The semi auto handgun has come a long way in the last 50 years or so, with many advancements being quickly accepted as the industry standard. These improvements have included lightweight materials like aluminum alloy or polymer frames, dovetailed front and rear sights, accessory rails, and slide cuts for optics compatibility. So why are most revolvers stuck so far back in the 1900s? I like revolvers, but I also like not carrying a heavy brick, I like something with decent sights, and I really enjoy cartridges that cost less than 30 cents/round without reloading. But most revolvers are here with expensive ammo, fixed sights or flimsy .080 sheet metal rear sight blades, and Taurus of all companies is the most innovative with the TORO revolvers. I don't give a shit about capacity, but that doesn't mean I don't give a shit about everything else. Ruger, Colt, and S&W need to step it up a bit.
>>62873245the same reason the average rifle is stuck in the mid 20th century anon, economies of scale
it's a revolver
>>62873245S&W make a scandium/titanium .357 that weighs less than 12 ounces.
>>62873245because whenever someone tries anything different, the same guys who buy revolvers, say the same thing the do about semiautos>unreliable!!!!>nobody need more than 4 rounds!!!!>cops don't use that!!!!>too much plastic!!!!you might as well be asking why they think the mini14 is the best gun ever made
>>62873245cylinder gap is so archaic, closest thing to a revolver innovation is probably that asian guy who made that ring-mag 3d printed gun
>>62873245Revolvers are already a niche, so most companies aren’t really interested in innovating with them, which would likely scare off the people who like the simple reliability that revolvers are known for. Modernizing a revolver would likely result in poor sales and a massive price tag. If someone could make pic rel for less than an m&p 2.0, someone would buy it. But nobody is interested in spending 3k on this.
>>62873322>ring-mag 3d printed gun?
>>62873245I dont see what revolvers would need to "evolve"I mean having them be more optics ready is nice or being more compatible with common/cheaper ammo would be nice for sure.But at the end of the day, I like revolvers for filling the niche of being simpler than semi autos and being able to fire significantly more power cartdriges with more reliability than Semi autos
>>62873265I love the 340pd but making a revolver super light is really just an incremental upgrade. I've never noticed my model 36 (carbon steel) in my waistband even compared to my 442 (aluminum frame), both are so light it hardly matters. Part of that is because they only carry five rounds.The Kimber K6S has dovetailed sights, basically the only snubby that does, but really sights don't matter. You don't shoot a snubby for fun, you put the minimum amount of rounds through it to become competent and carry it. All larger revolvers have better sights. Have you even seriously looked at K/L frames at all?
>>62873265S&W only builds scandium revolvers in the extremes for some retarded reason. I know they have the 340PD .357, the 329PD .44, and the TRR8 N Frame .357, which either suck ass to shoot, gigantic, or both. The closest thing I know to S&W making an average revolver with scandium was the Nightguard series which was discontinued about 10 years ago. The compact scandium .38/357 was discontinued a decade ago but they still sell a god damned 26-ounce .44 magnum with a 4" barrel. >>62873351I was surprised to find out that Charter Arms already makes that revolver for about $450. Another case of a smaller company pushing innovation, with a 9mm revolver that doesn't require moon clips, but the biggest industry leaders can't give us a more refined version in the $700-1000 range. And I'm not saying I wouldn't buy the 9mm Pitbull because it's Charter Arms, but because I've never seen one in real life.
>>62873245All i ask for is usable sights on a j frame
>>62873245>polymer frameExists. Taurus Judge Public Defender>alloy framePlenty of those.>dovetailed sightsrevolvers have all sorts of sight options, from non-adjustable gutters to high end fine precision target sights. night sights are a thing too.>But most revolvers are here with expensive ammo9mm revolvers are a thing. .38 isn't very expensive.>stuck so far back in the 1900smost guns were perfected then, honestly. most modern wonder 9's are John Browning's old tilting barrel design with modern materials.
>>62873382>with a 9mm revolver that doesn't require moon clipsNothing new about that, Manurhin MR73's did that back in the 1970s. They used to come with 9mm cylinders that didn't require clips until France decided to outlaw "military calibers".
