Advantages of revolvers over semi autos

Well the fact of the matter is that today you hardly ever see any police departments using revolvers and Army officers don't use them either. They all use semi autos. So if the professionals use semi autos it stands to reason that they are taking the place of revolvers.
Click to expand...

One needs to consider that semi-auto handguns (read pistols) are what is issued. That does not make them better necessarily. Then you have to ask "better for what?".

Semi-auto pistols have been taking the place of revolvers since the early 1900's (read Colt 1911) for the US military. The big change over to pistols in police department came after Glock introduced their plastic fantastic pistol in the early 1980's. They are and were very reliable. Other manufacturers quickly started making their own versions. Essentially... double action pistols.....

The big advantage of a DA revolver over a pistol (semi) is fail to fires or jams for the common man. If you have a fail to fire with a revolver, you just pull the trigger again. No raking the slide in hopes of clearing a round.

Is one better? If you want high round counts, then the duty sized pistols certainly have the edge over revolvers. For the common person, if you want reliability and simplicity, you go DA revolver. How often does one need more than 5 or 6 shots in a self defense situation? Not often....

Reload speed is debatable. I think a revolver is faster to reload if you have no filled spare magazines. How many actually carry a full back up magazine on their person? Not many. How many carry any reload at all? Not many.
 
Last edited:
Sure, you can pop in a loaded magazine quickly but what if you start out with empty mags and a box of 50 bullets?

Seems to me a top-break revolver such as an H&R 999 could be very competitive with the same 50-count box of ammo if both started completely empty.

Wish I had a 999 so I could compare times with one of my Ruger Mk's.
 
Get yourself one and find out. Always liked those top break H&R 999's for their loading convenience. I was never particularly impressed with their overall quality however. The one I owned was junk. It was my very first handgun and it took a couple years for me to realize that what I experienced was not normal with a DA revolver. Switched to Colts and Smith & Wesson and never looked back.
 
I've never had a semi that I can shoot a one-hole group with at the range at 50' - all of my S & W revolvers can do that if I do my part....just saying.
 
At 50 ft, I can certainly shoot one hole groups on a good day with my High Standard Victor and Ruger Mark II Govt model (5.5" heavy barrel). But I enjoy shooting revolvers more overall unless I'm just blasting away ammo at plinking targets.
 
Unless you train with your semi-auto pistol, I think you are more likely to run into problems adapting to fail to fire issues and jams then with the simplicity of a double action revolver. Remember under HIGH STRESS, simplicity rules. That's one of the reasons that double action pistols are popular with police departments as they certainly have a much higher chance of needing to use their gun than a civilian in a self defense situation. But they are supposed to train with their service guns and as mentioned, many carry a small revolver as a backup.
 
Alright, folks. I think all the practical reasons have been covered. Even some of the sentimental stuff has. However, my wife asked me to share this one because she doesn't use web forums:

"Revolvers are prettier."

She only owns revolvers and occasionally steals mine. :eek:
 
The big change over to pistols in police department came after Glock introduced their plastic fantastic pistol in the early 1980's. They are and were very reliable.
Click to expand...

Ok, fair enough, now include the OTHER reason GLock was so successful.

MONEY

GLock won over the police market not JUST because they offered an acceptable pistol but ALSO because they offered it a lower price (including a hefty credit for the police guns being turned in for Glocks) than all their competitors.

There were some police departments using semi autos back in the 70s. Glock didn't even exist then. Glock's later success was a triumph of marketing, NOT the (arguable) intrinsic advantage of their semi auto pistol. I strongly doubt GLock would have gotten the acceptance and market share they did if their pistol had been more expensive than their competition.
 
Glock could probably sell their pistols for half of what they sell for now and make money.

Yes, money was the ultimate reason for their rapid acceptance. Of course now you see a lot of H&K pistols.
 
I've never had a semi that I can shoot a one-hole group with at the range at 50' - all of my S & W revolvers can do that if I do my part....just saying.
Click to expand...
Geez...I've done that too...fire the first round, then dump the rest of the cylinder/mag into the berm! Works well with the uninitiated! Rod
 
Last edited:
I own many of both. The truth is that in general I shoot my revolvers better than my semi-autos. That is why they are better FOR ME.

YMMV.
 
