Awesome Revolver article - Page 3

Awesome Revolver article

This is a discussion on Awesome Revolver article within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by semperfi.45 I appreciate "Just for the sake of discussion" instead of calling your way the way as alot of people do. So, ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 46
  1. #31
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,812
    Quote Originally Posted by semperfi.45 View Post
    I appreciate "Just for the sake of discussion" instead of calling your way the way as alot of people do.

    So, just for the sake of discussion, I choose to carry a J-frame and I really try to never pass opinion on what, where, when and how people carry. I carry the J the most but also have the G27 option, so I am not against the semi-auto. The bottom line is I have over 20 years in the gun game. No one is aware of all of my combat experience, my instructor certifications, my skillset, my ability, and my proficiency.

    The one opinion I do express is that I have always advocated that CCW and LEO be extemely proficient in hand to hand and defensive tactics. I am more likely to confidantly go hands on with an adversary and use pain compliance to control a situation if I am in close quarters. It also reduces my liability in a confrontation or proves my escalation through the use of force continuum. If you just carry a gun and have none of these skills then I think you are severely lacking in warrior skills to survive a deadly threat encounter. A gun does not cure all, but may be needed to end all.

    To all I say that the first rule of a gunfight is to have your gun.

    End rant. Flame on.
    No flame, but you didn't answer the question. Does it make sense to you to carry only five rounds in a semi?

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    And again, just for sake of discussion, if you knew you were likely to be in a gunfight that would involve two BGs and long guns are not available, would you prefer a handgun that only held five shots and requires a substantial amount of time and fine motor skill to reload, or a gun that held 15 shots?
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!


  2. #32
    VIP Member Array semperfi.45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Over here now!
    Posts
    3,616
    Does it make sense? I'll agree with no if there is capacity to carry more.

    As for a "what if" gunfight I would just avoid that situation. If I had to, the answer is of course I want the higher capacity. Just don't come back and say "shame on you" for not carrying the biggest gun. I don't buy into that.

    Don't you think that everyone should carry what works for their situation?

    I'll just say again that I am not all for a revo and against the semi auto. I carry a G23 on duty and I also carry a G27 at times. Always have a BUG on duty. The J Frame just works for me most of the time. This is my first revo and I find it to be a perfect fit for me. Of course with a new gun there is a little novelty associated withit. If I go into NYC, I carry a Glock and maybe the J as a BUG.

    In the future I may reassess my 5 shot carry but not right now.

    I feel like I'm in the 6 star General's office having to explain myself. LOL. Thanks for the discussion. I like this forum!
    Training means learning the rules. Experience means learning the exceptions.

  3. #33
    whw
    whw is offline
    Member Array whw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by Tangle View Post
    Just for the sake of discussion, what would you think of someone that carried a 1911 (or any compact to full sized semi) with only 5 rounds in it because he believed that was enough to handle any SD situation he would face?

    I would think the same thing about someone that carried 2 rounds in a J-frame. If they decide to not utilize the full capacity of that weapon, regardless of the average rounds, I would think they made a bad decision.

    Would anyone seriously consider this option? Most folks I know decide to max out the weapon's capacity and then add back-ups in the way of reloads.

    whw

  4. #34
    Member Array AgentX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by Tangle View Post
    No flame, but you didn't answer the question. Does it make sense to you to carry only five rounds in a semi?

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    And again, just for sake of discussion, if you knew you were likely to be in a gunfight that would involve two BGs and long guns are not available, would you prefer a handgun that only held five shots and requires a substantial amount of time and fine motor skill to reload, or a gun that held 15 shots?

    If I know I am likely/possibly to be in any gunfight, I carry a hell of a lot more than a handgun. And most CCWers are highly unlikely to be in any kind of altercation at all. You can what-if it to death, and always come out in a scenario that leaves you under-gunned.

    Being a solo gunfighter isn't a very good idea in any case. I like to have lots of friends along when things have the potential to go pear-shaped.

