View Full Version : Is the medium/large frame revolver obsolete for personal defense?
Could a person be fully justified in carrying something like a K, L, or N-frame these days? Does the revolver's reliability advantage make up for its lower capacity, slower reloads, and heavier trigger? If someone has several serviceable semi-automatic pistols could a revolver have a niche personal defense role in certain situations?
HighDesert
10-17-14, 01:12
Absolutely personal preference.
If you shoot a revolver well, who gives a shit what other people think.
I carry a 4" 686 Plus occasionally in a simply rugged pancake and it carries great. Additionally, 7 rounds of 357mag is hardly a compromise especially when you compare to those who carry a full size 1911 with only 8 on board.
Carry what works for you and be happy.
Gunnar da Wolf
10-17-14, 08:44
If you hang around in the woods where "personal defense" includes furry things with teeth and claws, if you worry about defending against people inside vehicles, or if you might take a 100 yard shot with a pistol. Then the big magnum revolvers are a better hammer.
I'd also figure that an assailant in body armor might have problems shrugging off a double tap of 250gr .44 Magnum rounds as easily as a couple .380 rounds.
I've got a couple large frame 4" revolvers and they're really not that much harder to carry than a 1911 or big Glock in a good holster.
, slower reloads, and
You ever watch Jerry Miculek videos?? ;)
He can fire and reload a revolver twice before I could find my next mag on my belt.
To answer the question, no it is not obsolete. It's a different tool for the job.
I used to carry a colt python when hunting or just trekking through the woods. It's been replaced with a Glock 22. Is the python ineffective? No. For me it came down to what would I prefer to lose, tear up(much more active in my younger days), and more bb's(16 opposed to 6). That's it really.
I still somtimes carry the python. Why? Because it feels good in my hand. Lots of rounds through that pistol, like it a lot. And if I shoot somthing in the face with it, short of a bear or extra large critter, I don't think I'm going to have any more problems with said critter.
Now a lot of this depends on where you live. If you are in bear country, I would have my .41 mag or .44 mag. Bigger hammer as said above. In my area, anything above .380 would be good.
Doc Safari
10-17-14, 09:45
The revolver will never be fully obsolete. To the non-gun enthusiast "six for sure" is still the mantra for people who don't have the time or interest in learning malfunction drills with a semi-auto, or simply find all the levers and push buttons on an autoloader to be too much to train for.
A revolver lets you know it's loaded or not at a glance. A revolver can be unloaded in a flash by just emptying the cylinder.
You don't have to worry about jams, bad magazines, or low-powered rounds failing to cycle the action. If a round fails to go bang, just pull the trigger again. No tap, rack, bang needed here.
I might also add: I've seen more than one person reach the age where they did not have the hand strength to chamber the first round in an autoloader. No such issues with opening a cylinder and putting rounds in.
Not at all obsolete! Also keep in mind in areas with mag cap limits the auto advantage shrinks as well(sadly I live in one of those places) while not as big as some make it out there is still a reliability edge with wheel guns. Also even your garden variety smith k frame will tend to be much more inherently accurate than the typical combat auto.( a person on the trigger who can exploit that potential is an in reading rare bird these days) I have been to ppc matches and seen guys really good with wheels run sub four inch fifty yard groups with box stock k frames shot double action. No combat auto made today and even come close to that. My club runs a idpa type shoot and we run a course once with auto and once with the revolver up to about 40 targets. Even with the extra reloading my times for the wheel run are very close to my auto score. Not sure if that means I am good with a revolver or bad with an auto!
Nothing that launches bullets effectively can be truly "obsolete" . Not ideal, maybe, but not obsolete.
I have a 19 k frame with a 2.5 bbl being worked on right now that I wouldnt mind carrying.
