Thoughts on Massad Ayoob quote

[hdtwice]

So I was reading an article on revolvers and the following was started by the author

"The rule of thumb I heard from Massad Ayoob is, "Automatics tolerate abuse better, revolvers tolerate neglect better." In other words, if you're putting 10,000 rounds a year through a gun, but you're cleaning and lubing it regularly, the automatic will perform better."

I shoot both platforms but no long time experience.

So if you have shot the kind of numbers on both pistols and revolvers listed in the quote, do you agree?

 

[Malamute]

@Nyeti also mentioned that same sentiment. I dont know the origin of it, or if many just came to the same conclusion.

Nyeti expounded along the lines of "revolvers tend to work reliably if loaded and left alone for long periods, or just carried a lot, autos tend to work better with lots of rounds between cleanings and continued hard use". (paraphrased) Perhaps he'll comment. Is Mas Ayoob a member here?

My fairly limited experience with autos tends to confirm the feeling expressed above. Ive never had a revolver choke when I needed it or general shooting, but I think they want some attention to keep crud from under the extractor star, the extractor rod torqued properly, and basic stuff like that. I havent heard of anyone doing the 2000 rd challenge with revolvers. They may do fine, but many autos go through it just fine, and many many thousands of rounds on top of that without cleaning or attention. Todd Green did 70-some thousand rds in a glock 17 with about 6 cleanings I think.

 

[Harkrader]

My OPINION is, Massad Ayoob is always worth paying attention to.
The thing to consider in this quote is "Does it apply to me?"
I have put 10,000 round plus through a number of autos, mostly Sigs, and all I can say is they stomped the Energizer Bunny flat as they ran by him.
I've put fewer, but still thousands, of rounds through some 1911A1s (and variants), nearly all Colts, and THEY still run like freight trains going down hill. I have never bothered to change any springs, either. ONE, count it, ONE, magazine failed in use when the lips went soft. It was a brand new Springfield and the magazine had probably fed no more than 100 rounds when it failed. (Springfield refused to replace it under warranty.) I have retired several 1911 magazines of GI origin after who-know-how-many round through them, when the locking notch wore out or the slide lock failed during practice.

Of my personal guns, I have experienced dead stop failures in Ruger Vaqueros (could not drop the hammer with the trigger), a S&W 329PD (the crane broke), and a couple other S&W DA revolvers that mysteriously locked up as I pulled the trigger, but then operated fine. It has happened a couple times since, with those guns, but because I can't get one to lock up for a gunsmith, I've relegated them to plinking-only status.

Happily, except for the Rugers that failed during Cowboy matches, all the others failed in training or practice. I sent one 329PD to Cylinder and Slide for some work, and they called me to say the lockwork was dangerously worn and they would not work on it until it went back to S&W. I was charged, appropriately, for a rebuild, and the gun has soldiered on, though I no longer fire the stronger rounds through it.

I ordered a S&W Performance Center 327 TRR8. When it arrived, our youngest son, a LEO, grabbed it by the barrel and demonstrated how it wiggled in the frame. Sent back to S&W, they replaced the whole thing.

I bought a 586 "no dash" for pennies because the finish was very worn and the lockwork practically rattled. No idea how many rounds had been through it, but the barrel was excellent. Sent to S&W for refinishing and they repaired the lockwork for a reasonable fee. It is now a beautiful and accurate gun.

A Colt Anaconda was spitting lead from the cylinder/barrel gap and went back to the factory. They repaired it for a very reasonable fee, and polished the exterior for no charge.

I bought a Colt Trooper MKIII, a former LEO's gun, for a song because the finish was trashed and the lockwork DID rattle. The bore was excellent. To Colt for rebuild and refinish, resulting in a fine gun.

Autos? Note ONE personally-owned auto has gone back to the factory for a malfunction or rebuild. I HAVE replaced a barrel in a former GI Colt 1911A1, and a well-used Series 70, because the rifling was shot out. I've also replaced barrel bushings in a couple Colts.

I won't speculate as to what this means in the grand scheme of things. Any gun you intend to depend on must be thoroughly proven before such trust is put in it.

