Revolver vs Semi Auto for carry

[AMC]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: AMC


There are many reasons that modern police, military and security units world wide are not using revolvers anymore, follow in their footsteps and do not bother with revolvers. About the only exception to that would be if you want a 41 magnum or higher wilderness carry gun for defense against large animals. In that case, get yourself a ruger redhawk or s&w mountain gun. Cheers!


Agree completely. I would add, though, that for your hypothetical wilderness carry, I have a Glock 20c. The 10mm performs nearly identically to the .41 magnum, and in the Glock, I have 15 rounds in a slim, reasonably sized, relatively light pistol.


That is why I said 41 mag or larger. Even at that though, a 10mm pistol still doesn't reach the potential of a 41 mag, especially if you reload. For factory loads, take a look at buffalo bore ammunition. The most powerful 10mm round they produce is a 220 grain bullet at 1,200 fps. The top load in 41 magnum is a 265 grain flat nose bullet at 1,350 fps. That is over a 300 ft/lb difference in power and the 2 calibers really aren't that close anymore. For big animals like big hogs or bears, I would still choose the 41 mag revolver. For a very rural city type situation where you are mostly concerned with people and animals are only a secondary threat, the 10mm with hot loads would work quite well.

 

[2cool]

I really like the SP101! Fantastic Ruger design and quality. I'd vote for a semi for carry, though. Thinner and more rounds. If the SP 101 is the only gun you have, and you carried full house .357's and Bianchi reloading strips, you would NOT be undergunned I assure you. If you could see your way to a Hogue grip, so much better for the "buck and roar" of a real .357.

 

[HM12460]

It really gets down to personal preference/comfort. A high capacity semi-automatic (Ruger SR40C) is my choice. Never a mis fire from mine.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

More rounds are better.

Prepare for the worst-case scenario, and if it doesn't happen you'll be relieved.

Obviously, you can go overboard, but 27 is a lot more comforting than 12.

Quick to hand and accurate is best no matter what you carry.

 

[Smoky14]

It ain't the arrows, it's the Indian. Nothing beats training. The weapon is the warrior, don't get too wrapped up in the tools.

Smoky

 

[rlunderhill66]

They were bad shots. Needed more rounds.

 

[rlunderhill66]

I used to carry a Revolver but went to a CZ 75B. Just kidding dparm.

 

[dkryan]

Originally Posted By: Smoky14
It ain't the arrows, it's the Indian. Nothing beats training. The weapon is the warrior, don't get too wrapped up in the tools.

Smoky


+1

 

[Robenstein]

Originally Posted By: Smoky14
It ain't the arrows, it's the Indian. Nothing beats training. The weapon is the warrior, don't get too wrapped up in the tools.

Smoky


I dont agree. The tools are indeed important, but the weaker the tool, the more finely tuned the operator must be. If you are going to pack a 32acp versus a 10mm, shot placement is going to be of much more importance. But yes, you should train yourself well in whatever you do pick to carry.

 

[Mystic]

I think it is the warrior AND the weapons. Good warriors have achieved victory with poor quality weapons (the American Sherman tank was a piece of junk compared to German Tiger tanks) but you want the warrior to have the best weapons possible.

Actually, to get back to the Native Americans, the Comanche warriors were better off with bows and arrows compared to the primitive rifles. The training and skill of the warriors with the bow and the arrows was amazing.

If you were going to have concealed carry you would want the most powerful handgun you could have, but in many situations you would have no choice but to carry a very small handgun. In depends on the situation.

 

[Robenstein]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
I think it is the warrior AND the weapons. Good warriors have achieved victory with poor quality weapons (the American Sherman tank was a piece of junk compared to German Tiger tanks) but you want the warrior to have the best weapons possible.



It also helped we produced as many M4 Shermans as every single model of German Panzer in ww2, of which less than half were matches or superior to the Sherman. So the overwhelming logistical advantage had a bit of a factor to it in winning the war as far as tanks are concerned. I think a better comparison is to how the British Expeditionary Force in 1914 held off the numerically superior Germans who also had many more machine guns than the Brits. But the fast and accurate firing of the BEF soldiers and their SMLE rifles actually made the Germans assume the Brits had more Maxims and were greater in number.

 

[Mystic]

The US produced about 50,000 Sherman tanks. The Germans made about 1000 Tiger tanks I think, only about 500 of which were the most advanced design. One on one in open country the Sherman was no match for the Tiger.

But in a forest a Sherman had a chance because the German tank had a longer barrel and could not turn the barrel as easily between trees. If the Sherman could get on the side or behind the Tiger it had a chance. Plus the USA made a lot more Sherman tanks.

I think another good example is how a two man sniper team in Vietnam took on a large enemy force. The sniper fire was so accurate that the sniper team did major damage to the enemy force. Another sniper was able to stop several enemy soldiers from crossing a river by himself. The enemy force was going to attack his unit. Accurate fire from a single sniper stopped a large enemy force.

 

[SOHCman]

Whatever you get or have, the most important thing behind training is have it on you.

 

[otis24]

Originally Posted By: 2cool
I really like the SP101! Fantastic Ruger design and quality. I'd vote for a semi for carry, though. Thinner and more rounds. If the SP 101 is the only gun you have, and you carried full house .357's and Bianchi reloading strips, you would NOT be undergunned I assure you. If you could see your way to a Hogue grip, so much better for the "buck and roar" of a real .357.


I found that the 3" SP101 with Trausch grips makes an excellent carry revolver. They are issued to female police officers in France, due to the generally smaller size of female hands. The Trausch grips are designed to keep the revolver from bucking in the hand due to recoil.

 

[05LGTLtd]

Always carry the NAA black widow 2".

Sometimes carry the 37 airweight, prelock, factory bobbed hammer.

Or sometimes carry the kahr CW40.

Need to get a holster for the S&W M65 3", for the Magnum Carry option.

Also need to shoot the kahr 9mm a bunch to be able to put it in rotation as needed. I just like the way it feels compared to the CW40, as it is a steel frame. Trigger is a bit better too.

 

[Bud]

Hammerless SP101 is what I carry. Got my CCL years ago using a P89 so I could carry either, but the SP101 is my favorite.

 

[Barkleymut]

My favorite gun is my .32 H&R revolver. It fires .32 S%W Long. Although I will admit I feel safer with my 9mm. BUT I think I am more accurate with my .32 and honestly if I hit a bad guy in the chest with one round he is going down. I have fired it into a 4x4 and it only penetrates about 2 inches with a wadcutter round....but translate that into a human body and at minimum it is going to break a rib. No one is coming at you any more with that kind of pain.

 

[Robenstein]

Get a Mateba revolver and have the best of both worlds.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Barkleymut
My favorite gun is my .32 H&R revolver. It fires .32 S%W Long. Although I will admit I feel safer with my 9mm. BUT I think I am more accurate with my .32 and honestly if I hit a bad guy in the chest with one round he is going down. I have fired it into a 4x4 and it only penetrates about 2 inches with a wadcutter round....but translate that into a human body and at minimum it is going to break a rib. No one is coming at you any more with that kind of pain.


I would not put so much faith in pain, or in stopping power of the .32. Plenty of combat and street experience to show that bad guys will keep coming despite pain. Those who are larger, or under the influence of drugs, can take much more damage before they cease to be a threat. Current combat experience in Afghanistan shows that several 5.56 rounds to the torso are needed to convince a determined adversary to stop fighting.

The 90 gr bullet of the .32 at 700 fps has about half the muzzle energy of the 56 gr 5.56 bullet moving at 3100 fps.

The first rule of a gunfight is to have a gun, so I would take your .32 over no gun. Certainly, hits are superior to misses, so in your case, the .32 may be a good choice, but I would not expect one shot stops with that caliber.

I would recommend Bill Jordan's excellent book, "No Second Place Winner". Though published over 50 years ago, it is a great book, I which there are many instances of bad guys, and Texas Border Patrol, getting shot and staying In the fight. Those determined to win are the ones who usually do. And a broken rib, or a wound that doesn't impact my CNS, would not alter my determination to prevail in a fight.

 

[supton]

One nice feature of a steel snub is that, once your five shots is gone, you have a nice pound plus rock in your hand.