No matter how it starts,or where it goes,size,weight,caliber,etc,for Reliability we turn to our 100% proven revolvers!Like most,I own several nice,dependable pistols.But in total need of protection,I'll carry Revolver Reliability every time! What about you guys? All comments respected,Skeets.
Reliability Spells Revolver!
- Thread starter Skeets
- Start date
I have a bunch of revolvers, and as much as I like them, I dont carry one anymore, even my 642's.
My experience has been the autos are just as, if not more reliable, and on the rare occasion there might be a problem, the autos are quicker back into action. The revolvers tend to be DRT when they stop.
My experience has been the autos are just as, if not more reliable, and on the rare occasion there might be a problem, the autos are quicker back into action. The revolvers tend to be DRT when they stop.
The revolver that I shoot the most is easily the least reliable gun I've ever owned.
Unless I hand-seat soft primers it will misfire about once per cylinder, and that's after the factory action job.
Combine that with the dedication required to master the DA trigger, and I'll take an auto pistol - single action - every time.
Revolvers are fun, I enjoy the challenge, but for serious work? They've been obsolete for 100 years.
Unless I hand-seat soft primers it will misfire about once per cylinder, and that's after the factory action job.
Combine that with the dedication required to master the DA trigger, and I'll take an auto pistol - single action - every time.
Revolvers are fun, I enjoy the challenge, but for serious work? They've been obsolete for 100 years.
A DA/DAO revolver can easily experience a functioning problem when the shooter doesn't allow full trigger recovery. Totally shooter-induced. Short-stroking the trigger.
When people try to modify or fiddle with the action of their revolvers they can also increase the potential for a range of problems to occur, including light strikes, stubbing, failure of triggers to recover, throw-by, carry-up, etc.
Not properly maintaining one can result in increased potential for functioning issues, like ejector rods coming loose (on some models), extractors not fully seating (debris underneath), etc.
Improper (including abusive) handling isn't without potential for possibly resulting in a mechanical issue, like someone "flipping the cylinder closed", instead of closing it properly.
Using lesser quality or improper ammunition can also result in potential problems, such as bullet pull (jumping the crimp under recoil), an obstructed bore, accelerated flame cutting/erosion (titanium cylinders), just to list a couple potential issues.
Revolvers are very reliable, when properly maintained in good condition and used with appropriate, good quality ammunition ... and especially in the hands of a trained and experienced revolver shooter.
I still use a number of my J-frames as occasional retirement weapons, and they see a good deal of range time for quals, drills, training, etc.
As a S&W revolver armorer I keep things simple and keep them running within normal spec. (Okay, closer to the top end of normal "spec".
)
Being a long time revolver shooter, and someone who carried a service revolver for the first several years of being a young cop, I consider the modern revolver to still be a viable firearm for many personal defensive roles.
I miss the days when most people who carried handguns had to learn their foundation handgunning skills on DA revolvers. Now that small DA/DAO revolvers are enjoying yet another resurgence of interest among a lot of younger LE shooters, for secondary and off-duty weapons, it's often harder to upgrade their pistol-only based skills to help them become revolver shooters. I'd much rather make a DA revolver shooter into a pistol shooter, than the other way around. Less work.
As an armorer for S&W revolvers and a number of different make/model of semiauto pistols, I'd much rather support most pistols than revolvers, though. Easier.
When people try to modify or fiddle with the action of their revolvers they can also increase the potential for a range of problems to occur, including light strikes, stubbing, failure of triggers to recover, throw-by, carry-up, etc.
Not properly maintaining one can result in increased potential for functioning issues, like ejector rods coming loose (on some models), extractors not fully seating (debris underneath), etc.
Improper (including abusive) handling isn't without potential for possibly resulting in a mechanical issue, like someone "flipping the cylinder closed", instead of closing it properly.
Using lesser quality or improper ammunition can also result in potential problems, such as bullet pull (jumping the crimp under recoil), an obstructed bore, accelerated flame cutting/erosion (titanium cylinders), just to list a couple potential issues.
Revolvers are very reliable, when properly maintained in good condition and used with appropriate, good quality ammunition ... and especially in the hands of a trained and experienced revolver shooter.
I still use a number of my J-frames as occasional retirement weapons, and they see a good deal of range time for quals, drills, training, etc.
As a S&W revolver armorer I keep things simple and keep them running within normal spec. (Okay, closer to the top end of normal "spec".
)Being a long time revolver shooter, and someone who carried a service revolver for the first several years of being a young cop, I consider the modern revolver to still be a viable firearm for many personal defensive roles.
I miss the days when most people who carried handguns had to learn their foundation handgunning skills on DA revolvers. Now that small DA/DAO revolvers are enjoying yet another resurgence of interest among a lot of younger LE shooters, for secondary and off-duty weapons, it's often harder to upgrade their pistol-only based skills to help them become revolver shooters. I'd much rather make a DA revolver shooter into a pistol shooter, than the other way around. Less work.
As an armorer for S&W revolvers and a number of different make/model of semiauto pistols, I'd much rather support most pistols than revolvers, though. Easier.
Last edited:
I love both wheel guns and semi autos. Have many of each. I have had both that malfunctioned, and examples of both that never malfunctioned.
When I was a firearms instructor at my police dept. I had a Beretta 92F that went a documented 11,000 rounds without a malfunction. It did get a new recoil spring every 5000 rounds.
When I was a firearms instructor at my police dept. I had a Beretta 92F that went a documented 11,000 rounds without a malfunction. It did get a new recoil spring every 5000 rounds.
I don't have any issue carrying one of my revolvers...especially in a 2 1/2" or 4" barrel in a .357 Mag ( S&W model 19's, 66's ...mostly )...and yes they are reliable - and I'm well trained with them -- and will shoot them tactically a couple of times a month. ( but my reload times, are like watching paint dry ...)
I have recently purchased a new 627 2 5/8" ( N frame, 8 shot, .357 Mag ...) but I don't have an IWB holster for an N frame...but I suppose I could carry it ...and I have not messed with moon clips on this gun yet ( it is cut for moon clips )...
--------------
But my primary carry gun is a 5" 1911 in 9mm ( Wilson ) is a very reliable gun as well...so if I carry, 90% of the time, it will be that Wilson Combat 1911.. --- but I carry a model 19 or 66 a couple of times a month just for the heck of it, but not because I don't trust my 1911's reliability.
I have recently purchased a new 627 2 5/8" ( N frame, 8 shot, .357 Mag ...) but I don't have an IWB holster for an N frame...but I suppose I could carry it ...and I have not messed with moon clips on this gun yet ( it is cut for moon clips )...
--------------
But my primary carry gun is a 5" 1911 in 9mm ( Wilson ) is a very reliable gun as well...so if I carry, 90% of the time, it will be that Wilson Combat 1911.. --- but I carry a model 19 or 66 a couple of times a month just for the heck of it, but not because I don't trust my 1911's reliability.
I think there was a time when the revolver had a very clear reliability advantage over the semi-automatic pistol but now not so much.
That assumes that anyone who depends on an autoloader for self-defense has tested its function by shooting a few hundred rounds of FMJ ammo and a couple of 50 round boxes of whatever self-defense ammo they choose to carry to make sure it feeds. If they don't want to take the time or incur the expense of doing so, they may be better off with a revolver.
I have a GP100 .357 Magnum. Yes, it has generally been very reliable but it has not been 100%. I have managed to temporarily bind the action by short stroking the trigger return. And I have had a primer backing out of an unshot round lockup the cylinder.
So I think the reliability of a thoroughly vetted auto-loader is about as good as a revolver these days.
The reasons that I would generally always trust an auto-loader over a revolver for self-defense are:
1. In most self-defense scenarios I assume I am going to be shooting my revolver double action for all shots. I have a double action only pistol and three traditional double action pistols and I shoot the TDA pistols DA all the time. But nonetheless, I am not as accurate shooting DA as I am SA.
2. Even if I do get off an accurate DA first shot, I know that I will not be as quick with follow up shots with a double action trigger due to the longer trigger return.
3. At least for the .357 Magnum revolver, there is a problem with cartridge selection. Even though I have shot it a bunch, a am not stellar when it comes to controlling rapid shots with .357 Magnum shot double action. And 38 Special leaves a bit to be desired in terms of power compared to 9mm, .40 S&W or .45 ACP. 38 Special +P is not too bad, but not as good as 9mm Para standard pressure or +P IMO.
4. Ammo capacity and reloads: I know that the majority of self-defense shootings are over before 5 or 6 shots are fired, but there are surely exceptions. With my Beretta 92 FS and a Mec Gar "plus two" magazine (to give an example), I have 20+1 shots before I have to think about reloading. And I know I can reload an auto-loader more quickly than a revolver.
That assumes that anyone who depends on an autoloader for self-defense has tested its function by shooting a few hundred rounds of FMJ ammo and a couple of 50 round boxes of whatever self-defense ammo they choose to carry to make sure it feeds. If they don't want to take the time or incur the expense of doing so, they may be better off with a revolver.
I have a GP100 .357 Magnum. Yes, it has generally been very reliable but it has not been 100%. I have managed to temporarily bind the action by short stroking the trigger return. And I have had a primer backing out of an unshot round lockup the cylinder.
So I think the reliability of a thoroughly vetted auto-loader is about as good as a revolver these days.
The reasons that I would generally always trust an auto-loader over a revolver for self-defense are:
1. In most self-defense scenarios I assume I am going to be shooting my revolver double action for all shots. I have a double action only pistol and three traditional double action pistols and I shoot the TDA pistols DA all the time. But nonetheless, I am not as accurate shooting DA as I am SA.
2. Even if I do get off an accurate DA first shot, I know that I will not be as quick with follow up shots with a double action trigger due to the longer trigger return.
3. At least for the .357 Magnum revolver, there is a problem with cartridge selection. Even though I have shot it a bunch, a am not stellar when it comes to controlling rapid shots with .357 Magnum shot double action. And 38 Special leaves a bit to be desired in terms of power compared to 9mm, .40 S&W or .45 ACP. 38 Special +P is not too bad, but not as good as 9mm Para standard pressure or +P IMO.
4. Ammo capacity and reloads: I know that the majority of self-defense shootings are over before 5 or 6 shots are fired, but there are surely exceptions. With my Beretta 92 FS and a Mec Gar "plus two" magazine (to give an example), I have 20+1 shots before I have to think about reloading. And I know I can reload an auto-loader more quickly than a revolver.
I used to carry revolvers, but changed to pistols a few years back because of capacity.
The only pistol with which I have ever had reliability issues is a Libia (a copy of a Browning 1906 made by a small Spanish firm between WWI and the Spanish Civil War). It was a restoration project after we found it in the home of a deceased relative, and we only keep it as a keepsake and novelty, shooting it infrequently. Other pistols in the house are made by Beretta, Sig, and Glock, and the only failures they have had is when I was still working on my reloading recipes.
Any mechanical object is capable of failure, of course, but in the modern day I don't know that the reliability of revolvers and pistols differs significantly.
The only pistol with which I have ever had reliability issues is a Libia (a copy of a Browning 1906 made by a small Spanish firm between WWI and the Spanish Civil War). It was a restoration project after we found it in the home of a deceased relative, and we only keep it as a keepsake and novelty, shooting it infrequently. Other pistols in the house are made by Beretta, Sig, and Glock, and the only failures they have had is when I was still working on my reloading recipes.
Any mechanical object is capable of failure, of course, but in the modern day I don't know that the reliability of revolvers and pistols differs significantly.
buckhorn_cortez
New member
The last S&W I purchased new was a model 625 in 2011. Had malfunctions right out of the box. Didn't have to push it at all - it failed from the factory.
Factory had not seated the strain screw correctly and it very slowly unscrewed making the gun non-functional after 300 rounds (one range trip).
At least no one has said revolvers are more reliable because "they have less parts."
I always like that one because a revolver has at least 75 parts versus semi-autos that have 35-55 (depending upon the pistol design).
+1
I find that a properly maintained semi-auto is just as reliable as a revolver when good ammunition is used. that said, for my wife and daughter, the revolvers are their house guns because they are less prone to shooter or ammunition induced problems. of course I have to admit I do like my 629 mountain gun over any semi-auto when I'm in the woods goofing around.