Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > General Handgun Discussion > Revolvers over Autos?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-27-2008, 09:01 AM   #31
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 272
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boris View Post
Everone is entitled to your point of view, but if you forgive me I find you a very opinionated young man. That is not the point I was trying to make, however it matters little. But I would like you to understand that in the dark reaches of this forum is a lot of experienced guys, who have been shooting for a considerable length of time.
I've reached the half century mark, so if I'm "young" compared to you, then you must be a serious old geezer!

I've been shooting since the 1960's, and have been a dealer on the gun show circuit in a two state area since the 1980's. I've shot HUNDREDS of different semi-autos and revolvers in my time, thank you!

Quote:
Robocop was spot on the money in respect of defensive sidearms.
In YOUR opinion. Which so far hasn't been proven to be correct.

Quote:
I have shot both revolvers and semi-auto's for a considerable amount of time including my police service and in the private sector I have never had a problem with Smith and Wesson, however all weapons held in central armoury are only as good as the armourer who is responsible for them. Semi-autos by their nature can be prone to stopages, but regular maintainance obviously reduces this possibility redically.
Who says they were being held in "central armoury"? The article doesn't. So you're simply making an assumption.

Even IF they were being held in "central armoury", you're still making a sheer assumption, since you have NO idea how well the armorer(s) took care of them.

And if the massive number of revolver malfunctions was due to abuse and poor maintenance by the corrections department, why would Smith replace them? The article says NOTHING about the problems being caused by abuse etc.

The article clearly states that the corrections department was having perpetual problems with three different models. Definitely a sign of poor engineering.

Bottom line---anybody who thinks revolvers don't misfire is dreaming.

Quote:
If one is new to shooting a revolver is an excellent start, it developes your basic shooting stills and control. As for defence it will do the job very well.
Semi-autos develop your basic shooting skills and control. As for defense, the semi-auto is clearly superior. That's why every military and major police organization in Europe has been using the semi-auto virtually exclusively for decades.

Semi-autos have been the official sidearms of the U.S. military for almost a century now, and virtually every major police department in the U.S. has converted to them over the last couple decades or so. Not to mention the FBI, CIA and virtually every SWAT team in the U.S. use semi-autos.

Quote:
At one point you mentioned .22lr, I would point out that at least one major intelegence agency used them for overseas operations (and likely still do).
The fact that you're unwilling to name them, tells me that they are NOT carrying them as a PRIMARY DUTY gun. "Overseas operations" sounds like they're being used for special ops only, if your phantom intelligence agency is actually using them at all.

Quote:
I had the unpleasent job of putting down a rampaging very dangerous large Malinois last year on a neighbours land, that had savaged a flock of sheep. If I had anything handly I would have used it but I took him down with a single shot from a Manhurin PP .22lr. Nothing is written in stone.
If the .22LR has so much stopping power, why isn't every military, police and SWAT unit in the world using it?! .22LR is dirt cheap, plentiful and lightweight---and would save these agencies MILLIONS of dollars in ammo costs.

But we already know why they don't use it--it's NOT a reliable man-stopper. If given the choice before going into an extremely dangerous armed situation, no intelligent individual would choose a .22.
__________________
Defender is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2008, 11:39 AM   #32
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6
Default

Hello Glen.

Back Ground: I spent 9 years teaching the tactical use of the revolver at the Border Patrol Academy, 5 years in the field qualifying 150 Agents at the station to which I was assigned (60 with both semi-auto and revolver) and then 6 years back at the academy teaching the semi-auto. I was also part of the agency's semi-auto test team when it was considering switching from the revolver to the semi-auto.

I can say without reservation that the revolver was much more reliable when carried in the field and during qualification in our agency. (US Border Patrol)

The agency did switch to the semi-auto, but it was strictly due to the perceived need for a high volume weapon (12 rounds Vs six) and the rapid reload capability provided by the semi-auto.

Respectfully,
Kent Williams

__________________
USBP1969 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2008, 04:17 AM   #33
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 272
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Modern semi-autos are EXTREMELY reliable, as evidenced by the Springfield XD.

The main reason cited by MANY law enforcement agencies--federal, state and local--for making the switch to semi-autos, was because they were quite simply being easily out-gunned by perps with semi-automatic weapons.

Even IF revolvers are very marginally more reliable--a slight edge in reliability is NOT the primary reason one should choose a weapon for self-defense in today's very violent world.

A single-shot shotgun is extremely reliable. If properly taken care of, many of them can last a lifetime without a single misfire. However, they're a poor choice for self-defense, and no police or SWAT officer in his right mind would want one in a SHTF situation where he's facing armed perps with semi-autos.

Semi-autos have been accepted with overwhelming approval by street officers around the country, among the hundreds of police departments that have made the switch to semi-autos in recent years.

There's probably not a SWAT team in the country that uses revolvers as their primary duty weapon, nor a single elite U.S. military unit that uses revolvers as primary duty weapons.

The use of semi-autos as primary duty weapons among European law enforcement agencies and military organizations is virtually universal. Europe made the switch to semi-autos years before the U.S. started.

After weighing all the evidence and considering all the angles, the vast majority of police and military experts have come to the conclusion that semi-autos are the way to go.

__________________
Defender is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2008, 08:47 PM   #34
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6
Default

Hello again Glen.

I apologize for not responding to you original questions. I guess 20+ years of witnessing the reliability difference between semi-automatics and revolvers has taken its toll.

Quote:
…it looks like revolvers are not only easier to fire, but just easier to take care of in general. You can tell if there loaded with one glance, easier to clean.
The manual of arms for revolvers is indeed easier to teach folks than semi-automatics. Simply open the cylinder, insert the cartridges (they only go in one way*) and close the cylinder. Then pull trigger as needed to fire; usually single action for fun shooting, or double action for defensive situations. Additionally, there’s no problem with the support hand grip as there is with semi-autos since there is no high speed slide cycling during firing.
(* It’s amazing how many times we encountered cartridges loaded backwards in student’s magazines, especially during night fire exercises.)

Glen, there is another aspect that endears revolvers to those who want to be sure that their weapon will fire. After insuring that a revolver is indeed empty, the cylinder can be closed and the weapon function checked quite easily. Simply point in a safe direction and slowly pull the trigger double action**. Be sure to hold the trigger to the rear when the hammer falls. As you pull the trigger you will be able to see when the cylinder locks into position prior to the hammer falling and, after the hammer falls (with the trigger held to the rear), you can look between the rear of the cylinder and recoil shield and verify that the firing pin is protruding. That tells you that, aside from bad ammunition, the revolver will indeed fire.

Another benefit to the revolver is that when one loads the cylinder it is easy to determine if there is any structural defect in the ammunition. If the ammunition does not easily slide into the chamber, it needs to be closely inspected for defects. Additionally, the same thing applies if there is any undue resistance when closing the cylinder or, if after closing the cylinder, it will not freely rotate when the hammer is retracted slightly.

A “case” in point. One of my responsibilities at our National Firearms Unit was to check each new “lot” (manufacturing run) of ammunition we were about to receive from the manufacturer. To do that I used a “case gage” to check each of the 3,000 test rounds for proper length (Head Space) prior to test firing. On one occasion I had to reject a lot due to the fact that I encountered a number of over length .40 S&W cartridges in the sample. That meant two things. First and most important was that any over length casing in a lot that went to the field would cause certain malfunction. Secondly it meant that 3,000,000 rounds of the manufacturer’s ammunition could not be delivered.

I immediately checked each round that I carried in my issue semi-auto with a case gage as did the rest of the staff. I then wrote up a justification for purchase and issuance of a case gage to each Agent / Officer in the field and was 90% of the way through the procurement process when a “nay sayer” at high levels stated that purchase of such an item would “send the wrong message” about the ammunition that the agency was providing! The procurement was scrapped.

The point being that a revolver, in essence, provides one with a built in case gage while a semi-automatic does not.

(**Ever wonder why they call it “double action” when all one does is to pull the trigger to fire, and they call it “single action” when one has to both cock and fire. The answer is that it describes what occurs when one pulls the trigger. In double action one is both cocking and firing when they pull the trigger.)

I hope this helps.

Respectfully,
Kent
__________________
USBP1969 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2008, 09:37 AM   #35
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 272
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Springfield XD Semi-Auto Torture Test

Conducted by Chaim Stein, Firearms Instructor and Israeli Army Combat Vet

2500 rounds fired with ZERO malfunctions:

"The Ice Test. We filled a tub with water, dropped in the XD with a magazine and put it in the freezer for a week. Breaking it free by dropping the "gunsicle" onto concrete, we let it thaw out on the way to the Oak Tree Gun Club, our favorite outdoor handgun range. Upon arrival, we inserted a fresh magazine into the XD and fired. We fired about 150 rounds before wiping it down and lubricating it. Result: zero malfunctions.

The Dirt Test. Following the lead of the Glock tests, the XD was "caked, covered and buried alive in soils of varying consistencies." We used everything from dust and ash to moist dirt and sand. We fired 100 rounds after subjecting the XD to each of the five kinds of dirt, for a total of 500 rounds. Predictably, sand proved the most challenging to its mechanism. After burying the gun in sand, then stepping on it to grind it in, we took it out to shoot. The slide cycled noticeably slower, but the gun never jammed. Result: zero malfunctions.

The Mud Test. The XD was covered with thick, gritty mud. After a quick shaking off, it was fired 100 times. Mud went everywhere from the recoil, mostly on the shooters, some on bystanders--it was amazing how much sprayed off the gun. Still, the gun kept working. Result: zero malfunctions.

The Water Test. Fully loaded, the XD was left completely submerged, removed from the water and fired. This was repeated 10 times, firing 10 rounds each for a total of 100 rounds. Result: zero malfunctions.

The Chemical Degreaser Test. Using GunScrubber, all lubricant was removed from the firearm. After making sure there wasn't any lubricant remaining on the firearm, the gun was fired. Glock's test fired 100 rounds. We fired 150. Result: zero malfunctions.

The Tire Test. We placed the XD on a gravel surface, then had shooting champion Mike Dalton drive his Toyota Tundra repeatedly over it, then park on the weapon. We then retrieved and fired it 100 times. Result: zero malfunctions.

With the torture tests behind us, I fired the remaining 1,400 rounds with no failures of any kind."


http://springfield-armory.primediaoutdoors.com/SPstory11.php

__________________
Defender is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2008, 12:14 PM   #36
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
stalkingbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lebanon,Ky
Posts: 3,621
Liked 10 Times on 9 Posts
Likes Given: 3

Default

Defender,I agree with you for EXPERIENCED shooters and semiautos HOWEVER for inexperienced shooters,I still believe a revolver is simpler and easier to learn to operate. Also,a lot of women don't have the grip strength to rack the slide on some semiautos. Another thing to consider is some beginning shooters may "limp wrist" a semi-thus inviting a malfunction, whereas a revolver will still fire without problems.

__________________
stalkingbear is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2008, 02:23 PM   #37
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6
Default

Hello Defender.

The Springfield XD was just coming into the country when I re-retired, so I have no experience with that particular weapon. I can, however, speak in regards to the ones (.40 S&W) that were tested at Aberdeen Proving Ground for our agency over a three year period which included all the then big names in semi-autos, both US manufactured and imported.

I became intimately familiar with such acronyms as FTE, FTF, FTC and FTF as they were recorded by the project engineer in that manner. I came very close to having the Ruger GP-100 included in the testing. We had the weapons and the ammo at our finger tips, but several nay sayers in DC seeded enough doubt as to the possible outcome that, in the end, the GP was pulled from the test lineup. Their reasoning? What if the GP-100 won the tests? What then? It truly would have been interesting. What if a semi-auto won? Sadly we will never know.

One of my responsibilities was Ergonomic testing where 20+ agency sworn personnel subjectively graded each entry in tests over a two week period. The first year of testing all the semi-automatics submitted (all known .40 S&W make and models) failed during the early stages of testing due to problems with ammunition compatibility and no ergonomic testing was done.

The second year we added a 350 round break in period on all test weapons (ten of each make and model) where no malfunctions were logged. After the break in, all weapons were cleaned (ultra sonic) before formal testing began. We were able to conduct the ergonomic testing that year, but before the first shot was fired there was an urgent call from DC instructing us to pull two of the seven entries as those models had self destructed during the durability / reliability (10,000 round) testing at Aberdeen. Each night we logged the results of the day’s testing by the test personnel. Each night my partner would say the same thing after witnessing that day’s testing, “They can have my revolver when they pry my cold dead fingers from the grip.” We were definitely in agreement. That did not happen though as all entries that year failed the reliability testing at Aberdeen.

The third year, called “Best and Final Offer” in the procurement world, we witnessed the same thing except that the manufacturer that had produced the weapons that catastrophically failed did not enter the competition and one of the other semi-auto models with an aluminum frame experienced catastrophic failures between 8000 and 9000 rounds with each test weapon.

Testing note:The testing at Aberdeen included reliability & durability (10,000 rounds), accuracy, parts interchangeability, cold temperature (-40F) testing, high temperature testing (+140F), sand and dust tests, drop tests, salt water immersion tests, plugged chamber tests as well as non-destructive testing and compliance with specifications checks. It was my opinion that the GP-100 would have probably excelled in all categories except the sand and dust test, but again, we’ll never know.

Historical Note: A semi-auto manufacturer was awarded a contract that year for 16,000 units which was later doubled to 32,000. The winner was the Beretta 96D Brigadier .40 S&W.

A good friend of mine wrote a book entitled, “The Snubby Revolver” in which he states,

Quote:
A few years ago the New York City Police (NYPD) did a study of a 10-year period during which officers of the department were involved in 6,000 armed confrontations. They could not document a single instance in which an officer’s revolver failed to fire during one of these confrontations. Given the endless variety of things that can go wrong in a gunfight, I take great comfort in such information.
Several years after the INS National Firearms Unit went into operation I stopped by the armory and posed a question to the armorers who were doing LTI’s (Limited technical inspections) of the thousands of newly arrived 96D Brigadiers. I asked, “What in your opinion is THE most reliable handgun in existence for law enforcement duty carry?

I didn’t expect an immediate answer, but I turned to leave they said in concert, just as if they had somehow practiced together, “The Ruger GP-100!” I thanked them and left knowing that I had heard from men who had experience as armorers working for the FBI, Secret Service, Glock, the USMC and who also had years of experience working for the INS.

On the other side of the coin I remember a FLETC (Federal Law Enforcement Training Center) Firearms Instructor, who was indeed a real “piece of work” (Anyone who was trained at FLETC would likely have heard of him. I won’t give his full name, but his first name was “Charlie.”) In any case, he had been temporarily “loaned” a Glock-17 by Glock and took great delight in having students pitch it to him. He’d hit it across the parking lot with a baseball bat and then load and shoot it as a demonstration of Glock’s durability. He’d always say, “Try that with your revolver.”

Whenever that came up I remembered that Ruger used to drop either a GP-100 or a Security Six (I forget which) out of a helicopter from 100 feet onto the parking lot at police expos. They would then pick it up and fire six primed cases to show that it still worked.

Respectfully,
Kent
__________________
USBP1969 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2008, 03:00 PM   #38
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6
Default Function Test

Note: It appears that my prior post has not yet made it into the forum. I hope that it does since this one is a spin off of that post.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I write this because anyone who plans to carry a semi-automatic for protection owes it to themselves to conduct the following test with the weapon and the ammunition they intend to carry.

It’s called “Around The Clock Testing.”

Test Protocol:

1) Load each magazine that will be carried fully.

2) Insert the magazine and chamber a round.

3) Top off the magazine to full capacity and reinsert into magazine well.

4) Utilizing both hands, fire a magazine in each of the following orientations: (Visualize the face of a clock)
a. 12 O’clock
b. 1 O’clock
c. 2 O’clock
d. 3 O’clock
e. 11 O’clock
f. 10 O’clock
g. 9 O’clock

5) Utilizing the strong hand only, fire a magazine in each of the following orientations as above.

6) Repeat weak hand only.

7) Fire one magazine left hand only at the two O’clock position limp wristed with just enough grip pressure to retain the weapon. This will test the weapons system (pistol, magazine and ammunition) in a worse case scenario.

Notes: To save on ammunition, steps 1 - 7 can be conducted by firing the first three rounds of each fully loaded magazine, and then with the last three rounds in each magazine.

If steps 1 - 6 are prohibitive, step #7 can be fired to determine if the worse case scenario function test exceeds the operational envelope of the weapons system.

The above test was recently conducted with a local deputy sheriff’s newly acquired .40 S&W pistol. It failed test #7, but only with one of his magazines.

Respectfully,
Kent

__________________

Last edited by USBP1969; 03-01-2008 at 05:58 PM.
USBP1969 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 08:16 AM   #39
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 272
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Advantages of Semi-autos:

1. Fire faster
2. Reload faster
3. Higher ammo capacity
4. More rugged
5. Easier trigger pull
6. More concealable
7. Handle & point more naturally
8. Fire under more adverse conditions
9. More efficient transmission of recoil
10. Wider array of high-tech & conventional accessories.

__________________

Last edited by Defender; 03-03-2008 at 09:17 AM.
Defender is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 08:16 AM   #40
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 272
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

According to world-renown handgun instructor Massad Ayoob, EVERY SINGLE state police agency in the country issues semi-autos as their official duty weapon.

Virtually every European military organization and law enforcement agency issues semi-autos as their official duty weapon.

Semi-autos are the official sidearms of the U.S. Army, Marine Corps, Air Force, Navy and Coast Guard---including all the special ops outfits like Delta Force, Green Berets, Rangers, Seals, Recons etc.

Semi-autos are the official duty weapons of the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, Diplomatic Security Service, BATF, DEA, Border Patrol, Capitol Police, Federal Sky Marshals, U.S. Marshals Service, National Park Service, Dept. of Energy Nuclear Security Patrol, Dept. of Agriculture, U.S. Customs Service, NASA Special Operations Team, IRS Criminal Investigation Dept. etc.

Semi-autos are also the official duty weapons of the LAPD, LAPD SWAT, LAPD Special Investigation Section, L.A. County Sheriff's Dept., NYPD, Texas Rangers, and virtually every major police department in the USA. As well as a substantial percentage of the medium and small ones. Not to mention a large percentage of sheriff's departments.

__________________
Defender is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Italian Autos Benning Boy Other Weapons 10 01-16-2009 05:24 PM
Smith and Wesson Autos mainefishinggui Semi-Auto Handguns 5 09-11-2008 01:22 PM
WW2 Full autos. BLS33 NFA/Class 3 & FFL Discussion 7 06-18-2007 11:36 PM



Newest Threads