Are revolvers for amateurs?

[malph]

I agree with the many comments that the revolver is easier for a neophyte to get comfortable with.

It is the harder gun to master though. This is especially true in snubby form.

 

[max503]

Say all you want about how cool and well trained you are, but our sympathetic nervous systems have evolved over time, and in a crisis chances are you are going to lose your fine motor skills. IMHO, a revolver would be simpler to use in a situation like that. I bet my life on a J Frame.

The design of the humpback, and the Fitz modification were done for a reason. Lot's of people who buy semi-autos are influenced by marketing.
(Getting off my soapbox now.)

 

[Buzzzer]

1968 to 1972 I used the US Army Model 1911A-1 extensively, including combat in Vietnam. Then I joined the cops and carried the required 4" blued steel S&W or Colt .38Spl or .357 magnum until the "great enlightenment" period of late 1980s and early 1990s resulted in a general switch to semi-autos. After a few years with SA/DA automatics in 9mm and .45 I went back to the 1911-style. Continued with that after retirement.

Wrist surgery, elbow surgery, shoulder surgery, arthritis, cataracts in both eyes left me a bit challenged in confidently handling the semi-autos. Reached in the gun safe and retrieved my old 1979 S&W Model 64 2" round-butt .38 Spl. Much less effort in operating, manageable recoil, plenty of muscle memory from earlier years of training and experience.

I don't feel under-gunned for everyday civilian needs. I am very glad to have had the experiences that allowed me to make these transitions as life demanded.

Very well said. I've often wondered why more people don't think of/recommend revolvers for the advanced in age (had to word that right since I'm closer than I think). Especially older folks who never grew up with firearms and don't have a ton of experience with them. I know of one woman who, upon the recommendation of a gun shop owner, bought a Taurus 380 (can't remember the type but didn't have good reviews) and a 12 gauge pump shotgun. This woman is in her 70's! What type of idiot would recommend these types? I mean, I understand making a buck but this "guy", IMHO, is a total moron. She can't pull the slide back on the Taurus and I don't even want to think what would happen with that shotgun.

Unfortunately, we still have idiots in sales...

 

[cracker57]

I didn't even take the time to read the post from this thread, Here is My take.
Semi autos are for amateurs, Don't get me wrong I shoot semi's.
Revolvers are for the guys who know how to shoot.

 

[Tex1001]

Are semi automatic pistols for wanna be's?

Same thing.

ETA: Seems some people have to disparage what they don't have
(And probably don't know how to use effectively).
Case in point- I will probably never own a Glock, but If the man in my foxhole had one and could use it, I wouldn't make fun of him, as long as he didn't make fun of my 1911.

 

[GypsmJim]

Personally, I think that semis are for amateurs.

A PRO can get along just fine with only six rounds. To do that he / she must practice and be proficient.

They give semis to amateurs in the hope that with 17 rounds maybe they might hit something.

 

[RetCapt]

Personally, I think that semis are for amateurs.

A PRO can get along just fine with only six rounds. To do that he / she must practice and be proficient.

They give semis to amateurs in the hope that with 17 rounds maybe they might hit something.

Going on that line of thought, the overwhelming majority of LEOs are amateurs, despite being paid for what they do, which I have always thought was the definition of a professional. Please do correct me if I am wrong.

My department went for several years where the troops could carry an approved semi-auto, or the issue revolver (Smith 686). By the time the department decided to transition to mandatory issue and carry semi-autos, a majority were already carrying them.

No one put forth the argument that they could get along with only six shots. Speedloaders were issued with the revolvers and were necessary in all the shoots, regardless of format. No one that I was ever aware of resisted carrying speedloaders. We took pride on how quickly we could reload our revolvers and get back to shooting, even in darkness.

So am I to believe that the troops who had been carrying revolvers but then welcomed issue semi-autos transitioned from being professionals to being amateurs?

Tough talk is fine, until you hit the streets.

 

[AJ]

Revolvers' can be for amateurs and they can be for the most expert handgunners out there.

Much safer in the hands of an amateur than an auto. Less things to make it work, then an auto.

In the hands of an expert handgunner it is amazing! Look at Ed McGivern!

 

[pawngal]

My opinion as a senior age female, I've been a revolver shooter most of my life so I'm not a beginner nor am I a pro at it. The easiest gun for me to shot accurately is a K frame snubby. I don't shoot DA, I can shot it one-handed if needed. I can do OK with a J frame shooting in SA but to me I would never recommend a DA only to a beginner. I do OK with semi-autos made in the 1911 style. But striker fired, not for me.

 

[AJ]

1968 to 1972 I used the US Army Model 1911A-1 extensively, including combat in Vietnam. Then I joined the cops and carried the required 4" blued steel S&W or Colt .38Spl or .357 magnum until the "great enlightenment" period of late 1980s and early 1990s resulted in a general switch to semi-autos. After a few years with SA/DA automatics in 9mm and .45 I went back to the 1911-style. Continued with that after retirement.

Wrist surgery, elbow surgery, shoulder surgery, arthritis, cataracts in both eyes left me a bit challenged in confidently handling the semi-autos. Reached in the gun safe and retrieved my old 1979 S&W Model 64 2" round-butt .38 Spl. Much less effort in operating, manageable recoil, plenty of muscle memory from earlier years of training and experience.

I don't feel under-gunned for everyday civilian needs. I am very glad to have had the experiences that allowed me to make these transitions as life demanded.

I too, carried, qualified and competed with an M1911A1 or a derivative for 24 years in the Corps. Shot it competitively for a number of years after. My right hand and thumb are beat! Can not shoot my 342Ti anymore without max pain. Have switched to a S&W Model 60 Ladysmith for carry. All SS and mucho heavier than the 342Ti, my hand thanks me!

 

[John Patrick]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I agree with this!


Revolvers tend to be pretty simple to operate handguns. Maintenance is also pretty simple. Semi-auto pistols require a reliable magazine, ammo that will reliably feed and extract/eject, the slide has to be racked in order to chamber a round, and cleaning requires a degree of disassembly of the pistol. Revolvers are a better choice for the first time handgun owner. Sadly, revolvers are expensive to manufacture, polymer receiver pistols are much less expensive to manufacture, so the buyer goes into a gun shop with a budget and revolvers may be beyond their budget, so they get a plastic pistol.

More problematic , the slide needs to be racked, after the magazine is removed, to render the semi auto safe.

 

[Buford57]

Somebody once wrote "Beware the skilled amateur". The point being that the issue is commitment to the skill, and maybe innate talent, not status.

I worked with professionals who were amateurs because they didn't take the skill seriously and couldn't compensate with innate talent they didn't possess. A real professional (or skilled amateur) is dangerous in a good way with either type of handgun. An ordinary amateur is dangerous in a bad way with either type until and unless he or she puts in the training and practice time to acquire the needed skill. But probably less dangerous with a DA revolver than most anything else.

That's my opinion and it's worth every penny you paid for it.

 

[lrrifleman]

The concensus seems to be that revolvers are more appropriate for amateurs. I respectfully disagree. If you take a hard look at the supporting arguments, many of the opinions seem to come from LEOs that trained in combat-style shooting.

How do you define an amateur vs a professional? Is it their demonstrated proficiency on a Q target or a B27? If you look at the current shooting games, most are action-style games, typically scored as "time plus". Courses of fire may range from "Bad breath" to maybe 25 or 30 yards. How would these "so called" professionals fare if their targets were overlaid with decimal scoring rings, and scored accordingly? How would these "so called" professionals fare on the NRA 2700/Precision Pistol course of fire with their chosen semi-auto?

Remember, revolvers ruled on the NRA 2700, and slid aside with the advent of the accurized 1911! And these matches were slow fire at 50 yards, and timed and rapid fire at 25 yards, typically shot single action. I was not a LEO, but a medically retired teacher that shot for fun.

I was weened on S&W revolvers (initially K22s and K38s) and 1911s. Back in the '90s I had the pleasure of cleaning a dueling tree with a Model 27 shot SA against a 17 shot G17. Speed-wise, I could clear a table of 6 bowling pins or a rack of six plates with that 27 against a G17, and not require a reload! Not aiming to brag, but just last weekend at the Adaptive Defensive Shooting Summit using a Sig P320, I was able to shoot an IDPA match dropping only 6 points in 151.34 seconds placing 14th out of a field of 39 fellow challenged shooters using only 83 rounds, with most exhausting the recommended 120+ round load out.

Most games today are not revolver friendly, and speed is valued over precision at much closer distances. When shooting for precision, it is unlikely that most polymer pistols will be competitive against a revolver with a revolver capacity course of fire. Increase the required number of rounds and look for faster speeds, and the revolver loses ground.

