Is the revolver now a 'hobby gun'?

[Ziggy2525]

Op do you believe gun manufacturers are treating revolvers as second class citizens or are today’s manufacturing processes just better suited to mass produce semiautos?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

semi’s have to be easier to produce. Compare a glock or recent M&P semi to the internals on a j-frame (my only revolvers). The semi’s would be way easier to mfg.

 

[gjgalligan]

I carry a revolver everyday. Been buying guns since the early 1970s. First semi auto pistol bought in the 1990s and it has been a mix ever since.
Never had a problem with revolvers but had several semi autos jam. As far as functioning (not talking accuracy) properly ammo can cause problems in semi autos but about the only problem in a revolver would be a high primer.
For SD I'll go with a wheelie most of the time.

 

[chief38]

Now might also be a good time to procure a few common wear items that need replacement on Revolvers from time to time. Also a great time to learn about fixing things yourself as shipping and costs will be more problematic and expensive in the near future.

 

[Onomea]

I no longer have any semis, and only five revolvers remaining out of a couple of dozen that I acquired. Newest revolver I ever owned was a 2000 Python Elite. (Still recall it fondly as I sold it for over four times what I paid for it.)

Where I am now, this residence, I have two revos, a 1958 Colt DS and a '70s 4" M65. I EDC the Colt and keep the Smith bedside. (At another residence, I have a 50's 4" Colt 357, a '60s 4" M10, and a 640-1.)

I've owned a couple of high end 1911s and a Belgium Browning HP, but I never shot them enough to feel fully comfortable with them. While I took a three-day SD course with a revolver some years ago, I shoot them rarely, too.

I suppose my revolvers are a bit of a hobby for me. I like having them around. I like the workmanship, the quality of the older guns. But I do have them for SD as well. I like the simplicity, the ease of handling, and the safety of a DA revolver.

I think for a guy like me, for my lifestyle, interests and level of shooting ability, they're a better choice than a semi.

 

[BloodyThumb]

It's certainly not the majority, but I still see a fair number of lightweight J frames and Ruger "plasteel" 5 shot 38's on a lot of ankles and laced on to duty boots. Some vintage (guns and officers) and some not.

 

[lkabug]

I have many semi-autos. I have many more revolvers. I often carry a Smith 66-3,
(black) 2.5 inch revolver. When not carrying the 66, I carry 642 or a 442 nickel plated, or a 10-5 hard chromed. I shoot semis very well, but being an old coot I learned to shoot revolvers at an early age, I shoot revolvers better. I carry revolvers for self defense. I shoot both as a hobby. However, when my kids, grandsons or sons-in-laws visit and we venture out to shoot, they mostly gravitate towards the semis. They seem not to want to take the time to learn the basics of revolver shooting. I suppose the revolvers are not "woke" enough for them.

 

[bigwheelzip]

They are all hobby firearms to me, but short reset trigger is easier for me to consistently operate rapidly. Hence the semi-auto preference for CC.

 

[needsmostuff]

Parts fall of Harley Davidsons all the time.
Guys that love them figure out a better way to bolt them back on and move on.
Nothing in life is gonna be perfect so you just got to figure out what is worth the effort , to you , and work the bugs out.
Cars ,trucks, women and guns may take a little effort to sort out . If not that important to you ,,MEH,, try a different direction.

 

[johngalt]

The only autos that interest me are single action (1911, M41, Hi-Power, etc.). I shoot them far more often than my revolvers.

I think manufacturing tolerances are such that it is easier to build an auto than a revolver. An auto seems to be able to have much more slop and still function reliably.

Revolvers are more reliable in theory, but when they do malfunction, I think it is harder to recover from it. For example, get some unburned powder under the ejector star and bind up the cylinder.

 

[500SNW]

I guess YMMV is the key to these sorts of topics. I really don't have much to say except that I never had trouble from my NEW revolvers. I trust them to go bang when I need them to. I wouldn't be concerned about CC'ing any of them...and that's precisely what I do.

 

[GypsmJim]

OP - You didn't upset me, so its my turn to try.

My perception is that in the olden days people took more care in shooting. They practiced a lot and became proficient. Today, rather than try and aim carefully, because you only have 6 shots, carry 17 shots and then just spray them all and hope for the best. (that's not a stereotype comment)

I think the manufacturing processes are ALL good and do not lean toward making one or the other product higher quality.

I also think that, in general (not absolute), that many companies are putting less R&D effort into revolvers. It's a business, and supply and demand rules profits.

My experience with RECENT autoloaders has not been that good. Except for a Glock (that's 100%) and a couple Ruger .22's (both 99%) I would not want to rely on a semi.

 

[BB57]

Both statements can be correct at the same time, and I suspect this is the case.

Generally speaking a simpler explanation is more likely to be true.

In other words modern production techniques are probably better suited to semi-autos than revolvers, rather than their also being some fiendish plot to intentionally sacrifice quality on revolvers as they are no longer used in law enforcement.

On the one hand, the vast majority of pistols (by make, model or just plain numbers and percentages) are also not used by law enforcement.

There are between 600,000 and 700,000 law enforcement officers in the US in any given year. The number of new officers issued or existing officers re-issued a handgun is a lot less. If the average LEO stays in law enforcement 7 years and each officer is issued a new service pistol, that's only 100,000 pistols per year.

Since there are about 4.5 million pistols made in the US each year (compared to about 850,000 revolvers. The odds of a pistol being used in law enforcement are still only about 45 to 1.


On the other hand, Modern MIM and CNC processes mean that reliable pistols can be made without significant hand fitting. The 1911 is a great example, as you can now get a reliable 1911 from various manufacturers using low skilled labor that are quite reliable. That was not the case in the past, where a high level of precision machining and hand fitting by actual humans was required.

I'll argue the same is not the case for a double action revolver, where hand fitting is still essential. I refuse to buy a current/recent production Ruger double action revolver based on 2 out of the last 3 I bought being improperly fitted with 1 of the 2 being returned to me twice, before they replaced it (all over an improperly cut forcing cone).

 

[Sistema1927]

I am neither a prophet, nor the son of a prophet, but I believe that we will see a revival of revolver popularity in the future.

 

[Mistered]

I think a big part of it is how guns have 'devolved' from a sporting/hunting/self-defense position to how they are seen now (by a large population of owners anyway) is for self-defense only.

I have talked to many people who believe there is no reason to own guns except for self defense.

Given that position ammo capacity is probably the most important requirement for these people (not all - or me however) and semi-autos are the only way to maximize ammo capacity.

Next seems to be the gun's action and simplicity of firing and safeties.

Heck, capacity has even ruled out the 1911 for many as a serious carry gun, along with it's single action design.

This has effectively ruled out revolvers as a consideration for MANY as a primary carry gun however I think like many here, I.E. capacity is NOT an issue and revolvers being as effective as ever for primary carry.

The industry has a lot to do with it as well, promoting semi autos along with high capacity, as them being the 'only' practical consideration as a carry gun.

 

[Wyo]

I'd say that depends on who you ask and what you're using it for. First, what is a "hobby" gun anyway? I'd would suggest that is a gun that is used for playtime only. Take it to the range, fiddle with it at the bench, etc., but don't use it for serious purposes. If that's the definition, I would personally say revolvers have not become hobby guns, even the new ones, because I use them often for serious carry, primarily when I am in the mountains. They make perfect sense in that environment for many reasons I won't go into here. Some autos work well too - the Glock 20 and the Colt Delta come to mind - but I prefer the revolvers and the autos don't offer any real advantages in any likely scenario. On the other hand, if you ask the guys who teach handgun defensive courses for a living, most will tell you that they believe the revolver is "obsolete." Most of them see no advantage in the revolver as a weapon carried specifically for defensive use, especially in an urban environment. I taught with John Farnam for years and I know that in the last 10 years I worked with him we didn't see a single revolver in a single class that I helped with. That would probably have encompassed around 300 students including cops, US Marshals, military and civilians. Had a revolver shooter showed up he would have had a hard time keeping up with the class. And reliability with quality autos these days is pretty much a non-issue. They all work about as well as can be reasonably expected and at least as well as most revolvers. So, I would say that among those who view the handgun as reserved largely for serious social use (a very narrow limit) the revolver is, indeed, a "hobby" gun. That's my thinking. Others may disagree.

 

[Doug44]

Not very many semis come anywhere close to the beauty of the revolver. Even a well used one. You just can’t beat them.

 

[cmj8591]

Will chocolate ice cream eliminate the demand for vanilla?

Revolvers of all stripes are just as viable as ever for whatever purpose a handgun is needed for. I doubt that they are going anywhere.

 

[Buford57]

Gypsum Jim started the train here and I'll ride it a little farther: people in the past took more care in their shooting (to paraphrase). I think it is true in part because people were more likely to own only one gun (or only one handgun). That leads to familiarity: only one manual of arms, one sight picture, one trigger pull, one draw sequence. The greater variety of guns available today and the economy that makes the "one-gun man" an historical curiosity makes even training a hobby, regardless of the platform.

I own and shoot plenty of guns of both varieties. I COULD carry any of them. In normal practice I DO carry either a 642 or a 9mm Shield. Neither has ever failed to feed, fire or eject.

I recently realized that I was spending more range time shooting my "hobby" guns (revolvers and semi-autos alike) than the two that I depend on for my full time job: staying alive. Changing that is as close to a NYs resolution as I have made.

 

[Skeet 028]

I have many revolvers...only one with a 'lock". no real problems with any. I recently sold(traded)a Kimber micro 9 that was not very reliable but I didn't give it much of a chance to work the kinks out. The only other semi auto I ever had a problem with was an Auto Ordnance 1911 that had about every part that could fall off do so. Re did it all as it happened and it was probably the most accurate 1911 I ever had...but when the rear sight came off I fixed it and sold it to a fellow that just had to have it. I still have the original green grip panels from that gun. I mostly carry semi autos but still have a few revolvers I like to have on me too. Almost all S&Ws

 

[stratplexi]

Revolvers are by no means just a hobby gun. Yes, some new guns have QC problems but that doesn’t dictate their use. Law enforcement transitioned to plastic years ago and that had nothing to do with QC problems. Revolvers are now a niche platform that are used for CCW, home protection, competition and hobby collecting. I seriously doubt the quality on new revolvers has somehow gone down compared to ‘back in the day’. Modern metallurgy, modern manufacturing, reduced hand fitting, tighter tolerances, improved designs, etc. all would promote improvements in new guns. Anyone looking to carry should put some serious test time into whatever they are planning to carry. I wouldn’t carry anything that I have’t put several hundred rounds through.

Having said all of the above, i have had great luck in all my gun purchases...revolvers, semis and long guns. I have not had a single problem in the 20-25 I have bought new. I am planninf to add a few revolvers this year and I will buy new.