Why don't revolver carriers worry about capacity?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I enjoy shooting revolvers-single action. Going shooting into the double action mode, for me, is not a good thing. I have a custom K38 that was returned to the maker because the wonderful double action would not reliably work with ordinary 38 Special rounds. My smallest Smith's are K frames. The shortest has a 4" barrel.

My carry gun is a stock Glock G23.4. Great gun. I shoot self-loaders these days more than the revolvers.My carry gun is the stock Glock 23.4. I'm currently looking for a G29 Glock 10mm. If I worry about capacity it's possible to take along G22 magazines. On the G23 there is in the gun safe an OEM 357 SIG barrel.
 
I enjoy shooting revolvers-single action. Going shooting into the double action mode, for me, is not a good thing.
Click to expand...
fine, for targets, plinking, small game, and so on.

For self defense, there are a number of very important reasons for using DA only.
 
When I pocket carry my j frame, it's because of the form factor. While it is light because it's got scandium in it (and holds 1 less round than my Kahr CM9.. lead is heavy), it's the shape of the grip that helps in my case.

Revolvers grips don't need to house a magazine inside, they could have grips as thin as a pencil or pen if someone chose to design G10 or aluminum grips for J frames that just covered the hammer spring. My crimsons trace grips are on the thin side and therefore give up a little comfort / rapid-fire shootability. But some of my pants have pocket mouths that are cut like jeans: tight, horizontal opening. Having a thinner handle that is canted forward like a revolver grip makes it easier to get my revolver out because one knuckle at a time leaves the pocket starting with the pinky. If all knuckles try to exit the pocket at once, there's not enough slack to let it happen without some trouble. I've since found a little trick that helps me withdraw a small semi-auto too, but before that it was difficult.
 
My comment on double action was not about double action as such. The comment was on my inability to use the double action effectively. I regularly shoot Glock's to 25 yards. There, the revolvers rule single action. The small auto's work. Shooting at that range with with my double action revolver is a disaster. I'd ,in these circumstances, rather stack to deck to my favor. This is for me and me alone. It's the G23. YMMV
 
I'm not military or police. Where I live, I feel a revolver is more than enough, so when I carry, its just my .44 Special Bulldog.
 
J.G. Terry said:
My comment on double action was not about double action as such. The comment was on my inability to use the double action effectively. I regularly shoot Glock's to 25 yards. There, the revolvers rule single action. The small auto's work. Shooting at that range with with my double action revolver is a disaster. I'd ,in these circumstances, rather stack to deck to my favor. This is for me and me alone. It's the G23. YMMV
Click to expand...
If you take the time and effort, and it doesnt take much of either, to learn to shoot DAO, you will find that the benefits cross all platforms, and you will shoot better with pretty much anything you shoot.
 
Where you at Ohio Guy?

I'm in N.E Ohio - just outside of Akron.

We should get together and burn up some .38 spl. sometime.
 
JimCunn said:
SA is just as fast as DA on first shot out of the holster.
Click to expand...
Id argue no, but a lot of that depends on the shooter too, type of gun and how well practiced they are. For the average shooter, Id still say no.

If youre talking strictly a DA revolver, I will also say no. Draw the gun, stroke the trigger. Less work and better accuracy.
 
I carry a 342 DAO and I do worry about capacity. I practice a lot with it and a 642. I shoot drills up close and shoot out to 25 yards on a regular basis. At tines, I stretch it out to 40 yards on a steel plate but I have trouble getting hits at that range. I will never shoot it as well as my G26 but it is much easier to carry concealed, especially when doing physical work that requires me to crawl into engine compartments or under a dash.

I do worry about capacity but the more concealable nature of the 342 gets it the nod.
 
I appreciate everyone's thoughts. Most likely, my Walther PPS with its 8+1 configuration and a spare 8 round magazine will remain my EDC under most conditions. The small revolver will play backup duty, or for those times when comfort reigns supreme. For instance, I'll soon have a 9 hour car trip coming up (both ways) when I'll really only be out in public during gas and food stops. I can see the j-frame providing that comfort and convenience. Do to my work environment, the only times I actually carry *all* day are sometimes on weekends, and so the size or weight of a carry piece never has factored that much into my decisions.

I've just about checked out from carrying a 15 round double stack -- that sucker gets heavy and for whatever reasons, I do not feel less prepared carrying 9+8 rounds than carrying 16+15 rounds.

But carrying 5 + 0 rounds on a regular basis does give me pause, although I can't articulate why, and to date, I've survived just fine needing 0+0.
 
Unless you have a reason specifically to carry a revolver I would lean towards the semi-autos and I say that as someone who carries a revolver. A revolver is very seldom an answer in search of a question. For some people it is an answer to a question.

