Longhorn1986
New member
I don't think anyone has ever been in a life-threatening shooting situation and said "Gee, I wish I had something less powerful than my .357"
I pocket carry a 642 revolver. Bought an LC9, I shoot it slightly better than the 642. I can draw the 642 from my pocket, can't draw the LC9. Put my hand around the handle of the LC9 and can't get it out of my pocket. The fact that I can shoot it faster than the 642 is a moot point if I can't get it into action.
If I'm gonna use a holster, might as well carry the lightweight Commander or S&W 19.
revolver has a distinct edge. It's just more reliable for both the first shot as well as subsequent shots.
Maybe...but...I'd add that capacity, size of the grip for small stature'd shooters, unit costs, training to proficiency costs, and FBI transition to auto's due to the Miami? shootout played a greater role in the transition. Too, the influence of movie and TV use of handguns on a younger generation of shooters, plus the advent of shooting games slanted towards autos can't be discounted.If reliability prior to the necessity of a reload were the only requirement of a handgun, DA revolvers would still probably reign supreme for duty and carry use.
Give me a .357 revolver over any pistol. No magazine failures,ability to shoot mild to wild and a flatter trajectory for a long shot.
- Easier to conceal (in most cases)
In a less than 3" barrel I find the .357 mag less impressive than 4 or more. Plus so much louder and heavier recoil.