Are revolvers more accurate than semi autos?

It is a probably a moot point cause I expect semiautos :barf: to become obsolete and semiextinct in face of all the great modern revolvers :p that are being manufactured today! :) Dennis
 
I have only had one experance with two guns that I owned in a ransom rest

One was a colt Gold cup.
And the other was a hand built gun out of a 28 Smith N frame with a 3 inch Douglas barrel in 44 sp.
Yes the N frame revolver was more accurate, shooting a 3/4 inch group at 25 yards while the 45 was close to 2 inches.
What does this mean?
Absolutly NOTHING.
There can be many reasions.
Pro revolver: the revolver normaly has longer bullets which make better contact to the lands of the barrel there for are better stabalized.
Pro Auto the bullet dosent have to jump the gap before hitting the lands

It can go on and on and never stop ,which is better and eju.
The MOST accurate gun is and will always be the one you shoot BEST.
The 44 mentioned above the best group that I have ever shot off hand with it was about 2 inchs at 15 yards. I have shoot better groups with the Colt at that range, the wheel gun is still my favorite becouse I can do everything with that gun well. It double tapps with wonderful ease, and fit my hand like a glove.
Everything else is secondary.
 
It seems to me that a semi-auto loses some energy in sending the projectile down range by also sending the slide back against the springs. There has got to be some energy that would have been used on the bullet used here instead
Click to expand...

You're confusing energy, force, and momentum...

The energy in the powder is changed from potential energy stored in the chemical bonds of the powder into kinetic energy of the bullet and heat...energy cannot be created or destroyed, it just changes form...nothing is lost, though much is 'wasted' in the form of heat that produces no useful work in sending the bullet downrange.

Sidenote:
If ALL the energy in 8 grains of Unique could be instantly released, then kB! would become ktB!!!!! (as in kilotonBOOM, if you catch my drift)
​
The force which acts on the slide and sends it back is the reaction force from the bullet/powder/gas moving forward...Newton's third law...there is nothing lost by having the slide moving backwards...the force backwards is exactly equal to the force forwards...which brings us to momentum.

Momentum is mass x velocity; like energy, momentum cannot be created or destroyed, and the momentum of the bullet is equal to the momentum of the gun moving backwards...the bullet has a small mass and a high velocity, which equals the large mass and low velocity of the gun.

Which brings me to the qualified answer to the question, which is that regular production revolvers are more accurate than regular production recoil-operated semiautos.

REVOLVER:
If the barrel axis is co-axial to a cylinder charge hole axis, and the forcing cone and cylinder exit holes are square to those axes, the only accuracy-affecting factor is the free play movement of the cylinder at lockup...we'll assume for both revolvers and autos that the cartridge in the chamber or cylinder has equal free play.

Revolvers use chemical energy converted to kinetic energy to actuate their mechanisms...in other words, your finger moves.

R-O AUTO:
Free play movement occurs at the muzzle between slide and barrel
Free play occurs at the breech between slide and barrel
Free play occurs between slide and receiver

This is necessary of course because r-o autos use momentum to actuate their mechanisms...in other words, the slide/barrel moves.

(Notice that blowback autos still have two sources of accuracy-robbing movement)

* * *

The second factor is the ignition mechanism.

Any decently made revolver has a mechanism that is the result of centuries of refinement, and would makes a Swiss watchmaker drool on his Rolex (Ruger and your liability lawyers, go sit in a corner). They can have small bearing surfaces because recoil doesn't affect those surfaces.

Any auto has the problem of a slide returning to battery and slamming to a stop...a sudden impact that affects the trigger/sear/hammer relationship...the surfaces can never be as small as a revolver's, and hence never as crisp.

This of course is only an aid the the shooter and has nothing to do with inherent accuracy.

* * *

SO,
Revolvers have one source of accuracy robbing movement, which in total is usually less than the three of a r-o semi-auto.

Revolvers have much crisper hammer releases.

Given equally well-made barrels, an off-the-rack revolver is more accurate than an off-the-rack auto.
 
