Why is the 9MM such a champion in AUTO, but not so in revolver..??

NHunter

NHunter

BANNED
CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
116   0   1
Location
Slave Lake, AB
The FBI puts its belief in the 9MM auto once again...why the same ammo in a revolver so shamed...?
Is there a fear when you only have 6 to pull instead of 10, 17+..? (17+ USA..owners...)
Would a 9mm caliber exist and flourish if autos never became successful and affordable?
Is the revolver now a just an old western movie prop...?
 
Last edited:
Rimless ammo is a PITA in revolvers, most requiring the use of moon-clips. Modern designs are reliable, so why have six when you can have 17+?? Plus revolvers are often bulky and heavy.
 
Phat Eagle said:
Rimless ammo is a PITA in revolvers, most requiring the use of moon-clips. Modern designs are reliable, so why have six when you can have 17+?? Plus revolvers are often bulky and heavy.
Click to expand...

This. Plus LEO used 38spl revolvers for decades, which performance wise is pretty much identical to 9mm. Nothing wrong with it, just expensive to aquire and maintain compared to modern autos.
Glock can pump out a 17 for under $100US, it's compact, lightweight, holds 3 cylinders of ammo in a mag, and is likely more reliable then a revolver as well.
 
Hitzy said:
This. Plus LEO used 38spl revolvers for decades, which performance wise is pretty much identical to 9mm. Nothing wrong with it, just expensive to aquire and maintain compared to modern autos.
Glock can pump out a 17 for under $100US, it's compact, lightweight, holds 3 cylinders of ammo in a mag, and is likely more reliable then a revolver as well.
Click to expand...

Rottawa.... really that bad...;__)
 
S&W built one for European police forces, at their request I believe, a number of years ago.

It had a special springy music wire extractor star to deal with the rimless cartridges.

But, why would anyone bother with 9mm Parabellum in service revolver when .38 Special and .357 Magnum work so much better in revolvers?

And, since both use .357" bullets, and 9mm Parabellum is .356", they ARE 9mm revolvers.

In any case, why would revolver makers bother about chambering anything for such an old and obsolete cartridge, designed in the horse and buggy days of 1901 and now 116 years old?

The .357 magnum can outperform 9mm any day at the same chamber pressure with heavier bullets.
 
NHunter said:
The FBI puts its belief in the 9MM auto once again...why the same ammo in a revolver so shamed...?
Is there a fear when you only have 6 to pull instead of 10, 17+..? (17+ USA..owners...)
Would a 9mm caliber exist and flourish if autos never became successful and affordable?
Is the revolver now a just an old western movie prop...?
Click to expand...

It's not shamed. There's just no contract market for it, because it's inferior to an autoloader. Revolvers are heavy, complex, and low-capacity. S&W makes 9mm revolvers, though.

Yes, because police may have to make extended engagements with multiple perpetrators. More firepower in a lighter, smaller package is a no-brainer.

9x19mm was designed for autos at a time autoloaders were becoming the trend for military. So, no, it wouldn't. A rimless cartridge doesn't make sense in a revolver.

Well, DA revolvers are a post-cowboy invention. For the private citizen, it's a personal choice. Most self-defense shoots end in 0-1 shots. For big organizations with different needs for their firearms, a double-stack, polymer-framed service pistol is a smarter choice.
 
There are at least 3 different 9mm auto revolvers, that I have seen, and I'm not much of a revolver expert at all.

Rimless is a big pain in a revolver, and the chambers are generally a lot longer than in autos. Not so great to have the bullet so far from the rifling so revolver brass is generally rimmed and longer than 9mm auto.

38 special is basically 9mm in a different case, 357 magnum is similar to 9mm+p in a lot of ways.
 
Had a 9mm sp101 snub. It was nice and small, but as has been said, the moon clips are a pain. I also had a 45 caliber redhawk that would shoot 45 acp, but that was the same deal moon clips are a pain. Some competition people prefer moon clips, because they are still faster than a speed loader. You just drop the whole clip into the revolver whereas you drop the speedloader in and disconnect it from the rounds and drop it on the ground. Autos and revolvers both have their places, but they rarely do the others job well
 
NHunter said:
Is the revolver now a just an old western movie prop...?
Click to expand...

From the standpoint of self defense use and as a duty gun, yes. There is nothing wrong with revolvers for general shooting enjoyment, they have just been superseded by newer designs and technology for combat use. As noted, 9mm doesn't really work well in revolvers for a number of reasons and you are better off with rimmed cartridges for wheel gun use.


Mark
 
mmattockx said:
From the standpoint of self defense use and as a duty gun, yes. There is nothing wrong with revolvers for general shooting enjoyment, they have just been superseded by newer designs and technology for combat use. As noted, 9mm doesn't really work well in revolvers for a number of reasons and you are better off with rimmed cartridges for wheel gun use.
Mark
Click to expand...

Depends, I would argue for self defence/concealed carry it really is hard to beat a revolver (particularly if the individual is untrained). It is much easier to maintain a revolver and use a revolver, and for those reasons it makes a great gun for self defence when the individual doesn't spend much time training and shooting (also if someone is new to shooting I always start with a revolver for them as it is easier for them to learn how to control it).

The other advantage a revolver has for that purpose which a auto-loader will never have is the ability to simply pull the trigger a second time if it doesn't go bang. A auto-loader you need to know and practice stoppage drills, on a revolver your stoppage drill is pull the trigger again.

Not saying auto-loaders aren't better for many applications (which they are), however the revolver does have some advantages and niche roles that a auto-loader can't preform.

I also agree with the sentiment that a 9mm revolver is somewhat useless, I would take a nice .357 or .38 over 9mm if I had to choose in my revolver. Just simply due to the fact that since a 9mm is rimless it doesn't preform as well in revolver designs (unless you start getting into moon clips which is a whole other ball park).
 
Alfa Proj in the Czech Republic makes dedicated revolvers in the 9mm Parabellum/Luger caliber: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXqB9OPwYCk. They can shoot without the moon clips or with the clips (the chambers in the cylinder are specially machined to acommodate 9mm Luger cartridges). The Alfa Proj revolvers are being sold in Canada e.g. by Blue Line Solutions. The reviews I've read are very positive.
 
05RAV said:
Alfa Proj in the Czech Republic makes dedicated revolvers in the 9mm Parabellum/Luger caliber: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXqB9OPwYCk. They can shoot without the moon clips or with the clips (the chambers in the cylinder are specially machined to acommodate 9mm Luger cartridges). The Alfa Proj revolvers are being sold in Canada e.g. by Blue Line Solutions. The reviews I've read are very positive.
Click to expand...

THat would be nice to have if they are problem free and accurate
 
Eaglelord17 said:
Depends, I would argue for self defence/concealed carry it really is hard to beat a revolver (particularly if the individual is untrained).
Click to expand...

It is significantly harder to conceal a revolver and the 6 rounds versus 15-17 plus vastly faster reloads make the rest of it a moot point. I would take a revolver over being unarmed, of course, but current semi's are simply in another class as defensive weapons.


Mark
 
mmattockx said:
It is significantly harder to conceal a revolver and the 6 rounds versus 15-17 plus vastly faster reloads make the rest of it a moot point. I would take a revolver over being unarmed, of course, but current semi's are simply in another class as defensive weapons.
Mark
Click to expand...

It is a bit harder to conceal, however in a concealed carry situation if you need more than 6rds there is something seriously wrong happening (like fighting a whole gang, in which case I don't think 15-17rds are going to help). Concealed carry situations tend to happen in 10m or less and at that distance you simply point and shoot. With a revolver there is no safety to worry about and if it doesn't go bang you pull the trigger again. Finally it requires a lot less skill to use efficiently which for most people is better as not everyone has the time to learn how to use a semi properly.

There are pros and cons to both, personally I would depend on a revolver for concealed carry, but considering that isn't a option for me, it is kinda a moot point.
 
For recreational shooting, a 9mm single action would be just fine. The rimless case is irrelevant. Ruger did make .357/9mm and .45Colt/.45 ACP convertibles. I suspect most owners would have used only one cartridge. Ballistic and sighting differences would made switching back and forth awkward.
 
edmgunslinger said:
bunch of people with no experience just moved into the professors office. we are in Canada. no point here
Click to expand...

This makes more sence then anything else in this thread.

Chances are if you don't hit what you are shooting with the first or second shot you won't with the other 15 rounds, remember what you are about to shoot at will be shooting back at you.

Me thinks to many people watch to much TV.

I may be wrong in this I seem to remember reading that since the RCMP have adopted the semi auto 9mm that in a bad situation no office has fired more then 5 shots at one time.

Kinda makes you wonder why they got rid of a perfectly good firearm that most people can hit something with and went to one that is much harder to use. This is not me saying this I got this from the Man that does the RCMP qualifying in our town.

Graydog
 
Officer involved shootings almost always have greater than 6 shots fired. Every high profile shooting in the US in the last 12 months or so have involved officers shooting far more than six rounds.

Its interesting to note officer shootings 20 years ago were resolved most commonly inside of 6 rounds. Bad guys were shot one or two times with .38 revolvers. Similar situations now seem to regularly take 12-15 rounds. The training now is to 'shoot until the threat is no more' which seems to translate to shoot until you are out of bullets. I find it highly unlikely that given 6 shot revolvers these officers would reload and continue shooting at the single threat they were facing. Its curious to note that anyone would find it obviously excessive, in fact criminal to reload a revolver 3 times while engaging a single suspect (provided there were hits in the first cylinder of course) but almost daily we read of officers firing 12 times or more in encounters and its just accepted as standard procedure.

The only difference in the encounters is that one gun held 6 and the other held 17 or more..but for some reason since the switch to higher capacity semis we don't count bullets just figure its still 'resolved prior to reloading'.

Short version..if you have the bullets it appears one tends to use them. Much harder to collect stats on private citizen encounters but in the fairly common 'home intruder' scenarios we read from the US they are typically resolved in a much smaller number of expended rounds, which would suggest revolvers would work in these engagements but would not be suitable for LEO encounters,,which is strange considering in both cases it is almost always a single opponent...

Not sure the conclusion I am trying to draw..think I may have just gone in a complete circle. And I certainly left the 9mm question behind though I think capacity was where the last few posts were taking us..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom