The Gun Thread

EDIT: I had a recoilless rifle-related question for a chapter of my webnovel, but the time was up and I already uploaded the said chapter anyway. XP

Edited by dRoy on Apr 17th 2023 at 8:03:57 PM

"Reliability -cheaper prices"

Maybe at one time, but I find that it isn't so true anymore. As revolvers became more popular, they also became more expensive. And modern semi-auto's are so reliable that you hardly notice the difference. The cartridges they use tend to be more powerful, though.

9 can't touch 357, shot for shot!

They are not really superior or inferior to each other. Maybe back in the days of the early semi-autos when revolvers were the more developed tech that was true.

We live in a golden age of subcompact slim concealed carry pistols and they're incredibly affordable too.

If you're not bringing one of those single stack skinny 9mm handguns like the Shield or P-365 or whatever number Glock that is you're handicapping yourself tbh.

The main arguments that often seem to be made in favor of revolvers are accuracy and reliability, both are overblown though. Any accuracy advantage you might gain with a revolver’s fixed barrel is going to be negated by a double action trigger, which for the vast majority of shooters is essentially impossible to fire without pulling your aim slightly off. Round for round a modern semi-auto like a Glock is going to be equally reliable or better when compared to a revolver, and semi-auto malfunctions can be rapidly addressed by the shooter in most cases while revolver malfunctions require much more effort to address.

Have owned many semis and revolvers (former instructor and smith). Revolvers are Just Better is largely a myth, especially in the last 30-40 years. I've had revolvers jam, especially the Taurus titanium line, and I've had semis jam (in particular a Springfield V-10 with an extractor that was technically in spec but was a jam-o-matic until I replaced it on a hunch), and I've had 100% reliable examples of both. My current go-to is a bone stock Springfield Garrison that happily eats anything I feed it and is so consistent that the RSOs at my range ask me how I don't get bored putting them all through one ragged hole.

Edited by coinneach on Apr 18th 2023 at 11:57:26 AM

The main advantages of revolvers these days are the ammunition, which tends to be more powerful on average, and the ruggedness (not the reliability, which is a different thing).

I don’t think revolvers can really be said to have an advantage in those areas either. Pistols in .40, .45, and even 10mm are commonly available, and there really isn’t much need for those larger calibers outside of a few edge cases when 9mm’s lethality is more than proven. As far as ruggedness, the saying goes “revolvers are tolerant of neglect, autoloaders are tolerant of abuse”. Don’t forget that the possibility of fouling is much higher on a revolver given the openness of their actions, among other issues. The fact that militaries worldwide have switched over to autoloading pistols and haven’t looked back should be proof enough that they’re able to handle extreme conditions.

I disagree. Revolvers are available in any caliber autoloaders are available, and I believe autoloaders are available in any caliber revolvers are available (would have to check for some of them). But the most popular revolvers are magnums (relevant, because that helps explain why people buy them), and the most popular autoloaders are 9mm, and even a 357 is much more powerful than a 9.

A .357 is more powerful than a 9mm but that's also irrelevant.

Yeah, the fact that the most popular revolvers are magnums is essentially irrelevant here. For starters, even the absolute most popular models of revolver don’t come anywhere close to the popularity of autoloading pistols in similar calibers, much less 9mm pistols. It’s also worth noting that the advantage carried by large-caliber pistol rounds is almost entirely fiction, a 9mm will kill you just as dead as a .357 magnum and arguably represents a net increase in lethality as you can carry far more rounds.

The fact remains that magnum revolver rounds are more powerful than 9mm. Whether that's relevant or not is up to the buyer.

I’ll refer back to what I noted earlier, that autoloading pistols with superior reliability and capacity are available in any cartridge a revolver might be available in.

The only real reason to choose a revolver over an autoloader is because you like it. That’s a perfectly fair reason, but let’s not pretend there are any others.

well revolvers are better for reloading. automatic pistols eject the brass casing every shot, revolvers dont so its easier to reuse the brass casing for ammo reloading.

Honest question then, can you get semi-auto's in magnum?

There are some magnum automatics, such as the Desert Eagle, Guncrafter Industries .50-caliber Glock conversions, Automag, and LAR Grizzly, but they're firmly Awesome, but Impractical. 10mm Auto isn't a magnum chambering, but it can be comparable to .357 Magnum depending on the load.

As mentioned, you can, although they tend to be rather expensive, and by some accounts the recoil is less comfortable, due to the grip shape (an autoloader has to have a grip of a certain minimum thickness and shape, because the magazine feeds through it. A revolver grip is typically more ergonomic).

There was also an M1911 chambered in .357 Magnum being made a few years back, but it was very expensive and not all that practical so it was pretty much relegated to the same "rich person's range toy" niche the Desert Eagle occupies.

Perhaps that helps explains why the FBI abandoned .40 Smith and Wesson for their autoloaders. That was a sub-magnum cartridge and it was still too much recoil.

Allegedly because some guy claimed he saw a 9mm bounce off a car windshield one time.

.40 S&W is just a cut-down 10mm, like .38 Special is a cut-down .357 Magnum. I owned a Glock 20 (10mm) and found it far more comfortable than any .40. It's a fistful of BANG to be sure, but more controllable.

Oh, and before I forget, revolvers tend to accept a much wider range of cartridge loadings as well as bullet shapes than your typical autoloader will. So it's somewhat easier to customize your cartridge to your personal needs.

There isn't any one big reason why someone might pick a revolver over an autoloader, but there are a bunch of little ones.

Demarquis: That isn't true either. They literally make a wide variety of cartridge types for autoloaders as well and have for decades. That includes pretty much the full array of powerful handgun rounds with a few exceptions you can count on one hand. Most of the ones that don't have autoloader handgun designs for their cartridge are ones that fire some absurdly huge and powerful rounds. These guns are range queens being large and unwieldy to a stupid degree and not practical examples of firearms. If you want stupidly powerful rounds out of a handgun you won't be using a revolver design, to begin with. You would go to the breech-loaded pistol designs which have fired full-sized rifle cartridges and some even more powerful cartridges including designs firing .50 BMG.

Round shape has nothing to do with it. The bullet shape only matters if it doesn't fit the traditional design, to begin with. Oddly shaped bullets tend to be made for unique weapons and nothing stops you from doing it for an autoloader and it has been done for some auto-loaders. There are even a few weird hybrids like the Dardick Tround handgun which had a magazine-fed revolving chamber system.

I don't know where you are getting the bit about the grip either. It is perfectly comfortable even on weapons that take a double-stack mag like an M9 Beretta. You literally learn to hold it correctly so it isn't an issue. The same goes for learning to fire powerful cartridges out of any gun semi-auto or revolver. You learn to hold it correctly and it won't be an issue.

There is literally nothing truly unique about modern revolvers that puts them over semi-auto pistols in any shape or form. It is literally down to personal preferences at this point.

Article on some advantages of revolvers including grip shape

Checking some online ballistics tables, .357 revolver can fire anything from very low pressure .38 wadcutter (less than 150 ft/lbs at the muzzle) to very powerful .357 (over 700 ft/lbs at the muzzle), with no loss of reliability. That's a multiple of almost 5. By way of contrast, 9mm seems to start at around 270, and tops out around 540 (and I'm not sure how many 9mm pistols can actually fire a round that powerful).

The variants are known to be rugged and have high-pressure tolerance. This is not unique to revolvers. If it fits the chamber and barrel as long as you don't exceed the chamber's pressure limits you can usually shoot it with reasonable safety and reliability. Stepping down to lower-pressure rounds works as well to a point. There are also high-pressure 9mm rounds like the P+ and +P+ rounds meant to be fired from regular handguns that are more powerful than the more common rounds.

The article on revolvers' "advantages" is lazy fanboying not actual facts or even valid arguments.

Right off the bat its first paragraph simply isn't accurate. Revolvers can and do have safety's and there are more than a few autoloaders which have something simple like the in-trigger safety or other easily used feature. This is again down to the choice of a firearm not any literally fabricated factor of revolvers.

Reliable is just as bunk and was covered up thread. They are not magically more reliable. They have way more space for something to get into their mechanisms, block chambers, and foul up the works. There are very few and rare revolver designs that are sealed off in any form. The rest are directly exposed. Autoloaders have proven consistently reliable for over a century at this point and in general their internals are protected and covered. The advice for autoloaders still holds true for revolvers. You are testing the ammunition's reliability and consistency in your weapon. Nothing changes there.

The third point is absolute garbage to a fault. Revolvers like any gun will not magically fit anyone. This is down to finding the right firearm for your needs and capability. It is just as likely a revolver is not what you need. There is nothing unique to revolvers there either. I can guarantee you can do the same with pretty much any firearm and is part of making an informed purchase, not some mythical quality being lazily painted onto an overly broad design concept.

The fourth point is not an accurate statement either. Mags are not a weak point at all. Unlike the revolver, you can easily carry more ammo, and reload faster and more reliably, and because the spent brass is ejected you're not messing around with making sure all your brass clears the cylinder before a reload. Those cylinders break and wear out and have small parts that wear and break and are turned by a small part operated by a mechanism that can and does fail.

The fifth point is more garbage. Trigger pull is largely adjustable on most firearms. Heavy trigger pull is as much a curse as a boon and their example is solved by training not high trigger pull. Heavy trigger pull can negatively affect accuracy.

I would not use that article as a metric by any measure for selecting any firearm revolver or otherwise.

Again it is literally down to what you want in the broader sense. There is nothing special about revolvers and there hasn't been for a very long time.