Why have revolvers become passé ?

[gazpacho]

Because revolver buyers normally don't put up with tacti-crap.

There are a LOT of semi-auto buyers that absolutely have to have the latest generation, doublestack tactical tupper-gun.

The guy who invents the double stack semiauto revolver will make a boatload of money.

 

[JohnnyK]

two words: Glock Perfection

 

[Zaydok Allen]

The guy who invents the double stack semiauto revolver will make a boatload of money.

That was invented well over 100 years ago.

 

[TestPilot]

It's a simple economics.

For example, Glock 19 is a fine combat pistol. You can get that for about 2/3 price of a 686.

It has more than twice the capacity while still being lighter. Want more power than a 9mm? Then there's Glock 22 or M&P40.

Morern self-loaders are significantly easy to shoot and hit with, compared to revolvers. More training at less cost and more effectiveness.

I find my shooting to be more purposeful when shooting a revolver over a semi-auto. I find with a revolver I want to make ever shot count. I tend to get sloppy with semi-autos and just fire away.

That's not a characteristics of a self-loaders. That's a characteristics of you.

 

[pps]

I have about an equal number of semi-auto pistols as I do revolvers. For super light weight that I can just drop into the front pocket of my shorts, my j-frame sees the most carry, with my M&P Shield being carried when I have to wear business casual.

At the range, as a hunting sidearm, or nightstand duty I still favor revolvers. As a reloader, I LOVE not having to stoop over and chase my brass all over the range. With a revolver I just dump it out into a coffee can or when I do drop them on the range the moonclips (left) keeps the brass in a neat/tidy little bundle.

 

[JohnBiltz]

two words: Glock Perfection

Man Glock gets blamed for everything. Its not true. Police departments started shifting over to 9mm before Glocks ever came to the USA. What Glock did was make reliability affordable. Once the police switched over then the public followed.

Has anyone considered the possibility that pistols are better than revolvers if you don't need to worry about shooting a bear?

 

[Tcruse]

For me I would never consider owning a revolver, here are my reasons:
1) They are too complicated, in that when they fail it is a serious failure, where when my Glocks fail there are many fewer parts and the parts are much cheaper and much easier to replace without special tools (in the field)
2) Revolvers always leak "hot gas" out the sides of the gun, unacceptable and very distracting for follow up shots
3) They are uncomfortable to grip (even the ones with soft rubber)
4) They are too heavy and not well balanced (nose heavy)
5) I understand that many people claim they are more accurate, however, the vast majority of the people that I observe at the range with revolvers are spraying bullets all over the target, worse than beginners with a service sized semi-automatic. The times that I have shot revolvers, my accuracy was unchanged from my Glocks or 1911.

I always get a "good feeling" when my Glock or 1911 fires. When the revolver fires, all I get is dirt blown around and no sense of doing anything pleasurable. Now, to be fair, most of my shooting friends love their revolvers, but carry Kahr, Kimber, Steyr, and Glock.

The only advantage that I see is easier to mount a red dot or scope.
However, each to what they want.

 

[Sam1911]

Looking at the original question on its face, one has to assume the OP understands at least some of the fundamental benefits of modern auto pistols. (Capacity, weight, cost, ease of shooting, low bulk, durability, etc.) Having said that ...

Technology is funny. Just because something is archaic, doesn't mean it does not do its job correctly or adequately. It simply means that there now exists something that does the same job faster, easier, or in some other more beneficial way.

As a defensive sidearm, a revolver is archaic.

The design still works just as well as it ever did. It is excelled by other choices. The two statements are not incompatible.

For certain gun games, the revolver is king. That's because that particular game is set up to favor the revolver.

For handling large-bore hunting cartridges, the revolver is king. That's because the geometry of auto pistols is not well suited to handling large cartridges.

For pretty much everything else, the revolver is an aesthetic choice (hey, I just like 'em) or a matter of attitude/pride (the conceit of exclusivity, and/or pride of accomplishment at shooting them well), and sometimes due to lack of training (the questionable belief that a revolver is easier for a new or unskilled shooter to use).

