Who here prefers a Revolver over a semi-auto?

[cd228]

I live out in the boonies. I never heard anyone say a revolver was the way to go in combating animals. What animals? Are we talking racoons, skunks, coyotes? Sure, the little stuff can probably be scared by the discharge of a firearm. But would you go up against two wolves with only a handgun if you had a choice, or a black bear? I cannot even believe anyone would prefer any sort of handgun in case of a problem with a brown bear. A guy shot a mountain lion not too long ago which had killed his dog on his property. He used a hunting rifle.

I was always told a revolver is more reliable and a hammerless revolver is less likely to get tangled up in your clothes (or purse for women). If we are talking self defense at 0-15 feet, why not?

Feral Dog or a surprised Hog or other dangerous game animal or If I needed a finishing shot on an injured deer. I'd trust .357 or .44 special/magnum well know handgun hunting cartridges over most semi auto service pistol cartridges. As for using a handgun over a long gun as a first choice, I don't think anyone here is advocating that. However, if I were to go walking in the woods outside of hunting season with a rifle on my back, or if I carried a rifle while trail running, mowing the lawn (adjacted to woodland), etc. I would be visited by the local constabulary and probably told not to do that again if not arrested. Obviously, laws vary by location. Now If I looked out my back window and saw a coyote trying to eat my neighbor's dog, I would reach for a long gun because it is a better choice.

I'd also recommend reading Elmer Keith's book Six gun cartridges. He tested both semi auto and revolver cartridges against a myriad of game and documented his findings. The semi auto cartridges : 9mm Luger, .38 Super and .45ACP underwhelmed him.

[Pilot1]

I'd also recommend reading Elmer Keith's book Six gun cartridges. He tested both semi auto and revolver cartridges against a myriad of game and documented his findings. The semi auto cartridges : 9mm Luger, .38 Super and .45ACP underwhelmed him.

Cartridges, and bullet construction have come a long way since Elmer Keith.

[Det-Sog]

Cartridges, and bullet construction have come a long way since Elmer Keith.

Exactly. If he were still around, I'd love to go out and let him shoot my Glock 20 with Buffalo Bore.

[cd228]

Exactly. If he were still around, I'd love to go out and let him shoot my Glock 20 with Buffalo Bore.

He’d probably enjoy it and then go hand load a magnum version of it.

[cd228]

Yet the standard load for a .45 ACP is still 230 grains doing around 930 FPS? Yes, I agree that we have made improvements, but I am still not running across a lot of hunters using 9mm or .45. I do know one German fellow that carries a .40 cal Glock, but everyone else I know that carries a handgun while hunt (a very small amount) carry .357s and .44s

[Kain]

Yet the standard load for a .45 ACP is still 230 grains doing around 930 FPS? Yes, I agree that we have made improvements, but I am still not running across a lot of hunters using 9mm or .45. I do know one German fellow that carries a .40 cal Glock, but everyone else I know that carries a handgun while hunt (a very small amount) carry .357s and .44s

Are you talking hunters who are hunting with handguns or carrying them for defensive or as a tool to put a wounded animal down?

If the former, then there are barrel length constraints in a lot of areas that would make even a 5inch 1911 too short, let along a Glock 19. If the latter, I've known more than a few who carried .22lr, .22mags, and other small bore revolvers to use to administer the coup de grace.

There is also the area that you are in. If in bear country then yes a 9mm is really not the choice for handguns to deal with a bear. And .357mag is likely as small/powerful, as most would go and many would go up from there. At which point the reason is picking the right tool for the job not 9mm or .45ACP sucks. Just as while a .44mag will kill a man it really is more gun than needed to get the job done. For what it is worth I do believe that Iceland, or someone up near the Arctic issue glock 20s for defense against polar bears. Also some of those guys carrying .357s and .44 mags you have to ask how many carry it because it has been ingrained in their brains or that is the only pistol they have. I know a lot of hunters who have a lot of preconceived notions that were beat into them 30, 40, or even more years ago. I mean got every myth I have heard about the AR, I have heard just as many about hunting and shit.

[soulezoo]

He’d probably enjoy it and then go hand load a magnum version of it.

Believe me, Buffalo Bore IS a magnum version.

BB loads in 10mm are double the energy of 9 or 45. Double. And more than .357 mag is capable of. Some 10mm loads are 900 ftlbs.

I love Elmer. But he didn’t test 10mm. So his observations at this point are obsolescent.

[Det-Sog]

Believe me, Buffalo Bore IS a magnum version.

That's what I was getting at.

[soulezoo]

That's what I was getting at.

Oh I know you were.

Many folks don’t know or appreciate just how powerful it can be.

Unless of course they are arguing for the 9mm as the 10mm is “just too powerful “

[JaegerOne]

Having revolver firepower, i.e. 357 or 44 mag, and being able to effectively use it are usually not one in the same. In my more than 70 years of existence, rarely have I seen most folks able to shoot those loads accurately for more than 1 or 2 shots in rapid succession. Of course this would apply to the 10mm auto as well.