Primary-Secondary's recent podcast on nonstandard weapons discussed the shortcomings of the revolver. Essentially it was felt to be a "get out of trouble" weapon, not a fighting gun, due to various design shortcomings (mainly double action revolvers): delicate, screws backing out, sensitive to primer height, inability to reliably function in sustained fire as the round increases. This is consistent with my experience but a main functionality issue may be related to caliber size in my view.
Powder/shooting debris build up in a 38/357 cylinder can make it difficult to properly seat new cartridges using a speedloader without added help of manual push of a protruding cartridge so the cylinder will close. There are a lot of factors affecting this including the initial cleanliness of the cylinder, bore size, polish, the ammo/powder type, number of rounds fired, etc. The other element of reliability is shooting/powder debris ending up behind the ejector/star--hence the inevitable "shooting toothbrush." Can one shoot a match of 200 rounds without cleaning cylinder bores or brushing away debris?
However, in my experience, as the 38/357 caliber is susceptible to these problems, it seems the larger the caliber, the less prone a revolver is to these type of reliability issues. I shoot GP's and K-frames in matches but have never experienced these kind of problems with an N-frame (44) (although my N-frame has never had 200 rounds in one session it thousands of rounds through it). In matches, it doesn't seem other shooters' N-frames have these kind of problems and appear more prone to mechanical breakages and unseated screws.
Stack tolerance is probably not the right term but it might that bigger caliber tolerates more debris and better reliability (at least in this area).