Can we show Revolver's are not as reliable as today's Semi-Autos

[Ziggy2525]

I will be interested to see what they have to say about my very long post on reliability. I used to do those things for a living.

Back in the old days, when I was working as a dishwasher at the local diner, I used to moonlight in the evenings at the local nuclear power plant doing some equipment reliability calcs and FMEA analysis do determine the probability of equipment failure if a loss of coolant accident occurred. Back in those days it wasn't very highly thought of work so was mostly limited to the unemployables.

The one thing I'd say about your post based on my limited experience is no matter how well you try to conceptualize the various modes of failure, without some basis to quantify the actual failure rates of the various components, the assessment will be off. But then again, I was just washing dishes for a living.

 

[jtcarm]

By their very operation revolvers will ALWAYS be more reliable than a semiautomatic, given we are talking about quality firearms on both sides. The ammo in a semi needs to have a good magazine, seated properly, a flawless transfer from the mag to the chamber, fire and propel the bullet, move the slide to reset the trigger and load the next round, eject cleanly despite any issues with the gun itself or the shooters grip and actions and then do that every time you pull the trigger. The ammo in the revolver needs to fire and propel the bullet...and that's it. Only then can we start talking about possible issues with the mechanical parts of the guns themselves...

After seeing other posts from the OP, it's obvious he's not interested in a real discussion and is just trolling to get a rise out of revolver shooters.

He's not getting any more of my bandwidth.

 

[muddocktor]

After seeing other posts from the OP, it's obvious he's not interested in a real discussion and is just trolling to get a rise out of revolver shooters.

He's not getting any more of my bandwidth.

I have to agree with you, jtcarn. Just trolling the revolver forums to get a rise out of the revolver shooters.

I have revolvers (quite a few) and semi auto handguns in metal frame and also polymer plastic fantastics. I have had mechanical malfunctions with both, but there is just more to malfunction with a semi auto, in my opinion. To each their own. If you like the plastic bottom feeders then good for you. I happen to like something more substantial in hand, but that is what I feel best with. The added weight mitigates recoil and lets me get back on target a bit quicker, but that is my experience. But I don't go into the bottom feeder forums and troll them with statements about my revolvers being more reliable than their bottom feeders.

 

[fortyshooter]

Well my only two plastic fantastic semi-autos would laugh and run circles around my new Model 69 Combat Magnum 4 shooter right now!

 

[WC145]

I like revolver's. I enjoy shooting the and just looking at them, however, I no longer believe they are as reliable as a well designed Law Enforcement Semi-Auto.

I KNOW this is an opinion. I would like to back it up with facts but without an employee leaking information or a analysis of a revolver or long term tests we can't prove it.

It's not the lock in Smith & Wesson or the changing of manufacturing processes to MIM with all major manufacturers.

I still think they better serve a gun owning population that need a gun to stored in a home and ready for use but used seldom and given little attention.

However, I think the reliability of carried often and shot often Semi-Auto design used for LEO use is more reliable for a more active an well trained user.

The issue is basically the engineering and manufacturing processes used in today's semi-autos and their widespread use ensure manufacturers compete to win these markets and put their best products forward.

In contrast, Revolvers aside for security use in some cities in the US are consumer grade products. The LOCK demonstrates this. Even on competition models like the Competitor or Performance Center guns.

What pushed me to this post was watching a youtube video of a 7 Shot GP100 which could not close it's cylinder because some brass specs were a little too large. Maybe the rims expanded or were out of spec, but when a revolver can't be closed because of it's design when loaded the manufacturer has reached a new low. Unfortunately this is not new, I had a new Colt double action revolver fail to function with almost all brands of ammo 20+ years ago. It only held 6 rounds. Just before they stopped making revolvers. I can see why they stopped. Why ruin your reputation.

I no longer believe in revolvers...

The problems with opinions is that they are just that, opinions, and many, such as this one, have no basis in fact. And, no matter how much you want such an opinion to be true, it just isn't.

And, the example you cite as pushing you to this post is not a failure of the revolver in question but the ammunition. If you had ammunition that one would use in an auto that suffered from the same issue would not chamber properly in an auto nor allow the slide to close.

Good luck in your quest to prove your opinion but I'm afraid it's doomed to failure.

 

[Nanuk]

But what about the revolver shooter that trains alot? I carried a 357 mag for decades on duty and shot on the pistol team. Now that I am retired I still carry a 357 mag and shoot competitively.

What you mean is more training is required to run a semi well.

 

[Fchewy]

I have one of the new 7 shot GP100's with 2.5" barrel and have ran across only one brand of ammo thats "tight" when loaded with 7, 6 is fine in it, the ammo is cheap WWB target rounds, all of my defense loads from multiple brands work fine.
IMO really ain't any different than a Semi that won't feed certain brands or hollow points and then you also have the magazine problems to deal with like the Shield that double over own themselves and quit working, I own a 9mm Shield and like it though, or like the Sig P365 that seems to have multiple issues.

 

[Engieman]

Further testing is required. Only way to be absolutely sure is to buy as many S&W revolvers possible and see if they all shoot. Can't be too careful when scientifically testing theories.

 

[MightyMouse4466]

I never saw a revolver fail to fire due to limp wristing.

I have had my 629 fatally jam due to limp wristing by a friend, it was cheap factory reload ammo, and the bullet slid forward in it's case and jammed the revolver to the point it would not fire, would not rotate at all, could not open cylinder, had to push the bullet into the case for it to rotate, complete catastrophic failure to function.

This type of failure turned the revolver into a club.

I love revolvers, but prefer to carry autos, for more capacity, and for the ease of correcting malfunctions, just replace mag and rack.

 

[JayFramer]

I like revolver's. I enjoy shooting the and just looking at them, however, I no longer believe they are as reliable as a well designed Law Enforcement Semi-Auto.

I KNOW this is an opinion. I would like to back it up with facts but without an employee leaking information or a analysis of a revolver or long term tests we can't prove it.

It's not the lock in Smith & Wesson or the changing of manufacturing processes to MIM with all major manufacturers.

I still think they better serve a gun owning population that need a gun to stored in a home and ready for use but used seldom and given little attention.

However, I think the reliability of carried often and shot often Semi-Auto design used for LEO use is more reliable for a more active an well trained user.

The issue is basically the engineering and manufacturing processes used in today's semi-autos and their widespread use ensure manufacturers compete to win these markets and put their best products forward.

In contrast, Revolvers aside for security use in some cities in the US are consumer grade products. The LOCK demonstrates this. Even on competition models like the Competitor or Performance Center guns.

What pushed me to this post was watching a youtube video of a 7 Shot GP100 which could not close it's cylinder because some brass specs were a little too large. Maybe the rims expanded or were out of spec, but when a revolver can't be closed because of it's design when loaded the manufacturer has reached a new low. Unfortunately this is not new, I had a new Colt double action revolver fail to function with almost all brands of ammo 20+ years ago. It only held 6 rounds. Just before they stopped making revolvers. I can see why they stopped. Why ruin your reputation.

I no longer believe in revolvers...

Poppycock.

I've had out-of-specification brass keep my Glock slide from going into battery.

You think that's only a revolver problem? It's not, period. And malf you can name with a revolver can be had with an auto. The reverse is NOT true.

Revolvers are more reliable. They are more durable and dependable, they are not outdated. The men that shoot them, true shootists that grew up in times when men were men, know how to shoot more than most of today's pray and sprays with their bucket of bullets under the gun blasting.

A fightsman so armed with a wheelgun of his chosing is today no less a foe than when Sammy Colt whipped up the first one in his shop over a century ago. I'd take one in a gun fight ANY DAY over the new jamomatic tupperware. WOOD AND STEEL rule the day. Plastic don't belong in no guns no how that's what ma daddy taught me.

 

[Struckat]

The revolver is not at fault for a crimp jump stoppage, that is an ammunition issue.

I reload and take great care in my process which results in better quality control than factory ammo. I feel that is a big part of the reliability of my Sigs and CZs. The only stopages I have had were due to poor quality factory ammo.

I have had crimp jump in a revolver. That was part of the learning process as a new reloader. That was an ammo issue.
If your revolver stops due to crud, that is a maintenance issue. If it crud's up after only a small number of rounds, that is an ammo issue.

I have had only one firearm actually break, that was a revolver. The hand that turns the cyl broke inside the gun during normal operation. I can only assume that was a bad part.

My gut tells me that the revolver is more reliable, but there is a lot required to prove such a point. A point that no one will spend the time and money required to prove scientifically.

I carry both, and trust both equally.

If the OP is indeed a troll, then wow, that was quite a post just to get rise out of some old bones.

 

[Nanuk]

I have had my 629 fatally jam due to limp wristing by a friend, it was cheap factory reload ammo, and the bullet slid forward in it's case and jammed the revolver to the point it would not fire, would not rotate at all, could not open cylinder, had to push the bullet into the case for it to rotate, complete catastrophic failure to function.

This type of failure turned the revolver into a club.

I love revolvers, but prefer to carry autos, for more capacity, and for the ease of correcting malfunctions, just replace mag and rack.

That was an ammo failure, not a gun failure.

 

[500SNW]

That was an ammo failure, not a gun failure.

That's true, but the point was that "limp wristing" a revolver enhances the centrifugal forces on the bullets and makes crimp jump more likely...whereas a very rigid grip keeps muzzle flip down to a minimum and reduces the "whiplash" on the bullets.

 

[mdf9183]

I was always a wheel gun guy when I was a LEO. Even when the dept. went to autos in the late 80s I kept my Mod 19. I was plainclothes by then but a lot of the investigators went to autos but I was not comfortable with them. I did get a S&W 915 but never carried it. I still mostly shoot revolvers but I do have several autos that I shoot also. There is just something about a revolver that it will go bang every time along as you keep it clean and use good ammo.

