"Why Carry A Revolver?"

Andy Moynihan

Senior Master
MT Mentor
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
176
Location
People's Banana Republic of Massachusettstan, Disu
http://www.snubnose.info/docs/why_carry.htm

"Also, in certain situations (e.g. with the muzzle pushed into the torso of one's attacker, or the gun grasped by one's assailant) a pistol slide can be pushed "out of battery", meaning that the gun will not fire and/or will not cycle the action if fired. A revolver suffers rather less from this handicap (although if the cylinder is grasped, it can be prevented from turning, so a revolver isn't altogether immune)."

Unless you know the trick to circumvent even the cylinder grab--which I DO....



Respect the revolver! RESPECT IT!!!!
 

Explorer

Blue Belt
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
234
Reaction score
5
Location
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Whatever you say Andy ... "Mr. Revolver, without reservation I would like to tell you how much I respect you and your entire family."


Good enough?
 

seasoned

MT Senior Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
11,253
Reaction score
1,231
Location
Lives in Texas
At times I do favor my 38 cal, SW 640.
icon7.gif
 

jks9199

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
23,473
Reaction score
3,795
Location
Northern VA
Revolvers have the advantage of being much simpler mechanically, so they can be deemed more reliable. But they're slower to reload, and carry fewer rounds. They'll also kick more, because the semi-auto uses the energy of the recoil to operate the slide.

In the end... no gun is "better" than another; one doesn't make you deader than another with a well aimed shot! Use & carry what works for you!
 

Haakon

Blue Belt
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
299
Reaction score
10
Revolvers are great, I really miss my Ruger Speed Six. The 3" GP100 is great too, but I never should have traded off that Speed Six.
 

Skpotamus

Brown Belt
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
426
Reaction score
19
Location
Terre Haute, IN
In the end... no gun is "better" than another; one doesn't make you deader than another with a well aimed shot! Use & carry what works for you!

I agree wholeheartedly. Both types of guns are merely tools. Each has it's advantages and disadvantages. A revolver can be fired in a pocket or purse more than once without jamming, a semi auto can hold a lot more rounds. I carry by 38 snub in a pocket often, but I prefer to carry my semi-autos as they carry a LOT more rounds. 5 in my snub, vs 18 in my glock. My highest capacity revolver (non 22) is a 8 shot 357. Even carrying a reload for the revolver, that puts me at less capacity than I can put out with my semi-auto without having to reload. The 8 shot is cut for moonclips, but they are kinda slow to reload with in that gun. Nowhere near as fast as my 625 6 shot 45 cut for moons. Even then, I can still reload my semi-autos faster and have more rounds on board than my revolvers.

Revolvers have the advantage of being much simpler mechanically, so they can be deemed more reliable. But they're slower to reload, and carry fewer rounds. They'll also kick more, because the semi-auto uses the energy of the recoil to operate the slide.

Revolvers are not simpler mechanically than any semi-auto I can think of. It's just that their guts are hidden inside the frame and you don't normally see them, so they get accused of being simpler. Truth is, they have mroe parts, and more of them move than in semi autos.

For comparison, a 1911 has 46 standard parts (http://www.gunpartscorp.com/catalog/Products.aspx?catid=11958)

A smith and wesson 686 has 78 (http://www.gunpartscorp.com/catalog/Products.aspx?catid=10085)

Even the old smith and wesson 1917 model had a total of 53 parts (http://www.gunpartscorp.com/catalog/Products.aspx?catid=8042)

I can't find the resource now, but I remember reading in either one of Applegate or Fairbairn's books that they saw far more revolvers break during their time in shanghai than semi-autos.
 

jks9199

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
23,473
Reaction score
3,795
Location
Northern VA
I don't know; I'm quoting what I've been taught more than once about revolvers. However, number of parts doesn't automatically tell you about how simple something is mechanically. I'm not a gunsmith -- but as I understand it, there's much less that can go wrong with a revolver, and they're generally much more tolerant of poor care than many semi-autos.

Of course, there's not a lot of malfunction drills for a revolver, because when they do break, there's generally not a whole heck of lot you can do short of a gunsmith's bench!

One other note I wanted to address on the semi-autos... Most WILL fire at least one round, if it was already chambered, even if the slide is held. They won't eject the spent casing, and they won't feed the next round... but you get one bang! Whether it'll fire if you manage to shove the slide back, out of battery, is a different question.
 

