A second look at revolvers

[jumbopanda]

I currently own only two handguns: a SW1911, and a Ruger Super Redhawk in .454. Obviously, there is a distinct difference between these two guns as one is suited for fighting/self defense, while the other is suited for hunting/fun blasting. I'm 22 and obtained the 1911 two years ago as my first handgun. I've always sworn by this gun, and preferred its ergonomics to those of other handguns that I've tried (Glock, M&P, Sig). I later bought the Super Redhawk because I wanted a big-bore handgun that would be fun to blast things with. I quickly noticed that I'm MUCH more accurate with that gun than I was with the 1911. In ideal conditions, I could shoot a 1 gallon jug at 150yds offhand. But of course, such a huge magnum revolver has no practical use in terms of self-defense or any other type of practical shooting other than hunting.

Fast forward to this weekend, when I had the opportunity to shoot a S&W Model 17, and I was surprised by my accuracy. The small steel targets that I could not hit with my 1911 were sounding off consistently as I fired the revolver.

This compels me to take another look at revolvers as fighting/self-defense guns. And I'm talking about full-sized .357s, not tiny .22s or huge .454s. I just think that revolvers point much easier and feel more comfortable in my hand. Obviously the biggest drawback for a revolver is its ammo capacity, but a 1911 only holds 8 in a standard magazine, and it is still in use by military and law enforcement today. So what say you guys? Does a seven-shot .357 magnum revolver have any place as a practical handgun in today's world?

[ssracer]

I know a couple of people with 8 shot S&W PC .357s. They are very nice revolvers to say the least.

And while reloading a revolver for most is going to be much slower than reloading a semi-auto pistol, it is a skill that can be sped up immensely with training. I have shot with a guy in local competitions who has won many national championships, who can complete a course with his 6 shot revolver way faster than I can with my 1911.

[jumbopanda]

Those 8-shots are interesting. I've always been concerned with their size, but the scandium framed models still weigh less than a standard 1911. I guess I will have to handle one to see if it suits me. The problem is, those guns are a lot less common than Glocks and M&Ps which I can go fondle at almost any gun store.

[bigghoss]

I don't feel under gunned with a 6 shot wheelie .357 or bigger. safariland comp I or comp II speedloders are great too. I used to have a smith and wesson model 19-3 4" barrel and it's a great gun. I gave it to my dad when I brought home a ruger gp100. he used to carry a 19 as a cop and with speedloaders could beat most guys with autos during the timed range quals they had to do.

[jenrick]

Revolvers chambered in a good SD caliber such as .357 mag, .41 mag, 10mm, .45 ACP, and even .38 spl +P/+P+ are all solid weapons. The bullet doesn't care what it's coming out of, so if you're comfortable with caliber how well you shoot the gun is the major issue. If you are shooting a revolver better then a semi-auto there's nothing wrong with using one. Training and practice will allow you to manipulate the weapon in acceptable times. Revolvers have the added advantage of easily changeable grips/stocks to better fit your hand, and the ability to cycle right past jams. Regardless of what people you, you can jam a revolver up hard. It however is a lot rarer, and requires either a defective round, major mechanical failure of the weapon, or the introduction of a lot of gunk into the weapon.

The 327 is a beast, I would carry it on duty in a heart beat if I was authorized to. Only issue is that no one makes 8 round speed loaders, you have to run moon clips, which isn't a huge deal. The 686+ is a 7 shot, and speed loaders are available. The modern .38 spl +P/+P+ loads are pretty good, and I feel confident in using them versus .357 mag when talking general SD. The .41 mag is an extremely effective SD cartridge, combining the bullet mass of the .44 mag with almost .357 mag velocities. It can be a bit much to shoot for some, but if you can run it or find lighter loads it will do the trick.

-Jenrick

[bigghoss]

The 327 is a beast, I would carry it on duty in a heart beat if I was authorized to. Only issue is that no one makes 8 round speed loaders, you have to run moon clips, which isn't a huge deal. The 686+ is a 7 shot, and speed loaders are available. The modern .38 spl +P/+P+ loads are pretty good, and I feel confident in using them versus .357 mag when talking general SD. The .41 mag is an extremely effective SD cartridge, combining the bullet mass of the .44 mag with almost .357 mag velocities. It can be a bit much to shoot for some, but if you can run it or find lighter loads it will do the trick.

-Jenrick

here you go. 8 shot speedloaders.
http://www.thunderranchinc.com/8shot.html
http://www.5starfirearms.com/357_n.html

[M4Fundi]

I know a couple of people with 8 shot S&W PC .357s. They are very nice revolvers to say the least.

And while reloading a revolver for most is going to be much slower than reloading a semi-auto pistol, it is a skill that can be sped up immensely with training. I have shot with a guy in local competitions who has won many national championships, who can complete a course with his 6 shot revolver way faster than I can with my 1911.

Yeah, hate those wheelgun guys... had a guy in MT that shot a Scandium 45 revolver (325?) and would kick everyone's butt running autos:confused:

The 325 was VERY shootable for speed. I was impressed. I only shot it once on a steel stage, but hit all my plates very fast. It didn't seem to have much recoil for such a light gun.

