The Revolver vs. the Pistol for self defense. Which is better?

Exactly NKJ,

Gabby Giffords was shot in the head with a 9mm, and she is doing just fine. They really are just for plinking and young kids. :p

"A year after the shooting, in halting speech due to her injuries, the Congresswoman announced recently she would resign Congress to continue to work on her recovery." No joking matter. Especially when you consider the other six people who died in the same shooting.
 
Last edited:
Pistols are obviously smaller, sleeker, and easier to conceal than revolvers, but which one is more likely to jam on you? The FBI and military carry pistols because the reaction is quicker; there is no hammer to pull. Let's all be honest here though. If the men in Marine infantry have to use their handgun, you already know the **** has hit the fan. One isn't necessarily greater than the other when talking about self-defense. Jams happen quite often. When have you heard about a revolver jamming? Not never. It's ALWAYS better to be safe than sorry, so just carry a snub nose, so you get the best of both worlds.
 
Malfunctions do happen -- I must be cursed

Pistols are obviously smaller, sleeker, and easier to conceal than revolvers, but which one is more likely to jam on you? The FBI and military carry pistols because the reaction is quicker; there is no hammer to pull. Let's all be honest here though. If the men in Marine infantry have to use their handgun, you already know the **** has hit the fan. One isn't necessarily greater than the other when talking about self-defense. Jams happen quite often. When have you heard about a revolver jamming? Not never. It's ALWAYS better to be safe than sorry, so just carry a snub nose, so you get the best of both worlds.

Nothing is guaranteed and defensive shooters must know how to handle malfunctions.

S&W 327 bullet jumped crimp
K17 endshake caused dragging and was good only for 24 or 30 shots
M27 with internal firing pin. Pin shattered on first shot.
Taurus Judge: 100% cylinder lockup with 410 buckshot--twice in 5 shots.
Ruger GP100 had light strikes with only 50% ignition rate.
 
I need to be honest here, the entire CCW thing is important to me, I just got my ccw and really only carried once ( a bersa .380 in one of those holsters built into a t-shirt, I was not impressed it was awkward and it would OBVIOUS if I was going for a gun if i needed it.) I have a 5943 that at first I hated because of the dao but now that I have put a cpl of hundred rounds through it I really like it, I did buy an iwb holster for it and with a t-shirt on and a Hawaiian shirt over it you can't even see the full size 5943, I like the fact that i can carry 16 rounds as well , to me it's basically just a 16 round revolver, very safe. I have no reservations about having an AD with that firearm. On the other hand I do have a 1911A1 and carrying that cocked and locked scares the beejesus outta me. I was at the local gunshop and just bought a colt diamondback 4 inch .38 special. I expect to carry that as well. Guy sold me a plastic iwb holster for it. so I will go to the range today and try it out. Anyway Semi-autos vs. Revolvers ? I am far to new CCW to have any reasonable opinion on what is better, all I hope is I never have to use anything.
 
Are you sure Joe?

When have you heard about a revolver jamming? Not never. It's ALWAYS better to be safe than sorry, so just carry a snub nose, so you get the best of both worlds.

I had a Taurus Model 415 2" Stainless .41 Magnum. Five shot, ported barrel, a true hand cannon; with certain types of commercially reloaded ammo (primarily lead bullets) the recoil was sufficient to cause a lightly (read not crimped enough) crimped bullet to move forward in the case enough to cause the cylinder to not rotate. At first I thought the cartridge OAL was too long but without shooting I could cycle the cylinder by hand. It didn't happen often but when it did it was a show stopper.

My nickle plated 4" Model 58 doesn't do that at all!
 
Duke, while there's a lot to be said for a revolver in terms of reliability, don't be fooling into thinking they never fail. After all, there was a reason the military made the switch back in 1911.
 
Duke, while there's a lot to be said for a revolver in terms of reliability, don't be fooling into thinking they never fail. After all, there was a reason the military made the switch back in 1911.

There are a lot of reasons but he mechanical reliability of the revolver was not one of them.

Sent from my Ally using Tapatalk 2
 
I wouldn't depend on a revolver for home defense these days. In my area the big thing is home invasion, anywhere from 3-5 guys heavily armed with pistols and AK's and you want to defend your family with a 5 or 6 shot revolver. Surrender isn't really an option they are there more for the rape and murder then money

Well, it is bad where I live but I have not optioned yet for a shotgun.
I own 4 revolvers, a S&W625-5 4" Long Colt 45, and a CA 44 Bulldog,
and two 38's. There is one way into my abode, and one way out, no side doors or back doors. So if there are 15 of them they may get me for sure,
but they have to come through one door. I also will not say I have not had a revolver fail, because I have. But I trust S&W Revolvers, and my CA Bulldog and I am more comfortable with revolvers. I carry two of them regular. I have not found it necessary yet to buy an AK either.

If the gangsters start moving in with AK's I probably will buy a Pump Shotgun. Till it gets that bad I am sticking with my Revolvers!
 
on the home front, shotgun is my first choice with a handgun being a very close second.
where I came from in the north woods, when things went bump in the night, more often than not it was some form of critter. some would beat a retreat, others were territorial and would face you down. Shotguns have proven to have the quickest first shot of all weapons, and properly loaded, the most lethal.
 
Which is better?

Why not ask the FBI, CIA, Navy seals, Army Rangers, Military, and Secret Service, along with a couple million law enforcement officers who depend on their weapon to save their life every day and see what they carry?

Before I retired from the Army, it was an M1911A1 or, reluctantly, an M9 for me because that's what we were issued and I wasn't messing with my muscle memory/motor skills. For my wife, it was a double-action revolver.

Since I retired and the odds are rather slim that I'm going to war, it is a double action revolver. In an agency full of Glocksters, I carry a S&W Model 686-6 loaded with Remington 125 grain SJHP .357 Magnum rounds on duty. One of these days a Glockster will beat me during qualification, but it hasn't happened yet.

Off duty, I carry revolvers, too. Can't mess with muscle memory/motor skills.

ECS
 
This thread, Elvis, and Michael Jackson all have one thing in common....

Can you guess what it is??? :p
 
There is not one single handgun that is consistently capable of a "one shot stop." There are both revolvers and pistols that are chambered in calibers that certainly are capable of making a one shot stop but not everytime.

People have died from being shot once by a .22 lr; and peope have survived being shot by .45 acp and .357 Magnum loads.

Its been beaten to death - the original poster's general themes of his posts have convinced me he has an as of yet revealed agenda regarding firearms and defending onesself.

Bottom line - it doesn't matter what the gun is that you are carrying; what matters is (and this is my definition of gun control) the ability to hit what you are aiming at, consistently, until the threat is stopped.
 
All this is subjective. Any firearm is subject to failure, as for the revolver being abandoned for the auto by the military that is simply not the reason. It is a simple fact that autos are more complicated and experience malfunction from time to time due to either ammo or mechanical problems. Revolvers on rare occasions do the same but are almost always still fire-able even if only as a single action or down a "bad" cartridge.
It was already posted that statistically the gun fight is 2 to 3 rounds and at less than a few feet. And no matter what the gun or caliber these 2-3 rounds are going to determine the out come.
I hate to depend on spray and pray instead of skill and or training. With that said I am not against the auto there are some very dependable and tactical guns and I own and carry some from time to time. I have no doubt I will preform the same with either, the circumstances and the opponents ability will be the difference or it will be a moot point.
I carry a gun with the full knowledge that the gun is my tool for survival and like all tools it's nothing but expensive steel if the craftsman is not up the job. And for all others I hope they are up to the task, both physically and mentally. After the fact is a whole other issue you are going to have to deal with too.
So good luck and be prepared!
 
Back
Top