Skpotamus

Brown Belt
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
426
Reaction score
19
Location
Terre Haute, IN
I don't know; I'm quoting what I've been taught more than once about revolvers. However, number of parts doesn't automatically tell you about how simple something is mechanically. I'm not a gunsmith -- but as I understand it, there's much less that can go wrong with a revolver, and they're generally much more tolerant of poor care than many semi-autos.

Of course, there's not a lot of malfunction drills for a revolver, because when they do break, there's generally not a whole heck of lot you can do short of a gunsmith's bench!

One other note I wanted to address on the semi-autos... Most WILL fire at least one round, if it was already chambered, even if the slide is held. They won't eject the spent casing, and they won't feed the next round... but you get one bang! Whether it'll fire if you manage to shove the slide back, out of battery, is a different question.


The firing mechanisms are more complicated and a lot more of a PITA to work on, lots more parts working together, and they're all freaking small as hell and hard to hold onto with only two hands. :soapbox:
Here's prob the best diagram I've found of an actual S&W revolvers guts: http://www.dnmsport.com/SW/SMITH & WESSON REVOLVER CUTAWAY.htm
http://science.howstuffworks.com/revolver2.htm a neat little animation of a simple revolver firing, note that it's leaving out a HUGE chunk of the parts in teh above diagram.
http://www.m1911.org/loader.swf a 1911 animation
http://www.sniperworld.com/content.aspx?ckey=sniper_world_glock_index and a glock animation

Part of the reason they seem to last longer is that most people don't shoot nearly as many rounds through a revolver as they do a semi-auto. A box of 50 rounds at the range si a lot of shooting and reloading for a lot of revolver guys, a couple hundred rounds is a lot for most semi-auto guys.
Another (and probably bigger reason) is that the revolvers guts are separated from the dirty powder burn so they don't get gunked up. But when they do break or gunk up, it's beyond most people to fix them.
 

Haakon

Blue Belt
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
299
Reaction score
10
I'm not a gunsmith -- but as I understand it, there's much less that can go wrong with a revolver, and they're generally much more tolerant of poor care than many semi-autos.

Revolvers are relatively fragile, especially compared to something like a 1911 or a Glock. In general revolvers hold up to neglect better, autos hold up to abuse better. It doesn't take all that much to bend a yoke or knock a revolver out of time and out of commission. Most combat autos have fairly loose tolerances, they can get whacked around and still function reliably.
 
OP
Andy Moynihan

Andy Moynihan

Senior Master
MT Mentor
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
176
Location
People's Banana Republic of Massachusettstan, Disu
Revolvers are relatively fragile, especially compared to something like a 1911 or a Glock. In general revolvers hold up to neglect better, autos hold up to abuse better. It doesn't take all that much to bend a yoke or knock a revolver out of time and out of commission. Most combat autos have fairly loose tolerances, they can get whacked around and still function reliably.


Unless it's a Ruger, there is a definite difference between them and their S&W or Taurus counterparts( Colt no longer makes revolvers that aren't SAA's--such a shame, I sure would love me a nice 2 or 3 inch Python) .

Those Rugers are just about bombproof.
 
Last edited:
OP
Andy Moynihan

Andy Moynihan

Senior Master
MT Mentor
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
176
Location
People's Banana Republic of Massachusettstan, Disu
I agree wholeheartedly. Both types of guns are merely tools. Each has it's advantages and disadvantages. A revolver can be fired in a pocket or purse more than once without jamming, a semi auto can hold a lot more rounds. I carry by 38 snub in a pocket often, but I prefer to carry my semi-autos as they carry a LOT more rounds. 5 in my snub, vs 18 in my glock. My highest capacity revolver (non 22) is a 8 shot 357. Even carrying a reload for the revolver, that puts me at less capacity than I can put out with my semi-auto without having to reload. The 8 shot is cut for moonclips, but they are kinda slow to reload with in that gun. Nowhere near as fast as my 625 6 shot 45 cut for moons. Even then, I can still reload my semi-autos faster and have more rounds on board than my revolvers.



Revolvers are not simpler mechanically than any semi-auto I can think of. It's just that their guts are hidden inside the frame and you don't normally see them, so they get accused of being simpler. Truth is, they have mroe parts, and more of them move than in semi autos.

