revolver vs. pistol

There are no "ninja like skills", it is called common sense. You don't stand there and shoot. You try to protect yourself with a hard surface between you and the bad guy. This allows you the extra time to reload and negates a need for rapid fire cause he'll either get behind cover too or die from calm, accurate shots from the revolver. The less-effective part of this has literally stemmed down to less capacity and your inability to shoot it accurately.

I'm not against the pistol. I'm against the idea that the revolver is less effective in real world situations. I think we've all expressed our opinions on the matter thoroughly enough. I'll finish though by asking, how do you know? "Shooting a DA revolver quickly and accurately requires a lot of work, a lot more than an auto, and I don't see the need to put in the extra work to master a less-effective weapon." If you don't feel like putting the time in, obviously you can't know if it is so difficult to run one. Watching YouTube will never answer the question of what you yourself can do.
 
amd6547, let's start with the original post. The OP asked about .357 revolvers compared to 9 mm pistols. Introducing .38 or 9 mm revolvers to the discussion lacks merit. I suppose you could even say it is a specious argument, though that might be considered insulting by some. You can contend that a .357 magnum is not more difficult to master than a similarly sized 9 mm semiautomatic but that doesn't make it so for most of the shooting world.

Your model 10 may make you feel like Batman, but that isn't necessarily so either. You would certainly be better armed with a 9 mm and 10-18 rounds in a smaller and lighter package. Probably be faster and more accurate as well if you are willing to compare. Either way it makes no difference to me.
 
When wardrobe imposes more serious size restrictions, I'll always choose the LCR over a pocket-ready semi-auto. In that size class, the LCR is easy enough to carry and is relatively comfortable to shoot. Five shots might not be enough for everyone but in .327 Federal, it's a reasonably powerful six-shooter that doesn't kick quite as hard as .357 magnum.

When size restrictions are lessened, capacity makes the decision for me. Fifteen is just too much more than six or seven. In the winter time, I'm almost always carrying a full-sized semi-auto.
 
I’ve carried lots of different handguns...HiPower, G17, G26, 1911...none of them made me “feel like Batman”, but maybe you are projecting your inner psychosis, K Mac. All I said was that I felt well armed with a 4” 38spl, loaded with one of the best current 38spl loads.
I’ve never felt the need for a super light weight 357mag snub, but I have carried a 2.5” Model 19, which I found easy to shoot full power magnum ammo in.
My current carry is a 3” GP100.
Double action revolver shooting is not nearly as difficult as some would paint it. People with no training whatsoever have been shooting other people with them for over a century.
I’m not a cop, it is not my job to go forth, running to the sound of the guns, glad to have my G17 and multiple spare mags. I’m a private citizen protecting myself and my family. A good quality 357 with a couple speedloaders does that for me in real world fashion unrelated to comic books heroes.
Frankly, I was carrying the 9mm HiPower when most cops carried revolvers, so I like the nine and know it’s limitations and capabilities.
Fact is, any handgun is a compromise, and I’d rather have a 12ga pump loaded with buckshot if I needed to protect myself (cue the whining about how hard the riot gun is to master).
 
K Mac,
you need to get rid of the notion that just because you can't nobody can. I carried a 357 mag into harms way for 2 decades and have seen hundreds of people shot with different things. I shot PPC many years ago and compete in IDPA with revolvers and my Glock. When I do carry a Glock it is not a 9mm, it is a 357 Sig.
 
The best way to settle this VERSUS
discussion:

All you guys with autos line up and
face all you guys with revolvers,
9 mm vs. 357. At 8 feet distance
in a darkened alley.

Upon the whistle, you all draw and
proceed to shoot autos toward
revolver guys and revolver guys
toward auto guys until we have
winners and losers.

I'll abide by whatever the outcome
is. Call me at Joe's Tavern when
you're done.
 
The best way to settle this VERSUS
discussion:

All you guys with autos line up and
face all you guys with revolvers,
9 mm vs. 357. At 8 feet distance
in a darkened alley.

Upon the whistle, you all draw and
proceed to shoot autos toward
revolver guys and revolver guys
toward auto guys until we have
winners and losers.

I'll abide by whatever the outcome
is. Call me at Joe's Tavern when
you're done.
Click to expand...

In your attempt at humor you have played the trump card. At a certain point It is about the individual, not the tool.
 
