your recommendation in Automatic revolvers

[zeeshan]

I perfer revolvers to pistols. The problem is accuracy. I want a revolver which auto cocks and thusit will be more accurate. Secondly, i want the revolver for ccw without compromising the potency of calibre at any cost.
what are your recommendations?

[darkgael]

There are very few "auto" revolvers. The two that I know of are the old Webley-Fosbery which is an antique at this point, having been produced early last century. The other is the Mateba; as far as I know, it is no longer produced (Could be wrong about that). If there are others, I am unaware of them (though a search would probably turn them up), as far as I know the Mateba Model 6 is the only one.
You needn't be concerned with the difference in accuracy that might exist between a revolver and an semi-auto pistol in a particular caliber. In any practical defensive situation, the revolver will more than hold it's own accuracy-wise.
More important to many shooters is the limit on the number of rounds available in the gun and the speed of reloading.
The debate about reliability is ongoing. There is no arguing, though, that if a round doesn't fire in a revolver, you just pull the trigger again (and I'm a semi-auto guy).
Pete
Check this link:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=111924425

[Gonzo_308]

I think his concern is about the DA trigger pull and his ability to effectively shoot with that pull.

There's no revolver currently in production that cocks itself to give you a single action trigger pull.

The only way around the problem I think you're describing is to practice and become proficient with a double action revolver trigger.

Revolvers, due to their fixed barrels are inherently more accurate than semi auto pistols.

That said, any quality firearm semi auto or revolver will likely be more than accurate for your needs in a self defense situation.

[B. Lahey]

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn298/brendanclaude/Mateba_Model_6.jpg

I don't know if I would carry one, but they sure are neat.

Mateba.

[Firepower!]

What do you mean automatic revolver?

Is it something like Daewoo's tripple action mechinism that cocks the trigger with light pull??

How does the trigger cock itself?

[noelf2]

I also prefer revolvers, but why on earth would you want one that auto cocks? I prefer revolvers for their simplicity and their reliability. An automatic revolver wouldn't be any more accurate than a regular wheel gun, just because it auto cocks. If you want the target accuracy then get a single action revolver, or a double action that you can use as single action. If you want personal protection, then use double action and practice, practice, practice.

If you absolutely need something that auto cocks, don't get a revolver. Auto cocking revolvers were a stupid idea way back when (IMHO), and are a stupid idea now. That's why they aren't common.

Also, thanks for not making this thread a "poll".

[stevieboy]

There are no autococking revolvers in production and, from its appearance, the Mateba is about the size of a toaster oven. I agree with the other posters. If one pulls a double action trigger often enough one can become confident shooting double action.

[zeeshan]

I think his concern is about the DA trigger pull and his ability to effectively shoot with that pull.


you are right

[zeeshan]

That said, any quality firearm semi auto or revolver will likely be more than accurate for your needs in a self defense situation.

which do you recommend (having the smoothest d/a for ccw)?

[zeeshan]

IMHO
what does it mean?

[Don H]

In My Humble Opinion

[M1911]

IMHO -- In My Humble Opinion

As others have pointed out, about your only options are the Mateba and Webley-Forsbery. That scarcity should give you a hint usefulness of semi-automatic revolvers -- they basically combine the worst attributes of both action types into a single gun, IMHO.

[Jart]

Pretty much.

The Mateba is an interesting exercise. I was sorely tempted when CDNN was closing them out.

But they do remind me more of a semi-auto with a round non-detachable magazine than a revolver.

[wdelack]

I think most firearms, auto or revolver are likely to be more accurate than the hand that is holding it - more so in a defensive situation. I think one should choose the type (auto or revolver) more on personal preference, or on how the firearm is to be carried or used.

I qualified for my CCW license with a Kahr K9 but carry a snubnose .357.

[carguychris]

FWIW if you want a reliable revolver for CCW, you should buy a regular DA/SA revolver from a major manufacturer and learn to shoot it. Don't buy an esoteric and unproven "auto revolver".

The key to accurate and fast DA shooting is practice, and lots of it. Although it's not easy for a beginner, it's quite possible to shoot accurately and quickly with a DA revolver. People have been doing it for decades. It's not magic.

Also, IMHO the heavy trigger of a DA revolver is a benefit in a SD situation because a frightened person experiences a surge of adrenaline that boosts strength and causes a loss of fine motor skills. Add an excessively light trigger to this equation and you've got a recipe for an unintentional discharge. :eek:

[Jeff #111]

Go to U Tube and you will find videos of both the Webley-Fosbery and the Mateba being fired. Garry James is shooting the W-F and he manually cocks the hammer by pulling back on the upper reciever before firing. However you can also thumb cock the hammer before firing.

When fired the barrel and cylinder, which is one unit, recoils together, thereby cocking the hammer and causing cylinder rotation to bring a loaded chamber under the hammer. The Webley-Fosbery is a break top revolver. The empties are ejected when the stirrup latch is pushed and the barrel levered downwards which opens the action and operates the extractor.

There is a metal stud fixed to the lower reciever or frame it you like. When fired the stud runs in the grooves that are on the cylinder. The movement of the upper reciever causes the cylinder to rotate one-twelfth of a revolution during each stroke, thus completing one-sixth of a turn in the complete recoil cycle and therefore indexing a fresh round in front of the chamber. That is why the zig-zag pattern in the cylinder.

The description of the action is from Military Small Arms of the 20th Century. Ian V. Hogg & John S. Weeks (7th Edition) Krause Publications. 2000.

Most were made in .455 Webley though a few were made in 38 acp. There was an American company (Union Arms Company) that made a replica in a 32 caliber. It was/is a very accurate design and very well made, but in the early days of WWI it was discovered that the design did not like dirt and mud. Webley stopped making them in 1914. It was a sporting revolver, not meant for the stresses of combat, and the company had it's hands full producing the Webley MK V and the Mk VI. So it went to the wayside.

They never resumed production of the W-F after the war ended, but they had enough parts to assemble and sell the model into the early twenties. I've seen a Webley catalog from 1920 and they were still listing the W-F at that time.

If you should find a W-F, even in mediocre condition, you will pay mucho dinero for it. Hopefully this picture will help clear up some of the mystery. Incidentally the Webley-Fosbery has a safety switch on it. So it's one of the few revolvers ever made that the user can "flick the safety off." :rolleyes:

I have no experience with the Mateba. Sorry.

[R.Ph. 380]

Sounds like someone wants a 1911 to stay C & L.
Bill;)

[twhidd]

Where do you come up with some of these questions dude?

[kristop64089]

Where do you come up with some of these questions dude
Pakistan

[Jeff #111]

R.Ph. 380 Sounds like someone wants a 1911 to stay C & L.
Bill

What are you talking about???? What does this have to do with the automatic revolver design? Please explain.

[Jart]

What are you talking about???? What does this have to do with the automatic revolver design? Please explain.

I am neither R.Ph. 380 nor do I portray him on the internet, but I believe I can offer some reasonable guesswork.

The OP floated two threads: one on automatic revolvers and one on "smoothest, shortest and lightest trigger pull".

So I surmise he's looking for 1911-ish trigger or reasonable facsimile in a revolver. Why does he want a revolver?

Surely not "simplicity" - the Mateba is the Bavarian coo-coo clock of firearms.

Not "reliability" - the lightest and shortest trigger shoots that smooth between the cheeks.

From the OP we get this:
...i want the revolver for ccw without compromising the potency of calibre at any cost.
He wants a .357 power factor.

Not reliability, not simplicity, probably not ammo flexibility, no reason to assume blue steel and wood, elegance or any other mantra we have memorized from revolver love threads. It is not unreasonable to conjecture that he'd throw all that under the bus for a satisfactory trigger.

He wants a single action type trigger with a stout round.

So, we either get a single action type trigger to operate (in DA) a DA revolver or, here's the leap: we get a semi-auto that has a .357 power factor.

One is easier than the other. The first alternative requires that we repeal several laws of the physical universe, the second requires that one remove his virtual self from the revolver forum and plunk it down in semiautos - see what's there apart from the obvious Desert Eagle, perhaps a Coonan, who knows?

But as Wesley Snipes noted:
Some [folks] are always trying to ice skate uphill.

It's easier to up the power level of a handgun with a light, short trigger than to operate a double action with a single action trigger (without using one's thumb).

Hence, what R.Ph. 380 was suggesting was that the OP get himself to another section of the forum and quite trying to ice skate uphill.

But he did it in ten words. Clearly, I have much to learn in re: concise.

[zeeshan]

Also, IMHO the heavy trigger of a DA revolver is a benefit in a SD situation because a frightened person experiences a surge of adrenaline that boosts strength and causes a loss of fine motor skills. Add an excessively light trigger to this equation and you've got a recipe for an unintentional discharge.
__________________

its an intresting theory

[zeeshan]

Quote:
What are you talking about???? What does this have to do with the automatic revolver design? Please explain.

I am neither R.Ph. 380 nor do I portray him on the internet, but I believe I can offer some reasonable guesswork.

The OP floated two threads: one on automatic revolvers and one on "smoothest, shortest and lightest trigger pull".

So I surmise he's looking for 1911-ish trigger or reasonable facsimile in a revolver. Why does he want a revolver?

Surely not "simplicity" - the Mateba is the Bavarian coo-coo clock of firearms.

Not "reliability" - the lightest and shortest trigger shoots that smooth between the cheeks.

From the OP we get this:

Quote:
...i want the revolver for ccw without compromising the potency of calibre at any cost.

He wants a .357 power factor.

Not reliability, not simplicity, probably not ammo flexibility, no reason to assume blue steel and wood, elegance or any other mantra we have memorized from revolver love threads. It is not unreasonable to conjecture that he'd throw all that under the bus for a satisfactory trigger.

He wants a single action type trigger with a stout round.

So, we either get a single action type trigger to operate (in DA) a DA revolver or, here's the leap: we get a semi-auto that has a .357 power factor.

One is easier than the other. The first alternative requires that we repeal several laws of the physical universe, the second requires that one remove his virtual self from the revolver forum and plunk it down in semiautos - see what's there apart from the obvious Desert Eagle, perhaps a Coonan, who knows?

But as Wesley Snipes noted:

Quote:
Some [folks] are always trying to ice skate uphill.

It's easier to up the power level of a handgun with a light, short trigger than to operate a double action with a single action trigger (without using one's thumb).

Hence, what R.Ph. 380 was suggesting was that the OP get himself to another section of the forum and quite trying to ice skate uphill.

But he did it in ten words. Clearly, I have much to learn in re: concise.
intresting analysis

[Jart]

Thanks.

But still all largely conjecture. No doubt colored by my lazy nature. Path of least resistance and all that.
;)

[Jeff #111]

Hey Jart at least you made an effort. I was confused. I think some posters try so hard to be concise and brief that they enter the realm of obtuse and obscure. Went right over my head. :D

[Gonzo_308]

It's obvious english is not his first language. Please be polite, patient and understanding.

That said. In my opinion Colt has a better trigger pull than Smith and Wesson and Smith and Wesson has a better trigger pull than Ruger.

I personally prefer the Smith and Wesson designs to the Colt because I think they're sturdier and less complicated.

I dont know what kind of selection you.

If I were going out today to get a good self defense revolver it would be a Smith and Wesson model 686-5 or older.

THe only thing, short of modification by a gunsmith, that will improve your accuracy with the double action trigger pull is practice.

Practice using .38 special ammo and leave a chamber or charge hole, empty when you practice so you see how much your pull is making the gun move.

Also, I think installing a laser on the gun for dry fire practice is a great way to see what your pull does to the point of aim. chasing that dot in dry fire practice will teach you to smooth things out quickly.

helped me dramatically when practicing shooting my tiny little J frame from the hip.

[s4s4u]

I perfer revolvers to pistols. The problem is accuracy. I want a revolver which auto cocks and thusit will be more accurate. Secondly, i want the revolver for ccw without compromising the potency of calibre at any cost.
what are your recommendations?

I think you're SOL on that ideal my friend. Do you have two thumbs, works for me ;-)

[Jart]

...
That said. In my opinion Colt has a better trigger pull than Smith and Wesson and Smith and Wesson has a better trigger pull than Ruger.

I've found Colt and S&W to be different but "better" is slippery. Colt stacks.

Being polite is good advice regardless of one's native language. My point (actually I was laying it off on another poster) wasn't dealing with how something was being asked rather than what was being asked. But then I'm a long time advocate of doing things the easy way and have had my own issues coming to terms with a revolver's DA trigger.

It did cross my mind that someone might be located in a place where big bore semiautos are more heavily regulated than revolvers but that's yet more conjecture.

Shouting, especially in color, is considered rude in many circles. Anyone self-appointing themselves the internet's Miss Manners should remember that. At least I've noticed that "Dear Abby" kept her typefaces under tight control.
;)

[Live_Free]

Not sure if the divorce, or the gun would cost more:

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=111328186

[zeeshan]

It's obvious english is not his first language. Please be polite, patient and understanding.

That said. In my opinion Colt has a better trigger pull than Smith and Wesson and Smith and Wesson has a better trigger pull than Ruger.

I personally prefer the Smith and Wesson designs to the Colt because I think they're sturdier and less complicated.

I dont know what kind of selection you.

If I were going out today to get a good self defense revolver it would be a Smith and Wesson model 686-5 or older.

THe only thing, short of modification by a gunsmith, that will improve your accuracy with the double action trigger pull is practice.

Practice using .38 special ammo and leave a chamber or charge hole, empty when you practice so you see how much your pull is making the gun move.

Also, I think installing a laser on the gun for dry fire practice is a great way to see what your pull does to the point of aim. chasing that dot in dry fire practice will teach you to smooth things out quickly.

helped me dramatically when practicing shooting my tiny little J frame from the hip.
__________________
Loaded like a freight train, flyin' like an aeroplane!


thanks for your kindness and very good advise. i appreciate it.

[Gonzo_308]

I've found Colt and S&W to be different but "better" is slippery. Colt stacks.

This is true. It seems to be heavier at the back of the pull and Smith seems to require more initial force.

This is merely opinion and perception on my part.

I learned on a model 10, my first gun purchase was a King Cobra and my first duty weapon was a model 686.

I doubt I'll carry anything but a Smith ever again.

Zeeshan, It was a pleasure helping you. Please dont be discouraged by some others who were less willing to help.

That isn't a knock on anybody else but I have what I need.

[Socrates]

How much practice are you likely to get with any gun in Pakistan?

[zeeshan]

How much practice are you likely to get with any gun in Pakistan?
sorry i couldnt understand your question sir.

[Gonzo_308]

Our impressions of Pakistan are that it wouldn't be too easy to go to the pistol range. All we know about your country is what we see on the news.

[zeeshan]

Our impressions of Pakistan are that it wouldn't be too easy to go to the pistol range. All we know about your country is what we see on the news.
__________________


there are pistol ranges for civilians in pakistan. i am a memeber of a handgun club in pakistan. we here dont have well equipped ranges like states but we manage:)