sonier
Member
Im 19 and my open carry is a colt python, my concealed carry gift to myself when i reach 21 is going to be a single action ruger 357 magnum vaquero
Young people laugh at revolvers?
- Thread starter dogngun
- Start date
- Status
pacerdude
Member
I am only 21, but am neither brave nor stupid enough to laugh at someone for their choice of a carry weapon be it a revolver or a semi-auto.
And for the record I dont own a revolver yet, but I want one. Right now I only have one decent self defense pistol, a S&W M&P 40.
And for the record I dont own a revolver yet, but I want one. Right now I only have one decent self defense pistol, a S&W M&P 40.
I enjoy revolvers, for a few years my only gun, for carry or range, was a 4" S&W Model 65. It was small enough, light enough, and slim enough to carry comfortably IWB with the proper belt and holster, and I shot it well because it was all that I trained with.
I now carry a Glock 17. It holds 3x the amount of ammunition, fires with less recoil, weighs less, and was easy to find the sighting system that I wanted. Everything that I can do with the revolver I can do more times before reloading. What really made me switch was shooting at a 3D range, against targets that move while I was moving. 6 rounds goes very quickly, and sometimes just isn't enough.
For recreational shooting, it doesn't matter. For fighting, revolvers just don't compare to double stack auto pistols. Shooters who do well with a revolver would only do better with a semi automatic...
I now carry a Glock 17. It holds 3x the amount of ammunition, fires with less recoil, weighs less, and was easy to find the sighting system that I wanted. Everything that I can do with the revolver I can do more times before reloading. What really made me switch was shooting at a 3D range, against targets that move while I was moving. 6 rounds goes very quickly, and sometimes just isn't enough.
For recreational shooting, it doesn't matter. For fighting, revolvers just don't compare to double stack auto pistols. Shooters who do well with a revolver would only do better with a semi automatic...
minutemen1776
Member
Sniper X, I stand by that statement, but I don't think we really disagree. I'm not trying to say that it's easy to see how someone would decide that a semiauto is a superior platform when compared to a revolver. I'm only saying it's easy to see how a buyer would see the benefits of a semiauto and buy one based on that observation. Revolvers have some benefits as well, but I don't always think they're as readily apparent to new gun purchasers. Frankly, I can't fault anyone for selecting one or the other, but to me it's easier to see how someone would opt for newer tech over an older design.
Publius1688
Member
I think this is a myth. When I get comments on my wheelguns at the range from younger fellows, they are always positive.
Hawk
Member
Interesting that this would turn up in "general handguns".
In the revolver forum there lives a thread along the lines of "us older guys prefer revolvers" which is sporadically but inevitably necromanced every so often:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=451404&highlight=older
Having willingly subjected myself to the numerous pages of the above thread I believe I can offer the folowing conjectures:
1. If you prefer revolvers and are "older" you have no specific age bracket to claim. Similarly, young folks will resist the stereotyping - there will be no shortage of posters advising that they're 21 and love wheelguns. You will, however, be in the minority and THR and the sister forum may be relied upon to offer up some confirmation bias to smooth your equanimity.
Revolver folks seem to have something of a persecution complex which baffles me but they do tend to rush to one another's aid which is comforting.
2. I've never noticed any particular disdain for revolvers at CHL classes with the noticeable exception of Texas which (at least used to) restrict those that qualified with revolvers to stick with them - your permit wasn't valid for semi-autos. Few remember the compromises that were made to get "shall issue" through and are understandably puzzled by the policy. It does, however, encourage folks to test with semi-autos which will allow the carry of either. I've been gone for a spell so hopefully that mess has been cleared up but I really don't know.
3. The revolver "persecution complex" at least insofar as internet fora are concerned seems reinforced by the prevailing wisdom that revolvers have gradually gathered more suckage about themselves with the passage of time.
Semi-autos, apart from swartz-safety afflicted items and certain other notable exceptions, are generally accepted to be getting better over time.
The inevitable conclusion is that revolvers will die out. At least this would be the case if the buying public were reflective of forum posters. Fortunately it isn't - nobody much cares about MIM or locks and revolver sales have been on a general uptick since 2003 to the immense and undisguised chagrin of forumites everywhere.
I humbly submit that one reason why noobs gravitate to semis is that anyone buying a new semi can register and make his or her first post about his brand spanking new SIG, HK or whatheheckever to a background of backslapping and high fives.
Try the same stunt with a revolver and you'll get an unsolicited and unwelcome series of lectures about the "old days", "hand fitting", locks and temporally challenged assertions about HUD and the Clinton administration.
Or, not to put too fine a point on it: new revolver purchases are, for the most part, punished severely on internet fora.
One can enter the semi-auto forum without being beaten about the head the shoulders that they need a pre-war (unspecific war - might be the Spanish-American for all I know) example to not get an example that will spontaneously lock-up, explode or insult their boss's wife at the company party.
Anybody surprised by the results needs to recalibrate their surprise-o-meter.
In the revolver forum there lives a thread along the lines of "us older guys prefer revolvers" which is sporadically but inevitably necromanced every so often:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=451404&highlight=older
Having willingly subjected myself to the numerous pages of the above thread I believe I can offer the folowing conjectures:
1. If you prefer revolvers and are "older" you have no specific age bracket to claim. Similarly, young folks will resist the stereotyping - there will be no shortage of posters advising that they're 21 and love wheelguns. You will, however, be in the minority and THR and the sister forum may be relied upon to offer up some confirmation bias to smooth your equanimity.
Revolver folks seem to have something of a persecution complex which baffles me but they do tend to rush to one another's aid which is comforting.
2. I've never noticed any particular disdain for revolvers at CHL classes with the noticeable exception of Texas which (at least used to) restrict those that qualified with revolvers to stick with them - your permit wasn't valid for semi-autos. Few remember the compromises that were made to get "shall issue" through and are understandably puzzled by the policy. It does, however, encourage folks to test with semi-autos which will allow the carry of either. I've been gone for a spell so hopefully that mess has been cleared up but I really don't know.
3. The revolver "persecution complex" at least insofar as internet fora are concerned seems reinforced by the prevailing wisdom that revolvers have gradually gathered more suckage about themselves with the passage of time.
Semi-autos, apart from swartz-safety afflicted items and certain other notable exceptions, are generally accepted to be getting better over time.
The inevitable conclusion is that revolvers will die out. At least this would be the case if the buying public were reflective of forum posters. Fortunately it isn't - nobody much cares about MIM or locks and revolver sales have been on a general uptick since 2003 to the immense and undisguised chagrin of forumites everywhere.
I humbly submit that one reason why noobs gravitate to semis is that anyone buying a new semi can register and make his or her first post about his brand spanking new SIG, HK or whatheheckever to a background of backslapping and high fives.
Try the same stunt with a revolver and you'll get an unsolicited and unwelcome series of lectures about the "old days", "hand fitting", locks and temporally challenged assertions about HUD and the Clinton administration.
Or, not to put too fine a point on it: new revolver purchases are, for the most part, punished severely on internet fora.
One can enter the semi-auto forum without being beaten about the head the shoulders that they need a pre-war (unspecific war - might be the Spanish-American for all I know) example to not get an example that will spontaneously lock-up, explode or insult their boss's wife at the company party.
Anybody surprised by the results needs to recalibrate their surprise-o-meter.
angel1216
Member
my ruger SP101 loaded with speer gold dot short barrel .357 mag 135gr JHP is nothing to laugh about! oh by the way i'm in my 30's.
bwsmith2850
Member
That's how I feel about mine too. Nothing fits or balances in my hand better than a K frame Smith. I guess Bill Jordan knew what he was doing when he lobbied S&W for the .357 in a K frame.
They do have a higher tolerance for crud than the Berettas. (I was told my 96G was 'sensitive' be nice to it. They were not amused when I asked for a revolver, 1911 or a Glock, anything not sensitive) Entry team Shield men are learning to like them too. You can hang a light on them, one finger failure to fire drills, not prone to 'limp wristing,' don't hang up on the shield when cycling. A bit of a pain to reload one handed but what isn't?
Last edited:
KevininPa
Member
I just traded.....
.....a CZ75 Compact for a 7615 Patrol rifle. When I bought the Compact, I thought it would be my main pistol for everything. When I took it shooting, I just didn't cotton up to it. The only semi I take to is my Sig 232sl. It just points the same as my revolvers. I just prefer revolvers. And it is my summer carry due to its slimness(?). Otherwise I prefer revolvers. I have a Taurus 605 for now, but it is soon to be upgraded to a Ruger SP101. Also have a S&W 686. The CZ became a locker queen and didn't see much use. This Remington will have a lot more use for me, camp gun etc.
.....a CZ75 Compact for a 7615 Patrol rifle. When I bought the Compact, I thought it would be my main pistol for everything. When I took it shooting, I just didn't cotton up to it. The only semi I take to is my Sig 232sl. It just points the same as my revolvers. I just prefer revolvers. And it is my summer carry due to its slimness(?). Otherwise I prefer revolvers. I have a Taurus 605 for now, but it is soon to be upgraded to a Ruger SP101. Also have a S&W 686. The CZ became a locker queen and didn't see much use. This Remington will have a lot more use for me, camp gun etc.
Cocked & Locked
Member
I don't feel inadequate carrying my .357 magnum S&W 
I think it really needs to be looked at objectively. There is definitely an aesthetic aspect, personally I think autos are better looking, and as a 25 year old, that may have a lot to do with all the guns used in movies/tv carried by the "cool" guys being semis. Revolvers are always depicted as being the gun for the private dick or the "old" guy. Think Danny Glover's revolver in Lethal Weapon vs Mel Gibson's Beretta.
However, there are tradeoffs. I will admit that a good semi is generally as reliable as a revolver. Two of my three shooting buddies have started with a Sig 229 and a Glock 19. They both got LCPs afterward. My other buddy and I both got Taurii, myself a PT92, my buddy one of the subcompact autos. I'm the only one that's had any reliability issues, and they were mag and cleaning related, so user error.
I, however, still feel that a revolver is the one weapon I can count on, intellectually, to work the highest percentage of the time. Based on the following points:
Fewest parts to fail - no magazines is the biggest point here. Any auto guy will tell you to always carry a spare mag. Yes, you should always carry a reload for a revolver, but it's not because the bullets in your chamber are going to fail.
Failure solutions - as simple as tap-rack-bang, then mag swap if that doesn't work vs pull trigger agian
No moving slide - the old argument that you can fire a revolver out of a pocket or pressed up against a BG 100% of the time
Manual of arms - no safeties, loaded or unloaded chambers, mag in or out, less variables. The gun is always loaded, and once confirmed, the gun will fire when you pull the trigger.
Autos have the advantages of more capacity, a slimmer profile, and more safeties, if you're into that kind of thing. You can argue the possibility of a better out of the box trigger, but I see a trigger as a solveable problem, and I'm sure there are a lot of revolvers with fantastic triggers, as well as a lot of autos with ****ty triggers.
Each platform has it's advantages. I love autos, but revolvers seem more practical to me in a life-and-death situation. 5/6 for sure vs potentially double, triple, or quadruple that maybe.
Not to disparage autos, or say revolvers are infallible, but revolvers will ALWAYS have a place, in my mind. Look at 642 or LCR sales.
However, there are tradeoffs. I will admit that a good semi is generally as reliable as a revolver. Two of my three shooting buddies have started with a Sig 229 and a Glock 19. They both got LCPs afterward. My other buddy and I both got Taurii, myself a PT92, my buddy one of the subcompact autos. I'm the only one that's had any reliability issues, and they were mag and cleaning related, so user error.
I, however, still feel that a revolver is the one weapon I can count on, intellectually, to work the highest percentage of the time. Based on the following points:
Fewest parts to fail - no magazines is the biggest point here. Any auto guy will tell you to always carry a spare mag. Yes, you should always carry a reload for a revolver, but it's not because the bullets in your chamber are going to fail.
Failure solutions - as simple as tap-rack-bang, then mag swap if that doesn't work vs pull trigger agian
No moving slide - the old argument that you can fire a revolver out of a pocket or pressed up against a BG 100% of the time
Manual of arms - no safeties, loaded or unloaded chambers, mag in or out, less variables. The gun is always loaded, and once confirmed, the gun will fire when you pull the trigger.
Autos have the advantages of more capacity, a slimmer profile, and more safeties, if you're into that kind of thing. You can argue the possibility of a better out of the box trigger, but I see a trigger as a solveable problem, and I'm sure there are a lot of revolvers with fantastic triggers, as well as a lot of autos with ****ty triggers.
Each platform has it's advantages. I love autos, but revolvers seem more practical to me in a life-and-death situation. 5/6 for sure vs potentially double, triple, or quadruple that maybe.
Not to disparage autos, or say revolvers are infallible, but revolvers will ALWAYS have a place, in my mind. Look at 642 or LCR sales.
Lucky Derby
Member
For a good number of years I was the chief of security in a small casino. I had a staff of up to 12 armed officers working for me at any given time. The officers owned and carried their own sidearms. I had to approve the weapon they carried. Being a "gun guy" my main stipulation was a "firearm of quality manufacture" I determined what was "quality."
In any event I had one officer who was a retired Federal LEO. He carried a 4" K frame, as it was what he had carried for almost 40 years prior to coming to my employ. He could shoot it VERY well.
Most of my officers were younger men who all carried an auto of some flavor and gave him a hard time about his "wheelgun".
I had carried a Sig P220 most of my career and had switched to a Springfield XD shortly before I hired the revolver guy.
Well after a few weeks of listening to it, I showed up for work with a 4" S&W M25-5 .45 Colt strapped to my side. Would have been sooner but it took a bit to find a decent N frame duty holster. Funny all the revolver bashing stopped. I carried that gun for 2 more years until I left that job. I got more possitive comments from the general public about my wheelgun in 2 years than I did about the autos in the 15 years I carried them.
In any event I had one officer who was a retired Federal LEO. He carried a 4" K frame, as it was what he had carried for almost 40 years prior to coming to my employ. He could shoot it VERY well.
Most of my officers were younger men who all carried an auto of some flavor and gave him a hard time about his "wheelgun".
I had carried a Sig P220 most of my career and had switched to a Springfield XD shortly before I hired the revolver guy.
Well after a few weeks of listening to it, I showed up for work with a 4" S&W M25-5 .45 Colt strapped to my side. Would have been sooner but it took a bit to find a decent N frame duty holster. Funny all the revolver bashing stopped. I carried that gun for 2 more years until I left that job. I got more possitive comments from the general public about my wheelgun in 2 years than I did about the autos in the 15 years I carried them.
Guncollector1982
Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2010
- Messages
- 80
Im in my late 20s i dont own a semi auto handgun only one that interest me is the 1911. However i do have a older ruger superblackhawk 44 mag, a Mod 10 S&W 38 special, a Cimmaron model P 45 LC and a Uberti colt walker. I prefer the revolvers over handguns cause i like the generally more powerful cartridges (id take a 38 spl over a 9MM anyday) and they just have more class from my view. Someday i may buy a 1911 but thats it.
minutemen1776
Member
You might want to check out the ballistics tables on those two cartridges.
speaksoftly
Member
I literally almost peed my pants at this one.
To Cocked and Locked, very nice. I'd feel safer with that than my PF-9
BADUNAME37
Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
- Messages
- 4,434
A lot of people don't realize that the 1911 was made in 1911 - that is 100 years ago!
When you think of the "technology" back then, it was remarkable for them to have made such a weapon that still lives on today!
When you think of the "technology" back then, it was remarkable for them to have made such a weapon that still lives on today!
wojownik
Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
- Messages
- 2,086
When I was first getting into handguns (in my early 30's - late bloomer, I suppose), there was definitely a tangible/intangible "social pressure" or bias towards semiautos over revolvers. Definitely from vendors (both young and old). Even when I first participated in IDPA, revolvers were definitely looked down upon by the organizers and participants alike (at the NRA range, of all places).
I quickly broke free of those prejudices and found great joy in both semiautos and revolvers. In fact, for quite a while I went completely "retro" with a Single Action Army as my bedside home defense gun.
One of the things I get a chuckle about are a few of my friends who turned up their noses at my (re)discovery of revolvers, due to their limited capacity. A few years later, one friend now carries a Sig 238 (5+1 rounds), another just picked up a ruger LCP he revels over (6 rounds). Uh, what was that about wheelguns again?
I quickly broke free of those prejudices and found great joy in both semiautos and revolvers. In fact, for quite a while I went completely "retro" with a Single Action Army as my bedside home defense gun.
One of the things I get a chuckle about are a few of my friends who turned up their noses at my (re)discovery of revolvers, due to their limited capacity. A few years later, one friend now carries a Sig 238 (5+1 rounds), another just picked up a ruger LCP he revels over (6 rounds). Uh, what was that about wheelguns again?
03Shadowbob
Member
I am 38, went through the Academy in 1991. At that time most everyone was qualifying with Glocks or Sigs. I qualified with a S&W Model 65 because that is what my agency gave me. I later qualified with my 1911. I carried my 1911 as primary and a Taurus Model 85 as BUG. There are more advantages for LEOs to carry semiautos vs a revolver.
I love all guns, I really do. However the newer polymer guns of today just don't work for me. I've had Glocks, HKs, Tauri, etc but always got rid of them for "steel" and wood. I now carry a P238, a Kimber Pro Tactical Compact or 642. None high capcaity but I got a good feeling that my 5, 7 or 8 shots will find the X more often than a BG's 17 round Glock will.
I love all guns, I really do. However the newer polymer guns of today just don't work for me. I've had Glocks, HKs, Tauri, etc but always got rid of them for "steel" and wood. I now carry a P238, a Kimber Pro Tactical Compact or 642. None high capcaity but I got a good feeling that my 5, 7 or 8 shots will find the X more often than a BG's 17 round Glock will.
Guillermo
member
Actually I was thinking that I might owe Nushif an apology. I was a little aggressive when he was just trying to make a point.
jad0110
Member
Same here. Most folks are indifferent, but those who have commented were either positive or genuinely curious. I've even managed to convert a few along the way to loving/owning both platforms, including a self described Glock addict who was plesantly surprised at how well he shot my 4" S&W Model 15.
When I go to a range, I notice most people are shooting semi-auto. Guy walks up, takes a station, pulls out a Glock, nobody will look or say anything. I shoot a few full-house rounds from the 686, it's common for almost everybody to stop and look at what I'm shooting. "Damn nice gun!" "What you shooting? 357?" etc. Nobody laughs at a 686.
I think the fact that I was and still am biased toward revolvers (including aesthetic considerations) and had been biased against polymer-framed pistols, yet I still went with a polymer-framed semiautomatic for home defense qualifies as being objective.
Not quite, but a good semiauto will come close enough. They can be tougher in some ways, too, I believe. Not that I ever expect to drop my gun, but hypothetically I'd feel a lot more anxious after dropping a revolver onto a hard surface than a semiauto. If this is unwarranted, then let me know, but it just seems as though so much more can go wrong on a revolver in such an incident.
It would be difficult if the bad guy has a hand on the cylinder, though.
The only really meaningful reason that I personally would prefer a semiauto for certain situations is capacity. For the vast majority of scenarios in which a pistol would come in handy, revolvers should have enough (often more than enough) capacity without having to reload. However, when faced with a higher-than-normal probability of having to stop an attacker who is specifically determined to kill you, capacity becomes a more significant factor.
True, although some folks may shoot better with lighter triggers (or need a lighter trigger to shoot at all if they're on the weak side), and a DA revolver's trigger can only be made so light. There are ways around this, as discussed in a couple of recent threads in the Autoloaders forum (ironically), but there are tradeoffs involved.
Yep, for me the choice depends on threat analysis and how that relates to capacity.
Absolutely...well, at least while a system using explosively-propelled kinetic energy projectiles loaded via metallic cartridges is relevant, and I don't foresee that changing anytime soon.
Different technologies advance at different rates during different eras, which is dependent on both scientific advances (unpredictable in occurrence) and in some cases, such as personal firearms, the consumer market. From my point of view, human beings have always been clever at making tools--just as clever as they are now--and there is no need to disparage their level of knowledge of one type of technology in the past based on the less advanced (or nonexistent) state of other technologies at the time. It could be said that the only remarkable thing here is that so few advances and improvements have been made to personal firearms in nearly 100 years, which usually means that we've once again run into limits based on nature and our understanding of physics.
I'm a young guy and I like revolvers. Their internal complexity is fascinating, and they look really beautiful. With a few speed loaders I believe they can hold their own in a gunfight against a similarly sized automatic, especially since most gunfights are not drawn out affairs requiring Hollywood amounts of ammo to end.
One thing I don't buy into is they revolvers are ultra reliable compared to automatics. I have experienced my fair share of revolver malfunctions.
One thing I don't buy into is they revolvers are ultra reliable compared to automatics. I have experienced my fair share of revolver malfunctions.
Guillermo
member
Me too
A HORRIBLE Taurus, a Security Six and a Smith 19 (although that broken spring got me a REALLY good deal on it)
In the long run I have had more problems with autos though. (Combat Commander, HiPower, Ruger Mk1, Smith 41 just to name a few)
That said, if I was a cop or even a mall ninja I would carry a hi cap auto. After all, it would be my job to go TOWARDS trouble.
Being a civilian my job is to protect myself and those around me until we can escape or the cops show up. That is a job that most probably requires less capacity. So my D-Frame is, hopefully, more than what I will ever need.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked