HighValleyRanch
New member
CDR, see if you can adjust your iphone photos smaller somehow. Photos are way too big for this forum!
Why don't revolver carriers worry about capacity?
- Thread starter OhioGuy
- Start date
- Status
CDR, see if you can adjust your iphone photos smaller somehow. Photos are way too big for this forum!
I made them smaller. Did that work?
I use Tapatalk.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
HighValleyRanch
New member
Purfect!
Just found that the new 3" LCRx is approved for California, so will have to pick one up! My current 3" LCRx in .38 is my favorite revolver carry.
Just found that the new 3" LCRx is approved for California, so will have to pick one up! My current 3" LCRx in .38 is my favorite revolver carry.
Some of us, as CDR Glock pointed out have been shooting magnum revolvers for many years. I carried on on duty for decades and still shoot competitively with them. The only time I could not reload faster than most auto loader shooters is sometimes @ -40. Things tend to get sticky....
The closet Wall Mart is a high crime area with many dope deals going on after dark. The parking lot is visited by the homeless during the day. This Wallyworld is supposed to be the most highly shoplifted store in the USA. As I recall many years ago police were trained that a person armed with a knife could move very fast across seven yards. So I'm supposed to start shooting wild at any range? If I can function at 25 yards how about three or five. Have you ever heard of a drive by? Most, Most, Most. It is highly unlikely that terrorist will fly airplanes into the World Trade center.
Added: I can carry at total of twenty-seven rounds how about you
I get 18 with a couple of speed loaders. If I ever figure I need to go on the offensive, I can go 46 rounds with a brass chunker.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Prevailing wound ballistic theory does not agree with this. Higher velocity or heavier bullet magnums are not considered to do meaningfully more damage than other bullets that expand and penetrate sufficiently. They either penetrate further and exit the body without further effect, or they cause slightly greater temporary stretch of surrounding tissue without further damage because of the elasticity of that tissue.
If this theory of wound ballistics is true, it has profound meaningfulness especially to those loading and carrying 357 and other "magnum" cartridges. If this is correct, Magnum users have an acute opportunity to do something that is possibly very counterproductive and at best completely useless.
It is important to understand that this theory does not negate all the value of 357 Magnum or make 38 Special "just as good." What it does suggest is that 357 Magnum, 125 grains loaded to 1100 fps is enough and that loading it to 1600 fps or 158 grains to 1400 fps is not any better. But, sorry, 125 grain 38 Special loaded to 890 fps still sucks.
High round counts and reloads are only relevant to extreme outlier "worst case" scenarios for personal protection. We don't have to use "gunfight statistics" to limit our "options" or restrict our preparedness, but we would be ill-advised to overlook the "most likely" conditions to favor extreme outliers.
Worst-case thinking always shifts attention and resources away from the most-likely case. Believing a high-capacity magazine, greater capacity in spare magazines, or faster reloads gives a person an "undeniable edge" is clearly ignoring the most-likely case in favor of preparation for extreme outlier events.
The person who is giving attention and preparation toward the most-likely case is going to be training and practicing the skills that are important rather than dwelling on the possibility of a scenario that requires equipment other than that which gives the best opportunity for first-shot hits, sufficient effect, and complete accountability for every shot fired.
Worst-case thinking always shifts attention and resources away from the most-likely case. Believing a high-capacity magazine, greater capacity in spare magazines, or faster reloads gives a person an "undeniable edge" is clearly ignoring the most-likely case in favor of preparation for extreme outlier events.
The person who is giving attention and preparation toward the most-likely case is going to be training and practicing the skills that are important rather than dwelling on the possibility of a scenario that requires equipment other than that which gives the best opportunity for first-shot hits, sufficient effect, and complete accountability for every shot fired.
J.G. Terry
New member
The auto rules
The answer is yes to OP's question. Round count is meaningless to revolver carriers. All this is fine and well with the revolver. If I recall correctly the move for self-loaders had to do with the bud guys showing up with high capacity semi-auto handguns. The move to auto's nationwide came after that point. The main replacement handgun was noted for reliability and ease of maintenance. A serendipitous outcome was that qualifying was easier. The local police carry their Glock's with two extra magazines. What a waste since they cold carry a revolver with a couple of speed loaders. The same reasons apply today as at the time of the prudent swap was made to high capacity magazines.
I notice the vast number of 9mm personal defense handguns offered today. One point to remember that any of us could be in a situation were the bad guys were also carrying the identical high capacity magazine automatics. Would I pick my G23 or a five shot J frame Smith? Who ever gets the first shot has the psychological advantage. I'm really going to sacrifice a round from my five shot revolver. I'll stay with the auto.
I went out at twilight to test my Ruger Blackhawk Bisley 45 Colt caliber. I find this revolver to be accurate and powerful. There are a half dozen revolvers here that do as well. All things being equal (they never are)would I carry a Smith&Wesson K frame. No. It's still a six shot firearm. The least I would carry is my 1911 or HK USPC in 45ACP with eight shots. Got extra magazines for each. The G23 rules for what what we are talking about.
The answer is yes to OP's question. Round count is meaningless to revolver carriers. All this is fine and well with the revolver. If I recall correctly the move for self-loaders had to do with the bud guys showing up with high capacity semi-auto handguns. The move to auto's nationwide came after that point. The main replacement handgun was noted for reliability and ease of maintenance. A serendipitous outcome was that qualifying was easier. The local police carry their Glock's with two extra magazines. What a waste since they cold carry a revolver with a couple of speed loaders. The same reasons apply today as at the time of the prudent swap was made to high capacity magazines.
