I declare that everybody's posts, except the first one, are all valid arguments. With a high quality, well maintained HANDGUN with good quality ammo there is little difference between the two in reliability while knowing that there are some differences between how they COULD fail, on the possible occurrence that one does, and know that no mechanical system is perfect, or stays perfect under use.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Honestly, does it really matter?

In my experience, reliability/function seem to vary between individual firearms, which is most often in turn a reflection of the firearm's owner and the amount of diligence they demonstrate towards their firearm, ergo you can have 2 of the same firearm from the same lot function differently just because one of them is shot/cleaned more often.
Furthermore, there are a number of different variables at play which can cause or otherwise contribute towards the malfunction/failure of a firearm, many of which are liable to be more or less problematic between semiautomatic pistols and Revolvers, ergo the performance of either type of firearm can be highly situational.

Personally, I think that as long as the firearm is reliable enough to function when needed, then questions in concern to that which is "more reliable" are completely irrelevant, serving as little more than juvenile schoolyard-esq "My dad could totally beat up your dad!" argument fodder. At least as far as civilians are concerned, anyway.

I like both Revolvers and Semiautomatic Pistols, use both of them for different purposes, and enjoy them both equally, so I don't have a personal stake in arguments in regards to which design is more reliable, but even if I did prefer one over the other in general, then I would still think that it's a silly argument.

Just carry whatever you like, as long as it functions reliable when properly cleaned/lubricated/maintained, then that's really all you have to worry about. Everything else is just a lot of "what-ifs" which nobody can ever be adequately prepare for because there are simply too many variables to consider without driving yourself crazy to the point that you are literally irrational/paranoid in your desperate struggle to prepare yourself for every dire situation your mind can possibly conjure and thus no longer capable of making any informed decision to begin with. The world is imperfect, mankind is imperfect, mankind's creations are imperfect, you are imperfect too, ergo their can be no such thing as perfect preparation/flawless execution, so you just gotta do the best that you can do with reasonable/realistic limitations in mind.

I'd be inclined to agree with the OP. For the first 8 years of concealed carrying, I carried some form of Glock. Never had an issue with any of them, and they always went bang every time I pulled the trigger. Switched over to revolvers about 3 or 4 years ago. In that time, my CC revolver has locked up three times due to crimp jump, and has suffered a cracked up firing pin which still needs to be replaced. Based on my limited experience to date, I wouldn't say revolvers are more reliable...but perhaps I'd say that revolvers and modern semi-autos are about equal in terms of reliability.

__________________
Smith. And Wesson. And Me!

What gun and what ammo?

Neither have I, and I carry two of them every day.

So you're basing your opinion that revolvers are not reliable on just one youtube video and your experience with a colt 20 yrs ago?

Why is this post in the revolver section and not in "The lounge"?

I'm outta here......

To answer the OP's initial question: No. He bought a lemon Colt 20+ years ago, which colored his opinion. Then, he saw a video of a Ruger revolver that had a malfunction. Case closed: revolvers are inferior to semi-autos.

Sorry, I respectfully disagree. I've been owning, shooting, and carrying both types for over 40 years. No firearm is free of risk of breakage or malfunction. Find the manual of arms that suits you best through trial. Use quality ammunition. Practice often to maintain skill and gain confidence in your defensive firearm. Inspect and maintain your firearm(s) regularly.

In my personal firearms history, I've had more "failures" with semi-autos than I've had with revolvers. The worst was a broken extractor on my duty carry Sig P229 after approximately 30k rounds fired. The rest were minor clearing issues that were quickly remedied, and would not have taken me out of the fight had I needed to defend myself. Nowadays, my most frequent off-property concealed carry is a Sig subcompact DAO P290RS 9mm, but my Smiths get carried around the homestead, and out in the woods. I like having a choice in firearm selection.

This is not a revolver versus Semi-Auto thread. The issue I did not convey well enough is that how a product is designed and manufactured results in a level of reliability. The features the product has as well as the processes used to make it will affect it's reliability and its meeting requirements.

I don't believe today's revolvers except for a few are designed and manufactured to the same standards as today's semi-autos.

The M&P revolver might be.

I have had both semi-autos and revolvers fail. I have had magazines drop their base plate spilling ammo at the range. I have had rifles and shotguns fail to cycle and fire in competition and even hunting. If you use guns enough they will fail. I have had new and old guns fail to work.

My point is I think you are more likely to get a semi-auto that if you calculate an MTBF or a calculation of whether it would fire reliably if carried for 5 years ASSUMING you maintain the gun the numbers for the Semi-Auto would be higher than we think.

