Tell that to the guy that pulled the trigger 6 times on a loaded 357mag while pointed at me. I thank god everyday that it didn’t fire.

When we recovered the gun a few minutes later each round had a primer strike

Damn pucker factor right there.

that’s enough to make a man seriously ponder about divine intervention.

There was 2 gun malfunctions that day, that’s the only reason he is still alive. When I was taken to the ground, my pistol was in my hand and the slide caught the tire on the way down, there wasn’t enough force to fully eject the round and it caused a stove pipe. When I came up from the other side of the car I already knew there was going to be a gunfight. In my head I fired all 15 rounds. I never came to sights or else I would’ve seen the stove pipe. Instead I watched the cylinder spin each time he pulled the trigger and heard the hammer hit the primer.

Once I realized my gun was out of battery he used turned and ran.

Gonna have to disagree with you here, on autos being much more reliable than revolvers and better defensive guns. I think you're the first person I've ever heard say that LOL. Lots of folks like the high round count, I get that. I like/own/shoot both autos and revolvers and have for many years, and except for the junk Heritage 22 rimfire I have never in my life ever had a revolver fail to fire. I have however had more jams than I can remember over the years shooting autos. Either gun was too dirty/not lubed properly/not broke in properly/can't shoot this brand of hollow points in this gun/or ammo wasn't hot enough etc etc....I suppose that if you run a revolver hard (or any gun of course) in competition long enough something's gonna break, that's a given.....but my personal experience over the years tells me that overall a revolver is much more reliable than an auto loader for defensive and hunting purposes. Heck, my daily pocket carry auto loader has jammed on me 3 times because of a little lint and dirt. Gotta keep that sucker clean and lubricated. None of the revolvers that I've ever carried on my hip getting dirty/muddy doing ranch work etc have ever failed to fire when I needed one to. Not even one. Different strokes for different folks....

Your guardian angel saved your bacon that day BP. Lord have mercy.

Yessr, I've heard similar stories from LEO's/X LEO's too. My Dad was a LEO in the 60's & 70's and back then (in his dept at least) you could pretty much carry what you wanted. My ol' man carried a S&W 44 mag and loaded his own super hot duty ammo. It wasn't because he didn't like auto's, he was a gun collector and had a bunch of them. He carried the 44 wheel gun because of it's power, he could shoot it well, and it would go bang every time he pulled the trigger in any given situation. Now my Grandpa, he carried a 1911 as a duty weapon for close to 40 yrs. I have no idea how many jams he might have had, never asked him about that (I love a 1911 in 45 BTW, and the Colt Defender is one of my carry guns).

I was going to add that folks, messing with revolvers to make them fast yet unreliable from a defensive aspect is common, and when you quoted me mid change my post went poof

My bad!

The "slop" you refer to is achieved by a fit that has more play designed into it. To achieve that loose fit, the tolerances would still have to be tight, or the dimensions would not be hit and could result in an oversized part. In fact, if the intent of the design was to have a loose fit, the tolerance may need to be more narrow. If part "A" must slide loosely inside part "B", you would have to have a tolerance that is -.xxxx,/+.0000. So no over on the + side at all, while only some deviation to be undersized.

When I was shooting combat matches in the 70's most of us were shooting revolvers, the only auto's being shot were Colt's, Remington Rands and Ithaca's. The top shooters were running revolvers, either Smith and Wesson's or Colt's. We were running against the clock and accuracy, the only auto that could even come close to the revolvers in the accuracy dept was the Colt Gold Cup but it was picky on ammo and rarely went through an event without having to clear a jam or two. Shucking the rear sight was another problem I've seen with them. It's hard to stop a clean revolver but it can be done. Back then everybody wanted a slick greasy action and one of the easiest ways to lighten the pull was to drop the load on the hammer spring. You could buy custom springs or in most cases just back off the hammer spring and in some cases they backed off to far resulting in primers strikes that were to light causing a failure to fire. The biggest problem with the 1911's was having to shoot the same load throughout the match for reliability purposes, With the revolvers we could shoot two different loads depending on the stage we were shooting. For targets we would shoot light loads, for pins and plates we shot heavier loads. At that time period the auto's just couldn't compete with the revolvers.

Today is a different story! Most of the problems we faced back then trying to run auto's are long behind us, they've come a long was in both the reliability and accuracy department. I've only got one 1911 and it's a Springfield Loaded Model and it has run flawlessly for many years, even when carried daily and neglected. Had I had this pistol back in the 70's I would have been hard to stop. Glock and Sig pretty much proved to the world that you can now trust your life to an auto. Only thing one really has to worry about when running an auto is ammunition, some of those light weight flying ashtray defense loads made are just begging for a failure to feed. I've been carrying the same SIG pistol for the last 25 years and haven't found a reason to replace it yet. I love my revolvers, but I carry a SIG.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQUEHF_QRNc


This is not me but gives a couple of examples of ways I have seen revolvers fail. I have also seen factory ammo jump crimp and completely lock up revolvers and I have seen crap build up on the forcing cone and bind the actions. Also seen crap build up in the cylinder and not allow rounds to drop in freely so that the brass drags on the frame and causes binding. Seen rough cut chambers cause major ejection issues. Also have seen tweaked moon clips that drop in freely bind a revolver. So yes revolvers fail. These were all quality guns like a Smith or a Ruger. And the guns that I have seen fail were all shot by people who knew what they doing, so operator error was not the issue. The gunk causing binding was within 100 rounds of clean, not shooting for 1000s of rounds without cleaning. Also some of the revolvers were moon clip guns, some were "standard" and some would shoot moons or use standard ammo. Some of the failures were in matches and some were just out shooting

Wow, what are the odds of that happening? Lottery winning odds I’m sure..

.

That’s divine ...

I have also been a range officer for many tactical matches. The 2011's I see a lot failures when you wear it all day long on your hip and you've been shooting prone all day and running around in the dirt. The gum up quick. The other "plastic' guns that I've seen issues with were due to a VERY light load and a modified pistol, and a combination of factors. I run a G35 in 40 cal, and it's had ten of thousands of rounds down it. It's had several malfunctions of the many years, and all were shooter related. I try not to down load my handgun ammo too much, also. They like to run at medium to near max pressures.


Wade, glad you are ok! That's crazy! When did this happen?

My glock hasnt been out of the holster in over a year. I carry it daily, work or play. I was rolling around in the sand welding on some fence braces with it on and God knows what else. Shot it for the first time in way too long the last weekend and it drained the magazine with no issues.

From the way the OP reads it seems scripted to be pre determined against the "plastic guns" I wonder what real stats of number of guns breakdown of what they were and jams would be other than anecdotal oh yeah lots of those plastic ones jammed.

Or it could be that I watched a hundred and forty or so people shoot about 6,500 rounds this weekend and just told you exactly what I saw. It could also be that I was shooting a plastic gun and would be inclined to think plastic guns are more reliable and the reason it was interesting is because over the course of this weekend they weren't. I don't know why people get their panties in a bunch when someone just reports exactly what they saw. But whatever

I’d be inclined to say that revolvers are more reliable, based on the shooting I’ve done. But that shooting was just here at the ranch and probably isn’t more than a couple thousand rounds total. And it’s not a wide spectrum of handguns.

But I gotta say that what BigPig said about the guy’s revolver not firing in the situation they were in...that puckered me up too. It might be impossible to totally ever forget that moment.

I have shot a bunch and ROed matches and qualifications, and IME when an auto malfunctions it can quickly be brought back into service about 99% of the time (Tap Rack Ready, strip magazine/rack slide a few times, reload), but when a revolver malfunctions (ejector rod unscrews, case/cases under ejector star, cases won't eject from cylinder) it takes a much longer time and usually tools to get that revolver back into to firing condition.

With a Glock being available in 10mm, I really don't have a need or desire to own a revolver.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

They are mechanical, maintenance is paramount.

Any one remember the Fred Eichler grizzly charge video? Bear charged will they where in raft. Guide pulled revolver and put one in water in front if big sow, luckily she turned, gun jammed up and wouldnt roll over to next cylinder

Maybe someone who buys an expensive 2011 is more proficient in reloading and gun maintenance.
On the other hand it's easy to buy a plastic gun, change a few spring/parts to make it super smooth with a great trigger. The problem is that the gun will no longer be as reliable as a factory gun.

There are a LOT of "revolver is more reliable" posts that then go on to give an explanation based on 30+-year-old experiences. Weird how basically no one with current, high-volume, relatively objective experience in instructing recommends a revolver over a semi-auto for the vast majority of shooters.

I echo 603’s sentiments. Big Pig, bless you for what you do. God was with you that day.

RJH, good post. Thanks for sharing your observations with us. Lots of food for thought. For shear reliability I will choose a revolver with a heavy roll crimp and not trust the crimp to someone else. (Day to day I carry a semi automatic pistol) Factoring speed to get back in service in a competitive situation where volume of on target rounds down range while on the clock, an auto loader makes sense. I shoot pistol and revolver quite a bit and load for them. Target loads loaded just stout enough to reliably run the pistol when shooting targets quickly are the ticket. Recoil is light and follow up shots are faster. The downside is two fold.
They burn dirtier, requiring more diligent attention to periodic cleaning. Shoot enough target loads and you learn what that interval is with your setup.
Target loads also don’t have the snap to overcome as much internal friction from powder residue combined with dust and grit in the slide of a semi automatic. I suspect the dusty conditions shortened the interval required between cleanings to function reliably with target loads.
I also suspect using full house loads in those conditions would have helped with reliable function of the semi automatic pistols. It is also another reason why full house loads make the most sense if you are carrying a semi automatic for self defense.

I recommend a full size 9mm auto (personal preference is a Glock 17) for most new shooters, and with training people who have issues with hand strength can still rack the slide.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr