| Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive http://www.ellegon.com/forum/ |
|
| Why are revolvers considered to be superior for aim? http://www.ellegon.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=21 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Bartleby [ Thu Aug 11, 2005 11:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Why are revolvers considered to be superior for aim? |
Why are revolvers considered to be superior tools for the purpose of aiming? Autos and revolvers both have recoil, but double-action revolvers require more intervention on the part of the user, which can lead to a failure to aim as accurately as one might wish. It is because of this that I absolutely stink using revolvers, but am just fine using automatics. I realize that it's a failing on my part and that I need to practice with a revolver to overcome it. That said; what is it about revolvers that make them more accurate when properly used? Bartleby |
|
| Author: | joelr [ Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Why are revolvers considered to be superior for aim? |
Bartleby wrote: Why are revolvers considered to be superior tools for the purpose of aiming? Autos and revolvers both have recoil, but double-action revolvers require more intervention on the part of the user, which can lead to a failure to aim as accurately as one might wish. It is because of this that I absolutely stink using revolvers, but am just fine using automatics. I realize that it's a failing on my part and that I need to practice with a revolver to overcome it. That said; what is it about revolvers that make them more accurate when properly used? Bartleby I don't think there's any serious practical difference in accuracy between a revolver that points well for you and a semiauto that points well for you, and if you're a good shot with a semiauto, my strong guess is that the issue isn't flinching, but pointing. Simple test: take an unloaded revolver, and a friend. Have the friend stand next to you while you grab the revolver with an instinctive grip in your strong hand, and thrust it out (in a safe direction, obviously, which doesn't include at the friend) at chest level. If the barrel is dead level, it points well for you. If not, you may need differently shaped grips. |
|
| Author: | JCinMN [ Fri Aug 12, 2005 8:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My experience with it ends up coming down to fatigue. If the guns are both sighted in the accuracy should be relatively equivalent. However, in my (admittedly limited) shooting experience, revolvers are more front heavy. Couple this with more recoil, and I just have a harder time holding a revolver as steady as a pistol over time. I'd say that's practially splitting hairs but it's my $0.02. It's not really saying anything about the gun, but the capability of the shooter. Pistols have some of the weight balanced over and/or behind the grip where with a revolver it's all hanging out there. |
|
| Author: | Brewman [ Fri Aug 12, 2005 10:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I find it a toss up. I have a 1911 longslide match grade with a nice light single action trigger release, and enough mass to greatly dampen recoil. However, it's not a good carry gun- too big and heavy. But it's fun to tack drive with it. My carry gun, an XD-40 has a mushier trigger, shorter sight raduis, and less mass, so when I shoot at bulls eyes, I'm less accurate than with my trophy match 1911. But since it's my carry gun, I usually just practice pointing, and not aiming one eye closed. Good enough for my self defense needs. My revolver (.357 mag), I'm pretty accurate with shooting single action, and expectedly less so shooting double action. Especially when shooting .357's, shooting .38sp more accurate. All my guns go where they're pointed enought for self defense use. |
|
| Author: | Ramoel [ Sat Aug 13, 2005 8:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
For accurate, longer range shooting, I am best with a revolver. I might add that I normally deer hunt with a .44 Magnum revolver and have for many years. Out to 50 yards or so I can do just as well with a 7.5" Redhawk as I can with a rifle with open sights. For carry I sometimes use a small 5 shot .357 and other times I use an auto depending on how cool the weather is. At self defense ranges I shoot both about the same using double action with the revolver. For CCW qualification in both MN and AZ I used a 1911 since I feel very comfortable with that weapon. I developed a fondness for the 1911 years ago when I carried one in the military. I think that flinching is the single biggest problem people have with handgun accuracy and the best cure is long sessions of dry fire. After that at the range with a revolver you can leave a couple of empty chambers. You'll find out in a hurry if you flinch if you see your gun jump when you drop the hammer on that empty chamber. I remember watching beginners when I was a range safety officer and watching them flinch badly because they started shooting with magnums instead of a smaller caliber. Enough said, we old guys tend to ramble on... |
|
| Author: | Lobotomy Boy [ Wed Aug 17, 2005 7:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
There is a huge difference between the way I shoot a revolver double action and the way I shoot one single action. I can shoot a revolver pretty well single action, but can barely put 60 percent of the rounds into a sillouhette target when shooting double action at 10 yards. Shooting from low ready I can empty magazine after magazine into a four-inch circle at 10 yards with my Glock 26 no matter how fast I shoot. If I take my time I can do much better than that. Because of this I choose to carry my Glock instead of a revolver. The gun is as reliable as any revolver I've ever owned (over 1500 rounds through the gun and not a single failure to feed or failure to eject), so I feel comfortable that it will go "Bang!" if needed. I used to consider myself a revolver guy. Now I think of myself as a Glock guy. |
|
| Author: | sigman [ Thu Aug 18, 2005 10:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't consider revolvers any better or worse than semi-autos. I think it comes down to the shooters confidence in whatever he shoots best. |
|
| Author: | 1911fan [ Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The most accurate handguns are semi-automatics if you judge by the Olympics. Revolvers have not been used there for quite sometime. The same as in bullseye competition, a great majority that i have seen are 1911's. Most if not all .22 competitions are won by automatics. in hunting, the revolver wins on the basis of being able to handle more power loadings than automatics. Although there are exceptions, It is the revolver that has the Horsepower to kill big bears, african big five or other game of similar size. The big casull 454, the S&W 500 and others all have to be shot from a revolver. shooting big game goes to the auto. In military uses, no one uses a revolver anymore, you might find the odd locale that does but for the most part the autoloader has completely replaced the wheel gun. |
|
| Author: | Agro500 [ Fri Oct 07, 2005 5:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
1911fan has hit the nail right on the head. It has always amazed me how revolvers can produce any accuracy at all. Think about it, the chamber is separate from the barrel it wobbles and it’s a different chamber for every shot. Now go to your gun cabinet get you fev ½ MOA rifle apply the above qualities to it and try to imagine how accurately it will shoot. 
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|