This is a topic that has been discussed more than a few times. Although I dont personally care for revolvers I dont dislike them. I say this because when I get into these discussions it is sometimes percieved that I have a dislike for them. I dont. However, the area of discussion that I find myself most engaged in is in the reliability debate. I think I get particulerly passionate about this facet of discussion because I run into a lot of people that seem to believe that a revolver is infallable. As with anything man made, it can fail. However, my experiences in Texas this past week have given me enough instances to draw some conclusions. As I have stated before, in the circles I shoot, pistols are the vast majority. So it strikes me as dispraportionate the number of revolver failures I have seen. Here is the point that I am driving at. First, let me say that for this discussion I am focusing on failures resulting in a non functioning firearm that cant be readily corrected and returned to action. In numbers the pistol failures I have seen vs the revolver failures I have seen, I have seen more revolvers go down unrecoverably! The incident that drove this home last week was a 357 mag. I had 5 brand spanking new shooters on the line. We had a Sig, HK, Kimber, Glock, and a S&W. (And a full auto Uzi for PAPA ). Long story short a screw must have backed out of the side of the revolver. When the shooter went to reload it spit the entire crane and cylinder!!!! He was standing there with a revolver with a bay window view through the side! It was done! So this failure got me thinking about the other revolver failures I have seen. In my experience it would seem that although an auto may have a greater chance at malfuntioning, it would seem when a revolver fails, it fails in a big way. Only one malfuntion I have encountered out of several revolver failures was what I would call similer to a simple pistol malfuntion. This was when a casing slipped under the ejector star locking up the weapon. All others where issues making the revolver inoperable. Thats not to say that cant happen with autos. I have seen them go inoperable as well. Im just truly suprised that given the 20 to 1 ratio of pistols to revolvers that the body count is about even(revolvers slightly edging out pistols in # of failures). Just some food for thought and discussion.

 

Shane

I think that revolver VS auto failure is more important in this context..

 

newer inexperienced shooter home protection... who will LIKELY not make it to the point of reloading in a HD shoot..

 

auto failure - rack.. clear... fire.. shoots? good to go... another failure.. rack again.. check? there is a certain complexity to it..

revolver failure - pull the trigger again..

 

I think that is why a lot of people steer the novice shooter looking for an HD piece towards a revolver.. in operation (not reloading) the revolver is far simpler and less prone to fail.. obviously a semi auto is faster when you take into account reloading and all that.. but like I said.. in a simple home defense situation how many reloads are you going to really do?

I agree that for a novice shooter a revolver makes a lot of sense and in fact give that same advice.

I agree that for a novice shooter a revolver makes a lot of sense and in fact give that same advice.

 

Except Shane recommends a S&W 500 for the coolness!!

Except Shane recommends a S&W 500 for the coolness!!

Pure stopping power. You never know when that bear breaks into your house to steal your stuff.

I think that the reliability argument between auto vs. revolvers is a dated debate. The technology has come a long way, and I don't really think that reliability should be much of a concern.....as long as you stay within a certain price point.

Long story short a screw must have backed out of the side of the revolver. When the shooter went to reload it spit the entire crane and cylinder!!!!

 

This is more the result of poor maintenance than a catastrophic failure. If the screws were tightened properly it wouldn't have happened.

Except Shane recommends a S&W 500 for the coolness!!

 

I prefer 460 S&W for the house. Faster flatter trajectory than the .500 and if I can't find .460 I can use .454 Casull or 45 LC in an emergency. But nothing stops a methed/LSD/Ecstasy jacked up perp like 200 gr @ 2,200 FPS. I hope Hornady comes out with a Critical Defense load with reduced recoil and less muzzle flash while expanding to 5X it's diamiter so as not to overpenetrate.

I firmly believe that Revolver reliability has gone down in recent years as manufacturers struggled to cut production and material costs. The advent of lightweight alloy revolvers also doesn't help as they can not handle the recoil forces from high-powered ammo like the .357 and .44 magnums.

 

There were reasons revolvers were built to be heavy and like a brick shithouse.

I need one of these!!

200 gr Hornady FTX + 52.7 gr H-110 = 2,250 FPS.

Screws come loose on my S&W revolver all the time. This is a maintenance issue just like if you dont maintain your semi auto it will fail. I still believe revolvers fail a lot less than semi auto. Its just a much simpler design and if built properly a revolver doesnt need to even be cleaned as much as a semi.

Screws come loose on my S&W revolver all the time. This is a maintenance issue just like if you dont maintain your semi auto it will fail. I still believe revolvers fail a lot less than semi auto. Its just a much simpler design and if built properly a revolver doesnt need to even be cleaned as much as a semi.

 

But it's not when looking at it from a mechanical point of view. A semi-auto when it comes down to it's basic parts is mechanically less complicated than your typical revolver. 90% of the work in a semi-auto is done by the cartridge itself, in the form of cycling the weapon back. Then the rest depends on proper spring forces in both the recoil and extractor spring.

 

A revolver, disassembled, is like a watch that must be timed properly in order to function. Unlike a semi-auto, the full-force of the magnum bullet is imparted on those mechanical components, and the second you cheap out there (which is what S&W and Taurus does), you will begin to see a lot of failures.

 

I may be new to guns, but as an engineer, I can see quality workmanship in both the design of modern revolvers and their material construction. Those things today are cheaply made compared to the wheelguns of yesteryear.

lrizzo, thats my point. Keep in mind, again Im talking failure, not malfunction. I run into a factor of at least 20 to 1 pistols over revolvers but the failures I have seen have the revolvers ahead in actual numbers. If it were 50/50 then one could losely extrapolate that the failures would be X20

lrizzo, thats my point. Keep in mind, again Im talking failure, not malfunction. I run into a factor of at least 20 to 1 pistols over revolvers but the failures I have seen have the revolvers ahead in actual numbers. If it were 50/50 then one could losely extrapolate that the failures would be X20

 

Shane, those revolvers you're seeing fail... are they new ones? Or older ones from the 80's and before?

Revolvers are more mechanically complicated but more forgiving with ammo types and tolerances.

Revolvers are more mechanically complicated but more forgiving with ammo types and tolerances.

 

This is true. But how often does one find issues with ammo types or their tolerance?

Mostly new. The failure of old was my own 70's era Python.

Mostly new. The failure of old was my own 70's era Python.

 

Pythons will have that problem given their lineage. Their internals were carried over from Colt revolvers designed for .38 special, you shoot legit .357 magnums and you'll see timing issues and other issues crop up.

This is true. But how often does one find issues with ammo types or their tolerance?

 

If you reload your own ammo, then revolver is great. No case resizing or crimp issues. I started on a revolver, and the only thing I liked about it was extremely cheap and easy to reload. As for target shooting, 25 yards in d-a was not fun. Come to think of it, even s-a was not fun with having to pull the hammer back for each and every shot. After about a year I switched to semi-auto and never looked back. Its also much easier and faster to clean the semi-auto vs the revolver after a session at the range.

The only revolver I've seen that failed was my own. I've never seen anyone elses revolver fail. Here's the thing that makes a revolver a better ONE gun, or primary gun. Load it and forget it.

Now, I'm a fan of semi auto's too. But when it absolutly has to go bang, a revolver wins.

Well, I have been a shooter for 35 years, RSO for 15 years, and a practicing professional engineer for 21 years. I could give you plenty more reasons why a semi has higher probability of failure. Reliability's major factor - proper maintenance, regardless of handgun. There are also plenty of poor revolver and semi designs alike. While I am not platform bias, I'd put my S&W 66-4 x 3" pre-lock as one of the most reliable and accurate revolvers ever produced. However, I am also very partial to my German SigPro 2022, which I've put around 1900 rounds through flawlessly, and the Sig is probably one of the most simplistic semis. Novices tend to be inexperienced with good maintenance and often make a poor or uninformed choice in their first handgun. As an RSO, I see failure to fire and failure to eject and failure to feed commonly in semis. Sometimes it's limp wristing, but more often it's load and maintenance issues (I've had shooters look at me like deer in headlights when I ask when they changed their mag spring last). I can only recall a handful of revolver failures due to mechanical reasons (recall two of these were wheelies that should never have been shot - one very poorly kept and the other shot loose) the rest all have been due to bad loads and they make for catastrophic failure.

 

Just my thoughts.