I have both revolvers and autos but tend to be more partial to revolvers for subjective and not entirely reational reasons. However, just off the top of my head I can think of an HK P7M8 that I had that within the first 50 rounds of standard pressure fmj ammo broke it's firing pin bushing and was rendered completely inoperable. HK fixed and it ticked fine ever since, but it still happened. I had a Rossi 720 that would begin to lock up from heat, I guess, after one or two cylinder-fulls of shooting. I purchased a Taurus 85Ti that bound incredibly and would not index properly on a couple of chambers. It is back at Taurus for the second time and still has not been fired by me. (I ordered this revolver or never would have bought it.) I have an SP-101 which, out-of-the-box, would not lock up properly. (Ruger fixed it promptly and it has been superb ever since.) I had a Beretta 950 which cracked internally, could not remove the slide and was replaced by Beretta. I bought a new Smith and Wesson Model 640 in .38 Special and when I inspected it closely, the firing pin protruded through the bushing and would have contacted a primer at rest. (Also fixed promptly and courteously and never a bit of problem since.) I have a Guardian .32, early model, whose magazine latch cracked in two, dropping the magazine and rendering the pistol inoperable except as a single shot. (Also fixed, upgraded and flawless since.) Revolvers and autos, expensive and inexpensive, all machines, all capable of breaking. I still tend to like revolvers a bit more because I shoot them better, in my thinking, and they are not "feed finicky" and they tend to feel better in my hand and give me a higher comfort level and I don't chase brass, etc. etc., and I think high-capacity is over-rated for the kinds of potential threats I might conceivably face. If I were to need capacity, I have a Ruger P95 with hi-caps that I would not hesitate to rely on completely. Inexpensive, durable, completely reliable. Just my partial experiences.