Reliability Spells Revolver!
- Thread starter Skeets
- Start date
I think the military made the proper decision back in 1911. It took police departments decades to agree with them but it finally happened. A semi-automatic will take neglect and abuse better than a revolver. The semi-automatic will malfunction due to neglect and abuse but it can generally be corrected by the user while the revolver requires a skilled gunsmith.
Doc Holliday 1950
New member
Okay. That was a very well written post. However, most of us are not living in a Military situation nor are most of us LEOs.
I think that Skeets was referring to,WE, John Q Public's need for protection and what is the most reliable for us.
No matter what I shoot out my 6 shot 357 mag Ruger, as long as the ammo is not defective, the revolver wins vs. the Semi and of course this is in my humble opinion.
Any of us can find out what the average amount of shots fired while in a situation that is not non Military/LEO.
I have NO bones to pick about semis except that I cannot use them anymore.
Therefore, I have to trust my WHEELS AND I 100% DO.
Again, it goes back to my previous reply to Skeets about confidence and
quality of each person's ablities to protect oneself. If I am not confident in my weapon, I'll probably be up the creek without a paddle.
Doc
I think that Skeets was referring to,WE, John Q Public's need for protection and what is the most reliable for us.
No matter what I shoot out my 6 shot 357 mag Ruger, as long as the ammo is not defective, the revolver wins vs. the Semi and of course this is in my humble opinion.
Any of us can find out what the average amount of shots fired while in a situation that is not non Military/LEO.
I have NO bones to pick about semis except that I cannot use them anymore.
Therefore, I have to trust my WHEELS AND I 100% DO.
Again, it goes back to my previous reply to Skeets about confidence and
quality of each person's ablities to protect oneself. If I am not confident in my weapon, I'll probably be up the creek without a paddle.
Doc
As machines they seem to both be reliable.
I have never had a bullet "jump crimp" in a revolver. But I have had a very few dud rounds in a semiautomatic.
I have never "short stroked" a revolver. But my daughter apparently can limp wrist any semiautomatic ever made. (Some of them are amazing. She even managed to once end up with a live round in the chamber and an empty piece of brass stuck in the ejection port.)
I have been shooting regularly for 35 years or so, but I know that is still a very small sample size. I have owned examples of both which are/were flawless for decades. So, on one hand I believe revolvers to be slightly more reliable due only to things like dud ammo or operator error. On the other hand, I must not believe that the difference is significant, because I carry a semiautomatic more often than I do a revolver.
I think there is a lot of room for middle ground on this topic.
I have never had a bullet "jump crimp" in a revolver. But I have had a very few dud rounds in a semiautomatic.
I have never "short stroked" a revolver. But my daughter apparently can limp wrist any semiautomatic ever made. (Some of them are amazing. She even managed to once end up with a live round in the chamber and an empty piece of brass stuck in the ejection port.)
I have been shooting regularly for 35 years or so, but I know that is still a very small sample size. I have owned examples of both which are/were flawless for decades. So, on one hand I believe revolvers to be slightly more reliable due only to things like dud ammo or operator error. On the other hand, I must not believe that the difference is significant, because I carry a semiautomatic more often than I do a revolver.
I think there is a lot of room for middle ground on this topic.
It is not if a revolver is reliable, the question should be, which is more reliable. Consider which (autos or revolvers), it is recommended by their manufactures to fire 200 or more rounds to "break it in", (A.K.A., make sure it functions), before coming to any conclusions. Posters here seem to have ignored my first post to that effect. Lets hear some insightful counter to my observation, if you please. What have I overlooked?
If youre buying one of those that requires you to break them in, you over looked the ones that dont need it.
That break in thing is BS. Why should you do the manufacturers job for them, and often pay a premium to do so?
No thanks, Ill buy the ones that work out of the box.
I shoot a lot of both(~25-30000 auto/~5-7000 revolver a year), and over the years, percentage wise, its always been the revolvers that have had more troubles. And when they had troubles, they normally required more than just a "TRB" equivalent.
Just keep in mind here too, we arent talking about a lot with either, and its not a normal occurrence with either.
When I experienced crimp jump on my 629, it was the chamber directly to the right (as viewed from the back of the gun) of the cylinder, yet I was still able to open the gun without driving the bullet back it. Like I said, you have to pull the hammer back to the point that the cylinder stop drops down out of engagement, but before the hand starts to rotate the cylinder, at that point you can start to rotate the cylinder backwards (clockwise). At that point, release the hammer (the cylinder stop will pop back up, but it will be resting against the side of the cylinder) and you can then rotate the cylinder backwards one position so that the protruding bullet can clear the forcing cone and allow you to open the cylinder.
Two points in answer: You seem to imply that ALL pistol manufacturers recommend a 200 round break in, which is not the case at all.
Secondly, I don't regard breaking in to be the same as proving function. Breaking in is a process of improving function by wear. Firing a gun to prove it functions properly is a different idea. Personally, I would not purposely go to a gun fight with an unfired handgun whether pistol or revolver.
Of course, I would not purposely go to a gun fight at all, but that is another threat subject.
The bullet in your case must have just barely passed the front of the cylinder, which I could see might allow you to do as youre saying.
The times Ive experienced it, the bullets were far enough out, that they would not clear the frame. There was no opening the cylinder without the hammer and drift.
The bullet was sticking far enough out to contact the outside of the forcing cone, but it would still clear the frame window. I suppose it didn't have to move all that far forward as my handloads were using 250 gr Kieth bullets which, in .44 Magnum brass, come nearly to the end of my revolver's cylinder anyway.
I suppose I can see what you're describing if you had a really bad case of crimp jump with heavy, and therefore relatively long, bullets. With a Model 28's relatively short cylinder and large frame window, however, it might have been easier to try to pull the bullet the rest of the way out of the case rather than push it back in because it must not have been far from being pulled completely loose.
Yes, revolvers are reliable, I pretty much require my autos to be that reliable too, If not, the're out. I kicked the 1911 to the curb for not being reliable enough. I have the Beretta 92/M9, Glock 21, and Sig P226 that I find to be exceptionally reliable. I've been using the 92 series since 1992, I have a whole fleet of them, some with tens of thousands of rounds fired through them, They ARE reliable.
I have witnessed a squib from a fresh box of factory ammo push the jacketed bullet halfway into the forcing cone...shooter was done for the day.
I also saw an LCR shooter at my club get the crimp jump effect, tying up his revolver. Of course, he was shooting cheap Blazer aluminum case RNL.
That being said, I've never experienced a problem with a revolver, and my 3" GP100 is loaded next to me right now.
I also saw an LCR shooter at my club get the crimp jump effect, tying up his revolver. Of course, he was shooting cheap Blazer aluminum case RNL.
That being said, I've never experienced a problem with a revolver, and my 3" GP100 is loaded next to me right now.
2damnold4this
New member
My 342 is finicky when it starts to get dirty. When shooting dirty ammo and loading from a speed loader, every so often, a cartridge won't drop all the way into the cylinder and I'll get a rough trigger pull as the cartridge drags. I don't seem to have this problem with my 642.
In contrast, my G26 seems to do fine even after shooting 400+ rounds without cleaning. Of the thousands of rounds through the G26, I've had the slide not lock back on an empty chamber twice (I think I rode the slide stop). Once shooting in the dark in a low light class, I thought the gun was dry and reloaded, fired the rounds in the second magazine, only to find a few rounds left in the mag I dropped. Not sure what happened there but I thought I had a dead trigger. Whatever the problem was, reloading fixed it.
I have a lot of confidence in the first couple of cylinders of the 342 but if I need to shoot more than ten rounds, the G26 is certainly more likely to get the job done without cleaning.
In contrast, my G26 seems to do fine even after shooting 400+ rounds without cleaning. Of the thousands of rounds through the G26, I've had the slide not lock back on an empty chamber twice (I think I rode the slide stop). Once shooting in the dark in a low light class, I thought the gun was dry and reloaded, fired the rounds in the second magazine, only to find a few rounds left in the mag I dropped. Not sure what happened there but I thought I had a dead trigger. Whatever the problem was, reloading fixed it.
I have a lot of confidence in the first couple of cylinders of the 342 but if I need to shoot more than ten rounds, the G26 is certainly more likely to get the job done without cleaning.
I think the break-in periods of many guns is a little to do with the gun and a lot to do with the shooter and learning how to shoot it. I had stovepipes, failure to lock back on the last shot and the usual low and left shooting with my first couple of semi-automatics. Once I got accustomed to the grip, quit limp wristing and quit jerking the trigger, the problems went away because I had apparently broken-in myself and the guns were fine. My last couple of semi-automatics have been flawless in operation and are accurate. My last RIA 1911 specified a 500 round break-in but after 400+ flawless rounds, I figured I was already broken-in.