Most Durable and Reliable Handgun?

>>34939711
>The most durable and reliable gun is going to be the one with the fewest parts to mess up.

So...Makarov?

>>34939678
An N-frame smith and wesson revolver in 357 mag, if you want to stick with the way too big theme.

>>34939767
Overkill would be an X frame or Super Redhawk in .22 short... ... ...

>>34939778
>>34939767

But revolvers, even though reliable in function, are pretty fragile out in the field if dropped, or if they got dirty.

Semi autos have more reliability when taking the elements in mind.

>>34939829
>Semi autos have more reliability when taking the elements in mind.
This is literally the dumbest, most clueless statement ITT.
>More moving parts.
>More materials.
>etc.
The very fact that there are more failure modes negates any argument you could possibly come up with.
Go get your MSME then start a new thread.

>>34939915

So what do you think will start being affected first? All the tiny little metal moving parts on the revolver? Or the less tiny metal parts on a semi auto? When it comes to having it as an outdoor/survival woods gun?

File: Weaponsarethemeanstoliberty.jpg (506KB, 2199x1258px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 2199x1258px

>>34939955
IDK but if I were to put a revolver into a bucket of mud and shake it around twice then do the same to a semi I am sure there would be similar results from both.

THe only difference woulb be the small ammounts of sand and rocks that would be harded to get out of a revolver.

IDK why modern revolvers don't have a simple way of taking the side plates off for simple cleaning but, whatever.

Aside from the bucket full of mud or dropping both into silt, the revolver has just as many benefits and draw backs as a semi auto. Depending on the application, I could argue in either direction.

MK23 owner here (BG year). Love that sick bitch. Mine shipped with a thread protector which was nice. It's a pistol that keeps shooting and shooting. Put thousands of 230gr FMJ through it. I want to put 185gr +p JHP through it now since it's what it's zeroed for.

>>34940785
I want a Mk23 but that $2k+ price tag is keeping me away and honestly I'll never be able to shoot my USP 45 until it breaks. I'm probably just souring graping though.

>>34940833
sour graping* whatever. Ya'll smell what I'm stepping in.

>>34939678
This:
>>34940833
Mk23's aren't that hard to find, at least online, but you could save yourself $800-1000 by getting a USP or USPt, and it's still going to outlast you.

>>34940496
revolvers are infinitely more reliable then semi auto

I actually got into a debate about this with another anon.

Yes the mark 23 has been torture tested and held to a standard that surpasses any other handgun. But just because no other gun has been tested to those extremes, doesn't mean it couldn't survive or surpass those tests.

So I guess its theoretically the most reliable semi auto. But maybe something like a 226 could do the same, or better. It just hasn't been tested to that effect.

>>34939678
>durable
SOMETHING NOT MADE OF TOY FUCKING PLASTIC

FUCK.

>>34941118
Really activated my almonds I hate HK now

>>34941029
depends on the gun, it's not that hard to mess up the timing on some revolvers.

File: HK-Mk23_govt.jpg (42KB, 680x473px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 680x473px

>>34939678

As far as civilian roles go, it's far too big for CC unless you're Brian Shaw or a Space Marine, and too underpowered for everything else (why use it for HD when you can grab a rifle/shotgun?).

Outside of some niche USSOCOM roles, it's pretty fucking useless. Though I will admit, it is both durable and aesthetic as fuck.

>>34941430
>its too big
nope

File: zygqvkF.jpg (37KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 640x400px

>>34941456

lolokay

File: revolv.png (287KB, 601x283px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 601x283px

>revolvers

>>34941464
Chad wants everyone to notice the cannon in his pants when mexican carrying at appendix

>>34939678
I own a few Glocks. Then I bought a USP 45 because it was on sale and for a change of pace.

The USP is what I'm giving to my firstborn.

>HK thread
So basically companies that haven't gone through a safety recall thread...

Glocks, Springshit, Sig, CZ, need not apply.

File: HK-P2000-no-grips-left.jpg (50KB, 1200x846px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 1200x846px

>>34939678
just get this

I almost pulled the trigger on buying a MARK 23 but at almost half the price I went the USP Expert route instead.

>>34941513
That mag pinky extension is cancer. Rest of the gun is perfect.

>>34941675
get the one from hkparts, MYYYYY nigga.

>>34941704
I did from top gun supply for cheaper. Things were out of stock for months. I took a wire cutter and file to a couple of my shit state mags to make them flush.

I'm 6'6" 260, can I conceal a Mk23?

>>34941430
It's the size of a PDW. That fucking light is practically a fore grip.

>>34941771
i am over 9000, can i suck a nigger dick?

>>34941528
How's the USP expert route treating ya?

I can't decide now between the USP or the USP expert in .45acp.

Now before people bitch about caliber, most of my guns are 9mm so I'm just trying to get something different.

>>34941509
Glock never had a safety recall tho

>>34941029
try tossing a revolver into mud or water

yeah no, revolvers more reliable my fucking ass

>>34943399
I shot a 45 expert with a weight and it was the best shooting gun I've ever fired.

>>34939678

Mud/sand test results when?

that weird multi cal revolver is pretty beefy

The designer was a NASA engineer

File: 20141026_235347.jpg (1MB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1152px

>>34941771
Absolutely. Helps if your shoulders are wider than your waist though. I carry pic related OWB with a light cover garment. Unbuttoned dickies shirt or light jacket when it's cooler out. I'm 6ft 220lbs and do it, so as long as that weight isn't centered on your middle you'll be fine.

>>34939678
>>34941069
Yeah I mean for me, it's kind of nice knowing you have that data to fall back on, that's kind of what makes me happy about it. just knowing the ludicrous things it has endured makes me happy knowing it'll outlast me all things considered.

>>34944703

I think both you and him are wrong. Are revolvers more reliable? Yes they are. Are they more durable? When considering environmental hazards? No.

So it depends what you guys mean by durability and reliability.

It's not that hard to comprehend, but jesus people are so retarded that everything has to be black and white and no grey areas.

Revolvers are more likely to go bang every time you pull the trigger, provided that all they do, is get carried and put on a night stand. They're mechanically more precise, they don't rely on the ignition of a round, nor feeding ramp. You literally revolve the next round into play.

Semi autos are more prone to malfunctions than revolvers. BUT!!! Here is where it gets tricky for you less intelligent buffoons... Semi autos are more durable to being dropped, or getting dirty. So even though revolvers are very reliable if you take good care of them, they can break far easier than semi's can.

>>34939739
This or any quality stainless steel revolver

>>34945466
Revolvers have more moving parts, and smaller more fragile ones.

Reliability does not equal durability. But yes, a Stainless Steel revolver from Ruger would be pretty hard to beat.

>>34945768
Dont even pretend revolvers are less reliable than a semi auto

>>34945960

Don't even being to have reading comprehension... no wait, I want you to, so you would stop being retarded.

Revolvers are much more reliable than Semi autos, but semi autos are more durable, especially in tacticool special op conditions most people would never be in.

>>34946030
either way im too poor for either and you wont help...

>>34946100

I'll give you a gun for free if you plan to kill a kike or nigger, give me a burner email

>>34941464
I have hueg hands so it's actually very comfortable for me

File: lucy-wilde-despicable-me-2-5.5.jpg (19KB, 210x240px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 210x240px

>>34939678
>Reliable
>Has a safety
Keep looking, friendo.

>>34945297
I like you.

Are you also bothered by people's inability to differentiate between clearance and tolerance in mechanical systems?

File: 20150525_193851.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

one of only two handguns that actually fit my hands comfortably

>>34947507

You're god damn right it rustles my jimmies.

>>34939915
When a revolver goes down it usually goes down hard.

>>34948635

>not knowing the difference between malfunction and critical failure

Revolvers rarely have malfuctions, and when they do, they're just as easily cleared, or even easier.

Revolvers are prone to critical failures though... and semis are no different.

>>34939678
Noir plz.

>>34945297
Revolvers critical flaw is lack of capacity though.

Handguns are notoriously poor at killing people; you want as many shots as you can get.

>>34948788

Yes, but you should also consider, that handguns that are notoriously bad at killing people are in the 9mm, 40, 45 calibers.

158 grainer going at 1650fps is on a whole other Territory.

File: 1502682037623.jpg (200KB, 857x1202px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 857x1202px

I'll place this here

>>34949062

Whether you're trying to be ironic, it's true.