Why don't revolver carriers worry about capacity?

[Real Gun]

Ah, we like to argue. That assumes anyone has actually tried it.

[J.G. Terry]

What happened to me: There was a time where hearing protection was unknown. We shot without benefit of hearing protection for years. The army was slow to supply hearing protection. Ear plugs came after we qualified with M-14's Afterward it was shotguns and rifles at home. What was happening is the accumulated damage to the hearing. When you hear the ringing the damage is done. Today I wear a hearing aid. My partner gave me a pair of high end electronic ear muffs. He said he was tired of yelling at me. Anybody that regularly shoots without hearing protection is headed for an ear trumpet. It's just plain stupid not to use hearing protection.

Added: Do you think a compact Glock like a G26 or G27 would work OK for confrontations less than 10 yards. Would the bullets just bounce of the targets?

[StihlKicking]

Originally Posted by labnoti

Prevailing wound ballistic theory does not agree with this. Higher velocity or heavier bullet magnums are not considered to do meaningfully more damage than other bullets that expand and penetrate sufficiently. They either penetrate further and exit the body without further effect, or they cause slightly greater temporary stretch of surrounding tissue without further damage because of the elasticity of that tissue.



If this theory of wound ballistics is true, it has profound meaningfulness especially to those loading and carrying 357 and other "magnum" cartridges. If this is correct, Magnum users have an acute opportunity to do something that is possibly very counterproductive and at best completely useless.



It is important to understand that this theory does not negate all the value of 357 Magnum or make 38 Special "just as good." What it does suggest is that 357 Magnum, 125 grains loaded to 1100 fps is enough and that loading it to 1600 fps or 158 grains to 1400 fps is not any better. But, sorry, 125 grain 38 Special loaded to 890 fps still sucks.

Theory may not agree with this but real world shooting does. I’m not up to speed on ballistic theory or very interested in it. However I have shot enough critters with a hand gun over the last 30 years to understand which loads kill the quickest and most efficiently.

I’m more interested in the damage a bullet does to a living creature rather than a block of jelly.

[Forte S+W]

The simple answer is because it comes with the territory and they feel confident that 5-8 rounds of ammunition is sufficient.

Personally, I could see carrying something like a S&W TRR8 or a Taurus 627 and not feeling underarmed. .357 Magnum has a long and storied history of effectiveness which I don't doubt, so if you're a good shot and can land those shots directly on target, then there's little reason to doubt that 8 rounds of .357 Magnum would be insufficient for anything less than facing multiple attackers, and in which case you're probably just as screwed with a double-stack 9mm, the only difference is you have more unfired cartridges for CSI to find in your gun afterwards.

People can argue all day about how statistically 9mm Luger is just as good *swings arm in an upward arc* as anything else because the FBI says so and simulated tests cannot detect any difference, but I imagine that a bigger stretch cavity likely equates to more pain, (Try pinching your earlobe then stretching it out, then stretch it further. Hurts more when stretched further, right?) and obviously the brighter muzzle flash and report are obviously more frightening, so there's likely also a higher probability of psychological stops with .357 Magnum versus 9mm Luger as well, and if a stop is a stop, why split hairs?

[J.G. Terry]

Miracle bullets: I read where one of the new miracle bullet in 9mm actually expands to .451. This combination should replace everything. Ha.

[Nanuk]

Nanuk

Due to all that repetitive bone damage from years of magnum use, I can see you as an old codger sitting at a table holding a spoon to sip your afternoon bowl of soup and having your wrists suddenly crumble.

Just sayin...

Dunno, I am 58 now. I have big hands/wrists. Here I am holding my Shield.

[shurshot]

Damn Nanuk, I don't think I would want to have you mad at me... I can't imagine that bear paw wrapped around my neck! Lol!!!

[J.G. Terry]

Carry Gun: How would a Glock 29, the 10mm compact, stack up against the revolvers of which you speak? That Glock handgun as a 3.77" barrels. How long is the barrel on those 357 pocket pistols?

[Nanuk]

Prevailing wound ballistic theory does not agree with this. Higher velocity or heavier bullet magnums are not considered to do meaningfully more damage than other bullets that expand and penetrate sufficiently. They either penetrate further and exit the body without further effect, or they cause slightly greater temporary stretch of surrounding tissue without further damage because of the elasticity of that tissue.

