Revolvers vs. Pistols

either a glock 19 gen 3 or gen 4

Gen 3
>cheaper

Gen 4
>ambi mag release (but you need to use the gen 4 mags if its in lefty mode)
>comes with 3 magazines so wew

honestly both handguns are superbly reliabe. make sure to clean it like any weapon and you'll have no problems.

some people hate the glocks trigger, but thats just a training issue. it also has no manual safety so if that irks you then don't.

>>32634581
Welcome to guns. Before you walk into a store, try to get in the habbit of calling your revolver a pistol too. Lol.

It's revolver vs autoloader, bud.

A lot of single stacks these days hide better than a revolver. I carry an xds. Super slim. You won't print much if at all with aiwb. Winter months wearing bigger clothing I can hide owb larger guns. Just my two Jew cents.

>>32634581

I've carried a lot of different guns over the least few decades, and maybe it's just laziness, but maybe it's wisdom...

But I've been carrying S&W 642 for about the last 5 years.

>goes in front pocket with pocket holster
>works with the business casual look
>or shorts
>or a suit

>pull trigger, goes boom
>bad grip, no problem
>upside down, and pulling trigger with pinky finger, sure, it'll work
>most gunfights are under 5 rounds


So, it's kind of the bare minimum, but it's easy and effective.

>>32634581
It all comes down to personal preference and which you will be more likely to always carry.

File: 5.png (911KB, 1502x851px) Image search: [Google]

911KB, 1502x851px

>>32634742
>Before you walk into a store, try to get in the habbit of calling your revolver a pistol too. Lol.

It is normal to say pistol instead of autoloader.

Pistol = a handgun with one chamber integral to the barrel

>>32634742
lots of people consider revolvers and pistols to be mutually exclusive terms and will use pistol only to describe semi automatic handguns and single shot pistols.

but going with the US legislative definition of pistol sure everything without a stock is a pistol.

>>32634581
never get a polymer piece of shit. i thought glocks for example were cool until i shot one. it was so light you cant control it. and plus i dont trust plastic on my guns

>>32635325
>t. fudd

and I don't even like glocks

revolvers are really nice just for the fact it goes boom 99.99% of the time

File: SWM638and642rear1.jpg (51KB, 500x469px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 500x469px

>>32635226
DAO J-frames are just as good today as they were back in 1955.

>>32635331
Bitching about "plastic" on polymer frame is a dead give away. Unless it is a Hi Point, that shit is just plastic.

>>32635322
>lots of people consider revolvers and pistols to be mutually exclusive terms
Lots of people are stupid

>I'm having trouble deciding between a revolver or a pistol for my C.C.
Short answer : yes

Long answer what are you more worried about not enough ammo or gun malfunction.
If the answer is running out of ammo go with a pistol.
Or if the answer was malfunction go with a revolver.

>>32634742
It's nice to know that "autoloaders" hide better than a revolver. I don't think I want to call revolvers pistols, though.

>>32637020
I hadn't thought of it like that and I would personally be more worried about a malfunction. I think having some Bianchi speed strips for reloading a revolver would leave me comfortable enough with not having as much capacity even if my reloading would be slightly slower than it would be with a pistol.

On a different note I have heard that there are more complex legal issues with revolvers. Something about if you cock a revolver your firearm becomes something with a "hair trigger" that can get you into some legal soup. Does anybody here have experience or knowledge with/about this?

>>32635273
I like both equally as of now.

>>32634581
If you're looking for CC you need a double action if you're getting a revolver. As far as revolver vs pistol goes it sort of depends. Revolvers, at least from what I've run across, tend to be a bit on the heavy, bulky, or uncomfortable side. Additionally, you're going to notice that they've got a lower capacity than the pistols. This is where it depends though, because where I live, pistol magazines are limited to the capacity of you're average revolver. The one advantage I'd list for revolvers other than aesthetic/ease of maintenance would be the fact that if you have a crappy round, you can cycle past it to the next one, where you risk a jamb in a pistol - not a super common thing but hey. I suppose if you're worried about cost too, then a nice revolver will run you a tad more upfront, but you wont need to get any additional mags or lubricant. If you live in a state without magazine limitations I'd recommend a pistol with a fair capacity over a revolver, but if you're in a place that restricts magazines it's a toss up and you're free to choose whichever you like. I personally prefer revolvers - the slight discomfort is tolerable and they're just so damn sexy.

>>32634581
9mm costs half of what .38 spl does

Unless you wanna shoot .22 LR, a semi will be cheaper. But revolvers are hella classy.

>>32637850
You can naturally hide both equally well, the single stacks are just really slim and are going to be more comfortable period. The legality point is blurry and it depends on where you are. Ask someone in the department that issues permits - or if you're in a place that has constitutional carry head down to the station and ask. It's going to be a negligible thing though, because the chances of you accidentally cocking the hammer are real low. There's not really a situation you cock it while it's pointed at someone without firing either, the only time you should draw the thing in public is if you're absolutely sure you're going to fire it. If you're worried about malfunction more than your decision is kinda already made - there's more moving parts in the auto loaders; more failure points. It's really not all that likely that you'll run into a problem with either if you take care of them correctly, but the maintenance for pistols is going to be a tad more involved, and you're technically looking at more things that could go wrong - even if it's only by a little.