I notice the vast number of 9mm personal defense handguns offered today. One point to remember that any of us could be in a situation were the bad guys were also carrying the identical high capacity magazine automatics. Would I pick my G23 or a five shot J frame Smith? Who ever gets the first shot has the psychological advantage. I'm really going to sacrifice a round from my five shot revolver. I'll stay with the auto.
I went out at twilight to test my Ruger Blackhawk Bisley 45 Colt caliber. I find this revolver to be accurate and powerful. There are a half dozen revolvers here that do as well. All things being equal (they never are)would I carry a Smith&Wesson K frame. No. It's still a six shot firearm. The least I would carry is my 1911 or HK USPC in 45ACP with eight shots. Got extra magazines for each. The G23 rules for what what we are talking about.
Last edited:
I think 6 rounds of 357 from a carry-size gun and without hearing protection would never happen, overwhelming at about round three maybe.
OldMarksman
Staff
Well put.
This is not true. After the first shot, a person is at least temporarily deaf. The temporary hearing loss may not be total, but they could even have ruptured ear drums. Either way, they will be less sensitive to the noise, not more. By round six they will be quite desensitized and could easily go on to destroy their hearing permanently without realizing it. The acoustics of the environment will affect how quickly and severely this happens. Don't count on noise stimulation from preventing it under circumstances whether its a fight or just practice.
J.G. Terry
New member
Hearing Damage
What happened to me: There was a time where hearing protection was unknown. We shot without benefit of hearing protection for years. The army was slow to supply hearing protection. Ear plugs came after we qualified with M-14's Afterward it was shotguns and rifles at home. What was happening is the accumulated damage to the hearing. When you hear the ringing the damage is done. Today I wear a hearing aid. My partner gave me a pair of high end electronic ear muffs. He said he was tired of yelling at me. Anybody that regularly shoots without hearing protection is headed for an ear trumpet. It's just plain stupid not to use hearing protection.
Added: Do you think a compact Glock like a G26 or G27 would work OK for confrontations less than 10 yards. Would the bullets just bounce of the targets?
What happened to me: There was a time where hearing protection was unknown. We shot without benefit of hearing protection for years. The army was slow to supply hearing protection. Ear plugs came after we qualified with M-14's Afterward it was shotguns and rifles at home. What was happening is the accumulated damage to the hearing. When you hear the ringing the damage is done. Today I wear a hearing aid. My partner gave me a pair of high end electronic ear muffs. He said he was tired of yelling at me. Anybody that regularly shoots without hearing protection is headed for an ear trumpet. It's just plain stupid not to use hearing protection.
Added: Do you think a compact Glock like a G26 or G27 would work OK for confrontations less than 10 yards. Would the bullets just bounce of the targets?
Last edited:
StihlKicking
New member
Theory may not agree with this but real world shooting does. I’m not up to speed on ballistic theory or very interested in it. However I have shot enough critters with a hand gun over the last 30 years to understand which loads kill the quickest and most efficiently.
I’m more interested in the damage a bullet does to a living creature rather than a block of jelly.
The simple answer is because it comes with the territory and they feel confident that 5-8 rounds of ammunition is sufficient.
Personally, I could see carrying something like a S&W TRR8 or a Taurus 627 and not feeling underarmed. .357 Magnum has a long and storied history of effectiveness which I don't doubt, so if you're a good shot and can land those shots directly on target, then there's little reason to doubt that 8 rounds of .357 Magnum would be insufficient for anything less than facing multiple attackers, and in which case you're probably just as screwed with a double-stack 9mm, the only difference is you have more unfired cartridges for CSI to find in your gun afterwards.
People can argue all day about how statistically 9mm Luger is just as good *swings arm in an upward arc* as anything else because the FBI says so and simulated tests cannot detect any difference, but I imagine that a bigger stretch cavity likely equates to more pain, (Try pinching your earlobe then stretching it out, then stretch it further. Hurts more when stretched further, right?) and obviously the brighter muzzle flash and report are obviously more frightening, so there's likely also a higher probability of psychological stops with .357 Magnum versus 9mm Luger as well, and if a stop is a stop, why split hairs?
Personally, I could see carrying something like a S&W TRR8 or a Taurus 627 and not feeling underarmed. .357 Magnum has a long and storied history of effectiveness which I don't doubt, so if you're a good shot and can land those shots directly on target, then there's little reason to doubt that 8 rounds of .357 Magnum would be insufficient for anything less than facing multiple attackers, and in which case you're probably just as screwed with a double-stack 9mm, the only difference is you have more unfired cartridges for CSI to find in your gun afterwards.
People can argue all day about how statistically 9mm Luger is just as good *swings arm in an upward arc* as anything else because the FBI says so and simulated tests cannot detect any difference, but I imagine that a bigger stretch cavity likely equates to more pain, (Try pinching your earlobe then stretching it out, then stretch it further. Hurts more when stretched further, right?) and obviously the brighter muzzle flash and report are obviously more frightening, so there's likely also a higher probability of psychological stops with .357 Magnum versus 9mm Luger as well, and if a stop is a stop, why split hairs?
Last edited:
J.G. Terry
New member
Miracle bullets
Miracle bullets: I read where one of the new miracle bullet in 9mm actually expands to .451. This combination should replace everything. Ha.
Miracle bullets: I read where one of the new miracle bullet in 9mm actually expands to .451. This combination should replace everything. Ha.
J.G. Terry
New member
G29 in 10mm
Carry Gun: How would a Glock 29, the 10mm compact, stack up against the revolvers of which you speak? That Glock handgun as a 3.77" barrels. How long is the barrel on those 357 pocket pistols?
Carry Gun: How would a Glock 29, the 10mm compact, stack up against the revolvers of which you speak? That Glock handgun as a 3.77" barrels. How long is the barrel on those 357 pocket pistols?
- Status