Assessing defensive handgun reliability

[lrrifleman]

In surfing various threads (both here and on other forums), the sage advice is to fire X00 rounds through a semi-auto to assure reliable function, and to break in the pistol.

I can see putting a few hundred rounds through a semi-auto that is carried for self-defense, especially when you are using the ammo you plan to carry. However, I have rarely seen that sage advice being conveyed for revolvers. Is this because revolvers are viewed as being more reliable than a semi-auto?

What is your perspective, please?

 

[robertrwalsh]

Revolvers do not have the potential feeding issues that Semi-Automatic pistols do. Bullet shape does not bother them. Power level does not bother them (within reason). They are cycled with finger power via the trigger rather than by spring compression. Cartridge length does not bother them as long as they are not too long to fit into the cylinder. All of these things can, and do, effect semi-auto pistols.

 

[mikerjf]

Autos depend on ammo shape and power for feeding and ejection. Revolvers do not.

Main thing with revolvers is to use ammo that is crimped well enough to resist recoil. But anything that will fit in the cylinder will function.

Revolver guys usually shoot a few to check recoil and point of impact. That's all you need.

 

[delcrossv]

Well, I've had two revolver failures - both on X frames. One (stuck fining pin) prevented the gun from firing at all. So there are such things as finicky revolvers.

 

[dr. mordo]

I might shoot two cylinders of my carry ammo, if just because I had a S&W 325 that failed to ignite primers until I swapped in a aftermarket firing pin.

Another reason to break in an auto is often they become more reliable after a couple hundred slide cycles. I've had a few autos that had issues during break-in but ran like clockwork after.

 

[BB57]

I'll play Soviet Judge today and be the downer on revolvers.

They can fail and they do need adequate testing with a self defense load.

1) Under heavy recoil, bullet can start to back out of the case to the point that the bullet will extend past the end of the cylinder and lock up the gun. That jam is near impossible to fix without a hammer and a rod of some sort to reseat the bullet. They tend t happen on the backside of the frame so you can't even open the crane.

2) Revolvers can suffer light strikes just like semi-autos. In fact, in some designs the hammer spring is tensioned by a screw on the front side of the grip frame. That screw can loosen and if it's hidden under a grip the shooter will never realize it until he or she starts getting light strikes. In addition, primer cup hardness varies. For example, you may get 100% reliability with softer cupped Winchester primers, but get intermittent light strikes with CCI primers fired in the same range session. You need to be sure that your revolver is reliable not just with your practice ammo, but also with your carry ammo.

3) reloading is a rare thing in an armed citizen self defense shoot, but reloading can result in a disabled revolver. A weak activation of the ejector rod in concert with horizontal positioning of the revolver, generous chamber dimensions or tapered cases can all greatly increase the potential for a case to not only fail to be ejected but end up with the rim under the ejector star where it very effectively prevents a reload. It's also time consuming to clear and requires fine motor skills you won't have under extreme stress. Some grips can also catch a case and prevent it from clearing the ejector star, so the grips come into consideration as well.

Cartridge cases can also start to stick at high pressures, and that can be an even large issue with magnum round and short barrel revolvers that lack a full length ejector rod.

4) Similarly, large grain slow burning colloidal ball powders are also popular in magnum loads. When ejecting the cases in a proper vertical position, an unburned grain of powder can fall onto the inside of the ejector star. That will prevent it from retracting fully and will prevent the cylinder from going back into the frame. You'll have to dump your reload and brush it off the ejector star before you can proceed with a fresh reload.

-----

Before I carry a revolver with a specific load, I fire at least 50 rounds to check not just for point of impact versus aim, but also light strikes, and bullets backing out of the case. I check for the latter by shooting 5 rounds rather than 6 (or 6 rather than 7 in a 7 shot revolver) and then repeat the process with the same unfired round going through 15 (or 18) rounds, and then checking to ensure the OAL did not increase. I'll do this with 3 rounds pulled randomly from a box of 50.

I'll also practice reloads to check for the issues mentioned above - powder grains, sticky cases, grip interference, etc.

So for me, 50 rounds with my carry ammo is the minimum.

 

[bigwheelzip]

I mentioned on this forum when it happened a few years ago, but a new 3" 686 Plus stopped working after three outings in a month, and about 500 rounds of factory 158gr magnum ammo. The trigger pulled back but stopped moving the hammer.

Sent back to factory, and when I got it back, the entire gun was locked up tight. Nothing worked or opened. Sent back again and came back fine.

If I could, I'd want to give a defensive carry a good workout, including with carry ammo.

 

[ContinentalOp]

I have my own methodology for testing a gun's reliability, and it's the same for semi-autos and revolvers. I've had semi-autos fail. I've had revolvers fail. Revolvers may not have the same issues as semi-autos, but that doesn't mean they're immune to problems.