    So carrying a J-frame is great for me for times I'd otherwise be unarmed, because I'm simply not going to carry my heavy auto with two spare mags at certain times. That's why I went for a secondary gun that I just don't have an excuse to leave at home. It may only hold 5 rounds, but it's there with me.

    No one's saying 5 rounds are optimal, or I don't wish that I had a gun with the weight and ergos of my J-frame that held a magazine of 30 7.62 cartridges, but I'm saying that it's a great tool for carrying. I even chose it over a Glock 26, because it just doesn't carry quite as nicely, and gets heavy when full-up on rounds. Now, I think I might get a Glock at some point, but I wanted the lightest and easiest carry I could get, so I chose accordingly.

    AX

  5. #35
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,812
    I'm not pickin' on anyone, just trying to understand the thinking that five is enough. First, regarding - "...Don't you think that everyone should carry what works for their situation?..." I'd have to ask, how do they know what their situation is gonna be? Is it one BG, two BGs? I tend to think that we should at minimum plan on two BGs. Or, should I believe that there will always only be one? I also think we should consider that not all shots are gonna be good hits, meaning fight stopping hits; some may not even hit at all. If we miss twice or get two poor hits, the other three have to get the job done.

    Regarding, "As for a "what if" gunfight I would just avoid that situation." I'm confused, if you can just 'avoid' then why carry in the first place? If we look at a lot of the situations that required a gun for SD, most, if not all, could not be avoided or they would have been.

    "I'll just say again that I am not all for a revo and against the semi auto. I carry a G23 on duty and I also carry a G27 at times. Always have a BUG on duty. The J Frame just works for me most of the time. This is my first revo and I find it to be a perfect fit for me. Of course with a new gun there is a little novelty associated withit. If I go into NYC, I carry a Glock and maybe the J as a BUG."

    So you carry a semi as the primary weapon and a revo as a BUG. I can understand that. I'm under the impression that we have been mostly addressing the revo as a primary carry gun. Since you carry a G23 as a primary, think of the advantage of the G-27 as a BUG. Mag and ammo compatibility, same trigger feel and pull, more ammo in the bug. But I can see a small revo in a BUG role.

    IMO, the prime basis for choosing a CCW handgun is it should be the one we'd want if we had to be in a gunfight. CCW means everyday carry where a long gun would not be an option. I get the impression CCW guns, esp. revos are choosen based on convenience, etc.

    "I feel like I'm in the 6 star General's office having to explain myself. LOL. Thanks for the discussion. I like this forum!

    LOL, well, I'm not a 6 star general by any means, literally or figuratively, and I sincerely apologize for making you feel that way. I sure didn't mean to. As far as I was concerned we were all just swapping ideas and thoughts about CCW.

    I'm tryin' not to come across as pickin' etc. - just trying to understand the thinking that says five is enough for a primary gun. I have to say, I simply can't see the confidence in five rounds, I mean we're betting our lives that 5 rounds is gonna solve the problem(s). That seems to be a real stretch if there is more than one threat. In fact, I wouldn't want to face one armed threat with just five rounds. Most of us could easily fire five rounds in just over a second. Clint Smith says, "When you run out of ammo, the gunfight is over." I'd be so bold as to say, "When you run out of ammo in your primary gun, the gunfight is over."

    I guess I'm tryin' too hard to make the point that some are literally betting their life that five shots will do and/or choosing a handgun for convenience instead of for combat. Why take the chance?

    AgentX -
    "If I know I am likely/possibly to be in any gunfight, I carry a hell of a lot more than a handgun." Sure, who wouldn't, but the only option for most CCWers is their handgun. It is curious that you'd find a handgun inadequate but don't see a problem with a handgun that only shoots 5 times.


    "And most CCWers are highly unlikely to be in any kind of altercation at all. Sure, if we know we're not gonna be in a gunfight then it doesn't matter what we carry then. The purpose of CCW was because we think we could face a life or death fight.

