# Revolvers for Ladies



## Smitty79 (Oct 19, 2012)

I will start with the disclaimer, of the handful of hand guns I own, none are revolvers. A Smith or Ruger revolver will be the next firearm I purchase.

What do you all think of this? The guy who wrote this is a Master in both revolver divisions in IDPA.

5 reasons NOT to tell her to buy a revolver as her first gun | Gun Nuts Media


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

My opinion, based upon having taught Jean to shoot and to carry a concealed pistol, is that these explanations are entirely correct.

Jean has difficulty racking the slide of her small carry gun, but, difficult though it is, she can do it. "You just have to know the trick."

The prohibition against double-action (DA) triggers, however, cuts two ways. Yes, it's much easier to learn to shoot a single-action-trigger (SA) pistol, but sometimes the easiest concealment method for a woman just about requires a double-action-only (DAO) semi-auto.
Jean learned to shoot pistols using a SA semi-auto, but her self-defense pistol is DAO, and she can control its trigger quite well. All it takes is gentle instruction, and lots of practice.

Jean did at first believe that a DA J-frame S&W would be her best choice, but while she was achieving proficiency with it, she thoughtfully decided otherwise. I schooled her on what could go wrong and how difficult it would be to repair, and she balked at the relatively slow and complex reload procedure (even with speed-loaders). As noted in the referenced article, bulk (of both gun and reloads) was also an issue.

I concur with the referenced article.


----------



## borris (Oct 28, 2012)

As Myself I am Self Thought And Started With A S&W Mod#645 Back Sum 36yrs Ago It's Only A few Years That I've Gotten Into Revolvers I Understand The Easy Method Of Storing Them Loaded And Cleaning Them When Possible, But Have Thought Both My Daughters To Shoot Semi's First And Let Them Make Up There Own Mind At A Later Date To What They Would Like As Far As Racking A Slide "It Is With Out A Dought A Push Pull Method" Easy To Learn !


----------



## biggfoot44 (Apr 7, 2014)

Firstly , there is no such thing as a Lady's Gun. There may well be factors for : inexperienced , physical size , hand strength , etc , but they are factors for everyone. Women are people too , with different preferences .

But I Like revolvers. I recomend to everyone to at least give open minded consideration. To revolvers. Mrs Biggfoot refuses to shoot an autoloader other than .22lr , but likes her big bore revolvers. The Biggfoot-ette has fired various handgun ( and will try pretty much everything offered ) , but prefers K Frames so far.

I DO agree that a J Frame ( or similar light wt 5 shot snub) as a first/ only gun for a new shooter of any flavor.


----------



## Dframe (May 7, 2014)

I disagree with some of what he says. He puts up strawmen by the bunch in that piece. Who ever would try to work on a revolvers timing in a self defense situation? Yes revolvers can fail. but most of the time if they do you simply pull the trigger again. No need to rack a slide. There are also no safetys on a revolver and at very close range, (where MOST defensive uses happen) trigger pull weight is of little consequence.


----------



## Billy113 (Apr 1, 2014)

S&W 642 w/ crimson trace laser grips using hornady critical defense reduced recoil


----------



## Spike12 (Dec 10, 2008)

I agree with a revolver for a woman's self defense gun. I used to work in a gun shop and in help women customers who were not avid shooters that was almost always the obvious choice. 

That said, the Ruger LCR was designed for women. The trigger pull effort was designed primarily for women's strength after a SHOT show when it was seen how many women couldn't pull a GP or SP trigger. The design is cammed to reduce effort and has a patent. An SP101 can be reworked with springs and shims to be pretty close too.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

I agree with much of the article, but, logical though it may be, it won't change most people's perception that revolvers are simpler to operate. And, when teaching a person to shoot, it's probably best to let them choose based on those perceptions, so they will have early positive experiences. Most folks, once initiated by actually shooting a gun and hitting where they intended to, are open to exploring other options. It isn't hard to teach a petite woman how to rack a slide, once she has gained confidence that she will be able to learn anything she wants to learn about shooting. The early (and most important) part of the learning experience is overcoming the noise and fear of recoil, learning sight picture, and learning how to 'lock up' into a stable enough platform to have that sight picture be consistently on or very near a small target, all while depressing the trigger. That can be accomplished with a revolver or a semi-auto.

Being indoctrinated early on with rifles and shotguns, I didn't take handguns very seriously for about 30 years. I owned several revolvers during that time, but was completely unimpressed with their accuracy potential, at least in my hands. Self defense was a non-issue for me, at the time.

However, when I finally decided to start carrying a concealed handgun, I recognized that it was important to choose an appropriate weapon and learn to shoot it accurately at short and medium ranges. I discovered that my marksmanship improved greatly with a semi-auto, above what it had been all those years with revolvers. I eventually figured out the reason. It was because my fundamentals were much better. Not knowing much about semi-autos, I had actually paid attention to what the experts said. Eventually, I got around to studying what experts said about revolver shooting, too, and I now feel comfortable with whatever I happen to pick up.


----------



## aarondhgraham (Mar 17, 2011)

*I'll buy them all but number 4,,,*

I'll buy them all but number 4,,,
And even then I can't fault the statement,,,
It just that I carry either an LCP or a S&W model 36.

I don't find concealing the revolver,,,
Any more difficult than concealing the semi.

This was a decent article that said nothing more,,,
Than what other gun writers have stated many times.

It's all good though,,,
Gun writers have to make a living too.

Actually, a person could copy the text and save it,,,
Then use it as their closer in a discussion of appropriate guns for ladies.

It was well written and succinct,,,
Just nothing new is all.

Aarond

.


----------



## gunguy (Oct 1, 2014)

I own a few Smith & Wesson revolvers...357, 38 special and 22.

My wife and I LOVE our little Smith & Wesson model 36, 38 special! 
Even though it only holds 5 shots, its so light and compact, its perfect for carry or home defense. Its her favorite gun.

Nothing greater than a well made and reliable classic Smith revolver. :anim_lol:

------
*NRA Member*

Our Second Amendment is a privilege...embrace it, protect it, and never take it for granted


----------



## dahermit (Oct 30, 2014)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Jean did at first believe that a DA J-frame S&W would be her best choice, but while she was achieving proficiency with it, she thoughtfully decided otherwise. I schooled her on what could go wrong and how difficult it would be to repair...


Being a person who prefers revolvers, perhaps you can school me on what can go wrong and how difficult it would be to repair?


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Very weak and one sided argument in my opinion.

1. A small revolver is designed to be a close quarter self defense pistol not a 25 Yard competition pistol. Trigger weight should be irrelevant within reason and perhaps beneficial as you don't want the firearm to go off unless you intend it to.

3. Air weight J frames are far from bulky to carry, cylinder and all. Actually they are a dream to carry IWB.

4. I don't know what revolvers this guys been around, but I know S&W and other high quality revolvers to be extremely reliable and stay in time. Yes any machine can break, but I'm just not seeing this happening as often as the author would leave you to believe. 

5. Is a semi as simple to operate as a revolver? It can be if it's a Glock or similar pistol, and you have it loaded, chambered and ready to fire. Is it safer to carry or have at the ready for extended periods of time? I suppose.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

I really find this to be completely a preference issue, which is usually driven by a comple factors being age and interest. The level of gun competency, or desire to become gun competent, will be the overwhelming factor wrt to whether or not a younger woman wants to carry a revolver or a pistol in most cases. Older folks tend to gravitate toward revolvers where as the younger crowds seem to prefer pistols, unless there is little interest to become proficient with a pistol. 

No question that on the whole, revolvers are simpler to operate, easier to maintain and generally safer for those who are just not that interested in becoming gun competent. Of course there are exceptions, but I think on the whole, this is true. To just assume that b/c it's a woman looking for a gun, she needs a revolver is errant thinking, IMHO.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

GCBHM said:


> No question that on the whole, revolvers are simpler to operate, easier to maintain and generally safer for those who are just not that interested in becoming gun competent.


Good point.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

dahermit said:


> Being a person who prefers revolvers, perhaps you can school me on what can go wrong and how difficult it would be to repair?


Most modern, double-action revolvers have small (even weak) internal parts, some of which are relatively fragile. (Rugers may be an exception.)
Certainly, you can't really field-strip most DA revolvers, and you can't really do in-the-field repairs on them, the way one could with a M1911 (for instance).
DA revolvers are subject to getting out of time when used a lot under strenuous conditions, and this is not easy to correct. Under the same conditions, ejector rods get bent, a problem that's also not easy to correct, especially in the field.
If a trigger job is your pleasure, I would much rather perform this modification on a SA semi-auto than on a DA revolver. Even many DA semi-autos are simpler inside, than are DA revolvers.
Shall I go on?


----------



## dahermit (Oct 30, 2014)

You may have to go on...because I do not buy it. Those "weak", "fragile", internal revolver parts hardly ever break. Please name those parts that are so trouble some. DA revolvers do not need to be field stripped. Nether do autos in the scenario of this thread (defensive guns for ladies). I have never seen a ejector rod get bent on a defensive revolver. Just what are those "strenuous conditions" are revolvers carried for civilian defense going to be subjected to? You seem to have defensive, concealed carry confused with a fire-fight in the rubble and sand of the Iraqi desert, not a Walmart parking lot. In the unlikely event that wearing a revolver resulted in some problem (dropping it on the pavement, etc.), it would be taken to a gunsmith, not field stripped under a poncho with a flashlight. I find that my revolvers are quite hardy and a whole lot less likely to malfunction than my autos.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

I took the time to read the article and I ain't buying any of it. Just a bunch of BS. 

Nothing wrong with a good revolver. And yes, lots of women have issues racking a slide. Revolvers rarely have operational issues. In the wrong hands, a semi-auto can be very failure prone. 

Internal parts breaking in a revolver? I suppose it could happen, but give me a break. I'm 60 yrs. old and have yet to see or experience a broken internal part on a revolver. Maybe that's cause I only buy S&W revolvers.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Some revolver options other than .38 and/or .357........

79920 9 mm Pitbull Rimless Revolver

Taurus Model 380 Mini-Revolver 2380121UL, 380 ACP, 1.75 in, Rubber Grip, Blue Finish, 5 Rd - Able Ammo

Another option which address felt recoil and cylinder bulk is the Rhino.......

The flat sided cylinder design of the Rhino reduces the typical revolver profile allowing greater concealment.

The new Chiappa Rhino barrel is aligned with the bottom most chamber which is the key component to Rhino's tame characteristics. The position of the barrel lowers the center of gravity and yields a center line of the bore more in line with the shooter's arm allowing for the most natural "point ability" while engaging a target. This characteristic also drastically reduces both recoil and muzzle flip which insures subsequent shots to be on target faster than ever before.
Chiappa Firearms

Video: Colt Detective Special vs Chiappa Rhino 200DS which shows less muzzle flip with the Rhino
Face-off: Colt Detective Special vs Chiappa Rhino 200DS - YouTube


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

dahermit said:


> You may have to go on...because I do not buy it. Those "weak", "fragile", internal revolver parts hardly ever break. Please name those parts that are so trouble some. DA revolvers do not need to be field stripped. Nether do autos in the scenario of this thread (defensive guns for ladies). I have never seen a ejector rod get bent on a defensive revolver. Just what are those "strenuous conditions" are revolvers carried for civilian defense going to be subjected to? You seem to have defensive, concealed carry confused with a fire-fight in the rubble and sand of the Iraqi desert, not a Walmart parking lot. In the unlikely event that wearing a revolver resulted in some problem (dropping it on the pavement, etc.), it would be taken to a gunsmith, not field stripped under a poncho with a flashlight. I find that my revolvers are quite hardy and a whole lot less likely to malfunction than my autos.


Um, you asked me for my opinion.
I gave it to you.
And now you want to convince me that I'm wrong and you're right.
Sorry: My opinion remains the same.

Merely as the result of competition use, I have seen out-of-time issues develop, and ejection rods get bent. My assumption, then, is that these things can also happen as the result of rough handling during self-defense use. Panicked rough handling is a given in save-your-life use, I believe.

Have you ever watched a really good pistolsmith do a DA-revolver trigger job? I have, and I know that it's a whole lot more difficult and finicky than doing one on any semi-auto I've ever seen.