Gentlemen, I never said that I was not proficient with a .357 revolver. I've been shooting revolvers for years and can hold my own. What I have said is I'm better with a semi, and that is true of everyone I know. It is certainly true of every new shooter I've ever seen once speed is added to the picture. I simply understand that for me, and most everyone else, time spent training and practicing is best done with a semi.

AMD a GP100 is a solid chunk of iron. I shoot mine from time to time. I even carry it in the woods on occasion. It is not a concealed carry handgun for me. And yes, a semiautomatic carbine is much easier to use than 12 gauge pump for most. :rolleyes:
 
I don't want to get into this debate because I don't feel I am sufficiently knowledgably about revolvers or .357s to give a solid argument, but I have to say that in an imaginary gunfight between a good guy with a revolver and moderate DA revolver experience, and a street thug with a semi auto 9mm. Id bet the good guy wins!

However with my level of wheel gun experience I should probably just opt for the semi. My confidence in my skill with a revolver is very little.
 
Originally Posted by RickB
Shooting a DA revolver quickly and accurately requires a lot of work, a lot more than an auto, and I don't see the need to put in the extra work to master a less-effective weapon.



Incredibly lazy way of thinking.
Click to expand...

Twenty years of weekly experience as a shooter and observer.
75,000+ rounds downrange, while alternating among autos and revolvers (including winning an IDPA state championship shooting a revolver).
Wow me with your qualifications for judging my laziness? :rolleyes:
 
But...………..I'm almost 50 years of experience as a shooter. And I'm not yet, as good as Jerry Miculek, as far as revolvers go. I need to keep working on it, in order to master....


I'll just keep at it!
 
how do you know?

I can make some comments regards how much easier an auto pistol is to shoot v. a revolver. This is based on my observations running folks through LE training at the academy level for a couple of months, and working as in instructor back in the parks over the course of a career. The yardstick was 30 rd qualification courses of fire and basic instruction shooting common drills.

-One of the things in my instructor days we commonly saw was the lack of hand strength in some shooters to effectively run the DA revolver. The DA trigger pull, especially over a multiple round string or course of fire, was beyond the ability of some folks. These folks would resort to running the trigger with both fingers in many instances. Typically, this was with petite women, but I could also foresee it in elderly folks. It makes me wonder about injured shooters too.

-Our/my agency typically carried revolvers, initially .38+P+/110, in K frame or L frame S&W's. That load was involved in some shootings with less than ideal results, and the agency went to full magnum's, either 110 or 125 gr. The 125 was a handful for some shooters. When the switch to mag ammo occurred, qualification scores dropped for most shooters, some more than others. The majority of the Kframes disappeared, to be replaced by the heavier L-s , and Pach grips appeared overnight, all intended to mitigate recoil. Blast and flash were monumental, especially in reduced light shooting.

-When the agency went to SA pistols initially the 9mm SIG P228, everybody's scores went up. Good shooters shot rat holes, and marginal shooters qualified consistently w/o trouble. The trend continued when multiple calibers were introduced w/ sibling pistols, .40/P229, and .45/P220.
There was an option to retain the revolver if one was within so many years of retirement. To my knowledge, nobody did.

I believe there is a distinct jump in power with magnum ammo. I also believe that there are folks who can handle a DA revolver and shoot well enough that it is a satisfactory weapon for them. But across the board, my observations are that the rank and file will shoot an mid powered auto better. It will carry easier too.
 
I've been carrying a S&W 642 for the past decade and find it just about ideal for my purposes. But then, I live a very low threat lifestyle and what works for me won't work for everyone.
 
Back in the 1970s, reading Bill Jordan's No Second Place Winner, I was convinced that the revolver was superior over the semi auto in a self defense situation. In the'90s a friend at the range got me to try his Glock 23 and I changed my mind.

Nowadays I carry a Kahr all stainless MK40, or a Glock 33 (357 Sig), or a S&W M&P340. The revolver gets packed more often lately what with the summer heat my usual wardrobe is a pair of shorts and a t-shirt. I feel any of these will deliver if I do my part.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
RickB said:
Twenty years of weekly experience as a shooter and observer.
75,000+ rounds downrange, while alternating among autos and revolvers (including winning an IDPA state championship shooting a revolver).
Wow me with your qualifications for judging my laziness? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Explaining how "online qualifications" make for poor justifications requires a lot of work...I've answered why I thought it to be lazy in earlier posts. To summarize, in real world conditions, the revolver will function just as well as the semi automatic. If you can't shoot it as well as your semi, great, but that doesn't make it a less effective SD choice. It might make it one for you, but considering real world situations, I'd still argue you can defend yourself with one just as well outside of the absolute worst of luck scenario that can just as easily happen with a semi.


