".a renaissance of interest in revolvers. . ." Michael Bane. You think that's true?

[Chipperxd]

Greetings from the Left Coast. California magazine capacity is indeed limited to 10 rounds, but IMHO five- or six-shot revolvers are enough to settle such situations or allow a retreat towards a shotgun. (Ithaca Model 37 here. I do like me the mid-century classics.)

Same here in NY. If I lived in a state with no restrictions I would get a high cap plastic gun. but since we don't have that luxury, I have my 10 round EMP 4 and 627 8 shot snub as my carry, that is when I get my restriction lifted on my permit.

When I was in WA, my main carry where Glocks. I get that 6 shooters can get the job done but I always live by the rule that I would rather have it and not need it over needing it and not having it.

Everyone here has love of wheel guns, or we probably won't be on this forum but to knock a polymer gun as being junk is as ignorant as it gets.

 

[exdetsgt]

In the fifties, when I became an LEO, I was issued a well worn S&W Model 10 with a 6" pencil barrel. Not knowing any better I considered it a work of art and precision. Back then I was just a kid with eagle vision and made the department handgun team with it. I must have truly had eagle vision considering the "sights" on a box-stock Model 10!

Then I made detective, no more uniform and a Model 36 in a cross-draw.

I'm an old man now and I have yet to encounter a slicker trigger than those two revolvers had (some 1911's excepted).

 

[shouldazagged]

In the fifties, when I became an LEO, I was issued a well worn S&W Model 10 with a 6" pencil barrel. Not knowing any better I considered it a work of art and precision....I'm an old man now and I have yet to encounter a slicker trigger than those two revolvers had (some 1911's excepted).

You were right about the Model 10. It is a work of art. So's the little 36.

Me, biased? Certainly not.

 

[prairieviper]

Although I still love revolvers and I shoot a revolver (S&W 617) more than any gun I own, I'm not seeing them at the ranges that I go to and personally don't believe that there will ever be any kind resurgence of revolvers. The advantages of modern semi-autos are many and revolvers hold no advantages that I see, other than hunting applications.

My second most fired gun is my EDC, which happens to be a SIG P938. Go figure.

 

[blues7]

It must be true...

...I just ordered myself a 642 Airweight (no-lock) this morning!

Who could resist? And now I at least begin to fill the hole left behind when I sold my model 36 twenty years ago.

 

[PALADIN85020]

Although The advantages of modern semi-autos are many and revolvers hold no advantages that I see, other than hunting applications.

With all due respect, I beg to differ. Here are a few advantages that immediately come to mind:

1. Immensely different power levels and loads can be handled with aplomb in a revolver - not so in a semiauto.

2. The revolver does not fling empties into the air. While this is a convenience, it can also work out to being a tactical advantage - no trail of cases during or following a justifiable shooting.

3. Reliability is not as much of an issue as it used to be when considering revolvers vs. semiautos, but still, I have 99.9999% confidence that when I pull the trigger on a revolver, it will go "bang." Even more important, successive shots will also go "bang," unless you have a dud round, in which case, the drill is to simply pull the trigger again. Clearing a dud or a jam with a semiauto is a bit more involved and time-consuming.

4. Considering pin-point accuracy at longer range, the revolver will have a slight edge. With most semiautos, the sights and the barrel have a tenuous relationship - in short, there will usually be some slop in the system between the two.

5. Is it loaded and ready to fire? With a revolver, just look. With a semiauto, looking usually involves a press-check, or the added complexity of a loaded-chamber indicator. Even with a notch in the barrel hood, you might need a strong light and a magnifying glass.

6. The intimidation factor. The person on the other side, when confronted with a revolver, will see immediately that he is facing a loaded firearm - no doubt about it.

7. Condition of readiness is simple. Once loaded - all you have to do is pull the trigger. No worrying about manual safeties, magazine disconnect mechanisms, loose magazines, or not being fully in battery.

8. Don't worry about leaving the gun fully loaded for long periods of time. There will be no compressed springs to lose their power over time. It will be as ready to go 20 years from now as today.

9. With a semiauto, a dropped magazine will result in a 1-shot wonder, or a poor substitute for a hammer. No sweat with a revolver - it doesn't HAVE a magazine.

10. With some revolvers, they can be fired multiple times while still in a jacket pocket - the Centennials and shrouded hammer models most certainly. After the first shot with a semiauto, I can almost certainly guarantee a jam, precluding any further immediate use.

Your honor, I rest my case.

John

 

[75Vette]

VERY well put John. Thank you!!

 

[exdetsgt]

Yes, and everyone of the 10 points you touched on is valid.

My EDC is still a Shield 9 (8+1), but I'm preparing an SP101 (lighter springs, action job, better [wood] grips, Wright Leather Works Predator holster) and when it's ready I'll switch. I'd rather it would be an old Model 36 but can't find one, though the option of shooting .357 is nice with the Ruger.

 

[SeamasterSig]

Are revolvers making a comeback?

I hope not! That would just make them more expensive for those of us who have liked them all along But truth be told, I haven't noticed an increase or decrease in interest in wheel guns in the last few years.

 

[Sal1950]

The advantages of modern semi-autos are many and revolvers hold no advantages that I see, other than hunting applications.
.