Last edited:
I take..

ap engineering/physics i am not questioning you, but I do understand entirely what you are saying, so theoretically if you prevent rearward motion there is less gross loss of propellent energy, meaning you get more umph on the bullet with the same amount of powder, whether you like it or not you lose some energy in recoil, not "destroy" but it gets transfered into your body, basically if no energy could be transfered backwards then that energy that would normally produce reoil would drive the bullet a little bit faster, am I wrong?
I am open to correction
Chase
 
Yes, you're wrong. The momentum used to cycle the slide of a semi-auto is also present in a revolver, it's just wasted in the revolver--it's not put to any use other than shoving the revolver back into your palm.

There is no significant energy loss from slide motion in an auto. For all practical intents and purposes, the bullet has left the barrel before there is any significant slide motion.

The kind of differences you're talking about are on the same order of magnitude as holding a revolver tightly or loosely and saying that when you hold it loosely, that allows the revolver to move more in recoil so you lose some bullet velocity. Maybe there's a theoretical difference, but it's not something you'll be able to measure in the real world.

I get the feeling that you're fishing for some earth-stopping reason to pick a revolver over an auto--you may as well give it up. There isn't one.

Autos don't lose any significant energy from slide motion.

Autos may not be as accurate as revolvers, but the like the slide motion issue, the difference is more theoretical than practical--certainly nothing like the 2 foot groups vs 2 inch groups you posted about earler.
 
you pointed..

out in your own post that theoretically you might loose minimal energy, thats the same thing i said "theoretically"
I am a 16 year old kid in hs, i have no reason nor is it possible for me to buy a pistol, it was a bet with a friend, I won the bet partially. I like em both, no bias or claims.
Chase
you guys are defending unintiated attacks: your fighting air: I never challenged you
asked a question to answer a bet, need no reason to buy a revoler/semi
 
I'm not fighting anything, it just looked like you were trying to come up with any and every disadvantage to autopistols that you could. I'm not saying that there are no disadvantages, but the ones you're focusing on are trivial to the extreme.
thats the same thing i said "theoretically"
Click to expand...
Yeah, but I don't think you really are getting what "theoretically" means in this case. "Theoretically" in this case means so small as to be unmeasurable. So small that the variations inherent in firing ammunition from one "identical" gun to another will be far larger. In other words, it is essentially non-existant unless you are REALLY stretching for something.

If you take your friend's money on a bet either over accuracy differences or energy loss differences, you're really not being fair.

The accuracy differences are not large, and may favor either the autopistol or the revolver in a given situation. On AVERAGE, revolvers will enjoy a small advantage if both guns and both types of ammunition are of similar quality. We're talking about maybe two inches or less at 25 yards and fractions of an inch (at most) at 50ft.

The energy loss difference is even less significant. It's into the realm of non-existant. Velocity variations of around 30fps are reasonable when firing a single gun using a single type of ammunition in a controlled environment. What you're talking about is probably much smaller than that--maybe not even one or two fps. Seriously, what I said earlier about trying to measure velocity differences in a revolver held with a loose grip vs one held with a firm grip is what you're talking about.
 
I am really not that up on the theoretical side of it, but I can speak from some experience.

Given decent quality ammo and good quality handguns of similar sight radii that are in good condition, I really can't tell the difference between the accuracy of autoloaders and revolvers. Either seem to to be able to shoot better than I can, and I'm not a bad shot at all.

Just get something you like and shoot well, and then shoot it well.
 
in the name of science..

not gun points/counter points, they both have faults/advantages.I like em both. BTW do they make a 357mag snubbie?, 38 is anemic, same enrgy as a hyper 22 from a 23" barrels
Chase
 
"do they make a 357mag snubbie?, 38 is anemic, same enrgy as a hyper 22 from a 23" barrels"

I don't know of any .357 or .38 snubbies with a 23" barrel! :eek: Dennis
 
Yup, you can even get a .454 Casull or .480 Ruger Snubby if you're so inclined! ;)

229L.gif


http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=5301&return=Y
 
I know

there is no deringer with a 23" barrel, everyone seems to think the 22 is anemic, it is to a DEGREE. my point was a 38 has similar enrgy to a 22 hyper velocity bullet!
Now, regarding the 454 casul snubbie, wouldnt you break you hand if you fired the thing? 357 has modest recoil compared to the casul, plus it packs a punch!
Chase
do they make 357 with a 3" barrel?
 
