Are Revolvers Really More Dependable than Semi-automatic Pistols for Defense?

While semi-automatic pistols continually proved themselves suitable for military service in ordnance tests and combat during much of the Twentieth Century, revolvers remained weapons of choice for the majority of American police who seemed reluctant to depend on "jam-a-matics" that could fail at a critical moment.  Even now, though the transition to semi-automatics, which began in the 1980s, is largely complete, a few law enforcement agencies still permit revolvers to be carried on duty while a smattering still issue them.  Are double action

Double Action Revolvers Still Provide Effective, Versatile Defense

Thirty years ago, double action revolvers were highly favored for defense, being relied upon by law enforcement and civilians alike and they proliferated the market. Then came the age of the high capacity "Wonder Nine" and the trusty old revolver became a relic of the past, more suitable, in the eyes of many, for the novice rather than the skilled "operator". But double action revolvers have not faded away and they remain effective and versatile defensive weapons.

Those who criticize revolvers point to limited capacity, high bore axis (which renders greater perceived recoil than many semi-automatics), heavy double action triggers, bulky profiles, and slow reloading. They may also continue that extractor rods can loosen to bind actions, that revolvers shoot loose and get out of time, and that (at least in theory) the lock work of revolvers have more moving parts than semi-automatic pistols which makes them more likely to fail in adverse conditions.

While there is merit to these criticisms, semi-automatic pistols are not without issues. Double feeds and stove pipe jams (both of which are often caused by shooter error such as "limp wristing" and unseated magazines) can bind actions, a bad cartridge can momentarily stop a semi-automatic (which leads some to promote double strike capability), and damaged or lost magazines can compromise reliability and curtail function. Moreover, the service life of most handguns is finite which means that after so many rounds, they will require the attention of an armorer.

Proper care and maintenance, understanding the design and the limitations of your defensive handgun, and practice and more practice can eliminate the majority of criticisms that can can be directed towards both revolvers and semi-automatic pistols, making them more academic than practical. On both sides on the aisle, some designs are more fragile than others. Many extoll the virtues of the Glock which has a well deserved reputation for reliability and durability, yet the Ruger GP 100 and the larger Redhawk offer similar qualities and may well represent the current pinnacle of evolution for double action revolvers.

What does the archaic, double action revolver really have to offer in the world of high capacity semi-automatics and rapid magazine changes? We could enter the land of the theoretical and say that as long as a handful of cartridges remain, the old revolver will keep shooting long after magazines have run dry. We can point to custom grips, such as those offered by Herrett's that make the revolver truly fit the hand of the shooter. We can indicate that revolvers are strong enough to handle the most powerful handgun cartridges in the world while semi-automatics are typically not and we can note that the fixed barrel renders accuracy that far exceeds the "combat accuracy" offered by many semi-autos.

But, the real virtue of the revolver is the combination of sufficient capacity (yet and still, an average of 2.5 rounds are fired in defensive situations), simplicity of operation (just open it, load it, close it, and pull the trigger), and substantial versatility. Since revolver cartridges headspace on the rims rather than the case mouths, overall cartridge length does not affect function as long as the cartridge fits in the chamber. Since revolvers do not have feed ramps, bullet profiles do not interfere with feeding. Since revolvers do not have slides that are dependent upon recoil springs, low chamber pressures does not cause revolvers to fail to cycle.

Thus, a revolver can be loaded up or down for specific applications without the necessity of changing barrels and/or recoil springs. This provides a field day for the hand loader (who is also gratified by not having to crawl around on the ground to recover his brass) but it is also useful for those who only use factory ammunition. For example, one who chooses the well proven .357 Magnum for defense can reliably shoot lower cost, milder mannered, .38 Special cartridges for practice by simply loading them in the chambers. Similarly, one who chooses a .44 Magnum for the field can use less powerful .44 Special cartridges which are more suited to defense against human attackers.

Of course, there are trade offs when you choose one handgun over another. For many years, six rounds of .357 Magnum ammunition in the cylinder and two loaded speed loaders (or a total of eighteen rounds) was considered adequate for most defensive applications requiring the use of a handgun. Although many now seem to feel unprepared without 45 rounds of .40 S&W at their disposal (which is five more rounds of ammunition than was held by an infantry cartridge box during the War Between the States) the double action revolver still provides capable, reliable defense with exceptional versatility that does not require purchasing and changing parts.

Reflections Upon .22 Caliber Handguns

I'm not much into hiking or backpacking per se but ever since I was a kid, I have enjoyed knocking about in the woods whenever the opportunity arose. Long ago, I found the companionship of a .22 to be convenient for dispatching snakes and other vermin and the source of many fun, impromptu plinking sessions. At first, my .22 of choice was limited to the only one available: an old Remington Model 33 single shot rifle that had been handed down from my great grandfather. A few years later, it was upgraded to a Ruger 10/22 and at the age of fifteen, I passed the point of no return, acquiring my first .22 handgun as a birthday present. Since then, I have tried to keep some type of a .22 pistol or revolver on hand and I have had the opportunity to own and shoot many good ones and a couple of bad ones.

My first handgun was a New Model Ruger Single Six, a convertible chambered in .22 Long Rifle with an extra cylinder for the substantially more powerful .22 Magnum cartridge. This single action revolver came from Montgomery Ward in May of 1982, just prior to my fifteenth birthday and being presented with that yellow and black box, emblazoned with the Sturm, Ruger logo, was one of the most exciting moments of my life. After getting it into my hands, I could barely wait to shoot it. At the time, I was a decent shot with a .22 rifle and I naturally assumed that I would shoot this new revolver equally well. Suffice it to say that, though I encountered a learning curve that was only cured by a lot of practice and a liberal supply of ammunition, I was thereafter hooked on handguns.

