Revolvers vs. Semi Autos ?

imported post

I usually carry my 1911 or my Mak; but, am not opposed to carrying my wife's S&W Ladysmith .357...it's one heck of a gun.

imported post

I think one of the best features of modern semi-auto handguns is the >5 capacity. We all know that you play how you train, but how many of us train by shooting at paper when the paper is shooting back? How many stories from the street have you read where the police (not an attack on them, just an observation) have fired 60+ rounds at one person firing at them (or not firing at them), yet either never hit the suspect or only hit them a handful of times?

If you miss with the first 3 shots because you're getting fired at, you're left with 2 more chances to incapacitate with your average wheelgun before you have to reload. With a standard duty-size semi, you're left with 5-15 (7+1-3=5, right?).

Ultimately, it comes down to what you're comfortable carrying. If you feel comfortable that you'll be able to stop a life-threatening situation in 5-7 shots, no matter what, carry a revolver. If not, I think I know where you'll end up when you go to the gun shop.

I know a lot of us semi-auto carriers also carry an extra mag (or 3). I do, too (only 1). It's not because I don't think 15+1 is enough to handle a life-threatening situation. It's because mis-feeds and jams happen on semi's. It's a lot easier to drop an almost full mag, clear, and reload a full mag from the hip than it is to try to keep track of the original mag during a fight-or-die situation.



That being said, I'm currently in the market for a reliable revolver, just because I've never owned one. I doubt it'd replace my M&P40 as an OC gun, but I'd like one none-the-less. Unfortunately, I have a feeling I'll be hard pressed to find one I like, just because I want a 6 round gun. Most of what I've looked at is 5-rd only.

imported post

The revolver is the most reliable handgun and if capacity is a concern just have a "new york reload" handy. I will have 5/6 shots available in my carrypieceand a 5/6 more in the truck gun if needed. I personallydon'tcarry two snubbiesout and about butit is an option. Lets face it, how many shots are you going to get off anyway in an unexpected situation. After all, aren't you just"trying to stop the threat", not make swiss cheese out of someone?

imported post

That Ruger is a beauty! I just recently bought one for myself in 3" .357 Magnum

I would like to get different grips than the factory ones, and I have been reading about some Hogues in wood to limit the catching on the shirt from the rubber grips. How does your new grips feel when conceal carrying?

imported post

i OC a S&W 581 4" barrel in .357mag. nickel plated. kinda sticks out like a sore thumb, but thats the point ain't it? haha. and as for the only having 6 shots...i also carry 2 speedloaders on my left hip; usually only when i'm going far away from home though

imported post

wjxavier wrote:

i OC a S&W 581 4" barrel in .357mag. nickel plated. kinda sticks out like a sore thumb, but thats the point ain't it? haha. and as for the only having 6 shots...i also carry 2 speedloaders on my left hip; usually only when i'm going far away from home though

Click to expand...

Nice looking gun. I have a nickel 586. Somewhat scarce.

6 shots is plenty for the vast, vast majority of potential situations. But carrying speedloaders has got to be a drag.

I've got to ask, though. Your decision to carry two speedloaders is based on how far you are from home? I don't get that...

Have you tried speed strips? I never used to carry a reload for my (5-shot) revolver...then I bought some speed strips. Much, much easier to carry a reload now...

imported post

wjxavier wrote:

i OC a S&W 581 4" barrel in .357mag. nickel plated. kinda sticks out like a sore thumb, but thats the point ain't it? haha. and as for the only having 6 shots...i also carry 2 speedloaders on my left hip; usually only when i'm going far away from home though

Click to expand...

A serious question for you... and a sincere one..

Have you thought about the possible time savings of a second gun over reloading with a speedloader?

Perhaps you have and are very proficient with reloading... I'm just asking.

Edited because I messed up the first time.

imported post

Bikenut wrote:

Have you thought about the possible time savings of a second gun over reloading with a speedloader?

Perhaps you have and are very proficient with reloading... I'm just asking.

Click to expand...

Some people can reload real fast....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giSaNiQ-Wb4

imported post

HankT wrote:

Bikenut wrote:

Have you thought about the possible time savings of a second gun over reloading with a speedloader?

Perhaps you have and are very proficient with reloading... I'm just asking.

Click to expand...

Some people can reload real fast....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giSaNiQ-Wb4

Click to expand...

Hank... not many folks practice for hundreds of hours like Jerry has. I would venture to say that the average person who carries a revolver who has practiced as much as Jerry has is... shall we say... rare?

Oh... have you thought about a second gun, revolver or auto, having a significant reload time savings over speed strips?

That is actually a serious question Hank... not bait.

imported post

Bikenut wrote:

HankT wrote:

Bikenut wrote:

Have you thought about the possible time savings of a second gun over reloading with a speedloader?

Perhaps you have and are very proficient with reloading... I'm just asking.

Click to expand...

Some people can reload real fast....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giSaNiQ-Wb4

Click to expand...

Hank... not many folks practice for hundreds of hours like Jerry has. I would venture to say that the average person who carries a revolver who has practiced as much as Jerry has is... shall we say... rare?

Oh... have you thought about a second gun, revolver or auto, having a significant reload time savings over speed strips?

That is actually a serious question Hank... not bait.

Click to expand...

BN, I think most people understand that ole JM is wayyyyyyyyy out there on the distribution. The offering was for amusement, comaraderie,... you know, fun.

I've considered a second gun. Too much overhead. Too little benefit. Wayyyyyyy to little benefit. Hell, carrying the speed strip isn't worth it in my analysis. It is just an experiment that I kind of forgot to end.

Actually, I'm thinking of cutting down to the number of rounds on the strip...I think I can make a really good case for that....

imported post

Revolvers are nice and you'll probably never need more than 5 shots to get the job done.

Here are a few Smiths. A 337 .38 special 5 rounds, 327pc .357 magnum 8 rounds, and a 29-3 .44 magnum 6 rounds.

imported post

hank,
i've never tried speedstrips, i might have to look that one up. the reason i carry two speedloaders when i'm far away from home is just a personal security of mine. if something ever DOES happen, i want to make sure that i'm prepared and have ample ammunition for anything that happens to come my way. especially when i travel far distances, i really don't feel like lugging around a box of ammo, that seems quite rediculous to me. so two speedloaders on my hip suits me just fine and keeps me comfortable.
plus, i know damned well that ONE time when i dont carry any extra ammo, THAT would be the time i need it. i've been caught in situations like that, and don't intend on that happening again. just my .02 cents.

imported post

I still have two revolvers and have no intention of getting rid of either one of them. One's a 1984 Ruger Redhawk 5 1/2" barrel and the other one is a 1976 Ruger Security Six. I have done some work on both to improve their actions, sighting, and shootability. BTW, the Security Six is a collection's gun due to the "Made in the 200th year of American Liberty" stamping on the frame.

imported post

Not to mention the Beatles never put out an LP called "Semi-Automatic" (Although Commander Cody had a song called "Semi-Truck") :celebrate

imported post

For me, it boils down to just a few criteria. #1 is confidence in its reliability to work when needed. Simplicity equals reliability. #2 Stainless equals ease of maintenance, staniless revolvers equal ease of maintenace, therefore I will never buy another blue gun. #3, Power, sufficent to the task. i.e. 38 spl minimum, and no 158 gr RNL bullets.

During my years as a firearms instructor, I used the acronym "SAP"while instructing students how to survive a gunfight. Speed, Accuracy, Power. You supply the first two, the gun you choose supplies the last. Of all the choices I have, both revolver and semi, I can be found daily OCing a Taurus 605, A Smith 640, or a Smith 66, all of which are loaded with 110 Gr. +P+ Treasury loads. The choice of which usually hinges on destination, climate, coordination ofbelt and holster colors and material.

Since actions speak louder than words, my confidence, familiarity and trustin either of those weapons coupled withmy ability to use them safely and accurately, weigh heavily on the side of the revolver for daily open carry.

imported post

Reminds me of the movie, "Snatch", where "Boris the Blade" is selling a revolver. "Heavy is good; heavy is reliable; and if it does not work, you can hit him with it."

My preference is for S&W revolvers, 4" barrels, though I've also got a GP100 in that length. They range from .38 special to .357, to .44; six rounds, w/two speedloaders. I seldom have any problem concealing them, though I really don't try very hard to pretend I don't have a gun. Which one I carry depends on where I'm going and whether I'm likely to meet up with any black bears, cougars, wolves, or coyotes. My favorite is a Military and Police "Combat Masterpiece", a stainless .38 with a four inch barrel and fixed sights (model 65-0).

I believe in buying the best value gun you can, and if you can't afford it, save your pennies until you can, or sell your car or girlfriend or something. It's not like gasoline where you have to be price-conscious because you buy a lot of it every week; but it is like tires, where your life depends on sixteen square inches of rubber and you need to have the best you can afford.

A lot of the semiauto's people carry around are not designed to be accurate, they're designed to be somewhat sloppy and to shoot "groups" or "patterns". That's so the tolerances can be open enough that you can drop it in the muck and it will still shoot without blowing up. Shoot a Sig mounted in a vise and it will uniformly place each shot within a three inch circle at ten yards. Shoot a Kahr the same way, and every bullet will go through the same hole, with some variation due to the differences among individual cartridges. But don't attempt to fire it after dropping it in the sand. That precision will cause it to blow up if sand gums up the works.

I hate snubnosed revolvers, J frames and like that, because I can't grip the teeny li'l things well enough to control 'em.

imported post

S&W 686 w/3' barrel.

imported post

user wrote:

Reminds me of the movie, "Snatch", where "Boris the Blade" is selling a revolver. "Heavy is good; heavy is reliable; and if it does not work, you can hit him with it."

My preference is for S&W revolvers, 4" barrels, though I've also got a GP100 in that length. They range from .38 special to .357, to .44; six rounds, w/two speedloaders. I seldom have any problem concealing them, though I really don't try very hard to pretend I don't have a gun. Which one I carry depends on where I'm going and whether I'm likely to meet up with any black bears, cougars, wolves, or coyotes. My favorite is a Military and Police "Combat Masterpiece", a stainless .38 with a four inch barrel and fixed sights (model 65-0).

I believe in buying the best value gun you can, and if you can't afford it, save your pennies until you can, or sell your car or girlfriend or something. It's not like gasoline where you have to be price-conscious because you buy a lot of it every week; but it is like tires, where your life depends on sixteen square inches of rubber and you need to have the best you can afford.

A lot of the semiauto's people carry around are not designed to be accurate, they're designed to be somewhat sloppy and to shoot "groups" or "patterns". That's so the tolerances can be open enough that you can drop it in the muck and it will still shoot without blowing up. Shoot a Sig mounted in a vise and it will uniformly place each shot within a three inch circle at ten yards. Shoot a Kahr the same way, and every bullet will go through the same hole, with some variation due to the differences among individual cartridges. But don't attempt to fire it after dropping it in the sand. That precision will cause it to blow up if sand gums up the works.

I hate snubnosed revolvers, J frames and like that, because I can't grip the teeny li'l things well enough to control 'em.

Click to expand...

Ahem.

I carried a Combat Masterpiece during my stint in the USAF and they do NOT have "fixed sights". The rear sight is adjustable for windage and elevation. If your gunhas fixed sights then it is not a "Combat Masterpiece". Also the "Combat Masterpiece" was from 1948 to 1957 designated the "K-38 Combat Masterpiece". From 1957 on it was the "Model 15". I don't know a whole hell of a lot about the Model 65 but I do know that it is not a "Combat Masterpiece".

I have a preference for revolvers as the best all-round choice in handguns, but by this I mean that if you want to arm a large group of beginners quickly and train them to use a handgun, then a revolver is rthe best choice by far. You can skip instructions about various levers an catches and safeties and go right to basic handling, safety, shooting and maintainence, which is easy because you needn't field-strip a revolver for cleaning.

Having said that. I will say that the favorite weapon in my arsenal is my Walther P.38 9mm. It is extremely rugged and was (as I like to say)"the pistol designed with World Conquest in mind." (and it quite literally was) The short-recoil system has just three moving parts so there is little to go wrong, it can be field stripped and re assembled in less than 30 seconds, the wide-open ejection port all but eliminates jamming and if a jam occurs it is easy to clear; and if you fire off all your magazines but need one more shot in a hurry, a single round can be loaded manually and the slide released. On top of all that, you can make multiple strikes on a failed primer instead of having to rack in a new round. Sure it's only 8+1, but with two magazines that's 25 opportunities to end the fight. If you need more than that, then IMO you've got more of a problem than just you and your weapon are likely to be able to handle with any amount of ammo.

The only real problem I had was obtqaining a modern non-military holster for the thing. But I have found that anything designed for the Beretta M92 can be used with slight modification namely cutting an extra 1/4 inch clearance for the Walther's trigger guard. (See Holsters and Accessories for photos)

imported post

Alexcabbie wrote:

...Ahem.

I carried a Combat Masterpiece during my stint in the USAF and they do NOT have "fixed sights".  The rear sight is adjustable for windage and elevation.  If your gunhas fixed sights then it is not a "Combat Masterpiece".  Also the "Combat Masterpiece" was from 1948 to 1957 designated the "K-38 Combat Masterpiece".  From 1957 on it was the "Model 15".    I don't know a whole hell of a lot about the Model 65 but I do know that it is not a "Combat Masterpiece". ...

Click to expand...

No need for the "ahem" - I appreciate correction when I'm wrong - I'm still getting better, after all, and need all the help I can get. It's not a model 65, after all, which is a .357; it's a model 64, the proper name of which is, "The .38 Military and Police Stainless". I'd lumped it together in my mind with a model 67, which I also have, also in 4" (though not with a heavy bull barrel), which is designated, "The .38 Combat Masterpiece Stainless". And that one, a stainless version of the 15, does have adjustable rear sights and a red-ramp front sight. That one is my wife's favorite "rewallower" (at the time her grandfather taught her to shoot, she was too young to pronounce, "revolver"). I prefer the 64.
Meet 64-3 (upper right) and 64-5 (bottom left).

imported post

This is the exact same question I've been debating for the past few days now, as I'm looking for something a tiny bit easier to conceal than my Ruger GP100 4" wheelgun.

I know the semi-autos have a slimmer profile and can hold more rounds, but the revolver is pretty much guaranteed to go BANG every time the trigger is pulled. It is really a tough choice. I liken the semi-auto to a vehicle with an automatic transmission and the revolver to one with a manual trans, except when it comes to vehicles I'll take the stick-shift any day.

I've been seriously looking at the Glock 27 semi-auto and the Ruger LCR wheelgun...