What do I mean by that? If you are not sure and do not have a specific reason(s) you want to use a revolver as a carry piece it is likely you are better served by one of the choices of semi-autos.

I am one of the people who ended up with a revolver but I have specific reasons having to do with ease of concealment
 
The one thing I dont get is, if I can have a gun of similar size, that carries two to three times the ammo, with generally faster reloads, thats generally easier to carry, and shoot, why wouldnt I?

It just doesnt make much sense to me to intentionally handicap myself unnecessarily.
 
The one thing I dont get is, if I can have a gun of similar size, that carries two to three times the ammo, with generally faster reloads, thats generally easier to carry, and shoot, why wouldnt I?

It just doesnt make much sense to me to intentionally handicap myself unnecessarily.
Click to expand...

Similarity of dimensions are just that. The curves of a revolver, at least for me, make it carry much easier. I originally bought it for on my running belt but remembered how much I like how a revolver "fits". I have given up carrying it on a running belt because of practicality but there is more to how a pistol fits than dimensions.
 
For instance, I'll soon have a 9 hour car trip coming up (both ways) when I'll really only be out in public during gas and food stops. I can see the j-frame providing that comfort and convenience.
Click to expand...

For car rides, I actually find IWB more accessible although less comfortable depending on the holster. Hybrid holsters with a wide backing feel nice if I'm sitting against something. Try drawing from your front pants pocket while driving - it isn't easy! You might have to straighten your leg first. But even knowing this, guess what - I still pocket carry most of the time.
 
Lohman446 said:
Similarity of dimensions are just that. The curves of a revolver, at least for me, make it carry much easier. I originally bought it for on my running belt but remembered how much I like how a revolver "fits". I have given up carrying it on a running belt because of practicality but there is more to how a pistol fits than dimensions.
Click to expand...
I guess a lot of it is perception and personal preference.

In the past, Ive carried on a daily basis, both full size revolvers (2"-4" K, L, and N frame Smiths ) and full size autos (1911, SIG's, Glocks etc), both IWB and OWB, and really didnt see much difference between them when doing so. If anything, the revolvers, because of their bulk, were a bit less comfortable IWB, but still doable.

OWB, the revolvers were a bit bulkier too, especially with leather holsters, and I dont remember any advantage to their shape, but again, not at all difficult to pull off.

I normally carry a full size handgun, and the "smaller" guns, when I carry them, are secondary/backups to it. I dont normally carry one as a primary.

Even in the heat of the summer, I find its just as easy to carry my 17 under my tee-shirt, as it is a 26 or J frame.

I guess the reality is, its just all about what you want. I know a lot of people bitch about carrying a Seecamp or LCP, etc. And when I hear stuff like that, all I can think of, is ithe Princess and the pea. :p
 
dyl said:
For car rides, I actually find IWB more accessible although less comfortable depending on the holster. Hybrid holsters with a wide backing feel nice if I'm sitting against something. Try drawing from your front pants pocket while driving - it isn't easy! You might have to straighten your leg first. But even knowing this, guess what - I still pocket carry most of the time.
Click to expand...
I cant get the money out of my pocket to pay a toll. Forget about getting a gun out. Besides, I already have to much junk in my pockets anyway.

I do use a Smart Carry, and that is very easy to draw from while sitting. They are actually the most versatile holsters I own/use, and wont be without one.

Normally, Im carrying a 17 AIWB, and its very comfortable and driving is a very comfortable and very accessible.
 
Something that every person practicing personal protection should be focused on is a 100% hit rate for the first shot. None of us can afford the liability that comes with anything less. Because of this, the little j-frame or LCR pocket revolvers are ill-advised -- not because they have only five shots, but because they make a 100% hit rate for the first shot needlessly difficult.
Click to expand...

Because as a civilian, I expect any encounters to be at 2 to 5 feet distance on a man size target, so a small revolver is plenty accurate for that self defense scenario.
 
Master Blaster said:
Because as a civilian, I expect any encounters to be at 2 to 5 feet distance on a man size target, so a small revolver is plenty accurate for that self defense scenario.
Click to expand...
With that in mind, this is a good read. "Trained" cop vs bad guy at "5 feet".

http://fmgpublications.ipaperus.com/FMGPublications/AmericanHandgunner/AHMJ11/?page=1

Starts at page 32.

The distance was around 5-6 feet. 23 rounds expended (bad guy 9 rounds, cop 14) bad guy made one hit, cop, 7 hits. Total time, less than 10 seconds.
 
People carry with what they are confident in. Who cares if you have more or less bang-bang in your boomstick than someone else?

I often don't carry spare mags, just a plain ol 1911 with 8 rounds. Does that make me crazy? :D

though if I expect to go into a Walmart I do tend to put a spare mag in the pocket.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top