OT: Wheelguns disappearing....

munk,

I'm really trying to compare apples to apples here. The P-11 is very small, inexpensive, and is in a duty caliber. (The closest cost/quality/size comparison to a J frame is probably a Kahr, which I guarantee will shoot any J frame into the ground.) The closest comparison I can find off the top of my head in a revolver- both price, size, and power-wise- is the little Taurus 85. Do you really think the 85 will shoot over 20,000 rounds? (Both KT and Taurus have been known to have various problems, so I'm not attempting a quality comparison- they're both quality products for the money.)

You're the one who said revolvers are stronger, so let's do the math together. Glock has a test Model 17 that has fired at least 200,000 rounds. Do you have ANY revolver you would like to compare in number of duty rounds fired?

Be honest, munk- the limiting factor in autoloaders is grip size and rimmed cartridges. Even despite this, there are autoloaders such as the Desert Eagle in magnum calibers. Yup, the DE is a big honkin' piece of iron...but then, so are most big magnum revolvers.

The autoloader design works to absorb some of the recoil energy. Because of this, a decent autopistol can last practically forever, with nothing more than minor maintenance like changing recoil springs and barrels.

Honestly, munk, let's do some research. Look for the highest number of duty rounds fired from a K or L frame. I'm really interested- after all, I like these revolvers.

John
 
munk said:
Satori and Spectre and others, if you guys really believe the revolver is passe; fine. I don't have to put down semi autos to love revolvers.

I know you don't mean it; that is, it's not personal, it's just your 'facts'. I have shown over and over again your facts do not mesh with reality. That is my opinion. And it's OK!
Click to expand...

Munk - please, do not place words in my mouth. I was content to exit this thread and agree to disagree but this doesn't stand with me.

I was arguing that the "revolver is passe" for police and military use. That's how this thread started...about police trading in their revolvers for autos. This is my opinion on the issue. If you would like to debate this, that's fine, but I believe that we're actually in agreement on this. If we're not - well, the facts that back my opinion mesh very nicely with reality.

This is not, and has never been, an attempt to kick any sacred cows. It was simply my view that the police were correct in their policies. Somewhere along the line we must've gotten mixed up.
 
Jeezey Pete, Guys!! Out come the ballbats! We gotta lighten up!

Did I mention that I have a few of both, revolvers and semi-autos, thoroughly enjoy them, and that each has it's strengths and weaknesses? I genuinely hope y'all have chosen wisely and love the heck outta wha'cha got.... This most assuredly is a case of what's right for one man (or woman) is not necessarily best for another......Vivre le difference.......... ;)
 
Spectre,
I've answered your J frame question earlier. If the littlest revolver is weaker than the littlest semi auto, it still leaves unchanged that in general revolvers are stronger than semi autos, and more reliable. You've selected rounds served as a fair measure of your position. You've ignored performance and foot pounds delivered.

Satori,

I was disapointed to see you leave this thread. I kicked myself a little about it. I think you and Spectre are wrong and biased, but so what? I'm not the arbitur of Ultimate Reality, objective reality, and I have almost no math skills. And it will come only to tired ears when I tell you both I'm biased. Oh horrible truth! Can the World bare a biased munk?
I'm afraid so, and that mostly the big World doesn't even listen to voices as ours in threads like these.
For both of you; I was caught offguard by your beliefs. I had no idea a lot of people believed as you do. And I mean knowledgable, competent, reasonable men.

You know how you sometimes think you can change a person's mind by revealing facts or perspectives they may not have been aware of? One becomes eager, hopeful this will happen.

Kismet is very right, you know. We've done very well.

If we'd been in the same room, looking at each other and seeing our smiles and hearing the tone of voice, we'd have no question about the 'fun' of it.

I've seen some political threads here that make us look as if we're about to transcend into the Uberman by comparison.

A civil, well reasoned disagreement.

We've put both houses of Congress to shame!

munk
 
Everyone is biased, Munk.

People that know me well know that I do not take things personally and I do not hold grudges - and that's when I'm angry. I'm not angry. We'll agree to disagree.

If and when we ever get the opportunity to shoot together, we will impress each other, prove nothing, and argue about it afterwards. I think that it would make for a good time. :)
 
Satori,
You were the one who stuck to the premise of this thread: I did not!

I agree the Military and Police need semi auto handguns.

The only wheel guns would be for specialties. Long distances of patrol, open spaces, possible animal threat and long yardage shots.

You're a good guy Satori.


munk
 
Heh. Were we in disagreement, somehow? ;)

I should be picking up that nice Model 65 in a couple weeks. Really wish I coulda found a way around selling my last one.

I don't think anyone has suggested ejecting Bruse yet in this thread, and that really needs to be done. The check is in the mail. :p

John, AUR

I'll be at Blade this weekend, so I'll probably miss my reg'lar calls, y'all.
 
What's funny John, is the difference here between my stiff writing in public and the easier correspondance we were having on the same subject in private. And that's what it's about. I want our forum to be as much like home as possible. The net is a challenge for a new culture, a new society. HI forum is the best I've seen.




munk
 
Spectre, I think the revolver is thought of being stronger than semi-autos because they can fire much more high pressure cartridges.

A semi takes the energy of the explosive event and cycles. So some of the force the Semi must endure has been.....er..reduced. (?) The revolver simply stands there and takes it. And the Revolver can be shot to ruin. I'll always remember Dean Grennel's comment in Nosler #3 when he speaks of his N frame 41 mag as being just as tight and sound as the day he first took it out of the box, nearly twenty years ago. He thought he'd shot loose 4 or 5 N framed 44' s in the same time. Now, there's a guy we need in this discussion. He's probably shot the tens of thousands of rounds through various revolvers and could tell us something.

You know Cliff, thats true of the older guns and the cutoff dates. It reminds me too that SW has improved the N frame revolver over the years. The slight revamp of the locking system in the 1990's helped, and maybe today the 44 will last longer.

munk
 
I've read and believe that a good revolver is like a windup watch, with small parts and stuff buried between the cylinder and the trigger guard.

A autopistol isn't.

Power? reliability?

Form follows function. I wouldn't want to live in a world where a guy didn't have some choice in what he carried. I'd probably not be happy as a cop huh?
 
Great Post, Cliff.

If you took a Ruger blk or Redhawk and shot it a lot, would it wear out? I dunno. The little J frame, and the first frame SW put a 357 into, that the K? L the new one, or vica versa? ( I forget these things) would stretch after abuse with full house loads over time. That means I guess they were no longer servicable.

But I don't think you can wear out some of the properly balanced revolvers we have today. GP 100 357, you won't wear it out. You could blow a Blackhawk 45 Colt by hotrodding it over the already hot loads published.


Colts with their little springs would wear out. Wonderful guns, but not as reliable as Ruger. The Kobra and Anaconda are strong though.

The Smith 44 would wear out. Frame stretched? In the 90's Smith added a couple small features that greatly aided the life expectancy, and we are already talking about a long life.

The Smith 44 in the N frame, and the J and the smaller 357 frame are a trade off- portability and or concealability for power. Especially with the 357 and 44, you are bringing a lot of power to the specific need. More power than most semi autos can dream of.


We haven't lived long enough to see if Ruger can wear out. They've only been here a little over 50 years.

My sons can have this conversation with Spectre's sons some day in HI forum. They'll have my Ruger revolvers. I don't think many semi autos, if any at all, could last as long. I think there is a point at which you have to throw plastic away.


munk
 
munk said:
If you took a Ruger blk or Redhawk and shot it a lot, would it wear out? I dunno.
Click to expand...

It can. I've done it. For the morbidly curious, here's how:

My first handgun was a Super Blackhawk, 7.5" barrel. (My first long gun was a Mossberg 500. I was never one for half measures.) I bought it secondhand from a friend who also introduced me to reloading. At the time, Walmart carried more reloading equipment than most gun stores did so I had no problems in getting materials.

This was before I knew that the hottest load is not necessarily the best load. H110 quickly became my favorite powder. 240 grains was the minimum bullet weight I'd consider. Brass usually only survived two firings or so. Every so often a casing would last long enough for the neck to begin cracking...crush the case with pliers to make sure it didn't go back into circulation? Of course not, that would be no fun. Instead, it saw one last use with a "Viking Funeral" loading to hasten it on its way to the everafter.

I'll put it this way - we never had any problems figuring out which casings were mine. The local range at one point politely asked me not to bench my Ruger any more on account of gas cuts to their sandbags.

Several years later, the forcing cone was shot, the weapon was "loose," and it was pretty much out of time; by then, I'd learned a bit more about firearms, had survived numerous mild blowouts and one severe explosion, and had pretty much given up reloading for inexpensive Russian and milsurp ammo. I'd learned enough to know that I didn't want to try to fix the thing. I traded it off for another .44 that gets treated far better than this one did.

Suffice it to say that I don't consider this normal useage.
 
Satori,
You traded the gun off, you said. Would it still shoot? Sounds like it was fixable.

Your brass survived two firings or so? And the gun was used when you bought it.

There is a difference between wearing out and being destroyed. Getting only two reloads from a case tells me something was very wrong. My worst loads, even the overloads, would last longer than that.

You've reminded me ..there are people who go through weapons...I remember I shot with a guy in the desert. He didn't say much, smiled a little, and was a better shot than I was. He could get a inch group with my Ruger mini 14, and hit more clays than I with handguns. Our mutual friend was a gunsmith, and he pulled me aside one day.

"He brought his ___ ______ semi auto, and it was worn out. I did what I could, but I told him, 'if you keep shooting the way you do, it'll just break again, and eventually no one will be able to fix it." He looked at me in wonder. "Munk, he actually shoots guns out. They just won't work right any more."

Guy came into the gunshop with a SKS. He showed me the barrel was loose. He'd shot it out. I could hardly believe it. "Hell yes," he said, "there's lots of guys shoot these loose and others too; and we go through cases of ammo. This isn't the first one."

I wrote to Dope Bag in American Rifleman. I explained the loose barrel in the SKS and the owner's testimony other carbines were in the same shape. My real question was how much tougher was a threaded barrel vs a pinned barrel.

The Dope Bag didn't believe it, and said it was highly doubtful a barrel could be shot loose. They did add that the pinned barrel was theoretically weaker, but that most shooters would never abuse the weapons enough to see the difference between that and the threaded one.


munk
 
These were gross overloads. As I said, that Ruger was pretty tough. The forcing cone erosion, though, I've heard is a common problem with stout charges of H110. Wish I'd known that at the time...not that it would've changed anything.

Could it have been salvaged? Sure. Recut the forcing cone, remove the cylinder play, new springs, new screws. The topstrap was starting to show a hint of gas cutting but it didn't look like a problem yet. It could've been rebuilt probably and I hope that it was.

It still shot, but not well. The bore was on its way out. Fixing the timing and recutting the forcing cone would've kept it going for a bit longer.
 
With what you cut, a new barrel and some small parts and you could probably shoot normal 44 mag loads and never advance the wear on the top strap.

I stopped using H110, 296, AA#9, because of velocity variations. I like IMR 4227 or H4227 100fps less but more accurate and stays that way rain, cold or heat. I load for 41 44 and 45, and others, of course.


munk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top