I don't know how to make the calculations. The answer above was the closest I have found.

For my use I have decided to use Polymer semi-autos and J-Frame. They have worked the most for me.

Give any gun to me and i will swap it out with so many aftermarket parts they will all be unreliable as ****.

While conducting firearms training for my office, prior to transitioning to autoloaders, I witnessed the following stoppage:
a ham-handed agent, while reloading, managed to get a fired casing under the extractor star yet still in the chamber. This was with either an S&W Model 36 or a Colt Detective Special. Don't remember which. Getting that casing out took some manipulation. This was not a fault of the gun but how the user interacted with the gun.

I obtained a box of Norma factory loads in .357 Magnum. Using them in my S&W Model 19, The ammo was so hot that the primer extruded into the hammer nose hole in the frame, effectively locking up the cylinder. To open, it was necessary to bash the cylinder against a wooden structure while holding the cylinder release in order to shear off the extruded primer material.

And yes, I've had my fair share of stoppages with autoloaders.

I was honored to be able to write a portion of the instruction manual that accompanies every Kahr handgun. As I recall, I said that reliability depends on the interaction of the gun, the magazine, the ammunition and the user. These, alone or in combination, can affect a pistol's overall reliability.

Been owning, shooting, and toting both revolvers and automatics since 1975. It matters not if a consensus may be reached on this question. I've satisfied myself that the revolver whips automatics in shot-to-shot reliability. I'm under no illusions that today's automatics are truly better than "yesterday's" either. They are cheaper though.

A 2nd Generation Glock 17 was acquired a few years back, mostly so I could hate on Glock in a more informed matter. Either the brand is perfection or its not. I'm gonna say "not."

Failure-to-extract. Just last month. Much amused. Don't know when a revolver laid down on me last but it probably had to do with experimental hand loads loaded so light that the bullet stuck in the barrel.

But (I) don't think you can. YES, certain ammo issues can stop both platforms. The revolver has an advantage of going to another cylinder, (in many cases). When an auto jams you can't.

The key word is " reliable ", and it seems many have different interpretations of what that is.
To me, what is important, is a gun (already established to be in good condition) ability to be loaded and stashed either in a nightstand, a holster on your side, glove compartment in your car, tackle box, wherever, and when pulled out after how many whatever years, will go bang when needed.
With this criteria, a single shot break action pistol would probably be too dog, revolver 2nd, semi auto last.

I say, KISS! I love my 1911 pistols but seem to favor a revolver for any thing that may happen.....

__________________
Only difference Fool/Mule-ears

The only thing about revolvers that frightens me is the possibility of something getting under the star extractor. But at that point it would be empty, anyway.

Very timely topic for me, as I have recently caught the snub nose revolver bug. Many years ago, when they first came out, I grabbed a Ruger SP101 3 1/16" barrel. These were Ruger's test to see if there was a market for an SP101 in 357. Basically, these were repackaged SP101 .38 Special revolvers, with a barrel stamped "125 Grain Only". Great revolver. The most natural pointing revolver I've ever had, recoil straight back, with quick follow ups. Still, I never practiced much in DA.

So, a while back I picked up a Charter Arms .38. Extremely clean, in the box. Bang! To much snap, I'll pass.

Fast forward a few more years, on an impulse, I bought a Colt Detective Special. It's a slightly later model, with full barrel shroud. Darn accurate at SD distances and recoil is almost pleasant. What really shocked me was my DA shots were smooth and as accurate. Friend had his earlier Colt, without the barrel shroud, and it, too, treated me very well. So, I found an earlier model Colt without the barrel shroud, but with a hammer shroud and I grabbed it. Haven't shot it yet.

I did some reading, Pros/Cons, and all that. The Miami Shootout offered some lessons on the topic of revolvers. Perhaps partial reloads would have helped one of the agents. I can see it being hard to only reload a couple rounds in a firefight, but 2 rounds might have ended that battle sooner. There were no speed loaders in use either, which is a head scratcher, of course no FBI rifles on scene either, and we could go on and on. Oversights were made and it's a shame.

I started to think that DA revolvers were my future and I realized something. I have DA revolvers, DAO 3953, TDA 3913, 1911s, Glock, etc. There really isn't one of them that I can't shoot well. I really don't have to pick a "best" gun for me, jsut need plennty of holsters ; ) Gun to my head, if I had to pick, i think the 1911 wins, but only because of the trigger. Who doesn't love a 1911 SA trigger??? Glock would probably be the last gun I'd grab for.

Regarding the GP100 failure in the OP. If I recall, Ruger had a 7 shot revolver, which would not function with certain types of ammo. The rims on certain ammo brands "crowd" the cylinder and cause issues. Some Ruger fans were quite upset, some said, just stay away from certain ammo brands. Perhaps a testimony to the attention paid to the manufacturing of modern revolvers. Anyway, Google it, you can read plenty.

In almost four decades of being involved in firearms , I have never seen a stock revolver with factory ammo not go bang every time. I cannot say that about past and present semi autos.

Revolvers and 1911s are fine if you are into them. JMB started a revolution in firearm design. His designs are carried on today in more modern semi autos that are far more reliable, and almost just as reliable as pistols but with a far greater capacity and faster reloads on average. Time marches on and so do I.

All of the semis that ive owned over the years have at one time or more given me reason to pause, and reflect on the reliability of them..I've done more repairs to, and polishing of ramps and breechfaces and mag spring swaps than i care to remember in the name of making that particular semiautomatic run, all the defensive shooting and criminal shooting videos I've seen over the years that show real footage of handguns in battle..the only malfunctions I recall have been semiautos jamming..many many examples. Ive never had a reason to not trust my revolvers they have always just run. I'll always trust a revolver over a auto in a fight for my life. But I do enjoy shooting semiautomatic pistols for fun... Just not for edc protection in my opinion.

I think next we should kick around 9mm versus .45 Auto. Or better yet, "Is The .380 big enough for self-defense?"

I'll bring the popcorn!

Keep in mind their are still no-lock S&W revolver in use by corrections and security folks the nation over. I remember just last year seeing multiple Illinois Department of Corrections officers with Model 64s in holster at a Southern Illinois hospital on prisoner transportation duty.

Up next......

Which do you prefer...Blonds or Brunettes?...


And....


Ford or Chevy- which is the best?


Best Regards, Les

__________________
SWCA 3084, SWHF 495, PGCA 3064

Mopar Les. The 440 V8 rotates the earth. Hah!

So the ammo was out of spec and you blame the revolver?

Heh.
The most reliable gun is the one I have with me at any given time.
Other than that, I'm not wrapped so tight that I have to analyze what is, at this stage of my life, my hobby, and I choose not to ruin it with endless debates over configuration, ammunition, etc.
Y'all have a nice day.

You can’t limp wrist a revolver . . .
You don’t have to mate your ammo to the strength of your slide spring in a revolver . . .
You don’t get spring fatigue during lengthy times of storage with a revolver . . .

Sorry but revolvers are still more reliable. But they do still fail sometimes and i agree that semi-autos have come a very very long way,

On top of reliability, revolvers have other advantages that still make them relevant.
You can shoot all sorts of different types of bullet profiles. You can shoot a greater variety of ammo (500 fps to 1600 fps out of the same gun, shot shells, wadcutters, everything). Revolvers are stronger so you can shoot some really heavy ammo if you like. (454 Casull is my favorite heavy caliber). And revolvers are more accurate. (I know some will disagree with this one but please show me a handgun hunter taking 100 yard shots with a semi-auto . . . That’s what i thought.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have carried both revolvers and a semi auto (G17) on duty.

I have shot both revolvers and semi auto's (CZ 75 and 1911 derivatives) in competition.

I have trained both cops and pistol club members in shooting practices.

There are some cops I would like to take their G17's from and give them a revolver. There are some revolver competition shooter I would like to trade their revolvers for a semi auto to progress.

Revolvers are good for those who shoot and train little, provided they are properly maintained.

Semi autos are good for those who shoot and train a lot, given the more varied ways they can malfunction.

As to which is "better" out of the box to a trained and motivated person, well apart from changing grips and springs and a trigger job there is little to modify on a revolver.

On the other hand a carry semi can often benefit from full internal parts replacement, better magazines and replacement sights etc.

I would not like to be shot by either type of handgun.

We also need to consider which gun is the most reliable at stopping a charging Grizzly Bear! Failure here would be of the worst kind. :-)
Best,
Rick

The OP rejects revolvers because one cartridge was out of spec and hung up his GP100. He had an ammunition problem, not a revolver problem. From this one experience he makes a generalization about revolver lack of reliability. In the future he will have some problem with his semi-auto. Will he then state that semi-autos are not reliable and therefore he will stop using them. Perhaps he needs to get a sword.

I'M GLAD THAT YOU REALIZE THAT THIS IS MERELY YOUR OPINION, THAT CAN'T BE SUPPORTED BY FACTS---BECAUSE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THAT'S ALL THIS IS ! ! !

BASED ON 60 YEARS OF SHOOTING SEMI-AUTOS AND REVOLVERS, IN BOTH MILITARY AND CIVILIAN LIFE---MY OPINION STANDS IN DIRECT OPPOSITION TO YOURS---AND ONCE AGAIN, JUST MY OPINION ! ! !

THE ONLY FAILURES TO FIRE A REVOLVER, IN THOSE 6 DECADES, HAVE BEEN RELATED TO A FAULTY FACTORY AMMO ROUND, ON A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS.....

THE FEW HAND PICKED, ANTI-REVOLVER VIGNETTES THAT YOU PRESENTED, ARE NOT FREQUENT OCCURRENCES, JUDGING BY WHAT I READ ON THIS FORUM, AND OTHERS THAT I BELONG TO--AND NOTHING THAT I HAVE EVER EXPERIENCED......

MUCH MORE FREQUENT ARE JAMS, FAILURES TO FEED OR EXTRACT, AMMO OGIVE SENSITIVITY, BROKEN EXTRACTORS, WEAK SPRINGS, OR MAGAZINE PROBLEMS, ETC, THAT ARE COMMON TO THE MORE COMPLEX MECHANISMS OF SEMI-AUTO PISTOLS---ALL OF WHICH, I HAVE EXPERIENCED......

__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.

I NOTICED THAT YOU ARE RELATIVELY NEW TO THE FORUM, SO I JUST WANT TO WELCOME YOU......

I ALSO NOTICED THAT YOU HAVE YET TO RECEIVE A "LIKE" ON ANY OF YOUR POSTS, SO FAR.....

IMHO, AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT---YOU WILL NOT BREAK YOUR STREAK, WITH THIS ONE...lol.

__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.

I recently read an article on this subject (I don't remember the publication or the name of the article), but in summary, the author determined that all else being equal, there is quite a bit more potential for something to go wrong when using a semi-auto than with a revolver. Things such as magazines not properly locking when inserted in the gun - and subsequently falling out and the limp wrist semi-auto misfire. Also, if a light primer strike should occur, with an auto, you need to manually cycle a new round into the chamber. With a revolver, you simply need pull the trigger again and the gun does the rest.

Semi's violate the KISS principal of engineering "Keep It Simple Stupid".

Years of working on all sorts of electro/mechanical systems,electronics, automobiles,motorcycles,aircraft etc. has convinced me simple is better.
However I must admit complicated has put bread on my table for years.

My revolver shoots 100% even with weak (or wounded/even frightened to death) wrist.
Happy 4th everyone.
J

I am going to give this issue some more thought. In 5 years I might have more say on the subject. I may try a 686 or 67. IF I break it before then I will report it if using factory ammo.

Out-of-spec ammunition is an equal opportunity for of all handguns. In most cases if the ammo defeats the revolver it will also bedevil the automatic. In fact a list could likely be made of myriad forms that out-of-spec ammunition could take and one would find that the revolver would successfully deal with more of them than would the automatic.

The automatic is the big loser when it comes to out-of-spec ammunition.

He who is painted by the front sight of a Glock Pistol or S&W Revolver should seek cover immediately.

__________________
Ad Astra Per Aspera

OP claims that while newer manufactured semi-autos have improved, most revolvers haven't. Apparetly (to him) that means that newer semi-autos are now more reliable than most of the currently manufactured revolvers. Interesting theory. From what I can tell from the postings of those who have bought the newer Smith revolvers, with few exceptions they seem to work fine.

THAT'S A GOOD PLAN ! ! !

MEANWHILE---I THOUGHT YOU WERE NEW TO THE FORUM, BECAUSE OF YOUR LOW NUMBER OF POSTS, SO I WELCOMED YOU. NOW I SEE THAT YOU'VE BEEN SILENTLY LURKING SINCE 2003. MY MISTAKE---THE WELCOME STILL STANDS......

__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.

Revolver = KISS?

Moving parts, including the reloading process:

1911 Semiauto 25 parts
S&W DA Revolver 22 parts

When compared to a 1911, it appears you are correct, the revolver is KISS..ish.

Yes, it is.

In my 32 years and counting, LE career, the only malfunctions/stoppages I have had, were with semi autos. These were a 220 in .45, a 6906, Colt 1911 45. The 66, 681 and 25-5 NEVER failed (yet).

You are asking if my non-pinned, non-recessed, swing out cylinder, three screw hand ejector is less reliable than a semi-auto?

No. No it is not.

I'll take a blonde F-150 STX.

Wait..what?

The full-size semi-autos are more reliable than they used to be, that's for sure. It has a lot to do with refining the mechanism a bit (e.g., working out the right angle for the feed ramp) and employing better manufacturing techniques (CNC machining, drop-in parts that are finally really interchangeable, etc.).

The small semi-autos remain problematic.

My revolvers have let me know when they have a problem, always in time for me to fix them or clean them up while they still work. I have had many FTEs, FTFs, etc., over the past 50 years with semi-autos -- most notoriously, a Series 70 Mk IV Colt and a S&W Mdl 457, neither of which would run - ever.

We all know about magazines, too.

Overall, my experience (with lots of disparate data but little scientific method) tells me that my revolvers are more reliable and dependable than my modern semi-autos.

I hope I'm not too much of a chump for responding to this thread.

__________________
S&W Rover

Not possible. See, it doesn't matter if this thread was started as SPAM for posts, trolling, etc. We can all still share our experiences and opinions. That's why forums exist. I read everything, apply what I've experience/learned, then decide what's best for ME. Hard to be a chump for doing that.

I think at the end of the day, everyone is looking to cover their *****.

IBM had very early commercial, "No one ever got fired for buying an IBM." Why? Because IBM had a reputation and if everything went to ****, no one could really fault a buyer for purchasing the IBM units in the first place.

Anyway, it's my guess that lots of folks are looking to have their safety net. So, after the transmission craps out on your Chevy, you can say, "See honey, most people online agree, the Chevy is the better truck!" Something like that. Of course, if you make the wrong choice in weapon, you might not get to say anything after a failure... Which brings me to another point.

We're talking about MBF - Mean Time Between Failure and statistical probability that a semi or revolver will fail. Well, if we're discussing the probability of a gun failing in a gunfight, then shouldn't we also apply the probability of being in a gunfight to begin with? So the probability of getting into a gunfight, then the probability of your gun failing, then the probability of it failing before you get off 3 rounds. Something like that.

Chance favors the prepared mind. The simple fact is your most reliable weapon is between your ears. Know your exits, look for other weapons, etc., know how to clear malfunctions, be prepared for a New York reload if the opportunity presents itself. I'm no expert, but my wife, who shoots a few different guns herself, can't fathom how I know to operate so many different firearms. it just comes with time I guess.

To answer the question posed in the post title: Barring objective and exhaustive testing or empirical evidence, the answer is an emphatic no.

As to your "decision": I hope you don't make a lot of decisions based on YouTube videos.

Assuming it's accurate and from a reliable source, out-of-spec ammo kills any and all arguments. An autoloader wouldn't function reliably with it, either. That cannot be blamed on the weapon design. If anything, revolvers are much less finicky about ammo. They don't care about bullet profile, or whether the load is hot enough to cycle the action.

If the rims were too thick, I would be more concerned if the revolver cylinder had closed. That would mean potentially sloppy headspace. Have fun with an autoloader that has excessive headspace.

Aside from all that, you'd be a damn fool to rely on a gun/ammo that you haven't thoroughly tested.

Your assertion that revolvers are "consumer grade" is pure speculation. You mean to tell me a Glock isn't consumer grade?

I could not care less what anyone chooses to carry, but I do object to categorical pronouncements based on speculation or anecdotal evidence.

Practicial:

Here is a reliability record, for you to consider. I have my first S&W handgun, it's also my first center fire handgun, a 1952 S&W Mod. 15, Combat Masterpiece. I bought it new, in 1953, and it has served me, reliably for 65 years. It has been, my self defense weapon, I shot it in Bullseye competition, recreational shooting, trained my two sons, and it's Traveled in my autos, and RVs with me all over the USA, and Canada. That little revolver has had a countless number of rounds shot in it. I doubt if ten bushel baskets, would hold all of the rounds that have been fired in that Mod. 15. During that 65 years service, not one "good round" ever failed to fire and do it's job in that mod. 15 "REVOLVER". Now, I love a good Semi-Auto handgun, but, match that record, with any Semi-Auto that you would care to come up with, including all of the "Horse manure & Soy bean" Semi-Autos, and see if you can top that reliability. Just My 2¢ worth.
Chubbo

I am glad you had a good run, with a revolver made in Smith & Wesson's peak years. My #1 revolver has only been a Model 60-9.

I've parts (not springs) break on a 67, 19, 36 and a Python. Only the 36 had the lock. Anything mechanical can break.

__________________
K & N S&W revolvers