Geez...I've done that too...fire the first round, then dump the rest of the cylinder/mag into the berm! Works well with the uninitiated! Rod
Click to expand...

Excellent!!!

As another poster said once, those one-shot groups tend to be VERY tight.
 
Alright, folks. I think all the practical reasons have been covered. Even some of the sentimental stuff has. However, my wife asked me to share this one because she doesn't use web forums:

"Revolvers are prettier."

She only owns revolvers and occasionally steals mine.
Click to expand...

If that's the case she would probably love my Ruger Redhawk. So if you are going to get a Ruger Redhawk don't give her the combo to the safe you keep it in.
 
GLock won over the police market not JUST because they offered an acceptable pistol but ALSO because they offered it a lower price (including a hefty credit for the police guns being turned in for Glocks) than all their competitors.
Click to expand...
If that's the case than Canik will probably be the next brand to be won over. That is, if the USA is able to maintain good trading relationships with Turkey.
 
I figure that for the gun owner who has the time, money, and access to frequent range visits, class instruction, etc, then the auto-pistol is best for them. Let's face it, for so many reasons, the semi has it all over the revolver for lighter trigger, capacity, and ease of reloading, and price (c'mon, a S&W 686 is $800 new, and a S&W M&P9 is $450 new).
For other dedicated gun enthusiasts, there might be limiting factors to where the less-complex-to-operate Revolver MAY the best choice. Budget limits, time limits, distance from a range, second job, etc... mean less range time and less hands-on for getting good at the manual of arms of a semi (jams, reloading, etc). I would like to hit the range 2x a month, but my job doesn't pay well so it's more like 2x a year. I do however practice dry firing and speedloading drills at home to stay familiar with getting my S&W J-frame 649 into action.

Also, I do believe the 5 to 8 shots of a revolver (5 in my case: J-frame) can be an asset in the following situation: a BG breaks into your home and through element of surprise/blazed up on meth is able to wrestle the gun from you in a struggle. With a revolver, he'd 5 or 6 rounds on tap, and if he gains the upper hand and swipes your GLOCK 19, he'd have 15 rounds... I'd rather he have fewer options to take me out while I can escape.
I'm partial to revolvers for these reasons.
 
(c'mon, a S&W 686 is $800 new, and a S&W M&P9 is $450 new)
Click to expand...
A .357 Magnum gun is naturally going to cost more than a 9mm gun and it doesn't matter whether you're talking about revolvers or semi autos. If you want to compare price you should compare the price of guns that are of the same caliber. For instance a Desert Eagle which is a .44 Magnum semi auto will cost over $500 more than a Ruger Redrawk which is a revolver in .44 Magnum.
 
the semi has it all over the revolver for lighter trigger,..
Click to expand...

Is this meant to be a serious statement of fact??

I'd go along with a "lighter trigger" pull if you are comparing SA auto to DA revolver. Otherwise, no.

and, as to price? comparing not only different caliber gun but steel vs polymer frame gun? Not a fair comparison in my book.

I just checked, MSRP on a .44 Mag Ruger Redhawk is $1079. :eek:

Cabela's sells Desert Eagle .44Magnums for $1599.99 and up! :eek::eek:

When I bought mine, it was $650 NIB. (1990) :D

Magnum auto pistols are complex and expensive. "Combat Tupperware" is not.
 
I've read all the ones I knew already and a few I didn't too.

Here's one that is true for me personally. Even with a more expensive calibre, I find that a hour at the range with a semi sees me shoot more shots and therefore cost more money than an hour with a revolver.

Revolver shooting just seems to elicit from me fewer wasted shots: a semi may entice me into dumping a mag of three during an outing, a revolver will not.

For me any reliability advantage in revolvers revolves (:D) mainly around failures in ammo and the problems this entails and failures in magazines and the problems that entails. Crud between my crane and frame has locked up my snub in the past and that would be a worry in a stress-reload situation....
 
Last edited:
If that's the case she would probably love my Ruger Redhawk. So if you are going to get a Ruger Redhawk don't give her the combo to the safe you keep it in.
Click to expand...

She loves the Redhawk but lucky for me, only as eye candy. She is tiny and even the GP100 is a little too heavy for her. Most of her shooting is .38 special out of a K-frame. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top