Are revolvers for amateurs?

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

The only difference between an amateur and a professional is that a professional gets paid for it. Charlie Askins, Bill Jordan, Jim Cirillo were all revolver men, Bill Jordan noted that Charlie Askins only became an auto advocate after his gunfighting days were over.

 

[Laketime]

That's like saying the polymer guns brought about the era of the professionals. In my opinion it takes quite a lot more practice to become proficient with a double action revolver than a semi auto.

 

[Faulkner]

What kind of firearm would I suggest to my non-gun enthusiast cousin who would like a firearm for home protection?

A revolver likely would be on the top of the list. That doesn't mean they are JUST for amateurs.

 

[Pef]

In the current American Rifleman, a reader wrote in, "I believe that, for anyone who is not professionally involved with handguns, the revolver has inherently simple and effective safety features that cannot be accommodated by the semiautomatic pistol."

That kind of stuck in my craw. Professionals used revolvers for decades, till that Austrian guy undercut revolver prices. And the record of professional semiauto use is full of NDs and spray and prays. It's possible that us amateurs have a similar ND rate, or worse, with semiautos but I know of no statistics on the matter.

Then, to suggest that semiautos can't "accommodate" a DA trigger? Pure silliness.

Of all the letters they receive, they chose this one to print. Sigh.

I'm not sure what the writer meant by "professionally involved," but for novice shooters, I agree with the sentiment.

I have shot quite a bit, and a lot of handguns - revolvers, striker fired, hammer fired SAO and DA/SA.

What's in my nightstand? A SW 686+.

If it were just me, I might have something else now. But I have confidence that if I am not here and my wife or daughter would need it, they could use it without it jamming from a limp hold or severe slide bite, etc.

For those reasons I do think the revolver is a solid choice for the novice/inexperienced shooter looking for a HD weapon.

 

[LVSteve]

In the current American Rifleman, a reader wrote in, "I believe that, for anyone who is not professionally involved with handguns, the revolver has inherently simple and effective safety features that cannot be accommodated by the semiautomatic pistol."

That kind of stuck in my craw. Professionals used revolvers for decades, till that Austrian guy undercut revolver prices. And the record of professional semiauto use is full of NDs and spray and prays. It's possible that us amateurs have a similar ND rate, or worse, with semiautos but I know of no statistics on the matter.

Then, to suggest that semiautos can't "accommodate" a DA trigger? Pure silliness.

Of all the letters they receive, they chose this one to print. Sigh.

The quoted passage does have a touch of elitism about it and is also incorrect in the technical sense.

Yes, you can have true double action semi-autos, the Sig P250 and SCCY CPX pistols are two I can name straight away. But if you ever see a review of one, the wailing and gnashing of teeth is biblical. "There's no reset, I have to release the trigger all the way!" they complain. Well, DUH! that's the way it's supposed to work.

 

[rockquarry]

The quoted passage does have a touch of elitism about it and is also incorrect in the technical sense.

Yes, you can have true double action semi-autos, the Sig P250 and SCCY CPX pistols are two I can name straight away. But if you ever see a review of one, the wailing and gnashing of teeth is biblical. "There's no reset, I have to release the trigger all the way!" they complain. Well, DUH! that's the way it's supposed to work.

Only the most inexperienced would make such a complaint. They truly give themselves away as to their basic gun knowledge.

 

[Narragansett]

I think that what he is trying to say is that the revolver is best suited to the less than proficient. That said, he could have said it better.

Personally, I gave up reading gun mags decades ago, when the great writers passed. I don't need to read any more 7 yard tests, and hear writers say that every new gun that comes off the line is great and has a place in my arsenal. We all know some are junk.

I get the American Rifleman and read the Armed Citizen, the Dope Bag, and This Old Gun. Then it is off to recycling

 

[Puller]

I'm thinking that the only people who actually write in to a gun magazine editorial and complain about such things are those not savvy enough to log onto a gun forum and whine and moan like the rest of us.

 

[theprincipal]

I don't think that you can limp wrist a revolver, but they are often more difficult for beginners in regards to accuracy and follow up shots. Considering the accuracy issue, capacity plays into things. My take has always been that a beginner should stick to a reliable compact semiautomatic pistol, and get the necessary training and practice time.

 

[Old cop]

Is it still true that a lot of LEO only shoot once or twice a year, at a range?

Yes, we only qualified twice a year @ my agency. I carried a revolver for the first 20 years of my career & it served me well. When we transitioned to the Glock I was all for it b/c of the superior amount of ammo, AND it put us on even footing w/the bad guys we had to face.

 

[Inusuit]

After 25 years of providing S&W revolvers to the students in our NRA Basic Pistol classes, we are now holding our first class with the much-aligned "plastic" semi autos. We instructors debated this change at great length and took the following issues into consideration:

1. .38 Special ammunition is at least twice as expensive as 9mm even when .38 can be found locally.

2. Despite the considerations mentioned by posters in this thread, new shooters are likely to end up with semi automatic handguns when they choose to purchase their own. Price, availability, and input from others often drive that decision

3. If new shooters are trained with semi autos and master all those fiddly bits, they can probably transition to revolvers safely and with minimal instruction. Moving from revolvers to semi autos is a different story.

We did have some students who struggled with accuracy requirements, primarily due to the difference between the single action pull on a revolver with 10,000 or so rounds and the typical long and mushy"plastic" trigger. Instruction on staging the trigger helped some to meet the requirements.

 

[gregintenn]

Not many can call Jerry Miculek an amateur. He's made a good living with a revolver.

 

[smoothshooter]

Yes, and no.

For the average homeowner, non-gun enthusiast, who is simply going to leave it in the nightstand until they need it, the simplicity is a benefit. They are the definition of amateur.

If you are going to use a revolver professionally, you'd better be darn good with it, and that requires a little more dedication and skill than the average semi-auto. Not an amateur.

Having spent nearly 30 years teaching cops to shoot, I don't believe the 'spray and pray' changed much over the years, though the supply of bullets in the gun got larger...

Sometimes I wonder if it would be better if most police departments went back to revolvers. They miss over 70% of the time anyway, and a more limited capacity might cut back on the spray and pray shooting situations with all the liability issues that come from innocent bystanders being hit.

 

[WR Moore]

After reading a comment or two above, I recalled that after we adopted semis, and a couple of years for the troops to get used to their new sidearm, we were able to eliminate the "qualification enhancement program" for those who had been qualifying in the 70% range. While it may be more difficult to acquire all the skills to be absolute master of the semi, they are generally easier to shoot and hit with.

I also have to respectfully disagree with the poster above who recommends compact semis. Generally, full size guns are easier to use, but it somewhat depends upon hand size and strength.

BTW, while we've been touting the revolver, having worked for an entity that had us doing a LOT of training, there's one major issue with a majority of revolver training. The only immediate action drill in most such training-if they get any-is "just pull the trigger again." That doesn't begin to cover the possible malfunctions of the revolver. Now there is no IAD for a bullet lodged between cylinder and barrel, but there's a lot of other stuff that we saw go wrong. Many of which can be solved by a hearty yank on the hammer spur, but not all.

 

[Ghost Magnum]

I remember reading somewhere that said that "revolvers are the easiest guns to shoot. But the most difficult to shoot well."

 

[theprincipal]

After reading a comment or two above, I recalled that after we adopted semis, and a couple of years for the troops to get used to their new sidearm, we were able to eliminate the "qualification enhancement program" for those who had been qualifying in the 70% range. While it may be more difficult to acquire all the skills to be absolute master of the semi, they are generally easier to shoot and hit with.

I also have to respectfully disagree with the poster above who recommends compact semis. Generally, full size guns are easier to use, but it somewhat depends upon hand size and strength.

BTW, while we've been touting the revolver, having worked for an entity that had us doing a LOT of training, there's one major issue with a majority of revolver training. The only immediate action drill in most such training-if they get any-is "just pull the trigger again." That doesn't begin to cover the possible malfunctions of the revolver. Now there is no IAD for a bullet lodged between cylinder and barrel, but there's a lot of other stuff that we saw go wrong. Many of which can be solved by a hearty yank on the hammer spur, but not all.

I think it was me who recommended the compact. I agree that most are more accurate shooting a full size pistol, due to sight radius. I recommended a compact model, which would be your typical Glock 19 or CZ p10c sized pistol, because it is a "middle sized pistol", which can be comfortably used for both CCW and home defense for a decent percentage of the population. I think the compact is a great versatile starting point for a beginner. Then they can go up or down in size for their second pistol, if they so choose. I may be splitting hairs here.

 

[LVSteve]

I think it was me who recommended the compact. I agree that most are more accurate shooting a full size pistol, due to sight radius. I recommended a compact model, which would be your typical Glock 19 or CZ p10c sized pistol, because it is a "middle sized pistol", which can be comfortably used for both CCW and home defense for a decent percentage of the population. I think the compact is a great versatile starting point for a beginner. Then they can go up or down in size for their second pistol, if they so choose. I may be splitting hairs here.

Lol, now we are into the semantics thing again. I would call a G19 or CZ P10c "duty size", although I would put them at the smaller end of that category.

 

[theprincipal]

Lol, now we are into the semantics thing again. I would call a G19 or CZ P10c "duty size", although I would put them at the smaller end of that category.

I don't disagree with you, but I call them "compact" because firearm companies call that size compact, hence the "c" in p10c, as opposed to the p10f (full size) or p10s (subcompact). Glock has the same descriptor on their G19 page.

 

[jimmyj]

REAL MEN CARRY REVOLVERS ! (that's why I carry a semi-auto)

 

[WR Moore]

The only difference between an amateur and a professional is that a professional gets paid for it.

Amateurs practice until they do something right. Professionals practice until they can't do it wrong.