I've never been in a self defense situation, but have fire many 1,000's of rounds through both semi autos and revolvers. I have yet to have a revolver lock up or misfire for any reason, but I have had several fail to feed, fail to fire and jams with semi autos. I have 1911s, XDm's, SRs and 1 Browning Hi Power. All have malfunctioned at some time or another. All of my revolvers are Ruger single actions with the exception of two Double action Rugers. I usually tote a 5 shot SP101 or a 8 shot Blackhawk. I shoot both of those very well and do not feel under gunned. If the 5 or 8 shots are not enough I don't have enough folks on my side of the argument. I guess I'm betting my life on this but it is my life
Revolver capacity
- Thread starter garyl43
- Start date
May it ever be thus...
Fine, Gary, do or do not carry the speed loader or extra mag, as you choose, as long as you can live (or not) with the consequences of being wrong. I hope all who depend on you for anything can live (or not) with your decision, also. I've never much had that luxury.
Please also direct LOLBELL's attention to this post, as I suspect it covers his assertion(s) also.
Fine, Gary, do or do not carry the speed loader or extra mag, as you choose, as long as you can live (or not) with the consequences of being wrong. I hope all who depend on you for anything can live (or not) with your decision, also. I've never much had that luxury.
Please also direct LOLBELL's attention to this post, as I suspect it covers his assertion(s) also.
And had he grabbed a revolver correctly, it wouldn't have fired either.
You're not going to find "statistics" on gun failures in self defense scenarios simply because no one keeps track of them
All there will be is anecdotal evidence, which is seldom reliable.
Carry what you feel comfortable with, and be glad that realistically you'll probably never use it at all
I know what I can do with a revolver. Better still, I know what I can not do with a semi auto. If my math is correct 75% of 8 rounds hitting the intended target is better than 20% of 12 rounds making their markOkay, so we have two anecdotal examples of intended victims who emptied their revolvers, but still successfully deterred the threat. How many examples can people come up with where a potential victim was actually able to reload and continue shooting, whether it be semi or revolver?
Michael Brown was brought up. I would contend that had Wilson not been a police officer trying to take Brown into custody, Brown would not have tried to overtake bullets. Goes back to my civilian vs LEO argument.
I will disagree with the OP on the revolver being more reliable. I favor them by a longshot, but when dirty, the cylinder can bind, I found from experience primers can bulge and cause them to bind. Its not very often, but it happens. The vast majority of autos jamming is due to ammo that doesn't work well with the gun. Police, military, and most civilians practice at the range, and know how well their works in their gun. Criminals typically don't go to the range, don't practice at all, don't by premium defense ammo, and shoot whatever ammo they happened to steal. Most are not very familiar with actually aiming and shooting their weapon, and if it doesn't work, they don't know what to do.
Michael Brown was brought up. I would contend that had Wilson not been a police officer trying to take Brown into custody, Brown would not have tried to overtake bullets. Goes back to my civilian vs LEO argument.
I will disagree with the OP on the revolver being more reliable. I favor them by a longshot, but when dirty, the cylinder can bind, I found from experience primers can bulge and cause them to bind. Its not very often, but it happens. The vast majority of autos jamming is due to ammo that doesn't work well with the gun. Police, military, and most civilians practice at the range, and know how well their works in their gun. Criminals typically don't go to the range, don't practice at all, don't by premium defense ammo, and shoot whatever ammo they happened to steal. Most are not very familiar with actually aiming and shooting their weapon, and if it doesn't work, they don't know what to do.
Now come on Tim, "but when dirty, the cylinder can bind"? Not being more reliable on that basis? How many here would carry a dirty gun be it revolver or semi? And "Its not very often, but it happens"? Yes it does, but far less often than a semi will jam making it more reliable right? If you have two guys in a shootout and you have to clear a jam, that will take you right off target and take time you don't have at the close ranges these things usually happen.
Now don't get me wrong, I've only ever carried semi autos and carry one now. I'm 52 and was raised around guns, and from experience I've seen many autos fail many times, but very very few revolver failures. This is an old argument but I'm no tactifool. You can't be prepared for every contingency, and for too many their lives revolve (pardon the pun) around the slim chance that 47 armed ronin are going to jump out of the dark and attack you and if you aren't totally prepared for that, you've somehow done your family a disservice. That's just not me. I want enough rounds to do the job in the most all around reliable platform, that's all. So even anecdotal examples are welcome.
Now don't get me wrong, I've only ever carried semi autos and carry one now. I'm 52 and was raised around guns, and from experience I've seen many autos fail many times, but very very few revolver failures. This is an old argument but I'm no tactifool. You can't be prepared for every contingency, and for too many their lives revolve (pardon the pun) around the slim chance that 47 armed ronin are going to jump out of the dark and attack you and if you aren't totally prepared for that, you've somehow done your family a disservice. That's just not me. I want enough rounds to do the job in the most all around reliable platform, that's all. So even anecdotal examples are welcome.
Gary, I'm not talking about, "oops I forgot to clean it today" dirty. I'm talking about more extreme testing, such as the military does. Drop it in loose dirt, for example, or even worse, mud. Its a lot easier to bind a cylinder than it is to bind a slide. I've had a couple of minor cylinder binding situations while hunting after clawing through heavy vegetation with gun in holster. A toothpick twig in the crack can easily bind a cylinder to where you cannot make it rotate by pulling the trigger or cocking the hammer. Been there.
Yes, I've seen autos jam way more often. I've had many jams with unfamiliar ammo and testing loads. I've also never had an auto jam with known good reliable ammo that I've decided was a "keeper load". Yes, as a revolver guy, I stick with my opinion that autos using ammo that has been thoroughly tested to be reliable in the gun is just as reliable as a revolver. When carried in abusive, field conditions, a good auto will be more reliable than a revolver. Of course, this varies greatly depending on the particular auto you are comparing it to.
Yes, I've seen autos jam way more often. I've had many jams with unfamiliar ammo and testing loads. I've also never had an auto jam with known good reliable ammo that I've decided was a "keeper load". Yes, as a revolver guy, I stick with my opinion that autos using ammo that has been thoroughly tested to be reliable in the gun is just as reliable as a revolver. When carried in abusive, field conditions, a good auto will be more reliable than a revolver. Of course, this varies greatly depending on the particular auto you are comparing it to.
Microgunner
New member
I regularly carry the S&W 327PC 8 shot 357 that skans mentioned.
I find it very easy to conceal and at 21ozs a breeze to carry.
I find it very easy to conceal and at 21ozs a breeze to carry.
OldMarksman
Staff
Posted by garyl43:
But the mean says absolutely nothing about the distribution of the data.
Absent sufficient data about the number of rounds fired to draw reliable conclusions, we have to resort to other data.
We know that handgun rounds have to hit something vital, and maybe more than one something vital, to stop an assailant.
We know that hitting something vital in a rapidly developing situation against a moving attacker or two will likely require multiple shots.
We know that most people, even trained ones, miss the target completely more often that they hit it, both in real and in simulated defensive encounters.
We know from the limited real data that we do have that if one is attacked, the odds are greater than even that there will be more than one attacker.
So, what can we do with all of that?
In June of 2012, TKL staff member John KSa made some statistical calculations, based on realistic assumptions regarding the above points, about one's chances of coming out on top with different numbers of rounds fired. They were eye opening.
John's analysis showed us that a defender with only five shots available had---far, far less than "enough firepower in 99.99% of any situation a civilian might find themselves in"--that against a single attacker, the chances of success are less than one in two, and against two who need to be stopped, miniscule. Six rounds improves the odds by more than 32%, as Colt always contended and as police officers knew. Seven is better, and eight still better.
I carry eight.
Here are links to the analysis. Don't like the assumptions? Choose your own, and run the numbers yourself.
And don't forget to take into account whether you would like to be left standing with an empty gun as you call 911.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5129793&postcount=1
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5131003&postcount=10
There are very "real world statistics". For those few that there are, the mean number of rounds fired in civilian defensive encounters that involve shooting falls under the maximum capacity of even small pocket revolvers.
But the mean says absolutely nothing about the distribution of the data.
Absent sufficient data about the number of rounds fired to draw reliable conclusions, we have to resort to other data.
We know that handgun rounds have to hit something vital, and maybe more than one something vital, to stop an assailant.
We know that hitting something vital in a rapidly developing situation against a moving attacker or two will likely require multiple shots.
We know that most people, even trained ones, miss the target completely more often that they hit it, both in real and in simulated defensive encounters.
We know from the limited real data that we do have that if one is attacked, the odds are greater than even that there will be more than one attacker.
So, what can we do with all of that?
In June of 2012, TKL staff member John KSa made some statistical calculations, based on realistic assumptions regarding the above points, about one's chances of coming out on top with different numbers of rounds fired. They were eye opening.
John's analysis showed us that a defender with only five shots available had---far, far less than "enough firepower in 99.99% of any situation a civilian might find themselves in"--that against a single attacker, the chances of success are less than one in two, and against two who need to be stopped, miniscule. Six rounds improves the odds by more than 32%, as Colt always contended and as police officers knew. Seven is better, and eight still better.
I carry eight.
Here are links to the analysis. Don't like the assumptions? Choose your own, and run the numbers yourself.
And don't forget to take into account whether you would like to be left standing with an empty gun as you call 911.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5129793&postcount=1
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5131003&postcount=10
Last edited:
That proves absolutely nothing since you have no idea if they are familiar at all with the pistols
The "typical thug" thinks every semi is a "Glock" and tends to buy the cheapest ammo they find.
Real world stats show that close to 80% of the time an unloaded gun would produce the desired results.
I don't bet my life on statistics
Thanks oldmarksmen, as of now I carry 11 in my Glock and 9 in the Bersa. If I get the revolver it would be at least six and in .357 mag so more power also. As I said I would also carry a reload. Now I know the odds of ever needing to draw my weapon, I also know from experience that the odds are small of needing to actually fire it. At least in the case of the store owner he never had a malfunction either and survived. One lucky man!
Snyper, it does prove something as you assume bad guys know nothing about weapons and only use bad ammo. Have you watched The first 48? Lot's of nice guns and ammo are used as seen by the casings generally left behind. and a few of the cases in the videos I posted weren't thugs. One was a policemans daughter who probably knew how to use the weapon as she got it from his holster and tried to shoot him. One of the others was a boyfriend trying to kill his girlfriend. Also, you do bet your life on statistics and odds, otherwise you would prepare for even more attackers than you do. The fact is you're odds of surviving multiple armed attackers are slim at best no matter what you carry, unless they turn and run.
Snyper, it does prove something as you assume bad guys know nothing about weapons and only use bad ammo. Have you watched The first 48? Lot's of nice guns and ammo are used as seen by the casings generally left behind. and a few of the cases in the videos I posted weren't thugs. One was a policemans daughter who probably knew how to use the weapon as she got it from his holster and tried to shoot him. One of the others was a boyfriend trying to kill his girlfriend. Also, you do bet your life on statistics and odds, otherwise you would prepare for even more attackers than you do. The fact is you're odds of surviving multiple armed attackers are slim at best no matter what you carry, unless they turn and run.
OldMarksman
Staff
Posted by garyl43:
The very few data we have show that one's chances of being accosted by more than one assailant, if one is accosted, are greater than those of being accosted by one.
More often than not, the display of a firearm does the trick. But if it does not, the "second guy" can only be expected to flee when shots ring out if...
If you are attacked by even one person, your chances of coming out uninjured are very low unless you have happened to recognize the danger soon enough and have been able to draw, and if necessary, fire timely and effectively.
I don't think I would make such a generalization.
The very few data we have show that one's chances of being accosted by more than one assailant, if one is accosted, are greater than those of being accosted by one.
More often than not, the display of a firearm does the trick. But if it does not, the "second guy" can only be expected to flee when shots ring out if...
- he happens to be one who is dissuaded by the sound of shots;
- he realizes that the shots have come from the defender and not from his accomplice;
- he has time to turn and run safely (I wouldn't rely on his understanding, and putting much stock into, the legal limitations placed on a defender when the attacker flees); and
- he concludes that fleeing on foot will be a better survival strategy than taking your car.
If you are attacked by even one person, your chances of coming out uninjured are very low unless you have happened to recognize the danger soon enough and have been able to draw, and if necessary, fire timely and effectively.
Which may just make the case for carrying a concealed hammer revolver that can be fired from a pocket to get the drop on somebody who may have his gun ready. When I speak of multiple attackers I was meaning three or more, as two is fairly common and I was trying to make the point to snyper that we all play the odds to a degree, and you can only be so prepared.
I've worked in a gun store, and lots of my friends are LEO's
I know what type of ammo the "gangsta's" would buy, (and I often encouraged them to buy), and how much gun knowledge they exhibited
I even got one arrested one day when the came in wanting a magazine for a "Glock 40", but he couldn't tell me the model number
I showed him some guns to see it he recogized "his" and he pointed to an HK USP 40.
When he left I called the PD across the street and gave them his license number.
When they stopped him they found the stolen HK (which oddly had been purchased at our store)
They may have "nice guns" sometimes, but they are often clueless on how to properly use them, and they rely largely on the intimidation factor
My mention of ammo causing jams was not meant to imply that cheap ammo jams and good ammo doesn't. That's simply not true. I specifically mentioned being familiar and experienced enough with your gun to know what ammo functions poorly, and to carry it only with ammo that functions flawlessly on the range. Most semi auto shooters can name what ammo works well in their gun, and what ammo works poorly, and they may have another gun with opposite ammo results. It often has nothing to do with ammo quality. Some semis like heavy bullets. Some like lighter bullets. Know your gun. Know your ammo in THAT gun. Whether good guys or bad guys, when autos jam, its usually because people have loaded their gun with ammo they have not sufficiently tested in it. Semis jam. Semis loaded with sufficiently tested ammo almost never jam.