Is there any situation where it would be better to carry a revolver

>>33271424

yes if the other gun does not work

>>33271424
When you suck dicks and let people put them in your butt, too.

>>33271424
When you don't want to have to hunt brass before you leave the crime scene.

Revolvers can be loaded with different types of ammunition and the cylinder advanced to whatever load is required at the time.

For example, you could carry a .44 magnum loaded with 5 stout loads for bear defense and a single CCI .44 shotshell for taking small game at close range. A lightly loaded .44 special would also be good for lesser critters.

j-frame in the front pocket of a sweater/hoodie, hand on the gun. if you get caught with your pants down you don't have to risk drawing on a gun pointed at you - just point and shoot through the sweater.

>>33271498
You can do that with a semi auto too though, if you keep one in chamber.

>>33271479
>>33271498
Best responses in this thread

>>33271510
You could get one round off but you can't guarantee a follow up shot. Slide could get hung up.

>>33271424
Hunting? Trail protection? I mean really, 9mm will probably scare most animals away, but .357 or .44 would be more persuasive, especially towards bear or boar. But then again 10mm wouldn't be bad either.

I carry an old S&W model 29 while hunting, but really I probably don't need to.

File: maxresdefault (1).jpg (71KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1920x1080px

>>33271779
>Telling a grizzly bear to make your day
I see nothing wrong with this

File: IMG_20170311_125243.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

>>33271424
Rimfire.

The best thing I can say for revolvers is that they can pack a big cartridge into a very small gun. Whether that's actually useful is debatable, though.

I love wheelguns too, but I don't think I'd carry one. They're awesome at the range though.

>>33271424
Better for long term storage as a night stand or truck gun due to no risk of spring compression damage. Also not as finiky about dust or lack of oiling for the same situation.

Last, the cartridge they can carry is generally more powerful than any automatic in a similar size (except possibly 10 mm)

>>33271929
>spring compression damage
bullshit fuddlore. No such thing.

Revolvers can't jam or misfire the way a semi can. If you have a dud cartridge just pull the trigger again. No need to rack it or try and clear a bent case.

>>33271953
Tell that to the three Glock magazines that needed to be repaired after having rounds left in the for 6 months

>>33271424
Going to plink in the backyard, a .22lr revolvers are so much fun. Put in CB, Short, SV and HV in succession and laugh your ass off when it goes *pop* *POP* *bam* *BAM*

>>33271424
CC for a retarded woman who can't rack the slide or remove the safety, and can't be trusted to not ND.

>>33271424
My dad lost most of the use of his one of his hands and can't properly work the action on a semi auto pistol, so a revolver is great for him.

>>33272051
if they were the cheapo aftermarket korean ones, those have shit springs out of the box.

Springs being continually compressed does not wear out a spring. The only thing that wears a spring out is the transition from compressed to uncompressed and vice-versa.

Not really. I love my revolvers but I wouldn't ever CC one. Lots of fun on the range though, especially for big BOOM.

>>33272108
Kek. My Mom's CC is a S&W .357 with a 3" barrel. No muss no fuss in a situation. Just point and shoot. >>33272108
>>33272108

>>33271424
You can leave a revolver loaded safely for a long time, unlike a semi-auto

>>33272147
>Springs being continually compressed does not wear out a spring
it does but it takes decades and that set is generally taken into consideration during design.

>>33272407
>spring compression damage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pch0J9-7i2k

He basically blames cheap knockoff springs and mags. I agree.

>>33271424
One small advantage to a revolver I like is how you can silently load it when you get off from a flight.
>go to bathroom
>load up j-frame
>get your semi auto handgun back on you when you reach a destination

As much as revolvers are cool, they're not as practical as a modern autoloader but that's one niche advantage I can see with one.

>>33271873
This actually. Rimfire semi autos are shitty and dirty and have terrible magazines. You also don't have the excuse of "but muh tactical situations" with rimfire so you might as well go with ten shots in a cylinder.

>>33272051
1) Anctidotal
2) Prove it
3) If that was the case, then all semi-autos would be completely useless

>>33271479
speaking the truth...

Revolver as a survival gun. A durable revolver can fire extremely heavy loads and very light loads and continue to cycle.
Semiauto might need to change springs and other setting to cycle.

So varmint round for food and heavy round for bear.

Also
>>33271996
Some semiautos do have a double strike capability but does not protect you from a total dud round.

>>33271424
If you need to save brass, get magnum class power (1000+ ft/lbs) in a reliable and packable firearm, or just to look like a pimp.

>>33271779

You seen the video of the guy who took down a charging grizzly with a 9? Shot at it twice and it dropped like 20 feet from him. It wasn't a younging, thing was pretty good size, not full grown but Def much much bigger than a black.

>>33271424
>I love revolvers but why would anyone carry one over a modern semi auto?

If you shoot and train with an auto loader, know the controls, the best type ammo that feeds and ejects properly, and have practice and knowledge of swapping mags and clearing jams, then the semi auto is the way o go.

If you don't practice and train with an auto loader, go with a revolver.

>>33271424
Most of the real reasons have been listed already. except that faggot talking about wear on springs that aren't being cycled. He should go tell all those engineers and material scientist that they don't know how springs really work and go become an industry titan if he really things mag springs wont last 6 mos when loaded.

That being said, personally I find revolvers to handle stout recoil better. .357 mag out of a 4" revolver is fun. OTOH I find even .40 S&W out of a semi-auto to be annoying. Also, I think that a properly conceal revolver will pose much less of a risk of printing than a similar size-class semi-auto. The curved handle sticks out from my body less than the straighter, thicker handle of a semi-auto while presenting a much less gun like silhouette to an observer. I can conceal a 4" security six very well, a G17 or M&P, not so much without a bit of dressing around.

>>33273228
There are several cases of grizz being stopped in a timely manner with a combat caliber handgun. either cor-bon, buffalo bore, or underwood i think even has a story with pictures of one of their 9mm loads being used for such. Not sure id want to rely on that though lol.

>>33271424
I'll talk about derringers for the reason being - derringers are much better at what revolvers do better than automatics, and much worse at everything they do poorly.

If you buy derringer you can have effective .357 and other heavy-hitting rounds in a pistol that's the size of .32 subcompact. It's super easy to use, and won't fail you. The problem is - you have 2 shots(4 in some little bit bulkier models).

Now revolvers won't fire as powerful cartridges for their size as derringers but they'll have that 5-6 rounds in the cylinder, while still being able to fire something considerably more powerful than similar automatic pistol.

However the real question is, whether you actually want to fire something like .357 out of small frame pistol.

That's for your CC needs.

For general use - revolvers are more likely to run until hell breaks loose without much maintenance. The high end pistol ammo is usually made with them in mind, which is the source of Desert Eagle's reputation for being unreliable(it only cycles with certain range of loadings for whatever calibre you have it), since there's gigantic variety of loadings for them.

If you're looking for .22LR plinker revolvers are also decent idea - rimfire generally works better with them.

If you only have access to shit quality ammo, they will be better too, since in case of misfire you just press the trigger again.

I hope I haven't painted them as some reasonable carry option though, because they aren't unless you really want to carry .44 magnum.

>>33271424
It depends.
I actually am a better shot with a revolver (sadly it ain't small enough for CC or I'd CC it. That and I'd feel absolutely terrible if a Webley Mk VI wound up in an evidence locker) and thus I intend to get a revolver for CC, however if I was better with a semi auto I'd carry a semi auto.

Oh, and this.
>>33271479
>>33272998

>>33271424
Revolvers are more reliable and less likely to jam because they are simple.

>>33274226
simple interface doesn't imply simple implementation

they are, literally, fucking clockwork internally

>>33271879
>The best thing I can say for revolvers is that they can pack a big cartridge into a very small gun.
God I wish S&W made a .44 Magnum J-frame.

>>33274332
but it does rule out things like ftes, stovepipes, slide out of battery, etc

>>33274818
But if it does malfunction, it's going to be an apocalyptic catastrofuck that locks up the whole gun and requires the care of a competent gunsmith to resolve, whereas automatics malfunction relatively more often, but can be resolved without tools by the end user while he's being shot at.

>>33271424
Grab a revolver, load it, and leave it alone for 5-10 years. It'll still fire and function just fine.

Grab an autoloader and try the same thing, it may or may not function.

Autoloaders rely on springs and other parts that can wear out more easily. Keep a spring compressed for years, and it'll lose some of its strength.

In the end, revolvers are a better gun for loading and leaving alone. If you want a home defense gun, it should be okay.

But if you actually train with your gun and use it often enough to know what you're doing, stick with an autoloader.

>>33271424

Because they want to carry one?

>>33274652
They make a .44 magnum L frame. 5 shots. You could probably get 3 in a J frame but just, like, why?

File: remarkably specific.jpg (52KB, 539x350px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 539x350px

>>33275364
Bear defense pocket carry for ultralite backpackers.
A 3-shot J-frame .44 Mag would hold 60% as many cartridges as a Model 69 for only ~42% of the weight, to say nothing of the size difference.
I'm not saying they'd sell like hotcakes, but there's definitely a potential market for such a thing.

