Are revolvers dying out?

[Chrisoro]

I can assure you that my mind isn't closed on this issue, and I'm still not sure why several of you are seemingly still trying to prove that semi autos is faster to reload than revolvers, considering that I have stated several times that I agree with that. The thing I disagree with, is the degree of inferiority of the revolver compared to the semi auto in ease and speed of reloads, and the relevance of this for likely civilian self defense scenarios. I have no problems with you guys carrying glocks and the like, and being happy with that. I am well familiar with Glocks myself, as I was issued a Glock 17 when I served in the RNoAF. My point is only that I don't think revolvers are as inferior in every way as it seems that many others here think, and that is what I'm arguing for. Maybe I've been unclear or something, as English isn't my primary language.

As I live in Norway, any kind of carry, exept to and from a gunshop, hunt or shooting range is illegal anyway, and if I were forced to defend my home with a firearm, I would most likely use my Remington 870.

 

[Tgace]

The thing I disagree with, is the degree of inferiority of the revolver compared to the semi auto in ease and speed of reloads,

I'm just enjoying the conversation.

But in that part you are simply wrong. The revolver is a fine weapon in many regards, but the inferiority of a revolver vs an auto in terms of ease and speed of reloads is pretty much fact, and is one of the primary reasons why the revolver has been replaced by the auto in "almost" every LE and military force in the world.

 

[Chrisoro]

Im just enjoying the conversation.

But in that part you are simply wrong. The revolver is a fine weapon in many regards, but the inferiority of a revolver in terms of ease and speed of reloads is pretty much fact.

Considering that I have stated several times that I agree with the fact that semi autos are superior when it comes to speed and ease of reloading, I'm not really sure what you consider I'm wrong at here? Maybe you should read what I wrote above one more time?

My point is not that revolvers are equal or superior to semi autos when it comes to ease and speed of reloading, but that while I agree that they are inferior in that aspect, I don't agree that they are as difficult and slow to reload for the average guy compared to semi autos as I get the impression that some of you think. Yes, semi autos are faster and easier, no revolvers are not as slow and difficult to reload as you think, while still slower than a semi auto. Am I expressing myself very unclear here?

 

[Tgace]

On the contrary. I believe that for the "Average Guy" the ability to reload a handgun under any form of stress will be FAR easier with an auto than with a revolver.

And as that article I linked stated. There is evidence that even experienced gunfighters like Cirillo wouldn't reload a revolver in a fight. He carried several revolvers and just dropped the entire empty gun and drew another vs even attempting it. That says volumes IMO.

 

[Chrisoro]

Yeah, I read the article you posted, and it has several good points. I'm not sure about the validity of generalizing from such an extreme case as the situations Cirillo found himself in to more likely civillian self defense scenarios, though. It may be that he did it the way he did simply because that was the absolute fastest of any solution, and that he chose the best possible solution just because of that, not because other solutions weren't possible.

In either case, I may be overestimating the ability of the average revolver shooter based on how easy I personally feel revolver reloads are, but I've been training this since about 2001, so I may not be representative. So far(and hopefully never), I haven't tested this in real life, adrenaline filled situations either, so I'm fully aware that I may be wrong here.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I would have to agree with Tgace. Revolvers have their place in certain situations like deep cover an environment that is t-shirts and shorts all the time. Or as a backup ankle gun supporting your regular edc of a semi-auto. However, I wouldn't recommend it as a first choice as the semi-auto advantages are very clear and far outweigh any negatives.

 

[ballen0351]

I'd recommend a person just carry a gun period. I don't care what kind as long as you have it. It's personal preference on what you like. A civilian carry for defense purposes isn't going out looking for a gun fight so the chances of needing to reload are pretty slim no matter what. I've personally been involved in 1 shooting, I've been the first backup officer to arrive on 2 more and have studied hundreds more police shootings. A vast majority are 6 rounds or less. So i don't care what gun people choose chances are they won't ever use it anyway

 

[Tgace]

Just for conversation....an interesting tidbit on the statistics regarding average number of rounds expended.

John Farnam - Enough Ammunition

SOP-9, as it is called, is NYPD's ongoing statistical study of lethal-force incidents in which MOSs (Members of Service) are involved. It dates from the 1860s to the present and is a credible source of information, one of the few available.

For years, we were all told SOP-9 established the "average" number of rounds fired by an MOS during a lethal encounter was two to three. We later learned that figure was incorrect and was actually the result of sloppy statistical analysis. Naive statisticians simply took the total of all rounds fired outside of the firing range and divided it by the total number of shooting "incidents." Unhappily, "incidents" included accidents and suicides!

A more careful analysis of the data (which included only intentional shootings) revealed the actual figure to be very close to six rounds. What that said to us all was that officers, when threatened with lethal violence, were firing every round they had in their six-shot revolvers. After six shots, there was a mandatory pause for a conventional reload or a "NY reload," which consisted of producing a second revolver! After the reload, additional shooting was rarely necessary.

That was prior to 1994. In 1994 autoloading pistols were introduced to the NYPD system.

When autoloaders (mostly Glocks, with an occasional S&W and Beretta) came into the NYPD system, we all expected that figure (six) to go up into the teens, fully expecting officers to continue to fire every round they have. The latest data has shown our expectations to be incorrect!

The new "average" number of rounds fired is eight. Subsequent data may alter that number, but that is what we have now. What jumps out at me is that, after eight rounds are fired, the parties separate or accommodate to the point where additional shooting is not necessary, at least in the short term, even though the officer is fully capable of firing more rounds. NYPD shooting accuracy has improved steadily, but the average hit percentage is still below twenty, so, out of eight rounds fired, only one or two are likely to impact anywhere on the suspect. In most cases, hit or not, the suspect disengages and runs away.

If you're wondering if there is a point lurking in all this:

If you have enough rounds in your magazine to get you through the initial exchange and still have some rounds left, you can then reload at your leisure. If you go to slide lock prior to the fight ending, then you'll have to reload and resume firing on an emergency basis. We teach students to reload on an emergency basis in any event, but having enough rounds to get you through the fight without the necessity of a reload bringing about an inconvenient interruption would appear to provide a genuine advantage.

Debates about calibers, accuracy, and ammunition aside, a fifteen-shooter or even an eleven-shooter would appear to be a better choice than a seven or eight-shooter, at least in New York City!

John

 

[ballen0351]

Just for conversation....an interesting tidbit on the statistics regarding average number of rounds expended.

John Farnam - Enough Ammunition

Interesting Id like to stats on non police defensive use of a weapon.

 

[Tgace]

Interesting Id like to stats on non police defensive use of a weapon.

I dunno if such stats are even kept. Hell...the total of police shootings is even an elusive number to tally. The NYPD stats are unique in that a large agency kept such numbers for so long.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[Dirty Dog]

I'd recommend a person just carry a gun period. I don't care what kind as long as you have it.

I'd qualify this by adding "and practice with it regularly".

It's personal preference on what you like.

True enough, but it's also important to make these decisions based on facts, not myths, such as the myth that a revolver is more reliable than a semi-auto. It's simply not true.
Yes, there may be some extremely rare situations (many of which would not even apply to personal carry, such as your deep undercover pocket pistol suggestion) in which a revolver might have an advantage. But it the VAST majority of cases, the semi-auto is the better choice.

A civilian carry for defense purposes isn't going out looking for a gun fight so the chances of needing to reload are pretty slim no matter what.

I hope (and believe) that police officers aren't going out looking for a gun fight either. And I have always understood that the vast majority of officers will never discharge their weapon in the line of duty. Just like civilians.

But civilian or police, the highest capacity, best shooting gun you can reasonably carry is a good choice.

I've personally been involved in 1 shooting, I've been the first backup officer to arrive on 2 more and have studied hundreds more police shootings.

I've never been involved in a shooting. But had I been allowed to carry at 17, I might well still have two eyes. His knife vs me unarmed, compared to his knife vs my gun.

 

[ballen0351]

I'd qualify this by adding "and practice with it regularly".

Ok but we are not filming a public service announcement If you like we could list 20 add ons to a simple statement

True enough, but it's also important to make these decisions based on facts, not myths, such as the myth that a revolver is more reliable than a semi-auto. It's simply not true.
Yes, there may be some extremely rare situations (many of which would not even apply to personal carry, such as your deep undercover pocket pistol suggestion) in which a revolver might have an advantage. But it the VAST majority of cases, the semi-auto is the better choice.

No matter how hard you campaign against it a revolver is just as good as any other pistol for everyday carry THAT is the only fact that matters.

I hope (and believe) that police officers aren't going out looking for a gun fight either. And I have always understood that the vast majority of officers will never discharge their weapon in the line of duty. Just like civilians.

True but police are out looking for crime where civilians are not thats what I meant by looking for a gun fight. A vast Majority of officers will draw a weapon at some point multiple times during a career where a civilian will not.

But civilian or police, the highest capacity, best shooting gun you can reasonably carry is a good choice.

Highest capacity not so much but the rest I agree with

I've never been involved in a shooting. But had I been allowed to carry at 17, I might well still have two eyes. His knife vs me unarmed, compared to his knife vs my gun.

And I bet at that point you wouldnt have cared if it were a revolver or semiauto as long as it worked

 

[Chrisoro]

Something that hasn't recieved as much attention in this thread as use of handguns in self defense, is handgun hunting or wilderness survival in a light package. If your goal is to hunt with your hangun, or use it as a survival weapon, a revolver is generally far more effective and versatile than a semi-auto, simply because of the much wider range of loadings and bullet types available in the same caliber, without any effect on reliability(unless you are using handloads that far exceeds the SAAMI-specifications of course).

In a .357 magnum revolver for example, one can use everything from whimpy loadings with light bullets in .38 special, all the way up to very powerfull and heavy .357 loadings meant for black bear defense(think Buffalo Bore), which far surpasses most rounds available for semi autos. If you go up to heavier calibers like .44mag., you can fire anything from light .44 specials to hot loaded .44magnums(where certain ammo gives you comparable muzzle energy from a 6inch. revolver as you get from a 14.5 inch M4 carbine firing 5.56NATO ammo. Source.) Then you have the even more powerfull .454 casull which exeeds most common millitary service rifles(e.g. 5.56mm Nato, 7.62x39) muzzle energies, while still being capable of also shooting light .45 LC loadings if needed, even from the same cylinder if one wish to do so.

And then you have beasts such as the .500 S&W revolvers, with possible muzzle energies that even surpassed 7.62NATO muzzle energies from a service rifle. Hell, there is even revolvers in .45-70 i you really love recoil and blast. The largest semi auto handgun caliber I'm aware of is the .50 AE from the MR Desert Eagle, which isn't exactly known for reliability, and where the heaviest loads are just comparable to the heaviest .44magnums in power, and this from a somewhat unreliable pistol that isn't capable of shooting lighter loads, as these wouldn't cycle the mechanism., and which has comparable ammo capacity as revolvers.

And if you go the other way, a .22lr revolver is capable of reliably firing anything from .22short, .22long, .22lr and .22 shotshells(ratshot & snakeshot) from the same cylinder reliably, if wanted. Good luck doing anything like that with a semi auto.

Another factor to consider is that revolver ammo is generally loaded to a higher pressure than semi auto pistol ammo, so shooting the samme revolver ammo from a rifle, generally gives you a much bigger rise in velocity/energy than shooting semi auto pistol ammo from a rifle. Pairing a .357 revolver with a 18inch Marlin 1894c lever gun in the same caliber, for example, gives a drastic rise in energy output(comparable to a similary length 5.56 Nato rifle at the muzzle. Source.), higher ammo capacity, and longer effective distance than a handgun, while still using the same ammunition, easing logistics considerably. A 9mm or .45 acp carbine gives you nowhere near the same rise in energy/velocity over a similarly chambered handgun.

So while one can argue that the semi auto pistol is better for self defense because of a generally higher ammo capacity and faster reloads, there are other areas in which the the revolver have some very clear advantages.

 

[Tez3]

'Are revolvers dying out'? I have this vision of an endangered species struggling to survive, with nature groups rushing to breed them in zoos to ensure the survival of the species, other revolvers of course will be lying on their backs with their little legs up in the air, dead as a dodo.

 

[PhotonGuy]

Revolvers aren't bred in zoos, they're produced in factories. And from what I see, they're still being produced in great quantity, you just don't see them that much in police and military use.

 

[ballen0351]

Revolvers aren't bred in zoos, they're produced in factories. And from what I see, they're still being produced in great quantity, you just don't see them that much in police and military use.

It was a joke lighten up

 

[PhotonGuy]

It was a joke lighten up

I know that. My response isn't meant to be taken too seriously.

 

[Tez3]

And from what I see, they're still being produced in great quantity

You answered your own question here, they can't be 'dying out' then can they?

 

[PhotonGuy]

You answered your own question here, they can't be 'dying out' then can they?

No but their popularity can be dying out.

 

[Tez3]

No but their popularity can be dying out.

Ok, how does that work out? the manufacturers are businesses, they aren't going to make things they can't sell therefore if they are producing them in great numbers they are still selling so their popularity isn't in danger yet.