IMO it's not so much about any "advantage" as it is fun in the shooting. How much of what we do really depends on a tactical advantage? Going out in the field plinking or to the range target shooting takes a big place in many handgunners life's.
I also enjoy an afternoon of shooting my 1858 Rem or 1860 Colt repro's. There's a certain something about stepping way back in time a dueing things the way the REAL cowboys did it.

 

[scout]

My take on guns:
Steel is REAL
Blue is TRUE (but recently three SS guns have came my way and I can 'adapt' - but they are still STEEL)
Wood is GOOD

Stainless is PAINLESS

 

[BornToLooze]

I've always been into revolvers. Anyone who hasn't been hiding under a rock the past several years knows the most sought after guns right now are Colt snake guns, particularly the Python. Just like decades ago when you'd hear everyone quote Dirty Harry movies and say, "Is that a 44 mag?", I'm hearing people compare every revolver they see to the Python.

If there's a renaissance it's probably more toward appreciating and owning the older revolvers. But the new ones I see are also very cool. I have a few newer models on my wish list but they're all Ruger's.

Everybody I know wants a Python because one of the guys on Walking Dead carries one. I want one because I've always heard it's one of the best .357s money can buy, I just don't have the money.

The whole reason I'm into revolvers is when I was younger I had a 10/22 that didn't have the most reliable magazine (apparently when you shoot 1000 rounds a weekend those things wear out), so when I turned 21 I didn't want a gun that took a magazine so the only thing I could find was a 28-2. I got the tactical bug and all the Glocks, Sigs, HKs just couldn't measure up to how nice my Smith was to shoot and I wound up getting rid of all of them. Then I got the 1911 bug and I've settled on a pair of Colts, so now I'm back into revolvers.

 

[Protocall_Design]

Don't get a Python. A S&W 686 is a better gun and you can buy 4 of them for the price of one Python. I've had them all, including 4 Pythons. I think the Python is the best looking revo ever made, but it ends there. The Smith is way tougher, you can get Smith parts easier and cheaper and they are a lot easier to work on. I build my own guns for competition, so I know the inside of them fairly well.

 

[dwever]

My take on guns:
Steel is REAL
Blue is TRUE (but recently three SS guns have came my way and I can 'adapt' - but they are still STEEL)
Wood is GOOD

Stainless is PAINLESS

Scandium is . . . , ummm . . . . I've got nothin'

 

[blues7]

Scandium is . . . , ummm . . . . I've got nothin'

Dandium?

(Or sore handium...Depends on your point of view, I guess.)

 

[LeftHand-Fu]

My take on guns:
Steel is REAL
Blue is TRUE (but recently three SS guns have came my way and I can 'adapt' - but they are still STEEL)
Wood is GOOD

Stainless is PAINLESS

Scandium is . . . , ummm . . . . I've got nothin'

Scandium, in plain, is dandy...and PAIN.

 

[HorizontalMike]

HUH?

Revolvers experiencing a revival?

IMO, NO WAY!
What I see is the start of the plastic pistol pause (P3)... when folks really understand a "survival" weapon vs. a "let's have a H_ll of a battle" weapon.

Personally, it is my intent to GET OUT OF TROUBLE, and not get into trouble...
Just sayin'...

 

[Redhawk500]

If there is a renaissance of interest in revolvers, I am not seeing it. There remains much interest in J frames for the CCW market. That said, I do not believe we will see a resurgence in mid-size revolver sales for self-defense or LE use without some strange law being passed.

Years ago, someone wrote that future revolver sales will primarily be J frames and large hunting-type revolvers. That is, in fact, what has happened.

I have even started to see articles in the last 5 years, mostly since the Shield was introduced, that pistols such as the Shield will one day eclipse even the J frames because of advantages in size, power, capacity, recoil control, etc.

Perhaps Mr. Bane is selling a product for an advertiser on his program? Perhaps he is privy to some fact others are not? I think the best way to interpret his comments is that some types of revolvers are selling, and on that show, he decided to showcase the large, sporting use type, which is not particularly useful for defense. It can be used, but it is perhaps not the ideal choice.

Unless automatics suddenly have an easier manual of arms, require less muscle strength to manipulate, have a better trigger than revolvers in single action, have the ability to fire everything from wax bullets to elephant stoppers, they won't fill all the niches. Bill Jordon got it right, under stress things need to be simple. Revolvers, at least until empty, accomplish this.

 

[Checkman]

Just an observation here. Last month we were in Bozeman, Montana. My wife loves to second-hand/antique shop so we stopped in at an absolutely huge pawnshop. Not surprisingly they had a very healthy gun selection, but what did surprise me was the prices on revolvers vs. semi-autos. The revolvers were consistently $75.00 - $200.00 more and there were many more revolvers for sale. That isn't typically the case down here in my corner of Idaho. I have to do some serious shopping when I'm looking to buy a nice used revolver. Anyway just an example of how things are different throughout this very large country of ours.

 

[DD357]

"IF THERE IS A RESURGENCE IN REVOLVERS, I WOULD CONCUR WITH OTHERS, THAT IT IS IN J FRAMES, AND LARGE HUNTING CALIBERS. OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T SEE IT."

Guess I'm of the same mind as One Eye Joe.