>>33274996
how much will it malfunction?
well made revolvers basically never fuck up.

>>33271424
When you're in bear country, that's pretty much the only case.

>>33275100
That isn't true. Springs don't lose tention from being held compressed, they lose tention from the act of being compressed and decompressed.

>>33273297
Revolvers are a lot harder to learn compared to semi autos

https://youtu.be/sPbTWGEPi2o

>>33272051
Dear glock magazines, sorry you were pieces of shit with terrible feed lips that needed repairing, but springs don't work that way. Love me.

File: tmp_27268-IMAG118849558006.jpg (3MB, 4000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4000x3000px

>>33271424
When your cartridge wouldn't work out well in a short recoil operated pistol for some reason, or when you want the ability to use a wide variety of loads without having to worry about an autoloader having trouble cycling those different loads. Also when you want to feel like a cowboy, or if you're going deep into fudd country and don't wanna spook the locals.

>>33274652
>>33275364
>>33275523
J Frames have enough trouble stretching out with .357 Mag, I don't think you would have a good time with a .44 Mag. Just get a Bulldog, Ruger's .44 Special GP-100, or a Model 69.

>>33271424
>I love revolvers but why would anyone carry one over a modern semi auto? Is there any conceivable situation where a wheel gun would be better?

Cosplaying as a 1940s detective.

File: Broken-Wrist.jpg (62KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 640x400px

>>33276942
>implying anyone would shoot enough .44 mag through a 14-ounce gun, three rounds at a time, for that to be a problem

>>33271424
>carry two small 5 shot .38 j-frame smiths in each jacket pocket
>dindu nuffin does do
>fire all five rounds inside your jacket
>new york reload if needed

Yes.

>>33272384
what?

>>33277049
I just wouldn't buy a magnum J-frame because of the issue. S&W feels confident stamping the gun as a .357 but then tells owners not to shoot magnums unless they're defending themselves. Seems kinda dodgy to me. At least an SP-101 could take some use in stride.

>>33277183
I wouldn't buy a magnum J-frame because out of a barrel that short, the slight increase in velocity isn't worth the dramatic increase in blast, flash, and recoil.
Whether the gun can handle it or not is a secondary consideration.

>>33277296
Anon was talking about a 3-shot 3" .44 mag J-frame abomination.

If you ever want to shoot up a school, get two of these along with a cowboy hat and leather. That way, you can plea for insanity when you scream "IT'S HIGH NOON", and gun down Chad Thundercock, this would be a good choice.

>>33271478
Not fucking bad man.

File: FB_IMG_1486688146301.jpg (43KB, 719x717px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 719x717px

>>33271478
Underrated

File: acfe622.jpg (137KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 640x480px

>>33277183
The 19 was the same way; too many full-power .357s and the forcing cone would crack right in half.
Anyway, most people who buy a magnum J-frame don't need to be told not to constantly shoot .357 through it; their wrists will figure it out for them in short order. A .44 Mag J-frame would be the same story, only more so.

File: why_he_carries_r.jpg (102KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1280x720px

>>33271424
Pretty good video with one guys reasoning
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_fGAq_TuyU

Modern revolvers can carry 8 shots and it just depends if you can conceal a cylinder that is 1.7 inches wide.. otherwise 5 or 6 for a pocket revolver and that is not much worse than your average single stack 9mm and some people even carry two revolvers for a new york reload

The reason a lot of people, myself included, like revolvers is because there is a tactile and visual signal that the gun is about to go off (hammer back and cylinder turning) and the trigger pull is heavier.. so it just seems like a gun that would be more comfortable to carry because automatics sometimes make people nervous like they might go off at anytime without a signal. You can see all the working bits and pieces in a revolver and what it is doing is self evident.. with a glock the thing seems like it just might go off if you breath on it the wrong way... But common sense tells us that you have to pull the trigger but still its just mentally less stressful to carry a revolver.

>>33277410
>tfw bought a Model 69 and have only put magnums though it

What's the worst that could happen, right guys?

Revolvers are easier to operate when you are blackout drunk.

>>33277499
I don't see how lining up a speed loader, using speed strips, or loading loose cartridges into a cylinder would be easier than sliding in a magazine. Pulling back a slide and letting it fall home isn't that complicated either. I like me sone revolvers, but that shit just doesn't make sense.

>>33277468
Keep going, see what breaks first
this is important

>>33277545
Yeah, I'll just tell myself it's for science.

>>33277543
Personally, I carry my gun loaded.

When you, as a shooter, are comfortable or familiar with a revolver and/or it's within reach and your semi-auto is not.

Revolver a shit
Get one as a primary and you're going to regret it
There are going to be multiple levels of regret, the biggest one is going to be capacity - I know I got one what are the odds I need 1 bullet let alone multiple but magazine is just better in terms of capacity and reload. Wanna carry spare rounds?
Loose rounds fumble fumble
Fast reload? Speed loader, BIG cylinder shaped thing with your bullets wiggling around good luck hiding all that bulk and not setting back your bullets
Speed strip- faster than lose rounds since at best you'll load two at a time and not individually grabbing each round and lining them up with the cylinder, slower than every other option
Again with capacity it doesn't seem like a big deal but in a real situation you're just adding a handicap, other people with guns are the least of your worries what if they got an attack dog? 5-6 shots is fine against one or two dudes if you're really confident throw in a smaller faster target and you will wish you'd thought of it sooner
Aside from capacity then you'll have to listen to a lot of fudd lore
Fudd lore 1. Shoot in your pocket
There is a cylinder gap. Gas coming out of that gap is enough to shred paper. When I sharpen a knife I was taught just go until it cuts paper, if it cuts paper it cuts skin. Shooting that in your pocket is going to shred your clothes and your fucking skin. You're not aiming and are almost guaranteed to hurt yourself in the process why in the fuck anyone think that's a good idea who knows.

Fudd lore 2 and 3: it doesn't jam, more powerful bullets
Yes, yes they do jam. They have a lot more ways to jam than a semi auto. If your primer isn't set right it'll catch on the firing pin and block the cylinder from rotating into battery.
Using more powerful bullets just shooting can make the bullet jump the crimp and hang out the front of your cylinder so it can catch on the forcing cone so the cylinder doesn't rotate into battery- also can outfire the timing to break

>>33277582
Right but reloading is the most complex part of operating a handgun. Unless the only autoloaders you've ever been exposed to are SAO's that you need to carry cocked and locked, it shouldn't be any harder to pull out a DA/SA or DAO autoloader and shoot it than it is to pull out a DA revolver, and you'll meed to reload your autoloading pistol less often than your DA revolver on top of that.

File: Paris-shield.jpg (41KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 720x960px

They're better for the pointman with a ballistic shield. Semiauto pistols could malfunction from the slide hitting the shield. No such problem with a revolver.

Of course, it's kind of a moot point nowadays since shields with cutouts to rest long guns are coming out. The capacity of semiauto pistols also can outweigh the reliability of the revolver, especially if they're caring 2 or more as backups (since you can't reload while holding a shield in one hand).

>>33277596
Hit the character limit
where was I - more powerful bullets, no not even true there are semi autos with gas regulators and or rotating bolts where you can get those magnum rounds the only limit is the handle size due to having mags wells in the handle, the things are really no bigger than some ludicrously huge magnum revolver. The semi auto would probably weight less since it has the one chamber and not a cylinder with multiple firing chambers spinning around. At the size where a revolver can beat out a semi auto if you're using it for anything other than youtube videos of giving it to your 90 pound sister girlfriend to record it flying out of her hand and smacking her face you might as well get a carbine in that caliber for anything practical since the revolver is already the size of a carbine while being way less ergonomic.
Fudd lore 4 better triggers
sa, da, sa/da you're only going to get better in single action if you want to manually cock it every time, even a semi auto like a 1911 is going to manually reset the single action along with better capacity to give you any consistency in aiming with a single action to give much of an advantage if you're firing in double action you're pulling all the mechanism of the cylinder into battery and if you let off pressure at the wrong time you can skip over firing a bullet and gimp your limited capacity even further -
>just pull the trigger again if it didn't fire!
like 5 or 6 times again for that one bullet if you already fired some and needed to keep firing you might have to go over ALL those fired ones to get back to another working around where you could of just spent that time reloading which would of been almost identical in time for reloading the cylinder or probably just much faster with a semi
There is like no advantage to a revolver unless you like the grip or have some type of problem with a semi. They're just bygone era legacy guns that have limited use.

>>33277099
Wears down the mag springs

>>33275641
Bullshit. Creep is a thing,
And repeated compression and tension work hardens a spring. Spring steel is made to endure it longer, that's all.

>>33277596
>>33277689
>Autistic rambling for 15 minutes

I can't understand a single word of what you're trying to say, you mong

>>33277596
First of all fuddlore is an inappropriate term since fudds are people who only think you should have hunting rifles and shotguns and therefore wouldn't be offering advise on self defence shooting and carry.

>Fudd lore 1. Shoot in your pocket
>There is a cylinder gap. Gas coming out of that gap is enough to shred paper. When I sharpen a knife I was taught just go until it cuts paper, if it cuts paper it cuts skin. Shooting that in your pocket is going to shred your clothes and your fucking skin. You're not aiming and are almost guaranteed to hurt yourself in the process why in the fuck anyone think that's a good idea who knows.

If you're shooting a hole through the inside of your pocket, why would you be upset about the gas from your cylinder gap damaging your pocket? If you're shooting someone through your pocket, they're probably close enough that you wouldn't be using the sights anyways.

>Yes, yes they do jam. They have a lot more ways to jam than a semi auto. If your primer isn't set right it'll catch on the firing pin and block the cylinder from rotating into battery.

There should never be a condition in which your firing pin is protruding and the cylinder is trying to rotate.

>Using more powerful bullets just shooting can make the bullet jump the crimp and hang out the front of your cylinder so it can catch on the forcing cone so the cylinder doesn't rotate into battery

This is what crimping is for. This is also a reason to test any defensive ammo you plan on carrying. You also need to check that ammo loaded into box magazines isn't slamming into the front of the magazine and causing bullet setback, leading to potential overpressure issues.

>also can outfire the timing to break

Wut.

Not even a huge revolverfag, but the anti-revolverfags like yourself tend to blow things out of proportion just as much as the dipshits who talk about how their revolver can't malfunction.

Also, you missed ammo with out of spec rims jamming up the cylinder.

File: 1425893367661.jpg (28KB, 461x500px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 461x500px

>>33277700
Dubs and trips

>>33277689
Hit the character limit again
Fixing a non functional semi auto is much easier than a revolver, if there is a malfunction you rack the slide. Good luck figuring out how to throw all your revolver parts back together.
Swapping out barrels in a semi is just a quick drop in most of the time, if you want a revolver barrel swap you're going to need a bunch of gun smith tools and being way more careful about how far back the barrel is set so it doesn't jam the cylinder.
Semi autos are just easier to add attachments and sights, revolvers are already so much heavier and bulkier that adding onto that already is almost totally impractical.

>>33277721
Did I mention cylinder gap? You put your hand on the wrong spot on a semi you'll get slide bite which might sting a bit. Put it the wrong spot on a revolver and you can lose a finger.

>>33277752
>If you're shooting a hole through the inside of your pocket, why would you be upset about the gas from your cylinder gap damaging your pocket? If you're shooting someone through your pocket, they're probably close enough that you wouldn't be using the sights anyways.
If it goes through you're pocket it's RIGHT near your skin. My problem isn't with ruining the clothing, it's common sense when that clothing gets ruined you're skin is right next to it and the clothing is not going to protect your skin any. You're body is going to get shredded as quick and easy as that garment.

>>33277752
>>also can outfire the timing to break
I ran out of character limit, you can break the timing just from firing heavy loads.

>>33271442
first post worst post

>>33271424
inside a jacket pocket

File: 1489107027381.jpg (89KB, 520x387px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 520x387px

>>33271424
>ALWAYS WORKS

>>33277890
ULTRA HIGH CAPACITY

>>33277752
>There should never be a condition in which your firing pin is protruding and the cylinder is trying to rotate.
There is a small little gap in the front and back of your cylinder that fowling or anything can block it up from the rip or primer. >>33277752
>This is what crimping is for. This is also a reason to test any defensive ammo you plan on carrying. You also need to check that ammo loaded into box magazines isn't slamming into the front of the magazine and causing bullet setback, leading to potential overpressure issues.
With magnum loads bullets can jump crimps or knock the primer loose in the back causing those types of problems.

In a magazine.. setback I really don't think that's more likely than a bullet jumping the crimp. I think it's even less likely since with spring compression and resting on top of other rounds they're not going to smack the front of the mag and have more leeway to rattle against other rounds instead of absorbing all the shock in a cylinder chamber with no where to push against like a spring to absorb recoil.

>>33277799
>If it goes through you're pocket it's RIGHT near your skin. My problem isn't with ruining the clothing, it's common sense when that clothing gets ruined you're skin is right next to it and the clothing is not going to protect your skin any. You're body is going to get shredded as quick and easy as that garment.

I don't know how your body is shaped, but when I point a gun away from myself the gun isn't laying flat against my body where gas would go through multiple layers of clothing to somehow damage the skin that's several inches and a 90 degree turn away. They weren't using a little .38 Special on that Mythbusters episode either.

>I ran out of character limit, you can break the timing just from firing heavy loads.

