Stupid question re: revolvers

[scott]

I need smarter people than I to tell me if I'm being stupid.
Generally when I carry it's either while I'm working or else it's in the woods. Work doesn't smile on guns, so that's generally a pair of j frames. The woods I usually carry a 45 redhawk. On the rare occasion when I'm concealing a full size gun it's generally a k frame because they have the same manual of arms as the others and I shoot bullseye with k frames, which is my main shooting sport.
The revolvers are great in the bigger and smaller than service size categories I think, but not up to par compared to a double stack 9mm of some kind when I can dress to conceal a full size gun.
Basically, am I being stupid by sticking to revolvers for full sized carry guns? Should I just not even worry about it because usually I'm not carrying a service sized gun anyway and just train more with the j frame? Or should I go to automatics for everything and retrain because of the capacity advantage? (the problem here is really that I haven't found a subcompact I like as much as a j frame. A 1006 or something would be fine in the field. Also that bullseye is my excuse to own beautiful old smith and wessons so I'll probably keep shooting wheel guns for that)

I'm putting it on this board because I feel like it's kind of a silly moment of self doubt. The obvious choice is, when I can carry a full size gun, make it a k frame. I shoot them well, I own a shitload, and I reload 38. But for whatever reason I can't shake the feeling that I'm being a stubborn luddite.

[ACP230]

Most likely it will not matter too much either way.

I have carried several different guns, including nines with lotsorounds on board. So far, I've
always come back to a J-frame. The few times I really thought I was going to need a gun involved
single dogs acting stupid. I think the snub I was carrying would have handled the problem. As it turned out I didn't
even have to draw, although once I got about half way there.
The owner suddenly got real serious about reeling in her Rott "puppy" that had decided it was offended that
I was using my own driveway.

[1slow]

IMHO
Revolvers excel as:
Pocket/ECQC pistols. Enclosed hammer J frames are especially nice.
Large dangerous animal pistols in heavy calibers such as .44 Mag, hot .45 colt, .454, 475 Linebaugh, .500 Linebaugh, .500 S&W.
Autos excel as belt carried sidearms in 9mm and up. More ammo in the gun, easier to reload fast. I find them easier to shoot fast and adequately accurate. I believe they hold up better over high round count (10,000+/year) training schedules.

K frames are easier to shoot well and fast than J frames. Headhunter would be my go to guy on the subject of revolvers (and much else).
For 30+ years I have used J frames, service auto belt guns, and .44 mag and up woods guns.

If you are willing to train for it I believe a high capacity 9mm auto will give you real gains in capability. On the other hand, I do not think you would be stupid to stick with K frames, you are used to them.

[Malamute]

IMHO
Revolvers excel as:
Pocket/ECQC pistols. Enclosed hammer J frames are especially nice.
Large dangerous animal pistols in heavy calibers such as .44 Mag, hot .45 colt, .454, 475 Linebaugh, .500 Linebaugh, .500 S&W.
Autos excel as belt carried sidearms in 9mm and up. More ammo in the gun, easier to reload fast. I find them easier to shoot fast and adequately accurate. I believe they hold up better over high round count (10,000+/year) training schedules.

K frames are easier to shoot well and fast than J frames. Headhunter would be my go to guy on the subject of revolvers (and much else).
For 30+ years I have used J frames, service auto belt guns, and .44 mag and up woods guns.

If you are willing to train for it I believe a high capacity 9mm auto will give you real gains in capability. On the other hand, I do not think you would be stupid to stick with K frames, you are used to them.

Well said. I was trying to think of a good way to word pretty much all of this.

[RevolverRob]

Carry two K-Frames. Problem solved.

So, I honestly, don't shoot double-stack 9mms as well as I do revolvers. The end result is, I carry a revolver, because I have confidence in my abilities to put bullets where I want/need them under a lot of different scenarios. I have no problem riding through the south side of Chicago, with a GP100 on my hip and a J-Frame in my pocket.

The question, to my mind, is not whether the double-stack gun is better overall, it's whether it is better for you. Given your circumstances (regularly carrying J-Frames, rarely K-Frame, bullseye shooting K-Frames, woods gun is also a revolver) I would NOT bother switching my manual of arms. Keeping it consistent across what you are regularly training and carrying is more important, in my opinion, than gains made in capacity or speed. Especially, if you're not going to regularly carry the double-stack gun.

-Rob

[Chuck Haggard]

I started on the job in the revolver days, carried a Security Six and a Cobra as a BUG, magnum rounds in the Ruger, 158gr "FBI" loads in the Colt, 125gr +P Remington SJHPs in the speedloaders on my belt so that I could load either gun. I really had zero worries about being able to handle whatever I ran in to, and I was being paid to go looking for trouble.



I think your current battery is fine, especially considering your shooting activities and lifestyle.

[LSP972]

I started on the job in the revolver days, carried a Security Six and a Cobra as a BUG, magnum rounds in the Ruger, 158gr "FBI" loads in the Colt, 125gr +P Remington SJHPs in the speedloaders on my belt so that I could load either gun. I really had zero worries about being able to handle whatever I ran in to, and I was being paid to go looking for trouble.



I think your current battery is fine, especially considering your shooting activities and lifestyle.

Ditto, except it was a stainless Combat Magnum (M-66) and J frame for me.

Surviving a gun fight is only partially equipment-related; a small part, actually. Mindset and competence are the two main ingredients. You have the competence with your revolvers; why give that up and start over with a bottom feeder?

.

[BehindBlueI's]

I'm *still* qualified on a 2" LCR, 3" GP100, and 4" GP100 for my department. In plainclothes, we are still allowed to carry a revolver as a duty weapon. The vast, vast majority of shootings are resolved one way or the other before you'd run a j-frame dry. A bigger gun and more capacity is more options, but if you shoot what you've got fine, don't overthink it.

The only reason I gave up carrying a revolver on duty was night sights and one handed manipulation ease.

[Dagga Boy]

Given your life and priorities I would say it is a good choice.

[Robinson]

Heck I still carry a 4" K Frame pretty often, when I'm not carrying a 5" 1911. The K Frames strike a good balance between easy to shoot and easy to carry. What you are giving up compared to a semi-auto is capacity and speed to reload. From a purely objective standpoint there are lots of advantages to the modern polymer framed striker fired high capacity semi-automatic pistol. I don't own any. I make my choices fully knowing both the advantages and disadvantages.

It's not too difficult to equip a S&W revolver with night sights if you want them. There are some good choices for .38Spl defensive ammunition.