Is the medium/large frame revolver obsolete for personal defense?

[Kain]

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.)

[Hizzie]

I'll be working on a detailed answer to that question this weekend at HiTS close quarters pistol class with a 3" GP100.

[NWPilgrim]

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No way you can say a revolver is obsolete for self defense.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]

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

[WillBrink]

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]

Digging around in my nightstand turned up an SP 101 and a GP 100. I sleep okay.

[SeriousStudent]

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.

[RHINOWSO]

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.

[19852]

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.

[Hizzie]

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.