Revolver; Antique, or viable 21st Century weapon!?

[ldp4570]

I'm not going to set this up as a poll, or as a bashing contest over whats better revolver or auto, this is simply a discussion, as we have some very knowledgeable minds here that have been somewhat dormant and need to refreash themselves with an open discussion about revolvers. Also please refrain from getting into a bashing contest over the "Hillary Hole"vs Older S&W. Also feel free to chat up about all the other quality revolvers out there, Colt's, Ruger's, and such.

OK, So lets hear it!!!!

 

[348]

I say they're viable, even if its only as a backup. I've never had to drop the mag for a feed issue, or clear a stove pipe on a wheel gun.

 

[Glock 'em down]

Revolvers and autos both have their strong points as well as weaknesses. They both serve different roles.

In a heightened state of awareness (cops and soldiers on duty) a hi-cap bottom feeder will always prevail.

If you are a "mind your own business" kind of person who stays away from questionable places, a short barrelled J frame revolver should be all the firepower you will ever need.

A sharp mind is the best weapon bar none!


Well...that and a good scattergun.

 

[_CY_]

Revolvers in two areas are clearly superior to semi-auto pistols.

one obvious area is light weight CCW. reliably fires all different types of defensive ammo without fuss. my 340PD w/CT weights 13.8 oz loaded with +P defensive ammo. 12oz unloaded

those few oz may not seem all that important, but for CCW all day long ... those few oz shaved makes all the difference. at least for me.

sure there are plastic auto pistols that approach those weights. but every small auto pistol I've ever had has jammed. that's with ball ammo... NO way I'm trusting a small auto pistol with defensive ammo. vs I've NEVER had a FTF with my 340PD or 337PD.

second area is large caliber handguns.... a .44 magnum revolver is large... but compare that to .44 caliber semi-auto desert eagle. starts making that .44 magnum revolver look downright compact.

semi-auto pistols have advantage in pure firepower due to large clips and ability to reload quicker. certain auto pistol like 1911 are much easier to shoot accurately. at least for me.

 

[Glocktogo]

In limited roles the revolver is a good option. For deep cover, a NY reload, bear country, or simple home defense gun for those not inclined to practice much, etc. they make sense.

For the savvy gun toter on a daily basis, I can't think of much they can do that a good quality semi-auto can't do a lot better. Many of todays predators have uprated their weaponry and even a good shooter with a 5 or 6 shot might get caught short when the fur really starts flying.

If you're going to carry a revo as a primary defense gun these days, you'd better carry at least two (says the guy who owns 5 revolvers and carries none of them for defense). JMO

 

[eby42]

I think they're extremely viable for sporting and personal defense, and probably somewhat less so for combat (especially military applications). At least IMO.

I'd say mostly a question of how likely application is to ever reach the extremes at which an autoloader shows big advantages over revolvers (ie, multiple quick follow ups and high capacity).

Revolvers still have a lot to offer the defensive and/or recreational shooter. For defense, they are simple, reliable, and have plenty of stopping power. For recreation, they can be excellent for plinking or serious target shooting. Also, the big bore revolver niche is something you can't really get elsewhere. The sheer variety of cartriges and loads for them means there is something for any taste or application.

While it's not an objective advantage or disadvantage, revolvers do have an undeniable "cool" factor that will probably keep me hooked for life regardless of technology.

 

[okie98]

While I have carried autos for 45 years in both military and LE roles, I will NEVER be without a good smooth wheel gun. I had the priviiledge 20 years ago to meet and spend some time with Bill Jordan. If I had not previously loved the revolver, a couple of visits with the old Border Patrolman would have straightened me out. I have a love for both and usually carry both, a Kimber Pro Tactical II and a S&W model 638. Both are hard to beat!

 

[TallPrairie]

Revolvers remain practical in two categories:

1) Pocket carry. A J-frame snubby is a lightweight, completely reliable handgun that chambers a decent cartridge (there are some good .38+P loads out there) and is easily concealed in the front pants pocket of a normal sized man. Not only is this very low profile carry, but it gives one tactical advantage that might be of value. Pocket draw can be extremely fast. You can walk through a darkened area with hand on the gun the whole time. Can't do that with your belt-holstered Glock 22 without looking awfully conspicuous. And from that position, the pocket CCW carrier will easily beat the belt CCW carrier to the draw. That is definitely my experience when I practice. Nowadays there are a few semi-auto pistols that can compete with the revolver for the role of pocket gun. In general, they all give up something to the airweight snub in power, reliability, cost-effectiveness ($1200 Rohrbaugh vs. $400 snub), or concealability. You had better practice with the snubby, though, to use it well.

2) Heavy hunting/wilderness sidearms. .44 Magnum Mountain Gun; .454 Ruger Alaskan; etc. (However, the Glock 20 with souped-up 10mm loads is making some inroads into this category.)

In other words, small lightweight guns and great big powerful guns. It's in the vast "middle" range that the semi-auto has assumed dominance. Including for me. When I can carry a larger gun, I carry a quality high-cap semi-auto. I shoot it better than my pocket J-frame, and it holds more ammunition, which might be needed. I think it was Clint Smith who said about reloads, "you will fight with what is in the gun." ...

 

[Shadowrider]

I think I'm in the viable category. A quality DA revolver is just hard to beat for a homeowner on a budget, who is not a skilled shooter. They are just too simple and reliable. I think of my step mom for this role. She doesn't have the strength to operate the slide on anything bigger than a .25 auto or maybe a .380. But she can operate a .357 revo just fine and if it's loaded with .38's she can deal with the recoil.

But in these days of multiple armed home invasion attacks I'm beginning to re-think the revolver for defense use thing, while better than nothing, I'm not sure it's enough for 99.9% of people. Most just don't practice enough to be able to hit with each shot which is going to be mandatory if you are up against multiple attackers. That's why at home my M&P is fully loaded, along with a .357 revo and a 12 gauge auto. I'll admit I carry a .357 snub CCW occasionally and I have speed strips stashed in about every jacket I wear and in all the vehicles. I keep .38 +P gold dots in these so it doesn't matter if I'm carrying the .357 or my J frame .38. So yeah for the moment I think they are viable but maybe not as much as they once were and for fewer people. But the killer sexy looks of a bling'd out DA S&W or Colt Python will live forever!

 

[TallPrairie]

I should add: my comments were 100% about practicality.

At a subjective level, I feel more affection for my revolvers. They have personality. Among semi-auto handguns I feel affection for my CCW/nightstand gun and my competition gun. I value them because of what they do for me, whereas I like my revolvers for what they are.

Show me one of the new 4th gen. Glocks and I'll nod. Show me a Colt Diamondback and I'll start begging to be allowed to handle it.