Semi Autos vs Revolvers vs Ported guns

Master Blaster · March 7, 2001, 04:28 PM

Ok what are the pros and cons??

My self defense instructor says that only a revolver is reliable enough in real world self defense situations.
Firing from close retention, struggling with a Bad Guy etc.
I see some people who advocate ported guns for self defense
What do you think???

CITADELGRAD87 · March 7, 2001, 04:59 PM

Your self-defence instructor was, hopefully, stating his preference rather than fact.

Ideally, while self defense shootings take place at close range, they do not involve a struggle for the weapon. While this DOES happen, I decided long ago that if I were involved in an actual physical confrontation, ie a wrasslin' match on the ground, it may be better to NOT draw a weapon.

But I digress. Revolvers are easy to learn, easy to teach, feature the built in safety of a DA first shot with no other safeties or controls, and are, generally, very reliable.

So is my Sig 226, no problems in over 5,000 rounds under all conditions.

It's a matter of preference.

I like autos because they are reliable enough for me, flatter, hold more rounds and are quicker to reload for all but the most skilled operators.

gryphon · March 7, 2001, 05:40 PM

Well, the odds of a revolver malfunctioning are close to none, so given the odds you might be better off with a revolver. But if you are depending on a sidearm for self-defense, I would want one that I could also shoot accurately. Personally, I shoot my 9mm and .45 ACP much more accurate than my .357 revolver.

Porting only reduces muzzle flip which is a good thing, but you also lose a bit of muzzle velocity with ported barrels.

It's really six of one and half dozen of the other.

The Observer · March 7, 2001, 10:09 PM

I agree with gryphon, I am also contented with my 9mm's and .45's calibers. I like the flatness of my .45 Colt full size. If I tucked it with the 7 rounds, you could hardly notice it even under a casual T-Shirt. The 10 rounder magazines are in my pouch for my reservation just in case.

Ported pistols are good looking and some ot it produces more sound perhaps to scare a common criminal if it hears the big bang.

The revolvers I love it too for its simplicity also. the only advantage for me of a revolver is, if I shoot a criminal then it would be hard to trace me for there is no empty shells scattered around.

Some advices I heard from the streets, they put a .38 special bullets on .357 so that it will not be easily traced if the gun is licensed. As well as to the .45, they interchange barrels.

M1911 · March 8, 2001, 09:09 AM

Observer said:

"Some advices I heard from the streets, they put a .38 special bullets on .357 so that it will not be easily traced if the gun is licensed. As well as to the .45, they interchange barrels. "

Huh? What are you talking about? Are you suggesting that if you use deadly force in a justifiable incident, that you should flee the scene? And why would .38 Spcl bullets be harder to "trace" than .357 bullets? Either would show the same rifling marks. But then, the authorities would have to either already have a sample bullet fired from that particular gun (or have the gun itself) to do a match.

Regarding semi-autos, yes you can swap the barrels. While that would change the rifling marks on the bullet, it wouldn't change the marks on the spent casing (from the extractor, the firing pin, and the breech block).

But again, we're (hopefully) all law abiding citizens here.

M1911

Betty · March 8, 2001, 11:32 AM

I think it just depends on you and the particular gun. There is no one magical gun that will work for everyone. (Glock people might say contrary, but I'm not going there!)

I shoot more accuratley with my Taurus .357 ported snubbie than with my K40 (with 4" ported barrel), but on the other hand, gryphon shoots better with his semi-autos than his .357. I shoot better with a Ruger Mark II than with all the above, but I wouldn't choose a .22 for my main carry weapon. My brother shoots better with his 1911 than with my .357. My dad shoots better with my .357 than his 1911. I shoot 1911's decently, but a full-size model is too much for me to conceal. It boils down to what you are comfortable with, what you can conceal, what you are accurate with, what has adequate stopping power, and what is reliable.

At the distance that most gunfights are known to occur, I don't consider losing muzzle velocity from a short ported barrel a major consideration. I like ported barrels because the reduced muzzle jump is easier on my hands, and allows me to shoot larger calibers more comfortably. It has also been said than shooting a ported barrel from retention may set you on fire since the flames will be shooting up at your clothes.

Nevada Fitch · March 8, 2001, 10:28 PM

I used to lean heavely toward the revolver.And I still think it is a sound choice. For conceled carry I see only one drawback to the revolver. I find them harder to hide on my person because of the cylinder and sometimes the grips.I even struggle with a model 60 smith sometimes to find a good way to carry the thing.Frankly I can carry a Lightweight commander about as easy as a Mod.60 smith.I also find lots of the autos hard to hide also, and I have sunk a fortune in holsters.As far as reliability goes I think the revolver definately wins out against small autos.I have seen many many small autos of several makes jam often enough to not have a lot of faith. The bigger autos I trust after they prove themselves.

LBC · March 9, 2001, 03:19 PM

I believe a ported gun would be a disadvantage in most civilian gunfights.

Figure the benefit of reduced muzzle climb/perceived recoil vs. increase muzzle blast, noise, flame, superheated gasses, and possibly bits of lead and copper shavings exiting into your face if your stance is anything less than "range perfect." This is especially true if you hold the revolver/semiauto in a protected/retention position. I believe the concerns about muzzle climb and recoil that most folks turn to a ported gun to solve can be addressed through judicious ammunition selection.

As for revolver vs. semiauto, I believe most people will carry what their favorite round is available in. I carry a .38 snubbie for convenience most of the time (i.e. at work) and a .45 ACP Colt Commander or a .357 magnum S&W Model 19 (2.5" barrel) when I can dress to hide it. Based on five years of CC, and given factory ammo and a regular cleaning/maintenance routine, I'd give a slight edge on reliability to revolvers. Ease of reloading and "shootability" to semiautos. IMHO, neither difference
is so great as to cause me to give up one platform or another.

Best Wishes, LBC

Cosmoline · March 11, 2001, 12:46 PM

If you're someplace where open carry is allowed (your home, if nowhere else), I can't see why anyone would choose a revolver over a carbine. I keep my Winchester close by when I'm in the house. It's more accurate, more powerful, and more reliable than any short gun. Moreover, it makes a great club when you need to apply non-deadly force. If you don't like leverguns, there are plenty of good semi-auto carbines out there. IMHO, carbines are the most underrated and underused weapon for self defense.

March 7, 2001, 05:40 PM	#3
gryphon Senior Member Join Date: November 21, 2000 Location: Ohio Posts: 1,069	Well, the odds of a revolver malfunctioning are close to none, so given the odds you might be better off with a revolver. But if you are depending on a sidearm for self-defense, I would want one that I could also shoot accurately. Personally, I shoot my 9mm and .45 ACP much more accurate than my .357 revolver. Porting only reduces muzzle flip which is a good thing, but you also lose a bit of muzzle velocity with ported barrels. It's really six of one and half dozen of the other. __________________ Your suffering will be legendary, even in HELL!! --- PinHead, HellRaiser 2

March 7, 2001, 04:28 PM	#1
Master Blaster Senior Member Join Date: October 11, 1999 Location: One of the original 13 Colonies Posts: 2,281	Ok what are the pros and cons?? My self defense instructor says that only a revolver is reliable enough in real world self defense situations. Firing from close retention, struggling with a Bad Guy etc. I see some people who advocate ported guns for self defense What do you think???

March 7, 2001, 04:59 PM	#2
CITADELGRAD87 Senior Member Join Date: August 30, 2000 Posts: 432	Your self-defence instructor was, hopefully, stating his preference rather than fact. Ideally, while self defense shootings take place at close range, they do not involve a struggle for the weapon. While this DOES happen, I decided long ago that if I were involved in an actual physical confrontation, ie a wrasslin' match on the ground, it may be better to NOT draw a weapon. But I digress. Revolvers are easy to learn, easy to teach, feature the built in safety of a DA first shot with no other safeties or controls, and are, generally, very reliable. So is my Sig 226, no problems in over 5,000 rounds under all conditions. It's a matter of preference. I like autos because they are reliable enough for me, flatter, hold more rounds and are quicker to reload for all but the most skilled operators.

March 7, 2001, 10:09 PM	#4
The Observer Member Join Date: August 11, 2000 Location: Pacific Rim Posts: 87	I agree with gryphon, I am also contented with my 9mm's and .45's calibers. I like the flatness of my .45 Colt full size. If I tucked it with the 7 rounds, you could hardly notice it even under a casual T-Shirt. The 10 rounder magazines are in my pouch for my reservation just in case. Ported pistols are good looking and some ot it produces more sound perhaps to scare a common criminal if it hears the big bang. The revolvers I love it too for its simplicity also. the only advantage for me of a revolver is, if I shoot a criminal then it would be hard to trace me for there is no empty shells scattered around. Some advices I heard from the streets, they put a .38 special bullets on .357 so that it will not be easily traced if the gun is licensed. As well as to the .45, they interchange barrels.

March 8, 2001, 09:09 AM	#5
M1911 Senior Member Join Date: March 28, 2000 Posts: 4,055	Observer said: "Some advices I heard from the streets, they put a .38 special bullets on .357 so that it will not be easily traced if the gun is licensed. As well as to the .45, they interchange barrels. " Huh? What are you talking about? Are you suggesting that if you use deadly force in a justifiable incident, that you should flee the scene? And why would .38 Spcl bullets be harder to "trace" than .357 bullets? Either would show the same rifling marks. But then, the authorities would have to either already have a sample bullet fired from that particular gun (or have the gun itself) to do a match. Regarding semi-autos, yes you can swap the barrels. While that would change the rifling marks on the bullet, it wouldn't change the marks on the spent casing (from the extractor, the firing pin, and the breech block). But again, we're (hopefully) all law abiding citizens here. M1911

March 8, 2001, 11:32 AM	#6
Betty Senior Member Join Date: March 22, 2000 Location: southern U.S. Posts: 1,807	I think it just depends on you and the particular gun. There is no one magical gun that will work for everyone. (Glock people might say contrary, but I'm not going there!) I shoot more accuratley with my Taurus .357 ported snubbie than with my K40 (with 4" ported barrel), but on the other hand, gryphon shoots better with his semi-autos than his .357. I shoot better with a Ruger Mark II than with all the above, but I wouldn't choose a .22 for my main carry weapon. My brother shoots better with his 1911 than with my .357. My dad shoots better with my .357 than his 1911. I shoot 1911's decently, but a full-size model is too much for me to conceal. It boils down to what you are comfortable with, what you can conceal, what you are accurate with, what has adequate stopping power, and what is reliable. At the distance that most gunfights are known to occur, I don't consider losing muzzle velocity from a short ported barrel a major consideration. I like ported barrels because the reduced muzzle jump is easier on my hands, and allows me to shoot larger calibers more comfortably. It has also been said than shooting a ported barrel from retention may set you on fire since the flames will be shooting up at your clothes.

March 8, 2001, 10:28 PM	#7
Nevada Fitch Senior Member Join Date: October 21, 2000 Posts: 261	I used to lean heavely toward the revolver.And I still think it is a sound choice. For conceled carry I see only one drawback to the revolver. I find them harder to hide on my person because of the cylinder and sometimes the grips.I even struggle with a model 60 smith sometimes to find a good way to carry the thing.Frankly I can carry a Lightweight commander about as easy as a Mod.60 smith.I also find lots of the autos hard to hide also, and I have sunk a fortune in holsters.As far as reliability goes I think the revolver definately wins out against small autos.I have seen many many small autos of several makes jam often enough to not have a lot of faith. The bigger autos I trust after they prove themselves.

March 9, 2001, 03:19 PM	#8
LBC Senior Member Join Date: January 6, 2001 Posts: 385	I believe a ported gun would be a disadvantage in most civilian gunfights. Figure the benefit of reduced muzzle climb/perceived recoil vs. increase muzzle blast, noise, flame, superheated gasses, and possibly bits of lead and copper shavings exiting into your face if your stance is anything less than "range perfect." This is especially true if you hold the revolver/semiauto in a protected/retention position. I believe the concerns about muzzle climb and recoil that most folks turn to a ported gun to solve can be addressed through judicious ammunition selection. As for revolver vs. semiauto, I believe most people will carry what their favorite round is available in. I carry a .38 snubbie for convenience most of the time (i.e. at work) and a .45 ACP Colt Commander or a .357 magnum S&W Model 19 (2.5" barrel) when I can dress to hide it. Based on five years of CC, and given factory ammo and a regular cleaning/maintenance routine, I'd give a slight edge on reliability to revolvers. Ease of reloading and "shootability" to semiautos. IMHO, neither difference is so great as to cause me to give up one platform or another. Best Wishes, LBC

March 11, 2001, 12:46 PM	#9
Cosmoline Senior Member Join Date: March 11, 2000 Posts: 1,080	If you're someplace where open carry is allowed (your home, if nowhere else), I can't see why anyone would choose a revolver over a carbine. I keep my Winchester close by when I'm in the house. It's more accurate, more powerful, and more reliable than any short gun. Moreover, it makes a great club when you need to apply non-deadly force. If you don't like leverguns, there are plenty of good semi-auto carbines out there. IMHO, carbines are the most underrated and underused weapon for self defense.