    "You can what-if it to death, and always come out in a scenario that leaves you under-gunned." I don't see how considering 5 rounds is 'what if-ing' some thing to death. The only thing in question here is, if a CCWer is in a gunfight, would he rather have 5 or 15 rounds.

    "Being a solo gunfighter isn't a very good idea in any case. I like to have lots of friends along when things have the potential to go pear-shaped. Of course it isn't, but a CCWer can't always depend on having anyone else there but himself.

    So carrying a J-frame is great for me for times I'd otherwise be unarmed, because I'm simply not going to carry my heavy auto with two spare mags at certain times. That's why I went for a secondary gun that I just don't have an excuse to leave at home. It may only hold 5 rounds, but it's there with me. Exactly, you are carrying for convenience, not combat.

    No one's saying 5 rounds are optimal, or I don't wish that I had a gun with the weight and ergos of my J-frame that held a magazine of 30 7.62 cartridges, but I'm saying that it's a great tool for carrying. I even chose it over a Glock 26, because it just doesn't carry quite as nicely, and gets heavy when full-up on rounds. That pretty clearly says, you've chosen your gun for comfort, not fighting.

    And I'm not saying that's wrong, I'm just saying the primary purpose of a CCW gun is fighting, not comfort.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  6. #36
    Member Array AgentX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    476
    Once again, you're ignoring the fact that you can indeed reload a revolver, and you're implying that you're somehow not taking a chance if you're in a fight with a high-cap auto.

    Again, being a solo man in a gunfight with ANY handgun is a really risky thing to do. Yeah, once a gunfight starts, anyone would rather have a high-capacity, powerful gun. But there's a lot more to the equation than considering the gunfight. You're talking about living your life, and some people have chosen to carry a j-frame because it allows them to to that better while still providing them the opportunity to defend themselves. Perhaps not against a North Korean human wave attack, but in the majority of situations civilians are likely to encounter.

    Yeah, I don't like the possibility of facing two armed men with a J-frame in my hand. Frankly, I don't like it with my SIG, either.

    We should be focusing far more on mindset and training than on the piece of metal we're carrying in our hands anyhow. Know your particular tool and use it well. Most of all, as Robocop reminds us, "stay out of trouble."

    EDIT:

    As far as 'dressing for combat,' well, none of us are dressing for combat. In combat, I'm dressed to be completely self-sustaining and I carry an arsenal around my middle. Do you at least wear concealed body armor when you leave the house? Would you if you did/could own it? (I don't know if that's available for you or not). If you do wear it, then you know then there's a point at the end of the day when you take it off and you're glad about it., and wouldn't ever put it on to go to dinner with the family. No one in his right mind would wear it unless he was in LE or some other high-risk profession and on-duty. But it'd be great if you did end up in a gunfight as a CCW...so why not? "Dressing for combat" is pure rhetoric.

    My point is that everything is a compromise. You draw your line on where you're comfortable as having 15 rounds and a certain gear layout. Fine...that's great...just understand there are other people out there who think differently. None of us can assail the (frankly rather smug) "I've got more rounds than you" position you've taken, because our j-frames don't carry that many, and no one can guarantee if and when we'll ever need a gun, much less a specific number of rounds. And no one's ever proposed that the j-frame is even as effective in most situations as a high-cap auto, although it does have a few characteristics that make it great for last-ditch close-in defense. (Just ask cops who've had to wrestle a subject for their sidearm and pulled the revo from their pocket, effectively and persuasively ending resistance...)

    But I know that if I hop on my bike to get a jug of milk from the corner store, I'm not going to wear a big auto and a cover garment and all that. I evaluate risk and accept certain risks. But I like the option of carrying a j-frame instead of nothing. It gives me options for self-defense that I wouldn't otherwise have. And I think it's great for what it does...I'm glad you have gear you like, as well...
    Last edited by AgentX; May 18th, 2007 at 03:30 PM.

