I have had problems with both and had excellent results with both. They are made by man therefore some will not work quite right.

I currently carry a M&P40 or Ruger GP100 dependant on mood. I don't feel under gunned with either.

Get either and in a year or so get the other. Sooner if you can afford it.

I also carry either, depending on the mood. I have a Taurus Model 85 and a S&W 642 that I carry regularly. Both have been good revolvers. I don't have any Taurus Semiautos right now, but have owned a PT145 and PT140. They were both reliable pistols. I do carry a revolver more often just because I like them. If you buy the .357, you can also shoot .38 specials which are cheaper and lots more fun to practice with.

I'll take 99.99% reliability and a 10+1 capacity all day, over "100%" reliability and 5 rounds...

Give me my XD9SC, my XD45, or my Keltec P-3AT.

Combined 3000 rounds??? ZERO failures to fire from all three.

Age old story as it's the Indian not the arrows that make the difference. Either way you go is OK as long as you practice and make yourself good with your choice. Good luck.

I carry a Ruger SP101 in 357 mag and like the revolver. I think most decent autos have solved the reliability issues of yesteryear and are close to a good revolver in reliability. I really don't venture places that I feel I need the latest 17 round mag pistol but it doesn't hurt to have it. To me it's like the old issue do you prefer a Chevy or a Ford pickup truck. I would see if you could try each that you are looking at and judge for yourself which you shoot better.

All handguns are a compromise.

Choosing a CCW is a combination of where your skills are, reliability of equipment, concealability and comfort.

If you want the edge in SD situations, hang out with buddies who carry as well.

Although there are many Taurus autos that run just fine, overall the Millenium line could not be considered a highly reliable line as compared to Glock or Sig or similar. Between the two handguns you mention, I would pick the revolver all the way, as I would not want to bet my life on a Millenium.

Then again, when one considers that a new Taurus will most likely run over $300, I would just save a bit more and get either a new Ruger, or a used Glock or Sig.....

PhilR.

Revolvers take less training in a failure to fire situation than an autoloader does.

I would pick a simiauto. You just need to learn how to clear malfunctions quickly. It takes a lot for these guns to have a major malfunction that cant be fix very quickly in the field. If you carry good ammo, that should help cut down on the malfunctions.

I've used both over the years. Right now it's a PT140. It's proven itself quite well after my range torture tests and had earned it's spot in the rotation.

Shot placement is the most important factor, period. And this depends on training and practice. So if you plan to put in a significant amount of practice (and you should) and money is an issue, tend toward a reliable 9MM. While a .357 is cheaper to shoot with .38's instead of the magnum loads, it is still twice a expensive to shoot as the 9MM.

Otherwise it comes down to feel and preference. Try both and go with tyhe one you shoot better.

Originally Posted by Wyatt

Shot placement is the most important factor, period. And this depends on training and practice. So if you plan to put in a significant amount of practice (and you should) and money is an issue, tend toward a reliable 9MM. While a .357 is cheaper to shoot with .38's instead of the magnum loads, it is still twice a expensive to shoot as the 9MM.

Otherwise it comes down to feel and preference. Try both and go with tyhe one you shoot better.

Not if you load your own.

Originally Posted by Bigjoedo

Hello,

I just finished reading "The Concealed Handgun Manual" by Chris Bird. Now I'm confused about the best gun for CCW. He states revolvers are more reliable than semi- automatic pistols.

I'm trying to decide between a Taurus .357 revolver or Millennium Pro 9mm. This will be for CC only and I will do target practice at a local range to improve my skills and accuracy. I realize no gun is perfect, but want a reliable gun when I need to use a gun. Taurus has guns that fall within my limited price range. Any thoughts? Thanks for the help.

Joe

There are more concerns than reliability, though of course that's a big one.

* Ammo Capacity - your average compact 9mm auto will carry about twice as many rounds as a .38 or .357 revolver. Whether this really matters however depends on the auto you are considering; If you're comparing a .357 revolver to a .45ACP semi (a decent comparison in terms of punch), you're only looking at two extra rounds. Comparing a .38/.357 to a 9mm however, the auto generally comes out ahead.

* Concealability - In general, autos are more concealable than revolvers because of the bulk of the cylinder. However, it again depends on the gun. A G26 is heavier than your average Rossi or S&W .38 snubby (they're very roughly the same dimensions), so you can throw the 628 in a pocket while the Glock will need slightly more attention to how that pocket sags. A Taurus Judge, however, is going to be more difficult to hide than a Kimber .45 (even full-size).

