Revolver vs. Autoloader

DavidR

you were right, it did turn into a wheel vs auto discussion.

I just want to add my 2c about the article itself. the debate is one like the AK vs AR or Mossberg vs Remington, MN 91/30 vs K98, etc... I've seen plenty of articles where the author had a bias towards one or the other.

really, this article seemed like just a bunch of self-hype press release. but any thing from a company that says their company is the best, take with a grain of salt. would you believe a pr that toyota came out with saying toyota cars are the best compared to others? i don't think so.

so yeah, it doesn't surprise me that CA did this, but wow. at least try and hide the bias in it first.

I not only like autos, I prefer a semi-auto for most self defense applications. However, a revolver is less susceptible to failure than are autos. Autos are much more ammo sensitive and they have more moving parts to fail. Also, revolvers require less training to use safely and effectively. But, the autopistol provides more on-board ammo, a slightly higher rate of fire and much faster reloading.

About failures. Revolvers have two types of failures that render them inoperable, one is a blocked barrel from a squib load and the other is a mechanical breakage that causes them to fail. Auto pistols have these two types of failures in common with wheelguns and it renders them them as fatally inoperable as they do the revolver. And the mechanical failure is slightly more common in auto pistols because they have more parts, the failure of which, will kill the weapon. The auto pistol also experiences stoppages from improper grips, under powered ammunition and magazine faults. These latter can usually be cleared quickly, if the operator is properly trained to do so quickly.