing a spring when needed.

A weak recoil spring can cause FTE, and weak magazine springs FTF - both of them weak and you're setup for 3-point jams.

Cleaning is also one of those things with a 1911 that's very interesting. I always wonder how many people regulary make sure the extractor hook is cleaned. Dirty extractor hook and you can have FTE or FTF.

1911's aren't finicky if you PM them properly, in fact you can run them with total reliability if you PM them, make sure they're lubed, and run at least mid-quality ammunition.

If you don't like that aspect of gun ownership, very simply, don't buy a 1911 - they're sort of like classic cars you have to want to "keep them up" and understand that's part of what you get if you own one.

As for revolvers...well, the worst two jams I've ever had were with a S&W model 25 .45 LC. Wonderful revolver, but whooo baby when that one locked up...at least 4 hours to clear it. I currently have a Ruger convertible that has to go to the smith because the cylinder rod keeps backing out and the cylinder jams in the frame.

Does either of those two experiences prove that revolvers as a whole are totally unreliable? No - it only proves I've had problems with ONE example of a double action and ONE example of a single action.

 

[bikemutt]

I shoot a fair amount. The only semi-auto I have never seen jam is my wife's Glock 21. Of all the revolvers I've owed or shot, which outnumbers the semi-autos by a fair margin, I've seen two jam. The semi-autos were cleared and resumed firing, the revolvers were pretty much done until repairs could be made.

Accordingly, empirically and statistically I trust Glocks and revolvers

 

[SK2344]

Yes, I have to agree with you but I did have a problem with a Taurus 38 special while I was doing my yearly qualification for my G License. It was a company issue gun and I had Frozen Trigger problems while on the range. I had to borrow a gun to finish my qualification round. The only guns that have NOT FAILED me are Glocks. I have been shooting them for 15 years and I presently own 4 and my EDC is the G 36. I am still waiting for my FIRST MALFUNCTION! But I also love my revolvers!

 

[bikemutt]

EDC is the G 36

I just bought one today.

 

[scythefwd]

50 rounds since I last cleaned it.. not 50 rounds total. Please read before you respond.

 

[Tony_the_tiger]

The answer is: it doesn't matter.

Carry what you feel comfortable with.

I've shot around 10k rounds in various revolvers without a single malfunction.

Couldn't get past 4 in a S&W semi auto.

Maybe it was just luck, but I personally trust my revolvers more.

We could set up a research study using 10 random factory revolvers and 10 random factory semi autos, shooting until a pre-specified sample of rounds have been fired that would allow us to make inference about larger round counts in the firearms, and settle the issue statistically.

 

[45_auto]

We could set up a research study using 10 random factory revolvers and 10 random factory semi autos, shooting until a pre-specified sample of rounds have been fired that would allow us to make inference about larger round counts in the firearms, and settle the issue statistically.

It's been a while since I had to do any sampling, but a sample size of 10 of each would be totally meaningless. I don't believe I've ever seen a sample size determination table that went below a 25% confidence level, and your 10 of each isn't even on that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_size

 

[beag_nut]

"why do so many people say revolvers are more reliable than autoloaders? "

Because they are. period.

 

[Tony_the_tiger]

You're right, I was not clear enough. The sample would have to be larger.

 

[RockyMtnTactical]

Same reason people say the AK never fails. One person says it and everyone repeats it.

There is no doubt there is a little truth in many of these myths, but they tend to be exaggerated like crazy...

 

[hemiram]

When I first started shooting, just after I turned 21, I bought a Taurus .38 that was total junk. It WOULD shoot six times in a row, but 12 was pretty doubtful. The cylinder wasn't machined correctly and just 8 or 9 shots would bind it up when the high side came around. It spit lead terribly too, and the bore/rifling was all messed up, you had to chisel out the lead or copper jackets from it! As bad as it was, I felt safe carrying it for the 6 months or so I had it, because it would work six times.