Personally, I would rather engage a semi-auto trained speed shooter at an extended distance than a revolver trained shooter using either a revolver or a semi-auto, I believe my chances of survival would be greater!

Plus, how many neophyte shooters today have an educated understanding of what they want to buy versus what the sales clerk recommends?

 

[AJ]

The concensus seems to be that revolvers are more appropriate for amateurs. I respectfully disagree. If you take a hard look at the supporting arguments, many of the opinions seem to come from LEOs that trained in combat-style shooting.

How do you define an amateur vs a professional? Is it their demonstrated proficiency on a Q target or a B27? If you look at the current shooting games, most are action-style games, typically scored as "time plus". Courses of fire may range from "Bad breath" to maybe 25 or 30 yards. How would these "so called" professionals fare if their targets were overlaid with decimal scoring rings, and scored accordingly? How would these "so called" professionals fare on the NRA 2700/Precision Pistol course of fire with their chosen semi-auto?

Remember, revolvers ruled on the NRA 2700, and slid aside with the advent of the accurized 1911! And these matches were slow fire at 50 yards, and timed and rapid fire at 25 yards, typically shot single action. I was not a LEO, but a medically retired teacher that shot for fun.

I was weened on S&W revolvers (initially K22s and K38s) and 1911s. Back in the '90s I had the pleasure of cleaning a dueling tree with a Model 27 shot SA against a 17 shot G17. Speed-wise, I could clear a table of 6 bowling pins or a rack of six plates with that 27 against a G17, and not require a reload! Not aiming to brag, but just last weekend at the Adaptive Defensive Shooting Summit using a Sig P320, I was able to shoot an IDPA match dropping only 6 points in 151.34 seconds placing 14th out of a field of 39 fellow challenged shooters using only 83 rounds, with most exhausting the recommended 120+ round load out.

Most games today are not revolver friendly, and speed is valued over precision at much closer distances. When shooting for precision, it is unlikely that most polymer pistols will be competitive against a revolver with a revolver capacity course of fire. Increase the required number of rounds and look for faster speeds, and the revolver loses ground.

Personally, I would rather engage a semi-auto trained speed shooter at an extended distance than a revolver trained shooter using either a revolver or a semi-auto, I believe my chances of survival would be greater!

Plus, how many neophyte shooters today have an educated understanding of what they want to buy versus what the sales clerk recommends?

Spent a lot of time watching new shooters and older folks trying to manage a Auto in both the gun shop and on the range. Lots of fumbling with both types of guns. If they can learn on a revolver, then an auto usually comes easier.

Spent a lot of time on ranges teaching combat pistol and just plain marksmanship. Prefer to start them out on a revolver and then work them up to a auto. The military said I had to start them out on an auto. By the time they actually shot the pistol there was a lot of classroom time spent learning the mechanics of the piece and discussion on how it operated.

A lot of the older folks can not rack the slide on an auto. Then they are just down to throwing it at the target.

 

[John Patrick]

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.

The labels are old and superseded.

A G19 is in no way a compact semi auto today. Maybe a G48…

 

[John Patrick]

The concensus seems to be that revolvers are more appropriate for amateurs. I respectfully disagree. If you take a hard look at the supporting arguments, many of the opinions seem to come from LEOs that trained in combat-style shooting.

How do you define an amateur vs a professional? Is it their demonstrated proficiency on a Q target or a B27? If you look at the current shooting games, most are action-style games, typically scored as "time plus". Courses of fire may range from "Bad breath" to maybe 25 or 30 yards. How would these "so called" professionals fare if their targets were overlaid with decimal scoring rings, and scored accordingly? How would these "so called" professionals fare on the NRA 2700/Precision Pistol course of fire with their chosen semi-auto?

Remember, revolvers ruled on the NRA 2700, and slid aside with the advent of the accurized 1911! And these matches were slow fire at 50 yards, and timed and rapid fire at 25 yards, typically shot single action. I was not a LEO, but a medically retired teacher that shot for fun.

I was weened on S&W revolvers (initially K22s and K38s) and 1911s. Back in the '90s I had the pleasure of cleaning a dueling tree with a Model 27 shot SA against a 17 shot G17. Speed-wise, I could clear a table of 6 bowling pins or a rack of six plates with that 27 against a G17, and not require a reload! Not aiming to brag, but just last weekend at the Adaptive Defensive Shooting Summit using a Sig P320, I was able to shoot an IDPA match dropping only 6 points in 151.34 seconds placing 14th out of a field of 39 fellow challenged shooters using only 83 rounds, with most exhausting the recommended 120+ round load out.

Most games today are not revolver friendly, and speed is valued over precision at much closer distances. When shooting for precision, it is unlikely that most polymer pistols will be competitive against a revolver with a revolver capacity course of fire. Increase the required number of rounds and look for faster speeds, and the revolver loses ground.

Personally, I would rather engage a semi-auto trained speed shooter at an extended distance than a revolver trained shooter using either a revolver or a semi-auto, I believe my chances of survival would be greater!

Plus, how many neophyte shooters today have an educated understanding of what they want to buy versus what the sales clerk recommends?

I work a gun counter every Sunday morning. So many new-to-guns people come in it's amazing. New to handguns or not, the great majority of customers fumble with a semi auto.

Even after being shown a couple of times, most can't figure out how to release the slide, can't figure out how to drop the magazine. And in MD, to buy a handgun, they've already been through a not insignificant training program. And then there is dropping the magazine, if they can figure that out, and thinking the gun is clear.

Show them a revolver (which they've not been told by YouTube or Billy Bob that they ought to look at) and, after being shown how to operate the cylinder release, they don't fumble…

For the vast majority of new-to-handgun purchasers, the revolver is the far better choice, imo.

 

[quikdraw67]

Not being a bragging narcissist, but I'd qualify as a skilled amateur IMHO.

I shoot almost every Saturday, 25 rounds per handgun. Could be a mix of 3rd Generation S&W pistols, S&W revolvers, 1911's, and/or Glock or Walther striker fired pistols.

I can switch between the different manual of arms with no problem. And I'm accurate.

Now, full disclosure. I shoot indoors, 25ft, 2 handed stance. Lately I've been doing single handed shooting as a next step and a challenge.

 

[Gene L]

Revolvers are great handguns for those who don't want to practice with them. Instructing people who aren't interested is useless. They can't process the information. It's kinda like an attempt me in calculous. I have no interest in math. I don't have an interest.

Something to point out is demonstrated at my LE agency and one of our instructions to shooting for citizens who brought their own weapon to become familiar with them, many of which had never fired a handgun in their lives. It was a confidence course and also in SD. The first few classes were for women and some of them brought revolvers.

The deputies teaching basic safety measures on the range were veterans. But none understood how to effectively load the chambers. They came from a Glock Generation and saw no need to in to learn revolver protocol.

My wife had no interest in shooting at all. Talking to her about shooting was like instructing me in algebra. I kept a 1911 under my bed and a .357 on her side of the bed. On the very few times when I was gone and she heard noises, the took the .357. Not that she offered much of a threat, but thank God nothing happened. I say that to say this: inexperienced shooters who want a "simple gun go for a revolver. Pull the trigger and the gun goes boom. No safeties, just a point and shoot.

We're at a place in time when LEOs who know Glocks don't know how to effectively load a revolver.

 

[theprincipal]

The labels are old and superseded.

A G19 is in no way a compact semi auto today. Maybe a G48…

The labels are the labels. If you don't like what the manufacturers call something (micro, subcompact, compact, full size, long slide, etc.), then call it what you wish. That being said, when speaking about a pistol size on an Internet forum, it's easier to go with the standard size label then to read everyone's mind on the topic. The firearm size that I was recommending, which is a g19, p10c/p07, p229, etc., sized firearm, for a first time firearm, one gun, firearm owner, I would still recommend.

Now that you fully understand what size I was recommending and we are over the semantics, what are your thoughts on this?

 

[LostintheOzone]

I know this, while I am not fond of any guns being pointed at me, at this point in time I would be more worried if someone was pointing a quality revolver or for that matter a 1911, than a new style semi auto. The chances that the owner of those "old outdated guns" actually knowing how to shoot it are considerably higher. I bet the number of people buying their first gun and picking plastic semi autos is about 100 semis for every revolver. Of course then I also get real nervous around people with no experience handling guns of any type. So, there is that.

A Glock or any striker would make me real nervous. That's probably 90% of the cops in your zip code.

I like DA/SA anything. I'm a huge fan of the HK LEM trigger also. Lives by my bed. If I couldn't have LEM I would have DA/SA bottom feeder. I have several of those also. If I couldn't have that it would be a DA/SA revolver. I truly don't know how many of those I have so don't ask. Last purchase was a model 28.