With the dawn of semi-automatic handguns and the many improvements that have come with magazine-fed pistols, I was left wondering why revolvers still hold a significant share of today’s market.
After all, there must be some reason legendary detectives like Colombo, Frank Drebin and Lenny Briscoe rolled with six-shooters. The answer, I found, goes a little deeper than them being from the “old school”.
Despite some of the obvious advantages of semi-automatic pistols such as faster reloading time and the capacity to hold more rounds, they don’t outstrip their revolving counterparts in every facet.
Besides being simpler to operate, revolvers can arguably be more reliable. For example, when a semi-auto pistol misfires, the user must manually cycle the action to extract the round; The cycling action of a semi-auto pistol is reliant on the energy produced by the actual firing of the cartridge itself. If a revolver misfires, the user can squeeze the trigger (or cock the hammer) again and its on to the next round.
Revolvers can hold an advantage over magazine-fed, semi-auto pistols in the ergonomics department as well. No mag in the handle means it can be smaller, giving the revolver the ability to fit smaller hands. This size factor can also be advantageous in terms of concealment.
Without the need for delicate springs constantly exerting pressure in key areas, revolvers can sit around and stay loaded for longer periods of time without maintenance. Eventually the need for maintenance is necessary, but they aren’t as reliant as semi-autos on lubrication and continuous care. This is ideal for home defense situations, where the owner isn’t constantly using or firing the gun.
While these comparisons deal in generalities (not all guns are the same), the basic principles are what keeps the revolvers relevant in today’s market. Unless someone invents some kind of laser-beam death ray, I don’t see the “old school” revolvers being retired completely from duty anytime soon.
Check out our stock of pistols and revolvers.
-Sean