Semi autos vs revolvers for carrying

[gb_in_ga]

I didn't vote.

The correct answer is: It depends.

Most of the time, day in and day out, I carry a semi-auto. But there are times when a revolver is the best solution to the problem at hand. If you know that what you are going to face are just varmints of the 2 legged variety, then bottom feeding autoloaders are adequate for the purpose and have their advantages, too. Not saying that revolvers won't get the job done, but that is what the bottom feeding brass chuckers are designed to do. But if you are in the field facing 4 legged threats then the advantages of the wheelguns make them preferable.

FWIW -- if the question was which would I prefer to shoot, day in and day out, it would be a revolver. Being a handloader, I greatly prefer wheelguns. No chasing brass at the range. And with several handgun calibers you just can't beat the versatility. And the ergonomics. There's just something about how a nice revolver points, fits the hand and how the trigger is (SA, and DA if applicable). If I were to be limited to wheelguns I wouldn't feel bad about it at all. I'd just have to find myself a nice CCW wheelgun to replace the bottom feeder I carry now.

 

[MLeake]

It really depends...

... on a bunch of factors.

If I'm outdoors where the 4-legged predators roam, it's hard to beat a .44mag or .357mag with heavy, hard-cast bullets.

If I'm in an area with higher than average crime rates, it's hard to argue against the extra capacity and quick reloads that an auto affords.

If it's really hot, and cover garments are impractical, then it's down to a snubby or a pocket auto. In my experience, the pocket autos are easier to shoot well, but the snubbies are more reliable. I'd have to go with the snubby, on this one, with some speed strips in pocket. (Currently have a S&W 442 in the works, with CTC grips on order.)

Note: I don't shoot snubbies badly, it's just that I can shoot small autos in tighter groups - but I'd prefer not to deal with FTF/FTE issues at point-blank ranges, and so far I just don't 100% trust my PM9. Too bad, because it shoots amazingly accurately; it just has FTF/FTE issues a wee bit more often than I can accept.'

Note2: I don't see much accuracy advantage for lasers with my compact and larger pistols; groups tend to be about the same, and impact to point of aim tends to be similar at ranges from 5-25yds. However, with lasers on snubbies, I do notice better grouping at distances past 7yds. Not that I expect to use a snubbie that far out, but it's good to have the enhanced ability.

 

[ksblazer]

I like both my Colt Defender and my J frame snubby. So it's kind of like picking which of your 2 children do you like the most?

But if I had to pick between the 2. I would prefer the Semi Auto for reasons that have already been posted.

 

[gb_in_ga]

If I'm outdoors where the 4-legged predators roam, it's hard to beat a .44mag or .357mag with heavy, hard-cast bullets.

+1
Not saying that people don't use 10mm for that role, but I still prefer the magnum wheelguns. I use a .357 Mag with nice, warm 180 gr wide flat nose hard cast handloads in this role. For 1 thing, I don't have to worry about feeding out of a magazine up a feed ramp, or having to compromise on bullet design in order to get it to do that. If it fits in the cylinder without protruding from the cylinder, it will work (assuming it has the proper crimp, as applicable).

If I'm in an area with higher than average crime rates, it's hard to argue against the extra capacity and quick reloads that an auto affords.

Again, +1
Then again, the best policy is to avoid such areas to begin with. Yeah, I know, not everybody can do that. For the most part, I can and do.

If it's really hot, and cover garments are impractical, then it's down to a snubby or a pocket auto. In my experience, the pocket autos are easier to shoot well, but the snubbies are more reliable.

Well, yeah. Unless, that is, you are fortunate enough to find a suitable auto that actually is reliable. I was fortunate enough to find one, and that is what I carry. The thing is, being a run of the mill civilian type, it covers any situation I'm liable to find myself in as I go about my daily business, so I don't limit myself to carrying it just in those situations. It is a KT PF-9, and has been 100% reliable since its initial 100 round break-in session. No F&B required. Yeah, I trust it, it has earned that trust. To me, it is my "Poor Man's Kahr", and I don't feel at all undergunned with it. It does what a Kahr does.

Note: I don't shoot snubbies badly, it's just that I can shoot small autos in tighter groups - but I'd prefer not to deal with FTF/FTE issues at point-blank ranges, and so far I just don't 100% trust my PM9. Too bad, because it shoots amazingly accurately; it just has FTF/FTE issues a wee bit more often than I can accept.

Have you tried doing a F&B on it? I understand that Kahrs can be made more reliable doing that, just like some KTs can be.
What irks me about them is that you'd expect the higher dollar Kahr would be 100% right out of the box, maybe needing a short break-in session like my PF-9 did. I understand that some do and some don't. I expect that from the low cost KTs. I expect better from the Kahrs.

Note2: I don't see much accuracy advantage for lasers with my compact and larger pistols; groups tend to be about the same, and impact to point of aim tends to be similar at ranges from 5-25yds. However, with lasers on snubbies, I do notice better grouping at distances past 7yds. Not that I expect to use a snubbie that far out, but it's good to have the enhanced ability.

Lasers: I've never used them and see little need for them. I've seen them in action. They're not for me. I figure that if I'm up close, I won't need it, I'll be on muscle memory, that training thing. If the range is longer, chances are I really shouldn't be shooting anyway, and if I did need it I'd find the dancing spot a distraction. I am a competent shot with regular sights.

 

[denfoote]

Own both.
Carry both.
Poll is non sequitur.

 

[Daryl]

those for me do not offset the fact that is is much more prone to failure. How many times have you had a FTF or FTE at the range with a semi-auto compared to the amount of times you were attacked by a group of armed thugs needing 10-20 rounds to eliminate the threat. I know the first one has happened to all of us and the second one is unlikely to happen to 90% of civilians on this board, note I said civilians.

How many failures I've had at the range with semii-autos is irrelevant. The fact that I've had -zero- failures with my current carry semi-auto is sufficient for me to trust it.

I also trust my revolvers, but like the semi-autos, I try them to be sure everything works the way it should. No light hammer strikes and such.

Once proven, the difference in reliability is a non-issue for me.

I carry either, or both with complete confidance; the primary difference in choosing being where I'm going, what I'm doing, and how I'm doing it.

No need for me to dog on one to justify the other. I have my reasons for what I carry, and both work well for their intended purpose(s).

Daryl

 

[Daryl]

To me more rounds in the gun means accuracy goes down.

While I understand your statement to some degree, and I know people who shoot like that, it's not an exclusive thing.

I've seen folks who blasted away with a DA revolver, unable to hit for spit, and others who placed their shots very accurately with a semi-auto.

Accuracy of the different designs would seem a legitimate point, but I'm not sure about perceived inaccuracy due to having more ammo available.

No matter what one carries, striving for an empty gun in a fight would seem somewhat less than wise.

Daryl

 

[Daryl]

I wasn't going to reply again, but I like this:

For me I get tipped toward revolvers for several reasons, but most of them are more pragmatic than 'they are more reliable... la la la'. First, you can load and unload and check for loaded anywhere and don't need a suitable backstop while doing so, unlike a semi. Second, the manual of arms is as simple as it comes. Third, I just like them more - which is probably the best reason to either carry one or the other if you really think about it.

I never need to check my carry gun to know if it's loaded or not (it's always loaded), but it's a valid point for some, depending on their individual circumstances.

The highlighted part is the best reason of all IMO. People have their preferences.



Daryl

 

[Sport45]

Revolvers are holding their own so far. The auto's don't have a majority, leading 21-19-3.

I'm a little surprised since there are over twice as many threads on the Semiauto Forum than there are on the Revolver Forum. Does that mean there are twice as many owners of semiautomatics?

Maybe it means twice as many people have trouble with their semi's?

Or maybe it's just another meaningless statistic....

 

[COSteve]

Semi auto hands down. My custom G20L (6" 10mm) with the magwell removed (my carry and field configuration) weighs less loaded with 17+1 rounds on board than a S&W 686 (6" 357mag) with only 6 rounds. And, another 17 rounds are a couple of seconds away.

Further, performance wise, using Double Tap's data for their 158grn 357mag in a 6" revolver and their data for their 165grn 10mm in a 6" barrel, they are a wash so one is really getting 3 times the firepower in the same size and weight platform.

 

[trigger happy]

I want a Mark 19 belt fed grenade launcher please

 

[fightingbard]

I believe all handguns are designed for open carry, except mouse guns... Revolvers however, are inarguably designed for open carry...
But hey, thats just me...

Kidding aside, I do not believe I can ever get used to ccw a revolver. Maybe if I had started really really young, it would be a different story.
So many pointy parts...no safety...I just can not...
Besides I even don't like adjustable sights on a semi. Yeah I know, I should get a Glock...


All the best

 

[BillCA]

My strong preference is for a revolver. But I've also been known to carry several types of semi-autos too. To me, it's more like using the appropriate tool for the job.

Revolvers work better for me.
- I shoot them more accurately
- They are much more reliable in my experience
- Revolvers are faster to deploy
- Wheelguns are less picky about ammo types
- Revolvers don't malfunction over limp wristing or body-contact shots
- Some wheelguns can be fired from inside a jacket pocket
- More powerful cartridges are available for the wheelgun

This doesn't mean I won't use a semi-auto, but my preference is for the good old sixgun. Note: Someone mentioned wheelguns better for open-carry. Perhaps, if you needed to "fast draw" against someone. I think the semi-auto is actually more appropriate if it is not a Glock, XD, M&P or other pistol lacking an external safety. If you ever OC without a safety strap or other similar retention system on your holster, I'd consider your actions foolish.

 

[CMichael]

To me more rounds in the gun means accuracy goes down

It doesn't make sense to me.

You can't have too much ammo in a gun fight.

Also after thousands of rounds in my Glock 19 & 34, I have never had a jam.

 

[B.N.Real]

A revolver is great because it can be carried ready to go without any of the possible function issues inherent in the semi auto design.

Yet,I have yet to find a revolver that carries as easily and as comfortably as a small semi auto.

That slab side is easily concealed and sits in the pocket way better then the cylinder of a revolver.

So this is one of those questions best answered by whatever works for you is best for you.

 

[Jo6pak]

I voted for the RPG.
It's not yet legal to carry concealed in WI So I figured if I was going to get into trouble, I might as well GO BIG