If this theory of wound ballistics is true, it has profound meaningfulness especially to those loading and carrying 357 and other "magnum" cartridges. If this is correct, Magnum users have an acute opportunity to do something that is possibly very counterproductive and at best completely useless.

It is important to understand that this theory does not negate all the value of 357 Magnum or make 38 Special "just as good." What it does suggest is that 357 Magnum, 125 grains loaded to 1100 fps is enough and that loading it to 1600 fps or 158 grains to 1400 fps is not any better. But, sorry, 125 grain 38 Special loaded to 890 fps still sucks.

Not true. The old technology 125 grain 357 mag @ 1400 fps is more effective than any common 9mm load. However, few people today can handle one effectively, and they have been largely cast aside for the altar of hicap pistols.

For the same reason the 357 Sig is effective, but, neither are popular with the jello crowd.

In real people, magnum revolver wounds can resemble rifle type wounds. Organs turn to jelly and trauma is indicative of high velocity rounds. Granted, not every one is identical but they are still very effective.

Having been a student of the gun for some decades and having been carrying a gun professionally since people still used solid lead bullets on duty. I can say that for all the "improvement" with pistol bullets, many people still take an awful lot of 9mm bullets to stop them.

[JohnKSa]

The old technology 125 grain 357 mag @ 1400 fps is more effective than any common 9mm load.

Is this based on the M&S one-shot-stop "data"? It's sort of rare to see that quoted these days given M&S' fall from grace.

If there is some hard data on stopping-power/real-world effectiveness from a reliable source that compares .357Mag with 9mm and conclusively picks a winner, I'd be interested to see it.

[Nanuk]

Is this based on the M&S one-shot-stop "data"? It's sort of rare to see that quoted these days given M&S' fall from grace.

If there is some hard data on stopping-power/real-world effectiveness from a reliable source that compares .357Mag with 9mm and conclusively picks a winner, I'd be interested to see it.

It comes from seeing it in action. As well as talking to other investigators.

You can also see jello tests that show the expansion/fragmentation of the old Remington load.

M&S were not the only ones. Massad Ayoub had the same opinion.

[JohnKSa]

Yes, it was (and probably still is) a common opinion--not arguing that. There are a lot of common opinions when it comes to handgun effectiveness. The problem is always the inevitable disappointment that results from attempts to find hard data to back up those common opinions.

[Nanuk]

Yes, it was (and probably still is) a common opinion--not arguing that. There are a lot of common opinions when it comes to handgun effectiveness. The problem is always the inevitable disappointment that results from attempts to find hard data to back up those common opinions.

That is going to be difficult to find today as most of its use was pre-internet days. I am not dissapointed, I know it works. The thing is when fired from a snubby it loses some of its mojo, and THEN it is equal to a +P or +P+ 9mm. Of course when you NEED to increase the pressure beyond spec to be effective, you should probably just get a more powerful gun.

[silvermane_1]

Is this thread going the way of the other high-cap thread?, that's the real question IMHO.

[J.G. Terry]

Direction: It's no bad thing. Looks like it boils down to ,"I like what I like," Next comes the scientific explanation with the response"....what are you thinking." Basically, it's a discussion among "Gun Guys." You don't think this bunch is opinionated? Never, not in a million years

357 SIG: Really, the 357 SIG actually has a couple of things running against it. Firstly, it is difficult to reload. I does get easier but the learning experience is tough. Next, The Big Box does not carry inexpensive ammunition.

I took my OEM 357 SIG barrel out of my G23 when the 40 S&W brouhaha started. Would my Glock 23 work at ranges 10 yards or less as a 357 SIG. Was not the 357 SIG designed to duplicate some other round in a high capacity self-loader? Now, what round was that?

Is it true that in a crisis situation it is not unusual for individuals fire all the rounds in the handgun in response? I'd still be going while somebody else is looking the the speed loader.

Added: Is not 1400fps really 1400fps regardless?

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by silvermane_1

Is this thread going the way of the other high-cap thread?, that's the real question IMHO.

Sure looks to be, and I guess it's my fault. Like an addict, "this time I thought I could control it!"

I never said a blessed thing about caliber, magnums, powder or anything. Just capacity. Pure and simple. Do you say "I think 5-6 rounds are plenty, and I like revolvers so I'll carry one?" Or do you say "I am sold on the merits of revolvers for CCW, and so I'll live with 5-6 rounds?"

Here we are discussing magnum ballistics. Anyways, the other thread is still alive and well, so I expect this will still be going at Christmas

[J.G. Terry]

Right on the topic. The caliber has to be factored in. For example, my revolver is a top break 32S&W long compared to your 10mm compact. I really don't thinks it's possible to have this kind of thread without going in the caliber direction at some point. We'll probably all agree that handgun type and caliber is a hot button topic.

I just ordered a Tom Threepersons holster for my 45 Colt caliber 4 5/8" Ruger Vaquero. Guess what's that going to be used for? Talk about old fashioned!

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

Sure looks to be, and I guess it's my fault. Like an addict, "this time I thought I could control it!"

I never said a blessed thing about caliber, magnums, powder or anything. Just capacity. Pure and simple. Do you say 1)"I think 5-6 rounds are plenty, and I like revolvers so I'll carry one?" Or do you say 2)"I am sold on the merits of revolvers for CCW, and so I'll live with 5-6 rounds?"

Here we are discussing magnum ballistics. Anyways, the other thread is still alive and well, so I expect this will still be going at Christmas

I think number 2....

[J.G. Terry]

Really not discussing caliber in number of shots is odd. Now the ballistics part is another critter. The next question after the number of shots is what? The question would follow is what caliber. Right after that follows the ballistics. Trying to control this stuff is like driving the wrong way up the interstate.

Except: How would it be if the OP stated the number of shots without regard to caliber....? To me,with some reservations, it would be fourteen. Rogues come in packs around here.

[fastbolt]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

Why don't revolver carriers worry about capacity?
I'm new to owning a revolver, and I'm not asking this question to start any fights. But I noticed that amongst semi auto carriers, you get a range of heated opinions over whether 7 rounds, 15 rounds, or 30 rounds are ever "enough"

Given that a CCW revolver carries maybe 7 at most, depending on caliber, with 5 being typical -- and reloads are much more challenging even with practice -- do revolver carriers just have a different philosophy of what counts as "enough?"

Back in the days of service revolvers capacity was the same, so aficionados would debate the purported merits of the difference calibers.

I carried a 6-shot .357MAG on-duty, and either a .357MAG, Commander (7+1/.45) or .44MAG off-duty, until I got tired of lugging full-size steel on my time off and started carrying 5-shot snubs.

Qualification courses-of-fire could involve shooting positions out to 50yds, so revolver shooters had to pay attention to basics.

Capacity isn't as high on my own list of practical concerns as it may be for other folks who have learned their handgunning skills using hi-cap pistols. I tend to prefer my retirement CCW revolvers to hold 5-6 rounds, and my pistols to hold 6-10 rounds. (Although I do own a "hi-cap" .40 that uses 12rd mags.)

Different strokes.

Personally, I'm much more concerned about being able to put the first 1-3 rounds where I intend for them to go.

[tubeshooter]

See post #15

[shurshot]

J G Terry "I just ordered a Tom Threepersons holster for my 45 Colt caliber 4 5/8" Ruger Vaquero. Guess what's that going to be used for? Talk about old fashioned!"

No argument here... that's a perfect packing pistol!!!

[Blaine Leonard]

Simple, because it's stylish af.

[IMG][/IMG]

[Radny97]

Originally Posted by labnoti

High round counts and reloads are only relevant to extreme outlier "worst case" scenarios for personal protection. We don't have to use "gunfight statistics" to limit our "options" or restrict our preparedness, but we would be ill-advised to overlook the "most likely" conditions to favor extreme outliers.

Worst-case thinking always shifts attention and resources away from the most-likely case. Believing a high-capacity magazine, greater capacity in spare magazines, or faster reloads gives a person an "undeniable edge" is clearly ignoring the most-likely case in favor of preparation for extreme outlier events.

The person who is giving attention and preparation toward the most-likely case is going to be training and practicing the skills that are important rather than dwelling on the possibility of a scenario that requires equipment other than that which gives the best opportunity for first-shot hits, sufficient effect, and complete accountability for every shot fired.

Agree wholeheartedly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jar]

There is always the classic Dump Pouch.