Author Topic: Pistol vs. Revolver? (Read 2201 times)

john9001 · « **Reply #30 on:** September 01, 2006, 03:08:05 PM »

i have both semi-auto's and revolvers, i prefer revolvers, semi-auto's are faster to reload until you run out of mags.

Dago · « **Reply #31 on:** September 01, 2006, 03:54:34 PM »

Awww heck, lazs just likes a revolver cause it makes him feel like John Wayne and Billy the Kid at the same time.

Lazs, you stated "

Quote

if you need more than 5 or six shots then you need something other than a handgun anyway or.... you need to learn how to shoot.

I have never been in a close up life or death handgun battle, but I suspect like the vast overwhelming majority, I would have the tendancy to loose off a bunch of ammo. Almost everyone (except the good guys on tv and in the movies of course) do this as studies have shown.

Have you ever been in such a shoot out to know how you would really do? I haven't so I can only wonder.

For some good reading on the differance, beyond my own personal opinions, I can only refer to others more experienced who have written on the issue:

Revolves Versus Autos

You can find articles with a preference for each.

It just is too subjective a subject to give a definitive answer.

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #32 on:** September 01, 2006, 04:13:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Terror
Welp, I own a Springfield XD Compact and I am not very fond of it. I find the trigger spongy and hard to get the same action out of shot to shot. The best thing I can say about it is it ergonamically feels comfortable in the hands, otherwise it's a Glock wannabe that falls way short. I will probably be trading it for a Glock27 or Glock36.

Terror

Terror, I know you are a Glock fan to start with, but you shouldnt find the XD trigger at all "spongy". If there is something wrong with it (and thats been known to happen from time to time at Springfield), send it back and they'll make it right.

Makarov9 · « **Reply #33 on:** September 01, 2006, 04:25:49 PM »

I just ordered my first 1911. It's a Dan Wesson Commander Bobtail .45. I looked at the Kimbers and Springfields, but decided to go with the DW because of the bobtail. It feels great in the hands and I've read lots of great reviews on it. I pick it up on the 10th.

http://www.cz-usa.com/product_detail.php?id=66

Dago · « **Reply #34 on:** September 01, 2006, 04:42:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Makarov9
I just ordered my first 1911. It's a Dan Wesson Commander Bobtail .45. I looked at the Kimbers and Springfields, but decided to go with the DW because of the bobtail. It feels great in the hands and I've read lots of great reviews on it. I pick it up on the 10th.

http://www.cz-usa.com/product_detail.php?id=66

I am sure you will be happy with it, Dan Wesson makes a good weapon.

Hawklore · « **Reply #35 on:** September 01, 2006, 08:03:25 PM »

The only silenceable revolver.

Source:Wikipedia.

As a general rule, revolvers cannot be equipped with a silencer, as there is usually a gap that exists between the revolving cylinder and the barrel over which a bullet must traverse or jump when fired. From this opening, a rather loud report is produced even when a silencer is installed on the end of the barrel of most revolvers.

Nonetheless, a silenceable revolver design does exist in the Nagant M1895, a Russian military revolver used from 1895 through World War Two. This revolver uses a unique cartridge that extends beyond the end of the bullet, and a cylinder that moves forward to place the end of the cartridge inside the barrel when ready to fire. This bridges the gap between the cylinder and the barrel, and expands to seal the gap when when fired. While the tiny gap between cylinder and barrel on most revolvers is insignificant to the internal ballistics, the seal is especially effective when used with a silencer, and a number of silenced Nagant revolvers have been used since its invention [1]

There also exists a modern revolver of Russian design, the OTs-38 [2], which uses ammunition that incorporates the silencing mechanism into the cartridge case, making the gap between cylinder and barrel irrelevant as far the suppression issue is concerned. Ironically the OTs-38 does need an unusually close and precise fit between the cylinder and barrel due to the shape of bullet in the special ammunition (Soviet SP-4), which was originally designed for use in a semi-automatic.

karayaone88 · « **Reply #36 on:** September 01, 2006, 08:04:37 PM »

Glock 36 for my personal carry and a good old pump 12 guage for home defence. That pump action is a great butt pucker noise if you're a intruder.

Blooz · « **Reply #37 on:** September 01, 2006, 08:14:35 PM »

I've had both types and I like autos better.

My fav was Walther P38 (double action auto in 9mm) but I hated the caliber and switched to 1911A1 in good old .45 ACP.

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #38 on:** September 02, 2006, 02:45:22 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hawklore

The only silenceable revolver.

I own 3 of them now. Original holsters, lanyards, cleaning rods, etc. Ammo is the biggest problem. The original Russian stuff is almost impossible to find now, and the Fiocci ammo isnt reloadable. The brass splits after just one or two firings. Bertram is the only place I can find that still makes brass for it, and its like a dollar each. Ouch. Wolf is supposed to start making the 7.62x38R Nagant ammo this year, waiting to see what its like.

That means most of us that shoot Nagants have to use .32's of some flavor. The .32-20 works well, but factory ammo is too long. Can only use handloads with a reduced OAL. Using .32 S&W Longs or .32 H&R magnums works ok, but the cartridge is a bit loose in the cylinder, and the brass expands something awful, making extraction a bit difficult. They are a challenge, and alot of fun though.

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #39 on:** September 02, 2006, 03:12:17 AM »

Quote

wow... finland has the tech to build a nuke? I didn't think they were smart enough.

As a matter of fact we do as we're one of the highest tech countries in the world. But that's a moot point really when you can buy one from Russia that sits right next to us.

Hell I think I could buy Putin if I payed enough.

lazs2 · « **Reply #40 on:** September 02, 2006, 10:12:54 AM »

ripley... I didn't think you guys had nuke weapons. Ya gonna bring em over by boat?

Dago... in the 70's the average gunfight lasted 1.7 rounds according to the DOJ and police studies. Most police and bad guys were equipped with revolvers... nowdays... the average is up to around 9 rounds and the results are about the same.

I grew up with revolvers and handguns and have allways been aware that the number of rounds was finite. I was allways amazed at the guys who would empty their guns at a running ground squirrel or jack while I took one or two shots that seemed worth taking.

it was also fun to watch the guys with 45 autos and 9 mm try to hit anything at any distance... at 200-300 yards they couldn't even use the sights.... had to pretend they were artillery.

I have been shot at.... I did not see any reason to empty my gun into the air.

I like my semi autos but like my revolvers more. Perhaps it is a throwback from when autos were even less reliable but... I trust my revolvers.

At the police range is a city mail box that is used as "cover" there are many 45 and 9 mm and .40 dents in it and some 223 through and through drill bit like holes.. There are also some 44 mag holes in one side and gaping 3/4" inch exit holes out the other side. The difference is amazing.

I would carry the revolver if things were serious with man or beast.

lazs

Softail · « **Reply #41 on:** September 02, 2006, 10:34:09 AM »

Ruger Old Army .45 Cal Revolver. and a dry can to keep the blackpowder in ;-)

Shuckins · « **Reply #42 on:** September 02, 2006, 10:51:31 AM »

Firing off rounds without obtaining a good sight picture is useless, regardless of whether you're using a semi-auto or a revolver.

Massad Ayoob and many other handgun experts involved in police work recommend a double-tap on a dangerous target but only if the proper stance is taken and the sight picture is "there."

Ever notice how, on many tv and movie cop shows these supposedly highly trained professionals clear a house while going around blind corners with the pistol extended at eye level, ahead of them. Good way to get it taken away by a perp hiding on the other side of the corner.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #43 on:** September 02, 2006, 11:17:11 AM »

Pistols are just for fighting your way back to your weapon*.

*rifle

john9001 · « **Reply #44 on:** September 02, 2006, 11:17:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Shuckins

Ever notice how, on my tv and movie cop shows these supposedly highly trained professionals clear a house while going around blind corners with the pistol extended at eye level, ahead of them. Good way to get it taken away by a perp hiding on the other side of the corner.

yes, and they always enter the bulding by themselves without calling for backup.