GlockTalk Forum banner

21 - 33 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,795 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
I still love having revolvers . It’s classical and everyday weather and dirt conditions it is by far the most reliable. And versatility of ammo is also another plus.

But I usually choose a semi too. But would you choose a semi auto over a revolver if the ammo capacity was limited to same number as the revolver? Some guns I would say yes for concealed carry. But what if the gun was for open carry only like in the military forces pre World War One excluding the colt 1911. It was too exceptional in its time to be the true representative of semi autos of the pre World War One time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
965 Posts
It was a lot easier to reload a 1911 on horseback than a double action revolver, especially before half-moon clips.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,795 Posts
Discussion Starter #23
It was a lot easier to reload a 1911 on horseback than a double action revolver, especially before half-moon clips.
Yes, the 9/11 and other browning designs were the exception in those days. The other semi autos of the time with exceptions did not have truly interchangeable magazines. The one magazine that came with gun was the only one in my cases would be hand filed to fit that gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,795 Posts
Discussion Starter #25 (Edited)
@walkinguf61 I'm getting a keen sense you don't know what you're talking about.
Go watch c&rsenal on YouTube about the early semi auto and transitions to semi auto by the European nations.

Just some examples:

View: https://youtu.be/mDO4LP6v5xc



View: https://youtu.be/V8K0FC5PXng



View: https://youtu.be/ETgAixNUwi8



View: https://youtu.be/MQTexxPSszU


He often explains why the militaries at the time used stripper clips instead of deattachable magazines. I’m not an expert, just repeating what an actual expert has said.
 

·
On the day of your birth death began stalking you
Joined
·
9,482 Posts
Watching the video I guess so much for the just pull the trigger again arguement huh?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,769 Posts
Don't sell your revolvers just yet because of this test - Biden may grandfathers them in after he outlaws the evil automatic
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,640 Posts
The WW1 era revolvers used by the US and Britain (M1917 and Webley) remained in service to some degree through the 1960s. The USAF used model 15s up through the Gulf War.
There were more M1917s in service than 1911s in WW1. They served well enough in the muck.
I think the 19 classic did fairly well in the test, but the idea that the revolver was replaced by military forces because of sand and mud isn't true.
A M1917 with full moon clips will still be a good way to go for troops.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,795 Posts
Discussion Starter #30 (Edited)
A M1917 with full moon clips will still be a good way to go for troops.
I don’t disagree. I was just wondering why the big push to semi auto in the pre World War One period. Even some of the revolver choices would seem stupid by today’s standards like to choose a loading gate system over a swing out cylinder.

View: https://youtu.be/ETgAixNUwi8


They had their reasons but they would appear stupid by today’s standards.

Or the lack of quality control prevented interchangeable magazines

View: https://youtu.be/V8K0FC5PXng


View: https://youtu.be/guXG8Vaq-R8


Or just MAC fear that he was going to blow up the revolver during the test because mud might get in the cylinder firing chamber.

I didn’t say that the revolver wasn’t a good choice. But the mud test made it clearer to me why people who were familiar with revolvers and its downsides would want to go to semi autos even in their early semi auto days. Especially before the Browning designs and American quality control would show them the way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
806 Posts
There is a misconception that revolvers are “simpler” and “cannot jam” and it just isn’t true.

I love revolvers. I have always been a revolver guy, but there are plenty of things that can jam up a revolver.

I personally have had high primers and had a case slip under the extractor star, and you better be carrying a backup gun because you are not fixing that under fire.
I have seen a far greater number of failures per rounds fired in revolvers than semi-autos.

Most semiauto failures are related to tweaking springs or ammo trying to gain competitive advantage.

Revolver issues I've seen lately in a few hundred rounds as an RO:

- Bullet COL increase under recoil

- Case rim slips off ejector/extractor

- Short stroke trigger

- Unburned powder or dirt under ejector/extractor star

When I compare that with the 28K trouble free rounds I have through one of my M&P 2.0 pistols, they don't compare favorably...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,493 Posts
I have seen a far greater number of failures per rounds fired in revolvers than semi-autos.

Most semiauto failures are related to tweaking springs or ammo trying to gain competitive advantage.

Revolver issues I've seen lately in a few hundred rounds as an RO:

- Bullet COL increase under recoil

- Case rim slips off ejector/extractor

- Short stroke trigger

- Unburned powder or dirt under ejector/extractor star

When I compare that with the 28K trouble free rounds I have through one of my M&P 2.0 pistols, they don't compare favorably...
I had to quit using Bullseye for my 38 reloads because it gunked up the cylinder under the extractor in short order. 30-60 rounds before it caused the cylinder to bind up.

W231 works much better, but only at loads past the midway point in the load data. Starting loads didn’t burn any cleaner than the Bullseye.

Running 4.0g of 231 behind a 158g LRN seems to work well. Still dirty, but I can fire several hundred rounds in between cleanings now. Gave decent performance as well. 809 FPS average over 12 shots and good accuracy in all of my revolvers.
 

·
woo woo
Joined
·
30,563 Posts
More firepower, easier to manufacture, less sensitive to variances. The cylinder can only go so big.
 
21 - 33 of 33 Posts
Top