Why are revolvers so expensive ?

J

Juancts

New member
Hi. I've been looking around to buy a brand new revolver. I've been carrying and shooting pistols for some years now. A good pistol (glock, Sig,,etc) costs from $500 to $700.
I'd like to know why are revolvers so expensive. They usually start at $700. A new Colt cobra 38spl cost @ $700+. Magnums cost more...

Appreciate your comments .

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
Tolerances and or hand fitting. I expect the tolerances on a revolver, particularly timing, require more labor to set.
 
Most of the parts for a pistol can be mass produced on a CNC machine in large quantities. Fitting those parts together does not require special skill. A revolver, on the other hand, requires LOTS of hand work - requiring significant skill. Couple that with the fact that a revolver has a whole lot more moving parts than an autoloader. Just look at the exploded schematic of a typical revolver and you'll see.
 
Making good revolvers simply require more labor than semi autos. This has been the case for a long time. Cost.... the dominant reason some of the brands like Rossi, Charter Arms, and I suppose Taurus sell here in the US.
 
Read an interview years ago about the
president of Taurus. He said he loves
revolvers but they cost a lot more to
make than autos.

And to be competitive in the U.S. the
profit margin is smaller than on an auto.
 
The fair comparison would be between a S&W or Ruger revolver made in the US and a US-made steel-framed 1911. I think the prices will be very similar for equivalent features and finish quality. There are a lot of machining operations needed to make these and that means one of two things:

a high rejection rate for hand-machined and fitted parts

or

more complex automated machinery and processes like MIM and ECM to ensure consistency of all the parts with a lower rejection rate

Either way, it results in higher costs.

South American made revolvers can be a little less costly. Revolvers with cast aluminum frames in low-pressure chamberings like 38 Special can also have lower costs.

If an autoloading pistol design can have substantially fewer parts and many more of those parts can be a low-tolerance injection-molded polymer that requires little machine time and have a very low rejection rate, then costs are going to be far down.

A good analogy would be a fountain pen versus a ball-point pen. There really are no fountain pens that cost less than $5. Most decent ones cost at least $25. These are just plastic or aluminum functional pens with no luxury features. Ball-point pens start at closer to $0.05. You can get a perfectly functional Bic pen at give-a-way prices. You can, of course, get either one in luxury versions for exorbitant prices.
 
It's demand.

The latest 2016 data shows revolvers made up a tiny portion of all handguns made/registered in the US.

Low demand, but stable demand and established high pricing keeps the price (too) high.
 
Let me throw a wrench into the mix here..... Why are most revolvers higher priced than semi's? People seem to demand finer fit and finish in a revolver, which requires additional labor.

But let's take a look on the accuracy side. To make a semi very accurate, it takes additional labor, just like making a revolver have a great fit and finish. A bone stock average, $700 M1911 will shoot what, 6 inch groups at 25 yards? What price range would it be for a stock revolver to shoot 6 inch groups at 25 yards? It could probably be done with a $400 Taurus. So do revolvers have to be more expensive if accuracy is the main goal? No they do not, it's the demand of better fit and finish that makes revolvers more expensive.


I have a old Taurus M83 .38spcl that I bought at an auction for $190 which included taxes and transfer fees. From the bench, it will out shoot my $1000 Colt M1911 with a Kart barrel and trigger job. So revolvers do not have to be more expensive, demand creates that.
 
Frames need to be cast or forged, then machined in mills. Cylinders turned on a lathe, then milled. There's a lot more machine time needed to make revolvers than a polymer semi auto whose frames are molded, slide rails and other steel internals that are stamped in seconds, the most time consuming process for semi autos are the slides.

Machining time aside, it takes longer to assemble a revolver than a semi auto as well since there are more parts.

Supply/Demand also has a factor in the price, the demand for semi pistols is so much higher than revolvers, so they get produced in mass numbers. When dealing with such high quantities, prices paid by the consumer are a lot less.

That's not to say there aren't good, cheap revolvers out there. Charters are pretty good for the sub $400 price.
 
Supply/Demand also has a factor in the price, the demand for semi pistols is so much higher than revolvers, so they get produced in mass numbers. When dealing with such high quantities, prices paid by the consumer are a lot less.
Click to expand...

Personally, I turn the question around, somewhat, why are polymer frame semi autos so EXPENSIVE??? :rolleyes:

Always seemed to me that if you are injection molding the frame out of some kind of plastic (and that's what polymer is) they should be even cheaper than they are. Significantly cheaper than an all metal gun. But they aren't, so while costs must be lower, they only sell for a little bit less than steel/alloy frame guns, so as I see it they are much more profitable to make.

Here's a blast from the past, from 1974, back before polymer frame guns, back before the police switched from revolvers to semis for general use...

A Colt Govt Model, Mk IV series 70 listed at $134.95, blued and 149.95 nickeled.

A S&W model 19 listed at $150.00 Blue or nickel.
S&W M&P model 10 was $96.00 blued, $106.00 Nickel

I do think demand might have something to do with today's pricing.
 
Always seemed to me that if you are injection molding the frame out of some kind of plastic (and that's what polymer is) they should be even cheaper than they are. Significantly cheaper than an all metal gun. But they aren't, so while costs must be lower, they only sell for a little bit less than steel/alloy frame guns, so as I see it they are much more profitable to make.
Click to expand...

The cost to produce something has nothing to do with it's value. When you pay for internet, cable, cell phone service, or computer software you're paying for air. You get nothing tangible and it costs nothing to manufacture. But most of us spend enough every year for those services to pay for several new guns. Companies are in business to make a profit. I'll buy the best product with zero thought as to how much it costs. Unless it is something I'm capable of producing myself at considerable less cost.
 
44 AMP,

I also recall the prices of a Colt 1911 vs. the must-have
Smith Model 19 in the 1970s. Once had a annual gun
magazine/book and those were about the suggested
MSRP.
 
The cost to produce something has nothing to do with it's value.
Click to expand...

I believe that actual value is a situational judgement call.

When you pay for internet, cable, cell phone service, or computer software you're paying for air. You get nothing tangible and it costs nothing to manufacture.
Click to expand...

I don't consider this to be accurate, because you are paying for a service, and it definitely costs something to manufacture in order to be able to provide the service. What good is your cellphone without the network, towers, and switching hardware? Those cost money to create and maintain. That's what the cost of the service pays for (plus all other corporate expenses and their profit).

My point about polymer frame guns is that, once your R&D costs are recouped, actual production costs are significant less than conventional metal and therefore, they could be priced lower than they are, and still keep the same profit margin found in metal guns, but they aren't. They are (or were) priced slightly lower than metal frame guns, but their profit per unit is higher, or so it seems, to me.

What's the big difference between revolver and semis? How about 6 (or 5) chambers instead of one? All of which must line up with the barrel within acceptable tolerances. The mechanism for doing that is more complex than the mechanism that feeds ammo into the single chamber of the semi auto.

That's a big point right there, especially today, when demand for revolvers essentially only comes from the private sector,. Note that cost for high end DA .22 revolvers is higher than the comparable models in centerfire calibers. The main reason is less demand.

Why is the 9mm Luger round the cheapest centerfire you'll usually find? Because they make so much of it. Volume means they can make lower profit on each individual piece but still make money, overall.

Uncle Ed,
the prices I listed came from the Gun Digest 28th Anniversary 1974 Deluxe Edition.

(and yes, I bought it new..:D)
 
We're not talking about value here. Value is a subjective judgment by buyers and sellers. We're talking about price. While price is affected by supply and demand, the price has certain constraints on it. Another way of looking at it is the "supply" of lower-cost revolvers is non-existent because nobody is willing to sell them at a great loss.

If the demand for revolvers is relatively lower because the market favors autoloaders, let's consider those 1974 prices from when the demand for revolvers was greater, adjusted by the BLS CPI inflation calculator.

The Model 19 that was $150 in 1974 would be $829 today.
The Model 10 that was $96 in 1974 would be $527 today.

Because new Model 10's have become comparatively obscure, I would compare it to prices on new .38 Special J frames. In both cases, we see the price of revolvers has not changed significantly since 1974. If anything, it has come down a bit. It sort of depends on MSRP vs. street pricing since it's not clear to me what the '74 prices were or how much store prices varied from MSRP back then. But it's safe to say that they weren't selling new duty revolvers for the equivalent of $400 back then when the S&W Model 19 was as popular as the Glock Model 19 is today.
 
Are polymer-framed automatics overpriced? That is, priced with high margins? The premium brands are, but that's because of widespread belief in their value. We can see that not just Hi Point, but a number of gun manufacturers producing equivalent features can price their automatics well below Glock, Sig, HK, FN, CZ and other premium brands. Taurus, Century, Canik, SCCY, even some Ruger models can be priced close to $200 -- at most no more than half what similar Glock models sell for (~$500). So those premium brands do probably feature larger margins than the discount brands. Those margins are shared between the manufacturer, the distributor, and stores, and customers also enjoy more buyers in the used market and higher resale prices.
 
Why are revolvers so expensive ?
Click to expand...
You can buy cheaper revolvers, if that's what you want. Revolvers cost more because there are more parts, more detailed machining of those parts, more detailed fitting, more attention to polishing, and more time required for assembly. All of that costs more than the same required for an autoloader, which generally have fewer parts, little fitting needed, and typically lower external finish expectations. Of course, you can buy revolvers made in countries with lower standards of living and associated lower wages (take a look at Taurus or Rossi revolvers next time you are in a gun store- look OK but are only so-so reliable). You could also look at revolvers made in countries with higher standards of living which have finer finishes and hand fitting, will look better and have very high reliability, and correspondingly higher prices (take a look at a Korth).

Basically, it comes down to economics: guns cost what it costs to have the machining, fitting, polishing, finishing and assembly done to the standards expected with the quality desired at a price that people will pay in the country you intend to sell them in, and leave enough profit to allow the company to grow and progress. People vote with their wallets. You could make the finest revolver in the world, but if people won't pay the price you'll go broke. If you make the cheapest revolver in the world, some people will buy them, but probably won't buy twice. So pay the price for the revolver you want.
 
Juancts said:
Hi. I've been looking around to buy a brand new revolver. I've been carrying and shooting pistols for some years now. A good pistol (glock, Sig,,etc) costs from $500 to $700.
I'd like to know why are revolvers so expensive. They usually start at $700. A new Colt cobra 38spl cost @ $700+. Magnums cost more...

Appreciate your comments .

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
When you are comparing premium pistols and revolvers that are sought by gun snobs, they are expensive. Many of us cheapskates or thrifty buy brands that are much more inexpensive and they are both reliable and accurate. You can buy a single action handgun for slightly over $100 (Rough Rider and others) to well over $700 (S&W and others). You can buy a polymer handgun for a little over $100 (I just paid $119.99 for a Taurus Spectrum) to very expensive. My Taurus 856 6 shot 38 Special snub nose can be bought for under $250 and you get a $25 rebate on it. My double action Charter Arms 22LR was a little over $350. All of the guns have proven to be very reliable and they all have a lifetime warranty.

I can buy the brands you mention and like but I don't want double or triple the price I paid to get something that is slicker, smoother and prettier when it performs the same. My Smith&Wessons and Rugers don't do anything better than my cheaper guns other than looking better.
 
A little confused here.

In this thread some one said that revolvers require so many more parts, than semi’s, and that they are more complex...etc, etc.

So my question is,,, I think revolvers were invented before semi’s. If they are so much more complex,,,,why??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top