I've always wondered if you had a revolver and semi-auto for the same exact cartridge load and barrel length, which would produce more power. It seems to me that a semi-auto looses some energy in sending the projectile down range by also sending the slide back against the springs
Click to expand...
NO, semi auto will have more power (in the same calibre of course) revolvers have a gap between the cylinder and the barrel so they loose some of the pressure where semi autos don’t have that problem.

As for the original question; Yes, revolvers are usually more accurate, but manly because of the sight radius, with revolvers cylinder length doesn’t count, so a 4in wheelgun is a bit larger than a 4in automatic ;) Therefore revolvers (with the same brl length) have longer sight radius and by far, now if you compare a 2in snubie to a 5in+ automatic that would be a different story. As you probably know most automatics have 5in barrels or less, while probably half of the revolvers have barrel length of 5in or more. BTW there are other factors of course like trigger, comfort, sight etc.

EXAMPLE: If I shoot a 5 inch tactical SA XD-9 versus a Taurus Raging Bull .44 magnum 6 inch, and I have roughly the same experience, comfort, and proficiency level with both, would the increased kickback from the .44 magnum affect my accuracy to where it would be worse than with the softer 9mm round?
Click to expand...
No, I have the Raging Bull (6.5in) and I can it shoot pretty good, better than most 9mm autos (more accurately but a LOT slower)
 
Yes, revolvers are usually more accurate, but manly because of the sight radius, with revolvers cylinder length doesn’t count, so a 4in wheelgun is a bit larger than a 4in automatic
Click to expand...

Although true, that is somewhat deceiving as a revolver with a 4" barrel is actually a bigger gun overall than a 4" barrel Semi-auto. A Beretta 92 for example has a 5" barrel but is the same overall size as a 4" revolver. The sight radius is pretty much the same. A Glock 19 has a sight radius of almost 6", which is what most 4" revolvers have. My 686 has a radius of 6" while my Ruger GP100 has a radius of 5 3/4". So essentially a Glock 19 is smaller than a 4" revolver but has the same sight radius. A difference of sight radius of 1" or less is really debatable in regards to accuracy. Some people even shoot better with a shorter radius. Simply put, similarly sized revolvers and semi-autos have similar sight radiuses.
 
Generaly speaking if both types are in good working order, a revolver will shoot the pants off a semi auto.
The primary reason is because of the solid frame and the fixed barrell.

The fact that the sights are on the barrel also helps, according to old timers like Elmer Keith.
However, if the gun is out of time it can send the bullet into the forcing cone at an angle messing up accuracy.
Generally though, a well made wheelgun is good for 2 inch groups at 25 yards in a rest all day.
Its rare to find auto pistols that can equal that right out of the box. The can be gunsmithed up though to be that accurate.
 
I agree with Jack on this one. Only custom-tuned semi-autos have the potential accuracy of the average revolver, from my experience. None of my semi-autos shoot as good as my Ruger GP100s and my new 686. A custom tuned 1911 might rival them though.
 
I'm sure that certain semis will shoot better than certain revolvers, and vice versa. And, in all practical terms, I realize that each individual shoots better with certain firearms. However, it seems to me that the average revolver shoots much more accurately in the average person's hands than does the average semi. Yes, we could all spend the bucks and shoot nothing besides custom-tuned 1911s and Sig 210s that would shoot the pants off any out of the box wheelgun. However, that's not realistic given most people's budget and, in all seriousness, the types of handguns owned by most individuals. While there are exceptions, I would bet that if I took $500 to my local shop (which is realistic for most people to spend on a handgun), that $500 would buy a more accurate revolver than a semi. I think this difference becomes more true from not just a mechanical standpoint, but when you take into consideration the trigger on most $500 revolvers vs. the trigger on most $500 semis. I would put the single-action trigger of my used 686 (purchased for $425 a few years ago) against any $500 self-shucker in terms of feel and crispness. I would also bet that the full underlug of my 686's 6" barrel creates, in most people's hands, a much more stable and sold shooting platform than most semis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top