>>28490138 >simplicity of revolvers WAT? Semi-autos have fewer parts than revolvers and tolerances are looser too. That's why you can build a cheap & reliable semi-auto and you can't build a cheap & reliable revolver.
>>28490351 He's saying the greater amount of movement results in more opportunities for the weapon to fail to cycle, IE outside forces acting on the slide, things like limp wristing causing a FTF, etc. While revolvers have a large number of moving parts, they move relatively little and are completely enclosed. Additionally, revolvers do not rely on ammunition to cycle which eliminates a significant source of potential failures.
>>28489192 It is not that one is more reliable then the other in my opinion (any system can fail) they reliability are about equal. Its that the 2 work of completely different systems of cycling, The semi auto is using the power the fired cartridge to push the slide back cycling the gun, if anything happens to the slide (limp wrist, shoot to close to chest and slide hits your chest half way through a cycle) or the ammunition supply the gun can jam. If you are properly trained and have a good ammo supply it shouldn't be an issue and you are able to get faster reloads (i know the world record for fastest shot and reload was with a double action revolver) but we aren't all Jerry Miculek. A Revolver is like clockwork so its a purely mechanical system, it is all powered by the pulling of the trigger or cocking of the hammer. so as long as the bullet leaves the barrel and nothing wrong inside the gun the gun will fire for as many shoots you have in the gun, minus grabbing the cylinder or sticking you hand in between the hammer and the frame but how many people have the guts to grab the gun that's drawn on them. This makes them able to do things the semiauto cant like shoot from a pocket. I like both and i think a G19/43 with a 9mm LCR as a backup, hell or high high water you will have a gun that will function and you will have plenty of ammo for.
>>28494841 o yeah few things i forgot. *Semi autos typically have higher capacity(not always true but typically) Easier and more concealable to carrier magazines over speed loader/moonclip and speed strips. Jams are usually fixed with Tap, Rack, Bang. *Revolvers can accommodate larger rounds like the .357 mag (.44mag-.460mag-.500mag) If that's to much kick for you that same chambering can also chamber .38 special that is equal (more or less) to a 9x19mm (Extreme case of this is Phillips and Rogers Medusa, if you don't know it look it up),Reloads are typically more difficult for a revolver. Then if the gun jams and it wasn't caused by not fully resetting the trigger there really isn't a way to quickly fix it.
>>28489417 >How important is reloading in a pistol? For my CC I really don't worry about it. >theoretical accuracy? I can hit a person dead center from a cross the room with a derringer, so fuckit >In hand accuracy? I like me some big grips >trigger pull? Other factors are more important >barrel length including chamber? I like 3"+ >ammunition types? Cheap >resistance to foreign debris and elements? An absolute necessity
>>28489192 Last range trip my dad had a .22 semi (some kind of luger) and I had my .22 single six. He had 2 jams and I had zero. To be fair though I've never seen his jam before it may have been the cheap ammo.
>>28489417 >>Wish I purchased a single stack .380 for CC instead. Because I didn't factor weight and size for carry.
Those are the most important parts of concealed carry so you didn't give it much thought. There's lightweight revolvers for CC like the 642 and LCR, both lighter than single stack 9mms in the same size class and lighter than many 380s, all in the pocket carry class of guns.
Reliability is somewhat related to why I carry a revolver. Ammo failures happen. Not often, but they can happen. If it's a high stress situation are you trained enough to clear it on an automatic before getting stabbed by a guy after your wallet? Maybe, I'm sure it's possible and more power to you, but on a revolver its as simple as pulling the trigger again and you'd probably be doing that anyway.
I don't begrudge people their CC gun. It's probably the most personal gun choice you can make and I can respect someone choosing a glock 43. What I can't respect is people who claim to carry 1911s as their CC gun. You don't, you leave it at home or in the car.
>>28495547 Heavy weight, lower capacity, complexity/not drop-safe hammer style (considered to be fudd lord but it is a ptebtial concern), .45acp has "dump truck" ballistics with high kinetic energy but low muzzle velocity and generally poor extended ballistics. Terninal ballistics are nearly the same as 9mm, so it's certainly not a bad round at close range, but the 1911 platform itself is not great for CC.
>>28490246 Translation for you niggers in case you're interested: Engineer Landstad's "automatic revolver" from 1900, manufactured at Hovedarsenalet (The Main Arsenal). Only a very few shots were fired during trials, and the revolver must be considered a complete failure. The "automatic revolver" was, however, the first Norwegian construct which was tested with the eventual future semi-automatic service pistol in mind. The Revolver is preserved in England (Dr. Geoffrey Sturgess' collection and photo).
Thread replies: 66 Thread images: 10
Thread DB ID: 400442
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.