 

[kci-mia]

I took a 3 day revolver self-defense course years ago with a well known instructor. There were 16 students in our class and most of us had 4" service revolver from S&W (K&L frame and one N frame) and Ruger (GP100). I don't remember any Colt revolver in that class. I fired about 1,100 rounds in 3 days using my 4" S&W model 19 (I brought a pair of 4" model 10 as back up) which was about what everybody else fired. I was firing my handload of Winchester 158gr JHP with enough Winchester 231 to get average of 875 fps from 4" barrel so it was not a mild load. By end of the class 4 revolvers had mechanical failures which made it unusable. More importantly 3 could not be repaired at the range (one Ruger revolver failed on first day but was repaired and back on line on second day). I was told by the instructor that in an average class 2 or 3 revolvers will have mechanical failure during the course.

I believe revolvers are more reliable than service pistols but revolvers are not as durable as service pistols.

 

[153]

In my experience Murphy visits revolvers and semi-autos, he is very open minded.

A clean, well maintained firearm and good quality ammo are the best insurance.

 

[shawn mccarver]

In the mid-70s, I had the opinion that revolvers were more reliable for LE and defense that semi-autos. I am not sure why I thought that in light of the military's adoption of the 1911 in, well, 1911.

That said, one day, I was on the range, and my Model 27 locked up tight. At home, on the bench, under a bright light, I carefully disassembled, and after taking out almost everything, a tiny sliver of lead fell loose from the area near the frame window for the cylinder stop. After a careful wipe down, light oil, and reassembly, everything worked like brand new.

It then became apparent to me that a tiny piece of almost anything could lock up a revolver, and that it takes special tools and a work bench to disassemble and to reassemble.

That day, the Model 27 was put away in its box. A range toy Colt Government Model .45 Model 1911A1 Series 70 replaced it as my every day carry. Ball ammo is so reliable as to be monotonous, and it does nicely, and the 5 inch 1911 carries easier because it is flatter, and a new-fangled "Summer Special" became the holster of choice (Mexican carry does nicely also). Carried in Condition One (and only), that day is the day I realized that Uncle Jeff had it right.

From that point on, the revolver was the range toy (K22), at least until it was replaced by Bill Ruger's 22 Auto. They are nearly impossible to clean, so I just don't - at least I haven't really, for all these years. So, the beautiful S&W works of art are now put away, to be enjoyed more for their beauty than for their practicality. The self-loaders have become the work horses.

When I discovered that the 1911 and the Ruger can go thousands of rounds without much more than keeping them lubed, I pretty well came to the conclusion I had been wrong.

S&Ws are still the go to revolvers of choice (when I want to go to one), but I find that the semi-auto pistol does nicely for me. And, there is nothing more handsome than a heavy S&W revolver. That said, for me anyway, the revolver has been replaced as a defense weapon so long ago that the idea that self-loaders are just being discovered in the last couple of decades is a source of endless amusement.

Don't get me wrong - a heavy Magnum is a source of comfort if that is all you have. That said, the 1911 seems to have been the correct answer to a question asked over a hundred years ago, and it is only in the last 40 to 50 years, give or take, that the rest of us are getting it.

While it may seem quaint, a pair of 1911s and a few cases of its big 230 grain cartridges are very comforting to have around - for that day.

 

[Practical]

Ziggy2525 had the best response I heard. My coworker felt there could be a statistical model of reliability based on number of rounds shot and parts replaced in the manufacturers testing regimen. Some 3d modeling might show motion and predicted wear as well he thought.

I think a usage profile for a product best likely indicates expected reliability.

And honestly this fits my preconceived notion of buying guns designed for heavy competition for reliability for number of rounds fired matching that type of game or buying a handgun for self defense which was designed for the LEO market to benefit.

Maybe this explains the popularity of the certain S&W models and dash numbers like the 686-4 with forged parts being a preferred model. It is peak S&W production material and methods for the model, the model is designed for the LEO market and it has all features that the market demanded before the 686 moved to a consumer handgun with the Lock, MIM materials to keep costs down by reducing labor. The gun product category is now a consumer product.

This is my reasoning why certain models though having high reliability now have risks of having 'potentially' lower reliability than former models.

This does not mean they are not highly reliable, but they as a product category are not as reliable as other guns.

Whether or NOT you and I need that 'degree' of quality is up to us as purchasers.

 

[Practical]

I have formed my opinion on this subject. the guns I trust will be ones designed for the application I performing with them and will be leaders in their product category.

Which means I will own at least ONE glock and one S&W J-Frame that is either new and broken in or will be a higher quality one like an M&P revolver.

 

[Elkins45]

An auto shooter has no idea if the 17 rounds of ammo in his magazine will feed without firing them. You can't really hand cycle them because that doesn't simulate the forces involved, and because of possibly inducing bullet setback. The plonk test is about the best you can do.

The revolver shooter can load his six rounds before firing and can hand rotate the cylinder to make sure they clear. Once that has been determined the only stoppage might be something like a primer flowing into the firing pin hole...and that would likely have happened when the gun was sighted or otherwise previously fired with the same batch of ammo.

My point is that a revolver shooter can know in advance if his rounds are going to function in his particular gun.

Others have said it before that revolvers are more tolerant of neglect while autos are more tolerant of abuse. I plan to do neither.