Christ, you're like Dunning-Kruger incarnate. No, heavy loads aren't going to fuck up your timing. The timing is the order everything happens in, i.e. the cylinder unlocking, the hand rotating the cylinder via the ratchet, and then lockup once the cylinder has been indexed and is properly aligned. If you shoot a load so heavy that you manage to alter the length of the hand or the ratchet or damage the lock, and throw the cylinder alignment off, you've really fucked up. Like blowing up your 1st gen Glock with a case capacity .40 S&W load fucked up.

>>33271424
>modern semi auto
>defense against very large game animals

pick one

>>33277927
What's wrong with a .50 AE Deagle-brand Deagle?

>>33271424
commiting a murder with one target

>>33277906
>There is a small little gap in the front and back of your cylinder that fowling or anything can block it up from the rip or primer.

Lack of maintenance is not unreliability and even if it was, smokeless firing revolvers don't see much fowling at all behind the cylinder. The cartridge cases fire-form to the chamber, stopping gas from pushing around the case where it could cause fowling in that area. I even mentioned the most likely thing that could cause a case to jam up your cylinder, our of spec rim thickness, but you ignored that to try and claim that fowling that doesn't turn up in that area will snag on primers and rims.

>With magnum loads bullets can jump crimps or knock the primer loose in the back causing those types of problems.

Your primers or your primer pockets are out of spec if the you're having primers pop out under recoil and your necks aren't crimped properly if your bullets are jumping out of the cases. Usually when bullets to jump forward it's from people firing partial cylinders, replacing the spent rounds and firing more times, without firing the ones that were subjected to recoil before. Even then it's not all that common, but is something you ought to check for with any ammo you intend to carry.

>In a magazine.. setback I really don't think that's more likely than a bullet jumping the crimp. I think it's even less likely since with spring compression and resting on top of other rounds they're not going to smack the front of the mag and have more leeway to rattle against other rounds instead of absorbing all the shock in a cylinder chamber with no where to push against like a spring to absorb recoil.

This is actually a well documented phenomena, just like pullets jumping their crimps in revolvers. It comes from improperly crimped rounds being subjected to recoil and smacking against the front of the magazine. It also usually occurs when topping up a magazine several times without rotating out the old rounds.

>>33277910
I don't watch myth busters. Pockets generally rest right next to your body, they're not typically deep and don't have a lot of give especially with something the size of a gun in it. If you really think clothing is going to be a protective layer that's going to dissipate high pressure burning hot gas you've got to be out of your mind. Most common materials are not going to protect against that, and synthetic ones would probably even melt and stick to you. Leather is probably the only thing that would really do much to stop it since it's an extra layer of skin. Even standing a few feet away from someone firing a revolver if you were in line with that gas you're going to notice it, you're just totally ignoring reality about how close that gun and gas would be to your vulnerable body because you think it's tacticool and makes you less vulnerable.

>>33277910
>he timing is the order everything happens
Yes I know what I am saying is that heavy recoil and wear and break components faster. Wearing a piece just a little bit can throw your cylinder alignment off with the forcing cone and then you're spraying lead fragments that sheer off from hitting the forcing cone along with hot gas out the side of your gun assuming it'll even go into battery.

>>33278056
>but you ignored that to try and claim that fowling that doesn't turn up in that area will snag on primers and rims.
You don't think fowling pops up behind the round? How do bolts get fowling on the face? That back part often extends around the entire cylinder as a gas shield. If gas reaches it, it's causing fowling.

>>33278056
>This is actually a well documented phenomena, just like pullets jumping their crimps in revolvers. It comes from improperly crimped rounds being subjected to recoil and smacking against the front of the magazine.
I've never heard of that happening that's pretty interesting.

>>33278167
Holy shit, you're either dense enough to bend space-time or you're trolling. A gun pointed straight away from your body is not going to direct gas directly back into your body it's no different from cowboy action shooters and 50's cops shooting from the hip. The pockets on a zip-up hoodie or jacket aren't going to be at 3 or 9 O'Clock with the side of the gun pressed against the hip, they're going to put the gun between 11 and 1 O'Clock with the gun pointed straight away from the body.

As for your claims about recoil wearing parts and harming alignment, you're still dead wrong. Recoil going back through the gun doesn't put much rotational stress on the gun at all, and that would be the kind of stress that would potentially damage the parts you're speaking of. On top of that the hand, ratchet, and cylinder stop are hardened to the point that they should be able to handle the forces they're subjected to while firing without becoming damaged. There are people who have been feeding magnum loads to their pre dash Model 29's since they got them.

>>33271424
>Melanin enriched choir boy comes up to me holding a knife
>Ey honkey gimmie your wallet and yo Iphone don't pull no shit or I'll cut you
>Raise my left hand to show I'm unarmed,, reach into right coat pocket, grip my pocket .38
>Point and shoot him through my pocket 5-6 times before he even sees anything.

>>33278255
It functions as a gas shield in the event of a burst primer, not diring normal firing. The fowling found behind the cylinder is negligible and you're as likely to fire enough rounds in one sitting that fowling jams up a modern revolver as you are to fire enough rounds in one sitting that your breech face in an autoloader gets fowled up enough to cause a malfunction.

If you live in a shitty state like NY and are limited to 7 rounds so you get the biggest fuck you revolver you can fit on your person

File: 1484942341989.jpg (1MB, 2667x4000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2667x4000px

>>33271498
NICE POST!

>>33271424

If marine lepen and Sarah Palin walk up and say we'll tag team blow you so awesome you'll have to pull bits if mattress out of your asshole when we're done, BUT ONLY IF YOU'RE CARRYING A REVOLVER.

other than that, no, there's no situation when it's better than a semi auto.

>>33279045
>Two middle aged women who weren't pretty enough to act so they hit the political stage instead

I never understood why anyone wanted to sleep with Palin. She's pretty plain.

>>33271996
I was shooting my bros 357 my second round misfired..

>>33279160
If it wasn't Taurus the fault lies with ammo.

>>33271424
Reliability in adverse conditions.

There is a reason why bolt, lever and pump action long arms are preferred over gas powered guns in the arctic circle.

Granted, Glocks have proven themselves in Alaska, most folks still prefer revolvers.

>>33279124
what kind of fag would want to sleep with a plain woman, what a shitlord. females are not hot unless they are medical obese, have a bunch of tattoo's, unnaturally colored hair, androgynous clothing, lots of piercings, and a very feminine penis. you're totally right to slut shame these non xer cis white male shitlords.

File: IMG_20161225_135631866.jpg (3MB, 2432x4320px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2432x4320px

They're better looking.

Bigger bullets for massive compensation.

Remedial action is as easy as physically possible.

They don't care about angle of fire.

Can't be limp wristed.

Won't mind if you whip someone with it.

No slide to get caught.

If someone grabs your revolver instead of jamming like sissy automatic it will deploy fireball from cylinder gap as deterrent.

More accurate.

>>33272051
That's interesting, because I happen to have 3 glock 19 magazines that, in the past, have sat loaded for almost a year, and the springs are as strong as the day I bought them.

>>33272407
I remember reading an anecdote on here that loaded 1911 magazines from ww1 were found in a govt warehouse in either ww2 or the Vietnam war that were still good.

>>33277700
How is this dumb myth so prevalent on /k/ all of a sudden? Do you guys put your cars on blocks when you're not driving them to keep tension off the suspension springs? You obviously have access to the internet. Just Google.

>>33277719
Why did you call bullshit and then reinforce his point? Do you have brain troubles?

>>33272051
US Army during WW2 found a stock of loaded 1911 mags which they forgot about after WW1 and they still perfectly worked. Glocknade a shit

File: steve_jobs_by_rware-d3af4rz.jpg (168KB, 487x740px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 487x740px

>>33271424

>>33271424
it can feed different lengths of cartage
cycles subsonic ammo
and does not stove pipe or double feed

File: marion.jpg (72KB, 781x933px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 781x933px

>>33279045
>Marine Le Pen and Sarah Palin
>not Marion Maréchal-Le Pen and Natalia Poklonskaya
>not even a Le Pen aunt-niece threesome
shit taste, m8

>>33279124

I go for a milf in glasses, especially with the DSL action. What's not to like?

>>33280759

Good point. The adult mother daughter team is hot. A 3 way would be much better, but it would only take two of ther three to get me to carry a revolver.

Natalia could get the job done on her own, though.

>>33281274
She's not very good looking, her voice is irritating, and she's as dumb as a bag of rocks.

File: 642.jpg (42KB, 1000x701px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 1000x701px

This is probably the most versatile handgun ever made. You can carry it as a back up, in your pocket, on your ankle, etc... It is more reliable than any pocket .380 I've shot. So as a backup or pocket carry gun, I am for the revolver all the way.

>>33274226
That's simply not true.

File: 1483476645609.jpg (60KB, 468x397px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 468x397px

>>33271424
Revolvers are far more reliable, and more tolerant of heavier or lighter loads. Pistols have to be tuned to a certain charge, give them too light a charge or too heavy a charge and they won't cycle right. Revolvers don't jam.

>>33275100
Quit spewing bullshit already. The only spring that's compressed on an auto is the magazine spring, and those do not wear out from just being compressed. That's been covered several times in this thread and is common knowledge to anyone that bothers to do a little research.
Besides, who the fuck doesn't at least function check their HD weapon at lest every couple of months? If you leave your shit in a drawer for years at a time untouched you are a moron.

File: Colt1917fitzspecial.jpg (183KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 800x600px

>>33271424
>Is there any conceivable situation where a wheel gun would be better?
The only situation I can think of is where a slide would induce a malfunction. IE. Firing from inside a pocket or where someone has their hand on where your slide would be.

>>33281468
If someone is in a position where they have their hand on the slide, their hand could be gripping the cylinder on a revolver. If the hammer is back on the revolver you might still get one shot off, otherwise there is no advantage there.

>>33281342

All i'll have to listen to is "mmmpf, mmmm, mmmpf mmmmpff *GACK* *SNORT*" so I don't really care about her voice.

>>33281342

...and I'm not going to Einstein for a blow job.

And she looks fine with my Dick in her mouf

File: 1480541984063.jpg (86KB, 500x587px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 500x587px

>>33277596
>>33277689

>>33271532
Sweater could just as easily hang up on or bunch up between the hammer on a revolver. IT is less likely that the slide on a semi auto would get stopped by a sweater

File: kgJU2z7h.jpg (153KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1024x768px

>>33282107
>just as easily hang up on or bunch up between the hammer on a revolver
that's where you're wrong, kiddo

My carry gun is an Lcrx 3 inch. I don't really see the point of needing a semi-auto as a carry gun. Over 800 thousand people in America pull their carry guns every year. 92% don't fire a single shot because the threat is stopped. 7% of the 8% that fire use less than 4 rounds. The remaining percent generally shoot more than they needed to. It's also relevant to know the location of the remaining 1%'s shootings.

>>33282682
Also when I say semi auto I mean modern semi auto.

File: implying.jpg (2MB, 3234x2623px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3234x2623px

>>33282055
DELET THIS

>>33278308
I really must be that dense trying to convince someone who thinks it is a good idea to negligently discharge through their clothing that it's actually a bad idea.

>>33271478
I came to say this.

>>33271424
You don't want to experience jamming when you need to defend yourself.

I came to this thread believing autos were better than revolvers. However, now I am unconvinced that automatic pistols that are not fully automatic have any purpose.

>>33284504
magazine capacity, ease of reloading, ease of concealment, ease of accessory mounting

>>33284583
>magazine capacity
Bigger bullets

>, ease of reloading
Who reloads in a fight?
>, ease of concealment,
Really depends on which gun more than type of gun
>ease of accessory mounting
NYET pistol is fine!

>>33284583
and ease of jamming

>>33282055
Actually now that I thought about it, there is one advantage to revolvers and why I bought one.
If you're left handed shooting it won't eject hot brass toward you.

>>33285229
Pistols aren't supposed to eject brass into your face, it's just Glocks that do that, and they do it to everybody, normal people included.

>>33271478
You taking the body too. Cause that's more useful evidence than Hollywood forensic magic

Anyway, contact shots, small handed shooters, Russian roulette

>>33285229
I think we lefties should throw a coup d'etat on a small traffic board here and take it from the normies.

>>33277774

Confirmed for never having shot a revolver.

I grew up with my dad's revolvers. I've put my hand like a retard accidentally next to .357 cylinders and even one time a .44

Worst thing that happened to me was a little cut that didn't even need stitches or a small insignificant burn.

It won't even "shred" your jacket and make it to your skin most likely.

It's always the same retarded noguns or at least norevolvers having arguments where you can tell you guys don't know what you're talking about.

>>33281362

I agree. The lightweight pocket revolvers rule the deep conceal carry world. Versatile, hold a powerful cartridge, pretty much the same capacity as a pocket semi-auto, more reliability.

They do have a CQC advantage though, they're harder to disarm and cannot be pushed out of battery. And once freed do not need to be tap racked and banged.

>>33271510
But you can only do it once. Slide interference

>>33278167

Anyone who's shot revolvers can automatically laugh their ass off at your comment.

Everyone's here most likely been burned or cut by the gasses from a revolver. Shits like a paper cut LOL

Because when you point a revolver at somebody they can see it has bullets loaded in the cylinders

The stoppage drill is the simplest of all firearms - pull the trigger again

>>33279045

I can think of three right off the top of my head.