Can we show Revolver's are not as reliable as today's Semi-Autos

[dr. mordo]

I only shoot S&W revolvers in competition. I have only had 1 time since 1979 when a malfunction was the gun's fault. That was when the pivot pin sheared off the hand and it would only fire the 1st round.

In just about every match, one or more semi-autos jam and cause the owner to have a much lower score than they would have had without a jam.

I see it as a materials handling problem. In a revolver, all the rounds stay in the chamber during the firing sequence. In an auto, every round has to be gotten out of the magazine, loaded into the chamber, fired, gotten out of the chamber, then out of the action. There are 5 places in each shot where something can go wrong. Sometimes it does.

That's why I have never switched over to semi-auto. I think they are cool guns, but not as reliable as a revo.

Great post!

 

[federali]

Well...

I think the main difference between revolvers and pistols is that, in the event of a stoppage, a semi-auto can be cleared and returned to action. When a revolver on the other hand, suffers a stoppage, it is usually out of action and cannot readily be returned to firing in a heartbeat or two.

Both systems require that the user know how to clean, inspect and maintain his firearm. For example, an undetected loose extractor rod on a revolver will lock up the cylinder. This isn't a problem on the range but in a life or death situation, will you be able to detect the cause and correct it without tools so that the gun may be reloaded?

Improper reloading technique with a revolver may allow unburned powder to fall under the extractor star, raising it enough to prevent the cylinder from closing.

Yes, I use both systems in self defense but I know how to keep each system functioning and how to perform preventive inspection and maintenance.

 

[GypsmJim]

I have owned literally dozens of revolvers. Only one time ever did i have a malfunction, but it worked when I pulled the trigger again. No time lapse, no fidgeting, no worries.

I have also owned a couple dozen semis, and almost EVERY one of them failed at one point or another. Then rack the slide, clear the jamb, try to feed another round.......bang.

Oh that bang was the other guy shooting at me.

Oh sure, some are 99.9% reliable, but its the 0.1% that bothers me.

My vote is for a revolver. I don't think anyone can "prove" otherwise.

 

[SRG]

I love revolvers, especially the old ones, but each day when I put on a gun belt for work or tuck my off-duty gun in my waistband, it is a high capacity polymer semi auto. There is something comforting in this day and age knowing that I have a large ammo supply at hand if needed, 50 rds on-duty, 30 rds off. I do not fall into the "spray and pray" crowd as many would argue hi-cap guns rely on. While most quality full sized revolvers are probably more "accurate" then most service grade semi's when shooting bullseyes, most of the semi's have more then adequate "accuracy" for social purposes. Modern semi's are also usually considerably lighter than service sized revolvers, which is also an important factor especially when we get a few years under the belt. I have been a firearms instructor and a competitive shooter for 30+ years and I have seen both pistols and revolvers fail on the firing line. "Reliability", as many have stated has many components to it, but I believe that there is virtually no difference in reliability between a quality revolver and a modern quality semi auto provided that each are maintained properly and both use quality ammunition. If I was mandated to carry a revolver I would feel confident in my ability to use it well and take care of business but, given a choice, I would always choice a semi auto for my primary carry handgun. Just my .02

 

[ParadiseRoad]

...I have a routine I follow with my semi auto...

...every time I get it out I push on the bottom of the magazine to make sure nothing has brushed against the mag release and allowed the mag to drop just slightly preventing feeding...

...I also unload it a lot and rack the slide to make sure the slide is completely free and hasn't gotten a little gummy...preventing reliable feeding...

...I haven't developed a revolver routine...haven't needed to...

 

[richbuff]

Snipped quote of the OP:

... ... ... The issue is basically the engineering and manufacturing processes used in today's semi-autos and their widespread use ensure manufacturers compete to win these markets and put their best products forward. ... ... ... ...

Is this just another revolver vs auto thread, one of a dozen contemporaneously running at any given time? Initially, I thought so, just like another Ford vs Chevy thread in truck forums, or just another Beatles vs Led Zeppelin thread in music forums. However, review of the original post shows that the OP brings up specific angle: His thesis is that revolvers are intended for the Civilian market, and Autos are intended for the Military and Police market. Is this thesis mostly correct, or not?

 

[joe44va]

Shot 200 rounds this morning.
100 thru my new SIG P365. 3 failures to lock back when the mag was empty.
100 thru my 3" 686+. No issues.
What does this prove? Probably nothing.

 

[AlHunt]

watching a youtube video of a 7 Shot GP100 which could not close it's cylinder because some brass specs were a little too large.

This is another debate that will never be settled but to this point, you can hardly blame the revolver for out of spec brass. Out of spec brass could jam any firearm.

I no longer believe in revolvers...

Now, to this point, I think you can still believe in revolvers. I have several that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that revolvers really do exist.

 

[TomkinsSP]

I think the main difference between revolvers and pistols is that, in the event of a stoppage, a semi-auto can be cleared and returned to action. When a revolver on the other hand, suffers a stoppage, it is usually out of action and cannot readily be returned to firing in a heartbeat or two.

Ok, I will bite. Using toolguys one stoppage (broken part) since 1979 (39 years), and let's say he goes to a match every 90 days (154 since 1979) and in each match "one or more Semi Autos jam" let's say 1.5x 154= 231 jams.

In 231 jams was ONE and end of match jam? A broken part? Did tap, rack, bang work 231/231 times?

 

[HOUSTON RICK]

For the average untrained person, a revolver is more "reliable" in that you do not have to be concerned with cycling and the safety under severe stress. I have seen numerous semi-auto failures to fire by people qualifying for concealed carry licenses in every class. I know revolvers can fail, but I have never seen it. Yes, if you train with semi-autos enough all of this can be overcome, but how many people (present company excepted) really do that?

 

[Jim NNN]

I haven't read through the comments, so excuse me if I'm stating previously stated opinions. I think that revolvers may not be more reliable than semi-autos when you add the reloading the gun into the equation. Maybe even less reliable.

First, there's the problem of ejecting spent shells; some cartridges might expand or some cylinder bores may not be smooth enough to allow easy extraction. I've had also some cylinders on some revolvers bind a little bit after stout or heavily loaded rounds so that releasing and opening the cylinder required some effort.

Second, revolver speed loaders and strips are far more awkward to use quickly than semi-auto magazines. True, that may not be an issue of the gun actually failing, but it is a matter of the gun not being able to be reloaded as quickly, whatever the cause.

Having said that, if you limit the reliability comparison to the rounds that are loaded in the gun, and don't consider reloading, the revolver is more reliable. I mention this because the statistics I've read so many times say that the typical self defense gunfight is over after just a few rounds. In that scenario, I'd rather have a revolver. Nobody ever limp wristed a revolver, and revolvers are less picky as to the brand and type of ammo they use, despite the recent improvements in semi-auto reliability. I have a nice newer Ruger SR40c that'll eat almost everything, but won't cycle Winchester white box at all.

Of course, these are all generalizations. There are many semi-autos that are ultra reliable and a few revolvers that have problems.

 

[ImDrRich]

I have converted my handgun-owning to mostly revolvers (with the exception of two semi-autos that I'm very fond of: a Colt Commander in .45acp and a Walther PP in .380). Neither of these are finicky.

I'm much more at ease with my Smith & Wesson revolvers. I have a sense of security that each will operate as it should when I am in front of the respective target. I have never had a revolver malfunction (but have had ammunition misfunctions as we all do from time-to-time). I trust that my revolvers are going to fire as they should, while even with my two trusted semi-autos there will always be a hang-up once in awhile for any number of reasons - any of which is unacceptable.

Sounds to me like you have been acquainted with a few lemons, no?

 

[Lou_the_welder]

You guys are totally right! Revolvers ARE less reliable than semi-autos! Totally true!
Please sell me all your vintage "one of a kind" revolvers, especially those Lou Horton's and what not.
I will dispose of them in a tasteful and admirable way! No reason to keep them anymore!
Gotta get me one of those fancy shmancy polymers now. To keep my shield 9 company. With those clipazines and such.



Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[Club Gun Fan]

I'll wait to post my opinion after someone shows me a legitimate picture of a revolver that stovepiped.

 

[Jim NNN]

I consider the Glocks to be more DURABLE and tolerant of ABUSE, whereas I consider the revolvers to be more RELIABLE and tolerate of NEGLECT.

I agree with this. My current carry revolver is a very neglected Model 36 with a 3 inch bbl that I picked up recently for $180. It had been stored - for years, I presume - in a very wrong environment that had allowed it to rust. Not much rust in the lockwork, however, and none in the bore.

I tried to clean it up with bronze wool and kroil, but it was too far gone and pitted, so I just took some 220 grit emory cloth and it took the rust right off. It's nice to have a great quality and reliable model 36 that I don't worry about scratching when I carry. Gun works great - a testimony to a good quality revolver's tolerance of neglect.

 

[Practical]

No this is not spam.

I was hoping for a more 'engineering' based answer. I am not a mechanical engineer, but have electrical and software engineering experience. My knowledge of mechanical reliability is basically none.

The comments here agree with my experience. I have found Glocks, Pre-lock J-Frames and N Frame competition models with Locks to be extremely reliable. I have only had ONE J-frame fail due to a broken part and I have had my glocks fail in competition due to me breaking off a adjustible rear site.

However, other brands and firearm types have failed me right out of the box or shortly after. Colt's including double action revolvers and 1911s, Kahr's, and a Beretta.

I tend to watch reviews closely and am disheartened when I see brand new guns failing regularly or having minor issues that preclude their use in competition or self defense. The issue of the GP100 7 shot is an example of why I don't think most new revolver's can be trusted based on the engineering processes that bring them to us.

I am not saying all the guns today are bad, I am saying SOME of the processes used to make them are NOT suitable for creating a competition gun or self defense product. I think MOST revolvers today are relegated to the 'consumer' side of the house where the assumption is that these guns may require a customer service call at a rate higher than the Semi-Autos used in LEO.

 

[kthom]

The fact is, any mechanical thing can fail. Any manufactured thing can be less than optimum. Very few of these things are found to be unreliable across the board. The only reports of unreliability we can trust are those of our own personal experience and even those can be suspect depending on the experience and knowledge of the operator (me!).

What makes me dumbfounded are the incidences of anyone who purchases a new gun and immediately begin to depend on it to work when needed without ever firing a shot through it or maybe just a cylinder or mag full. I've had and handled cases of unreliability in both type of guns mentioned here. Some cases were easily remedied after which the gun was proven to be as reliable as anyone could hope it to be. A few others cases required the permanent retirement of the firearm for serious uses (personal protection requirements).

Even a good quality reliable gun can fail because the owner operator does not maintain it properly. In my own case, there have been times past when I wanted to blame the gun for something that was caused or allowed unintentionally to happen that resulted in failure or less than optimum performance. But an honest assessment revealed that the cause was due completely or in part by operator error ... me!

Any platform can fail at some point in time. Nothing is totally reliable forever! The guns themselves haven't basically changed much over the years. There have been a few that should never been offered for sale among both types. But there is a great deal of "change" in operators all along the way, including this operator. The guns that I own and use have been thoroughly tested and vetted and proven reliable to me. If a problem arises, that gun is "off duty" till the problem is found and cured and then tested again. All these guns are periodically tested across the board to make sure they are still worthy of my trust.

Having and carrying and depending on a firearm involves a great responsibility by the firearm's owner. The firearm is incapable of doing anything by itself! It's my responsibility to test and maintain each and every firearm I own and to make responsible choices among them. That is on me, never on the firearm. I've sent some packing of both types, but only after I had good reason to do so, including the reason that I just didn't like it even though it worked.

I'm not picking on any one here. I understand the question. And it's an interesting one to contemplate. But the answer to that question is ... well, it depends! And it depends a great deal on who's asking and who's answering! That includes me!

 

[ParadiseRoad]

...never seen an unsupported brass failure in a revolver...

...OP should have just said "I like semi-autos over revolvers"...

...would have saved a lot of bandwidth...

 

[ctxcummins]

I've seen both semis and revolvers fail. New and old.

Anything made by man can and eventually will fail.

Next.

 

[HamHands]

My only benchmark concern has always been the "reliability" of the "man". If he who carries it is "reliable", I've no doubt his kit is "reliable".

And this pretty much sums it up for me! You take the time to get to know your weapon inside and out; you maintain and train with it and use quality ammo. If I had to estimate how many rounds I've slung down range since I've been shooting... I started at 20year old and I'm 40 now... I'd comfortably say I've pulled a trigger 50 to 60 thousand times in various platforms... 1911's, Glocks, M&P's, CZ's, Smith & Colt revolvers of various calibers. In all that time and rounds shot I can count also comfortably say I've experienced maybe a couple dozen failures. That is a hell of a track record if you ask me. And half of those failures were due to quality branded factory ammo that simply had a round or two out of spec, i.e. a case length that was a half a millimeter too long, a primer that popped it's pocket, the bullet's OAL too long/short, etc... The other's I remember were worn/over stressed and fatigued magazine springs... 1911's, albeit my absolute favorite semi-auto's suffer the most from spring fatigue in my experience. I put my revo's and semi-auto's to be on par in reliability and bet my life on them almost every day. I work in Real Estate and my downtown Atlanta office is two blocks away from the CNN Center... not a very savory side of the city. Common sense and putting 300-400 trouble free rounds down the pipe of a semi-auto before CCW-ing it is a must. 200 of the same with any quality revo is a must too. YMMV...

ETA: The above round count and failure count excludes any and all .22Rimfire cartridges of course... I was strictly talking about centerfire cartridges!