To follow up I guess I am old as my start in handguns pretty much the choices were a 1911 with seven round mags or revolvers. The difference between 8 45's and 6 357's is marginal. I know some people who can really smoke it with revolvers - not miculek speed but darn fast. With good technique even now average can learn to reload a revolver quickly and the stats that indicate the majority of fights end long before six rounds are gone are still true. I still carry reloads and won't deny the auto is faster in this regard, but a skilled revolver guy or girl with a k frame is still a force to be reckoned with.
teutonicpolymer
10-17-14, 21:41
If by obsolete you mean there is no reason to get one over an autoloader then I think yes. As much as I love revolvers, and I really do love them because I learned on them first, they just don't really have advantages over autoloaders in my opinion. You gain reliability but you can still have malfunctions caused by carbon build up or just the annoying difficult to extract casing (in all fairness issues are usually rarer than in autoloaders). Some like to say that revolvers have a ballistic advantage over autoloaders- there doesn't really seem to be an advantage of .357 mag over 9mm/.40/.45 now since companies seemed to have frozen development of .357 mag bullets while constantly improving 9mm/.40/.45. On top of that the recoil tends to be harsher with .357 partially because it is more powerful but also because you don't have energy going into a reciprocating action. Plus revolvers are just large and heavy for their barrel length.
I might sound like I am just hating on revolvers here but I really do like them. Just ask yourself, would you rather carry a G19 with 15+1 rounds with a 4" barrel or a 686 with 6 or 7 round and a 4" barrel which weighs roughly twice as much and is much bulkier?
Short answer no, they are not obsolete. There are a number of areas in my mind that they do excel, big game hunting/protection, as well as teaching/training new shooters (.38 wad cutters out of a full sized .357 is a very soft shooting gun and can raise comfort level of recoil skiddish shooters.)
I'll be working on a detailed answer to that question this weekend at HiTS close quarters pistol class with a 3" GP100.
Nothing that launches bullets effectively can be truly "obsolete" . Not ideal, maybe, but not obsolete.
I have a 19 k frame with a 2.5 bbl being worked on right now that I wouldnt mind carrying.
My thoughts exactly. In 99% of self defense situations a revolver is probably totally sufficient. In most cases the gun is not even fired, it is the presence of the gun and a person willing to use it that deters most cases of further violence. In a small fraction of cases people have needed more that 6 shots to adequately defend themselves. And if you need 15 then what's to say 30 would not have been better or 100? It gets to a point that the gun itself is often enough for 80% of the cases (or whatever the percentage), and three shots deals with another 15% (estimating), and 10 handles another 3% and 15 shots maybe another 1/2%. Another way t look at it is, a person armed with a revolver is better armed than probably 99% of the general population.
No way you can say a revolver is obsolete for self defense. Personally I prefer to carry as much ammo capacity as possible in order to improve my chances even just a few percentage points. But when I do carry my M29 or 640 I still feel well protected.
Nytcrawler93
10-19-14, 15:53
Kind of hard for me to picture a situation where I would rather have a revolver than a 10mm Glock except for a BBQ.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The revolver will never be fully obsolete. To the non-gun enthusiast "six for sure" is still the mantra for people who don't have the time or interest in learning malfunction drills with a semi-auto, or simply find all the levers and push buttons on an autoloader to be too much to train for.
A revolver lets you know it's loaded or not at a glance. A revolver can be unloaded in a flash by just emptying the cylinder.
You don't have to worry about jams, bad magazines, or low-powered rounds failing to cycle the action. If a round fails to go bang, just pull the trigger again. No tap, rack, bang needed here.
I might also add: I've seen more than one person reach the age where they did not have the hand strength to chamber the first round in an autoloader. No such issues with opening a cylinder and putting rounds in.
"I'll take a revolver, You take your chances," - Bill Jordon. Everyone should own at least one quality revolver I feel. I wish I was a decent revolver shooter as those who are are a joy to watch. It's easy to see why most prefer a pistol (me included) but I can't see how the revolver will be obsolete. If I spent more time in the woods and back country, a big bore revolver would be my choice for side arm. On the CCW side, pretty tough to beat a snubbie with appropriate loads for weight/size and "six for sure" aspect of them.
montanadave
10-19-14, 16:08
Digging around in my nightstand turned up an SP 101 and a GP 100. I sleep okay.
SeriousStudent
10-19-14, 23:45
I'll be working on a detailed answer to that question this weekend at HiTS close quarters pistol class with a 3" GP100.
I spent the weekend shooting next to this guy. He more than held his own, shooting those two "rotary drum-fed assault pistols."
And by the way, he was shooting .357 magnum rounds in those two pistols, not cheating with some weak .38 Special pipsqueak handloads.
500 rounds over two days, most of it shooting on the move doing head shots on demand, between multiple no-shoots.
So yeah, it can be relevant, if you are up to it.
Am I selling my G17's? No. Am I keeping my GP100? Yes.
Good shooting with you, dude. Looking forward to doing it again. Be safe.
Could a person be fully justified in carrying something like a K, L, or N-frame these days? Does the revolver's reliability advantage make up for its lower capacity, slower reloads, and heavier trigger? If someone has several serviceable semi-automatic pistols could a revolver have a niche personal defense role in certain situations?
Considering most personal defense encounters result in no shots fired and those that do have 3 or less shots fired, it's hard to say that 3 shots of 38SPL / 357 Magnum / 44 Special / 44 Magnum won't get the job done.
While I am prepared for reloads with my firearms, odds are you won't need to reload in a SD shooting.
People who dismiss revolvers are simply closed minded or uninformed.
Obsolete? Not for me but I suspect I am in the minority. Love my 6 shot, .357 S&W M13, 3" barrel but I fully recognize the advantages of more capacity and faster reloads with the auto.
I spent the weekend shooting next to this guy. He more than held his own, shooting those two "rotary drum-fed assault pistols."
And by the way, he was shooting .357 magnum rounds in those two pistols, not cheating with some weak .38 Special pipsqueak handloads.
500 rounds over two days, most of it shooting on the move doing head shots on demand, between multiple no-shoots.
So yeah, it can be relevant, if you are up to it.
Am I selling my G17's? No. Am I keeping my GP100? Yes.
Good shooting with you, dude. Looking forward to doing it again. Be safe.
Thanks SS. The class was full of good shooters and to be able to hold my own compared to them in the eyes of an observer is something. I got a ton of practice reloading.
Gallo Pazzesco
10-20-14, 14:48
Absolutely personal preference.
If you shoot a revolver well, who gives a shit what other people think.
I carry a 4" 686 Plus occasionally in a simply rugged pancake and it carries great. Additionally, 7 rounds of 357mag is hardly a compromise especially when you compare to those who carry a full size 1911 with only 8 on board.
Carry what works for you and be happy.
Exactly. A btw, the 686-6 is a great choice. You cannot go wrong with that wheelgun. I carried one for years.
I'll be working on a detailed answer to that question this weekend at HiTS close quarters pistol class with a 3" GP100.
I spent the weekend shooting next to this guy. He more than held his own, shooting those two "rotary drum-fed assault pistols." And by the way, he was shooting .357 magnum rounds in those two pistols, not cheating with some weak .38 Special pipsqueak handloads.
500 rounds over two days, most of it shooting on the move doing head shots on demand, between multiple no-shoots. So yeah, it can be relevant, if you are up to it.
Respect.
My primary personal defense pistol is a 4" 1911; however, I would feel equally confident and prepared carrying my S&W Mountain Lion with Buffalo Bore Heavy 44 Special 190 grain Soft Cast HF-GC. Excellent action and trigger - I'm more accurate double action.
A few vids.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=xtCRvIBZQvY
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WbcwGHO3B6o&feature=youtu.be
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8qoXPb0xfTg&feature=youtu.be
Gunnar da Wolf
10-20-14, 20:29
Videos look solid to me. A revolver shooter just has to learn to P/O smaller groups of bad guys than the Glock 17 shooters. :)
Look's like you've got it down. If you don't mind what holster are you using.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Look's like you've got it down. If you don't mind what holster are you using.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
JM Kydex. I think some changes need to be made with regards to the belt loop and angle. A revolver has all its weight forward instead of in the grip like a semi auto.
SeriousStudent
10-20-14, 21:38
Thanks SS. The class was full of good shooters and to be able to hold my own compared to them in the eyes of an observer is something. I got a ton of practice reloading.
Dude, it was great to see! I gotta admit, I busted out laughing when you did that human shield drill and Darryl yelled "BRING THE THUNDER!" just as you fired.
For the folks watching at home, Hizzie was shooting into the little small headbox, and also into a B-8 target repair center. 10 and X-ring hits were the standard, and if you actually hit outside the black there was a diagnostic session. Very high accuracy standards, along with time limits.
More in the AAR this weekend. But this was the best pistol class I have ever done. And Hizzie had no problems meeting all expectations with that "old relic".
In the words of my colleague: "Respect."
Next time you guys get up here, let's meet up again. I greatly enjoyed it.
Considering most personal defense encounters result in no shots fired and those that do have 3 or less shots fired, it's hard to say that 3 shots of 38SPL / 357 Magnum / 44 Special / 44 Magnum won't get the job done.
While I am prepared for reloads with my firearms, odds are you won't need to reload in a SD shooting.
People who dismiss revolvers are simply closed minded or uninformed.
Before Glocks, the average number of police rounds fired per armed encounter in NYC was (if I remember correctly) 2.7. Folks forget that it is hits that count and it appears to me that a lot of people who carry have what I call the "Sonny Crockett Syndrome". Their role models are TV and movies rather than reality.
Now there are advantages with some autos, namely the lightest weight ones. And they are thinner than revolvers. Aside from these, a revolver is a perfectly adequate personal defense (not offense) weapon.
Dave,
I used a combination of your Comp II's and JetLoaders in the above vids. I think I educated a few lost souls on the utility of the wheelgun at that class.
A while back I had a Charter Arms .38 Spl (forget the model) that my father owned. I took it to the range to test for function and it actually had a "malfunction" after firing a few rounds. Something was getting hung up with the spring/mechanism behind the grip panel. I tried to get a gun shop to diagnose it and ended up just selling it to them. I know for a fact it was never taken apart nor messed with (nor shot) as my father was not a shooter or gun guy. It merely sat in a night stand drawer for as long as he had it.
Now I know Charter Arm's reputation had ups and downs over the years and has never been held in the same regard as S&W but still a revolver, in theory, should not have done that. It is probably the rarest occurrence involving a firearm, but it happened to me. Six for sure, 99.9% of the time.
Thanks Hizzie! That was nice of you to mention that. I have another thought for all of you. What if things get really up close and personal, such as true hand to hand? After all, a weapon should be effective at any reasonable distance; right? How about zero to minus zero? If you press the muzzle of an auto against an opponent or a bear on top of you, is it going to fire? It might if it were a blowback of low power. It won't if it is short recoil as are most 9MMs on up. In addition, a muzzle against an opponent discharge will have a "bang stick" effect. Bang sticks were designed for sharks that are almost totally insensitive to shock. The high velocity gasses actually entering a body have an incredibly violent effect and may be your only hope in such a situation.
SeriousStudent
11-02-14, 23:24
That is a very good point, Dave, and was actually discussed in the class Hizzie and I were in.
I'd really love to get Southnarc (Craig Douglas) to offer some of his observations on that issue. Mr. Douglas has some terrific training info in his ECQC class.
Another member here (Irish) had some interesting feedback based on a class he took a year or so, I think. It was about the role of a J-frame in a contact gunfight.
I almost always have a fixed blade carried horizontally at 11:30, and a J-frame in a left front pocket. And it's pretty much for those reasons you described. But I am most likely going for the blade first to create distance, then go to the pistol if possible.
Interesting discussion, very interesting.
Because so much of my shooting time has been with revolvers and because I've studied the subject for decades, I must jump up and exclaim that the revolver is not obsolete for defense. BUT, its time has passed as a general issue weapon to police officers. It will serve well as a cop's secondary weapon, and for the man on the street, the revolver can be a suitable choice for defense. He who selects the revolver should master double action shooting. My strong opinion is that one's defense revolver should be double action only. Removing the single action feature(if present)to produce a DA only revolver is a good idea for a couple reasons, but few people do so.
Alpha Sierra
11-12-14, 06:56
Could a person be fully justified in carrying something like a K, L, or N-frame these days?
To whom is that justification owed? In my opinion, only to self. So your question is without basis from the get go.
If you don't want to carry a revolver, don't. Strap on whatever you want and move on.
If you do want to carry a revolver, do your own risk analysis, make your decision, and stick with it regardless of what others think because no one else can make this decision for you.
Alpha Sierra
11-12-14, 07:00
Removing the single action feature(if present)to produce a DA only revolver is a good idea for a couple reasons, but few people do so.
I'm interested in your thoughts as to why you think so.
I've done a lot of thinking on that topic, spurred on by statements like yours. I can't find one single upside to removing the single action feature and many downsides to doing so.
I've never been even remotely tempted to shoot a revolver in single action under the stress of timed drills and competition. So I can safely extrapolate that I never will try to use it when confronted with a fight for my life.
OTOH, the single action feature comes in very handy when having fun with revolvers.
titsonritz
11-12-14, 20:09
It has been my observation that while revolvers appear to be simple and more reliable on the surface they are actually more complex in both design and operation and more important when they do go down they are much more difficult to get back up when compared to modern autos, (i.e. pulled bullets seizing the action, case stuck under the spur, ruptured cases or primer), with an auto the "tap,rack,bang" thing work the majority of the time.
Obsolete? Nah, it's just like AS says just know what you're getting into.
Alpha Sierra
11-13-14, 06:40
It has been my observation that while revolvers appear to be simple and more reliable on the surface they are actually more complex in both design and operation and more important when they do go down they are much more difficult to get back up when compared to modern autos, (i.e. pulled bullets seizing the action, case stuck under the spur, ruptured cases or primer), with an auto the "tap,rack,bang" thing work the majority of the time.
Yes and no.
While a revolver's operating system is mechanically more complex than a semi auto's, it is virtually imprevious to malfunctions due to user input (limp wristing), ammunition factors, and accumulation of combustion by products.
A properly timed revolver, assembled with parts of the correct metallurgy (ie not Taurus/Charter Arms/Armscor/Spanish S&W copies) will work and work and work.
However, I agree with you that when a wheelgun stops working it is far more difficult to get it running again.
Gunnar da Wolf
11-13-14, 13:17
IMHO no matter what you carry it's your job to learn everything you need to know about making it run and keeping it running. Learn to shoot it and learn how to maintain it. Anything made by man can fail especially if you don't do your part.
I'm frequently appalled when a new guy shows up at the range with a new snubby and tries to shoot the qualification course. Monkeys having intimate knowledge of footballs comes to mind...
A real shootist with an 1860 cap and ball revolver could still hold his own in most real world shoot outs, a poseur with an night sighted, tac light equipped double stacked compensated 9mm and no knowledge is still a lamb to the slaughter unless he gets lucky.
I don't think they are obsolete. Just look at S&W's PC 327 line, 8 shots of .357mag. 2 models have rails above and below the barrel. I have a TRR8, the only thing keeping me from using it as a self defense tool is the Hillary Hole.
Are revolvers obsolete? No, so long as one keeps in mind they have a very limited supply of on-board ammo, compared to the modern autoloader, with which to respond to the possibility of multiple threats before having to reload. (As the modern violent felon, like hyenas, are pack scavengers that usually travel in packs of 2-5)
If one feels they can engage with a revolver and not only make hits, but make decisive hits on multiple moving tgts who are trying to do the same to you, resolve the situation and come out on top, then by all means make it your daily carry option.
Now in all reality, how many are actually capable of this? Not very many I'd bet. I believe most shooters, including those who think they're up to the task w/ a revolver, should probably go with a simple autoloader that has very few external controls and carries at least 10 rds, better yet a baker's dozen or more.
Some have made the argument that Wyatt Earp and his brothers did fine with revolvers.....Yeah they did, but keep in mind they were up against opponents who were similarly armed. Another thing you can count on was that they were toting the most advanced handguns of their day....so should we. I don't believe in placing myself at a possible disadvantage purposely.
This is coming from a revolver fanatic. I'm a guy who loves his revolvers and was issued one on duty for over a decade before we made the change over to plastic autos. I still have fits of nostalgia where I'll drag a revolver out and take it to the range and keep it out for a few days for re-familiarization, but, a revolver is most certainly not what I carry on a daily basis. I carry a simple autoloader that allows me to do a lot of work before I have to seek cover and reload.
I'll take efficiency and pragmatism over nostalgia, sentiment and panache any day when it comes to arming up for hostilities, but this is only my semi-literate opinion.
Doc Safari
11-14-14, 17:39
From my perspective, a five-shot snub revolver is one of the few guns you can conceal in the summer in the Southwest. You just don't wear a lot of clothing when it's 104 outside.
I've considered smallish 380 autos, but there are power and reliability issues with those.
So in my case a small wheel gun is better than no gun in the summer.
Very true! It's the same here in the South East. In the summer, I find the Walther PPS to be carried when light clothing is the order of the day. During the winter I do, on occasion, carry the S&W 386 Night Guard in a coat pocket, but it's not my primary carry pistol.
bodyarmorguy
01-31-15, 19:38
While a 1911 is my preferred carry option, I do occasionally find myself carrying a S&W 66-1 with round but and 2-1/2 bbl in a 5 Shot Leather CBS holster with a speed loader or speed strips in my pocket. I prefer .38+P Golden Sabers over their .357 magnum counterpart. It is accurate, fast recovery between shots, i do not feel under gunned with this combo.
You ever watch Jerry Miculek videos?? ;)
He can fire and reload a revolver twice before I could find my next mag on my belt.
This sums it up perfectly - for somebody already proficient, medium/large frame revolvers are extremely relevant, because they're great tools. For somebody learning from scratch with no prior experience, I'll put them onto a double stack auto every time - this is a lot like the AR vs Pump Action SG deal, the mechanically simpler tool is a great option for somebody who already knows how to run them, but because of idiosyncracies about how to load them and comparatively higher recoil, they're a poor choice for new shooters.
teutonicpolymer
02-01-15, 14:01
Not sure if I agree with the statement that revolvers are more mechanically simple than autoloaders but I do like revolvers nonetheless and a .357 magnum/.38 special medium/large frame revolver loaded with .38 specials would be my first choice to teach someone how to shoot a handgun. It upsets me that revolver cartridges have gotten so expensive... Now shooting .38 special costs more than .45 acp with factory ammo.
A .38 Smith and Wesson Model 10 just might be the perfect handgun for the non-professional/non-gun enthusiast who only wants to do a little practice 3 or 4 times a year, but still needs a night table gun for bad guys that go bump in the night. Most of the folks posting here (including myself) love guns and shoot them as much as we can, others are less enthusiastic but still need something. The ease of use and low maintenance required by a revolver make them excellent for this type of application.
A .38 Smith and Wesson Model 10 just might be the perfect handgun for the non-professional/non-gun enthusiast who only wants to do a little practice 3 or 4 times a year, but still needs a night table gun for bad guys that go bump in the night. Most of the folks posting here (including myself) love guns and shoot them as much as we can, others are less enthusiastic but still need something. The ease of use and low maintenance required by a revolver make them excellent for this type of application. A gun is a tool and like a set of sockets each sockets works best on its proper size nut. Up close and personal it is devastatingly reliable.
superr.stu
02-02-15, 19:07
A gun is a tool and like a set of sockets each sockets works best on its proper size nut. Up close and personal it is devastatingly reliable.
While just a sample of 1, I would submit that a 625 with laser-grips can make for a powerful tool. Also I personally find a model 19 is perfect for running up town to grab some gas/bread/diapers. Lastly I find a large framed revolver perfect for my wife, in general she's not into shooting, but if I'm packing up the 625 and the 986 I'll probably find her waiting in the truck for me.
I thought I posted in this thread a while ago. Perhaps I just missed it in my review of the posts.
Anyhow, I like to carry this, when I can dress around its size. I'm on the small side, so it isn't easy for me to pull off in just any clothing. I always carry it when I am in Bear Country and I don't feel like I have to justify it to anyone. When out and about it is rolling with 240gr XTP's over a stout load of 2400, when in Bear Country it holds some pretty stout cast lead bullets over a similar charge of 2400. It will get your attention right quick.
No, I can't reload like Jerry.
http://hkguns.zenfolio.com/img/s8/v78/p1423643648-5.jpg
Eurodriver
02-04-15, 21:12
HK Guns,
There is something gorgeous about a Stainless half-shroud .44 or .357 magnum S&W with a rubber grip.
It is the most beautiful gun in the world, in my opinion.
I love my wheel guns. I will never get rid of them, and I'll even do y'all one better. If I lived in a state that allowed open carry, I'd regularly carry my .44SPL Blackhawk, or my S&W 21-4.
Could a person be fully justified in carrying something like a K, L, or N-frame these days? Does the revolver's reliability advantage make up for its lower capacity, slower reloads, and heavier trigger? If someone has several serviceable semi-automatic pistols could a revolver have a niche personal defense role in certain situations?
People will always "go, with what they know" as well they should. I'll trust a guy that was raised with a lever action to use it effectively because he "believes" in it rather than trying to argue that he should use an AR/MSR that I "believe" in.
I will say I like that a revolver is static and under no stress when loaded/chambered, ready to go. Therefore I like the idea of it as a "storage" or stow-away gun. Also like that shrouded hammer revolvers can be used through items like clothing or a bag. That being said, I still don't use them as I dedicate my money to the semis that I prefer.
skimbleshanks
02-21-15, 06:53
if things got really nasty i would much rather try to crush a face with my S&W highway patrol man than my XD. i also shoot wheel guns better and i find them easier to maintain as a side arm while getting wet and filthy on long hunting trips.
I really like the .45 Colt round, and I reload for it. Last time I checked these can only be used in a revolver. I feel well armed hiking in the mountains with a .45 revolver on my hip.
Well for a very long time now I've only had small revolvers such as the Ruger LCR .357 that I really like.
The wife likes for it's decent DA trigger and recoil absorbing design. I like it for the same reasons and additionally because I like 158 gr .357 magnum loads in a 2-inch.
I was at a buddies house the other day and he really liked my Gen 4 Glock 32. He offered to trade me for his S&W 627 Pro with box and papers. (The 8-shot .357 4-inch) I've fired this particular gun and know it's a good one. (S&W made plenty of bad ones) It's had very few rounds fired. (Maybe 300?) It's recessed for the moon clips but I don't have any yet.
So I took the trade. The Glock 32 had been my "woods gun" that I took to carrying all the time because I loved the grip texture. Oh, well. Back to carrying the old G19.
To get back on thread though I think this gun will be my "woods gun", and when not in the woods a "stash gun" for the house and maybe car.
It's currently stashed and ready loaded with Federal 180 gr SJHP's. What do you yal'll think? Good trade?
Not sure what the deal is with the pic but it's clickable!
31883
teutonicpolymer
02-24-15, 13:04
Wow that's not a trade that's robbery
Not saying that I would necessarily want a current S&W revolver over a Glock but it is worth about twice as much
Wow that's not a trade that's robbery
Not saying that I would necessarily want a current S&W revolver over a Glock but it is worth about twice as much
I found these "Pro" 637's selling for $600-$800 typically. I did give him 100 rounds of quality ammo (including 50 rounds of Gold Dots) since he had none. I had installed good sights, the front having tritium. Both guns are "used" but with low round counts. Maybe 750 rounds from the G32.
Obsolete? No. Better options available? Yes.
Just about any handgun out there can be a viable personal defense weapon as long as it can launch a projectile with lethal force when needed. A .38 Special out of a Model 10 will kill someone just as dead as the latest and greatest polymer 9mm will. However I think the advantages of more modern handguns, like larger capacities, lighter weight, faster reloads, and easier to use trigger systems are hard to deny when looking for a self defense weapon. The one area where revolvers tend to excel is in chambering powerful cartridges that can be used to defend yourself from dangerous wild life.
I have several autos and one revolver. I choose the revolver for my home defense pistol over the autos. Why? The simplicity of the revolver is appealing to me in the middle of the night. Besides, if 6 rounds of 357 magnum ain't enough I'll just grab an AR.
BuzzinSATX
02-26-15, 18:22
Well for a very long time now I've only had small revolvers such as the Ruger LCR .357 that I really like.
The wife likes for it's decent DA trigger and recoil absorbing design. I like it for the same reasons and additionally because I like 158 gr .357 magnum loads in a 2-inch.
I was at a buddies house the other day and he really liked my Gen 4 Glock 32. He offered to trade me for his S&W 627 Pro with box and papers. (The 8-shot .357 4-inch) I've fired this particular gun and know it's a good one. (S&W made plenty of bad ones) It's had very few rounds fired. (Maybe 300?) It's recessed for the moon clips but I don't have any yet.
So I took the trade. The Glock 32 had been my "woods gun" that I took to carrying all the time because I loved the grip texture. Oh, well. Back to carrying the old G19.
To get back on thread though I think this gun will be my "woods gun", and when not in the woods a "stash gun" for the house and maybe car.
It's currently stashed and ready loaded with Federal 180 gr SJHP's. What do you yal'll think? Good trade?
Not sure what the deal is with the pic but it's clickable!
31883
Good trade for you...but if your friend wanted the 32, guess it was good for him too.
But id have given him any Glock I own (don't own a G40 yet...) for that revolver
Take Care,
Buzz
derfarhar333
02-27-15, 12:30
I carry a 4" 686+ in a high ride holster typically during winter months and for all my outdoor wanderings. I love the 357 magnum cartridge. I also keep it in my nightstand. I bought it for my wife because she prefers revolvers to semiautos.
