What do you guys think can and/or should be done to keep revolvers viable in this day and age? What current /modern trends do you like/dislike? I for one love the use of polymers in revolvers frames. I would like to see more done w rails for accessories like a modern semi automatic. I also would like to see companies like smith and wesson and ruger experiment with different designs, like maybe a low axis barrel aligned with the bottom chamber like a Mateba or chiappa rhino. Or with the strength and lightweight of modern polymers maybe a top break design? What are your thoughts?
The state of modern revolvers and the people who use them
- Thread starter h518may
- Start date
Here's a link to a recent & similar discussion on THR:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=740997
Polymer frames and top breaks got a lot of discussion. IIRC, the consensus is that modern top breaks wouldn't work very well due to their design and modern handgun pressures.
The low-barrel (e.g.Chiappa) design? Meh. It's a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist, IMO.
My take is that revolver accessories have done as much or more to keep revolvers alive. Full moon clips, better speedloaders, better ammo, aftermarket grips, kydex, fiber optic sights, etc., have all helped keep revolvers useable and relevant.
As far as the revolver itself, the basic side eject design works well and would be tough to fundamentally improve upon. Things you mentioned (accessory rail, increased capacity) are likely to do well in the market. S&W's new 8-shot PC 9mm will likely see good initial success, in which case we're likely to see other versions in their standard (non-PC) line-up.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=740997
Polymer frames and top breaks got a lot of discussion. IIRC, the consensus is that modern top breaks wouldn't work very well due to their design and modern handgun pressures.
The low-barrel (e.g.Chiappa) design? Meh. It's a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist, IMO.
My take is that revolver accessories have done as much or more to keep revolvers alive. Full moon clips, better speedloaders, better ammo, aftermarket grips, kydex, fiber optic sights, etc., have all helped keep revolvers useable and relevant.
As far as the revolver itself, the basic side eject design works well and would be tough to fundamentally improve upon. Things you mentioned (accessory rail, increased capacity) are likely to do well in the market. S&W's new 8-shot PC 9mm will likely see good initial success, in which case we're likely to see other versions in their standard (non-PC) line-up.
boondocker385
New member
simplicity has a lot going for it....so does accuracy and powerful rounds (no offense to the 50ae and wildey fans)
.Kreyzhorse
New member
If I want plastic, I'll buy a semi auto. Revolvers should be steel, blued or stainless with wooden grips.
I like that the revolver is still very similar in design and function to those 100 years ago. History is part of the experience with a revolver in my opinion and that will keep them alive and viable.
Also, despite semi autos being more popular, are they really "better" than a revolver?
I like that the revolver is still very similar in design and function to those 100 years ago. History is part of the experience with a revolver in my opinion and that will keep them alive and viable.
Also, despite semi autos being more popular, are they really "better" than a revolver?
IMO, most revolver shooters like the KISS principle. I really don’t want a lot hanging on a revolver, lights lasers, scopes and flash suppressors. That’s not to say they wouldn’t sell but with the sales of guns as it is right now you won’t see manufacture spending a lot of money working on new designs that they can’t build because they can’t build enough of to meet the needed supply.
As for polymers in revolvers, I wouldn’t consider one. I have rifles and semi pistols in polymer but I would not trade my 66 for a pair of Ruger LCR’s, nor 3 or 4.
The other problem with polymer revolvers is the increase in value. Just don’t see them increasing in value like steal revolvers from S&W and Ruger like you have in the past 30 years.
Another reason is that people who collect revolver like S&W J, K, L and N frame revolvers might not like the looks of odd looking guns like the Rhino. I for one don’t, it’s a very good gun and shoots very well but I don’t care for the look. Not the best reason for picking a gun, looks, but a lot of people do pick one for the looks.
It’s similar with 1911’s. You can get a lot of stuff on a 1911. But you will find that most people like the John Browning art work as is. Granted amby safeties and others simple mods are done a lot but it’s still simple modification.
As for polymers in revolvers, I wouldn’t consider one. I have rifles and semi pistols in polymer but I would not trade my 66 for a pair of Ruger LCR’s, nor 3 or 4.
The other problem with polymer revolvers is the increase in value. Just don’t see them increasing in value like steal revolvers from S&W and Ruger like you have in the past 30 years.
Another reason is that people who collect revolver like S&W J, K, L and N frame revolvers might not like the looks of odd looking guns like the Rhino. I for one don’t, it’s a very good gun and shoots very well but I don’t care for the look. Not the best reason for picking a gun, looks, but a lot of people do pick one for the looks.
It’s similar with 1911’s. You can get a lot of stuff on a 1911. But you will find that most people like the John Browning art work as is. Granted amby safeties and others simple mods are done a lot but it’s still simple modification.
Last edited:
Good replies all!! I think where I'm at is polymer is great for cc but 4in and above guns and espiecially heavy caliber/ magnum guns are better if they are good ole steel !! I also find myself liking anywhere from old single action cowboy guns to plastic guns with laser grips, etc! Maybe my problem(if It is one) is that I just like ALL guns and every gun, regardless type /design, has it's strengths and weaknesses.
Mastrogiacomo
New member
I'd love more steel, blued guns. Weight is your friend in a firearm, and I'm tired of all the revolvers trying to look tactical. I prefer to the classic look myself.
Laura
Laura
Weight is an important part of recoil with revolvers. The few ounces saved with scandium frames makes a big increase in recoil. And absent medical or similar issues, the few ounces saved only matters for pocket carry.
I would be much better off if I lost five pounds from my gut, than to worry about a pistol that weighes a couple ounces less.
Grip design has improved a lot with revolvers, but it still needs further development. The right grip (for our hands) does make a huge difference in control.
An eight shot 357Magnum should stop as well as an eight shot autoloader. The ballistics of good, real, as intended and formerly loaded, 38 Specials are right there with the 9mm. Heck, the old 38/44 loads are basically equivalent to many of todays' 357Magnum loads.
Same can be said for the 44 & 45 revolver rounds vs 45ACP.
Hanging things on a handgun has both good and bad points.
Rounds on target. Knowing when to shoot and when not to. Bring able to keep our family safe. Understanding the rules so we don't unintentionally cause a big mess.
And again, absent medical or similar issues, I would be better off worrying about losing a few pounds from my gut than saving a few ounces in a pistol.
In the end, this is a personal decision anyway. Just my thoughts.
I would be much better off if I lost five pounds from my gut, than to worry about a pistol that weighes a couple ounces less.
Grip design has improved a lot with revolvers, but it still needs further development. The right grip (for our hands) does make a huge difference in control.
An eight shot 357Magnum should stop as well as an eight shot autoloader. The ballistics of good, real, as intended and formerly loaded, 38 Specials are right there with the 9mm. Heck, the old 38/44 loads are basically equivalent to many of todays' 357Magnum loads.
Same can be said for the 44 & 45 revolver rounds vs 45ACP.
Hanging things on a handgun has both good and bad points.
Rounds on target. Knowing when to shoot and when not to. Bring able to keep our family safe. Understanding the rules so we don't unintentionally cause a big mess.
And again, absent medical or similar issues, I would be better off worrying about losing a few pounds from my gut than saving a few ounces in a pistol.
In the end, this is a personal decision anyway. Just my thoughts.
L_Killkenny
New member
Revolvers are going to go as revolvers go. No amount of plastic and gadgets will have much if any effects. Like already stated, people wanting such things are going to go semi most times anyway. If revolvers die (and they won't) let them have some dignity doing so.
All I want is a gun that arrives with a proper match of uniform throats, chambers, and bore. I am doing too much gunsmithing for the more finicky loading to achieve less barrel leading. The cylinder/bore match is an important factor, allowing a relationship that facilitates lead bumping up to bore diameter and a good gas seal. Harder lead should not have been swaged by the throats in the first place.
I also want cylinders, both chamber and throat, to be uniform. Gang drills allow drill bits to wear at different rates. I don't like quality by rework.
I also want cylinders, both chamber and throat, to be uniform. Gang drills allow drill bits to wear at different rates. I don't like quality by rework.
bedbugbilly
New member
I'm curious about the OP's age . . . not that it makes any difference or that I'm being critical . . . but I'm guessing younger?
Go in to any gun shop and see what folks are looking at . . . I have friends who own gun shops and they tell me that it is almost always "older" ones looking at revolvers and "younger" ones looking at semis and plastic. I'm not say that is good or bad . . just an observation.
I can pretty much guarantee that the market for radical changes in revolvers would be limited . . . and probably not worth the time for R & D by mfgs.
Personally . . . while polymers may have their place . . . I don't presently own a revolver that is anything but good old steel. I shoot 38s and most are "vintage". I'm not even a big fan of "extra iron" in such things as "ribs" and "under lugs". A rail? For what? I know very few who are going to be using a revolver for "tactical use". I'm sure some hunters might like 'em to hang a light off of for night-time coon hunting but again - how many would sell?
I own a quantity of handguns - Smiths, Colts, Rugers, etc. I do own a Ruger SR9 semi that is plastic - but it took a lot for me to buy a plastic gun - and yes, it functions fine. I had a LCR . . I traded it off and got a Smith 36 - I just like steel.
I was brought up on SA revolvers and have shot them for 50 years. If I could only have one handgun . . it would be a good steel SAA. They shoot well, are reliable and accurate . . . and they been doing the job since 1873 . . . without the need for plastic, rails, sirens, bells and whistles. All of those things are like "go fasters" that all the kids have to have on their cars so they can impress their friends . . . they don't do anything as far as the function of the car for getting from point A to point B. But then I'm old and crotchety . . . and of the "old school" of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
Go in to any gun shop and see what folks are looking at . . . I have friends who own gun shops and they tell me that it is almost always "older" ones looking at revolvers and "younger" ones looking at semis and plastic. I'm not say that is good or bad . . just an observation.
I can pretty much guarantee that the market for radical changes in revolvers would be limited . . . and probably not worth the time for R & D by mfgs.
Personally . . . while polymers may have their place . . . I don't presently own a revolver that is anything but good old steel. I shoot 38s and most are "vintage". I'm not even a big fan of "extra iron" in such things as "ribs" and "under lugs". A rail? For what? I know very few who are going to be using a revolver for "tactical use". I'm sure some hunters might like 'em to hang a light off of for night-time coon hunting but again - how many would sell?
I own a quantity of handguns - Smiths, Colts, Rugers, etc. I do own a Ruger SR9 semi that is plastic - but it took a lot for me to buy a plastic gun - and yes, it functions fine. I had a LCR . . I traded it off and got a Smith 36 - I just like steel.
I was brought up on SA revolvers and have shot them for 50 years. If I could only have one handgun . . it would be a good steel SAA. They shoot well, are reliable and accurate . . . and they been doing the job since 1873 . . . without the need for plastic, rails, sirens, bells and whistles. All of those things are like "go fasters" that all the kids have to have on their cars so they can impress their friends . . . they don't do anything as far as the function of the car for getting from point A to point B. But then I'm old and crotchety . . . and of the "old school" of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
The only "update" I want is for S&W to start offering quality factory nickel plating on all models. I know a lot of people prefer the switch to stainless and I have some of them but I like nickel. Along with that they could also start doing a good finish job on the stainless guns. A lot of the stainless guns come out of the box looking like someone did a bad job trying to polish it with a Dremel Tool.
As a former range safety, I have read many articles about the pros and cons of revolvers. For our department the biggest pro was that it can be used in an emergency when people tend to make mistakes, the revolver has no safety switch, just point and squeeze.
They are so simple that I feel they are very well suited for those who practice but do not shot as often as we may feel they should. I feel they are very relevant for home security again for their simplicity.
That being said, many people think that only having six rounds is a bad thing. I believe the contrary. I carry a KAHR that only holds 6+1 and the second mag only holds 7+1. I also from time to time carry my double stack Glock. Both are .40 S&W.
So I think the revolver has a place in the handgun world for a very long time.
Besides the 40mm revolver style launcher is way cool!!!!!
Mel
They are so simple that I feel they are very well suited for those who practice but do not shot as often as we may feel they should. I feel they are very relevant for home security again for their simplicity.
That being said, many people think that only having six rounds is a bad thing. I believe the contrary. I carry a KAHR that only holds 6+1 and the second mag only holds 7+1. I also from time to time carry my double stack Glock. Both are .40 S&W.
So I think the revolver has a place in the handgun world for a very long time.
Besides the 40mm revolver style launcher is way cool!!!!!
Mel
Leave plastic for airplane model kits
Don't like sleeved barrels
S&W, how about a nice finish on your stainless guns, also give me a choice of square or round grip frame. Safety doesn't bother me.
Ruger, how about a grip frame. Also, time for a serious makeover for your SRH if your not going to continue to make the Standard RH.
Don't like sleeved barrels
S&W, how about a nice finish on your stainless guns, also give me a choice of square or round grip frame. Safety doesn't bother me.
Ruger, how about a grip frame. Also, time for a serious makeover for your SRH if your not going to continue to make the Standard RH.
Ok I just wanted to clear a few things up. First I am 43 yrs old and am and always will be a lover of revolvers. I think some are getting the impression I feel and /or want the revolver to go to the wayside. Quite the opposite!! I started this post to discuss what could/needs to be done to ensure that wouldn't happen!( not that I see that as a possibility). I would however like to see the revolver on a same par of popularity as semi autos because i truly feel both have pros/cons and both are viable choices for different people.