How do you thoroughly clean the innards of a pistol that has gotten soaked, but that you cannot detail strip? Spray (solvent) and pray?
Yes, I know that many foreign military revolvers have few, robust internal parts that are easy to remove. But are you really ready to carry concealed and use a Rast-Gasser, a French M.1873 or M.1892, a Jap Type 26, or an Italian M.1889 for self defense?

Have you never seen a Colt's or S&W, the hand of which needed replacing or the "star" ratchet of which needed to be either replaced or re-cut?

And I wouldn't own, much less carry, a semi-auto which was prone to any malfunction at all. I set mine up properly, kept 'em clean, inspected magazines for feed-lip cracks, and they always delivered. The couple of malfunctions that I've experienced with, for instance, 1911s were both due to brass that I reloaded without powder. In neither case was it the gun.

Anyway, I gave you my opinion.
You disagree with it.
Fine.
I really don't want to get into an argument over our respective opinions.


----------



## dahermit (Oct 30, 2014)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Merely as the result of competition use, I have seen out-of-time issues develop, and ejection rods get bent. My assumption, then, is that these things can also happen as the result of rough handling during self-defense use. Panicked rough handling is a given in save-your-life use, I believe.


 I must be a little slow...please explain just how an ejection rod can get bent during self-defense use. I just cannot envision that. Open the cylinder and throw it on the pavement? Slapping the perp in the head with it?


Steve M1911A1 said:


> Have you ever watched a really good pistolsmith do a DA-revolver trigger job? I have, and I know that it's a whole lot more difficult and finicky than doing one on any semi-auto I've ever seen.


Good thing that almost all S&W revolvers have come out of the box with no need for an action job. They are intended to be used by the makers without such.


Steve M1911A1 said:


> How do you thoroughly clean the innards of a pistol that has gotten soaked, but that you cannot detail strip? Spray (solvent) and pray?
> Yes, I know that many foreign military revolvers have few, robust internal parts that are easy to remove. But are you really ready to carry concealed and use a Rast-Gasser, a French M.1873 or M.1892, a Jap Type 26, or an Italian M.1889 for self defense?


 If a carry gun got soaked? Open it and clean it...when you get home, no big deal. If the person does not wish to do that, they can take it to their gunsmith, still no big deal. If it "got soaked", it would still function until they did. No need for any other revolver than a S&W. Other than sitting naked (except for a gun),in the rain, under what circumstances does a person and their gun become soaked? It is getting hard to visualize the conditions you seem to think are common or at least, likely.


Steve M1911A1 said:


> Have you never seen a Colt's or S&W, the hand of which needed replacing or the "star" ratchet of which needed to be either replaced or re-cut?


 Yes, it happens with revolvers that have had extended use over years. However, not much different from extractors loosing their tension, magazine lips cracking, weak firing pin springs, extractors clocking, etc...all of which I have seen in Colt 1911's with minor usage.


Steve M1911A1 said:


> And I wouldn't own, much less carry, a semi-auto which was prone to any malfunction at all. I set mine up properly, kept 'em clean, inspected magazines for feed-lip cracks, and they always delivered. The couple of malfunctions that I've experienced with, for instance, 1911s were both due to brass that I reloaded without powder. In neither case was it the gun.


 They still break, they still wear-out, and they (autos), are dependent upon, and less forgiving of bad ammo than a revolver. It does not matter that it was not the gun's fault, you had a stoppage.

Oh, forgot to point out the unlike revolvers, upon extensive shooting, autos need (as recommended by auto-experts), replacement of recoil springs, magazine springs at specific intervals to maintain reliability whereas, revolvers almost always go through their entire life with the same springs while continuing to function. Consider that with autos, one never knows when a spring may begin to loose its tension, magazine lip crack, causing a malfunction, just when you need it.

Taken in the context of what "a lady should carry", few ladies that I know would want to do the mechanical maintenance required to keep an auto functioning. With a revolver, she does not have to.

In short, the modern S&W and Ruger double-action revolver will seldom if ever break, nor need routine parts changing (springs, magazines, etc), even with extensive shooting making it a better choice for a woman who just wants a reliable carry gun without having to become skilled at gun maintenance.

Not an "argument", a discussion. I am not so much interested in opinions than logical arguments (statements)...I may even learn something.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

dahermit said:


> I must be a little slow...please explain just how an ejection rod can get bent during self-defense use. I just cannot envision that. Open the cylinder and throw it on the pavement? Slapping the perp in the head with it?
> Good thing that almost all S&W revolvers have come out of the box with no need for an action job. They are intended to be used by the makers without such.
> If a carry gun got soaked? Open it and clean it...when you get home, no big deal. If the person does not wish to do that, they can take it to their gunsmith, still no big deal. If it "got soaked", it would still function until they did. No need for any other revolver than a S&W. Other than sitting naked (except for a gun),in the rain, under what circumstances does a person and their gun become soaked? It is getting hard to visualize the conditions you seem to think are common or at least, likely.
> Yes, it happens with revolvers that have had extended use over years. However, not much different from extractors loosing their tension, magazine lips cracking, weak firing pin springs, extractors clocking, etc...all of which I have seen in Colt 1911's with minor usage.
> ...


Everything you said about semi-autos requires extensive shooting, which most civilians will never achieve. I know more ladies who carry that carry a semi-auto over a revolver, and my wife doesn't maintain her weapon (although she can). I do. That said, cleaning and maintaining a pistol is not that intensive, but here's the thing. It doesn't matter! Different strokes for different folks, so there really isn't a point to be made here. Both revolvers and pistols work well for the intended use. One is really no more reliable than the other on the whole. When maintained properly both will exceed the life of the owner. Both will be more reliable than the owner. Both will be more accurate than the owner. Both will kill you dead. Anything else?

The underlying issue is telling a woman she NEEDS a revolver b/c she CAN'T handle a semi-auto pistol. While this will be true for some, it certainly is NOT true for all or even most. Of those women who WANT to become gun competent, she is more than able to do so and use a SA pistol as well as any man. It isn't an issue of ability but choice. Anyone who wants to can handle a SA pistol, with the exception of those who are older and don't have the hand strength. That generation does tend to lean more to a revolver, but not really b/c they "can't" handle the pistol. It's more to the fact that it is relative to their generation. Sure there are exceptions, but on the whole, I've seen this to be the case, which tends to hold true for men and women unless they have been trained to use a pistol. Again, at the end of the day, both are reliable weapons of choice. Choice being the key word.


----------



## dahermit (Oct 30, 2014)

GCBHM said:


> Everything you said about semi-autos requires extensive shooting, which most civilians will never achieve. I know more ladies who carry that carry a semi-auto over a revolver, and my wife doesn't maintain her weapon (although she can). I do. That said, cleaning and maintaining a pistol is not that intensive, but here's the thing. It doesn't matter! Different strokes for different folks, so there really isn't a point to be made here. Both revolvers and pistols work well for the intended use. One is really no more reliable than the other on the whole. When maintained properly both will exceed the life of the owner. Both will be more reliable than the owner. Both will be more accurate than the owner. Both will kill you dead. Anything else?
> 
> The underlying issue is telling a woman she NEEDS a revolver b/c she CAN'T handle a semi-auto pistol. While this will be true for some, it certainly is NOT true for all or even most. Of those women who WANT to become gun competent, she is more than able to do so and use a SA pistol as well as any man. It isn't an issue of ability but choice. Anyone who wants to can handle a SA pistol, with the exception of those who are older and don't have the hand strength. That generation does tend to lean more to a revolver, but not really b/c they "can't" handle the pistol. It's more to the fact that it is relative to their generation. Sure there are exceptions, but on the whole, I've seen this to be the case, which tends to hold true for men and women unless they have been trained to use a pistol. Again, at the end of the day, both are reliable weapons of choice. Choice being the key word.


I cannot find a whole lot of fault with what you have posted. However, the original post enumerated five reasons_* not *_to supply a woman with a revolver, said nothing about being an individual choice. Therefore, discussing the attributes and faults of the two different systems seems to be fair dinkum.
Those arguments(in the scholarly sense) are: 
1." It's more difficult to shoot" (heavy revolver trigger pull). A popular carry auto is the Walther PPK, PPKS, PP. family that have a notoriously heavy trigger pull (13 lbs. double-action as reported by a dealer on GunBroker). So, all autos are not equal as are revolvers. I have a Taurus (of all things), M85 snubbie that came with a great double-action trigger...better than a S&W M36 that I had to do a lot of work on, to get it as light as the Taurus.

2. "She is strong enough to rack that slide" How this is a reason to not get a revolver escapes me although I concede _it is a reason to buy and auto_, not to dissuade from a revolver.

3. "When it breaks, it breaks" Questionable reasoning. Revolvers seldom "break", and autos are known for, malfunctioning (yeah, I know about ease of clearing them). Revolvers "break" so seldom, I do not see that as a reason not to buy one. He is grasping at straws here.

4. "The cylinder creates bulk" But, not too much, as I can attest. I carry a S&W 36 in my right-hand pants pocket (in a pocket holster) everywhere I go, and it is virtually undetectable. His argument makes more sense and the frame size increases. Note: I do not pocket-carry any N or X frame revolvers. I wonder if he carries a full-size auto?

5. "Using a semi-auto is less complicated than driving a car." Again has nothing to do with not carrying a revolver...it has to do with carrying an auto. I could say that carrying a revolver is no more complicated than riding a bike...but I won't.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

dahermit said:


> I cannot find a whole lot of fault with what you have posted. However, the original post enumerated five reasons_* not *_to supply a woman with a revolver, said nothing about being an individual choice. Therefore, discussing the attributes and faults of the two different systems seems to be fair dinkum.
> Those arguments(in the scholarly sense) are:
> 1." It's more difficult to shoot" (heavy revolver trigger pull). A popular carry auto is the Walther PPK, PPKS, PP. family that have a notoriously heavy trigger pull (13 lbs. double-action as reported by a dealer on GunBroker). So, all autos are not equal as are revolvers. I have a Taurus (of all things), M85 snubbie that came with a great double-action trigger...better than a S&W M36 that I had to do a lot of work on, to get it as light as the Taurus.
> 
> ...


I agree, but the topic is really rather sexist altogether, don't you think? Don't get me wrong. I'm not one of these feminist promoters, but I'm no he-man woman hater either. Most people today find revolvers to be antiquated relics, and there is some truth to that; however, they still serve a very real and useful purpose in the hands of a trained marksman and the novice alike. I love the S&W Model 10 and 15. They are probably the best revolvers ever made, IMHO, and the S&W model 65 is a workhorse as well. Of course the 28 and 686 are classics as well, but a little large for my personal tastes.

I have an old Colt .38 Det. Special which is worn out, but I wouldn't trade it for anything. I have plans to reacquire the 65, 10 and 15 and maybe one of the new M&Ps as well, but I doubt that I would carry a revolver for EDC. In fact, I know I won't with what I have available to me now. Steve makes a lot of good points. He's well experienced and knows his stuff, but I think you make good points as well. It's all a matter of preference though. Like I said, both are good for the intended purpose.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

As others have implied, it's not an issue or right or wrong, it's just an issue of choice.

My wife is fine with a revolver, and she can shoot semi's just fine. But, when she does shoot a semi, I can see her tense up, as if she's trying to remember what she needs to do, or not need to do.

When she shoots revolvers, she's much more at ease and can concentrate more on shooting, rather than operating a semi-auto.

Some time ago, she was shooting a semi-auto, and the slide came back and hit her on the hand. She was pretty upset about that, even though she was well versed in the proper grip. She* still *brings that up from time to time.

Hell, as much as I've shot an auto, I still got bit at times, usually when LE training though, when being timed was an issue, or stress drills taking place.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)




----------



## borris (Oct 28, 2012)

Do Not Want To Get Involved In Any Piss-en Match ! 1st Thing First ! You All Should Know That A Women Will And Can Make Up There Own Minds Just Give Them The Basic's On Both Revolvers As Well As Semis Teach Them The Same On SAFETY ! And Let Them Make Up There Own Minds !:numbchuck:


----------