My next .22 caliber handgun came just a couple of years later, a beautiful Smith & Wesson Model 651 in .22 WMR that was also purchased from Montgomery Ward. This light and handy, double action kit gun, with a four inch barrel, was much less bulky than the six and one half inch Single Six and it could have promised great potential, had it not had an atrocious trigger and been prone to consistently misfire on one chamber. As a result, it spent much of its time just sitting pretty in its dark blue Smith and Wesson box and in time, I discovered a Charter Arms Pathfinder in .22 Long Rifle to be a more reliable, compact companion for the woods. With it's three inch barrel, it also carried conveniently in my hip pocket.

One day, I entered a gun store and saw a used Beretta 70S in .22 Long Rifle. I picked it up, fell in love with it on the spot, and made arrangements to acquire it. A .22 Long Rifle built on a .380 ACP platform, it had a bulky thumb rest grip and an adjustable rear sight, which made it more importable in the eyes of the BATF. An attractive, exceedingly accurate, rather compact pistol, it replaced the Pathfinder, becoming my back pocket pistol for the woods. As a matter of fact, for awhile, it was the only .22 caliber handgun that I bothered to shoot and it flawlessly digested thousands of rounds of ammunition.

Back then, I was convinced that a revolver was more reliable than a semi-automatic pistol, so I decided to test the Beretta 70S to see just how long it would remain reliable without regular cleaning. .22 rimfire cartridges are notoriously nasty due to "dirty", heavily fouling powders and outside lubricated bullets so I felt that I would be getting jams after a few hundred rounds. Over a period of time, I shot the little Beretta, put it away, and shot it some more. The action began to feel gritty and the chamber got nasty, but it continued to function reliably. I grew weary of my test, losing count after 3,000 rounds. When the little pistol refused to fail, I gave it the good cleaning that it well deserved.

I started regularly shooting centerfire revolvers and I began reloading and casting my own bullets in order to feed them. For awhile, I felt that I had outgrown my .22s and some, including the wonderful little Beretta, were foolishly traded to acquire bigger and better things. One day, I came to the realization that I was spending more time pulling the handle of a Lyman turret press than I was pulling a trigger and I decided that a full sized .22 caliber revolver would not be bad to practice with. So, I bought a Smith & Wesson Model 18 with a four inch barrel, and a couple of speed loaders and began shooting drills with it.

The Model 18 was an excellent revolver that handled like its more powerful, K-Frame counterparts, such as the famous Combat Masterpiece, and provided the legendary accuracy of the Model 17. It perfectly fit my "Border Patrol" holster, the type popularized by Bill Jordan, and its speed loaders were right at home in the pouch that typically carried those for a .38 Special or .357 Magnum. Efficiently speed loading a .22 revolver can be quite a challenge due to the small chambers so the practice that the Model 18 provided proved to valuable on the combat course.

Shooting the Model 18 provided the realization that the .22 was more than just a plinker or a toy for the woods. With this in mind, I bought a Ruger Government Model Target and tried my hand at some Bullseye shooting. Bullseye requires much precision and rigid methodology and with the coaching of a distinguished, elderly gentleman who once competed at Camp Perry, my Ruger and I, with some high dollar Eley ammunition, were holding our own in an environment filled with High Standards and Smith & Wesson Model 41s. This experience refined my shooting but I ultimately found it tedious and boring so I took up shooting bowling pins with a Ruger GP-100 in .357 Magnum and once again put my .22s on the back burner.

Fortunes sometimes change and a once impressive gun collection had to be pared down and the reloading presses put into storage. Shooting became limited to occasional practice with centerfire defensive pistols. One day, I stumbled upon an Armscorp P-22, an Argentine copy of the Colt Woodsman, for $150. I looked it over and turned my nose up at it. A short time later, it went on sale for $125 and I thought "what the heck?" I bought it and some cheap ammo and I was pleasantly surprised. It jammed occasionally, probably due to the rather fragile magazines, but the accuracy was astounding for such a cheap pistol and I was once again shooting a .22 on a regular basis.

A friend of mine owns a large piece of land and after spending some time shooting on it, I wanted a compact .22 that I could drop in my pocket and carry conveniently when I went exploring. I came across some pistols that had been seized by a law enforcement agency and then sold to a gun store. The prices were quite attractive and I bought a Beretta 950 BS in .22 Short and a Beretta 21 A in .22 Long Rifle. The Beretta 950 BS delivered amazing accuracy from a pistol that could be eclipsed by a pack of cigarettes. In comparison, the larger Beretta 21A was more accurate but its chunky profile made it less appealing than its smaller cousin when it was slipped into a front pants pocket.

While I was satisfied with both Berettas, I stumbled upon a little money and, perhaps recalling the Charter Arms Pathfinder and the Beretta 70S, I became enamored with a Smith and Wesson Model 317. Selling the Beretta 21 A to help fund the transaction, I purchased one at an exorbitant retail price. Tucking away nicely in my hip pocket, I felt that its ultra light weight, adjustable sights, and J-Frame size would make it a perfect companion in the woods. Instead, its mediocre accuracy and tendency to misfire on two cylinders, with every ammunition that I tried, led me to regret selling the Beretta 21 A. So, I began regularly carrying the 950 BS on my excursions and the Smith & Wesson Model 317 quickly found a new home.

I have currently reached a point where I am without a .22 caliber handgun and I am shopping for another one. After being a pistol shooter for nearly thirty years, I have come to regard a quality .22 as a necessity and I will soon purchase another one. I have shot several Ruger 22/45s, which provide a lot of bang for the buck, and I have set my sights on one. However, if I stumble across a Beretta 70 S at a reasonable price, I will jump on it without thinking twice. Who knows, I might try something else altogether different and add to the list of .22 caliber handguns that I have found to be enjoyable over the years.