Are revolvers dying out?

[Chrisoro]

I thought we were talking about limp wristing? Limp wristing is nor a design shortfall. The Glock, which is admittedly prone to stovepiping as a result of limp wristing, is intended to be light. Light guns, since they have less inertia, are more prone to limp wristed stovepipes.
It's purely a shooter error.

Yes, but as mentioned above, the chances of this shooter error happening is non existant with revolvers. And in live situations, especially in a close quarters struggle with limited room for movement, or if one is fatigued or injured, one cannot always expect to be able to do everything with perfect form or exactly as taught. In such situations, the design of semi autos such as glock, with the posibility of limp-wristing, is at a disadvantage compared to the design of revolvers. And if one takes into consideration the ability of revolvers to fire reliably if the barrel is pressed into the opponent, something else that semi autos generally have problems with, or the need for two hands to clear a dud round in a semi auto vs just pulling the trigger again in a DA revolver, one can easily make the case that the revolver is superior in terms of reliability in certain situations. There is simply less things that can go wrong with a revolver in such situations, user induced or not.

If your are a superman who expect to be able to always shoot with perfect form when using your weapons, in any kind of condition, situation or environment, or if you are 100% sure of never enter into a close range fight with a gun involved, this does of course not apply to you.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Let's not make "limp wristing" a big issue. I have seen one limp wristed malfunction in literally hundreds of times at the range with other people shooting my Glocks. I have actually had more malfunctions with revolvers than I have with this issue. (because that 357 has issues) The design of the modern semi-auto is simply superior to that of the revolver. That is why every military, police, etc. has pretty much gone over to the semi-auto. Why is it superior: more ammo, easier reloading, more manageable recoil, etc. However, that doesn't mean the revolver is dying out or doesn't have a place like Balleen, K50Marine or myself mentioned for certain situations in concealment.

 

[Tgace]

Try a speed loader. With a little practice you can reload almost as fast as with a semi auto.

No way....not for the average shooter, and not with the same volume of rounds.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Absolutely Tgace there is no way you can reload with a speed loader at the same rate someone can on a semi-auto.

 

[Chrisoro]

I agree that it isn't as fast, but with training, the gap in the speed of reloading isn't as big as most people think. And for civillian self defense, one have to ask exactly how much ammo capacity is generally needed. It's not like assault by hordes of orcs is very common.

But I have no problems accepting speed of reloading, managable recoil and ammo capacity as clear advantages for semi auto postols. But at the same time, I can also see clear advantages for revolvers in certain kinds of self defense scenarios, as described above. My point is only that this isn't a case where one platform is superior to the other in all settings, and that while semi autos have clear advantages in many cases(some mights say most), there are still some situations where revolvers are superior.

The good thing is that each of us (at least in countries that alllow citizens to own handguns) are free to choose the design that we feel fit the best to our uses, and that our prefered platform doesn't get any better or worse as a result of other people's opinions of it.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I agree that it isn't as fast, but with training, the gap in the speed of reloading isn't as big as most people think. And for civillian self defense, one have to ask exactly how much ammo capacity is generally needed. It's not like assault by hordes of orcs is very common.

Considering that police records indicate 70-80% of rounds miss, combined with the fact that the "one shot stop" is a myth, I'd say the more ammo the better. Empty a 5 shot revolver and, statistically, you'll hit once. And it likely won't stop them. And you haven't even considered their buddy over there...

As far as speed loaders go, with the exception of professional shooters, the difference in reload speed is significant. Now add in the fact that your 5 shot revolver will need to be reloaded twice before my Glock 19 empties it's first magazine. Now consider how much more difficult it is to conceal a decent speed loader, compared to a magazine - unless you're carrying the strips, in which case you'll still be doing your first reload when I've fired 15 rounds and have loaded the next magazine.

 

[Chrisoro]

True, true. Also, most police statistics shows that most incidents involving a firearms tend to be solved without a single shot being fired, and also that most civillian incidents involving shooting tend to happen at not much more than arms lenght distance. Anyhow, considering that it's much harder to miss when holding the revolver barrel in direct contact with an opponent, and considering that doing this with a glock turns it into a 1-shot pistol untill you're able to rack the slide again, I maintain my claim that a revolver is superior in certain curcumstances. Also, comparing the pistols with the highest ammo capacity available with the revolvers with the lowest capacity available in order to make a point, kind of makes it look like you are deliberately skewing things a bit. Most single stack pistols made specifically for concealed carry (as nearly all 5shot revolvers also are) tend to have magazines of between six and eight rounds.

But yes, as I agreed with above, pistols generally tend to have a higher capacity and are easier to reload, and that is certainly an advantage with pistols over revolvers. I'm not contesting that.

 

[ballen0351]

I thought we were talking about limp wristing? Limp wristing is nor a design shortfall. The Glock, which is admittedly prone to stovepiping as a result of limp wristing, is intended to be light. Light guns, since they have less inertia, are more prone to limp wristed stovepipes.
It's purely a shooter error. Same as the other things I mentioned.
And I do not think it's reasonable to blame the tool when it's the users problem.
.

We will just have to disagree I believe its a design drawback that a revolver doesn't have. You can limp wrist a revolver it will still shoot the next round. Every weapon has its benefits and draw backs. This is one for semiauto handguns. Along with double feeds, fail to feeds, weak mag springs, more moving parts to jam up or wear out. I even had a Beretta M9 freeze shut on me in the mountains of Bridgeport Cali during cold weather warfare training. I could not move budge the slide at all. Design draw backs to revolvers would be limited ammo numbers, enhanced recoil, powder flash between the cylinder and barrel. It just is what it is every gun has flaws

 

[Dirty Dog]

True, true. Also, most police statistics shows that most incidents involving a firearms tend to be solved without a single shot being fired, and also that most civillian incidents involving shooting tend to happen at not much more than arms lenght distance. Anyhow, considering that it's much harder to miss when holding the revolver barrel in direct contact with an opponent, and considering that doing this with a glock turns it into a 1-shot pistol untill you're able to rack the slide again,

Where did you get the (completely incorrect) idea that holding the muzzle of a semi-auto against the target will prevent the slide from working?

I maintain my claim that a revolver is superior in certain curcumstances.

Sure, and I agree. I just think that those circumstances are a teeny tiny fraction of the circumstances under which you'd use a handgun for defense.

Also, comparing the pistols with the highest ammo capacity available with the revolvers with the lowest capacity available in order to make a point, kind of makes it look like you are deliberately skewing things a bit.

Highest capacity? A Glock 19??? You do know that the Glock 19 is a COMPACT pistol, as well as the worlds most popular concealed carry choice, right?
If I were comparing it to highest capacity, I'd have a 30+ round magazine in the gun. If you'd like to compare that to the highest capacity revolvers (which, if memory serves, hold 7 rounds) feel free.

Most single stack pistols made specifically for concealed carry (as nearly all 5shot revolvers also are) tend to have magazines of between six and eight rounds.

Well, no, not really. A quick application of google-fu shows that of the ten most popular choices for concealed carry, only three (the Glock 42, Springsfield XDS and S&W Shield) fall into this capacity range, And those are primarily pocket pistols. The most common choice for concealed carry is the 15 round Compact Glock 19. Which will, of course, accept much larger magazines. I usually carry my G19 with a 15 round magazine in place, and a pair of 17 round magazines in a pouch or pocket. That gives me a nice even 50 rounds, with only two reloads. I've got some 33 round magazines, which fit nicely in my back pocket. And there are 100 round drum magazines available, but I discount those as being unconcealable. Hell, even my little Glock 26 will accept the 33 round magazines. It doesn't really get any more concealable than a Glock 26. Put one of those in your favorite concealment holster, tuck some 33 round magazines in your hip pocket, and you can reload next week...

 

[ballen0351]

You carry 50 rounds around with you? I don't even have 50 rounds in my on duty gun belt.

 

[Dirty Dog]

You carry 50 rounds around with you? I don't even have 50 rounds in my on duty gun belt.

Maybe you should move into the 21st Century and get rid of the revolver.
Most of the officers that I know carry at LEAST two spare magazines. And usually a spare gun, too. Many of them carry the Glock because (among other good reasons) their spare gun (say, a Glock 26) will use the same magazines as their service gun (say, a Glock 17).

I do not carry that much all the time, no. But it's only two spare magazines, after all. Easy to carry. Easy to conceal. Easy to reload...

 

[ballen0351]

Maybe you should move into the 21st Century and get rid of the revolver.

Naa Im not allowed to carry them

Most of the officers that I know carry at LEAST two spare magazines.

I have two mags on my dutybelt. But thats only 24 on my belt and 13 in the gun. I do have another 6 mags in the trunk of the car

And usually a spare gun,

I dont know many officers that carry two around here some do but not most

Many of them carry the Glock because (among other good reasons) their spare gun (say, a Glock 26) will use the same magazines as their service gun (say, a Glock 17).

Thats silly Glocks are junk and since I carry a SIG glock mags are no help

I do not carry that much all the time, no. But it's only two spare magazines, after all. Easy to carry. Easy to conceal. Easy to reload...

I guess

 

[Tgace]

I have 3 mags on me at all times..one in the gun and 2 spares..with an extra round in the pipe. 46 rounds.

 

[Tgace]

Where did you get the (completely incorrect) idea that holding the muzzle of a semi-auto against the target will prevent the slide from working?

He's talking about the slide being pushed out of battery.

Of course he forgets that in a grappling situation, grabbing the cylinder on a revolver will likewise keep it from firing. As can getting a finger or web of thumb in front of the hammer.

In a fight over an autopistol, there are some techniques to have in the tool box.

Video Firearms Training for Contact Shots

 

[Chrisoro]

Where did you get the (completely incorrect) idea that holding the muzzle of a semi-auto against the target will prevent the slide from working?

In this article in Personaldefenseworld, Mas Ayoob states the following:

CQB muzzle contact shots definitely favor the revolver, as a rule of thumb. When the gun’s muzzle must be pressed against the attacker’s body in a truly desperate self-defense situation, most autopistols will have their barrel-slide assemblies pushed out of battery, and will not fire. (The service-size Springfield Armory XD and the pocket size Beretta Nano are rare exceptions to this.) Any modern revolver, however, will fire five for five or six for six in that situation, and the only side effect will be that the muzzle blast will be directed into our would-be murder-er’s body, magnifying his wound(s) and stopping him all the sooner.

No offence, but unless you can prove this is wrong, I think I'll prefer to listen to Mas Ayoob over you.

Sure, and I agree. I just think that those circumstances are a teeny tiny fraction of the circumstances under which you'd use a handgun for defense.

And yet the statistics I cited above shows otherwise.

Highest capacity? A Glock 19??? You do know that the Glock 19 is a COMPACT pistol, as well as the worlds most popular concealed carry choice, right?
If I were comparing it to highest capacity, I'd have a 30+ round magazine in the gun. If you'd like to compare that to the highest capacity revolvers (which, if memory serves, hold 7 rounds) feel free.

Yes, I know that Glock 19 is a technically a "compact" glock(well, more compact than Glock 17 at least), but with a 15 round double stack magazine, it is still in the upper tier when we are talking about general capacity in carry pistols, and concealability wasn't the single most important factor when Glock designed it, as opposed to snubnose revolvers. Therefore, comparing it with snub nose five shot revolvers where concealability was the absolute priotity in the design is still unfair, regardless of what most people decides to carry, as it is still comparing apples and oranges. A more fair comparison would be the glock 43, or other semi auto pistols designed to compete directly with five shot snub nose revolvers.

By the way, there are several 10 shot revolvers available out there. However, if you want something in a substantial caliber and designed specifically for self defense, I think the eight shot S&W 627 with a 2.7" barrel is the highest available. Same capacity as a single stack 1911 with a non-extended magazine, and cut for full moon clips (which are faster than speedloaders).

 

[ballen0351]

I have 3 mags on me at all times..one in the gun and 2 spares..with an extra round in the pipe. 46 rounds.

Yeah thats what I had with the M & P with the Sig I only have room for 37 total

 

[Tgace]

The "thing" with "the average gunfight only takes X rounds" argument is that many shootings go like this:

Ammo How Much Is Enough

One year ago this month, a man named Paul Slater broke into a Georgia woman’s house while her husband was at work and chased her and her two children into a crawl space leading to their attic. When he opened the access door and attempted to enter the attic after them, she emptied her .38 revolver in his direction, hitting her attacker five times in the face and torso. That’s pretty good shooting by anyone’s standards, much less for a frightened woman crouching in a confined space trying to protect her two young boys. That didn’t kill him. She told him to stop or she would shoot him again, knowing that it was an idle threat as her gun was now empty. But fortunately for the family he did stop his attack that day, and after the mother and her sons ran past him to get away he was able to leave the house and drive away. He lived to stand trial. But what if she had not been as accurate? What if he hadn’t stopped his attack? What if he hadn’t been alone?

So sure that shoot "only took five rounds"....

Im guessing he fired 8 rounds of so there. That first guy took like 4 rounds to the torso and ran off (he died later so I've heard). If those guys wanted to stand and fight....

 

[Chrisoro]

Yes, extremes cases and anecdotes is definately what one should base ones strategy on. Last week I read about someone stopped by a single .22lr to the pelvis. We should all switch to guns in .22lr, and train to aim for the pelvis.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I have two mags on my dutybelt. But thats only 24 on my belt and 13 in the gun.

Poor guy. Even my little Glock 26 has 13 round magazines.

I do have another 6 mags in the trunk of the car

I have a whole pile of mags in my gun safe. They'll be about as useful as the ones in your trunk...

I dont know many officers that carry two around here some do but not most

Different environment... and I don't say that most cops carry two, just those that I know well enough to ask about backup guns.

Thats silly Glocks are junk and since I carry a SIG glock mags are no help

Too bad your agency restricts you so much.

The only SigSauer I currently own is a 1911 Target. I don't carry it much, though. With two spare mags, that only gives me 25 rounds. My other options for .45ACP are a Para P14-45 (45 rounds) or a Glock 41 (40 rounds).

 

[Tgace]

Not to say that revolvers "have no place". I actually like Ballens plan to have a hammerless revolver in a pocket as a "shoot through" deep cover gun. For big game hunters who like to use pistols, you can't get those whopping large calibers in autos.

But for a "carry gun"...I just couldn't recommend a wheel gun for the average person. IMO, capacity and ease of reloading make my choice clear.