Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 | >
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Survival Prep (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=141)
- - revolver versus auto post SHTF (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=192850)

damoc | 10-25-2007 10:50 PM
revolver versus auto post SHTF was thinking today that a revolver is a better choice post shtf because of greater tolerance of reloaded ammo. As I understand it an auto needs very compatable ammo to function correctly without jam and misfire so possibly in an extended shtf scenario where ammo is at a premium and reloading of home made unjacketed lead bullets and maybe even home brew black powder as propelant is becoming common place. it seems to me that a revolver could handle these loads better than a auto. any thoughts?

<SLV> | 10-25-2007 10:56 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Talk to ferFAL at www.warrifles.com. He's living in SHTF in Buenos Aires. He says auto - high cap (like Glock 17 in 9mm). 1) Easier to reload with one hand. 2. Fast firing C. More shots 4] Something about hot cases sticking in revolvers

drewfu | 10-25-2007 11:05 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by damoc (Post 796552) was thinking today that a revolver is a better choice post shtf because of greater tolerance of reloaded ammo. As I understand it an auto needs very compatable ammo to function correctly without jam and misfire so possibly in an extended shtf scenario where ammo is at a premium and reloading of home made unjacketed lead bullets and maybe even home brew black powder as propelant is becoming common place. it seems to me that a revolver could handle these loads better than a auto. any thoughts?
Buy multiples of the same revolver. Same ammo, same parts. It really depends on how bad the SHTF. If we end up like Mad Max or something, the only working guns are going to be revolvers and AK-47s, some shotguns.

SilverCity | 10-25-2007 11:26 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF This topic has been argued for at least as long as I have been reading gun literature...some 30 years. It can never be resolved IMO because the two types fill different functions. Yes, revolvers can shoot powerful cartridges, shoot a variety of loads in the same cylinder, stay at the ready for years. But, as SLV alluded to, in SHTF, you may have to reload several times in the coarse of a firefight. You're trying to reload in a hurry--this will get real frantic, when you are being shot at and the adrenaline pumping through your veins causes you to lose fine motor skills...fumbling around with loose rounds and pissin' your pants! In addition, the fact that you must take the revolver out of battery to reload... With an auto, you can reload much more quickly, easily, less frequently, the pistol remains in battery, and you can even reload while you are firing! For SHTF situations, I would much rather carry a handgun with greater FIREPOWER...that would be a high capacity automatic.

drewfu | 10-25-2007 11:37 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverCity (Post 796608) This topic has been argued for at least as long as I have been reading gun literature...some 30 years. It can never be resolved IMO because the two types fill different functions. Yes, revolvers can shoot powerful cartridges, shoot a variety of loads in the same cylinder, stay at the ready for years. But, as SLV alluded to, in SHTF, you may have to reload several times in the coarse of a firefight. You're trying to reload in a hurry--this will get real frantic, when you are being shot at and the adrenaline pumping through your veins causes you to lose fine motor skills...fumbling around with loose rounds- In addition, the fact that you must take the revolver out of battery to reload... With an auto, you can reload much more quickly, easily, less frequently, the pistol remains in battery, and you can even reload while you are firing! For SHTF situations, I would much rather carry a handgun with greater FIREPOWER...that would be a high capacity automatic.
2 seven-shot .357 magnums with speedloaders at the hip.

SilverCity | 10-25-2007 11:41 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Yeah, well there is a REASON most all police departments and military abandoned the revolver...slow to reload and reduced firepower.:smokin:

drewfu | 10-25-2007 11:43 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverCity (Post 796636) Yeah, well there is a REASON most all police departments and military abandoned the revolver...slow to reload and reduced firepower.:smokin:
Please. You are going to trust a government decision???

SilverCity | 10-25-2007 11:55 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF In an extended SHTF scenario where, regular gun maintenance by a competent gunsmith may take a backseat to more pressing matters... you may find your revolver's cylinder losing it's timing and starting to spit lead out of the sides of the forcing cone after only several hundred rounds fired in double action mode...not uncommon at all for revolvers--especially firing fullhouse 357 mag loads. Autos don't have this problem and will fire longer, without regular maintenance, than any revolver... IMO.

drewfu | 10-25-2007 11:57 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverCity (Post 796663) In an extended SHTF scenario where, regular gun maintenance by a competent gunsmith may take a backseat to more pressing matters... you may find your revolver's cylinder losing it's timing and starting to spit lead out of the sides of the forcing cone after only several hundred rounds fired in double action mode...not uncommon at all for revolvers--especially firing fullhouse 357 mag loads. Autos don't have this problem and will fire longer, without regular maintenance that any revolver IMO.
Bah, who cares. We'll be on the same side in that scenario anyhow.:D

damoc | 10-26-2007 12:04 AM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF thanks for all the replys I know i would much rather have the extra firepower and ease of reloading afforded by an auto but was thinking at some stage that good reliable ammo would become scarce and having an auto that does not fire reliably because of poor ammo is worse than a revolver. I have shot a couple of cheap autos that jammed regularily even with good ammo and i believe even a good auto would be unreliable with poor reloads.

drewfu | 10-26-2007 12:05 AM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by damoc (Post 796672) thanks for all the replys I know i would much rather have the extra firepower and ease of reloading afforded by an auto but was thinking at some stage that good reliable ammo would become scarce and having an auto that does not fire reliably because of poor ammo is worse than a revolver. I have shot a couple of cheap autos that jammed regularily even with good ammo and i believe even a good auto would be unreliable with poor reloads.
Whatever you go with, buy lots of it and lots of ammo. Redundant ammo Redundant parts

thorgrim | 10-26-2007 01:50 AM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Revolver and two speed loaders = 18 Glock 17 and two mags one in the chamber = 52 (can't shoot lead unless you get an aftermarket barrel but they won't jam with half decent ammo) You decide.

Maddie | 10-26-2007 01:57 AM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF You're overlooking the important thing here. This is clearly an excuse to buy more guns! :D Couldn't hurt to have both revolvers and semiautos. I personally think the auto is a better choice for the same reasons SLV noted. You can use speedloaders with revolvers, but if you're on the move, in the dark, etc., and need to reload quickly, you can't beat an auto (speedloaders aren't as convenient to carry and require some dexterity to use under less than optimal situations unless you practice a lot). If the situation after TSHTF is bad enough that your ammo supply has to be replaced by iffy reloads, then you'd better have the firepower to survive to that point. I think the most important thing, however, is to know your weapon and its tolerances well, and that might mean going through a few guns to find one that is not only reliable, but has a fit and feel that you can shoot comfortably and accurately with in less than optimal shooting conditions. Out of 9 handguns (none of which are competition grade or anything fancy), my most reliable is an old RCAF Colt 1911. It looks awful, with rust spots on the frame from being left in a damp basement by a previous owner. It's been modified by someone in its past. I have no idea how many hands its been through, as I got it from my father, who inherited it over 30 years ago from a friend of his, who inherited it from a friend of his. I've fired 1000s of rounds through it and never had a single failure to fire, even with reloads some of my other .45s didn't like. It fires anything I feed it. It's more accurate (or maybe I'm just more accurate with it...). It ain't pretty, but if I have to grab and go, that's the one I'm grabbing.

walker10 | 10-26-2007 05:06 AM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF I'd also suggest going with the auto, for the same reasons others have given. Nowadays, an auto like a Glock or Colt 1991A1 (my preference) will serve you very reliably. For a less expensive auto, Ferfal suggests a Bersa, I have no experience with this gun, but he gives them high marks, something to think about at least. Personaly, I go with three autos, a small pocket pistol, an AMT Backup .380 DAO, a Ruger MKIII 512 .22, and the Colt 1991A1. These three should cover everything from plinking/small game hunting to self defense. Ammo availability in a SHTF or TEOTWAWKI situation should also be a consideration. Stick with widely available common calibers, .22, .380, 9mm, .45. Easier to scrounge. If you do this, it will naturally cause you to purchase an auto, as there are few revolvers made in these calibers. Whichever you choose, purchase a large quantitiy of ammo, and I can't stress more highly the need to stock up on spare parts, cleaning supplies, and a few basic gunsmithing tools to keep you gun running.

REV127 | 10-26-2007 11:48 AM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Any gun is only as good as its springs so have extra springs. If you're worried about reliability with reduced power rounds you can keep a light mainspring and recoil spring on hand. Revolvers have their place. A .357mag can also fire .38's. Both of these cartridges have a lot of case capacity so they're easier to load with blackpowder if you need to. If you can scare up a Medussa revolver you can shoot darn near any cartridge whether rimmed or rimless with a .355 caliber bullet. That's a scrounger's gun if there ever was one. There's an old Astra, can't remember the model, but it's an auto with a similar ability. I'd trust the Medussa more. There's nowhere to put more than one bullet into an auto if it doesn't have a mag. One of the chief SHTF advantages of the revolver is it has no need for mags. You can take that one step further and get a blackpowder revolver which doesn't need mags or cases. It's easy enough to make your own percussion caps from sheetmetal, the trick is coming up with a primer compound. OTOH a flintlock or matchlock has no need for percussion caps, mags or cases as long as you have something to touch it off with or some sparkable stones. Downside is you only get one or two shots between reloads. You can speed things up with any blackpowder firearm by using combustible paper cartridges but they'll never be as fast as modern revolvers or autos. I have yet to see a revolver that loses its timing after only a few hundred rounds of double action fire. Maybe some kind of Lorcin-equivalent junk revolver. A revolver can lose its timing but it's an overstated problem. Just like how all autos aren't jam-o-matics.

jrog100 | 10-26-2007 12:04 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverCity (Post 796663) you may find your revolver's cylinder losing it's timing and starting to spit lead out of the sides of the forcing cone after only several hundred rounds fired in double action mode...not uncommon at all for revolvers--especially firing fullhouse 357 mag loads.
I've only seen this problem with lower end manufacturers such as Tarus, Astra, etc.

Unclad Lad | 10-27-2007 10:28 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Yeah, well there is a REASON most all police departments and military abandoned the revolver...slow to reload and reduced firepower.
As more and more law enforcement recruits come in with no prior knowledge of firearms, autos gain the advantage of a lot of shots vs a few well-aimed ones. It's pretty hard to screw up with a Glock, and having 15 behind the one you just shot over the target's head, eventually someone is going down. I'm not knocking autos--some of them are VERY accurate. But a good auto needs more tweaking than a good revolver to be utterly accurate. I have both, but my accuracy on my S&W 66 is way ahead of anything with the autos. Quote:
I have yet to see a revolver that loses its timing after only a few hundred rounds of double action fire. Maybe some kind of Lorcin-equivalent junk revolver.
Roehm. When someone says "Saturday Night Special", this is what they mean. Incidentally, this is the gun John Hinckley used. Reagan and Brady probably both would've died if he'd used a quality pistol.

MOD1 | 10-27-2007 11:43 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF I believe duplication is good to a degree. My next two handgun purchases will be two identical Ruger SP101 .357's. I currently have other semi-autos that accommodate the same magazine. Just trying to think things through. Take care, Mod1

SilverCity | 10-27-2007 11:53 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by Unclad Lad (Post 799781) I'm not knocking autos--some of them are VERY accurate. But a good auto needs more tweaking than a good revolver to be utterly accurate. I have both, but my accuracy on my S&W 66 is way ahead of anything with the autos.
Accuracy? Mr. UNCLAD, have you been to any pistol matches lately? Pick any type. IPSC, IDPA, any combat pistol matches, etc., even the Olympics, what are the competitors shooting? Revolver or Auto? I would be willing to bet almost any quality autoloader (Beretta, Sig, Glock, HK) out-of-the-box, would hold their own accuracy-wise against any stock revolver...all things being equal. I will put my OUT-OF-THE-BOX-STOCK Glock 17 or Glock 31 or Glock 21, for example, against any revolver you got...:wink: The original post specified POST SHTF...I envision something extreme, maybe more like TEOTWAWKI and when you are shooting to save your a$$, fine edged accuracy is probably the least important thing you need to worry about...what you need is RELIABILITY and FIREPOWER, since your pistol may be the weapon of LAST RESORT==>to get you to YOUR LONG GUN: SHOTGUN, ASSAULT RIFLE, etc. BECAUSE YOUR ADVERSARIES PROBABLY WILL HAVE ONE, YOU WILL BE SEVERELY OUTGUNNED AND YOUR ASS WILL BE DEAD! :thumpdown I would suggest to anyone who has a romanticized idea about what a SHTF scenario would look like--Katrina? Sunami? Earthquake? Nuclear terrorism?--...imagine you are out walking in the foothills on the outside the city one evening, and all of a sudden a pack of 5-10 feral dogs comes around the bend, spots you, and attacks you without provocation. Feel comfy with your little six-shooter? Think you could shoot accurately and reload quickly with one or two dogs clamped tightly on your b@lls? :smokin: Now then, go Captain Dave's Survival Center website, look for a link to a fellow named Buckshot's Trapper page and read some of his REAL LIFE ACCOUNTS of WILD DOG ATTACKS...this not even SHTF yet. And that S&W 66 is one of the smaller framed .357 magnums on the market...how long will it LAST with anything approaching stronger service loads in a PROLONGED SHTF situation? Do your homework. Read someone who has thought this through a little more thoroughly...like maybe...oh...I dunno...Mel Tappan. (see: Survival Guns) Survival means you fight to win. Or you die. Peace be with you.

wallew | 10-28-2007 07:44 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Going out walking? Hmm. Depends. Generally when I do that, I'm accompanied by at least two of my Akbash/Great Pyrenees. They are all working animals and were prone to run away. WHY? Because they were chasing down small deer that they killed and ate. Not too worried about that. But, especially if it's SHTF or other scenario, I'd probably be carrying TWO weapons. First will be one of my CZ52's. Second will be my PPS43 - soon to be purchased - just gotta wait for a month until I have the $$ back in my account - with several spare mags for both. Pretty sure that ANY pack of ANYTHING will think twice with either of those shooting hot FMJ's their way. And that's if my dogs don't chase them down, kill them and eat them. Akbash's are KNOWN in Turkey for chasing down and killing and eating bears. OH, if someone is interested in an 'unusual' pistol, here's the no longer produced Medusa 47 - which shoots .38/.357/9mm. IF you can find one, not cheap. But gives you several choices in available ammo in a revolver.

Big_Rob | 10-28-2007 08:30 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverCity (Post 796663) In an extended SHTF scenario where, regular gun maintenance by a competent gunsmith may take a backseat to more pressing matters... you may find your revolver's cylinder losing it's timing and starting to spit lead out of the sides of the forcing cone after only several hundred rounds fired in double action mode...not uncommon at all for revolvers--especially firing fullhouse 357 mag loads. Autos don't have this problem and will fire longer, without regular maintenance, than any revolver... IMO.
Bah, several hundred rounds? What kind of crappy .357 are you shooting? A Colt King Cobra, or one of those crappy S&W K frame? Ruger revolvers are the strongest and will handle full power .357 mags all day long. BTW, What world do you live in where an auto pistol out performs an revolver even without maintenance? Hahahahahaha

Bill | 10-28-2007 08:42 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF How about one of these:D http://world.guns.ru/handguns/webley-fosbery1.jpg Webley-Fosbery automatic revolver Webley-Fosbery revolver used recoil energy generated by each discharge, to rotate the cylinder and cock the hammer for next shot. To be able to do so, it had a two-part frame. Bottom part consisted of a grip with trigger unit, and has rails on its upper surface. The upper frame, which held the cylinder and tip-down barrel, as well as hammer unit, as able to recoil on the lower frame rails against a spring. Upon recoil, a special stud, fixed on the lower frame, followed the zig-zag tracks in the cylinder to rotate it and index next loaded chamber with the barrel. At the same moment, hammer was cocked. Once all ammunition in the cylinder was expended, revolver was reloaded by pushing on the barrel lock release and swinging the barrel down on its hinge, thus tipping the rear of the cylinder up. This movement activated the automatic extractor which pulled empty cases out of cylinder chambers simultaneously. Once cylinder was emptied, fresh cartridges were loaded (either one by one or all at once, by using a flat steel clip), then barrel was swung up and locked. After reloading, revolver could be fired either by double action pull on the trigger, or by manual cocking of the hammer with subsequent single-action trigger pull. http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg184-e.htm

Unclad Lad | 10-28-2007 09:14 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Accuracy? Mr. UNCLAD, have you been to any pistol matches lately? Pick any type. IPSC, IDPA, any combat pistol matches, etc., even the Olympics, what are the competitors shooting? Revolver or Auto?
Race guns are Olympians themselves, with tuning and even original construction far beyond what a common person is unlikely to ever shoot, let alone own. And they are loaded with exactingly calculated handloads. Jerry Miculek's revolvers are highly tuned too. Quote:
I would be willing to bet almost any quality autoloader (Beretta, Sig, Glock, HK) out-of-the-box, would hold their own accuracy-wise against any stock revolver...all things being equal.
I'd have to disagree. But the way modern pistols perform out of the box, with modern factory ammo, it's really a pissing match. Autos have the capacity advantage, while revolvers have the advantage of functioning with a very wide variance in ammo power and quality. So, WTSHTF, I'd want that high-cap auto. When it's time to scrounge for ammo, load homemade powder or use questionable components, I'll take the revolver. The Medusa mentioned earlier is a good option. Another good choice is a revolver and auto that shoot the same caliber. There are revolvers that shoot 9mm or .45 ACP, and the Desert Eagle is available in .357 and .44. All the rounds I mentioned are available in carbine form too, which makes it even more flexible. I have a LA in .357; while a pistol-caliber carbine cannot truly match ballistics with a rifle, it gives you a few more options, and lets you stock one less caliber. The real answer is the gun that works best for you is the best gun to have on you.

SilverCity | 10-28-2007 09:17 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Rob (Post 800751) Bah, several hundred rounds? What kind of crappy .357 are you shooting? A Colt King Cobra, or one of those crappy S&W K frame? Ruger revolvers are the strongest and will handle full power .357 mags all day long. BTW, What world do you live in where an auto pistol out performs an revolver even without maintenance? Hahahahahaha
Okay, okay so I underexaggerated...a little...maybe...how about a few thousand maybe several thousand rounds with lighter loads. Most people never, ever shoot their beloved revolvers to the limit...anyone care to find out just how long their revolvers would last? Glock22 factory service life: 40,000 rounds Mas Ayoobs Glock22 destructive test: stopped at 80,000 without failure using full power loads. FBI Glock22 qualifying test: 20,000 rounds without failure Herr Glock has a first generation 17 with over 347,000 rounds contact MarkCO @ http://dfuse.us/ and ask him how many competitive rounds he has through his collection of Glocks... I could go on...:rant: Still think your revolver is optimum for SHTF? :no_ma: Are revolvers capable of fine accuracy? yes Is a revolver useful for an everyday WORKING GUN? yes. Do ya'll LUV yer revolvers...yes. And since the thread originator specified POST SHTF as the scenario--I have given my reasons. What ever pistol you choose I hope you choose wisely and never have to test it.... peace. Am I a Glock fan? :applause_

J.D.Rockinfeller | 10-28-2007 09:50 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by damoc (Post 796672) thanks for all the replys I know i would much rather have the extra firepower and ease of reloading afforded by an auto but was thinking at some stage that good reliable ammo would become scarce and having an auto that does not fire reliably because of poor ammo is worse than a revolver. I have shot a couple of cheap autos that jammed regularily even with good ammo and i believe even a good auto would be unreliable with poor reloads.
It is encumbent upon US that ammo does not become scarce.....im not counting on being able to procure a single round in a shtf situation. That being said, geography has a role to play in your decision... urban areas,the lg capacity 9 has all the advantages.....but SURVIVING?? imo...forget it! Get the hell out of urban and suburban areas b-4 it hits is priority #1. Now if you have escaped , if griz are in your element revolver gets the nod....any other north american predator can be taken with a .45 auto... just my 2c.

wallew | 10-28-2007 10:04 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF SC, Just for you: http://www.theprepared.com/index.php...iew&id=90&Item Pretty much says it all for the Glock if you ask me. Tough weapon for sure.

SilverCity | 10-28-2007 10:11 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Thanks Wallew:wink:

SilverCity | 10-28-2007 10:13 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF 1 Attachment(s) For the record folks, I do have one of these...solid piece...heavy enuff to bust a skull when I run out o' ammo.:D

SilverCity | 10-28-2007 10:19 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF 1 Attachment(s) We don't have any Grizzlies around here but the Wildlife Management folks and other Mother Earth-loving "Greenies" wanna reintroduce them! :rant: :thumpdown :banghead: :no_ma: They already have forced the Mexican wolf on us... If they succeed with the big bears I'll have to get one of these...in 44 mag.

platinumdude | 10-28-2007 10:50 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Here's hoping for Mad Max.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:13 AM. |
Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 | >
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM

Gold & Silver Forum - revolver versus auto post SHTF

Page 2 of 2 | < | 1 | 2
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Survival Prep (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=141)
- - revolver versus auto post SHTF (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=192850)

Mastro | 10-28-2007 11:51 PM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF Quote:
Originally Posted by drewfu (Post 796571) If we end up like Mad Max or something,
How do you read my mind, this is what always comes to my mind for TEOTWAWKI

Unclad Lad | 10-29-2007 03:31 AM
Re: revolver versus auto post SHTF I'm glad if the Glock works for you, but my hands don't fit it.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:13 AM. |
Page 2 of 2 | < | 1 | 2
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM