Revolver vs semi auto

A

AL45

New member
Assuming that both guns are of good quality and cleaned properly, 50 years and 50,000 rounds later, which is most likely to be the truth:

1. The revolver will still be going strong while the semi-auto will be a distant
memory.
2. The revolver will fire all 50,000 rounds without a hitch while the semi-auto will
jamb on many occasions throughout those 50,000 rounds.
3. The revolver will never see a gunsmith, while the semi-auto will be a frequent
visitor.
4. The revolver will have better resale value.
5. If your life depended on it, you would choose the 50 year old revolver over
the 50 year old semi-auto.
 
Michaelcj, I expect I will see your answer a lot. The reason I ask is I am considering a semi-auto for concealed carry, but wether it's a rifle, shotgun or pistol, I see people have occasional malfunctions with semi-autos, while I never see that problem with revolvers. Are they not cleaning them? Are they using poor ammunition? Or are they using poor quality guns? If my life depends on it, I can't afford the prospect of a malfunction.
 
I'm a revolver man through and through, and a Single Action man at that. But the fact is, most handguns considered for defense are as reliable as humanly possible to make them. The modern autos are of two kinds, the older tried and true designs of steel and wood construction, and the newer polymer guns. Both have very good track records. Those that do malfunction usually fail because of poor quality ammunition or poor handling by the owner. The auto pistol is a little more likely to malfunction as a result of the owner's mis-handling.

The revolver can be made to break down through faulty handling, but it does have the ability to continue firing in the case of a mis-fire due to a bad primer or dud round, without any "clearing" on the part of the user.

The bottom line is to make your selection, learn to use it properly, and practice to become proficient with it.

Bob Wright
 
1 through 4 false, at least as stated.

5 depends on whether it means a 50 year old firearm that I've owned, used and maintained, or a 50 year old firearm that I'm suddenly handed with no info on its condition or history.

If the purpose of the post is to elicit views on the generic difference between revolvers and autos, I'd offer a different scenario:

A revolver is loaded and put in a drawer. A pistol also. Both are without known issues, in good condition, and properly cleaned and lubed.

50 years go by with neither drawer being opened.

Now, are the probabilities different that doing nothing but opening the drawer, picking up the firearm, and pulling the trigger twice will result in the firearm going off twice? Yes, favors the revolver.
 
Modern autoloaders are very reliable, in the hands of an experienced shooter. Hand my daughter a reliable autoloader, and she can make it malfunction.

Modern revolvers are very reliable. Hand an inexperienced shooter a revolver, and it wont malfunction.

I have been shooting handguns for more than 30 years. Only once in that time did I have a centerfire cartridge not fire. It was a quality brand .38 Special round, and was in a revolver. Had it been in a defensive situation, the beauty of the revolver is that you simply do what is instinctive... you pull the trigger again.

My wife is comfortable with a revolver, and shoots well with one. For that reason, we have high capacity revolvers for home defense, and concealed carry duty.
 
It is notable that current thinking is that auto-loaders require spring changes at specified round-counts as do magazine springs, whereas revolver springs do not require changing. I am a revolver man, however if I were a policeman or in the military, etc., where I may be required to protect my life with a handgun, you bet I would carry an auto.
 
I see people have occasional malfunctions with semi-autos, while I never see that problem with revolvers.
Click to expand...
You aren't looking very hard then. I have had three "malfunctions" with my LCR. Two squib bullets that I attribute to bad ammo (or at least incompatible) and one skipped cylinder due to short stroking the trigger attributed to operator error. It is still the only gun I use for carry though as I have had zero issues with quality hollow points and it does so well for pocket carry. But I want to get comfortable with belt carry with my Glock 19 as I have to admit I shoot it better than the LCR.

To answer your question, 1-3 are definitely false, 4&5 might be true.
 
Revolver malfunctions not attributed to ammo may be a bit more rare then say a FTF or FTE on a semi but they truly suck. A little un burnt powder under the ejector star and you are pretty much scrod (screwed twice :)) until you clean it out. With a semi a quick tap rack assess and you are gtg most of the time.

With 50k rounds down the pipe the gun itself must be considered so let's compare say a GLOCK 17 and Ruger GP100 as I believe both are hell for stout and the gp100 lockup should prevent it from going out of time. Both of these should be running fine after 50k with proper maintaining both are likely worth about the same, both if cared for probably look good. If they were my guns with a known history I would take either or. If not I go GLOCK 17 because replacing parts as a preventitive measure is cheaper and easier.

Now I am Looking at this purely as tools which I do not look at my guns as. There are other factors for me such as aesthetics and pride of ownership. Maybe history or just plain coolness. A GLOCK 17 doesn't tick any of those boxes. It's a hell of a weapon and one I would have no problem passing on but only as a tool. A nicely setup gp100 or smith 686 etc. with a nice set of grips is infinitely more enjoyable from an ownership standpoint for me.
 
Last edited:
50 years and 50,000 rounds later,
Click to expand...

Just curious why you chose those absurdly high standards??

Also, the broadest of group, revolver vs Semi Auto makes statements 1-4 meaningless. Essentially drivel. and #5 is an opinion question, every answer is correct.

1. The revolver will still be going strong while the semi-auto will be a distant memory.
Click to expand...

I am unclear what you mean by this. If you mean worn out (frame) to the point of failure, then, the answer is no. IF you mean something else, the answer is likely still, no.

2. The revolver will fire all 50,000 rounds without a hitch while the semi-auto will jamb on many occasions throughout those 50,000 rounds.
Click to expand...

This one is a bit closer to reality, semi autos do jam, but all you need to bust this myth is one revolver that jams FOR ANY REASON during the specified time & round count.

3. The revolver will never see a gunsmith, while the semi-auto will be a frequent visitor.
Click to expand...

Again, the blanket categories render the statement absurd. Revolver vs Semi Auto (as stated) includes EVERY revolver and EVERY semiauto, of all design variations and calibers. Just based on my own personal experience, (only 45 years shooting handguns, not 50, sorry), owning and using over a couple dozen handguns, only one ever went to a gunsmith, and that was an ammo failure, NOT the gun.

4. The revolver will have better resale value.
Click to expand...
Again, too broad, or if you prefer, too vague. Better resale value? Compared to WHAT?

I bet I get more from selling an old Luger than you do selling the same vintage Iver Johnson....

With such wide possibilities, one can compare anything to anything inside the Revolver and Semi auto classes.
 
Each answer of your multiple-choice question makes pistols inferior to revolvers, making me think that your mind is made up. Buy a revolver if that is what you want, but there is no reason to disparage pistols or those who own them. Revolvers are mechanical devices, and they can fail and show wear just as do pistols. They each have their advantages and disadvantages, and we are all free to choose our preference based on our own needs and wants.
 
Thanks for your input, fellas. I've shot firearms off and on for close to 40 years, but I am sure not as consistently as many of you. Most of my experience is with my Ruger Blackhawk .45 Colt. I have put a few thousand rounds through it, mostly my reloads, and have never had any type of failure. As far as reliability and durability, I would put it up against almost anything. As far as using it in a defensive situation, I personally would probably not fare too well as quick follow up shots with it are difficult for me. I have observed myself and many others shoot revolvers ranging from, .22, .38, .357, .44 mag, .45 Colt and have never witnessed a failure of any kind. I don't go to public ranges so I'm sure I have not been around as many people shooting as many of the rest of you. The majority of the times I have been around others shooting semi-autos, there is usually at least 1 jamb. This includes rifles, shotguns and handguns. I am only stating what I have observed, I am not bashing semi autos. My son's Ruger 1911 .45 ACP and his AR15 has only jambed once in about 1000 rounds each, but they did jamb. From what you are telling me, it sounds like the problem does lie in the hands of the shooter and the ammunition and not the gun. If that is the case, I will continue my pursuit of a good quality semi-auto for defense.
 
I never see that problem with revolvers.
Click to expand...

Then it is obvious you don't have very much experience with a variety of revolvers. When a revolver malfunctions it's usually difficult to remedy easily.

Example 1: Unburned powder between the frame and face of the cylinder. Locked-up the gun completely. Gun would no longer function. That one took me nearly 4 hours to remedy.

Example 2: Strain screw backed out on the mainspring. Gun would not reliably ignite the primers. That took about 20 minutes and some Loctite to fix - but, it essentially put the gun out-of-service until I could get it home and take it apart.

Example 3: Last Thursday I had a M629 out and the commercial ammunition I was using was, apparently, not crimped sufficiently and a bullet backed out of the case locking up the cylinder until I could figure out how to slightly push the bullet back into the case, open the cylinder and clear the gun.


... but it does have the ability to continue firing in the case of a mis-fire due to a bad primer or dud round, without any "clearing" on the part of the user.
Click to expand...

Both my SiG P229 and my HK P30 will continue "firing" (hammer will cock and fall) by simply pulling the trigger. If this is an important feature for you in a semi-auto pistol - then all you have to do is choose a pistol that functions double action. If the round is a dud, the yes, you have to rack the slide.


To the OP - any type of gun may malfunction, there are no guarantees. If you are using a gun for self defense, then you owe it to yourself to use the best ammunition possible - not the cheapest.

If you would like to see real world semi-auto testing, then go to Todd Green's website

On the right hand side you will find "Range Reports" under which you can find different gun tests. The much maligned reliability of the 1911 came out to be 64,579 rounds, 15 stoppages, 0 malfunctions, 5 parts breakages.

The part that broke the most during this testing was the ejector - however, even the broken ejector did not cause the gun to malfunction. Todd would find the ejector broken when he cleaned the gun - which he was not very diligent about. He cleaned the gun about every 5K rounds.

If you want an excuse to buy or carry a revolver, quit looking to find it superior to a semi-auto - just go buy it and carry it.
 
Last edited:
My CC gun is a Sig P250c which is full DAO. 13+1 vs 5/6 rounds and only carry premium ammo.

I don't feel helpless with it. :)
 
Buckhorn cortez, I'm not looking for an excuse to buy anything. I'm just trying to determine just how sure you "semi-auto" guys are of your firearms. So far, your making some convincing arguments. And thanks for the website info. I will check it out.
 
This post reminds me of the arguments between standard transmissions and automatic transmissions in the 60s. The "never had a problem with manuals" and the "automatics always fail" stories went on and on. I think the revolver is slowly going the way of the manual transmission and will always be available but will be a very small segment of the market. I have and like revolvers but most of my handguns are semi-automatic. I also like standard transmissions but only in certain applications.
 
There are a number of reasons why I like shooting revolvers, but their supposed invincible reliability isn't one of them (neither are 1-5, btw). Those who've never experienced revolver reliability issues (and/or believe the myth) likely haven't pushed them very hard.
 
My Sig P250 has a self-contained firing unit and of a simple mechanism. Not a lot to go wrong with it.

This makes it reliable and after thousands of rounds there's no doubt.
 
I've had problems with 100% of the revolvers that I've had significant time on. I've had problems with about 75% of the semi-auto pistols that I've had time on.

In my experience, a safety-less, modern semi-auto is a simpler firearm to use than a revolver, and just as reliable. This being said, I like both types. However, I'd feel much more comfortable putting a Glock, M&P, or XD in the hands of a beginner than a revolver.
 
+1 on Buckhorn's mainspring screw comment. It is a pain in the butt and impossible to fix on the fly without tools. A semi-auto, even if it is functioning poorly, you can usually tap and rack. And if it isn't going into battery, you can hit the slide and get single shots to go at least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top