Fortunately, we've got hundreds of wonderful choices in sidearms these days and you don't have to carry and/or shoot anything you don't want to.

If revolvers just hit your sweet spot, great! Practice well and a revolver will probably be plenty good enough in your moment of need.

 

[mikemyers]

1) They are too complicated, in that when they fail it is a serious failure, where when my Glocks fail there are many fewer parts and the parts are much cheaper and much easier to replace without special tools (in the field)
2) Revolvers always leak "hot gas" out the sides of the gun, unacceptable and very distracting for follow up shots
3) They are uncomfortable to grip (even the ones with soft rubber)
4) They are too heavy and not well balanced (nose heavy)
5) I understand that many people claim they are more accurate, however, the vast majority of the people that I observe at the range with revolvers are spraying bullets all over the target, worse than beginners with a service sized semi-automatic. The times that I have shot revolvers, my accuracy was unchanged from my Glocks or 1911.

Strange - for most of those points, I see the same thing, but the opposite of what you describe.....

1 - complication - for most people, and me in particular for many years, the problem I had was cleaning. While cleaning a revolver is quite simple, it took me forever to feel comfortable in doing it with a semi-auto. As to shooting, with a revolver, you just pick it up and pull the trigger. Racking the slide, remembering to unlock the gun, and dealing with casings that didn't eject properly was FAR more complicated.

2 - I know that hot gasses can theoretically come out the side, but on a good S&W, I've never noticed that, let alone paid any attention to it. If it's distracting someone, I think it might be a problem with the gun. What DID distract me was the empty shell from my semi-auto flying up into the air, sometimes hitting me along its trajectory to the ground.

3 - Uncomfortable to grip - While my hand feels just as comfortable with one as the other, I've never had the revolver cutting my hand as it cycled, which used to happen to me with semi-automatics before I learned how to hold the gun to avoid it.... For years, I used the soft rubber grips, but then switched back to the original wood. It just felt "more comfortable" in my hands, but that's just me..... Maybe I'll try soft rubber again if I can find a pair that fits my hands better.

4 - As to being too heavy, and nose heavy, all things being equal, I find that a heavy gun (revolver and semi-auto) is more stable in my hands - less "quivering", and less likely to fly up from recoil. I will agree with you though that a lighter gun feels more comfortable. As to nose heavy, the longer the barrel, the better I can shoot. But yeah, the longer the barrel, the more nose heavy the gun gets.....

5 - accuracy..... I think you get all the potential accuracy you can afford (buy a Wilson for $4000, not plastic for $400) and how accurate you will be has far, far, far, far more to do with how much you practice, and how well you follow the advice of those who know better...... than whether it's a revolver or semi-auto. You can't buy accuracy. You have to earn it.



I think you left one thing off your list "image", or "looking cool". For me, when I see a 1954 automobile, I think that's really cool! For a 2014 automobile, I usually think it's a shapeless blob. If I want "cool", I want something that looks "cool". In 1954, all my friends and I wanted toy revolvers. In 2014 (if kids were still allowed to play with toy guns) they would likely be semi-auto handguns, or maybe even something like an AR-15......

 

[RustyShackelford]

Why the semi auto pistols dominate over DA revolvers......

In the modern era; 2010s, the semi auto pistol rounds have improved greatly. Misfires, jams, duds etc aren't as common as the older US ammunition lines.
This in turn as led to many more semi auto pistols being used or purchased than the standard J or K frame DA revolvers with 5/6/7 rounds.
It's also a size & weight issue. For what weights the same as a K frame .357magnum 6 shooter, you can buy a polymer/plastic pistol with 15-17 rounds. It's faster & more efficient to reload too.
In 2014, I don't go by the "6 for sure" mindset or "you don't need 16-18 rounds" crowd.
It's true that a well made .44magnum, .45LC or other big caliber wheel gun can defend you, you get a lot more from a semi auto pistol that costs $200-300.00 less.

DA/DAO revolvers still have a place in modern US gun related issues but there time as a main defense or duty sidearm is way over.

Rusty

 

[Sam1911]

1) They are too complicated, in that when they fail it is a serious failure, where when my Glocks fail there are many fewer parts and the parts are much cheaper and much easier to replace without special tools (in the field)

Well, you've always got the "6 for sure" ... unless you don't. When a revolver is broken, it's totally broken. There's no fixing it in the field generally. Fortunately, that's a one-in-a-million sort of situation as they are very, very reliable. Autos have about 37 different ways of getting fouled up that range from ammo problems to user-induced malfunctions, magazine problems, and on, and on. It is undeniable that auto pistols malfunction at rates FAR higher than revolver malfunctions -- probably on the order of 100:1 or more -- but those problems are sometimes easy to clear so you can attempt to continue shooting.

2) Revolvers always leak "hot gas" out the sides of the gun, unacceptable and very distracting for follow up shots

That sort of sounds like the kind of complaint someone would definitely have if they'd never shot a revolver before, but with some experience running one you'll discover that it's pretty impossible to even notice the "hot gas" without special high-speed cameras and lighting tricks.

If you do regularly shoot with high-speed stop-motion photographic equipment that you don't want picking up "hot gas" "leaking" out of your gun, then I would certainly recommend that you avoid revolvers.

As for it being "unacceptable" ... it's been pretty acceptable for about six hundred years (if my recollection of the history of revolving cylinder guns is correct) and is still acceptable today.

3) They are uncomfortable to grip (even the ones with soft rubber)

I'm not sure how this would hold true, considering that it is far easier to modify the stocks and whole hand-feel of a revolver than it is almost any auto.

4) They are too heavy and not well balanced (nose heavy)

Again...how can this be said universally? There are 14" barreled revolver, and ones with 1" barrels. Steel frame, scandium frame, titanium cylinders, etc., etc. They're going to balance lots of different ways. Don't like a nose-heavy balance? Pick a different revolver.

5) I understand that many people claim they are more accurate, however, the vast majority of the people that I observe at the range with revolvers are spraying bullets all over the target, worse than beginners with a service sized semi-automatic.

A well-tuned revolver is very accurate. So is a well-tuned semi. I don't think many people will claim that revolvers are MUCH more inherently accurate than autos, but some large hunting revolvers are pretty easy to get shooting amazingly well, especially with optics.

However, DA shooting can be a challenge to learn. It is a skill that must be studied and practiced. I'd agree that a total neophyte probably won't do quite as well with a DA wheelgun right off the bat. Or rather, will be lightly less BAD with an auto.

When the revolver fires, all I get is dirt blown around and no sense of doing anything pleasurable.

DIRT blowing around? WTH? Stand up. You shouldn't be lying on the floor. How else would dirt be blown around by your gun? I'll admit, I'm at a loss to understand this complaint.

 

[mikemyers]

.......... Practice well and a revolver will probably be plenty good enough in your moment of need.

I read your reply above, and got to thinking that maybe we need to define the "need" first, before anyone can reply to this thread. Which of the following are we using the gun for:

• fun (target shooting, etc.)
• competition
• self protection
• warfare

I probably left others out....

All I know about self protection is what I've read in magazines, read in forums, and been told by friends or family. The only "competition" I've participated in is a "turkey shoot". I've never been a soldier.

For some purposes, a good semi-auto seems like a far better choice to me, if for no other reason that it holds more rounds, and I think I could reload it in far less time than a revolver. For my purpose though, fun, I have all the time in the world, so that's not an issue.

 

[Ed4032]

When you get older, the slide on an automatic becomes difficult to rack. Revolvers will come back to you later in life.

 

[OrangePwrx9]

'Tis the way of the world. Anything "automatic" or even "semi-automatic" gets the nod. Whatever's not perceived as being "automatic" is headed for the dustbin.

I say that as a revolver guy who is old enough that it won't make any difference.

To be honest I mourn the very real demise of 5-speed manual transmissions more than I do the somewhat imaginary decline of revolvers. Can't buy a new F150 with stick shift anymore. What's the world coming to?

 

[OrangePwrx9]

When you get older, the slide on an automatic becomes difficult to rack. Revolvers will come back to you later in life.

Another truism! My K9 is probably my best shooting SA, yet racking that slide is a pain. Come to think of it, fighting to stuff the magazine isn't fun either. Nor is disassembling my tight match-grade DW 1911 which contains a spring waiting to fly across the basement.

Maybe there's a message here. SAs are for people who haven't yet tired of fighting with springs.

They will...eventually.......they will...

 

[Sam1911]

What's the need? Well, that's a good question. Of course my statement still stands: revolvers are still just as good today as they ever were, regardless of the need.

However, some folks have found that sometimes they'd like something a little better -- a little more optimal -- in one way or another.

Truth is, most of the most popular gun games folks play these days aren't terribly well suited for revolvers. You can compete with your weelgun in USPSA or IDPA but most folks don't seem to enjoy reloading that often.

The big question about defense uses and LEO use is that of capacity. Folks enjoy pontificating about how autos are "spray and pray" devices and revolver are for folks who take their time and place their shots. "Fast is fine but accuracy is final" and all that silly gushing.

The truth is that video footage, simulations training and testing, and the historic record all prove that 99% of us mortals don't have the super-human self-control and jedi-like presence of mind to coldly make one or two or six precise shots at the guys who just jumped us or opened fire. Lethal force encounters tend toward pulling the trigger without cognition of number of shots fired, until there either isn't a target or something induces the shooter to cease fire. Under fairly common conditions, a 6-shot revolver simply means running dry (and going "clicky-click-click-click-click") sooner rather than (a little) later.

Taking stock of the probabilities, most folks will opt for "later."

 

[wrdwrght]

Out of fashion? Then who is keeping the prices up on the secondary market?

 

[The Narrator]

I shot both. Not super heavy since I don't own either for myself, but enough to win a few beer off one guy whose mouth was smaller than his group.

1) They are too complicated, in that when they fail it is a serious failure, where when my Glocks fail there are many fewer parts and the parts are much cheaper and much easier to replace without special tools (in the field)

Revolvers hide their complexity. I know a guy who has had the same revolver for years and has never even had the barrel off. With glocks people take the barrel off every time they shoot.

2) Revolvers always leak "hot gas" out the sides of the gun, unacceptable and very distracting for follow up shots

That's training aid, helps you use a proper grip. It's like how slide of a glock whacks thumb if you're dumb.

3) They are uncomfortable to grip (even the ones with soft rubber)

Revolver grip is designed only for ergognomics since it doesn't need to take magazine up bottom. Gives more natural shape, easy to squeeze like a bird neck.

4) They are too heavy and not well balanced (nose heavy)

Grab a plastic or scandalum snub and say again.

5) I understand that many people claim they are more accurate, however, the vast majority of the people that I observe at the range with revolvers are spraying bullets all over the target, worse than beginners with a service sized semi-automatic.

Everybody at the range sucks. Except that guy who brings a full size revolver and doesn't even bother with the pistol range, shooting 2" at the 100 yard rifle range. He is just slow. And a snob, probably. I have never talked to him actually but that just seems like rubbing peoples nose in it.

 

[jim243]

In one word "CAPACITY". Even a 100 year old 1911 carries more ammo then the revolvers of those days. And two more shots is two more chances to stay alive.

Jim

 

[TestPilot]

1 - complication - for most people, and me in particular for many years, the problem I had was cleaning. While cleaning a revolver is quite simple, it took me forever to feel comfortable in doing it with a semi-auto. As to shooting, with a revolver, you just pick it up and pull the trigger. Racking the slide, remembering to unlock the gun,

That is simply cherry picking motions needed.

Racking is part of the loading motion, not shooting motion. If you include racking the slide to make self-loaders sound more complicated, then you should also include putting rounds in 6 separate cyliners and closing the slide in revolver too, since that is what self-loader achieves with inserting a magazine and racking the slide.

Also, self-loaders can be had without any thumb levers to be flipped up or down to make it fire.

Again, cherry picking.

Your "feel" of self-loaders being more complicated to clean is just that: YOUR "feel." Nothing more.

and dealing with casings that didn't eject properly was FAR more complicated.

Probability of case not properly ejected is far less than probability of needing more than 6 in a gun fight.

3 - Uncomfortable to grip - While my hand feels just as comfortable with one as the other, I've never had the revolver cutting my hand as it cycled, which used to happen to me with semi-automatics before I learned how to hold the gun to avoid it.... For years, I used the soft rubber grips, but then switched back to the original wood. It just felt "more comfortable" in my hands, but that's just me..... Maybe I'll try soft rubber again if I can find a pair that fits my hands better.

A lot of revolvers force the user to grip with the index finger coming in front of the middle finger and pulling the trigger toward the middle finger.

No human hand is built that way unless they got a birth defect.

Most self-loaders have trigger above the middle finger.

Due to the cyliner placement, the trigger must be far below the web of hand lcation, so it nearly always force a wrist cranked downward grip, which is not confortable nor particularly helpful for many.

 

[HRnightmare]

I agree that revolvers are not cool anymore because tactial ninja's want the newest with the biggest "hi capacity tactical ninja clips, that hold the most tactical rounds tactically".

But honestly, It is like saying why is...carburated no longer cool? Well because fuel injected runs as well if not better with less work and better. (may be a bad example, I am not mechanically inclined...it is just the best fit example I could think of).

Revolvers do still have a strong following but I would argue that it is mostly with guys who grew up with them. Kind of like most 16 yr olds would rather have the new Camaro or Mustang rather than a 1969 version.

I like revolvers enough but I will admit I only own 2. One in .357MAG and one in .22LR/MAG. They were both bought with very specific purposes. I don't know that I would buy a revolver just because... (oh god, maybe I am becoming a tactical ninja! haha)

 

[HRnightmare]

Also...many revolvers are priced WAY over what you can get a semi auto for!

I guess they produce less revolvers so the price is higher... It almost seems like you are paying "more for less"

 

[Sam1911]

A lot of revolvers force the user to grip with the index finger coming in front of the middle finger and pulling the trigger toward the middle finger.

No human hand is built that way unless they got a birth defect.

Most self-loaders have trigger above the middle finger.

To be fair, though, this isn't an ACTUAL problem. It sounds bad and non-ergonomic, but it isn't a real issue for any human with normal hands.

Kind of like the "hot gas leaking" issue -- a good-sounding theoretical problem that fails to produce an actual hindrance of any sort to shooting the gun.

 

[Bullnettles]

Maybe the video games & action movies are influencing the younger generation in choosing less accurate guns with no soul? And half a box of ammo in every mag.

(Spray & Pray beats Accuracy every time, right?)

But I don't do video games & the latest movies much, so I remain pretty much unenlightened.

rc
__________________

RC, I'm a young adult who has played many an hour of video games in the past, and can say quite a few people pick a revolver because it almost always has more power than the M9 (just an example, there's still the DE, etc, but they have drawbacks, as well). Some like to spray and prey, but some get pretty good with the wheel-gun, and some games even have speed-loaders. It's pretty fun.

OP, my buddy and I were discussing this yesterday in the police. We frequent a restaurant that many officers eat at in Houston for lunch, and I've seen more revolvers than Glocks lately. There are a few that pack 1911's, a few Sigs, but not too many Glocks. This is all within the last year of eating there, and I don't see many police on a daily basis outside of their car elsewhere, so take it with a grain of salt. There are still revolver lovers among us, and my 28 yo friend is looking to get a 357 soon. I think semi-autos ARE just the cool thing to have, then once people get into shooting more, they really find out what works for them.

 

[The Narrator]

Probability of case not properly ejected is far less than probability of needing more than 6 in a gun fight.

That can't possibly be true. I have personally had slides fight to hold onto cases. I have never needed 6 or more rounds in a gun fight. I suspect nearly everyone who has shot both types of gun can say the same.

The probability of a case not properly ejected is about 100% if you shoot long enough, the probability of needing more than 6 shots in a gun fight must be close to 0.00001%. After all, most people never even get into a gun fight, and those that do rarely even fire, and those that do rarely fire more than three times. I'm quoting something I read on that last part, I haven't personally watched every gun fight.