>>32638055
Ruger makes a revolver in 9mm

>>32637850
>Something about if you cock a revolver your firearm becomes something with a "hair trigger" that can get you into some legal soup. Does anybody here have experience or knowledge with/about this?
trigger pull weight doesn't really become a legal factor unless you've modified your gun to be significantly lighter than the factory standard, and cocking a DA revolver isn't really modifying your trigger outside of the factory standards

>>32638128
Oh right, they do.

However, it is DA only so good luck with that. Maybe if they made a 9mm SP101...

>>32638161
This is straight Fuddlore.

It comes from an accidental shooting case, not a self defence one. If you ND someone with the hammer cocked, though, prepare your anus.

>>32638194
It's single action only. But yea, just saying. When you start talking about the cost of ammunition it doesn't really apply well to a CC wep imo. Because if you're carrying you just want whatever round for the platform that is most effective for defense not cheapest one. I saw 22lr and defaulted to oh we aren't talking self defense entirely mode, my bad. I was sort of saying that as an 'if you want a range toy there's a revolver that fires 9mm also'. The blackhawk convertible is fun as hell by the way, do recommend

>>32638317
What gun are you talking about? All I know of is the LCR, which is DA only.

Also, I didn't notice OP was talking about CC.

>>32635285
Woooow you're stupid.

>>32638453
Ruger makes several revolvers. The LCR is DAO, the LCRx is DA/SA.

>>32638554
No my friend. You are misinformed. Autoloader sounds like a transformer anyways you rp faggot.

>>32638588
No you're stupidity shined greatly by not being able to tell why I said that. Can't help ya bud.

conceal carry sized revolvers offer no advantages over a quality sub compact 9mm

you also do not want a $1000+ conceal carry gun that will be impounded by the police for months if you wind up actually having to use it

>>32638689
100 percent this. I could care less if I lost a Glock or XD to this.

Carrying a revolver is a bad idea for a few reasons, and none of them have to do with the quality of the gun itself

1. Reloading
Reloading a revolver will always take longer, and even with moon clips or speedloaders, you have to make sure all the spent shells are emptied first, while a semi-auto pistol relies solely on the ejection of a magazine before reloading

2. Size
They make small revolvers, but smaller semi-autos. The issue with a smaller revolver is that the smaller barrels are genuinely poor for accuracy and control, when you consider the calibers that a revolver offers

3. Calibers
.38 sucks dick, no doubt about it, but it's the only common revolver caliber that won't hurt you coming out of a conceal-sized revolver. 357 and 44 were calibers designed to be used out of longer barrels, and as such are much more powerful. A snubnose 44 is about as much fun to shoot as whacking your toe into the corner of a table leg

4. Cost
A good revolver can cost more than an average semi-auto concealable pistol, so you have to really consider what you are getting in return. The cost of accessories as well tends to be higher with revolvers, since most revolvers don't have the ability to accept laser sights unless they are built in to a grip, which are a lot more useful than people will admit.

tl;dr don't do it OP, don't get a revolver for CC

It depends how you want to carry your gun and how easily you want it to conceal.

Carrying IWB lets you carry a larger gun at the expense of convenience (you need a belt on to carry your gun and may need to buy new clothes) and a slower draw, particularly if you have to tuck your shirt in. Carrying in your pocket, on the other hand, is extremely convenient and offers the fastest draw possible outside of open carry, but limits the size of the gun you can carry.

An automatic like a Glock 26 is ideal for IWB. For pocket carry, I would choose a J-frame revolver like the Smith and Wesson 642. The main disadvantage of a revolver, capacity, is a moot point when autoloaders of the same size and weight have practically the same capacity (a J-frame holds 5, while a 938 or Glock 43 hold 6 with a flush baseplate mag). Meanwhile, the reliability of these pocket autoloaders is not on the same level as their larger counterparts. Even the Glock 43 has all kinds of feeding and ejection issues that the 19 or 17 do not. The 642 is also significantly cheaper despite actually being more reliable than any of its competitiors.

>>32638453
I was talking about the blackhawk 9mm revolver. If lcr comes in 9mm also that wouldn't be bad, double action only isn't the worst for cc

>>32638850
>reloading

Most instances in which a gun is presented by a CC holder do not result in shots fired. In the instances where shots are fired, the incident is usually over within 3 shots or less. The vast majority of CC shootings do not involve a reload.

>The issue with a smaller revolver is that the smaller barrels are genuinely poor for accuracy and control

A small revolver can easily do 2 inch groups at 15 yards in the hands of an average person with basic training. In a practiced hand, they can consistently hit a torso-sized target at 80 yards.

>.38 sucks dick, no doubt about it

There is no difference between common handgun calibers as long as they can achieve enough penetration to meet the FBI ballistic gel standards, which .38 special does.

>A good revolver can cost more than an average semi-auto concealable pistol

A 642 is $330. Every single automatic of equivalent function and quality--the Glock 42/43, the Sig P938, the Springfield XDS, and the S&W Shield--is more expensive.

>The cost of accessories as well tends to be higher with revolvers

A revolver is not a Glock. The only accessory your average person might need on a revolver is a different grip if the stock ones don't fit his hands. Most people don't even need that.

>>32638214
a good prosecuting lawyer can use the most benign modifications to turn a justified self-defense shooting into premeditated homicide. they'll be grasping at straws if the legal argument has boiled down to trigger pull, but a jury of your peers can be pretty stupid

>>32638689
If you're somewhere the laws restrict mag size it's a toss up. Comes down to what you like better or if you're anal technically you're slightly more likely to have a failure in pistols than you are in revolvers

>>32634581
>So I'm having trouble deciding between a revolver or a pistol for my C.C

Because of a rise in niggers concealed carrying, my city had 3x more murders last year than the one before.

Concealed carrying is literally nigger behaviour.

>>32642131
It's nigger behavior when you do it illegally because you're too stupid and lazy to go through the legal process. When you go through the legal process and get proper training it is called being "law-abiding."

I'd actually prefer to open carry but I sadly have liberals in my life. Me choosing to open carry means I'd never get to attend a family dinner, reunion, wedding or other such function again.

>>32639145
You have some very nice counterpoints to >>32638850

>>32638965
I usually wear a belt/suspenders so that might not be so bad although it does mean I will need to burn some weight. You also have touched on something I've heard before: micro-pistols don't preform as reliably and as well as their larger counterparts.

What are some other common ways to conceal carry a revolver or pistol aside from IWB?

>>32634581
I'm not a gun expert but I have found that pistols over all are easier to shoot, easy to reload and has can carry more than a revolver , so It'd probably be better to just get a pistole

>>32638689
They are lighter and smaller?

Only the cylinder is bulky, and they are also far more reliable.

>>32639461
Provide some examples

>>32634581
A revolver is a pistol, DUMBASS.

>>32639461
If your lawyer is that bad, they're gonna diddle your rainbow anyway. Only retard doesn't know self defense guns are for killing.

>>32638689
A good concealed carry revolver is lighter, possibly smaller and less expensive.

>>32644503
>autism = 11
The funny part is that you're wrong, the word pistol has multiple definitions. From the context of his post it is the abbreviated form of "semi-automatic pistol"

>>32634581
I wish I had a bought a Charles Daly when those were a thing

File: Wrong.gif (1MB, 480x287px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 480x287px

>>32644540

>>32634581
I'm a big guy and carry an auto. Double stack, 17 rounds of 9mm. Sometimes I also carry a .357 revolver loaded with swc due to snub length barrel. Revolver can be hidden more easily but it weighs more due to being entirely steel. Also 1/3 the firepower. If you can carry an auto get something SA/DA hammer fired and carry cocked and locked. Revolvers won't help your reaction time on a DA pull by much if you carry like that with an auto. DA on an auto is for the same reason why you would carry a revolver in the first place if your intention was "misfire so squeeze the trigger again"

>>32644669
>I want to shoot myself in the dick: the post

Is racking a slide really that difficult?

At least get a gun with a manual safety.

>>32644669
>DA on an auto is for the same reason why you would carry a revolve
no. on a revolver you're trying again with a different bullet. on an auto you're gambling it will go again, which is dumb. still better off with a tap-rack-bang. DA auto's are retarded.
>"misfire so squeeze the trigger again"
that's such a gamble. better off with a

>>32644702
Are you retarded? It does have a manual safety. Not everyone on here buys slavshit.

>>32644712
Never failed for me on a light strike. I've had more crimp jumps in my revolvers than light strikes in an auto. Not only that but a jumped crimp in a revolver means your assistance is reloading, potentially in the dark, a revolver in a high stress situation. The worst part is you won't even know it until you're being accosted and your gun doesn't work.

>>32644535
>A good concealed carry revolver is lighter, possibly smaller and less expensive.

Only when comparing to a full size 9mm.

>>32644480
>and they are also far more reliable

But not in reality.

>>32638850
Break top revolvers like the Webley automatically eject the shells

>>32639145
>A 642 is $330. Every single automatic of equivalent function and quality--the Glock 42/43, the Sig P938, the Springfield XDS, and the S&W Shield--is more expensive.

SW642 - Glock 42
MSRP $469 - $480
length 6.3" - 5.94"
barrel length 1.88" - 3.25"
weight 14.4oz - 13.8oz
capacity 5 - 7

Oh my, $11 more for a gun that is better in every way.