>>62873431I don't believe I've ever read a post that was any good which was broken down into several quoted parts like that. Of course I know that all of those features exist on revolvers, but the clear complaint is that they don't all exist on the same gun at the same time like is standard for a new semi auto.
>>62873387How about the fancy .32 h&r what is it called the UCR? Or something like that. Don't remember the model number.
>>62873252the average rifle is a ca. 2003 m4 carbine. not 20th century by any means.
>>62873808I am autistic so i want a .327 mag so i can handload higher pressure than .32 h&r but lower than typical .327 for effective but not miserable snub nose defense ammo
>>62873245Human beings aren't any tougher than they were in 1900. if anything they're easier to kill due to languorousness and thinner clothes. so if a .32 Colt New Police worked in 1900 it'll work now
>>62873869I'm tougher than anyone in 1900. Pit me against anyone born in 1900 and I'll wipe the floor with them.
>>62873245>These improvements have included lightweight materials like aluminum alloy or polymer framesHas existed for decades (aluminum j frames, scandium alloy frames, Ruger LCR)>dovetailed front and rear sightsPinned front sights and replaceable rear sights do the same thing, also has existed for decades>accessory railsExist on some guns like the TRR8>and slide cuts for optics compatibilityExist on some guns like the TRR8, also some rear sight assemblies can be replaced with a red dot mount>So why are most revolvers stuck so far back in the 1900s?Because that's what people who buy revolvers want. On the whole, revolver buyers do not want accessory rails or optic cuts. Revolvers that offer those features are niche within the market because people don't buy them.>I like revolversI don't believe you. Post 3 (three) timestamped revolvers that you own>but I also like not carrying a heavy brickA 4 inch barrel revolver is nothing, lift some weights>I like something with decent sightsReplaceable sights means you can have a 3 dot if you want. Stock revolvers sights are usually fine though>and I really enjoy cartridges that cost less than 30 cents/round without reloading. But most revolvers are here with expensive ammoThen buy a 9mm revolver, there's plenty of options>fixed sights or flimsy .080 sheet metal rear sight bladesAgain, user replaceable, but also a non-issue>and Taurus of all companies is the most innovative with the TORO revolversYeah, Taurus has made pretty good revolvers for a while>Ruger, Colt, and S&W need to step it up a bitAll 3 of these companies have addressed your issues in one way or another.
>>62875420>>62873459
>>62873847it's still just a slight update of a 1950s-60s design
>>62875444Post your timestamped revolvers.
What actually needs some attention is revolver holsters. Basically nobody makes kydex IWB holsters for anything larger than a j frame or LCR. Where the hell are my K frame appendix holsters?
>>62873459>they don't all exist on the same gun at the same timeThe TRR8 or M&P R8 are basically what you're asking for.They have a light alloy frame, accessory rails, easily replaceable/adjustable sights, and .38 is right around 30 cents a round.
>>62875484>kydexMake it yourself. If you need handholding because your father never taught you basic tool use youtube has you covered.
>>62873245what optic mount is this
>>62875541I'd rather pay someone to make me a good product than make a bunch of bad kydex holsters before I get the hang of it.
>>62875547Assuming you're a functional adult your first one will probably be great. Kydex is extremely easy to work with, it's as easy as kiddy crafts. No special tools required.
>>62875555Yeah, you're right. Still though, there's plenty of people out there like me who would like better holster options for revolvers and are too lazy to make them themselves.
>>62875542It's this onehttps://www.midwayusa.com/product/1008936677?pid=124151It's currently the lowest S&W optic mount you can buy I believe. I was previously looking at the DL Sports mounts, but those look taller and they're over $100. You will have to file off the rear mounting studs on that J Point mount to get it to accept a Holosun K footprint optic. >>62876179I can get that. I've made a few kydex revolver holsters, and it really is quite easy. Even if you fuck up the molding process, you can toss it back in the oven, it goes back to a flat sheet, and you can try again. It's quite idiot proof, and while your end result might not look perfect like the ones you can buy, it will function just the same.
>>62873382I keep asking about the charter in revolver threads but no one responds because I suspect no one here has one. I'm about to fork over the 500 bucks and be a guinea pig with their 45 version.
>>62877780I got a .44 Bulldog, one of the old ones. It's a bit rough, DA pull isn't terrible, SA pull is super light since it's a revolver. Hogue makes nice rubber grips for them from the tamer series. barely shot it
We still need a modern suppressed revolver
>>62877780the charter pitbull 9mm doesnt need moon clips but the loading and ejection of the cylinder was a bit sticky and slow. The rounds dont drop in like a rimmed cartridge. After firing the empties tended to be a bit stuck in the cylinder.
>>62877990That's caused by rough chambers.
>>62877990I've heard this and I'm okay with it, I imagine I could just polish the chambers a little if it really bugs me? I'm just looking for a pocket gun/back up to my 1911. more worried about reliability after a high round count.
>>62878100800 grit Flex hone would take care of it, but so would using a healthy amount of flitz, felt tips, and a dremel.
>>62878123How do I avoid taking off too much?
>>62878166Don't sit there for 15 minutes doing a single chamber.2 minutes is plenty per chamber. Hardened steel is actually pretty difficult to change the dimensions of more than .001" with fine grit polish/flex hone.
>>62874074Im glad you believe in yourself anon
>>62877969This. I'd love for a Nagant type that's not a complete piece of shit.
Revolvers can't win against automatics so they've developed their own niches. No one is going to buy some tacticool revolver like you're asking for, as evidenced by the TRR8.
>>62873847... based on 20th century designs and technology
you can't improve perfection
>>62874074>beating up a 124 year old manDamn son
>>62881116Could be a woman too, I don't dicriminate. And you can have all of them come at me all at once and I'll still win.1900's kids not so tough now huh?
>>62880507The TRR8 is fucking massive and is only advertised with picatinny rail mounted optics, not 2024 micro pistol red dot sights. I'm hoping that as the years go by and high quality videos of self defense shootings continue to show no single Average Joe failing to defend himself with only 5 rounds, people will get wiser and stop falling for the industry's desire to push capacity worship upon buyers. Once you realize that capacity is a meme for average buyers, revolvers become a great option for everyone.
>>62882047Then they'll buy single stack 9mms and .380s again. No one's going to rush to buy a revolver to carry unless they want the increased power that the .357 Magnum offers.
>>62873245The semi-auto handgun is the continuation of the revolver, both in role and in market, Anon. When revolvers were the norm, we were looking for capacity, reliability and stopping power in a package small enough to fit in a holster or a jacket. Now semi-autos are the norm and we're looking for capacity, reliability and stopping power in a package small enough to fit in a holster or a jacket.Revolvers haven't innovated because its an older technology that's already been supplanted by newer technology that serves the same role and fills the same market. When somebody comes up with a revolver that holds 15 rounds without making it any larger, you'll see revolvers bearing that innovation.
>>62882047>Once you realize that capacity is a meme for average buyers, revolvers become a great option for everyone.Capacity isn't a problem. I agree. But even if you put a micro dot on a j frame sized revolver, I can carry my Hellcat with that same dot, 7 more rounds, in a more powerful cartridge, for the same size profile and comparable weight. An LCR is 4oz less with a weaker .38+P, or the same weight as a Hellcat in .357. From that short of a barrel .357 isn't outperforming hot 9mm.You can argue the profile of revolvers is better for pocket carry (personally a Hellcat is damn big for pocket carry), but they are also larger in dimensions. I like revolvers. I think they are perfectly adequate for SD scenarios. But they will always give up performance, at least theoretically, which is going to be hard for people to gravitate towards.
>>62883026>Revolvers haven't innovated because its an older technology that's already been supplanted by newer technology that serves the same role and fills the same market.Exactly. It's no different than flintlock to percussion cap or blackpowder to smokeless, just less noticeable. We've had semi auto pistols for 131 years. We've had semi auto pocket guns for 120. They constantly get tweaked an innovated because they are the current best option. It's small incremental improvement, but it happens.
