Re-Thinking Revolver Carry-Particularly At Night

[Chuck Haggard]

I keep meaning to do a big long write-up, and then I never get around it to. General findings from personally trying to destroy Indiana's coyote population:

• All FMJ pistol bullets suck on coyotes
• .17 HMR sucks on 'yotes
• big soft lead pistol bullets work pretty well
• Fast JHP and semi-jacketed soft point pistol bullets work really well
• The Hornady Lever-Revolution rounds work regardless of whether they're fired from a pistol or rifle
• Rifles with JHP work really, really well, especially .223 with Hornady V-Max

I've seen coyotes take rounds such as a 165gr 30-06 through the chest sideways and still run half a mile, they are tough little animals.

[David Armstrong]

That is basically what I have argued for years, if I understand you correctly. Capacity doesn't make one more or less likely to win the fight IF one is willing to change tactics and both recognize and adapt to the different issues posed by different platforms, capacities, etc. That we don't see a disproportionate number of failures that can be attributed to platform seems rather telling to me.

Regarding dog packs, my dad walked the woods for years with just a single-shot shotgun and managed to take out a fair number of feral dogs without ever thinking he was undergunned, and I don't worry about walking the woods behind my house with "just" a revolver. Can't address urban packs, but it is rare to have a wilderness pack that will stick around long enough for you to get a second shot, much less more than that. In fact, yesterday I didn't even get a good clean first shot off at a pack of about a half-dozen who apparently thought Scare D. Cat was going to be their lunch. IMO I doubt much would change in the CCW world if all of us went back to carrying revolvers instead of autos.

[David Armstrong]

Use of the word "all" implies a lot of facts not in evidence. Are you saying everyone who has ever carried a revolver "survive(d) without any real problems" while doing so?

Well, if you want to play word games, pretty much by definition if they are still using revolvers today it means they all have survived up to this point, otherwise they could not be using, right? Here is what I said: "...you wonder how all those folks still using revolvers today manage to survive without any real problems."

If not, then it seems to me that Jon and some others have simply come to the conclusion that for them the costs involved with carrying a different gun outweigh the stakes at risk by carrying the revo. You know, like we've debated the last twenty times this issue has come up.

I understand what they are saying, I'm just saying in years of researching gunfights I have yet to see some indication that the revolver is inferior to the autoloader for most CCW events. I just haven't seen anything to make me think that revolver versus autoloader plays any significant role in the outcome of the CCW event. If there is some evidence to the contrary I'd love to see it, just like I've said the last 20 times this issue has come up.

[David Armstrong]

See my earlier post.

I did. Still wondering.

[JonInWA]

That is basically what I have argued for years, if I understand you correctly. Capacity doesn't make one more or less likely to win the fight IF one is willing to change tactics and both recognize and adapt to the different issues posed by different platforms, capacities, etc. That we don't see a disproportionate number of failures that can be attributed to platform seems rather telling to me.

Regarding dog packs, my dad walked the woods for years with just a single-shot shotgun and managed to take out a fair number of feral dogs without ever thinking he was undergunned, and I don't worry about walking the woods behind my house with "just" a revolver. Can't address urban packs, but it is rare to have a wilderness pack that will stick around long enough for you to get a second shot, much less more than that. In fact, yesterday I didn't even get a good clean first shot off at a pack of about a half-dozen who apparently thought Scare D. Cat was going to be their lunch. IMO I doubt much would change in the CCW world if all of us went back to carrying revolvers instead of autos.

Then let's for the sake of argument/entertainment throw in one further factor: What if the animal(s) involved were 1) medium-sized to large, and/or 2) you were faced with such an animal(s) that had rabies, and was not acting naturally/with natural inhibitions or constraints, and continued to aggress, despite a weapon being fired against them? To me, such a potentiality again emphasizes (or reinforces) the desirability of both larger capacity and easier reloadibility.

And I'd further suggest it's not as if you can normally predict in advance if such a feral/aggressing animal is rabid or not...

Best, Jon

[LittleLebowski]

I did. Still wondering.

Your argument can be used over and over again regarding any weapon. That was my point. I understand that according to your studies that you didn't see any real advantage in autos versus revolvers. I know this because you state it on here all of the time. However, why should we not avail ourselves of something with less moving parts, easier to maintain, easier to reload, and easier to carry? Is the reason "back in my day, we were fine with revolvers?" Is there a logical reason?

It's a tiresome argument that...like I said earlier can be applied to any weapon and shot down just as easily. Just because so and so used one and lived back in the day doesn't mean it hasn't been outdated. Revolvers were once new technology, just like cartridges, black powder, atlatls, and so on. However, it appears that fighting men throughout the centuries didn't let nostalgia keep them from upgrading.

[BLR]

Bill, despite (generally, usually, most of the time) 1911s having a 6-8 (plus one in the chamber) capacity, I'd still feel better served with one in my sceario than with a revolver, given the speedier, more ergonomic magazine ejection and reloading process. Similarly (and even more so) with my .40 FN/Browning Hi Power, with it's 10+1 capacity.

However, when you throw in periods of inclement weather/little relubrication opportunity, things speedily turn things into a polymer pistol type of situation...The generally higher capacity of the polymer pistols most of us would consider (Glock, HK, Smith & Wesson et al is a further fillip enhancing their desirability.

Best, Jon

Jon - didn't say I was changing

Just considering seriously my choices thus far. To be honest, I never felt "off" carrying a 357 Mag (read - under gunned due to capacity).

[ToddG]

I understand what they are saying, I'm just saying in years of researching gunfights I have yet to see some indication that the revolver is inferior to the autoloader for most CCW events.

The word I highlighted is all that matters to me in the equation. As I've said so many times before, I'm aware of far too many instances in which five rounds (or six) weren't enough to solve the problem that I wouldn't choose to hamstring myself that way if I had a choice. And I do. So I carry a gun with more rounds and one that's faster/easier to reload.

Because most people walk around unarmed and "manage to survive without any real problems." You obviously don't think that level of "most" is good enough. We simply differ on how many angles we want to count on the head of a pin before saying it's enough.

[Drang]

Recently, I was with some clients at a somewhat secluded location. I was carrying a Ruger GP100, with a Comp III speedloader in a belt pouch and a Speed Strip with 6 more rounds for reloads. Entering the development, there was an adjacent lot with chain-link fencing, and numerous dogs, which sounded like larger dogs.

Don't mind me. I'm just sitting here halfway between Jon and Puget Sound, trying to figure out where this happened...
...and contemplating another thread, in which the tendency for "more bullets" to equal "less accuracy" almost led me to suggest we'd all be better off carrying AR-180 pistols...

[psalms144.1]

I too started out concealed carry with a wheel gun - mine was a 2.5" 686, which I thought was the cat's meow. A couple of decades of experience later, and I'd still carry that 686 (if I still had it) or another wheely if I had to, but I don't see any advantage over a quality semi-auto nowadays...

The fact that 9mm is a sub-standard critter killer is one of the reasons why the G30 and G21 seem like they have a permanent home in my safe; when we're up hiking in ME, 10 rounds of .45 ACP 230 gr HST with a 13 round backup magazine just feels "righter" than a larger quantity of 9mm 147 gr HSTs...

Of course, that's definitely a "niche" gun for me, and, the overwhelming majority of the time, when 4-legged nasties aren't a concern, the 9mm gets the nod.

Regards,

Kevin