[JHC]

This compels me to take another look at revolvers as fighting/self-defense guns.

Actually it probably should not. You are hitting the long range gallon jug and the small steel targets with long barreled revolvers firing single action correct? My K-22 (Model 17) has a SA pull of about 2 lbs. That sort of shooting should not assume undue influence on your impressions of what makes a great defense gun.

Now if you can outshoot your 1911 (and other defense oriented semi auto's) while firing your wheelies double action (fast) in fighting drills then you may be onto something.

I've no problem with revolvers for self defense. I keep a few handy and own as many as I have autos. I was raised with them. They will work. But your comparison should not be single action plinking vs training at fighting.

[Silvanus]

I carry a 6-shot 4" S&W on duty everyday. I can think of a couple of situations where a higher capacity/ faster reload would be desirable and I would definitely prefer to carry a semi-auto. But generally I do feel rather comfortable with that wheelgun on my hip. I train a lot with this gun and know it's benefits and limitations.

[rdc0000]

Looks like everyone is giving wheel gun opinions so, I shoot S&W M22 with 45 AR & 45ACP. 255 grain laser casts bullets at 900 fps. This load is very accurate and I can control it better than a 357 mag. It can use 45 ACP on moon clips if I need it. The 255 gr load is LC energy and it is enough. I would also consider a 4" 10mm if it was in an N frame carbon style like an ole M58.

[John_Wayne777]

Fast forward to this weekend, when I had the opportunity to shoot a S&W Model 17, and I was surprised by my accuracy. The small steel targets that I could not hit with my 1911 were sounding off consistently as I fired the revolver.


Keep in mind that you were shooting a .22. Anticipation is less of an issue when your brain is wired to think that you're shooting a pipsqueak cartridge. I have two S&W J frame revolvers that I shoot regularly. One is a model 442 in .38 spl. The other is a model 317 chambered in .22LR. They are just about identical in terms of operation, but I never anticipate with the .22. Why? Because it's a pea shooter.

A good .22LR revolver is a training tool that I think holds a great deal of benefit for many shooters...but you must be careful not to extrapolate the results you get from one past the point of their legitimate usefulness.



So what say you guys? Does a seven-shot .357 magnum revolver have any place as a practical handgun in today's world?

My 2 cents:

A large chunk of the people buying handguns today are FAR too concerned about "feel" in a handgun. Generally their skill levels with a handgun are fairly low and they seek out a bullet launcher that compensates for their bad habits and lack of skill. I'm convinced that this is part of the reason why the Taurus Judge is so popular...because I've seen people at the range who struggle to keep shots on paper shooting birdshot out of that stupid hillbilly handgun at a paper target 3 yards away pleased as punch about it being impossible to miss.

As a weapon for defense against 2 legged predators, there is nothing that a .357 magnum revolver does significantly better than a Glock 19. I love to shoot revolvers as much as anyone, but if I were warned that 15 minutes from now I'd be in a gunfight I would not be reaching for my model 19 or my model 27.

What you are missing right now is training. If you put the time and effort into learning how to run a semi-auto properly, the results for tens of thousands of others who have come before you indicates that you'll be able to do anything you can reasonably expect to be able to do with a handgun using a semi-auto.

You want to hit something at long distance with a handgun? Ok, how about this:

http://i720.photobucket.com/albums/ww204/synergy303/LAV%203%20Day%20Pistol%20USTC%202010/IMG_0735.jpg

There you can see Larry Vickers about to take a shot at roughly 135 yards...and he hit what he was aiming at. With a Glock 17. I made that same shot using an iron-sighted P30, as did another student. After we took our shots others stepped up and tried the same feat, and a good many of them managed to make the hit. The gentleman who took that picture, for instance, made the 135 yard shot with a Glock 19.

When you invest money into building your skills with a handgun instead of pouring it down the drain looking for the handgun you suck the least with, it ceases to matter much what you're actually shooting. You'll be able to pick up just about anything and run it better than most.

Buy something you can shoot...a lot. Then spend your time learning to use it well.

If buying handguns to compensate for a lack of skill worked, Dave Sevigny would be my bitch.

As for revolvers for self defense use, they have their place. I carry a revolver every day of my life...the aforementioned S&W 442. It offers a blend of power, concealability, and reliability that nothing else matches. When I lay the S&W model 19 beside the H&K P30, however, there's no comparison...the P30 bests it in every way except aesthetics.

[ChicagoTex]

If buying handguns to compensate for a lack of skill worked, Dave Sevigny would be my bitch.

Now that's sig-worthy if ever I've seen it.

As a minimum it deserves to be quoted for truth.

Count me in the group of people who bought handguns left and right looking for the "one" until he finally got his shooting fundamentals to the place where there wasn't really that much of a difference and he was picking guns instead based on his operational preferences rather than "what can I hit the broad side of a barn with?"

[jumbopanda]

Keep in mind that you were shooting a .22. Anticipation is less of an issue when your brain is wired to think that you're shooting a pipsqueak cartridge. I have two S&W J frame revolvers that I shoot regularly. One is a model 442 in .38 spl. The other is a model 317 chambered in .22LR. They are just about identical in terms of operation, but I never anticipate with the .22. Why? Because it's a pea shooter.



Thanks for all the input! I've got a few more thoughts though...

Keep in mind that I also shoot my .454 Super Redhawk much more accurately than I do my .45acp 1911, so anticipation isn't really an issue here. And I don't think I'm bad with semi autos either, it's just that I seem to consistently shoot revolvers better. I'm sure I could improve with lots of training like you said, but my thought process is that I could potentially be much better with revolvers given the same amount of practice. Consider that I've only put about 1000 rounds through revolvers in my lifetime compared to about 7-8000 through my 1911, and I already shoot revolvers far better.

[jumbopanda]

Actually it probably should not. You are hitting the long range gallon jug and the small steel targets with long barreled revolvers firing single action correct? My K-22 (Model 17) has a SA pull of about 2 lbs. That sort of shooting should not assume undue influence on your impressions of what makes a great defense gun.

Now if you can outshoot your 1911 (and other defense oriented semi auto's) while firing your wheelies double action (fast) in fighting drills then you may be onto something.

I've no problem with revolvers for self defense. I keep a few handy and own as many as I have autos. I was raised with them. They will work. But your comparison should not be single action plinking vs training at fighting.

You've got a point; self defense is not about taking slowly aimed long range shots. Perhaps I should try more fighting drills.

Although I wasn't too bad firing double action versus single action.

[Littlelebowski]

Thanks for all the input! I've got a few more thoughts though...

Keep in mind that I also shoot my .454 Super Redhawk much more accurately than I do my .45acp 1911, so anticipation isn't really an issue here. And I don't think I'm bad with semi autos either, it's just that I seem to consistently shoot revolvers better. I'm sure I could improve with lots of training like you said, but my thought process is that I could potentially be much better with revolvers given the same amount of practice. Consider that I've only put about 1000 rounds through revolvers in my lifetime compared to about 7-8000 through my 1911, and I already shoot revolvers far better.

Go to a class with your revolver and see how you shoot. Might be different than the range.

[R Moran]

So you want to trade in a relatively soft shooting, higher capacity, easier to reload, easier to conceal, easier to clear a malfunction, reliable handgun for one, that is fatter, harder to conceal, harder to shoot well(DA) harder to reload, and usually kick more.....

good luck with that, let me know how it works out for ya....

A few points...

- The 1911 is fast falling out of favor with military units, mostly because of capacity.

-A revolver in a duty calibre tend to recoil more then autos' that have reciprocating parts to absorb some of the recoil

- Revolvers can and do malfunction. I had 442, that lost its ejector rod ball detente during a reload, had I not caught it, eventually the ejector rod would have unscrewed under recoil, and prevented the cylinder from opening, or even turning.
The ejector rod on a Colt Trooper unscrewed on me, when I went to shut the cylinder, it bent, making operating the gun impossible.

- Moon type clips are known to bend easily, making operating the revolver difficult

- No matter how much training you put into a revolver, put that same amount into a good auto, and you will shoot quicker and reload faster. Lets face it, defeating a Jerry Miculeck is probably not gonna happen any time soon.

- and before anyone starts, I didn't say revolvers are worthless, and you are naked against the forces of evil with one, but really??

I just switched from a 442 to a PM9 for all the above reasons, and have no reservations. My only wheel guns left are a Colt SAA(on the chopping board) and a no dash 586, which may very well get the axe also. Right now its only for fam fire once in a great while.

Bob

[John_Wayne777]

Keep in mind that I also shoot my .454 Super Redhawk much more accurately than I do my .45acp 1911, so anticipation isn't really an issue here.


Unless you are a freak of nature, I assure you that it is. The fact that you shoot a big bore revolver accurately in slow deliberate fire doesn't mean you aren't anticipating when you're shooting your 1911.

As an experiment, try this: Line up 3 targets 7 yards away and with big bertha there, put two rounds on each target in under 7 seconds. If you can consistently (as in better than 80% of the time) keep all your shots in an 8" circle with bertha you might actually be a genetic freak.



I'm sure I could improve with lots of training like you said, but my thought process is that I could potentially be much better with revolvers given the same amount of practice.


As I mentioned earlier, the prescription outlined earlier has worked for tens of thousands of shooters and has produced excellent results.

[glocktogo]

I've run my 629 MG at an IDPA match with some 240gr LSWC's at 305 PF. My best stages were my first and last. First because it wasn't hurting yet, last because I couldn't feel the palm of my hand anymore. :)

Borrow a good K or L frame with some decent speedloaders and shoot a match on the clock. Then run the next one with your 1911. You don't need pinpoint accuracy for defensive work, you need hits on center mass as quickly as possible. See how each handlles at speed, then decide.

FWIW, a revolver can be run quickly. Here's an IDPA stage at a state match I ran with a 686. I was 2nd overall on the stage, very closely behind Matt Mink. 9.17 seconds for twelve shots on four targets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmhmReBCyq4

[okie john]

I grew up on revolvers. Nothing wrong with them, but semis beat the pants off of them for self defense, especially if you carry concealed.


Okie John