Reliability is something that should be assessed periodically, not just with a new gun. Same goes for any custom work that may be done.

 

[Kanewpadle]

I only carry what I believe to be high quality guns. That doesn't mean expensive.

I shoot 100 rounds through a revolver and 300 through semi autos. If I have a failure of any kind I increase the number by 100.

After having worked at an indoor range for several years, I've seen most major brands have failures.

 

[WR Moore]

In addition to the items mentioned about revolvers, there is simply a need to cycle the action repeatedly to work in the moving parts. Several hundred cycles can make a marked difference in the weight/smoothness of the action. Best of all, these can be dry fire, but shouldn't be exclusively dry fire.

 

[jim lock]

I shoot mine alot. Not just for reliability but to hit what I'm aiming at. IMHO self defense weapons whether they are auto's or revolvers should be practiced with frequently in hopes that if we do have to use it we can hit what we are aiming at without any collateral damage. A nightmare none of us need or want. Meticulous maintenance is also a must.
Jim

 

[Univibe]

I fired 200 rounds through my new M&P9. Two extraction failures in 200 rounds. It went back to Smith yesterday. 99% ain't good enough to trust with my life.

 

[BB57]

I shoot mine alot. Not just for reliability but to hit what I'm aiming at. IMHO self defense weapons whether they are auto's or revolvers should be practiced with frequently in hopes that if we do have to use it we can hit what we are aiming at without any collateral damage. A nightmare none of us need or want. Meticulous maintenance is also a must.
Jim

As I've noted before as a national average law enforcement hit percentages are around 20%. A bit better in daylight at ranges of 5 yards or less, a lot worse at longer ranges or in low light. That's not surprising as the average LEO only shoots 1 or 2 times a year to qualify and most are not "gun people". They never reach a very high standard of proficiency and they don't shoot enough to maintain what they do achieve.

The problem is that many armed citizens look at how often LEOs shoot and conclude that there is no need for them to shoot any more often - if that much.

The flaw in that thinking is that LEOs can afford to miss, because they are covered by department policy, the department's attorneys, the department's insurance, and in some cases the department's sovereign immunity. LEOs have also historically been extended a great deal of latitude when it comes to mistake of fact shoots (about 20% of all LEO involved shoots), and they don't generally go to jail in the 5% to 6% of LEO involved shoots where an innocent bystander is hit by one of the other 80% of the rounds fired by an officer and skipping through the neighborhood.

My suggestion to armed citizens is to take careful note of the differences in criminal and civil liability if they miss and hit a bystander, as opposed to a police officer, and then train accordingly.

If armed citizens are not willing to shoot enough to become reasonably proficient, or at least recognize their limitations, and then shoot often enough to maintain a reasonable degree of proficiency, they probably should not be carrying a gun with any expectation of actually using it.

----

I'm a big fan of expending my carry ammunition on each range trip, and at a minimum on a monthly basis. It keeps the carry ammo fresh and over time you'll develop a very high round count with your carry ammo, which validates its reliability in your self defense handgun(s).

 

[stansdds]

Any firearm can fail and it can fail without warning.

It has been my experience that revolvers are generally reliable weapons, but dirt under the extractor can tie up a revolver. An over-length round can tie up a revolver. The lockwork or even a broken or weak spring can tie up a revolver.

I have also found that high quality semi-automatic pistols are generally reliable weapons, but a weak magazine spring or any spring in the action of the pistol can induce a failure. Some bullet styles may induce a failure.

No firearm is immune and just because yours fired 500 rounds of your chosen ammo without issue does not mean that the 501st round will not fail.

 

[SixGunSancho]

Long, long ago, revolvers might have been more reliable than some semis. That era is forever dead and buried, with nary of ghost of revolver reliability to be seen.

I'd go toe-to-toe in an endurance test with one of my Sigs or my Springfield Armory TRP .45 Auto against any revolver, Korth included. I've never seen a Sig or an SA TRP fail to do anything but perform with complete reliability. I have seen revolvers fail, 2 of which I owned. I gave away my early model 586 (when S&W was Bristish owned) that was briefly a duty weapon. I was so eager to cut ties with it that I paid UPS shipping charge to an FFL. It cost me about a Bengi to purge it from my inventory.

DA revolvers are of complex design with more parts and more moving parts. Especially the 1911-A1 is of simplistic design with fewer parts and fewer moving parts.

However, I am developing a pronounced sentimental attachment to my recently acquired Model 66-8 2.75".

BTW, the M-4 and HK 91, both full auto/semiauto, might be the most reliable weapons in the world. If a gun is made in Germany, buy it. If an automatic watch is made by Omega, buy it.

 

[NYlakesider]

In surfing various threads (both here and on other forums), the sage advice is to fire X00 rounds through a semi-auto to assure reliable function, and to break in the pistol.

I can see putting a few hundred rounds through a semi-auto that is carried for self-defense, especially when you are using the ammo you plan to carry. However, I have rarely seen that sage advice being conveyed for revolvers. Is this because revolvers are viewed as being more reliable than a semi-auto?

What is your perspective, please?

Well revolvers and semis you are talking two different classes of guns.

To trust a semi I want to put a lot of rounds both testing out the gun and me. I also will dry fire just to sharpen up the muscle memory between me and the gun.

Revolvers for the most part if you are familial with them, just a good exam and what I call normal revolver tests you have a good indication that all will work well without hammering a primer.

Of course any gun to be carried needs to be "proofed" by you that all is well. During that shakedown period you will adjust the sights or know your Kentucky windage of where your rounds are going to arrive down range.

Practice makes perfect and that holds for anything you are firing!
Add to that practice is fun or should be unless your firing off atomic level loads in a very light gun!

 

[fredj338]

Most modern pistols don't need a break in period. You certainly want to test a new pistol out of the box to make sure it is working & magazines do need a few rds thru them to get the springs running right. I will shoot about 300rds thru a new pistol before deeming it reliable, just ball ammo. Then run one full mag, each mag I carry, with a chosen jhp for function testing, as fast as I can pull the trigger, two hands & one handed. IF the gun runs, good to go. The idea I need to fire 1/2 a case of duty ammo seems silly. The gun either works or it doesn't & that usually shows up sooner than later in my exp.

 

[fredj338]

As I've noted before as a national average law enforcement hit percentages are around 20%. A bit better in daylight at ranges of 5 yards or less, a lot worse at longer ranges or in low light. That's not surprising as the average LEO only shoots 1 or 2 times a year to qualify and most are not "gun people". They never reach a very high standard of proficiency and they don't shoot enough to maintain what they do achieve.

The problem is that many armed citizens look at how often LEOs shoot and conclude that there is no need for them to shoot any more often - if that much.

The flaw in that thinking is that LEOs can afford to miss, because they are covered by department policy, the department's attorneys, the department's insurance, and in some cases the department's sovereign immunity. LEOs have also historically been extended a great deal of latitude when it comes to mistake of fact shoots (about 20% of all LEO involved shoots), and they don't generally go to jail in the 5% to 6% of LEO involved shoots where an innocent bystander is hit by one of the other 80% of the rounds fired by an officer and skipping through the neighborhood.

My suggestion to armed citizens is to take careful note of the differences in criminal and civil liability if they miss and hit a bystander, as opposed to a police officer, and then train accordingly.

If armed citizens are not willing to shoot enough to become reasonably proficient, or at least recognize their limitations, and then shoot often enough to maintain a reasonable degree of proficiency, they probably should not be carrying a gun with any expectation of actually using it.

----

I'm a big fan of expending my carry ammunition on each range trip, and at a minimum on a monthly basis. It keeps the carry ammo fresh and over time you'll develop a very high round count with your carry ammo, which validates its reliability in your self defense handgun(s).

I agree, anyone carrying a gun, ccw or LEO should be more than just competent. Alas the majority are just not. I shoot my carry ammo once a year. I shoot almost weekly so the idea I should be burning expensive carry ammo when my duplicate handloads punch paper the same seems pricey, but to each their own.

 

[HardToHandle]

Most modern pistols don't need a break in period. You certainly want to test a new pistol out of the box to make sure it is working & magazines do need a few rds thru them to get the springs running right. I will shoot about 300rds thru a new pistol before deeming it reliable, just ball ammo. Then run one full mag, each mag I carry, with a chosen jhp for function testing, as fast as I can pull the trigger, two hands & one handed. IF the gun runs, good to go. The idea I need to fire 1/2 a case of duty ammo seems silly. The gun either works or it doesn't & that usually shows up sooner than later in my exp.

Some agreement, some disagreement.

There are a few auto pistols, the Kahr in particular, that actually specify break-in periods. I believe their number is 200 rounds. That is a minor detail and consistent with gaining confidence in most machines.

As for 300 rounds and the recommended procedure above, that seems pretty solid to me.

 

[Biggfoot44]

BB57's post covered most of the ground , but I'll address #4 :

The issue of residue from dirty burning ammo isn't really a gun issue . And on that topic , vertical ejecting is still the best way to go . Holding the revolver at an angle just gives gravity more opportunities of crud to fall into inopportune places .

I have an alternative Factor #4 - Headspace issues
Not so much with S&Ws , but certain popular brands of revolvers are notorious for sloppy headspace and/ or rough chambers But with major brand standard pressure ammo , the ammo will function reliably . But higher pressures , and bad things happen . Ejection issues , and worst case , cylinders not rotating .