If new gun bans come to be this year then it will be 6 against 10 rounds.Then you will see new interest in big bore’s and magnum power being a Consideration like in the old days.

When I carried a badge I had work guns and hobby guns. I’m retired now, so they’re all hobby guns.

I don’t have to carry a gun. I live in a nice town and the odds of me needing a gun again are infimitesimally small. Its probably the same with nearly everyone here. I carry one anyway, because I have a lot of guns and I like carrying them.

To the OP’s point that it seems like new revolvers aren’t up to the standards of older ones because LE doesn’t use them anymore, I would agree. The revolver in modern law enforcement has been reduced to a stunt - like patrolling in Andy Griffith’s old Mayberry PD unit. Of course a couple fearsome old time cops may post photos of themselves still wearing a revolver, but they are the exception that proves the rule.

The most sought-after revolver this past year has been the new Colt Python. $1500 and they can’t make them fast enough. It may be the definition of a hobby gun. Many will never leave the safe, most will never see a holster, and precious few will be carried by anyone with a chance of actually having to use one for “non-hobby” purposes. (Still a great gun, though!)

Attached Images

00490D1A-2FD5-4842-A56E-FC8630BFBE35.jpg (92.0 KB, 20 views)

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

The CC semi autos I CC are a Walther PPKs Interarms & a Kimber Pro Carry II.
But most of the time it is my M640 357 Magnum & M696 44.
All are just what I need if anything should need as far as I concerned.

__________________
Only difference Fool/Mule-ears

Tracking down nice revolvers is a hobby, carrying them is not. 1/2 of my SD rotation is revolvers. I carried this 2” 15-2 for the past week.

p.s. After 14 months of waiting I finally received my brushed bronze Tyler T, a bday from a friend and forum member.

Attached Images

35ED6AAD-0C73-48EB-BEE5-90270D7334BA.jpg (108.7 KB, 28 views)

__________________
213th FBINA

I believe the op is correct,considering all the horror stories I hear about new revolvers.But ,out of suitcases full of model 29s I own, most were made before 1965,so I have no real experience with modern revolvers.I`ve had loads of Kimber and dan wesson 1911s,none of which have ever missed a beat

Is the Wheel Gun Dead?



Those were the words uttered in 1989. The Era of the Wondernine was upon us. High Capacity 9mm Semu-Autos that had a magazine capacity of 15rds to 17rds was becoming the standard. Technological wonders from S&W, Ruger, GLOCK, Sig Sauer, and Beretta were hitting store shelves and police holsters. The thought across the gun ranges and in the roll call rooms was that the old reliable wheel gun was done. By the year 2000; we'd all be shooting lasers in the 40 Watt range and doing it on the moon.

Carry guns like this factory bobbed hammer DAO S&W Model 65 were done and no one would want them.



Only old people would be carrying such a beast. Low capacity, heavy, and large. Why would someone lug a S&W Model 13 around?



The semi-automatic was to replace the revolver like the percussion cap replaced the flintlock or the self contained cartridge firearm replaced the muzzle loader. Well, weren't they wrong. Revolvers are still here and gaining popularity. So much so that Colt is back in the game with the Python and Cobra line after they abandoned it entirely with the belief that the semi-auto was the only future they could partake in.





Kimber has jumped into the market with an entirely new design.



S&W is making newer versions of their ever classic J-Frames without locks and they've even brought back the 3" Model 66.







Ruger is selling their revolvers like hot cakes and coming out with new designs.







And ultimately, folks like yours truly are still putting the original ones through the ringer.



The revolver is not dead, far from it. It is rising from the ashes like a phoenix. Sure, the wheel gun had a slump in the 1990s and early 2000s. But in the 2010s it regained its strength and is it starting the 2020s with a hell of a demand. Folks want guns that go bang due to the rioting and pandemic. And the revolver is still a hell of a self defense gun. For a novice shooter, the revolver isn't a bad choice. .38 Special and .357 Magnum are nothing to sneeze at and the fact that they don't need magazines is a plus to the thrifty buyer. Since with the massive panic we're witnessing, magazines like guns are hard to find.

__________________
GOA FL Dir. & Nat. Spokesman

By their functioning methods alone, revolvers will ALWAYS be inherently more reliable than semi autos. I'm not sure why this is even a debate still. And I know someone will try and say that if a revolver does malfunction its probably a very serious issue that will stop it for the time being. Even if that is true the rate of malfunction versus semi autos is still minuscule. Any one person's experience with any type of weapon means nothing overall.

Last year was a great year for me purchasing fire arms. I picked up 586 classic, 686, 9mm EZ, Sig 9mm, used 29-3, Python 2020, and a 10/22 target barrel. All shoot and look great. I prefer the revolver over the auto, but I shoot deer with a Ruger #1 single shot and have for 40 years. And I drive a stingray with a manual transmission, so I guess you could classify me as old school or a classic.

They're all hobby guns. My hobby is protecting me and mine, and sometimes I'm feeling revolvery and sometimes I'm feeling semiautoish . . .

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

It's entirely up to the individual. For me, they have always been hobby guns. But then so have the autos. At least as far as actual rounds fired.

As a fellow revolver lover, I can tell you that the generation gap has served me well. As an example, a couple of years ago I traded away an average Glock 21 for a 5" 95% S&W Model 10-5 manufactured in 1967. There is no shortage of folks younger than me who are willing to trade away "Daddy's old revolver" for the latest and greatest wonder pistol. I'm going to continue to take advantage of it.

Thanks for all the comments. I think some folks misinterpreted what I meant by ‘hobby gun’. My post was NOT to argue that the technology is obsolete.

Instead, my point is, the new models being made today have not been my most reliable guns (due to the many mechanical and QA issues I’ve documented on these boards). I’m having a hard time feeling good enough to carry a *new* revolver over a new Beretta 92, HK USP, or Colt 1911, given that so many of these auto loading models I’ve owned were stone cold reliable.

Since the new revolvers seem to have real documented issues out of the box, my thoughts are, they really aren’t defense guns anymore; just a range gun.

Not really. A Wheel Gun is far more inherently susceptible to failure due to its design and lockwork. I'm a huge wheel gun fan, but the modern automatic is far more relivable than a revolver. There is a reason why every institution that remotely deals with gun fighting has gone to the automatic.

The revolver is capable as a self defense tool. While obsolescence has slowly slithered its grimy paws on the revolver. That doesn't mean the revolver is any less capable today than it was back in 1921. A Remington Beals 1858 will still put a man six feet under just as it did in 1863. The difference between then and now is the simple fact that there are better choices.

Same goes for the modern revolver. There are better choices for most tasks. But a revolver is still capable and a viable choice if you understand its strengths and weaknesses.

__________________
GOA FL Dir. & Nat. Spokesman

I personally don't like the stuff Big Blue is pushing out. I find the quality as decreased. But that measurement of quality is based on my perceived desires based on looks and such.

Design wise, the guns coming out today are capable and somewhat better. Take the modern Model 66 for example. It has a strengthened forcing cone so it can eat a steady diet of full power .357 Magnum loads, while the original Model 66 was always recommended to shoot regularly with powder puff .38 Special loads and only carry .357 Magnum loads when on duty.

The newer guns are more utilitarian and cost management has gone into their production. But their ability to function for the most part hasn't decreased.

I'm just a purist and stuck in my ways. I like one piece barrels, no locks, and firing pins on hammers.

__________________
GOA FL Dir. & Nat. Spokesman

No. Once a revolver is established, I find them to be as reliable as you can get. I carry revolvers bith for this and I find that I am more accurate with them.

__________________
Let's be careful out there

New or old has nothing to do with the thought of a revolver as a “hobby gun”. I don’t think revolvers (new or old) are hobby guns at all. They are serious tools meant to be used. But I do think, outside of range use, revolvers are generally not seen as the universal benchmark they once were.

I believe revolvers are experiencing a resurgence in popularity as states above and won’t be killed off anytime soon. However, in general, I do think most of the general population see revolvers as still relevant, but quaint, tools that are not “the best” tools for self-defense. Think about it. In an LTC qualification class when someone qualifies with a revolver they’re seen as an amusing odd duck. The shooting portion of the class is usually designed around magazines, loaded on instructors’ commands. Special allowances are made for those who wish to use a revolver. Most mainline training is also set up the same way. Look at popular training schools like Front Sight. The overwhelming majority of training done there is with autoloaders. I know there are more than one of you (one I know of specifically in this board) that have shot courses at FS with a revolver and done exceedingly well. But this sort of success requires a devoted commitment to the revolver as the tool of choice. Grandma can’t roll up with her model 36 nightstand special and do the same thing. Of course, a similar level of dedication os required to shoot at Front Sight with any auto, but lower levels of tool-specific training are much, much easier to access if you start out with an auto these days.

