Why don't revolver carriers worry about capacity?

[OhioGuy]

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?"

[Lohman446]

In another thread it is pointed out I am being fatalistic but I believe the hour of your death is appointed and the only say you have in it is how you face it.

I also believe that a situation that would require me to need more than 5 involves either one very competent and determined individual or likely multiple competent and determined individuals. I believe I know the limit of my own skills and I doubt, given the reactionary nature of not being the aggressor, that I can defeat multiple determined and competent attackers before I am overcome.

So for me I accept five. It’s highly unlikely I ever fire a single round in a combat situation. It’s orders of magnitude more unlikely I need more than 5. In the event I do need more than five it’s more orders of magnitude more unlikely that I would be successful in using them. I’m also not in a position where if I’m out of ammunition I suddenly have zero ability to defend myself.

So if I meet the Valkyries with an empty and smoking J frame I will have this befuddled look wondering how, living a fairly peaceful lifestyle in a relatively safe area of the modern world, I managed to die in combat. Considering all four of my grandparents died of cancer there are likely worse ways to go.

Edit: I feel I must note my opinion relates only to me. Others know their circumstances better than I do and should be free to make the choices they feel are appropriate in regards to their natural right of effective self defense.

Edit 2: to avoid spiraling this thread out of hand I will avoid responding other than to answer questions posed or clarify my position in the event I have failed to properly express it

[JohnKSa]

Once the conscious choice to carry a revolver has been made, so has the conscious choice to be limited by revolver capacity. That cuts down on the arguments about capacity among revolver carriers, especially since the variance in capacity among the typical defensive revolvers is relatively small.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

Once the conscious choice to carry a revolver has been made, so has the conscious choice to be limited by revolver capacity. That cuts down on the arguments about capacity among revolver carriers, especially since the variance in capacity among the typical defensive revolvers is relatively small.

You mean 6 shot revolver owners don't scream at 5 shot revolver owners that they're guarantee to die?

[BBarn]

I suspect they simply prefer revolvers. They may feel being comfortable and confident with the gun and being competent with it is more important than how many shots they can take.

[reteach]

I carry the Ruger .327 LCRX in my pocket. I do think that six will be enough because I avoid chancy places and I plan to get away from whatever trouble I do run into as quickly as I can. In other words, I don't want to be in a long gunfight and I will do my best to avoid that. Because of my lifestyle, odds are in favor of me never having to draw my gun in self defense, and odds are even greater in favor me never having to fire more than six shots.

However, I do carry a speed loader. For the .327, the speed loader is very light and I really forget it's there. "There" is in an old flip phone pouch on my belt. An observer would have to look real close to see that the pouch contains anything gun related.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

Once the conscious choice to carry a revolver has been made, so has the conscious choice to be limited by revolver capacity. That cuts down on the arguments about capacity among revolver carriers, especially since the variance in capacity among the typical defensive revolvers is relatively small.

Is the conscious decision "5 shots are enough" necessary before carrying a revolver, or does one choose a revolver on other merits and then accept the capacity?

Just curious about the thought process.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by reteach

I carry the Ruger .327 LCRX in my pocket. I do think that six will be enough because I avoid chancy places and I plan to get away from whatever trouble I do run into as quickly as I can. In other words, I don't want to be in a long gunfight and I will do my best to avoid that. Because of my lifestyle, odds are in favor of me never having to draw my gun in self defense, and odds are even greater in favor me never having to fire more than six shots.

However, I do carry a speed loader. For the .327, the speed loader is very light and I really forget it's there. "There" is in an old flip phone pouch on my belt. An observer would have to look real close to see that the pouch contains anything gun related.

As someone who's used to changing magazines on the run between strings of fire, using speed loaders or speed strips seems more complex and to require more focused attention. Unsure whether I would put enough practice into becoming truly proficient. I guess in my mind right now I see 5 as what I have available.

[thesmithiz]

I have both revolvers and semis and really will/would carry based on my mood of the day. Not to make it sound flippant but as others point out I'm getting the hell out of harms way with a minimum of effort. Lastly, in a lot of situations the mere fact that you produce a gun could provoke a retreat of said bad person and I pray none of us ever sees the day we are in a gun battle..... then I think the world has truly gone crazy.

[Nick_C_S]

Do revolver carriers just have a different philosophy of what counts as "enough?"

I don't know. That's the short answer.

Background: I'm a revolver guy - through and through. I have a CCW and live in the California central valley (Sacramento area). It's warm here. So about nine months out of the year, I kind of have to carry a sub-compact 9mm. It conceals with light clothing. My Kahr CW9 holds 7 in the mag and one in the pipe.

But my preferred carry piece - the one I'm most comfortable shooting; and feel the most confident with - is a Smith 686+ (7-shot) with a 3" bbl. It's a burly revolver but conceals nicely with a windbreaker. That burliness gives it the mass I need to control 357 ammo in a defense situation. I like carrying it. (I do on occasion, carry it in the summer. Such as to the range where nobody cares; or to the gas station where I'm only going to get out of my car to pump gas. Fast food drive throughs too - where I'm not exiting the vehicle.)

Whether carrying the 9mm or the 357, I do not carry extra ammo. I live in a town with a good police presence. I'm going on the theory that it is highly unlikely I would need to reload before police arrive.

If my 357 was a six shot, I'd still carry it - without spare ammo.

I have a 38 Special 5-shot J-frame (Model 60), but I don't carry it. It's not on my permit because I'm not comfortable shooting it (in Ca you must specify up to three guns to have on your permit). I fancy myself a good shot with revolvers (I get lots of compliments at the range); but could never master the J-frame. My hands are small, and yet the little 5-shot Smith feels uncomfortably small in my hand. I can't "roll back" the trigger smoothly - hard to explain.

If I did carry a 5-shot, the low ammo capacity would start to be a concern. I can't rationally explain it - that's just where my concern starts to kick in. Fortunately, I have no need to dwell on it. I like my 7-shot L-frame - It gives me maximum confidence.

[reteach]

Just curious about the thought process.

For me, it's hard to determine which factor came first. The first handguns I shot were revolvers, and the first four or five handguns I bought for myself were revolvers. But then I bought a hi-cap 9 mm, and then a compact 9 mm, and carried those for years. And then recently I've gone to a revolver for ccw.

So I was convinced that the revolver had merits from those early days. But then I guess I decided that 5 or 6 were enough. One thing that helped greatly in the decision was the introduction of the LCR series. I tried carrying a Ruger Speed Six with 2 3/4 barrel. It was too big and heavy for me as an iwb gun. The LCR, being light and easy to conceal, and having such a good trigger, etc., made it easy for me to switch to a revolver.

But I couldn't swear that that was the order of my thoughts. Challenging question.

[Tom Servo]

Honestly, if six rounds of .357 Magnum doesn't solve my problem, a handgun was never the solution.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Honestly, if six rounds of .357 Magnum doesn't solve my problem, a handgun was never the solution.

The standard response to your statement is usually "what, you don't think you can miss?" And sometimes that line of reasoning leads to the need for 15 rounds plus 30 in reloads. I've always wondered, if somebody is in so dire a situation that they've missed a dozen times before they've presumably won the fight, well, those dozen misses just went somewhere and that's probably bad. For all the trick shooting we can do at range competitions, in any scenario in which there's a chance of missing, maybe one should not yet be shooting.

Such arguments often reference police miss rates in shootouts with criminals. But police are chasing down criminals. I don't think we have any such intentions.

In all likelihood my EDC will 90% remain my 8+1 9mm semi auto. But I really like this little J frame.

[labnoti]

The revolver shooter is well-advised to train for the "most-likely case." Those who insist on a minimum of 20-round magazines are focusing on "worst-case scenarios." They often defend their practice with worst-case anecdotes. Equipment selected for worst-case scenarios may or may not be a disadvantage, but worst-case thinking always shifts attention and resources away from the most-likely case.

Something that every person practicing personal protection should be focused on is a 100% hit rate for the first shot. None of us can afford the liability that comes with anything less. Because of this, the little j-frame or LCR pocket revolvers are ill-advised -- not because they have only five shots, but because they make a 100% hit rate for the first shot needlessly difficult.

A person who is poorly trained, poorly equipped, and who perceives themselves at a greater disadvantage with greater inability is more likely to shoot sooner, and shoot more often. Under extreme duress, they're going to reach their personal last resort quickly. That could mean shoot, or shoot again. "When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." For the person who lacks training and skill, the last round in their pistol is the last resort. It needs to come as late as possible for them, and they're likely to prefer equipment that will put that out farther. They're aware that they'll shoot sooner and longer.

Contrast this with someone who has more extensive training, who is comfortable working with multiple skills, who has many more options. They have verbal de-escalation skills, are practiced in command and control presence, moving and shooting are familiar to them rather than something they've never done before. They're adept at a variety of distances and in different lighting conditions. Shooting in buildings and around vehicles is something they've practiced. They have the skills and equipment that give them confidence -- not confidence to get into or stay longer in high-risk situations -- but to get out of them quickly without losing control and immediately going to the last resort. They won't necessarily choose a lower capacity gun, but they will be focused on problems that are more challenging than how soon their first reload will come.

The most-likely case is going to demand a 100% hit rate for the first shot. It may very well demand more than one shot on target, but it will also demand a present threat each and every time the trigger is pulled. 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 where 16 shots cannot solve the problem but 17 can.

[JERRYS.]

because you will run out of time before you run out of ammo.

[JimCunn]

"Just curious about the thought process".

Different strokes, different folks.

I don't worry about capacity when carrying a J-frame.
Takes 3 seconds to reload it, so you won't likely have the opportunity anyway, in the unlikely event you should need to do so.

My Dad used one to defend against more than a dozen unsuccessful armed robbery attempts, and he never needed to reload. I don't think he ever fired more than two shots during an attempt, and usually, none. He never killed anyone (never attempted to), and was finally killed on a day when he wasn't carrying.

In my mind, a J-frame is adequate for the job.

[AK103K]

I would hope that whatever you choose, youre realistic about youre choices, based on what you can do with it across a number of possible situations while under stress.

If you do just a quick search on police shootings, you will find more than a few, that burned up a lot of ammo in short order, and few hits were actually made, and thats coming from people who were supposedly "trained", and with qualifying credentials.

How much training and qualifications do you have out the gate with what you choose to carry, and what do you do regularly to try and remain competent?

I know a number of people who carry a gun, who have never once drawn it loaded from a holster and fired it under just range induced stress. Most of them only shoot a couple of times a year too.

Whatever you pick is what you have, and you get to live or die with the choice, and what goes with it, that might make it effective. And the "what goes with it" part, is really more important than what it is too.

Hope, or luck, isnt a skill. If thats the plan, then its probably not going to matter what you carry.

[jetinteriorguy]

I look at it like this, I stay away from risky neighborhoods and have a good sense of awareness at all times. If I miss all six shots, that hunk of steel will make a dandy club along with my Gerber boot knife. I'm perfectly comfy with my Smith model 67 and .38sp+p and a couple speed strips if I get the chance to reload.

[JohnKSa]

You mean 6 shot revolver owners don't scream at 5 shot revolver owners that they're guarantee to die?

People will argue about anything, so yeah, you can find discussions about 5 or 6, but I think it's not hard to understand why arguing about a single round doesn't generate the same heat and light as a discussion where the difference is 8 rounds or more--where tripling the capacity is a reasonable option and even quadrupling it is possible.

Is the conscious decision "5 shots are enough" necessary before carrying a revolver, or does one choose a revolver on other merits and then accept the capacity?

1. I never said anything about "5 shots are enough".
2. I imagine it's different for different people but I'm not sure that whether the chicken or the egg came first matters all that much. Since you specifically asked about "revolver carriers" the decision to live with revolver capacity numbers has already been made, regardless of whether it came first or not.

And sometimes that line of reasoning leads to the need for 15 rounds plus 30 in reloads. I've always wondered, if somebody is in so dire a situation that they've missed a dozen times before they've presumably won the fight, well, those dozen misses just went somewhere and that's probably bad.

First you inflate a comment about "six rounds" into a comment about 15 to 30 and then you speculate about someone missing a dozen times.

Maybe it's not 15 to 30, maybe it's only 8 rounds, and maybe there were only a couple of misses, maybe it was just that there were 3 attackers.

We can make up scenarios all day to argue about, especially if we are willing to make up the arguments too (e.g. going from 6 rounds to 15-30 rounds) instead of just addressing the comments that have actually been made.

[5150]

Originally Posted by Lohman446

In another thread it is pointed out I am being fatalistic but I believe the hour of your death is appointed and the only say you have in it is how you face it.

I also believe that a situation that would require me to need more than 5 involves either one very competent and determined individual or likely multiple competent and determined individuals. I believe I know the limit of my own skills and I doubt, given the reactionary nature of not being the aggressor, that I can defeat multiple determined and competent attackers before I am overcome.

So for me I accept five. It’s highly unlikely I ever fire a single round in a combat situation. It’s orders of magnitude more unlikely I need more than 5. In the event I do need more than five it’s more orders of magnitude more unlikely that I would be successful in using them. I’m also not in a position where if I’m out of ammunition I suddenly have zero ability to defend myself.

So if I meet the Valkyries with an empty and smoking J frame I will have this befuddled look wondering how, living a fairly peaceful lifestyle in a relatively safe area of the modern world, I managed to die in combat. Considering all four of my grandparents died of cancer there are likely worse ways to go.

Edit: I feel I must note my opinion relates only to me. Others know their circumstances better than I do and should be free to make the choices they feel are appropriate in regards to their natural right of effective self defense.

Edit 2: to avoid spiraling this thread out of hand I will avoid responding other than to answer questions posed or clarify my position in the event I have failed to properly express it

I agree with your post. I also like your reference to the Valkyries.


Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95

[lee n. field]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

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,

Eight round .38/.357 guns are out there. None higher that I can think of.

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?"

"different philosophy"? Yes.

There's a few different takes on it.

1. "Carry a second snub for your reload."
2. Statistics show that the typical self defensive shooting is over in very few shots. The need to reload in a self defensive shooting is extremely rare.
3. The gun is reloaded if you get even one fresh round int he cylinder, so don't sweat getting it perfect, get back in the fight.

The way I look at it, I'm quite unlikely to ever need to use this anyway, in my normal activities and environments. If I'm going into the sketchy areas around here, I might very well "gun up" a bit, if I can't avoid it.

[dahermit]

I carry a S&W Model 36, 5-shot, snub nose. I could carry my Browning High Power with 15 shots, but then I know that it is just too heavy and too much trouble compared to the little M36...which I carry when ever I leave the house. In short, I carry something that is no trouble to carry rather than something I will get tired of carrying because of the weight and size and would likely begin to leave it home.

[OhioGuy]

Well I've started training with a 442 because I got a good deal on it. if I begin carrying it with any real frequency I will probably consider getting some crimson Trace laser grips for it because the sights are so miniscule.

if I were going to carry a revolver all the time, I'm sure I would probably consider something that holds 6 shots with a 3 inch barrel.

[kymasabe]

I carried a J frame and never felt undergunned. When you decide to carry a revolver, you accept the fact that you're limited to 5 rounds.

[shurshot]

Most of the time I carry a revolver off duty, instead of one of my semi automatic weapons. Why? Because I trust the cylinder gun to function more reliably. I have observed and experienced far too many semiauto's jam up. Poor ammo, bad magazine, loose grip, whatever the reason, it has caused me to tap and rack, clear the jam. Not that revolvers are perfect (they too can stop functioning), but they have been far better performers over the years for me. I'll take the 5 or 6 shots a quality built revolver offers, along with speedloaders or speedstrips full of spare ammunition. Revolver grips usely fit my hand better and are easier for me to shoot well with. Works for me.