If you are capable of winning matches but incapable of using a revolver effectively in SD...

Yes, less effective for you isn't less effective in general or for OP.
 
I like the K6, and also carry a 9mm, at times, but a lot of time it's an old 32 cal,
because it's the right size, trigger, etc. The smaller nines all dance on the unsafe/size
line.
 
I have a Kimber K6s, SP101, and a LC9 as carry conceal options. I always gravitate towards my .357s. I don't mind conceding capacity to power. I am considering another semi-auto option. I'm leaning towards M&P 9mm 2.0 compact, however this is just a preliminary thought.

Back to the original question: I prefer to have the ability to slow or stop an attacker with a well placed shot over needing to have multiple hits on target. I realize there's a potential of multiple bad guys, but feel the stopping power of the .357 can help compensate for the lack of rounds.
 
I am quite impressed that our forum members pretty much stayed on point for my post.
I've added one more 357 in mag revolver. It's the EAA 2" 357 in mag revolver.
It's another heavy weight but I've not had any problem shooting 357 in mag ammo as well as 38 sp P+ ammo in it. Under 25 feet it's right on accurate.
I am quite confident that if I ever have to use a weapon it will be at 25 feet or less.
Personally I like carrying my 357's. Once in awhile I'll carry one of my glocks but for me, the revolvers are my go to guns.
The scenarios that I'll encounter multiple BG's is not a reality that I will ever be in, I hope. It's like if I would find myself in Watts in LA which is very low % wise, then I would carry my Glock 19 or try to melt into the background.
So, It just does not make sense to me that I'll be out gunned by multiple BG's & I would need mass quanities of ammo other than having a revolver that has 6 or 7 shots .
 
MINSH101 said:
I have a Kimber K6s, SP101, and a LC9 as carry conceal options. I always gravitate towards my .357s. I don't mind conceding capacity to power. I am considering another semi-auto option. I'm leaning towards M&P 9mm 2.0 compact, however this is just a preliminary thought.



Back to the original question: I prefer to have the ability to slow or stop an attacker with a well placed shot over needing to have multiple hits on target. I realize there's a potential of multiple bad guys, but feel the stopping power of the .357 can help compensate for the lack of rounds.
Click to expand...



Have you shot the .357 without hearing protection? I have and it was uncomfortable at best.

.380-.45Colt Not an issue without protection, I use muffs for practice but occasionally fire off a few rounds without as a sort of conditioning.

I know when I fire a gun at game I don’t remember the report, don’t know if a SD situation would be the same but I’ve gravitated to calibers with less shock and awe than a magnum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
"Revolver stoppages are a nightmare and rarely cleared and undone quickly or easily."

I think that this is a "group-think" reason for carrying semi-autos that is WAY overblown. I have good quality revolvers that I've shot many rounds through and that I keep clean. I NEVER have stoppages. The only reasonable cause would be a spring failing or something like that, which could happen just as easily with a semi-auto. I also have good quality semi-autos that I've shot many rounds through and keep clean. Very rarely, but occasionally, one will have a stoppage. It just turns out to be the VERY rare defective round, or user error due to me or someone else (usually someone else) limp-wristing it. Yeah, it only takes a couple of seconds to clear. BUT, a typical shooting encounter only takes a couple of seconds.

That being said, I carry semi-automatic pistols sometimes and I don't worry about it. Much more than 99 times out of a 100 they work fine for me, and that's good enough, imho.

I mildly prefer revolvers primarily because I am more used to them and shoot them better. I am middle-aged. My first handgun was a 22 revolver that I got when I was 15 or so. Even now I shoot most revolvers better than most semi-autos, though I shoot them both frequently. So I feel a little more comfortable with an LCR in my pocket instead of one of my small 9mm's or 380's. I prefer what I am more comfortable with and confident in, but I am willing to be flexible due to various circumstances. I do what seems best for ME. What other people carry is really none of my business and I don't get worked up about it one way or the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top