I replaced it with a Dan Wesson 15-2, that had a clipped mainspring and it was actually less reliable than the Taurus was! A simple cleaning and a new spring cured that totally, and I put thousands of rounds through that gun with zero issues, except for a couple of ammo issues, one of which caused a bulged barrel when I fired a round behind one that had lodged in there beforehand. A new $25 barrel and I was shooting again in minutes. My present Dan Wesson 715 6VH has been totally reliable, and if I was going to keep one handgun, it would be the one. I have a second, not so pretty one that I shoot most of the time, and it's rock solid too. I can't imagine either one of them having any kind of failure. I felt the same way about my old S&W 28, I was totally confident it would work, everytime. I can't say the same about my autos though. I have a group of them now that haven't had a single issue, jam, or anything else, but I never have the confidence level I have with my revolvers. Too many issues, most of them long ago, but I remember them well. My 1911 horrors are the basis of many, if not most of them. Friend's problems with their 1911's, both cheap and OMG, have kept me away from them. I have 3 .45 ACP guns, a S&W 4506, a 4586, and an EAA Witness fullsize. All three have been perfect, but there is always the "Is it going to hang up?" in my mind when I shoot them. I don't have a CCW yet, I need to do it, and I will almost certainly carry an auto, but I will have doubts about them, always.

 

[j1]

I will not enter the revolver versus auto argument because it is strictly a matter of different strokes for different folks BUT I will say that the revolver is more versatile as it is able to shoot loads from birdshot to midrange wadcutters to full house loads fo more serious occasions.

 

[jad0110]

1911's aren't finicky if you PM them properly, in fact you can run them with total reliability if you PM them, make sure they're lubed, and run at least mid-quality ammunition.

Agreed, also on the spring point. Not to drift too much, but what tools do you recommend to check mainspring tension? Is there a tool to check mag spring tension?

As for the 1911 itself, there are only what, 30+ companies making them? If you had 30+ companies making Glocks, all to slightly different measurements (with differing material quality standards), I wouldn't be surprised to see Glock's reliability reputation questioned too.

 

[jdh]

So many things.
I started my LE service with a revolver a Model 57 S&W.
For those of you who say you just cock the pull the trigger and clear a dud round, I take it you have never had a hang fire with a revolver. It ain't pretty.

Backed out primers and cocking the hammer to clear, No. The hammer on a S&W revolver retracts far enough just by taking your finger off the trigger BUT a backed out primer can still lock up the gun. The armorer kept a rubber mallet at the range house just for this. The bad part of this is rubber mallets can bend yokes, not good.

Let you ejector rod loosen up a little.

Revolvers fail to eject all the time. Case gets stuck and slips over the ejector star. Tell me you can clear that with a tap and rack drill.

Shoot hot heavy bullet loads. Bullets get pulled from the case all the time. Tap and Rack, Nope.

Revolvers are not immune to problems and when the do occur they take longer to remedy and usually require the use of tools to do so.

Now for the semis are jam-o-matics crowd, ancient history. Semis have benefited from constant development. Modern versions of the a species are more ammo tolerant, accurate, and problem free because of advances made in the manufacturing processes and materials used. Gun related malfunctions are not as common as you seem to believe. Ammo and magazines are the most likely causes followed by operator error.

No, they are not perfect, despite the claims of one well know manufacturer, but they are not the jam prone POSs that some of you try to make them out to be.

We had a "customer" at my last job who was a revolver user. I asked him why he did not use the more popular with his peers Glock. His reply was they were stupid to leave evidence laying around for the cops to find and use against them, while he could 'bust a cap' in you and the shell case stay with him when he left.

 

[mljdeckard]

Revolvers are much less likely to HAVE a malfunction.

Revolvers are much more difficult to get running again if they DO have a malfunction.

If I have a student tell me that revolvers are infallible, I have them hold one, and I tightly grab the cylinder and tell them to try to pull the trigger. OOPS.

 

[Drail]

Spend about 20 years working on all types of handguns and you will get the answer. My experience convinced me to shoot, collect, compete with 1911s. I dearly love them. For CCW use I will always have a revolver (generally in 41 Mag. or .44 Spl.)

 

[jmorris]

Jerry - 1 shot every 0.249 seconds, Todd - 1 shot every 0.216 seconds.

1911 speed totally blows the revolver out of the shooting range , ergo, revolvers are junk.

.


Yeah that .033 seconds averaged with a reload is a deal breaker. I'll bet $20 and a steak dinner you couldn't match Jerry's revo time of 6+6 with any semiauto. If you try and his revo speed totally blows your auto out of the shooting range does that mean your auto is junk?