semi auto vs revolver
- Thread starter Z400ACDC
- Start date
"I have carried a 9mm or a .45 auto for years. Is there a reason to switch to a revolver? I am looking at a Ruger 357 magnum."
Switch to a .357Sig if the ballistics compels you. Besides, there is not a reason to switch from one to the other if your semi-auto or revolver works as it should.
From personal experience I can tell you I bought a Taurus 85 for CC when I got my permit. I later bought a Glock 36. After experiencing several "feeding" problems with JHP, went back to my Taurus. Lost faith in the darn thing. The G36 is used by my wife for home defense (loaded with Powerball ammo) since she loves the gun and shoots great with it.
Switch to a .357Sig if the ballistics compels you. Besides, there is not a reason to switch from one to the other if your semi-auto or revolver works as it should.
From personal experience I can tell you I bought a Taurus 85 for CC when I got my permit. I later bought a Glock 36. After experiencing several "feeding" problems with JHP, went back to my Taurus. Lost faith in the darn thing. The G36 is used by my wife for home defense (loaded with Powerball ammo) since she loves the gun and shoots great with it.
Semi auto's can hold up to seventeen rounds and reload in an instant.
No revolver can match that.
Now criminals are getting smart enough to count the rounds fired at them from people using revolvers for defense and waiting for you to run out before they attack again.
The 40 S&W round is actually beginning to show that it is up to the task where the 9mm and 38 special was'nt.
In the bad guy stopping zone.
I would carry a full sized semiauto.
And an extra magazine.
But having a snub revolver for backup just seems smart too.
The revolver is a great gun .
But against multiple bad guys,a semi auto with it's quick reload capability is well worth having instead of the revolver.
And those who can use a speedloader as well or as fast as those that can reload with a semi auto magazine are few and far between.
You carry a revolver-you better be a very practiced,excellent shot.
Unlike the semi auto,there is'nt many behind that shot,you just missed the bad guy with.
No revolver can match that.
Now criminals are getting smart enough to count the rounds fired at them from people using revolvers for defense and waiting for you to run out before they attack again.
The 40 S&W round is actually beginning to show that it is up to the task where the 9mm and 38 special was'nt.
In the bad guy stopping zone.
I would carry a full sized semiauto.
And an extra magazine.
But having a snub revolver for backup just seems smart too.
The revolver is a great gun .
But against multiple bad guys,a semi auto with it's quick reload capability is well worth having instead of the revolver.
And those who can use a speedloader as well or as fast as those that can reload with a semi auto magazine are few and far between.
You carry a revolver-you better be a very practiced,excellent shot.
Unlike the semi auto,there is'nt many behind that shot,you just missed the bad guy with.
I've asked a question concerning this several times before and to date no one has been able to give me a satisfactory example. Can anyone show me a documented case of a legally armed U.S. citizen who was severely injured or killed and such circumstances are directly attributable to his or her gun running out of ammunition?
stephen426
New member
I like semi-autos because they are much easier to conceal. If you look at the same overall length, the semi-auto will have a longer barrel (greater velocity and slightly better accuracy). This is simply due to the design of revolvers, which require a cylinder and set the grip further back. Most compact semi-autos are much slimmer than revolvers too. The cylinder is the main issue.
When it comes to trigger pull, I still prefer my semi-autos to any revolver since I carry a Glock 26 or a Kahr MK9. The Glock's Safe-Action is only a 5.5 lb. trigger pull with a very shirt reset and the Kahr is a very smooth DAO striker fired gun.
You guys mention that revolvers are more reliable. I'm sure many members on this board can attest to firing thousands of rounds through their semi-autos without a single hiccup. As long as you take care of your gun, it should take care of you.
Someone mentioned that some semi-autos can be prevented from firing by pushing the slide back slightly. While this is a stretch at best, how likely is that? Double action revolvers can be kept from firing by grabbing the cylinder and preventing it from turning (unless already cocked back into single action).
Regarding ammo capacity, most semi-autos hold more ammo than revolvers of the same size. Reloads are much easier to carry as well due to their slim profiles. In my Glock 26, I can carry reloads of 10 shots each while compact 5 shot revolvers would require 1 speed loader just to match the original capacity. With a While Jerry Miculek can reload his revolver faster than I can reload my semi-auto, most people can reload semi-autos way faster than they can revolvers.
Second strike capability is over-rated unless your gun has a problem with light strikes. A second strike will rarely set off the round unlessthe first strike was a light strike. The reliability of factory loaded center fire ammo is extrememly high and dud rounds are very rare. While the revolver may have the slight edge in speed here, simply racking the gun does not take that much longer. Furthermore, failure to fires are so rare in quality firearms, that there is practically no advantage with the revolver.
Some people mentioned more powerful rounds in the revolver. There is no argueing that assertion, but how many people carry anything geater than a .357 magnum for self defense? If you are using it as a hunting backup or live in bear country, I understand. Besides, according to some threads, most modern handgun bullets have similar stopping power.
When it is all said and done, I'll stick to semi-autos. Thanks!
When it comes to trigger pull, I still prefer my semi-autos to any revolver since I carry a Glock 26 or a Kahr MK9. The Glock's Safe-Action is only a 5.5 lb. trigger pull with a very shirt reset and the Kahr is a very smooth DAO striker fired gun.
You guys mention that revolvers are more reliable. I'm sure many members on this board can attest to firing thousands of rounds through their semi-autos without a single hiccup. As long as you take care of your gun, it should take care of you.
Someone mentioned that some semi-autos can be prevented from firing by pushing the slide back slightly. While this is a stretch at best, how likely is that? Double action revolvers can be kept from firing by grabbing the cylinder and preventing it from turning (unless already cocked back into single action).
Regarding ammo capacity, most semi-autos hold more ammo than revolvers of the same size. Reloads are much easier to carry as well due to their slim profiles. In my Glock 26, I can carry reloads of 10 shots each while compact 5 shot revolvers would require 1 speed loader just to match the original capacity. With a While Jerry Miculek can reload his revolver faster than I can reload my semi-auto, most people can reload semi-autos way faster than they can revolvers.
Second strike capability is over-rated unless your gun has a problem with light strikes. A second strike will rarely set off the round unlessthe first strike was a light strike. The reliability of factory loaded center fire ammo is extrememly high and dud rounds are very rare. While the revolver may have the slight edge in speed here, simply racking the gun does not take that much longer. Furthermore, failure to fires are so rare in quality firearms, that there is practically no advantage with the revolver.
Some people mentioned more powerful rounds in the revolver. There is no argueing that assertion, but how many people carry anything geater than a .357 magnum for self defense? If you are using it as a hunting backup or live in bear country, I understand. Besides, according to some threads, most modern handgun bullets have similar stopping power.
When it is all said and done, I'll stick to semi-autos. Thanks!
Playboypenguin
Moderator
I am afraid you are going to have to keep waiting on that example. I doubt one exists. This is just another "machismo" driven urban legend similar to one like "9mm will not stop a drug addict but a .45 will knock them through a wall."
Even if one or two examples did exist, what would it really prove regarding likelihood of it happening to you? I know it has happened to LEO's in the field when they come against heavily armed targets, but the biggest difference between them and you is that you just have to fire enough rounds to cover your escape and they have to stay involved until the bitter end.
Stephen426, I think you misunderstand that barrels on revolvers and semi-automatics are measured differently. The barrel length of a semi-auto includes the chamber while a revolver does not. If you included the chamber of a revolver, you would find that a given barrel length is actually more equivalent to a semi with roughly an inch longer barrel. For example, a .38 Spl revolver with a 2" barrel actually has roughly the same length barrel as a 9mm with a 3" barrel if the chamber of the revolver is counted.
Secondly, trigger pull is a very subjective thing. When compared to my DA autos (a CZ-75, Walther PP, and S&W 1076) I actually find that I shoot my revolvers better because while the trigger may be longer and heavier, it seems much smoother (particularly on my S&W revolvers). As far as second stike capability goes, as you noted a second strike to a bad primer is unlikely to rectify the problem. Therin likes one of the advantages of a revolver, another pull of the trigger rotates the cylinder and brings a fresh round into play. While with practice you may be able to rack a slide quite quickly, I very seriously doubt that most people can do it as fast or faster than they can pull the trigger again.
Ammo capacity and reload time is one of the few legitimate advantages that I see a semi-auto having but, as evidenced by the lack of an answer to my question in post # 33, I think that this advantage is often over stated.
Finally with regards to power, I do frequently carry my 4" S&W 629 .44 Magnum in the winter time. With a good holster and belt, I find this gun no harder or less comfortable to carry than a full-sized semi-automatic.
Secondly, trigger pull is a very subjective thing. When compared to my DA autos (a CZ-75, Walther PP, and S&W 1076) I actually find that I shoot my revolvers better because while the trigger may be longer and heavier, it seems much smoother (particularly on my S&W revolvers). As far as second stike capability goes, as you noted a second strike to a bad primer is unlikely to rectify the problem. Therin likes one of the advantages of a revolver, another pull of the trigger rotates the cylinder and brings a fresh round into play. While with practice you may be able to rack a slide quite quickly, I very seriously doubt that most people can do it as fast or faster than they can pull the trigger again.
Ammo capacity and reload time is one of the few legitimate advantages that I see a semi-auto having but, as evidenced by the lack of an answer to my question in post # 33, I think that this advantage is often over stated.
Finally with regards to power, I do frequently carry my 4" S&W 629 .44 Magnum in the winter time. With a good holster and belt, I find this gun no harder or less comfortable to carry than a full-sized semi-automatic.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
My S&W m629 snub carries at least as easily as my Sig P229 Elite.
Stephen246:
If I may, it sounds like your post could be restated: "Autos carry more, and the probability of bad stuff is small enough I don't care." And I think that's great -- you've done your own soul-searching, and found what level of risk you're willing to adopt. A FTF is very rare, and you're satisfied with very rare.
On the other hand, what you can't do is deny that there is an advantage in some (most?) of these areas for the revolver platform. The advantages merely do not overcome your adoption of certain risks and preference for high capacity. Again, I think that's great. You have a reasoned approach, and it makes sense.
Yet, if someone makes their decision based on Murphy's law, comfort with "very rare" might be substantially less. I am one of these people. I am willing to sacrifice capacity for lack of bad things that even COULD go wrong. I work professionally in Information Assurance, and risk analysis is always complex, clouded with many subjective factors. I just land on a more cautious side than you do.
All of these choices are valid, personal, subjective, and (perhaps unfortunately) arguable ;-).
-Jephthai-
If I may, it sounds like your post could be restated: "Autos carry more, and the probability of bad stuff is small enough I don't care." And I think that's great -- you've done your own soul-searching, and found what level of risk you're willing to adopt. A FTF is very rare, and you're satisfied with very rare.
On the other hand, what you can't do is deny that there is an advantage in some (most?) of these areas for the revolver platform. The advantages merely do not overcome your adoption of certain risks and preference for high capacity. Again, I think that's great. You have a reasoned approach, and it makes sense.
Yet, if someone makes their decision based on Murphy's law, comfort with "very rare" might be substantially less. I am one of these people. I am willing to sacrifice capacity for lack of bad things that even COULD go wrong. I work professionally in Information Assurance, and risk analysis is always complex, clouded with many subjective factors. I just land on a more cautious side than you do.
All of these choices are valid, personal, subjective, and (perhaps unfortunately) arguable ;-).
-Jephthai-
Quality of ammo is more important in semi-autos
For years, I've used an old beater 45 ACP revolver for home defense. It's loaded with Auto Rim LSWC 's. I keep a couple of moon clips with it (they're the worlds fastest speed loaders) filled with Remington-UMC's very reliable 45 ACP FMJ ammo, just in case I ever need more than my first 6. I like this old 45 revolver for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is because at the range, it will shoot the cheapest ammo I can find without so much as a hiccup. (Well, the ejector rod did recently loosen up on me due to accumulated years of recoil) But almost everytime I go to a range, I see some guy with a semi-auto 45 ACP cussing and fuming with failures to feed, or failures to eject, or failures to fire. (I think that the problem is usually that they too, like me, are trying to shoot on the cheap, but their fine semi-auto's just won't handle the imperfectly headspaced, and/or otherwise cruddy ammo they're trying to shoot in it.) But my old revolver will shoot it just fine. I long ago decided to never buy a 45 automatic until I could afford to shoot only top of the line ammo in it at the firing range. I'm retired now and I still have the revolver.
For years, I've used an old beater 45 ACP revolver for home defense. It's loaded with Auto Rim LSWC 's. I keep a couple of moon clips with it (they're the worlds fastest speed loaders) filled with Remington-UMC's very reliable 45 ACP FMJ ammo, just in case I ever need more than my first 6. I like this old 45 revolver for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is because at the range, it will shoot the cheapest ammo I can find without so much as a hiccup. (Well, the ejector rod did recently loosen up on me due to accumulated years of recoil) But almost everytime I go to a range, I see some guy with a semi-auto 45 ACP cussing and fuming with failures to feed, or failures to eject, or failures to fire. (I think that the problem is usually that they too, like me, are trying to shoot on the cheap, but their fine semi-auto's just won't handle the imperfectly headspaced, and/or otherwise cruddy ammo they're trying to shoot in it.) But my old revolver will shoot it just fine. I long ago decided to never buy a 45 automatic until I could afford to shoot only top of the line ammo in it at the firing range. I'm retired now and I still have the revolver.