View Full Version : Single action revolvers for CCW
anachronism
11-22-10, 21:07
This question came up on another board I visit. I'm going to condense it a bit but the topic remains sound. If you were looking for a handgun for self defense & CCW, would you buy a single-action revolver? Now, base your answer on your current skill set, none of the "Bob Munden this" or "John Wayne that" nonsense.
An Undocumented Worker
11-22-10, 21:14
No, I want to be able to draw, and just pull the trigger.
No. It takes a lot of practice to be able to use a single action revolver effectively for self defense. If you get in a fire fight, you will want double action, especially if you are not a skilled shooter. If only one person is shooting at you and he reties his shoe after each shot, a single action might be ok. JMO.
Beat Trash
11-22-10, 21:17
Uh... no.
Anything I could do with a S/A revolver, I could do more proficiently with a D/A revolver. Put multiple aimed rounds on target faster, reload much faster, get the first round on target faster...
I stopped carrying D/A revolvers in the late 1980's because I found through training and experience that various semi auto pistols better suited my CCW needs than the D/A revolvers.
To go from my M&P 9mm's and Glocks to a S/A peacemaker? To me, it'd be a huge step backwards.
Magic_Salad0892
11-22-10, 21:19
Sorry, I wouldn't carry a SA Revolver for the same reason I wouldn't carry a 1911.
I don't like SAO. It's a manual of arms that (for me) could get very botched up and get me killed in a hostile environment.
Business_Casual
11-22-10, 21:21
The idea is madness.
B_C
operator81
11-22-10, 21:24
speaking of madness:
http://www.gunsite.com/main/course-offerings/specialty-classes/defensive-revolver-single-action-2/
NO.
I did carry my 1882 vintage Colt SAA once as an LEO on detail, "just because I could". But that was about 38 years ago in a galaxy far away.
I did notice recently that Gunsite (and Thunder Ranch?) offer defensive SA courses and they would no doubt be interesting in a nostalgic sort of way.
You could use anything including a flintlock for CCW, but it makes sense to choose the best tool. The single action hasn't been it in a hundred years.
anachronism
11-22-10, 22:34
I too voted against the idea. HOWEVER, a vast majority of respondents told him to go ahead if he was comfortable with the idea. The site this question was posted on has been getting more & more PC as time goes on. I guess nobody want's to upset the guy by disagreeing with him. Personally, I spent way too much time learning to shoot reasonably will with a DA revolver to consider hamstringing myself by going with a thumb buster. I still do 1911s because I've spent so much time with them, and because nobody makes the exact semi-auto I want. Kind of funny in this day and age.
MountainRaven
11-22-10, 23:19
If you do a lot of CAS and CAS constitutes the majority of your firearms experience and/or training, then sure. A pair of Ruger Vacqueros in .357 would make a decent enough, if heavy, way to pack some firepower. But you'd definitely want to carry two of them, at the least, and maybe even a pocket revolver or auto (Jesse James carried three revolvers, afterall, why wouldn't you, if you're packing the same sort of guns?).
But I think that most people are better suited by more modern options.
for me, hell no. if i was one of those cowboy dudes that put a million rounds a year through single actions... probably still no. but closer to a maybe then.
hell i still won't carry a gun with a thumb safety.
Jeff Cooper told of taking his SAA with him to the Pacific because he thought he knew better than the War Department. Trying to reload it in the dark and the mud convinced him that he didn't.
John_Wayne777
11-23-10, 06:53
This question came up on another board I visit. I'm going to condense it a bit but the topic remains sound. If you were looking for a handgun for self defense & CCW, would you buy a single-action revolver? Now, base your answer on your current skill set, none of the "Bob Munden this" or "John Wayne that" nonsense.
Nobody from the old west would carry a Peacemaker if they had the option to carry a Glock.
That's a clue.
There was a story, not too long ago, about a fellow who was OCing an SAA in a store that was robbed. He got into a gunfight with the robber, broke his gun, shot the bad guy and lived to tell the tale. Link here (http://singleactions.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=sas&action=print&thread=1004).
Clearly it's better than nothing.
Clearly there are better choices.
MadcapMagician
11-23-10, 08:28
How about not.
That would be the equivalent to running a 1903 Springfield instead of an M4.
Nostalgia and fun at the range are one thing, but when there are much better options and you have a choice, why stake your life on the lesser option?
ThirdWatcher
11-23-10, 12:26
Clearly it's better than nothing. Clearly there are better choices.
That sums it up for me.
How about not.
That would be the equivalent to running a 1903 Springfield instead of an M4.
Bad analogy. At least there are things a 1903 can do, or do better, that an M4 can't.
There was a story, not too long ago, about a fellow who was OCing an SAA in a store that was robbed. He got into a gunfight with the robber, broke his gun, shot the bad guy and lived to tell the tale. Link here (http://singleactions.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=sas&action=print&thread=1004).
Amazing story!
Shot the bad guy 3 times with reportedly .45 Colt. It's only anecdotal at this point, but I'd love to see the shooting and autopsy report. Might be another one to show the guys that still cling to large caliber bullets regardless of bullet speed or construction. If it indeed was .45 Colt lead at 700-800 fps, the guy would have been far better off with good 9mm loads. But try and tell that to old Elmer Keith fans....
Funny thing is, since I grew up on that dogma, I still have a soft spot in my heart for my .45 Colts and .44 Specials. But my brain knows we have better defense rounds today.
anachronism
11-23-10, 19:24
Common sense contraindicates his choice. I see it as a romantic answer to a clinical issue. The guy has more appropriate handguns, but bought the thumb buster specifically for this task. It appears to me that he doesn't really believe that he'll ever need to use it, and he may be correct about that point. BUT! This reminds me of some of the revolver guys who used to pick on the hi-cap shooters, telling them that they must plan on missing a lot. The truth is, you never know what to expect, and taking a minimalist approach to personal safety is a shortcut to a toe tag.
I don't know...... all you need is 1 shot and no matter where you hit it puts em in boot hill........... and Mavrick can fan a 45 and hit 3 times straight thru the heart at 30 feet..:sarcastic:
John_Wayne777
11-23-10, 22:16
but bought the thumb buster specifically for this task. It appears to me that he doesn't really believe that he'll ever need to use it
...and therein lies the problem. One you cannot hope to fix. When someone selects a handgun with the belief that they won't use it, there's not much you can do to fix it.
Amazing story!
Funny thing is, since I grew up on that dogma, I still have a soft spot in my heart for my .45 Colts and .44 Specials. But my brain knows we have better defense rounds today.
I hear what you're saying. I have a 4 in. Ruger Redhawk DA .45 Colt revolver that I carry when hunting elk and bear in the Pacific Northwest. I load it with 325 gr. lead flat nose hard cast. I chrono'd this load at 1385 fps. The .45 Colt may be old, but in a modern revolver (especially a cannon like a Redhawk) it can be safely loaded to deliver a hell of a punch. 325 grains of hard cast will punch a hole though hide and bone nicely. This is not the kind of load that you put in a SA cowboy gun.
The Redhawk .45 Colt and .44 Magnum are built on the same frame. Ruger has confirmed that the frames can easily handle loads exceeding 38,000 CUP. My .45 Colt load barely breaks 30,000 CUP and produces a lot less felt recoil than my old S&W 629 .44 mag. There are no brown bears where I live. My main concern is cougars and black bears, which can show up while you're gutting and skinning and really make life interesting (ask me how I know). Having a Redhawk in a chest rig is nice insurance when your rifle is out of your hands while skinning or bumming around camp in the back country. With this load, I've killed three feral hogs, a few coyotes and put down a black bear that had been previously wounded by some jackass who couldn't shoot straight. No issues whatsoever.
Insofar as an SA revolver for CCW goes: You can play baseball with a tennis racket, but why would you want to?
I love single action revolvers and own three. That said; I just used my Springfield Pro with 7rd mags in a home defense class with Mr. Hackathorn and it was a real eye opener. He had told me to get some 10rd mags and now I know why.
Lets try this: My gun is empty from shooting at bad guys. I missed because it is dark or low light and I have an airplane tail for a front sight( as my 4 5/8 blackhawk does.) There is someone out there trying to kill me and I must now:Reload one round at a time in the dark, now I must try again to run a flashlight ,properly cock a single action pistol two or three times and put my hits on target. This is all because I do not have the better option of running away. Can you defend yourself with a single action revolver? YES, but why would you? M&P9 $460.00, Apex sear $30.00, Surefire X300 $220.00, Laser grips...training... $1400.00 maybe? This is about the price of a Colt single action army. With which is it easier to stay alive?
The OP's screen name is the answer to the question.
MarshallDodge
11-24-10, 09:53
The single action revolver would not be my first choice in a gunfight but after spending some time playing cowboy games and getting good fast hits with it, my confidence is pretty high on the platform.
For a new shooter I would definitely recommend a quality autoloader and a training class on how to use it effectively.
Business_Casual
11-24-10, 10:25
It is moronic to compare cowboy shooting games to a modern gunfight and declare the SA revolver adequate.
B_C
The single action revolver would not be my first choice in a gunfight ....
Way back when I lived in PA, there was a gunstore that got broken into, but the crooks were scared off without getting anything. That night the owner and his wife slept in the store on the floor behind the counter. The crooks came back - 2 of them. The owner got one shot off with his Ruger single action and the bad guys were gone. The bad guys fired some rounds and the owner's wife fired some rounds too. The owner regretted his handgun choice because everything happened so fast that he only got off one shot, and he might have been toast if the bad guys had pressed the attack.
And remember that shooting in a convenience store, I think in SC? There was a guy holding up the store and a regular customer walked in open carrying a cheapo reproduction of a Remington single action revolver. The Remington guy and the robber exchanged fire, with the robber taking multiple rounds in the torso and eventually making it outside and collapsing. But what was notable about the shooting was that after the first or second shot, the sear on the Rem repro revolver broke, so the guy had to fan the hammer to shoot. Afterwards he said he learned not to trust his life to a cheap gun. This story is a bit off point from the OP, but still interesting because it shows a guy successfully using a broken single action revolver to prevail over a bad guy armed with a semi auto.
And remember that shooting in a convenience store, I think in SC?
Linked to earlier in the thread.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.