The same argument is made for the movement away from revolvers in law enforcement.

Serious users of the revolver and the revolver’s biggest fans prove that the revolver is still a relevant and quite useful tool even today. But the fact of the matter is this demographic is in the minority. The wide/vast majority of handgun users will be found with autos, unless there are legislative restrictions in place preventing them.

Look, I love revolvers, even though I only have a couple of them. And I have no problem carrying them, or trusting them for serious work. But we are the exception now. We choose what we see as the best tool for the job, given the conditions in whoch we think we will use it. Autos rule at the moment.

This is a very intriguing thread. It actually forced me to give serious thought to the question before I could put together an answer.

Capacity, for me is a non-issue, since the largest capacity magazine I can possess without facing prison time is ten rounds. For me, the biggest determining factor for me between a revolver and a semi-auto is reload speed. Being disabled, the semi-auto gets the advantage.

However, the OP seems to question the popularity of the wheel gun, and it's current level of reliability. There appears to be a number of contributing factors.

First, how often does Hollywierd put out a modern action movie utilizing the revolver? Semi-auto and full-auto will sell more tickets and catch the attention of the more impressionable audience.

Noting reliability issues and quality control problems in the most recent examples of revolvers can be attributed to the retiring of the masters that built the revolvers that we know and love. Back in the early '90s, I had a failure arise in my 27-2. The extractor star separated from the extractor rod. My 'smith declared that the part had been a press fit. Because the -2 had been superseded, S&W wanted almost $400 for repairs, since -3 parts were alleged to be the only parts available for the repair. On the flip side, I haven't exercised my 686-6 as much as that 27, so I don't know if it will ultimately experience a failure. I can safely say, the extractor failure would have slowed me down if I found myself in a firefight. Concerning the 686-6, I haven't found any QC issues, but I have to admit, it has the smoothest double action pull of any S&W that I own.

When you look at the majority of the current popular handgun shooting sports, revolvers tend to put the shooter at a disadvantage. Courses of fire which are scored "time plus" usually mandate a revolver reload, which adds crucial time. Even when revolvers and semi-autos are on an equal playing field, the revolver still requires a higher degree of skill in order to be competitive.

While I do like my revolvers, I will rely on my semi-autos for CCW considering the instability of society, and the fact that I don't have a Gypsy fortune-teller in my employ.

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

Since 1962 all it takes is one good movie or TV Show to make a gun popular.........think

From Bond and his PPK...... to
Dirty Harry
Die Hard
Lethal Weapon..... finally

The Walking Dead.....which brought the Python back to general popularity........

All of my handguns are hobby guns, revolver or semi-auto. I haven't actually needed to own one in two decades now. Now that I think of it, not since the last century.

Great Western and Ruger made SAA clones due to Big and Small screen Westerns being aired back then and that was in the 1950s.

__________________
GOA FL Dir. & Nat. Spokesman

As I read many of the comments in this thread, it is basically a continuation of an identical thread with a different title ("Is the revolver obsolete" or similar wording) from a few weeks ago.

I enjoy shooting traditional semi-autos and revolvers, the ones that look like traditional semi-autos and revolvers, and usually as they come from the box without adornment or molestation in the forms of alleged "improvements".

It seems everything changed due to three factors: law enforcement transitioned to semi-automatic pistols, civilian concealed carry, and the Internet. There are always exceptions, but revolver shooters and carriers are often among the older folks, the ones that have been shooting for a long time, but many of them have had experience with traditional semi-autos as well. There are fewer of the older folks daily.

The concealed carriers can be divided into two general groups: the ones that carry the same gun daily, shoot occasionally, and carry an ammo that works well in their guns and that they can consistently hit a target with. They care all about practicality and nothing about shooting jello. They have no interest in the gospel of YouTube "experts". They don't obsess over gadgetry, in fact, have no need for it, but they are reasonably prepared as a concealed carrier.

The other group is the hobbyist concealed carriers. They're equipped with speedloaders, extra magazines, laser sights, flashlights, custom grips, holster collections, extra guns, and are familiar with the specs of every ammo of current manufacture that will chamber in their gun(s) of the day. That goes beyond reasonable preparedness. They shoot briefly at the range on a regular basis at short distances only because gunfights occur "up close". They obsess over every facet of concealed carry and its accoutrements. Some of these are revolver shooters, but I'll bet most shoot semi-automatics. Nothing wrong with that, but it seems doubtful the revolver will ever regain the prominence it once held.

Many of the new schoolers have never owned or even fired a revolver and have no interest. That's something that's unlikely to change. It's their choice and nothing to criticize.

The defensive shooting perspective is certainly a valid perspective, but it's only one perspective.

There are different horses for different courses.

Here's an example, not related to firearms. Way back in the day (1930s) when the Aresti scoring system was developed for aerobatic competition, the Bucker Jungmeister was the aircraft to beat. Consequently, what it did well, or rather what was easy to do in it, was scored low, while the things it did not do well or were hard to do with it were scored high.

However, when the next generation of aerobatic aircraft came along the Jungmeister was no longer competitive. Aircraft like the Pitts Special were designed to do those high scoring maneuvers really well.

In turn a generation later, the competition aircraft that replaced the Pitts were better at maneuvers will long vertical lines and those that required lots of power and gyroscopic precession.

However, both the Jungmeister and the Pitts are still superb aerobatic aircraft.

----

Taking this back to your defensive handgun course example, those courses seldom reflect the reality of an armed citizen or law enforcement officer involved self defense shoot where it is over and done with in 5 rounds or less in 5 seconds or less, usually at 5 yards or less.

The FBI found that in 75% of its agent involved shoots, they were done in 3 shots or less in 3 seconds or less.

In those most frequent shoots the higher capacity of a the average issued semi-auto plays no role at all.

A DA/SA pistol will have an edge over a revolver or DAO pistol in double taps and controlled pairs, but an SA pistol will beat a DA/SA pistol at that same game.

Which one works best for a particular course of fire, depends entirely on the course of fire and what it is biased toward.

However, people also lose sight of the fact that the shooter also matters. For example I can shoot both the current (2019) and prior (2014) FBI Q courses - courses designed for high capacity semi-autos - and score 59/60 and 98/100 respectively on them with a six shot, 3" Model 13, a 2 1/2" six shot Model 66, or a 7 shot 3" 686+. Where I drop the points is the last shot here (the same in both Q courses):

From the 7 yards line;
- From the Ready, fire 4 rounds, conduct an empty gun reload, and fire 4 more rounds, all in 8 seconds.

I need about 8 1/2 seconds with the slower DA trigger pull combined with the slightly longer speed loader reload.

However, that 59/60 is far above the 48/60 needed for a passing score on the 2014 course, and the 98/100 on the 2019 course is way above the 90 points needed for an *instructor* to pass. And that's with an "obsolete" revolver.

Interestingly I can shoot the courses cleanly about 50% of the time with a Ruger Speed 6 in 9mm. The full moon clips load just enough faster that I can beat the target turning at the 8 second mark about half the time.

Short of no knock raids on crack houses or similar situations where you roll up with a lot of people and more firepower than a service pistol, the revolver will still get it done.

But that's not how defensive pistol courses are conducted. They inevitably focus on things that are well outside the norm and they play to a large capacity semi-auto's strengths.

----

For armed citizen concealed carry - where you won't being doing no knock dynamic entries or getting yourself into situations with multiple armed assailants, I'll argue the revolver is still a good choice.

Consider my mother, who called me at age 85 stating she was getting a concealed carry permit and wanted to know what she should get for a handgun. Given her hand strength, low probability of doing anything more than basic firearms training and how she planned to carry it a 5 shot S&W Model 36 made perfect sense. Not too heavy, not too light, controllable for her in .38 Special, and no issues with racking a slide with arthritic hands.

There are many folks who cling to their revolvers for self defense but I am not one of them. I haven't relied on a revolver for many years. There are simply too many advantages to a good semi auto pistol. Not even debatable in my book.

I love my revolvers and have a bunch of them. Can one be used for SD? Sure. I just say it's not the best choice. I want the best choice when protecting my loved ones.

I am mocked when I say I want the same gun all the time. I want it to be instantly familiar in my hand. Just common sense to me. I do not understand guys talking about putting a gun "In the rotation." Frankly, I consider that lunacy.

__________________
No life story has happy end.

Tolerance, tolerance, tolerance. Shooting in the comfort of a range is one thing. Target shooting tolerances are not the same as combat tolerances. Take your handgun of whatever persuasion, run it through a rain storm, drop it inthe mud and see what can happen on the possibly worst day of your life. Ask the sandbox guys about blowing sand as an alternative. Any gun can fail with the right combination. JMHO

__________________
Randy
Provenance nerd

Having had to stalk Gunbroker for quite some time to eventually pay the price I did for a 627 2.625" a couple days ago. Nowadays, I'm pretty sure people are buying revolvers (or anything they can get their hands on based on budget and availability) for other-than-hobby purposes.

Shooting itself is a hobby for me, but it's a hobby with a very serious purpose. I just happen to really enjoy it.

I've grown into the idea of the revolver as a serious defense option. I don't get to shoot, practice and train as much as I'd like, so I want something simple to use that I have confidence in. It took a lot of hand-wringing and consideration of platforms to get here, but I believe that for my own situation a revolver is every bit as practical as a semi.

I do still have a designated HD 19 +1 9mm plastic gun, mainly because I can hang a decent light off it and it's large enough to control effectively. But I know based on my environment that having to use more than a cylinder's worth of ammo - or any ammo at all - at one time is extraordinarily unlikely.

6 on top, 18 on the bottom.

Attached Images

IMG_20200821_121703390 (1).jpg (69.8 KB, 27 views)

A well worn path, right up there with the caliber debate. What someone chooses to carry is up to them. The new generation of auto loaders are reliable to a fault, (yes, I carry one, a Shield 45). That said, speaking strictly in terms of civilian EDC, not on-duty LEO's, if one is proficient with a DA revolver, to include doing a stress reload, he/she's every bit as formidable as anyone packing an 18+1 auto pistol.

A Desert Eagle is a hobby gun

__________________
Smith. And Wesson. And Me!

I like magnums and rimfires.

Once upon a time I worked in the nuclear power industry. We scoured and scrubbed the technology to find and eliminate what we called a "common mode failure", that is the single trait that described a collective group of failures. The common mode failure in your bad experience with handguns is age. That's a long and windy way of saying they don't make 'em like they used to. More important than action type.

Well, with Americans buying semi-auto everything these days it is understandable that bolt action rifles and revolvers are taking a back seat for the manufacturers. I like them all but as a routine EDC I still carry a M649 and I still keep a M686+ as my nightstand/home defense handgun. They're not just hobby guns for my purposes.

YMMV as always.

__________________
Come and take it!!

As for me, I get tired of the "scissors-string-paper-rock" philosophy of defensive firearms. Remember...in a combat situation between two individuals...it is not your gun versus his...it is you versus him. The skilled shooter who can best retain his composure will usually win...even if he only has a .38 snub compared to his opponents Uzi.

__________________
Smith. And Wesson. And Me!

Personally I don’t think revolver (S&W) quality was all that great even back in the day.

The major difference, IMO, was that departments back then had S&W-trained armorers who knew what was required to get them running and keep them that way.

I once read that when San Antonio PD adopted the Model 58, the first shipment required rework of every unit before they could be issued. One reportedly had a .44 magnum cylinder.

I still carry revolvers, mainly a 642. None of the newish revolvers I've purchased in the last several years have been perfect, not one of the last 8 S & W revolvers were perfect, they all have/had something wrong with them. However, they all fired when the trigger is pulled, every time. I can't say that about the last 8 semis I bought. The revolvers are at 100%, semis at maybe 50%, some just jam once in a while, some actually required repairs before they would function every time.

Everything semi-automatic, all the time.

Took me several years to come to the realization, but I've completely gone off of acquiring, or even being interested in current gun manufacturers' catalogs and wares. The more stridently current automatic are touted and pushed the less I want to hear about any of them and I distrust current production revolvers.

I'd be willing to sample a new Colt Python, but already have and older Python so can't get motivated.

Older revolvers and 1911s ...well maybe a High Power, will see out my handgun needs.

Own and like revolvers and semi autos. However the increase of legal ccw may have significantly increased the popularity of plastic semi's, and for good reasons. And yea, this is all just opinion. The semi's are much easier to conceal, easier to shoot with any accuracy / less practice and more affordable.

Went to the fancy indoor range for first time in a year, with 3 in 625 45 acp. Like to occasionally practice dumping all 6 rounds into humanoid target at 7 yds. After practicing for awhile turned around and all the employees had come out of the back rooms to stare. None of whom i recognized. Fortunately the owner was there and wasn't "reprimanded" for rapid firing. Broke in a whole new patch of young-uns to what a large bore revolver can do, which is to make a gaping 6 in hole in target fairly rapidly.

While i carry semi's mostly, there is a 4 in M29 bedside with moderately loaded 180 jhp's at 1250 fps. No safety and a deliberate trigger pull.

That depends on a lot of factors and is not a universally true statement.

I like and carry both. A J Magnum frame .357 magnum is difficult for most people to shoot well and qualifies as an "expert" gun, but it is easy to conceal.

A 2.5" or 3" K or L frame .357 Magnum is much easier to shoot with full power .357 Magnum loads, and while harder to conceal than a Model 60 it is still just as easy to conceal as many medium frame 9mm semi autos.

Similarly, a 1 7/8" Model 36 is as easy to conceal as some .380 pistols, and offers similar terminal ballistics. It also has no slide to rack, so it is much easier for women and for older people with arthritis to operate.

I don't know that a DA/SA pistol is that much easier to shoot than a DA revolver, especially when the first shot matters. With a DAO pistol it's a draw.

How well the handgun fits the shooter is far more important and revolvers generally have a much wider range of grips available to fit people's hands than pistols. That's especially true with the GP-100 and SP-101 where it has a grip stub rather than a grip frame, allowing for a much shorter trigger reach if needed for a small hand.

Revolvers also offer a great deal more flexibility.

Consider a 3" Model 60, a Model 66 or a 3" Model 686+. All three can shoot .38 Special, .38+P, and .357 Magnum, as well as .38/.357 shot shells, and they are fully functional across the entire range.

Try that kind of range of performance with the average 9mm semi-auto - without changing out the recoil spring.

Revolvers are also not picky in terms of feeding. I generally need to shoot a minimum of 200-300 rounds of my carry ammo in a semi-auto using all the magazines I plan to carry with zero malfunctions before I am comfortable carrying it.

With a revolver I can just check for bullets backing out of the case under recoil, cases sticking on ejection and large grains of powder that might get under an ejector star. 50 rounds and I'm usually comfortable with it's reliability and familiar with it's point of impact with that load.

For me, personally, I only trust a revolver for SD (mod 637)....Mine is not a hobby gun; in fact, I never shoot it at the range.... nope, I don't 'practice'.
IMHO as always,
J.

That's been my philosophy, and I have 6 of them now.

And what's wrong with that? That 'limit' is almost limitless

.22MRF, .357 Magnum, .41 Magnum, .44 Magnum, and all the Specials in between with their +P cousins.

I don't see revolvers making much of a comeback as a duty weapon unless it's for a backup; magazine round-count wins out nowadays over 6-in-the-wheel (and several revolver models have addressed that to some extent), and the plastic guns are just too cheap not to buy in quantity for a large department. However, I don't think they'll be relegated to strictly a hobby status (range guns); lots of hunters, outdoors people and CC carriers are using them.

"That depends on a lot of factors and is not a universally true statement."

Someone experienced with (shooting/carrying) a 2 in airweight 357 is likely much more effective than a newcomer armed with a 9mm carry gun. However that, and your comments, were not the context of the statement. Very little is "universally true", and there is most certainly exceptions to anything. This is why some use the terms "may" and "opinion".

No my revolvers are not hobby guns. I’ve had about 5 used revolvers, 4 new. 2 new in the 3 years all worked 100%. Only problem I ever had was ammo related. My Ruger LC9S has been 100% with every bullet I ever put through it. I trust my 3 Smith snubs with my life. The only limiting factor is my marksmanship

Why always the competition and the comparisons? Revolvers worked quite well...and got the job done for 150 years before people started bashing them as antiquated and ineffective. Ask any long retired cops and they'll probably tell you that their wheelguns got the job done. I mean, if you stop a threat, you've stopped the threat and it matters little which tool you used.

__________________
Smith. And Wesson. And Me!

I think in a civilian self defense scenario it matters little which firearm is used. I have both and carry both. However, as I get older I'm finding that I'm much more apt to carry a revolver than a semi-auto. Easier to load and unload is the main reason. I find as well that I can shoot revolvers a little better.

There is a definite place for each. As always, whatever one feels comfortable with, and can shoot well, should win the day...

The only thing that the semi does better than a revolver is that it holds more ammo. Now days it's cheaper than a revolver so I guess that's an advantage. Any one who thinks the average semi is more reliable than an average revolver hasn't spent enough time with both.

Just because first responders don't utilize revolvers doesn't mean that the revolver doesn't have a place in front line work. Most certainly it is very capable in the hands of private citizens for home defense, trail/woods gun, and personal protection.

I like wheel guns. But, I also ascribe to the mantra of it's better to have more ammo and not need it than to need it and not have it. I own a Browning Hi Power. Not only is it a great gun with excellent ergonomics and a storied history, it has plenty of capacity and reloads can be fairly quick.

That being said, I think many of us prepare for the worst case scenario that we envision in our minds. If I were to prepare for the threats that are most probable given my environment, lifestyle and social situation, a six shot k frame revolver would be more than adequate for the task! Revolvers have their place.

__________________
otis

the Leo I talk with carry glock 40 cal. I have a 1911a1 in 45 acp for many decades. I mainly carry a Redhawk in 44 mg with two speed loaders. I’m accurate with either gun. Some out to 100 yds. Carry what your accurate with. And practice with it often.

What has the market today in a tizzy is the cheap plastic autos.

__________________
Plant garlic in the fall

I've never had the option of carrying outside the home for self defense, so i do not know if I would want to carry a hammer shrouded J frame or a small semi-auto.

For the home, I feel much more confident of my ability with my SIG 226 than with any of my revolvers.
And my SIG has four important advantages over my revolvers:
1) Higher capacity (10 Rd. Mag. in NJ),
2) Faster reloading,
3) Tritium night sights, and, not to be underestimated
4) Pretty blue grips.

__________________
Buy American
Vote Responsibly

Own about 30 revolvers, have owned about 30 semi autos. Have never had one single problem with any of the revolvers, on the other hand damn near every one of the semi autos had some type of failure at one time or another. Have sold or traded all my semi autos, will never own another.

The interesting thing about this thread isn’t “revolver vs auto” (which has been done to death) but “hobby vs non-hobby”.

Its like hunting. For most of us its a hobby, but for some people its a living.

If you carry a gun for a living, its not a hobby.

If you carry a gun because you want to, its a hobby. Most people in the world get along fine without carrying a gun.

I used to carry a gun for a living - not a hobby.

Now I carry one because I want to - hobby.

Oddly enough, the more you are “into” it (paid training, tons of gear, studying different loads, etc) the more of a hobby it is.

The OP’s point is well-taken. Amongst the not-a-hobby group the revolver is a dead duck and the quality of modern guns has suffered for it.

No offense to those of us in the hobby group. I’m sure you take the protection of yourself and your loved ones seriously. Some folks skydive for a hobby and I bet they take that seriously too.

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

It compares with buying new vehicles.

When you buy as many "NEW" firearms of any type, as I have you are more likely to get to be the one that has the joy of getting the bugs out.

Poor fitting of parts was once far more common in the selfloader, thus feed reliability issues. Now most newly designed autoloaders are of modular design that requires little fitting of components.

Revolvers are still more of a clockwork design. They benefit from skilled hands and eyes.

It seems many of the major players are resting on their laurels. Selling off their name. Colt was one of the first examples of this I recall.

In the last 20 years I've had more issues with proper feed from bolt action than selfoading rifles.

I purchased a new 3" 686+ that wouldn't make it through a full cylinder before seizing. It was so tight the heat expansion would cause the barrel and cylinder to contact, thus rendering the piece useless until it cooled.

No doubt, fierce competition has caused auto loaders to improve. No doubt that we seem to have firearms being assembled by unskilled non shooters that simply assemble what they're given. The finish on many of the parts these unskilled hands are being given ain't at all what it should be.

In the last couple of weeks I looked at a Ruger Vaquero for a friend. Complaint, the load gate won't open. Cylinder doesn't turn.

I've been inside a Blackhawk many times, so I knew where to start.

As I was disassembling the revolver I was really disappointed at just how rough, basically unfinished the components are today.

I got the 44 up and running, but I'm not pleased at all with what I saw.

__________________
GOA
USA Shooting Supporter