 

[Malamute]

Ive had a couple glitches with revolvers, one or two instances of extractor rods loosening up, which stopped after I torqued them (as in preventative maintenance on them all), crud under extractor stars, which doesnt happen much if one uses certain extracting techniques and clean under it now and then, one broken mainspring in a Smith, and had the base pin jump forward in Ruger single actions a couple times, which is also preventable with good or extra power base pin latch spring, and making sure the base pin latch moves far enough to catch the groove in the pin well. Ive also had 3 Ruger transfer bars break, so stopped dry firing them, which also brought the breakage to a halt. Overall, many of the revolver stoppages were preventable, poor parts fitting, or were a result of broken parts. I have had various automatics fail to feed or eject for various reasons, sometimes for no apparent reason, other than they just decided not to work that time. So, yes, autos can run like the energizer bunny, but they can also simply choke for no apparent reason, then run fine for a month or a year, or a previously fine magazine work well... until it didnt. Ive had two or 3 glock magazines stop working well. They worked great the last time I shot them.

I can look at a Smith revolver I just came into possession of, check the timing, firing pin protrusion, and basics like that, load it on the way home,and feel fine knowing it will fire and cycle. Id want to shoot it to confirm point of impact, but otherwise Ive not ahd one not work when they looked OK on inspection. Autos do require more time to get comfortable with them as an individual gun. One Springfield 1911 was fine for about 500 rds, I was starting to be comfortable with it as a carry gun, then it started choking, and got worse to where it wouldnt make it through a magazine without several stoppages. Never figured it out. My dad once had a little sterling 22 auto. it choked almost every time he shot it. He could hand it to me and it worked. Hand it back, chokomatic.

I dont by any means think either are perfect, they both do different things well. Either will probably work fine if thats what you choose or have in hand when needed.

 

[rockquarry]

Perhaps there is more to the quoted statement than what was depicted in the original post. As it stands, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

"Neglect" is nothing more than a form of abuse.

 

[ContinentalOp]

I can't say from personal experience, but I've seen that sentiment shared by people other than Ayoob. Semi-autos do seem to be more sensitive to lack of lubrication than revolvers. A revolver left in a sock drawer for 50 years will probably be more likely to work than a semi-auto left in the same condition, generally speaking. I can see high round-counts leading to timing issues in revolvers. I remember reading somewhere that during the 90s USMC Force Recon Marines would put somewhere in the neighborhood of 80,000 rounds through their 1911s over the course of a training/deployment cycle.

I've experienced mechanical failures in one form or another with both semi-autos and revolvers.

The closest thing to abuse I've done was with my Beretta 92FS. I was taking a course and had been shooting all day, including some rapid fire drills, IIRC. At the end of the day the instructor said that there was ammo left over (9mm ammo was provided for the course) and we were free to use the range for as long as the ammo lasted. So I did some more shooting. At this point the gun probably had about 200 rounds through it. Then I decided to do a little "torture" test. I had four 15-round magazines, loaded them up, and ran 60 rounds through the gun as fast as I could. No malfunctions, although the gun did get hot, so I laid it on the ground to cool off a bit. The gun hadn't been cleaned all day.

 

[federali]

Ayoob

It is fashionable in some circles to dump on Mr. Ayoob but I too agree that with his experience and expertise, he should not be taken lightly.

That said, it has been my experience that most bad things that can happen with a semi auto can be cleared with a stoppage drill and the gun returned to firing. Not so with a revolver. A loose extractor rod, a shell casing that got behind the extractor star, or unburned powder behind the extractor star will shut you down and there is no stoppage drill, when rounds are incoming, that gets the gun shooting.

 

[Malamute]

When I started reading the 2000 rd challenge, I started realizing some of the people doing it were putting the 2k rds through their gun over a weekend.

The challenge is, start with clean, lubed gun, shoot 2k rounds thru it (whatever time frame it requires)with no further lube or maintenance, report every stoppage or malfunction of any kind, regardless of cause or excuse. Most autos people have been using and reporting go thru it, and on for more without cleaning, with no problem.

 

[Absalom]

.....
"The rule of thumb I heard from Massad Ayoob is, "Automatics tolerate abuse better, revolvers tolerate neglect better."

No disrespect intended to either Mr. Ayoob, who is one of the more thoughtful gun writers, or anyone else, but this appears to be one of those pithy platitudes that is either obvious or meaningless depending how you interpret the words.

Just taking "abuse", judging by the responses, folks are going off every which way, from dry-firing to no lubrication to no cleaning to simple heavy use to what have you.

And even if it were "true", a rule of thumb for what? Is there ever a need to choose? Regarding my guns, I've always avoided both abuse and neglect

 

[Steve912]

It is fashionable in some circles to dump on Mr. Ayoob but I too agree that with his experience and expertise, he should not be taken lightly.

Half the world's population, is below average in intelligence.

BTW, who is "Nyeti"? Google returns a bunch of unlikely hits.

 

[fdw]

All I can say from experience is I've had autos jam and a revolver lock up. The autos I could clear and get back in action quickly, the revolver was dead and took quite some time to get it operating again.

 

[nachogrande]

A CLEAR DEFINITION WOULD HELP.

Not sure of the OP's EXACT meaning & degree of neglect VS abuse. If you want to hammer nails, the revolver. Leaving it uncared for, for long periods on a boat in salt water, either could cease working, IMO.

 

[Rustyt1953]

BTW, who is "Nyeti"?

A forum member.

 

[TomkinsSP]

Perhaps there is more to the quoted statement than what was depicted in the original post. As it stands, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

"Neglect" is nothing more than a form of abuse.

I belive in this context Neglect is leaving it untouched in the sock drawer for 50 years. Or carrying it all year without removing it from its holster. Abuse is dropping it from a height onto concrete or dragging it through the mud.

But I know nobody here would dream of doing such things.

 

[Skeet 028]

I bought a S&W from a fellow at a gun show..brought it in in his pocket in the sock it had been in for at least 35 yrs. Had belonged to his father and was well used with some blue loss and holster wear. Model of 1950 45 Colt Target(loaded by the way). Cleaned it up lightly lubed it and it has never missed a beat. I don't shoot it a lot. I guess you would call it neglect to leave a gun in a drawer like that but not abuse. I happen to have a couple of pre war(WW1) 45 Colt military and can say both have had a few problems but most of the time it seems like magazines. I also have a Wilson Combat that is the most reliable 45 I have ever had....except with one Wilson mag. It worked fine in my full size Kimbers but I gave it to a friend and his Colt(series 80NM)just devours everything that goes through the mag. Yes I carry semi autos but prefer and trust my revolvers more

 

[vonn]

Any mechanical device can fail at anytime.

 

[Rule3]

Mr MA must have made that statement before Glocks where invented.

 

[Farmer17]

I not sure why people now put so much emphasis on torturing guns, they bury a fine gun in mud or sand and fire them and then brag about how reliable it is. I wonder if some firearms were damaged or ruined and they didn't mention anything because they were too embarrassed to say they screwed up a nice gun. I take pretty good care of my guns and they work just fine for their intended purpose and it doesn't matter if they are new designs or 80 years old. If people abuse their weapons they shouldn't be surprised if they don't perform perfectly.

 

[American1776]

I think that's probably correct, in my experience.

The lock work of a double action revolver can be considered 'fragile'. Fast double action shooting, along with heavy powder charges, can really wear the clockwork of the revolver. Add in those who 'cowboy' the cylinder closed, and the revolver will not tolerate such abuse.

A 1911 or a Beretta 92 will go tens of thousands of rounds without a failure. The Army trials have shown this. A double action revolver will most likely need some maintance in the lockwork during that round count. The Beretta or 1911 will only need a recoil spring.

If you want a gun for self defense, and just want to stick it in a drawer for 30 years, a double action revolver is a fine choice. If you want a gun that you want to shoot lots of rounds through with minimal maintenance, a 1911 (properly set up) or Beretta (or a glock) would be a better choice.

 

[Rock185]

I don't have any argument about what Mr. Ayoob wrote. As far as the revolvers, I've experienced some issues and observed others. I wore out my model 66 S&W over a period of approx. 6 years, and I don't know how many thousands of rounds. Sent it to S&W. Everything except frame and side plate was replaced. Seen damaged forcing cones on couple S&W model 19s and a Colt Python, broken hammer nose on a S&W, timing and end shake issues, revolvers using lead ammo tying up due to lead build up, new Ruger Blackhawk action become inoperative after first trip to range, D/A revolvers tieing up due to a couple unburned powder grains beneath extractor, loose extractor rods, etc. These issues took some time and/or professional attention to resolve. Still have that old previously worn out S&W 66, and still like revolvers as much as ever though.


Some of my semi-autos have not been exactly problem free either. Especially malfunctions of all kinds with Colts back in the '70s. Frame cracked on my alloy framed Colt Commander after moderate use, broke a firing pin stop once on a Browning Hi Power. That being said, I've found FN/Browning Hi Powers, Glock and SIG semi-autos to be especially robust and reliable pistols.......ymmv