  7. #37
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,812
    You are right - I am ignoring the claim that you'll have time to reload a revolver in a gunfight. Indications are there won't be time to reload a revolver or a semi in a gunfight.

    I didn't say there wasn't risk in a gunfight. There certainly is. We could die before we fire a shot. But the less ammo you have in your gun when the gunfight begins, the greater the risk there is of running out of ammo before the fight is over.

    Of course there's a lot more to a gunfight than a gun, so why risk running out of ammo on top of everything else that's happening?

    Sure, if I had an option to travel everywhere I go with armed friends, I'd do that, but we don't have that choice most of the time.

    I don't like the possibility of facing two armed BGs with my hi cap either. But if I have no choice, I'd rather face them with 15 rounds than 5!

    And yes we should think about mindset, but this thread deals with revolvers and 25 reasons they beat semis. I'm just trying to point out some good reasons why they don't. And besides, I do have mindset, I have my mind set against carrying a gun that only holds 5 shots and is more difficult to reload - please see a little humor in that as it was intended.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  8. #38
    Member Array Whirlwind06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    116
    I was reading another board about the same subject. I think Gabe Suarez put it pretty well:

    If you believe the stats, then simply carry a J-Frame snubby with five shots, no reload, and never mind with any of the rest...because statistically it don't matter. Whistling through the woods telling yourself, "there are no wolves, there are no wolves", will not change their minds about how tasty you might be.

    Statistically they may never choose a human over a rabbitt. Remember, you have your five.

    Consider that you can probably shoot a full-sized Glock 17 far better and faster and with greater accuracy than you can a snubby with five shots. (Don't bore me with what McGivern could do, tell me about what you can do right now.)...and then show me live on a force on force drill.

    Consider that a hand-filling gun automatically holds more than 5 shots. In fact, the Glock 23 that I shoot better than I shoot my snubby automatically comes with 8 more shots than I will need...statistically speaking. Of course, you can always block out your magazines to hold only five if you wish.

    Consider that people miss in gunfights because a gunfight is more typified by the force on force drill we do and not by the shooting sdrills done at marksmanship-based schools. A gun guru who says he's never missed in a gunfight has not been in many reactive gunfights. Hell, even Jelly Bryce missed with two out of six in a reactive fight. Having extra ammo will help you catch up if you do miss.

    Consider that the same statistics tell that multiple adversarties are the rule and not the exception. Consider that if its possible to miss when reacting to one, it is three times as likely when reacting to three. Go up against three uncooperative adversaries in a force on force drills (as opposed to a masturbatory el presidente on the safe and sane shooting range) with only five shots in your airsoft and then tell me again about statistics.

    Consider that the Islamic Terrorist in SLC WAS NOT STOPPED by a man with seven shots. He chose not to attack the 1911 armed guy because the islamic terrorist was in fact a coward.

    Apples and oranges? Just as many cowards are thwarted without the good guy firing a shot. Are we to carry replicas with which to threaten only, because of this?

    When I worked in the PRK, I carried no less than three pistols, and close to 75 rounds on my person. I had another bag of five 15 round magazines in the car and a shotgun or Colt Commando. Ammo is cheap, life is costly so I planned to be generous with my ammo.

    Today, I carry a Glock 23 every waking moment and have one spare magazine on board as well for a total of 26 rounds. Not exactly the 50 rounds bfoj discusses, but I usually have a Kalashnikov rifle within easy reach as well.
    http://www.warriortalk.com/showthread.php?t=23814

  9. #39
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,812
    Gosh, that's the first time someone actually agrees with me that a revolver isn't a good gun for a gunfight. I'm not a Suarez fan at all, but I must admit that he did state the case well.

    There were many points I liked, but I especially liked this:

    "Consider that the same statistics tell that multiple adversarties are the rule and not the exception. Consider that if its possible to miss when reacting to one, it is three times as likely when reacting to three. Go up against three uncooperative adversaries in a force on force drills with only five shots in your airsoft and then tell me again about statistics."
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  10. #40
    Member Array AgentX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by Tangle View Post
    You are right - I am ignoring the claim that you'll have time to reload a revolver in a gunfight. Indications are there won't be time to reload a revolver or a semi in a gunfight.

    ... please see a little humor in that as it was intended.
    Well, we both certainly agree that the article is kind of full of it...I don't think revos are 'better' than semis, either. I think their characteristics should be understood and if they meet your needs, they're great to use...I think the rants are off...

  11. #41
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,812
    Quote Originally Posted by AgentX View Post
    ...I think their characteristics should be understood and if they meet your needs, they're great to use...I think the rants are off...
    Well put! The key being of course, to identify what one's needs and purposes of carrying a handgun are.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  12. #42
    VIP Member Array semperfi.45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Over here now!
    Posts
    3,616
    Great points from all.

    Geez, I just thought it was a good article.
    Training means learning the rules. Experience means learning the exceptions.

  13. #43
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,812
    Quote Originally Posted by semperfi.45 View Post
    Great points from all.

    Geez, I just thought it was a good article.
    It was a good article, but it was written to prove a point, hence he left out things like a light can't be mounted on revolvers, the sights on especially the J-frames, are not removeable; night sights have to be added to non-removable types by shipping the gun to Trijicon, etc. and have the tritium tubes installed in the non-removable sights - a very expensive process (shipping, that is).

    I don't recall him mentioning that it is not uncommon for a case to get under the ejector star, I had that happen at Gunsite once and again during some practice at home. If that happens the gunfight is over. During our one-hand malfunction clearance drills, the instructor brought up the case under the extractor problem and said that he knows of no way to clear that problem with one hand.

    Another instructor at Gunsite told me he just dropped his revolver in the sand/chirt and had to take the gun home, and disassemble it to get it working again.

    Another instructor that was a Border Patrol said when they were issued revolvers he always carried a second (exactly like the primary) under his coat because he knew if he got into a struggle with a BG and got sand in his revolver it probably wouldn't work.

    I was doing one of those one-hand revolver reloads, described in the article as 'as fast as a semi' at my range with a 2-1/2" 686 and dropped it because the barrel was too short to hold in my belt and when I picked it up the cylinder wouldn't close because the cylinder rod was bent.

    Another thing my instructor mentioned, since I had a revolver, was that they are notorious for things shaking loose, esp. the cylinder rod, and advised that every screw should be secured with a thread lock. I had already done that.

    So, yeah, it was a good article, but a lot of stuff wasn't included. I believe there are some worthwhile articles in gun magazines and that there are also those articles that the editor says, "You know what would sell a bunch of magazines? An article that says a revolver beats a semi for SD."
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  14. #44
    Senior Member Array cockedlocked01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    1,046
    Very good points, Tangle. Personally, I like the revolver as a BUG. My primary is an auto & I've alread listed the reasons on an earlier post for this thread.

    This has been an interesting & good thread.
    "Use human means as though divine ones didn't exist, and divine means as though there were no human ones." Baltasar Gracian
    Integrated Close Combat
    NRA Member
    Glock 19 & 26, Kahr CM9 & P45, Para P12, Kel-Tec P-32, S&W 442, & Dan Wesson 14-2.

  15. #45
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,812
    Thanks, cockedlocked01. Hmmmm, a revolver as a BUG, maybe we need to start a new thread about that.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. My New Awesome Toy
    By SammyIamToday in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: April 21st, 2008, 06:06 PM
  2. JUST AWESOME*****Must see
    By Rob99VMI04 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: January 10th, 2008, 11:55 AM
  3. Awesome article today in the paper
    By Pro2A in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: January 6th, 2008, 03:20 PM
  4. Pistol & Revolver Lube Article
    By Captain Crunch in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 28th, 2007, 01:31 AM

Search tags for this page

aewsome revolver
,

awesome revolver

,

awesome revolvers

,
model 36 awesome revolver
,
revolver article
,
revolvers are awesome
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors