Why I prefer revolvers...

TravisB · Apr 26, 2009

I have only shot three semi-automatic firearms so far this year. But all three had at least one cycling failure. All three also had valid reasons for the failures (in order: crappy bulk ammo, gun was brand new and being broken in, gun was an AR-7). Still, I've never had any revolver stop performing and need to be fixed. Even if a defective cartridge fails to fire, the solution is just to pull the trigger again.

sidheshooter · Apr 26, 2009

Interesting. If Glock is recalling 2,700 magazines, then there's the first problem.

Of course, 13 shots and no relief is the second obvious problem; I too would really like to know how many hits–as well as what load–on that one.

No slam on Glocks; they've earned their market share. I vote for carrying what you want (if civvy); I've personally seen a friend's GP-100 Ruger lock up at a club tactical shoot (I suppose there is a first time for everything) and one of our local (now ex) cops recently shot a guy in the head with his glock .40 and department issue ammo, and the guy ran away and lived to file suit and make for a lot of (deserved, it was not the cleanest shoot) bad publicity for the department.

There just aren't any absolutes, save for possibly the constant need for more training, whomever you might be...

psyopspec · Apr 26, 2009

If an extractor breaks or whatever, an auto is just as screwed as a revolver...

Negatory. I've continued shooting an auto with a broken extractor before. It took me 2-3 seconds to clear the round from the lip where the breech face meets the barrel. But I was still shooting.

makarovnik · Apr 27, 2009

First off the name colon makes my butt pucker. Revolvers are great but they can seize up also.

Anonymous Coward · Apr 27, 2009

Thirteen shots? That officer didn't need a revolver, he needed a rifle.

Kleanbore · Apr 27, 2009

I have never understood this argument [(when revolvers fail, they often do so catastrophically. There is no rapid remedial action to unbind one in the heat of a shootout)] at all. When a semi fails, it might be for any number of reasons, if a revolver fails, it broke.

Revolver=part breaks, out of action
Auto=Fail to Load, fail to eject, jam, stovepipe... AND parts failure.
If an extractor breaks or whatever, an auto is just as screwed as a revolver...

There is also the possibility of a bullet jumping crimp and tying up a revolver.

Vern Humphrey · Apr 27, 2009

Plus things like crud under the extractor star, a popped primer, or a spent case falling back into the chamber under the ejector star.

Zerodefect · Apr 27, 2009

Tap, rack, bang..............but if your one target isn't dead after 13 rounds, I'd have a hard time blameing the gun for anything. Thats still 2 or more revolvers!

Sounds like BS, agency with a dead/injured cop excuse!

Keep in mind a Police Department is allways going to blame their equipment. Thats the only way they can get new stuff. I don't put much weight this incident.

Regardless I'm buying some new mags for my .40S&W Glocks soon, just to be safe.

Why are there so many people scared to carry with one in the pipe here? You still have to pull the trigger! What kind of decent holster deosn't cover the trigger.

The Glock, 1911 fanboys have their place. Usually they're right on.

If someones advice was: "Glocks jam too much." but then they couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, I'm not about to put much weight on their opinion.

13 rounds.....sheesh

REAPER4206969 · Apr 27, 2009

Tap, rack, bang

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfyULpEhmug

mordechaianiliewicz · Apr 27, 2009

I like revolvers.... on the range. I like shooting revolvers for fun. I understand large magnum revolvers for protection in the woods against predators, and for handgun hunting.

But, in a fight against people, I would rather have an automatic (preferably for myself, though your mileage may vary, a CZ-75, Ruger P series, Beretta 92FS, etc., or a plastic striker fired pistol).

Here is the deal. revolvers do tend to fail at a lot lower of a rate than autos. True.... despite films we can find showing failure for either. But, if you test your combat pistol, you should have figured out how reliable it is before you place it on your hip.

On top of that, I'd rather have 15-17 rounds and not need but one, than need 7 or 9 rounds, and have shot through the whole cylinder. If I thoroughly tested my carry gun, I can count on those 15-17 rounds to be there.

wuchak · Apr 27, 2009

Reaper4206969 said:
Quote:
Why I prefer revolvers...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbkoutGwA78

Actually that's a good example of why you shouldn't play gunsmith without knowing what you are doing.

Updated post
http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog.html

Original post
http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/03e46634cd383557e8a04092c596a77b-514.html

thorazine · Apr 27, 2009

However, IMO, for civvies, there is no better weapon than a good old-fashioned .357 Magnum revolver, and a .44 Special revolver rates a close second.

Good point.

So we might as well ban all hand guns capable of accepting a high capacity feeding device.

Do us civvies even need AR/AK'S?

A lever rifle should be more the sufficient.

mgregg85 · Apr 27, 2009

Vern Humphrey · Apr 27, 2009

I've said again and again, hang around this fourm long enough and you'll have an impressive list of revolver failures.

BhmBill · Apr 27, 2009

Guns are machines. Machines break. No machine is immune to failure. Sooner or later, all machines fail in one way or another.

I've had alot more semi-auto failures than revolver failures (none actually), so I prefer to carry a revolver, just personal preference until I can find a decent semi-auto.

Anonymous Coward · May 7, 2009

When a revolver jam, it's because of parts breakage. Any gun can break.

Autoloaders can and do jam during normal use (some more than others, of course).

Travis Bickle · May 7, 2009

I've had alot more semi-auto failures than revolver failures (none actually), so I prefer to carry a revolver, just personal preference until I can find a decent semi-auto.

Take a look at the Ruger P Series. They're like the Kalashnikov of automatic pistols. Very reliable. The only thing that sucks about them is that they're bulky and difficult to conceal, but since you're an OCer, that's of no consequence.

Vern Humphrey · May 7, 2009

When a revolver jam, it's because of parts breakage. Any gun can break.

Revolvers can have stoppages because of dirt -- such as unburned powder granules undee the ejector star -- bullets jumping crimp under recoil, and primers popping out.

As John Farnham points out, the number one cause of stoppages in actual fighting for both revolvers and automatics is running out of ammunition. In that arena, my Kimber Classic .45 with an 8-round magazine plus one up the spout for a total of 9 rounds has it all over my Colt M357 with only 6 rounds.

Feanaro · May 7, 2009

Anonymous Coward said:
When a revolver jam, it's because of parts breakage.

As pointed out, revolvers can be stopped via other means. Particulate matter has been pointed out but dumb is another source of stoppages. In two seperate IDPA matches, I've made a revolver FTF for half a cylinder or so. Rubbing my thumb on the hammer. Even revolvers aren't idiot proof.

I've also dumped every round of a speedloader on the ground, forcing me to scrounge for the two rounds I needed to complete the stage. Gotten rounds stuck under the star. If you want something to go wrong, hand it to me.

HippieMagic · May 7, 2009

I always wondered if an auto fails more often just for the simple fact that we shoot them more between breaks... I mean I understand that a revolver is somewhat simple by design but when you think about it we are usually shooting 3x the rounds through an auto before we take a break... seems like a lot more residue, chances to fail, and opportunities to do something stupid to me.

Vern Humphrey · May 7, 2009

I always wondered if an auto fails more often just for the simple fact that we shoot them more between breaks

There's probably a lot to that. I note that most people who claim revolvers are more reliable don't have much idea of how revolvers can fail, which would lead me to believe they don't shoot them all that much.

Let me give an example -- I have had a Ruger Blackhawk fail on me. Under recoil, the base pin came out. That's a very common cause of a stoppage in a single action revolver, but many people here would claim single actions can't fail.

easyg · May 7, 2009

I'm certainly not arguing that revolvers are better than autoloaders, but I do think that revolvers are more reliable.

It's a fact that most handgun failures occur due to failure-to-feed and/or failure-to-eject, both of which are autoloader problems only.

And with autoloaders there are three parts to the reliability equation:
Gun
Magazine
Bullet

With an revolver there are only two parts to the reliability equation:
Gun
Bullet

I'm not about to get rid of my Glock, but I do practice stoppage drills because I know that it could let me down on any given shot.

When I was a soldier my M16A2 was very reliable.
But every so often it still had a FTF or a FTE malfunction (almost always due to crappy ammo or a bad magazine).

No matter how you slice it, revolvers are more reliable.

Anonymous Coward · May 7, 2009

Okay, let me revise my statement. Revolvers fail due to parts breakage, as well as poor cleaning and ammunition failure. So do semi-automatics.

My revolver has never failed to feed, failed to extract or failed to eject.

Why I prefer revolvers...

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Moderator

Member

member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads