DA Revolver vs. 1911A1 Reliability

[44 AMP]

A small but essential point: In a semi a magazine is not an accessory.

I agree. A (or The) magazine is not an accessory. A SPARE magazine, however, is an accessory.

Today, it is usual to have a spare included, just as it was once usual for a (qualtity) pistol to come with a cleaning kit (rod, brush, swab) and I always thought S&Ws with not just the cleaning kit but also a cool screwdriver that properly fit the gun screws was a class act.

But there's still a lot of new guns out there that don't come with a spare mag included. Most duty class guns do, because its what people expect these days, but the makers aren't obligated to include a spare, because it's an accessory.

Spare = extra

[AK103K]

Not sure what youre buying, but any of the new, and used autos Ive bought over the past decade or so, have all come with at least two mags, and many of them, three.

I dont consider the spare mag as an accessory either. Since the mags tend to be the weakest link in the autos, the back up is a necessity, at least if youre smart about it.

[tipoc]

A spare mag is not an accessory either. It's a reload. What is below is also true.

I dont consider the spare mag as an accessory either. Since the mags tend to be the weakest link in the autos, the back up is a necessity, at least if youre smart about it.

Without an extra magazine you may be stuck with a single shot pistol should the initial mag be lost or damaged.

We may say "extra" or "spare" but again they are an essential part of the gun. If a gun is sold with a single mag (a cheap move by the maker) then the first thing a shooter does is go get at least 2 more mags.

tipoc

[44 AMP]

Not sure what youre buying,...

Pretty sure we're not buying the same things...

We may say "extra" or "spare" but again they are an essential part of the gun. If a gun is sold with a single mag (a cheap move by the maker) then the first thing a shooter does is go get at least 2 more mags.

I agree that getting extra mags are something we do if possible. I disagree that that a spare *(extra) magazine is an essential part of the gun.

Don't confuse a highly desirable enhancement with an essential part. ONE magazine is essential, the rest are just an improvement.

Now, don't think I'm saying I only want one magazine, all I'm saying is that if the pistol has the one it is supposed to have, it is complete and usable. Its just not as combat effective without extra loaded magazines.

I've bought a lot of pistols over the last 40 years. A few new, most used. Some of the new ones only had one magazine, many of the used ones only had one magazine. Quite a few pistols in the old days only came with one mag, especially if they weren't "duty class" type guns. When I bought (new) a Ruger Mk I it came with one mag. Browning BDA .45 (new) one mag. Heck, when I bought my first Desert Eagle, it only came with one magazine (though there was a spot in the box for another).

Lots of the used pistols I've bought only had one mag with them, One of them, a Mauser HSc I've gotten two spares and neither worked!

My main focus isn't on "combat" class pistols, though I have had dozens of 1911A1s a few Browning HiPowers, Sig P220s and some others, along with p.08 Lugers P.38 and such. One mag in the gun and its good. Additional mags with the gun are gravy.

So, yes its really nice when you get a spare or two with the gun. But they aren't essential, just valuable and desirable.

IF you only had one gun and no spare mags would you NOT carry it or keep it for home defense or hunt with it??

[AK103K]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

Pretty sure we're not buying the same things...

You might be surprised.

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

IF you only had one gun and no spare mags would you NOT carry it or keep it for home defense or hunt with it??

I wouldnt carry it any more than Id carry a revolver without a couple of speed loaders.

[tipoc]

Folks sometimes speak of splitting hairs to make a point (or give one the satisfaction of being the "winner") and this is a good example of that. One mag is essential but a second mag is just gravy, "valuable and desirable" but not really needed.

All of which is just a round about way of proving that it's faster to reload a revolver from a box of ammo off a table top than it is to reload a magazine for a 1911, and then load it in the gun, from a box of ammo also sitting on a table top. An important question of course which many users of weed debate at 3 am.

"Yeah man, but what if the first mag is the third mag and what happens if the second mag is the third mag. What then man? Then is the third mag essential? What if the esse mag is left at home then what's the gravy man?"

"Brah, you've blown my mind man! Hey, what's that smell?"

tipoc

[rodfac]

I've been shooting pistols since the late 60s, and my experience is different from yours, in that I found semi autos fail (of some kind) several times the rate that revolvers fail. No where near "about the same" failure rate.

The almost constant difference (there are exceptions) is that, USUALLY when a semi auto fails it can be cleared and returned to operability fairly rapidly, and often in the field and when a revolver fails its pretty much done until someone can do shop work on it. Usually.

Yep, my experience too. Rod

[Hal]

I thought about this thread in the last few days.....

I have a Kimber 1911 stainless - which works and shoots as any Kimber should be expected to (well and very accurate).
Recently, a "need" developed....
A tenant in one of our rentals contacted us from the hospital.
She told us that - she had to move out ASAP - her boyfriend had beat her half to death and he was stalking her.

Good chance he was going to show up and cause a lot of trouble for all concerned when we met her for the walk through & to collect the keys.

I/we never really met the guy, but, from her description he's big - real big - and can be really mean....& possibly armed...

The .45acp Shield, 9mm SIG 938 & Ruger LCP - all of a sudden felt - inadequate...
Having no holster for the Kimber - I decided to run out and pick one up.

While at the gun store, I was admiring a nice old S&W M28 they had. The sales guy mentioned it would make a great gun to go along with me on the walk through.

I told him, "Maybe, but, I'd feel a lot better with one of those S&W M69 snub noses"...

He pointed to a far counter and told me go over there for that!!!

Soooooo---early Christmas present for me & my personal answer to this thread & the whole issue of reliability...

I consider a 240 grain JHP @ roughly 1100 fps - out of a platform I have complete confidence in (D/a S&W revolver) to be the most reliable thing - - I can take into harm's way....

Sometimes - there's just more to the question of something than what meets the eye.

[hemiram]

Only real failure i've had on a revolver that took it totally out of action was when the hand broke on my Python soon after I bought it, used. Other than that, leaded up barrels was the worst issue.

The 3 1911's I've had would have been doing well to be anywhere near as good as the second worst of my revolvers.

[Nanuk]

Good choice Hal. I had the 4.125" 69 and sold it to get the shorter one. Still have not got the gun but........

[Hal]

Thanks buddy!

I've been Jonesing for a snubby M69 ever since S&W came out with the L frame .44 magnum.

My original idea was to have one custom made from a 4 1/4"- -but - -due to the two piece barrel, tat was just a dream.

It took years for a snub to show up at a local gun store. My original idea there was to wait for a used one to turn up - but - it seemed like that anyone that bought one new going in what to expect and bought one because that's what they wanted & they hung onto it.

Anyhow - very happy with mine! The Galeco Shoulder holster - not so much.
$172 for something that cuts a line in my neck after wearing it for 5 min.

[silvermane_1]

Originally Posted by Hal

I thought about this thread in the last few days.....

I have a Kimber 1911 stainless - which works and shoots as any Kimber should be expected to (well and very accurate).
Recently, a "need" developed....
A tenant in one of our rentals contacted us from the hospital.
She told us that - she had to move out ASAP - her boyfriend had beat her half to death and he was stalking her.

Good chance he was going to show up and cause a lot of trouble for all concerned when we met her for the walk through & to collect the keys.

I/we never really met the guy, but, from her description he's big - real big - and can be really mean....& possibly armed...

The .45acp Shield, 9mm SIG 938 & Ruger LCP - all of a sudden felt - inadequate...
Having no holster for the Kimber - I decided to run out and pick one up.

While at the gun store, I was admiring a nice old S&W M28 they had. The sales guy mentioned it would make a great gun to go along with me on the walk through.

I told him, "Maybe, but, I'd feel a lot better with one of those S&W M69 snub noses"...

He pointed to a far counter and told me go over there for that!!!

Soooooo---early Christmas present for me & my personal answer to this thread & the whole issue of reliability...

I consider a 240 grain JHP @ roughly 1100 fps - out of a platform I have complete confidence in (D/a S&W revolver) to be the most reliable thing - - I can take into harm's way....

Sometimes - there's just more to the question of something than what meets the eye.

A M69 subby?, you would probably better served with the Kimber with +P ammo or even 45 Super, 44 mag loses a lot out of a snubby, unless you "roll your own" with fast burning powder and even then you would still be better served with the Kimber 1911 in 45 ACP +P and/or 45 Super there Hal.

[Nanuk]

A M69 subby?, you would probably better served with the Kimber with +P ammo or even 45 Super, 44 mag loses a lot out of a snubby, unless you "roll your own" with fast burning powder and even then you would still be better served with the Kimber 1911 in 45 ACP +P and/or 45 Super there Hal.

With light for caliber bullets the 44 mag is still faster, maybe not a lot but you can also run full wadcutters..... I have been Jonesing after a 45 Super for years though.

[Hal]

A M69 subby?,

Yes sir...have wanted one since an article in a gun rag decades ago. They reviewed two different S&W M29's that had been chopped down to a 2" barrel, the frame cut down, ported and one had the trigger guard Fitzed.
They ran a whole bunch of different loads through them & came away with the surprising results that they were accurate, manageable and not bad recoiling at all - even with full boogie loads.

I have the utmost unwavering belief in my abilities with the D/A S&W revolver.
While I don't prefer the L frame - and/or any round butt S&W, I'll still rely on that before anything else.

Maybe you would be better served - - but - let me assure you, I'm not comfortable enough with the extremely accurate Kimber to say, "If I can see it, I can hit it".

[USNRet93]

Good chance he was going to show up and cause a lot of trouble for all concerned when we met her for the walk through & to collect the keys.

I/we never really met the guy, but, from her description he's big - real big - and can be really mean....& possibly armed...

Well, did he? Show up?

[Hal]

Thank God - -no.

At least - not yet anyhow.

I'm glad at this point I don't have a clean sweep (10 for 10) of the 10 commandments....I'm still holding onto that 9 out of 10 record.

[SATRP]

Buy a Springfield Armory TRP 1911-A1 .45 ACP and you'll sell your revolvers.

[Webleymkv]

There is a flaw in the original question: which specific DA revolver are we comparing to a 1911? I've personally had S&W, Colt, Ruger, Taurus, H&R, and Webley revolvers and they wall worked slightly differently and had different numbers of moving parts.

Even if we had a specific model in mind, however, the notion that a count of moving parts (or by extension complexity of design) is a good predictor of reliability is fundamentally flawed. A flintlock is much simpler and has far fewer moving parts than either a DA revolver or 1911, but few would argue that a Brown Bess is more reliable. My 2002 Ford Crown Victoria is far more complicated and has many more moving parts than my Grandfather's 1924 Ford Model T, but few would say that the old Tin Lizzie is more dependable.

[44 AMP]

Even if we had a specific model in mind, however, the notion that a count of moving parts (or by extension complexity of design) is a good predictor of reliability is fundamentally flawed.

Thank you for remembering what the OP was about.

[Drm50]

A 1911 Colt or a S&W revolver are about as dependable and durable as you can get. Pick one.

[zoo]

I'm not sure a part count on any given firearm is an adequate basis on which to determine reliability/dependability.

Such a premise strikes me as sorta silly although granted at a certain point it might become relevant.

Frankly though I'm not sure at what point that may be so.

[Blue Duck]

I have shot both extensively for over 40yrs, and seen quite a few examples of both types of guns give problems, and examples of both types of guns that practically never had a failure.
Many of the revolvers that gave problems, came from the factory with quality control issues, but a top quality revolver, once thoroughly vetted, and the possibility of factory defects eliminated, usually proved to be very very reliable, and would then only display a problem due usually to ammo issues, with high primers being one of the most common problems seen. And that problem can be eliminated by checking all of you carry ammo before depending on it. This is done by actually loading every single round in the cylinder of said gun and then spin the cylinder in the gun to see if any high primer issues show up.
Lint or dirt, or unfired powder granules getting under the extractor plate will be the next most common failure. But load a proven revolver with good ammo, and give the cylinder a spin to eliminate the question of a high primer, then put it in you holster and you will probably have a gun that is pretty much 100% reliable at least for the first 6 rounds in the cylinder.
The 1911 can also be extremely reliable, and the gun I usually trust my life with, but I have seen plenty of issues with them over the years. One problem with 1911's is there are so dammed many people making them and many to a price point. If the gun was built right, and has been supplied with proven magazines then it's pretty darned reliable. However, I have seen magazines go bad, and that is usually not evident until you experience a stoppage, and some brands of ammo don't always work in some guns.

Some guns are more ammo sensitive them others, but the 1911 does usually handle high primer issues a little better then a revolver and the 1911 will be easier to clear if a problem there does develop, where a revolver will often lock up, but like I said the revolver can be checked ahead of time for high primers, although I have seen primers back out after being fired and start dragging on the recoil plate of the revolver, but usually not to the extent that a stoppage develops but it could happen, however remote.

The other potential problem which could develop in an otherwise proven 1911, is the extractor. I have had this happen a few times on guns that I had trusted for a extended period of time to run 100% previously. I have had the problem develop suddenly on a couple of gun with complete surprise. And once replaced and tuned, returned to 100% reliability. One or two were broken extractors and one I remember just lost it's memory and got out of tune, but it was enough to make an otherwise history of extreme reliability turn to crap on the given gun.

Bottom line is between a good 1911 and a good revolver, I don't seem much difference in reliability if maintained decently. However, if were to start talking about small guns, then I would definitely give the smaller revolvers like the J-frame Smiths the edge on reliability over various small autos. And the smaller autos are harder and usually slower to clear than a 1911 if problems do develop. But we are not talking small auto's here on this thread, but 1911's instead.

My main carry gun is a Colt lightweight Commander and has been for many many years.

[J.G. Terry]

You automatic pistol people are overlooking history. I am surprised at you automatic handgun fanboys ignoring the facts about WWI. At the end of the war all 1911's were withdrawn from service. The 1917's revolvers became the workhorse handgun of the US Army. This US military use continued until the 1917 Smith was replaced with a K Frame Smith in 38 Long Colt caliber. The caliber selection was made to use up the supply of recently discovered 38 Colt cartridges going back to the Philippine Insurrection.

The 1911 was not successful and production was discontinued sometime in mid-1920's. The 1911 was not used mainly due to complex mechanism and general difficulty maintaining fragile Colt automatic handguns. Automatic parts had to be hand fitted etc.

The 1911's inventor no longer designed firearms. The 1911 totally failed as a competition gun of any sort. All this is common knowledge. History has spoken. This gun, the 1911, was a shameful footnote in history. The WWI era revolvers became so successful that dozens domestic and foreign makers made knock-offs to the present day.

[Onward Allusion]

Just get a S&W 627 like I did and call it a day.

[Nanuk]

You automatic pistol people are overlooking history. I am surprised at you automatic handgun fanboys ignoring the facts about WWI. At the end of the war all 1911's were withdrawn from service. The 1917's revolvers became the workhorse handgun of the US Army. This US military use continued until the 1917 Smith was replaced with a K Frame Smith in 38 Long Colt caliber. The caliber selection was made to use up the supply of recently discovered 38 Colt cartridges going back to the Philippine Insurrection.

The 1911 was not successful and production was discontinued sometime in mid-1920's. The 1911 was not used mainly due to complex mechanism and general difficulty maintaining fragile Colt automatic handguns. Automatic parts had to be hand fitted etc.

The 1911's inventor no longer designed firearms. The 1911 totally failed as a competition gun of any sort. All this is common knowledge. History has spoken. This gun, the 1911, was a shameful footnote in history. The WWI era revolvers became so successful that dozens domestic and foreign makers made knock-offs to the present day.

Your satire button must be broken.