Revolver or Semi in a gunfight?

[Baylorattorney]

A revolver. Any questions?ImageUploadedByTapatalk1345097007.541879.jpg

[Baylorattorney]

Lol. Jk. I would feel secure enough with my Ruger New Model Blackhawk .357 magnum as I would my Colt Delta Elite. Granted if the fight went on longer than the average, I'd prefer the semi which holds 9 rounds 8+1 and is quicker to reload than my Blackhawk.

[Glenn Dee]

Just my opinion...

In an up close down and dirty gunfight a revolver would be better. My reasoning is a revolver is much less likely to malfunction due to firing position, or contact shots. Not that an auto will malfunction... It may malfunction. Also I believe in an up close fight a revolver is easier to control, and more likely to be retained.

On a side note... I met an officer who carried a model 60 all the time. he sharpened the front sight to be close to a knife blade. If someone grabbed his gun he could pull back and cut the offenders hand open.

[45_auto]

If they were trying to get his gun and he could pull it back from them, why wouldn't he just shoot them with it at that point?

Sharpening a front sight seems like a pretty stupid thing to do to a gun.

[militant]

Which ever one your better at shooting with.

[militant]

Or an automatic...just almost every military, police, swat team ect, that trust them and are much more likely to be in a gun fight then me.

[Gunnut17]

In almost any circumstance, I think a semi is the way to go.

But if the one shooting at me has a scoped Remington 700 or something, a really long barreled revolver would be better than say, a Glock 17.

[SRH78]

It really depends on a lot of factors but I will put it this way. I carry an M&P 357 Sig because it is easier to conceal but my GP100 357 magnum sits on my nightstand with my Super Redhawk right beside it.

[PT-92]

To each his or her own but I want the greater capacity every time in the urban areas I must traverse (I know, no one ever needs that much capacity and so on but I prefer it). The ease of a mag change is simply natural to me as well and I would really have to drill with revolver speed loaders (if I want to even approach Jerry Miciluk's speed ).

[TXAZ]

I think Baylorattorney has the definitive answer for a revolver

That sir, is a REVOLVER!

[Straightshooter629]

My daily carry weapon is a 6-shot .357 revolver, and with a couple of speed loaders, I would still lean toward the revolver. I am very confident in my abilities with the revolver, and you can't question the stopping power of the .357. 'Nuf said!

[10mmAuto]

Revolvers are great concealed carry weapons and woods defense guns.

That being said, no professional gunfighters carry revolvers because they aren't carrying for woods defense or concealed carry, they're ready for a gunfight and that's why they carry an auto.

[Single Six]

I don't think that I qualify as a "professional gun fighter", having never been in a gunfight [thank God!], but I am full-time LE of 23 years experience. On my own time, I quite often do pack a DA revolver, specifically a stainless 4" Ruger GP-100, backed up with 2 reloads. I feel no qualms about doing so, having begun my career thus armed before the auto transition caught up to me. Mind you, I do pack an auto sometimes off-duty, but the wheelgun is still a viable tool. No less an authority than Clint Smith has said as much, in print...and he HAS been in gunfights.

[45_auto]

no professional gunfighters carry revolvers

A friend of mine's son is a Delta operator. I can't think of any occupation where "professional gunfighter" would be more appropriate. He carries a lightweight S&W J-frame everywhere - both at home and on deployments.

[SFsc616171]

Webley said:"While the best type of gun depends upon the situation, revolvers do have some distinct advantages that make them better suited to certain circumstances.

-Revolvers require nothing more than another pull of the trigger to deal with a misfire as doing so rotates a fresh cartridge into play.

I HAVE PROVEN THIS WITH DIFFERENT AMMO, ON THE FIRING LINE.

-Revolvers are also immune to grip-induced malfunctions so long as the shooter has enough strength to hold the gun and pull the trigger.

NO 'LIMPWRISTING'. JUST GRAB THE DAMN THING!

-Revolvers can be fired multiple times at contact distance without the possibility of being shoved out of battery.

BEST PHOTO RECORD OF THIS IS MR. JACK RUBY. THERE IS NO 'SLIDE' TO DISLODGE.

-A revolver with a shrouded or fully enclosed hammer can be fired from under or inside a cover garment or handbag should the need arise.

-Revolvers are much more tolerant of wide variances in ammunition such as bullet shape and power level thus giving the user more room to tailor his/her choice of ammunition to that which best suits his/her needs.

A SEMI-AUTOMATIC NEEDS ENOUGH RECOIL TO MAKE THE SLIDE MOVE, ERGO, REVOLVERS CAN FIRE 'SOFT' LOADS.

-Revolvers do not cause bullet setback from repeated loading and unloading as semi-autos can sometimes do.

-Revolvers have a very simple manual of arms which makes them easy to use for people who are not particularly well acclimated to handguns.

HAVING SHOT SEMI-AUTO'S THAT HAVE HAD MALFUNCTIONS, THE REVOLVER IS SIMPLER TO 'GET DOWN' AND 'WRAP YOUR BRAIN AROUND'.

-Revolvers can be left loaded for long periods of time (several years) without worry about compression and wear of springs.

THERE IS A HISTORY LINE OF MAGAZINE SPRINGS GETTING A 'MEMORY', AS DO SOME RECHARGEABLE BATTERIES. READ THE LATE STEPHEN CAMP'S BLOGGINGS ABOUT SUCH A THING.

-Revolvers require nothing more than the gun itself and loose cartridges in order to made ready to fire (no worries about damaged or lost magazines).

A YOUTUBE VIDEO BY 'USAFMILLER' ABOUT HANDGUNS, HAS MADE THE SAME STATEMENT. THERE ARE THOSE THAT DO THINK THAT SOME SORT OF 'SPEEDLOADER' MIGHT BE SOMETHING TO CONSIDER, SO BE ADVISED.

-The grip of a revolver is not limited by the size and shape of the magazine so aftermarket grips can be made in a wider variety of sizes and shapes to better fit a wider variety of shooters' hands.

YOU CAN FIND SOME REALLY NICE PIECES OF WOODWORK GRIPS, OR 'STOCKS', AS WELL AS HOGUE RUBBER GRIPS. I HAVE A S&W MOD 15-3, WITH A HOGUE GRIP, AND ANOTHER 15-3 WITH THE S&W WOOD GRIPS. BOTH WORK WELL, AND GIVES EACH PIECE THAT PARTICULAR 'CHARACTER' UNTO ITSELF.


-Revolvers can chamber more powerful cartridges than semi-autos without being made so large and heavy that they become too burdensome to carry. "

CONSIDERING ELMER KEITH USED A S&W 38-44, TO DEVELOP HANDLOADS THAT EVENTUALLY BECAME THE CHAMBERING THAT IS KNOWN AS 357 MAGNUM, THIS IS TRUE.

The revolver, in hand, must feel as an extension of your hand, with the necessary balance, so that when you have it in position, it is as natural as pointing your finger. The cartridge chambering is your choice, with the resultant controlled recoil, with the firing range practice to put them on the mark, all resultant of your choice. Read well on revolvers, examine as many as you can before you buy, until you find 'the one'.

"May your six shots be where you want them, with the deliberant quickness necessary, to make your day long, and ruin that chosen day of the BG!"

[MARKDANIEL]

If i possibly could not avoid it I guess a semi auto like this would do http://barrett.net/firearms/model82a1

[OldMarksman]

Is there any distinct advantage of a revolver in an engagement?

Some revolvers can be fired in a jacket pocket, and that can be an advantage in some situations.

If one has to engage a dangerous person at some distance, most of us would be better off with a revolver with a clean light trigger pull and a long sight radius than with most semi-autos.

[10mmAuto]

A friend of mine's son is a Delta operator. I can't think of any occupation where "professional gunfighter" would be more appropriate. He carries a lightweight S&W J-frame everywhere - both at home and on deployments

As a secondary back up to his Glock 22, which itself is a back up to his 416, 417, M110, or whatever his primary is.

[edfrompa]

Revolver, shot placement is what counts.

[Glenn Dee]

.45 Auto

Just because someone try's to take your gun dont mean you can shoot them. Just because you have a gun dont mean you should always shoot them.

Ok I can respect your opinion that sharpening the front sight is stupid. However I disagree. I think it's kind of a nifty idea. About as smart as putting a bayonette on a rifle. Not all guns are safe queens or are all owners looking to maintain some resale value. 2" Jframes are not meant to be tack drivers. I'm sure some folks can drive tacks with them. This thread is about surviving a gun fight. The best way to survive a gunfight is to avoid one. If your opponent is that close up on you (what J frames are designed for) I can see a sharp front sight being pretty usefull. It's just in my opinion of a practical soloution. So.... I'm looking for an inexpensive /shooter model 60... and I'm going to sharpen the front sight.

[MLeake]

Seems to me that practicing retention skills would be a more effective, and safer, method than sharpening a front sight. I suspect injuries to the user are more likely with the sharp sight, than the likelihood of use against a grabber. I could also see a couple of non-injury related drawbacks to this: damage to holsters over time from drawing the weapon, and eventual bending/warping of the sight. (Sharpened edges tend to be easier to bend or chip than less sharp edges - this is why wood axes are not razor honed.)

I do know some guys who carry TDI type knives opposite from their holsters. In the event of a grab, the idea is they can use their support hand to draw the knife and slice the gun grabber's hand or wrist. This also seems to me a more useful approach.

[357 Python]

If I expected to be in a gunfight I would bring my AR or shotgun. If limited on to revolver or semi-auto it makes little difference to me. I can use either very effectively. I started out with a revolver so I have faith in them and my ability to use them.

[Sgt127]

I don't think I've posted this in awhile....My humble thoughts on the matter:



I started out shooting revolvers many years ago. Revolvers were quite reliable to work with and then along came the autos with new improved designs, better ammunition performance and greater capacity. In truth, I felt that the reliability of the auto finally came up to a level of what I felt was the tactical equivalency of well maintained revolvers and so I began to carry an auto.

Here are some random observations I have discovered about the two weapon systems. Revolvers will occasionally malfunction and so will autos. I accept the fact that a high quality auto is just as likely, or unlikely, to break a part that stops the gun from functioning, just as any high quality revolver would should it experience catastrophic failure of a particular part. I have actually broken more parts in autos than revolvers, but I can attribute that to sheer luck. Slide stops have broken, firing pins have broken, but statistically, I would argue that neither one is likely to just "break" when you need it.

On the few occasions that I have had a revolver stop working, it was a cumulative effect of shooting. It started to get dirty, crap under the extractor star, the barrel cylinder gap got lead and powder residue, the chambers got sticky from lots of .38's and then having to force a .357 into the chamber. In other words, most of the problems came on slowly. I knew eventually the gun was going to stop working because of the indicators it gave; such as the trigger pull beginning to feel heavy or the bind I felt when attempting to close the cylinder.

However, there were times that for no apparent reason, a clean, well-lubed auto, would sometimes just not feed, fire, or eject a round. The bullet nose would catch on the feed-ramp, an empty round would fail to get out of the way of the next round, or there would be some other type of failure that seemed to occur randomly, and without warning.

Standing on the line, at the range, neither gun failed very often. Nice firm grip, dry hands, locked wrists, all is well in the world of hand-gunning. But, in the neat world of tactical hand-gunning when a deadly force confrontation erupts, we know that it is anything but a static situation or under perfect conditions!

Recently, I have watched a few episodes of "Under Fire" on Court TV. Autos, good quality (and, hopefully) well maintained autos, sometimes crap out in the middle of a gunfight. These incidents can be attributed to such things as: a weak one-handed grip, or perhaps coming out of battery when rolling around on the ground, or when the weapon is shoved against the bad guy, or whatever else that can impact a weapon system in a serious close quarter fight. The auto needs a solid platform to work off of. In the real world of close quarter fighting you must remember this should your weapon malfunction!

At distances where the Officer could maneuver, even though it was still in close proximity to the suspect, the auto rarely seemed to jam. But, if the fight closed all the way down to contact distance, then there is the chance that the auto could turn into a single shot weapon.

As an example of this, there is one particular episode that comes to mind involving an Officer fighting with an experienced, no-nonsense boxer, that was about to beat the Officer to death. Finally, the Officer drew his pistol and got off one shot into the BG's midsection with little effect, and, the gun jammed on the first shot! The BG then grabbed the gun and beat the Officer with it and tossed it. The Officer was able to pick it back up later in the fight. (Interesting video if you ever get a chance to see it.)

On duty, I have to carry a Glock 35. And, I'm not sure I am ready to give up the general reliability, magazine capacity, and ease of shooting of a good auto for the vast majority of shooting situations. But, as a backup, I carry a 642. And, it seems a lot of others are big fans of the little revolvers as backup guns as well.

Off duty, I find myself carrying a 3" S&W M65 more and more. I envision an off duty encounter being a very fast fight that turns into a gunfight. Bad guy rushing you with a knife, BG jumping you, knocking you down and attacking you, two guys pinning you into a corner and the fight is on. Capacity becomes secondary to utter reliability for me at that point. I can still get good hits with a revolver out to 25 yards or so, if I have to, but it's not really something I see happening. Truth be known, the odds of needing a gun at all are pretty remote, but if we are the kind of individual with the right tactical mindset, then we should plan for those unexpected events and be ready for it.

So, what are some other's thoughts? Have you taken your favorite defense auto out to the range, held it with your left hand, bent your wrist and elbow and tried getting off as many shots as you could? Have you held it upside down, or covered your hands in soapy water and then tried to shoot through an entire magazine? Have you tried shoving it into the target to see if it gets pushed out of battery? The question then is - did it jam after the first shot? I have personally done all those things and found that the reliability of a quality auto weapon went downhill.

It seems that most autos jam during the feeding and ejecting cycle. That's the one part that you do manually before and after the festivities with a revolver. During a gunfight, a revolver cannot have a feeding malfunction or an ejection malfunction. I realize that clearing an auto jam is a lot faster than clearing a revolver jam. But, that really cool "Tap-rack-bang" that you practice on the range really needs that off hand to work. If that off hand is keeping a box cutter off your throat, things go downhill in a hurry.

This is not to say if you are carrying a revolver that you couldn't experience a malfunction with it as well. As an example, I am talking about something like a high primer, making it difficult to pull through on the trigger. To combat this effect - pull the trigger REALLY hard, it just may go bang again! There are pros and cons to both of these weapon systems.

If these thoughts get a few people to thinking, and helps you to become more aware of your own abilities as well as your weapon's capabilities and limitations, then great. If it just makes you train harder, for what YOU consider a real world gunfight, even better. Remember: practice hard, practice often and be safe. Best regard to you all.

[igousigloo]

If I thought I was going to be in a gunfight, I would pick hand grenades!

[Dwight55]

This is certainly becoming a smorgasboard, just pick and choose whatever flavor you want.

BUT, . . . back to the OP question (at least the theme/theory of the question), . . . which IYHO is a better choice for a gunfight should you wind up in one.

I think all we have to do is look around at those people who carry sidearms for a living, . . . anticipate the very real probablity that in their line of work, they may be involved in a shooting altercation, . . . and see what they do.

When was the last time you saw a patrol officer with a revolver?

When was the last time you saw a USMC grunt with a revolver?

The sad part is that if they both go bad, . . . tap rack and bang usually works for the semi auto, . . . but it is gunsmith time for the revolver.

I'll have a semi auto, thank you very much, preferably in .45ACP.

May God bless,
Dwight