The revolver as a primary carry weapon

[Lohman446]

I have been thinking a lot about my primary carry weapon lately. In the woods I have taken to carrying a Glock 29 with the idea that a well selected 10MM gives me an advantage over many of the concealable handguns and give me access to readily carrying 26 rounds (10+1 plus an additional G20 magazine). While hiking with my children it has actually replaced my Ruger SP101 (3" 357).

Which left me in a slightly odd spot with that SP101. Until my 15 year old and I were shooting it with 38 special loads and I heard something to the effect "this is my favorite gun." I thought about that for awhile. I have gone through a lot of various handguns recently and yet that SP101 has held its spot in the safe.

And I've been thinking about it replacing my Sig P938 as my everyday "urban" (that is a stretch around here) carry gun. Today it sat on my belt loaded with .38 special +P and a speed loader of .357 MAG next to it. I have also been considering one of the various 9MM revolvers.

A couple things have struck me about the value of carrying a revolver that go beyond the normal "reliability vs capacity" argument.

A) I assume anyone carrying a revolver really knows how to use it. I also make this assumption with anyone carrying a 1911. Anyone carrying a Glock I figure odds are better than 50/50 that he or she is not that great with it. I make the (possible incorrect) assumption this goes for others as well

B) Anyone ever notice even your firearm friends refer to medium bore revolvers as cannons? There has to be some psychological benefit to this if you ever have to use it.

C) I believe using a revolver gives me any advantage I can gain in court should I have to use it. This is not some "evil black high capacity firearm." This also goes for accidental exposure or police interaction - there is something less threatening about a revolver in a holster than a semi-auto pistol.

[Targa]

The absolute only reason I would choose one over the other is for comfort and for me the P938 would carry more comfortably than the SP101. As far as ammo goes, if I am going to carry a .357 revolver it is going to be loaded with .357 rounds, which is what I did when I use to carry my SP101.

[Model12Win]

While I don't agree with your reasoning, it's up to you. They can be effective if you properly train.

[TailGator]

Carry what you want, but I personally can't put much stock in the stated reasons. A is your assumptions, B I've never heard the premise before, and C I seriously doubt. You don't have to justify your choice if your prefer your revolver, though.

[BigJimP]

You should carry whatever you want....

I will occasionally carry a revolver in .357 mag....and usually a 2 1/2" or 4" barrel...on a K, L or an N frame S&W.....model 66's, 686 or 627's. .../ but my primary is still a full sized 1911...

[Deaf Smith]

I assume anyone carrying a revolver really knows how to use it.

Bad assumption.

Now I am a wheelgun as well as self-shucker shooter. But I've seen bad revolver shooters just as often, if not more, than semi-auto shooters.

If anything, on the average it's harder to shoot well with a revolver than an auto (at least everytime a police organization as gone to autos they found an immediate increase in scores.

As for woods carry, I do pack either my Canadian GP-100 3 inch or my S&W 629-1 4 inch. But it has more to do with versatility of loads than shoot-ability. And it has nothing to do with 'firepower'.

Deaf

[bedbugbilly]

A person should carry what they are comfortable with. That said, they then need to practice, practice and practice with it.

To assume that a person carrying a revolver knows how to use it is a fallacy . . . and we all know what "assume" spells. The same goes for someone who carries a semi auto.

Personally, I usually carry a Smith Model 36 J frame snub . . . and for me, I feel that it is adequate along with a drop pouch of reloads. BUT . . . I practice with it regularly. Sort of like anything else in life . . . if you don't practice, you get "rusty".

I also switch off to my 9mm Shield at times . . . but then again, I practice with it so I can hit what I'm aiming at.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone who carries and does not practice and become proficient with their handgun is a "liability". Especially if they ever get in to a SD situation where others are around and due to their inability to put shots where they aim them could cause collateral damage to others.

In the end . . . carry what you want. I don't understand your reasoning either not the reasoning behind the revolver over a Glock when it comes to being involved in a shooting, should that ever happen, and what would be said in court. That will be the least of your problems.

[JERRYS.]

using the same or similar gun and ammo combo as your municipal, county, and or state law enforcement officers use makes the choice a lot easier to defend in court. a revolver does not guarantee this any more than a Glock 17/22.

do not assume the level of competency a person has based on the handgun they carry. the gun carried could be by choice or circumstance.