For comparison, a 1911 has 46 standard parts (http://www.gunpartscorp.com/catalog/Products.aspx?catid=11958)

A smith and wesson 686 has 78 (http://www.gunpartscorp.com/catalog/Products.aspx?catid=10085)

Even the old smith and wesson 1917 model had a total of 53 parts (http://www.gunpartscorp.com/catalog/Products.aspx?catid=8042)

I can't find the resource now, but I remember reading in either one of Applegate or Fairbairn's books that they saw far more revolvers break during their time in shanghai than semi-autos.


Please let me know if you can find that reference, I'd love to hear what they said.

For the record--I have and occasionally carry an auto( SIG P220, 45, DAO converted).

Just if I want to carry that, I have to wear a concealing garment, and I don't wanna have to bother with it.

Does the auto have advantages? Sure. But it so happens that in my situation, I prefer the advantages of the wheelie to the self stuffer.

As to the ability of a revolver to break--of course it can, every manmade mechanical device is subject to failure.

But you cannot compare a broken revolver to a jammed semi--A revolver has to mechanically BREAK before it fails to feed/fire. An auto does not.
 
OP
Andy Moynihan

Andy Moynihan

Senior Master
MT Mentor
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
176
Location
People's Banana Republic of Massachusettstan, Disu
I agree wholeheartedly. Both types of guns are merely tools. Each has it's advantages and disadvantages. A revolver can be fired in a pocket or purse more than once without jamming, a semi auto can hold a lot more rounds. I carry by 38 snub in a pocket often, but I prefer to carry my semi-autos as they carry a LOT more rounds. 5 in my snub, vs 18 in my glock. My highest capacity revolver (non 22) is a 8 shot 357. Even carrying a reload for the revolver, that puts me at less capacity than I can put out with my semi-auto without having to reload. The 8 shot is cut for moonclips, but they are kinda slow to reload with in that gun. Nowhere near as fast as my 625 6 shot 45 cut for moons. Even then, I can still reload my semi-autos faster and have more rounds on board than my revolvers.

Also true.

I just got tired of trying to imagine scenarios where I'd need to lug that much around all day every day. At the end of the day, realistically, for those of us NOT in a war zone, while the extra rounds are comforting, as far as self defense goes in scenarios we're likely to run into, us regular folks are gonna run out of TIME before AMMO, no matter what we brought. *shrug*
 
OP
Andy Moynihan

Andy Moynihan

Senior Master
MT Mentor
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
176
Location
People's Banana Republic of Massachusettstan, Disu

FieldDiscipline

2nd Black Belt
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Messages
739
Reaction score
18
Location
Great Britain
Unless you know the trick to circumvent even the cylinder grab--which I DO....

Care to share?

The big obvious advantage with a revolver is that you can leave it on a shelf for ages and then pick it and not have a problem. Conversely with a magazine you should really be relaxing the springs from time to time.
 

Skpotamus

Brown Belt
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
426
Reaction score
19
Location
Terre Haute, IN
Please let me know if you can find that reference, I'd love to hear what they said.

For the record--I have and occasionally carry an auto( SIG P220, 45, DAO converted).

Just if I want to carry that, I have to wear a concealing garment, and I don't wanna have to bother with it.

Does the auto have advantages? Sure. But it so happens that in my situation, I prefer the advantages of the wheelie to the self stuffer.

As to the ability of a revolver to break--of course it can, every manmade mechanical device is subject to failure.

But you cannot compare a broken revolver to a jammed semi--A revolver has to mechanically BREAK before it fails to feed/fire. An auto does not.

Found it. It was a quote on another forum from a guy who trained with Applegate and Sykes, I'll post his quote here: "In Shooting to Live by WE Fairbairn and EA Sykes, the authors state that they considered semiautos to be the most reliable. Anyone who has worked on both will see that revolvers are way more complicated and finicky. The belief that revolvers are more reliable because they are simpler is not true."

The actual quote in the book is talking about damage to firearms on page 67 of the .pdf, page 55 of the actual book "as far as our experience goes, a comparison between the automatic and the double action revolver, in respect to the their liability to damage, results in favour of the former" The next few paragraphs talk about the damage they've seen revolvers take, most from dropping them, tweaking the cylinder, etc. But they also talk about broken firing pins, worn out springs etc.

It should also be noted, that they recommend a revolver for detectives who have to make that first shot while in contact with someone. Of course, their mods to the gun make it seem scary by todays standards (cutting down barrel, removing hammer spur, removing front of trigger guard). They also recommend removing safeties altogether on handguns.

http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_64...airbairn_-_Shooting_To_Live_____110_pages.pdf is the book itself, available for free download. A great read for anybody who hasn't read it. Lots of neat info from people who actually got into gunfights pretty regularly. Some 600 odd gunfights with his police unit in shanghai over a 12 year period with handguns.
 

Carol

Crazy like a...
MT Mentor
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
20,311
Reaction score
541
Location
NH
Thanks for the link! Looking forward to reading that :asian:
 
OP
Andy Moynihan

Andy Moynihan

Senior Master
MT Mentor
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
176
Location
People's Banana Republic of Massachusettstan, Disu
Care to share?

Sure.

The first thing you must do is know in advance which direction your revolver's cylinder rotates( Smith and Ruger revolvers rotate left, I know not of others). It'll be clear even before you work the action just by looking at which way the grooves at the rear of the cylinder "point".

Normally, you'd begin the DA trigger pull and the cylinder would rotate that way and then release the hammer once the chamber is lined up.

But in the case of a disarm attempt where the cylinder is grabbed, you cannot do this--the hand is holding the cylinder against the frame.

But even my hands can't hold the WHOLE gun still at once.

Since you cannot pull the trigger and rotate the cylinder to the left( in my revolver's case)----you simply perform what amounts to a karate punch in reverse--you all at once pull back, pull the trigger and, at the same time you pull, rotate the FRAME to the RIGHT. on my Smith model 60 a mere 45 degrees is all I need to move it to fire even with the cylinder grabbed, on my Ruger SP101 I need to first tweak it a few millimeters left and THEN crank it 45 degrees and then it works. You've got me? who's got YOU? *bang*

The big obvious advantage with a revolver is that you can leave it on a shelf for ages and then pick it and not have a problem. Conversely with a magazine you should really be relaxing the springs from time to time.


Which I do. Give the slide rails an oiling once a month too whether they need it or not :)
 
Last edited:
OP
Andy Moynihan

Andy Moynihan

Senior Master
MT Mentor
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
176
Location
People's Banana Republic of Massachusettstan, Disu
Found it. It was a quote on another forum from a guy who trained with Applegate and Sykes, I'll post his quote here: "In Shooting to Live by WE Fairbairn and EA Sykes, the authors state that they considered semiautos to be the most reliable. Anyone who has worked on both will see that revolvers are way more complicated and finicky. The belief that revolvers are more reliable because they are simpler is not true."

The actual quote in the book is talking about damage to firearms on page 67 of the .pdf, page 55 of the actual book "as far as our experience goes, a comparison between the automatic and the double action revolver, in respect to the their liability to damage, results in favour of the former" The next few paragraphs talk about the damage they've seen revolvers take, most from dropping them, tweaking the cylinder, etc. But they also talk about broken firing pins, worn out springs etc.

It should also be noted, that they recommend a revolver for detectives who have to make that first shot while in contact with someone. Of course, their mods to the gun make it seem scary by todays standards (cutting down barrel, removing hammer spur, removing front of trigger guard). They also recommend removing safeties altogether on handguns.

http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_64...airbairn_-_Shooting_To_Live_____110_pages.pdf is the book itself, available for free download. A great read for anybody who hasn't read it. Lots of neat info from people who actually got into gunfights pretty regularly. Some 600 odd gunfights with his police unit in shanghai over a 12 year period with handguns.


Thanks, I'm gonna enjoy reading that when I have the time. :)

I'm not sure that revolvers of the 20's and 30's ( when Fairbairn/Sykes served in Shanghai and did all the fighting) Can be compared to modern revolvers though in terms of steel or caliber(.38 special, when it first came our in 1899, was first loaded with blackpowder, and then gradually became a smokeless round, and .357 magnum wasn't around till 1935 and I'm not sure you can really say the steel used then was the same standard as now--but I've been wrong before).

On the other side, I'd like to invite anyone interested to read Ed Lovette's "The Snubby Revolver" and visit

www.snubtraining.com and www.snubnose.info ( Most especially the "Library" section) for some perhaps surprising little bits of knowledge that may have you reconsidering the snubby.

To be clear: I do not think the snubby is a suitable military or general issue police sidearm given modern needs in those fields.

Do I think the snubby is a battlefield dominator? No I do not.

Do I think it's underrated and is still an almost perfect "Streetfighter"? Yes I do. :)

Would I prefer a fullsize auto? Who wouldn't.

Would I , failing that, or not wanting to bother with a concealing garment, rather have a pocket revolver than a pocket auto? Who wouldn't? :)
 
Last edited:

Latest Discussions

Top