Lost River
03-13-15, 21:14
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b109/IV_Troop/Taffin44project030.jpg (http://s18.photobucket.com/user/IV_Troop/media/Taffin44project030.jpg.html)
I am an unabashed fan of the Glock 9mm, and .45 auto pistols. That said, I've been carrying N Frame .44 mags for more than a couple of decades and consider a large for caliber projectile (such as a 300-320 grain cast bullet) pushed at moderate velocities, like between 1000 & 1150 fps to be big medicine, and very capable "one shot stop" type loads.
I've never felt undergunned while carrying one of my .44 Magnums, with a couple of speedloaders in my pocket. It's been my experience too, that with good leather, like Milt Sparks 200aw rigs, that one can carry all day with little discomfort. Similar to carrying a 5" government model.
Commonly carried, all will do the job if I will:
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b109/IV_Troop/015.jpg (http://s18.photobucket.com/user/IV_Troop/media/015.jpg.html)
I've spent a few minutes reading this thread from start to finish and I'd like to make a few observations-
When comparing sizes of self loaders and revolvers, comparing a 4 inch self loader to a 4 inch revolver is really apples & oranges. The chamber of the self loader is part of the barrel. The chamber of the revolver is the chamber and adds roughly 2 inches to the barrel length. A 4 inch self loader is comparable to a 2 or 3 inch revolver.
8 holes in the bad guy is better than 6 whether the round used is a 45, 357, 9mm or 38.
The revolver is obsolete but not abandoned and while it is not abandoned, revolver technology and economy is currently in a static state.
Revolvers fill niche as they can be effectively chambered for the more powerful magnums and in practical use, that niche is in between handguns and SBRs. If not for the artificial difficulties of SBR ownership, I think we'd see a blurring of the line between magnum handguns and SBRs in the field.
The combat double action revolver with its design and all steel construction is a unique blend of elegance and purpose that is unmatched by any polymer framed self loader
I was at a buddies house the other day and he really liked my Gen 4 Glock 32. He offered to trade me for his S&W 627 Pro with box and papers. (The 8-shot .357 4-inch) I've fired this particular gun and know it's a good one. (S&W made plenty of bad ones) It's had very few rounds fired. (Maybe 300?) It's recessed for the moon clips but I don't have any yet.
About the moon clips....the good news is that they make for very tidy reloads. The bad news is that the groove on the brass into which the clip goes, is different from one manufacturer to the next. Clip thickness is usually what distinguishes one group from another. No one seems to account for the diameter at the groove but I think that matters too.
I bought a 627 last year and have been going through the 'which brass in what clip' exercise. R-P and Federal works well in .025 thick clips. Winchester though has a narrower groove which does not (perhaps a .020 thick clip will work).
Also, compared to the clips for the 625 (several clips for a dollar) that fit mixed 45ACP brass, the clips for the 38s are hardly inexpensive (several dollars for one clip) and fit a few brands brands.
Be alert.
About the moon clips....the good news is that they make for very tidy reloads. The bad news is that the groove on the brass into which the clip goes, is different from one manufacturer to the next. Clip thickness is usually what distinguishes one group from another. No one seems to account for the diameter at the groove but I think that matters too.
I bought a 627 last year and have been going through the 'which brass in what clip' exercise. R-P and Federal works well in .025 thick clips. Winchester though has a narrower groove which does not (perhaps a .020 thick clip will work).
Also, compared to the clips for the 625 (several clips for a dollar) that fit mixed 45ACP brass, the clips for the 38s are hardly inexpensive (several dollars for one clip) and fit a few brands brands.
Be alert.
Yep. I got some and found the same thing. I must have the same type you do because Remington and Federal fit fine. Haven't tried Winchester yet. S&B and Geco do not fit. CCI Blazer don't fit IIRC. Hornady a little tight but still doable. Starline brass fits fine thankfully.
Of course the great thing is the 627 doesn't HAVE to use the clips. Loose ammo works and ejects just fine!
I think I paid around $8 for 10 clips or so IIRC. Or maybe it was $10 for 8 clips? Either way it's enough for now. I spend more time shooting my Glock 19 and Ruger LCR. (.357 also)
Obsolete? Not to me, the DA revolver is something I shoot well. For some reason that DA trigger action agrees with me. I carry a DA/SA autoloader because of 1) the DA first shot and my preferred AWIB carry and 2) lighter and flatter to carry. But I would not feel under armed carrying my 6 shot snub with speed strips. There is something to be said for hitting what you aim at and I have confidence that I can.
For open carry with speedloaders I would strongly consider carrying my 4" 686.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.