* Comfort - Usually, the difference between a full-size pistol and a compact from the same company is barrel length. The grip is largely unchanged. It's generally not until you get to sub-compacts like the G26 and XD9SC that the grip is affected to the point where controlling the weapons becomes more difficult. By contrast, small revolvers very quickly get small handles, the logic being that if you're not firing a big comfortable hunting revolver, you're firing a BUG. Also, revolvers generally have a higher bore axis; the bullet to be fired is further from your highest point of control on the grip. That increases muzzle climb and the pounding of the grip into the web of your hand (uncomfortable).

* Reliability - Yes, it's still important. There's something to be said about "six for sure". A revolver will simply never fail to feed, eject or cycle. A failure to fire is fixed with a subsequent pull of the trigger. The only thing that stops it dead is a squib. Autos simply can't compete; the fact that the bullet is moved around within the gun means that while stripping, lifting and chambering each round, something can go wrong. However, the Browning action's been around for almost a century, and even given that the possibility of a malfunction exists, the development of autoloaders has made that possibility EXTREMELY low on most guns. Gun manufacturing companies live and die by their reliability just like their users. If the gun-owning population as a whole does not feel they can trust gun X, the manufacturer of gun X is in trouble and must fix the design VERY quickly or go out of business.

It really all comes down to the gun you are most comfortable with on all levels. You must find a gun that carries comfortably, fires comfortably, and to which you are comfortable trusting your life and those of your loved ones in any situation. If that gun is a Rossi .38, that's fine. If it's an M&P 9mm Compact, great. If it's a Colt Python, more power to ya. If it's a Kimber Para Carry .45, you go with it. NO ONE can tell you that YOUR GUN doesn't meet YOUR NEEDS better than YOU.

Just get one (or more) of each and decide for yourself!!! Problem solved.

Fun thread about this here: Autoloaders versus revolvers.

* Reliability - Yes, it's still important. There's something to be said about "six for sure". A revolver will simply never fail to feed, eject or cycle. A failure to fire is fixed with a subsequent pull of the trigger. The only thing that stops it dead is a squib. Autos simply can't compete; the fact that the bullet is moved around within the gun means that while stripping, lifting and chambering each round, something can go wrong.

I have seen several types of jams and malfunctions with revolvers:

1. Case stuck under the extractor star on a too-hasty speed reload.
2. Bullets backing out of cases under heavy recoil and preventing the cylinder from turning.
3. Primer-only rounds causing a bullet to get stuck in the barrel (and a revolver doesn't let you know when this happens, unlike an auto).
4. Broken main/hammer spring that rendered the revolver totally inoperative.
5. Cylinder release latches fall off.
6. Ejector rods come unscrewed and prevent the cylinder from opening/closing.
7. Went "out of time," giving off-center hits and unreliable ignition.

Some of these have happened to my revolvers, others happened to different shooters in matches or on the range when I was present.

My Glocks are easily as reliable as any revolver I've owned.

All guns are unreliable except Glock! Right Mike?

The true question to ask yourself is cop versus cowboy. A cop carries an autoloader, and a cowboy carries a revolver. You pick.





Just kidding. I'm not big into revolvers unless they're large enough to tame recoil, hold onto during recoil, and can be openly carried. This translates into protection against large animals in the woods, not humans in populated areas. But that's just my opinion.

Originally Posted by Charlie

All guns are unreliable except Glock! Right Mike?

Nope. I only mentioned Glock because they are the guns I carry and shoot the most, and the ones I can best compare to other guns I've owned.

I was fully satisfied with the Beretta 92 I carried in Afghanistan, in terms of reliability. SIGs and HKs have also been put through enough wringers to know they are superbly reliable. The Springfield XD has shown itself to be very reliable thus far. I owned a Kahr K9 that was 100% reliable, and my KelTec P3AT and P32 have both been simply excellent.

While I am something of a Glock partisan for ergonomic reasons, I recognize that there are many reliable modern autos out there...to the point where I consider the revolver's "edge" in reliability to largely be a myth. (Unless your name is Bill King...)

I think in days past, when the autos available were old designs like the 1911 and Browning P35, there was some truth to the claim of greater revolver reliability. But I have seen enough revolvers choke, and enough reliable modern autos, that I don't think it's even a consideration with the newer auto designs.

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

While I am something of a Glock partisan for ergonomic reasons, I recognize that there are many reliable modern autos out there...to the point where I consider the revolver's "edge" in reliability to largely be a myth. (Unless your name is Bill King...)

This is true, but I can clear a malfunction REALLY FAST!!

The best gun to have in a gunfight is the one you have with you when it is needed. By buying a gun that is comfortable to carry, easy for you to conceal and one you like to shoot you will increase the chance that you will have it with you when you need it.
Like many things in life, people tend to overthink this problem.

It is true that Bill can recognize and clear malfunctions faster than anyone I know. Experience breeds skill.