[old bear]

I prefer a revolver, much of this is do to the fact that I carried revolvers daily for 27 years, and generally shoot one well. Today when I CCW I still feel well protected with a revolver and one reload.

Even though I don’t agree with many of the reasons given by those who carry autoloaders, but I’ve finally realized that it’s their life and there right to tote whatever handgun they wish to.

So carry whatever type of handgun that works best for you, and the one you work best with. If that choice is a revolver, of any size and caliber, or autoloader just make sure you can use it very well.

[2damnold4this]

I usually carry a S&W 342 instead of my G26. Not because I shoot it better but because it is so much easier to carry. If I can wear an undershirt, I'll carry the G26 AIWB. As a grease monkey in a hot and humid location, I find it difficult to wear an undershirt while doing physical for most of the year. The 342 is much easier to carry AIWB or in a pocket holster.

No matter how much I practice and dryfire the 342, I always shoot the G26 better. But the 342 is a firearm that I can always carry.

[g.willikers]

My 2 cents on the subject:
The only assumption that might hold water might be C.
But even then, if the situation gets to a court room, there's lots more being considered than just the type of weapon.

As for revolver users being better with their choice of weapon:
There's no indication of that at any public range I've attended.

As for assuming any weapon is more intimidating than any other, it's impossible to know how anyone else is thinking about anything.
Certainly not to the extent of depending on it for survival.

[rodfac]

Can't comment on your 3 listed assumptions but I do have some thoughts on revolver use in general in SD situations.

Revolvers are always a good choice, assuming you can use them DA and get effective hits at combat ranges, say 3-10 yards. That ability only comes with practice, though maybe less than what you expect. Here're my thoughts on that practice amount.

The simplicity of the revolver leaves you with a very abreviated manual of arms. For the most part it's pull the trigger and something happens or not...if it doesn't, pull the trigger again. The argument that tying up the cylinder with bullets that have jumped the crimp, is a non-starter if you use good ammunition...the same quality you'd use in a defensive carry auto...in my opinion, a revolver, in civilian hands (not in a military sand/mud extreme environment) is more reliable than an auto.

And the time saved in learning to clear an auto's malfunctions, locate and deal with a safety, magazine release, slide stop, mag safety if installed et al...equates to more time on learning the fundamentals that are essential to both types of arms: trigger manipulation, sight alignment, sight picture, and a solid combat firing grip on the gun before it leaves the holster. Dry fire, while practicing perfect technique...then going for speed, is what you're after...and you'll have more of it by using a simplier weapon.

With a revolver you give up a far greater capacity, and speed of reload for that simplicity. It's a choice you have to make after judiciously weighing your environment and your defensive responsibilities. For a civilian, who's role is not to run towards the fireworks, but to retreat/defend; a revolver may be enough.

This is an age-old debate, my friends and one that generates pretty strong feelings....As always, YMMV and the above is IMHO, Rod

[Wyosmith]

This is a subject that needs to reviewed in light of skill and training. I have used both a 1911 and a S&W M58. I was in my 20s then and was a VERY good shot under fire. 6 rounds was enough in my S&Ws and so was 7 in my 1911.
I have never used any other handgun for fighting other than those 3 (2 of the S&W M58s and one 1911A1) But I am making an educated guess that any handgun that was of the 38 Spl level of power or more, in any accurate and reliable handgun would have probably done about as well because I could use them extremely well in those days.
I carried revolvers most of the time for in my teens and then was issued a 1911, which I carried and used from about 19 Years old until I was about 26. From 26 to my late 30s I carried the revolvers and the 1911 both, back and forth---- and about the same amount.

I am asked in almost every class I teach "what is the best gun to carry?" and "what is the best ammo to use"?

So...here is what I tell them, and what I will tell everyone who wants to know.

#1 The best gun is one that is reliable and accurate and that you can shoot well, and gives a good wound channel at least 1 foot deep. "Best" is what you can use the best, and shoot the best. A Ruger Mk2 in the hands of a good cool-headed shooter is far better than a 1911 optic-sighted race gun in average hands.

#2 The best load is one that gives you 12" or more of penetration and the largest diameter would channel you can get in that particular bore size, as long as that expansion does not impede the penetration to come under that required 1 foot deep standard.

Speaking from experience I can tell you only 2 things for sure.

I can speculate about the rest.

#1. The US Gov 230 grain hardball is said by the FBI to be the very worst 'stopper' available in the 45 ACP, and yet I never needed more than one ever.

But as I said, I was once a very good marksman. I used to show off by shooting trap with handguns and I could hit an average of 15 out of 25 on the trap range with my revolvers. So that is why I believe I would probably done about as well with anything that was a 9MM or larger, as long as the gun would work well and would penetrate well.

#2 In the 41 mag I used a hodgepodge of what they gave me, and that ranged from Remington lead/mid range police loads to 210 Gr hollow points and also some Mexican made ammo that had some green corrosion on the rounds. I can say it did not inspire a lot of confidence in me, but they all fired when I needed them to. They were all effective.

Years later I was the CEO of Cast Performance Bullet Co and I tested many MANY types of bullets from a lot of different guns.
The one thing I would try to avoid with any anti-personal handgun round is the tendency for it to veer off course more than about 10 degrees when shot into test media.
Most 22 LR rounds will do so as well as 25s and 32s. Some 9mms will too.

Most 38s of a weight of 140 grains or more stay on course fairly well and heavier 357 s do too. The Hollow pointed 180 and 200 grain 44 mags will stay pretty straight for 10" or so most times, and then veer off, but by the time they start to wander the effect you'd want has already happened.

Shooting many hundreds of thousands of rounds in handguns and overseeing the manufacture of many millions of them, I can give a good overview on the performance of many of the bullets at various velocities that were available in the 1960s through the year 2000. I also had a file of reports from customers that filled 2 filing cabinets, so I did get feedback from hunters all over the world that shot game with handguns.

Not all were reports of the bullets we made either, but many people wrote to me showing what they had experienced with our competitions bullets. These was extremely educational to me.

There are a few new bullets that have come out in the last 16 years that I have no personal knowledge about at all, and so when asked about them I can only fall back on the statement I said before:

If they will penetrate 12" or more in a fairly straight line, and if they will give you a good wound channel, they will be just fine.

If they penetrate less than 12" use something else.

If they tent to veer off more than a few degrees in the first 9" of penetration, more than about 10% of the time, use something else.

(Many if not most handgun bullets can veer off course some times, but the ones that do so a lot of the time are not the best choice of rounds to use for self defense or for war.)

So that's the overview.

With all this typing and relaying the story of experience, I can sum it all up in this statement.

98% of the question is about you're abilities to shoot well under pressure.
2% is about the tools you use.

A very good marksman with ordinary guns and ammo will always do better than an ordinary marksman with perfect guns and ammo.

[Cheapshooter]

Carry what you are competent, and comfortable with. But for that reason only. All three of your assumptions are false.
A. I have seen many not so experienced people choose revolvers because they are "simpler", "safer", and "easier to use" than semi-autos.
B. Never heard that mentioned. "Medium bore"? 38/357= virtually same bore diameter as 9MM or 380.
C. A questionable use of a firearm is a questionable use regardless of color of gun, or capacity. A nustified use likewise.

[Onward Allusion]

Carry what you want. Your assumptions don't hold water for me. You may want to take a step back and look at your logic because they border on elitist.

[g.willikers]

98% of the question is about your abilities to shoot well under pressure. 2% is about the tools you use.

Thanks Wyosmith.
It's gratifying to hear an expert on the subject verify the old adage:
"The gun is the least of it."
Thanks also for all the other useful information.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I suggest folks try the gun in a competition discipline like IDPA or USPSA. Note they are not training but will give you a feel for accuracy, handling and reloaded under a modicum of stress.

Then ask yourself about the risk profile you are looking to respond to most of the time. Is it a critter in the woods, the single mugger at the gas pump or some horror show rampage. Will you have enough rounds easily available?

Abstract discussions are just fine but one should try it. I've taken a snubby class and shoot the gun in competition at times. I have a SW Model 19 that I shoot at IDPA once in awhile.

I once came in second to a national champion - but that's because there were only two revolver shooters that day (). Otherwise, for serious carry I carry a Glock.

The revolvers are for fun or in my pocket when I mow the lawn. I do think one should have a 38/357 just in case of ammo distributions or whatever. It's a standard.

My friends who specialize in revolvers shoot the 38s or 45s really well. They practice quite a lot and use moon clip guns. The guy who shoots a Colt trooper but loads it from a pants pocket speedloader (he does this on purpose to test himself) is slow in the reload.

[shafter]

A) I assume anyone carrying a revolver really knows how to use it. I also make this assumption with anyone carrying a 1911. Anyone carrying a Glock I figure odds are better than 50/50 that he or she is not that great with it. I make the (possible incorrect) assumption this goes for others as well

That's a dangerous assumption. A safer bet is to assume anyone you meet knows how to use their weapon. Unless you're at a range, then you should assume no one does and keep your head on a swivel.

B) Anyone ever notice even your firearm friends refer to medium bore revolvers as cannons? There has to be some psychological benefit to this if you ever have to use it.

I doubt it.

C) I believe using a revolver gives me any advantage I can gain in court should I have to use it. This is not some "evil black high capacity firearm." This also goes for accidental exposure or police interaction - there is something less threatening about a revolver in a holster than a semi-auto pistol.


Not true. I don't make any presumption of good or evil intent based on the particular gun being carried and don't know of any cop who does. It won't matter in court either. Carry a reliable firearm that you shoot the best. Capacity isn't everything, but it's a very valid consideration.

Both revolvers and semiautos have been used successfully in self defense for a long time. Personally I think an auto is a better choice for most people simply because they conceal easy and are generally higher capacity. If you shop quality both will most likely be very reliable.

[Nick_C_S]

Great post Wyosmith.

I'll start at the conclusion: The best gun to carry is the one with which you are most comfortable. I think we're at consensus there.

I'm a revolver guy and I am most comfortable carrying my 686+ w/ 3" bbl. And all else being equal, it's my primary carry piece. Problem is, all else is almost never equal. Namely, here in the sunny California central valley, it's rarely cool enough to layer up enough to conceal an L-frame.

In California, you can put up to three guns on your CCW permit. For me, the 686 is one; a Glock 29sf is one; and a Kahr CW9 is the one I carry the most - because it conceals with only light clothing.

If I lived in an open carry state, the 686 would almost always be on my hip.

[SG29736]

Outside of competition, I rarely see people shooting revolvers double action. Of the few who do shoot double action, a lot of them spend so much time staging the trigger, they might as well just cock it and shoot single action. With practice you can reload using moonclips or speedloaders pretty quickly, depending on how you carry them. I do like revolvers. Mark

[Joe_Pike]

I carried a S&W 642 for years and shot it well enough, but it wasn't a pleasant gun to shoot. I switched to the P938 and I shoot it better than the 642, plus, it's a joy to shoot. The extra 3 rounds on board doesn't hurt either.

[tallball]

Carry what you shoot best and are the most comfortable with. For me that happens to be a revolver. I am middle-aged and have been shooting them since I was a teenager. I've never liked semi-autos quite as much.

[Cousin Pat]

test yourself with your revolver -- from high chest position, extend/aim/shoot 3 double tap sets 7 yards double action -- how many in 3" circle (1 pt each) less 1 pt for any of six not in 6" circle. (or come up with your own test -- I do this one because I can't do holster drills at my indoor range). Then try your favorite auto and compare. My results: my 6" python is the high point winner, then the DA autos in 9 and 45 take over. I can't shoot light-weight revolvers (e.g. Ruger LCR in 38 Sp) with much success whereas lightweight Kahrs autos (P380 and P9) work for me.

[Sniper 51]

Having spent an entire career in law enforcement since 1977 and now retired, I feel that the best choice is always a revolver if you are not in law enforcement or military for civilians. # one is simplicity. Pull the trigger and it fires. If it doesn't, pull the trigger again.

Most civilians don't really know how to clear a semi-auto and get it back up and running in a shootout. Either tap, rack, ready OR rip, stop, cycle, tap, rack, ready. And I would bet that the majority of civilians aren't willing to learn and train this muscle memory to be prepared in a shootout.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[UncleEd]

Sniper 51,

What's this civilian stuff?