Revolver innovations throughout the 20th century came from novel manufacturing techniques, putting larger, high pressure cartridges in them, and solving problems with better steels.They are infinitely better equipped for hunting and long range sports than the next semi-auto, don't even pretend otherwise.
the revolver user demographic is split between old people and autistic people. its very hard to make a new product that caters to both.
>>62873245>lightweight polymer or alloys>big magnum cartridges sounds like a pleasant shooting experience
>>62884324/thread. I'm on the autist side of things and agree.
>>62873356this, could only find ant pics on google
>>62873245As others have answered you, you might not care about the capacity, but most people do. Perhaps the best way to innovate a revolver would be to make some 25 or 30 caliber thin magnum cartridge using the right metallurgy and size for the cylinder so that someone can carry around 10 rounds in that, I know you can carry 8 rounds of 9mm in modern revolvers but those are HUGE cylinders/frames. Have it be a long bullet (instead of thick) so that it has a high sectional density/good penetration (since it will at least be too thin for adequate and expansion). Have it come optics ready, try to make it Model 19 sized or smaller, and have an accessory rail. The company would also have to sell it's own speed clips or convince HKS to make some on launch. I also don't care too much about the capacity anon. Personally I'd be okay with six rounds for most CCW applications. But it's kinda hard for the normie to choose six rounds of obscure/expensive calibers when they can get hellcats and p365s that are smaller than a J frame but carry 10 rounds of cheap and easily available 9mm. Not to mention those guns would be cheaper than the niche revolvers you want, due to the market, further preventing companies from investing on an expensive flop.I love revolvers, they're more fun to shoot than semi-autos and I carry a J-frame when my Glock is too big to conceal in the hottest summer months. But fact of the matter is every year they become more "outdated" in the minds of the average consumer because the popular thing is putting more rounds inside smaller packages. If I wanted to buy a revolver today it would be a fuckyuge one in a big caliber for funsies, hunting, long range shooting, etc. Or a tiny one... as a lightweight streamlined gun to stick into a nigs belly. Anything in between is generally better gone by a pistol.
>>62884278Not to mention most people are not going to want to learn the DA trigger pull. Even in the semi-auto pistol world, you have 2/3rds complaining about being unable to shoot DA/SAs like Berettas, USPs and CZs due to the initial long heavy trigger pull. Revolver guy's who's every trigger pull is a long heavy trigger pull are even rarer. The market is leaning towards simplicity more and more. Which is why lightweight polymer pistols with zero external controls with a hair trigger are the norm. Not that I agree with that, especially for CCW, but since most gun owners don't really carry, they just take their gun to the range, they don't know how good a DA/SA or hammer fired gun with a heavier trigger feels when pointed at your junk in comparison to flimsy feeling polymer pistol with a striker/trigger that is less than a millimeter of movement and 3lbs of force from turning you into a tranny
>>62873245Revolvers are known for being the way they are and that won't change. I personally don't see by any means what would need to be changed about them. Regular pistols, sure, but revolvers? No.
>>62884639some sort of tech to reduce or eliminate cylinder gap would be great. you lose like 10% of your velocity from that.
>>62884658Engineering a solution to a problem no one is really bothered by.It's better to just have .002" gap for Single actions and .004" gap for double.
>>62884658It'll never happen because people feel better about being able to put 17 rounds into a firearm instead of 6.
>>62884520327 mag is kinda doing that, but there's not really any options like you want. The GP100 in .327 only holds 7 (it could probably hold 8 though since they can fit 7 .357 mags into the same size cylinder) and there aren't any good barrel length options for CC purposes. There's also .22 magnum, but lmao rimfire
Because they’re already perfect.
>spess revolver goes *pew*
What if revolver that only holds two rounds ? it would be slightly thinner.
>>62885655I got you bro
>>62885889fuck that bulky piece of crap get you a single barrel. no need for such a hefty carry piece
>>62873245modern semi auto pistols suck though, older pistols are way more fun
