...are they inherently cleaner than a semi? While I was in Wisconsin I finally got around to shooting a couple dozen rounds through the .357. Somewhere in my head I got that revolvers, like pump shotguns, require less cleaning than a semiauto pistol. So I just chucked it in its case and forgot about it...until last weekend. I was dreading cleaning it at this point but was pleasantly surprised at how clean it was. In retrospect, logically, the same things that make a revolver a terrible choice for a silencer--lots of places for gas to escape--make it a lot messier on its surroundings while the actual gun remains much cleaner. Add in the relatively short barrel and I suppose most of the fouling finds its way outside the gun instead of waiting to be removed by solvent soaked cotton patches. What say you?
There's maybe a slight cleanliness advantage to the revolver. Automatics have lots of lubricated surfaces that really seem to catch carbon and other residue. And revolvers don't have to be taken apart to be cleaned like semi-autos do. I only own one revolver (a Taurus .44 Magnum) and it's not too difficult to clean EXCEPT for the scoring that occurs around the vents in the compensator. Those usually require a little bit of scrubbing with some solvent to get off.
What Paladin said. A revolver is actually a good choice for a self defense weapon. There's far less cleaning and maintenance, no risk of jamming or stovepiping, and 6 rounds are plenty sufficient for the majority of self-defense situations.
Corrected. A revolver is far less likely to jam than a semiauto but it can still happen, especially if the weapon is dirty.
Are you talking about clean overall, or just talking about fowling of the barrel? If the former, then that would make sense because revolvers have less places and parts to get dirty. If the latter, then I don't know. Maybe because people tend to fire fewer rounds through a revolver than they do a semi-auto during a typical trip to the range?
I know I've told the story before about having to use a rubber mallet to get the cartridges out of the cylinder on a Former Chief's Smith 637. The way I look at it, both revolvers and semi-autos get equally dirty. A semi-auto gets a little dirty in a lot of places. A revolver gets really dirty in a few places.
People are also a lot less likely to remember to pull off the grips or side panels and maintain the works underneath on a revolver.
I've never had a mainspring get dirty on a revolver. I'll crack it open every other cleaning or so, but only to lubricate it.
I see no use for them except as a backup, hunting, or fun. Regardless of brand just the fact you can carry more rounds in just one magazine then almost any revolver is enough to seal the deal for me. Muad Dib is right that most self defense doesn't go past six rounds. Hell it's around 2 point something IIRC. But that doesn't mean on the day the shit hits the fan I don't need 15 +1.
I'm a little more careful when I'm scrubbing the bore of a revolver because it's easier to ding up the crown than with an autoloader. It probably doesn't make all that much difference with a fighting handgun, but I cut my teeth on target rifles, and I guess old habits die hard.
I think you just hit the nail on the head. For a target rifle, you do need to be that careful. I've always been around fighting guns since I started shooting, so I have a completely different perspective. Now, if it takes me more than 15 minutes to clean any firearm, I'm doing it wrong.
.357's plenty hot for me. I'll just plan to not be places where I could bump into a mother grizzly bear and her cubs.
Many times. I plan to own one *someday*, though it hasn't been a priority because, let's face it, it's practical value is about ZERO. It's big and heavy (I've only shot the 8.38" model). With lighter loads (around .44 Magnum power levels), the thing is a joy to shoot and you could probably plink all day with it. The power is incredible. [wyt=.500 Magnum vs. Watermelons #1]RoW8nHIVuRk[/wyt] [wyt=.500 Magnum vs. Watermelons #2]O1d7i3i0LLI[/wyt] As the power levels go up, the muzzle blast and recoil increase substantially. The heaviest loads I shot were 400 grain bullets at 1600-1700 feet per second (compare a moderately heavy .44 Mag: 240 grains at 1200 fps)...these smacked me in the hand pretty good with every pull of the trigger. Not intolerable (or even flinch-inducing), just...unpleasant. Not something you'd want to shoot all day. 5, 10 shots and you're done. The .500 is capable of shooting still heavier bullets at similar speeds and the recoil on these is SEVERE. There are videos on YouTube of people shooting these and almost losing control of the gun, which I consider very unsafe. [wyt=.500 Magnum 700 grain recoil #1]IxUfE1C7KeY[/wyt] [wyt=.500 Magnum 700 grain recoil #2]fjmtUFrFBc4[/wyt] The infamous .500 double-tap (the recoil of the gun causes the shooter to involuntarily fire a second shot) is a well-documented phenomenon. [wyt=.500 Double-Tap #1]iT9RUC-UHAo[/wyt] [wyt=.500 Double-Tap #2]C4OE78spknk[/wyt] [wyt=.500 Double-Tap #3]wCzOLEoko6o[/wyt]
I like a smith revolver. Perhaps its just me but they seem like the absolute best hand gun to just grab up without practice and hit what you aim at. To me that is the entire point. I don't want to have to practice with a weapon once a month to be able to use it for protection. Talking to several people who either hunt bears or deal with the threat of them, Its either a .500 or something that shoots the 454. I have shot one Taurus 454 and was not impressed. It didn't feel balanced. It was a hand cannon but, to me there was not a comfortable feel to it and It would cost a fortune just to get where you could hit what you aim at. I would like to shoot the 500 and see what it feels like. Maybe put 5 spent rounds in it and dry fire it and see how it feels, then lay it down and pick it up and fire a round and see how close I get to what I am aiming at. I would much rather shoulder a rifle but then if might be considered hunting or something.
