Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 54

Thread: Large revolvers

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    5,162
    If Smith would build a +P true Model 12 I'd buy a pair and a spare.

    Even with MIM. Even in .357.
    Warrior for the working day.

    Es una cosa muy seria. --Robert Capa

    "...I rode the range in a Ford V8...Yippy Yi Yo Ki Yay." --Johnny Mercer (as modified)

    "What cannot be remedied must be endured."

    Vale et omnia quae.

    P:20

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NWFL
    Posts
    16,581
    Is there a practical use for really large revolvers like the 500 smith and wesson shown below.

    I like Elmer Keith's concept of an N frame 44 with suitable bullets at 1200 fps in a 4 inch barreled revolver, like a smith and wesson mountain.


  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    3,439
    Quote Originally Posted by barnetmill View Post
    Is there a practical use for really large revolvers like the 500 smith and wesson shown below.
    If by practical you mean "the best weapon for a specific role and envelope", I guess one could argue that it's the optimal tool for killing the bear that just got in your tent or small one room, back woods cabin.

    Outside of the tent or cabin there's a lot better tools, and that's a pretty tiny niche.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,749
    Quote Originally Posted by BillyOblivion View Post
    If by practical you mean "the best weapon for a specific role and envelope", I guess one could argue that it's the optimal tool for killing the bear that just got in your tent or small one room, back woods cabin.

    Outside of the tent or cabin there's a lot better tools, and that's a pretty tiny niche.
    Glock in 10mm....:). Lots of ammo...
    Nothing says Fuck You like a shotgun.....

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,749
    If I honestly thought bears were going to kill me I would walk around with a shotgun or a rifle with a magazine... Just saying...
    Nothing says Fuck You like a shotgun.....

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NWFL
    Posts
    16,581
    Quote Originally Posted by BillyOblivion View Post
    If by practical you mean "the best weapon for a specific role and envelope", I guess one could argue that it's the optimal tool for killing the bear that just got in your tent or small one room, back woods cabin.

    Outside of the tent or cabin there's a lot better tools, and that's a pretty tiny niche.
    Glock in 10mm....:). Lots of ammo...
    For a 1000 lb bear, I would choose a 10mm glock ahead of a smith and wesson 500 caliber revolver.

  7. #27
    I'd rather have a Tac-13...

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    862
    Quote Originally Posted by 6Gunner View Post
    I had a grandfather who served 40 years as a Southwestern lawman, starting in the 1930's, at a time when most of his peers were manhunters and gunfighters. My grandfather prevailed in multiple gunbattles over his career, and like most fighting men he had VERY strong opinions about what constituted good tools and which didn't. He had very low opinions of the semi-autos of the day; dismissing them as "bottomfeeders" and "jamamatics", and much preferred to use large caliber revolvers.

    It was interesting to me when my father retired from the military we lived with my grandparents for a time, and every weekend my grandfather's compatriots - blooded gunfighters all - would come over to the house and they'd sit in the living room and spend the afternoon talking, joking, and just generally enjoying the company of like-minded men. They'd talk about politics, current events, family issues... and almost inevitably start talking guns, and fights they'd won. They'd debate revolver versus autoloaders, DA vs. SA, the merits (or lack thereof) of specific calibers, etc... and each had fiercely held opinions.

    My grandfather taught me about guns, gun safety, and shooting. He also taught me to shoot, using revolvers primarily. He once said the DA revolver was the easiest weapon to teach someone to use proficiently... but one of the hardest to truly master. I asked him how long it took him to master it... and he smirked and said: "I'll let you know when I get there."

    In the end, I have shot both autos and revolvers. I spent time in the US Border Patrol, and I've owned all the high speed, low drag semi-autos. I've trained with them all, and I like some of them very much. I've owned full-dress Glock 17s with RMR's, and currently am doing a lot of shooting with some Berettas tuned up by Ernest Langdon, and I am deeply impressed by them.

    I've shot them head to head using a shot timer... and am almost embarrassed to admit I'm faster and more accurate with a revolver. I've found myself using and carrying revolvers more and more, and enjoying training with them. Some might question me for it, but I think there are strong arguments to be made for the merits of the modern fighting revolver.

    Attachment 61016
    I really enjoyed this post. The revolver vs. auto choice of law enforcement during the period of about 1920-1990 has long intrigued me.

    At the start of that period police carried mostly DA revolvers with some in the Southwest carrying SA Colts. During Prohibition and the Dillinger/Bonnie and Clyde era, many lawmen seemed to go to 1911s in either .45acp or .38 Super. Apparently Frank Hamer was carrying both a .38 Super 1911 and a revolver when he led the team that took out Bonnie and Clyde.

    After let’s say 1935 or so, LE seemed to go almost exclusively to DA revolvers, usually .38 Special or .357 Magnum (Texas Rangers and some small departments seemed to allow 1911s. The Illinois State Police I think went to 9mm S&W autos in the late 1960s IIRC. They were very much the exception.

    Gabe and Papa and others here started LE with revolvers. Why did many in LE embrace 1911s in the late 1920s and 1930s and then LE went decisively back to revolvers?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NWFL
    Posts
    16,581
    Quote Originally Posted by cco45acp View Post
    I really enjoyed this post. The revolver vs. auto choice of law enforcement during the period of about 1920-1990 has long intrigued me.

    ............................
    Gabe and Papa and others here started LE with revolvers. Why did many in LE embrace 1911s in the late 1920s and 1930s and then LE went decisively back to revolvers?
    The revolver relative to training and safety is less demanding. A smith or colt on single action can shoot a better score on a target. A combat non-target auto of that age had a worse trigger. Also there was a concept likely that an officer was supposed handle business with six rounds. The Illinois state police was the first major department to chose the double action 39 and so those auto could be carried un-cocked. For a single action auto when to be got into action with just one hand it has to be cocked. Few police departments were favor of that. So the smith model 39 was deemed safe enough. Then when the model 59 with a double column high capacity mag was brought out, it was considered the superior weapons for a raising high crime rate america.
    Dealing with perceived increased threat has been the driver in police handgun selection. Remember in about 1900 many departments thought a .32 long revolver was sufficient. Then it was .38 spl. and then .357 mag. For a while some individuals were carrying even bigger caliber guns. Some went to .45 autos. Now high capacity semiautos either DA for the first shot or partially cocked striker fired auto are it with going to from 9 to 40 and back to 9. The 10mm never got wide acceptance.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    5,162
    Not dispositive, but the FBI was a trendsetter here. Before the "F" was added, the agents often did carry such firearms as the 1911 and even the Smith .35 in addition to a variety of other autos and revolvers. This predated their arrest powers, if I am not mistaken. (Insofar as Bryan Burrough and other authors perpetuate the myth of unarmed B of I agents they are mistaken or just plain wrong.) And in addition to revolvers, during the initial phases of the War on Crime, the .38 Super was actually issued by the Bureau. So was the Registered Model .357. And the 1911 .45 was not only carried but used to good effect, including the ambush outside the Biograph Theater in Chicago (Charlie Winstead used one).
    But once Dillinger and Gillis and most Barkers were dead and Karpis was under wraps they seem to have abandoned the auto in favor of the .38 Special six shooter. Remember that the rap against semiautos was their alleged propensity to jam. Serious semis move around in the untrained hand differently from a Colt OP with target loads. The brass gets tossed all over the place, including into the face. And the 1911 was perceived as being heavy and hard to conceal (it is neither).
    Add in the administrative problems (is that thing loaded? Did you know your hammer is cocked?), the single action only operation of the 1911 and, say, the 1903/08, and the perceived reduced cost of medium bore sixguns and their ammo and you end up with a .38 or .357 sixgun, with training and quals heavily weighted in favor of same.

    Considering what agents actually did (and do) on a daily basis and their access to shotties, Thompsons and Monitors, I'd be tempted to arm them with something like this, at least back in the day:

    PP.jpgPP2.jpg

    On the market from about 1929. I know. NIH. Sue me.

    And just 'cause I like 'em, a Monitor and maybe two. Gotta be a spare mag in that back pocket. monitor.jpg
    Last edited by Papa; 02-24-2021 at 07:24 PM.
    Warrior for the working day.

    Es una cosa muy seria. --Robert Capa

    "...I rode the range in a Ford V8...Yippy Yi Yo Ki Yay." --Johnny Mercer (as modified)

    "What cannot be remedied must be endured."

    Vale et omnia quae.

    P:20

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •