Revolver vs semi auto

Questions

Your questions, as noted earlier, presuppose much that may not be so about both types of firearm. Taken as a whole, even though you ask about the truth/accuracy of the statements, the message from the get-go is that revolvers are better than pistols.
Note: it does not take 50 years to shoot 50K rounds. Anyone involved in competition may well surpass that in a much shorter time. I have a 1911 that has in excess of 60k rounds through it and that is 20 years. Gun still going strong...has never been to a gunsmith since being accurized right after purchase.
Note: with the exception of CAS, pretty much all shooting competitions are dominated by semiauto pistols. There are good reasons for that.
 
the real question

Disregarding #1-5, and getting to the real question, revolver or auto and why? Here's some comments down that line.

I think the auto pistol is easier to shoot well, based on my observations instructing trainees in both the revolver era and into the auto pistol years. The SD/LE police revolver is almost always shot double action, and that requires a certain degree of dexterity and hand strength. A typical DA trigger can run 10 lbs or more. That can be a problem with certain shooters. It was not unusual back in the day for problem shooters to be issued a "half frame" revolver (no barrel-no cylinder) to do trigger pull excercises back in their dorm/quarters to develop hand strength. There were also strength test done by departments involving so many DA trigger pulls in "X" time frame, without the pistol touching a metal ring, through which the candidate was holding the pistol/barrel at arms length. Finally, I saw problem shooters scores and performance increase, with the transition to the auto pistol from the revolver.

There is a price though, as I further believe that the auto pistol has a more complex manual of arms and requires more mentally from the user. So the revolver is simpler to use and teach. Open, fill the charge holes, close, pull trigger as necessary 'till revolver stops going bang, open, eject, repeat as required. (simplified of course) No clearance drills, multiple reload types, safeties, decock levers, takedown levers, and so on. Upon inquiry, I often recommend a DA revolver to individuals purely seeking a defensive firearm who are not necessarily enthusiasts. One reason the DA revolver persisted in American LE for so long was their simplicity of operation for the rank and file.

Contrastingly, the almost universal trend away from the revolver by LE and the military before, is indicative of the suitability, and dare I say superiority of the auto, as a
"fighting" handgun. Easier to shoot well, , higher capacity, faster reloads, and reliability (debatedly) on par with a revolver. If one is in the business of looking for a fight, multiple threats, a prolonged confrontation, the auto has an edge.

I'll close by backing away from that stand and stating that the revolver can make a perfectly suitable "defensive" handgun as it has over the many years. They can be shot well and fast by those willing to work on it, Jerry Miculeck being the prime example. And a fellow in our local league shooting an N-frame .45acp with moon clips typically outshoots the bulk of our contestants in IDPA, me included.
 
Both are mechanical and can fail. I'm a big fan of Ruger revolvers, and recently bought a used 40 year old Security Six. When I was dry firing it the trigger spring broke and disabled the gun. It's a 1mm thick spring, and 4 decades of use caused it to fail. We've all experienced gun failures... they do happen.

At today's prices common ammo is around 30 cents per. A good reliable off-the-shelf pistol let's say is $600.

50,000 rounds is about $15,000-20000 depending on caliber. Over 50 years (or 600 months), amortized, the gun itself cost $1 per month, or 3 pennies per day. After shooting $15-20K in ammo and having paid for the gun many times over in 5 decades, the gun is disposable at that point.

Over 50,000 I would expect to replace the barrel and some springs, which are trivial costs. Semi-autos are simple to swap most parts, including the barrel and guide rod spring which are some wear points.

As a reference I've got many pistols 50+ yeas old... no real issues with them (although round count is unknown).
 
Last edited:
AL45 said:
If my life depends on it, I can't afford the prospect of a malfunction.
Click to expand...
You can if you practice. A stoppage doesn't mean you automatically lose a gunfight. The vast majority of stoppages are extremely quick and easy to clear, and with a well-made firearm they're also very rare. I currently own three firearms that have never once had a stoppage: Two AR-15s and a S&W Shield (and that's including my Model 94 lever-action rifle and my 870 pump-action shotgun, both of which have had several stoppages). And I own a third firearm -- a Glock 19 -- that has only had one stoppage, and it was a simple stovepipe (due to cheap ammo) that was cleared in about a second or so.

My point here is that stoppages with good-quality auto-loading firearms aren't terribly common if you're using decent ammo, and even when they do occur they're not an automatic death sentence. If auto-loading firearms were so unreliable that they were dangerous to use in a gunfight, then it would make you wonder why every single major military and police force in the world uses them almost exclusively.
 
Start with a high-quality revolver and a high-quality semiautomatic. Use good ammo in them. Clean them thoroughly every so often. Occasionally replace some springs. They should both be fine after 50k rounds.

I have many firearms that are over 50 years old that work just fine. They were quality guns to start with and have been well-maintained. Those two things are more important in longevity than revolver vs. semiautomatic, IMHO.
 
After 50K rounds, many revolvers will have problems that will need to be serviced by a competent gun smith to resolve, if they can be resolved. Cylinder gap, cylinder wear, forcing cone erosion, crane alignment, and timing to name a few.

With a semi-auto, it's fairly easy to replace springs, barrels, firing pins, sears, etc. to keep the gun serviceable, and you will likely not need a gunsmith to do this. In the semi-auto, the recoil spring absorbs a lot of the shock and is easily replaceable. In a revolver, the frame absorbs all of the shock, which will takes its toll on the frame over that many rounds.
 
Last edited:
Where the revolver has it's advantages with 5-6 shots, the semi-auto realm has more capacity, but more chance to jam depending on the make and model. Ramps into the chamber used to be the biggest problem, but 1911's and forward loading has taken the guess out of jamming and ejecting...though always a possibility with ammo.

In a sudden draw for personal protection when you are being attacted, you only have up to 5-6 shots max anyway.
 
Semi-autos have other advantages over revolvers than simply capacity. Given similar size/weight and rounds, the semi-auto has less felt recoil. Triggers are also generally lighter than those on revolvers and require less travel, even for most dao semi-autos. They also tend to be a little flatter and more compact.

That being said, there certainly isn't anything wrong with revolvers - some are quite small and light as well and I agree, in a true self defense scenario, I doubt that you would even need 5 rounds.
 
The reason I ask is I am considering a semi-auto for concealed carry
Click to expand...

I can't really comment on points 1-5 based on personal experience.
However, given the motive behind the thread as quoted above, I would say that far more useful to you than the list in the OP is handle and try as many revolvers and semis as you can and make a short list of those that are comfortable and you like.

From there research what your State may or may not allow, user feedback, prices and any known strengths/weaknesses. Then buy it, new or used, and practice.
 
6. Which will be more likely to still operate after being dropped on the pavement?

Answer (IMO): The Auto.

This is one of the reasons I switched from revolvers to auto- the ability to withstand abuse. I think if a revolver cylinder takes a hard enough whack it is seriously damaged, while an auto has its delicate parts protected inside.

David
 
I look at it this way - if the revolver was all-around "better" than a semi-auto, then there would be far more revolver models to choose from than autos and more people would carry revolvers than over autos. You just can't ignore the numbers - the DO tell a story!
 
the DO tell a story!
Click to expand...

That story may also be that semis are more sought after due to films, popular music, video games etc.

I bet a whole lot of people buy a semi and could not tell you one advantage they have over a revolver or vice versa...
 
A 50 year old firearm isn't old. It was made in 1965. A 50 year old firearm that hasn't been maintained properly is junk, regardless of the type.
If either stopped working after being dropped either was already junk. After 50K rounds, both will need attention.
And "None of the Above." is still the answer.
 
I look at it this way - if the revolver was all-around "better" than a semi-auto, then there would be far more revolver models to choose from than autos and more people would carry revolvers than over autos. You just can't ignore the numbers - the DO tell a story!
Click to expand...
You seem to be ignoring the influence of the police and military side arms. It is not as simplistic as you want to express it. For instance, in some scenarios a revolver may be "better" (pocket carry, one assailant) in others (in the Waist Band, multiple assailants), the auto-loader may be better. Consider the sociological influences upon hand gun choice. Seeing autos perform in movies and T.V., some easily influenced individuals will likely choose and auto just because of what they describe as "the cool factor". I am not convinced that "better" has much to do with any human choice.
 
6. Which will be more likely to still operate after being dropped on the pavement?

Answer (IMO): The Auto.

This is one of the reasons I switched from revolvers to auto- the ability to withstand abuse. I think if a revolver cylinder takes a hard enough whack it is seriously damaged, while an auto has its delicate parts protected inside.
Click to expand...
In military situations where a soldier (and his sidearm) are subjected to explosions, diving to the ground while under fire, etc., your argument makes much sense. However, we civilians do not normally drop our guns during gun fights. Therefore, your argument seems of a straw-man type...I may be attacked by a Black Bear here in the very South-most of Michigan, but then it is very unlikely inasmuch as a Black Bear has not be sighted here for over 95 years. In other words, you want us to choose a gun based upon a very unlikely scenario (dropped gun breaking). You would have a better argument if you centered on round-capacity instead.
 
In listing the priorities for a reliable gun, how it will last after 50 years or 50,000 rounds is nowhere near the top.

You mentioned concealed carry and presumably close contact self defense.

A revolver will likely be thicker, heavier, and less capacity. They are also slower to reload for most people. That is important to factor.

They do have an advantage of contact shots not interfering with the recoil of a semi-auto, however.
 
They are also slower to reload for most people.
Click to expand...

Yes, IF you have a spare LOADED magazine (that works).

If you start with ammo in the box (or loose rounds) and both an empty revolver and an empty semi auto, most will get the revolver loaded to capacity before the semi auto.

Not fair? not real world? Doesn't EVERYONE have at least one spare mag?

Actually no. not everyone does. Lots of the "dresser drawer" guns don't have one with them, if they have one at all. It's common to have the gun in the drawer, ready, but the box, spare mag, extra ammo, etc in a closet.

Again, a broad blanket statement, one that assumes you have a spare loaded magazine.

I will not dispute the superiority of some autoloaders as combat weapons. But that alone does not explain their popularity. Look 50 years ago. TV and movies were full of westerns, and even the cops carried revolvers. People wanted revolvers more than semis.

Today, cops carry mostly semis. Cop shows dominate entertainment. The semi is modern and cool. The revolver is old fashioned, outmoded, some say obsolete. (I don't, but some do)

Popularity = sales, and it doesn't matter if the product is superior or even actually useful to be popular. Just look at all the fads. The fact that the semi auto IS quite useful and superior in some regards just adds to their marketability.
 
You seem to be ignoring the influence of the police and military side arms.
Click to expand...
Of course, the police and military do influence the buying decisions of many gun owners. That would be a really bad thing if the police and military made their handgun buying decisions without any thought or effort. Or if the police and military used handguns for applications that are very different from what the average handgun buyer would use a gun for.

In fact, the police and military tend to put a good bit of consideration and effort into making good choices and their uses for handguns are not so terribly different that a handgun they choose would be a poor choice in terms of what a typical person buying a handgun for self-defense would need.

While buying a gun because it is widely used by military or police personnel may not be an ideal way to make a decision, it's not without merit. It's certainly superior to buying a gun based exclusively on "cool factor".
 
Originally posted by db4570
6. Which will be more likely to still operate after being dropped on the pavement?

Answer (IMO): The Auto.

This is one of the reasons I switched from revolvers to auto- the ability to withstand abuse. I think if a revolver cylinder takes a hard enough whack it is seriously damaged, while an auto has its delicate parts protected inside.
Click to expand...

I've dropped a couple of revolvers on concrete floors before and, with the exception of cosmetic damage, they were no worse for wear. On both a S&W and Ruger revolver, the yokes are ejector rods are pretty well protected and the moving parts locked securely into place when the cylinder is closed. I suppose maybe if you dropped the gun from 10 or 20 feet in the air it might be more likely to be damaged, but I'm not that tall nor do I make it a habit to dangle my guns over balconies. A good revolver isn't nearly as delicate as some would have you believe.

Originally posted by Skans
I look at it this way - if the revolver was all-around "better" than a semi-auto, then there would be far more revolver models to choose from than autos and more people would carry revolvers than over autos. You just can't ignore the numbers - the DO tell a story!
Click to expand...

Yes, the numbers do tell a story. What story does the fact that the S&W M&P revolver has been in continuous production for 116 years and had in excess of 6 million units made tell? What story does it tell that despite the fact that semi-autos and swing-out cylinder DA revolvers were developed at roughly the same time (late 19th and early 20th Century) the semi-autos have changed so much while the revolvers have changed very little? What story does it tell that, despite the fact that successful semi-autos have been available since the 1890's, it took until the 1980's and 1990's before they were able to equal or exceed the popularity of revolvers outside the military?

Also, what exactly does the fact that there are more types of semi-autos tell us? If the semi-automatic platform were superior, why would we need so many types? It seems to me that perhaps there are fewer types of revolver because that platform needed less improvement than semi-autos did/do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top