The only niches where a revolver is as good or better than an auto are in the extremes, like microcarry and hunting rigs.
When you get down to micro carry guns, most of the problems with revolvers become moot. The recoil of a .38 Special J frame (alloy or all steel) is similar to the felt recoil by slim 9mm or .380 pocket pistols, and with proper loads, the effectiveness of the .38 is roughly on par. .357s are also an option, but at the cost of the worst possible recoil. Capacity is also nerfed in the autos making the difference all but 2 rounds in most cases. The weight difference between snubs and micro autos of equal size and material is negligible at best. The difference in the quality of sights (those lovely, shitty J frame trench sights) is half the time not there (like with the LCP/LC9), and half the time immaterial, as these guns are not designed for true handgun combat range. The expectation for them to perform at that range is unrealistic, and if they can, it should be considered a luxury (and the individual who can make those shots, a damn good shooter). The revolver will also have a far better chance of being dead nuts reliable over the auto, as smaller guns operate at higher pressures with tighter springs, upping the chance that they will be more finicky. I suppose autos may have lighter triggers, but even with the weight, a smooth double action revolver trigger is far better suited for affirmative shooting, as the break point and reset are easy to determine. And if you know a gunsmith in your area, he's not worth his salt if he can't slick up a revolver trigger, something that every gunsmith ever has know how to do for decades. The only real advantage that autos have over revolvers are the reloads, as button release mags will always be faster than speedloaders (or those silly speed strips people insist on carrying). The philosophy behind the pocket gun, though is having the bare minimum gun you can, and so foregoing reloadability is just part of the creed. Reloading tiny single stack mags is a blunder compared to using full size double stack mags. It's a gray area within a gray area really. The point is, when you get down to this small size, revolvers are highly viable, if not preferred.
As for hunting, there are only a few options in this arena for autos (like the Desert Eagle). The bigger cartridges produce more pressure, which revolvers are able to take (if built right), while autos can't. This is not only due to the chamber pressures and internal issues, but the cycling as well. You need a strong locking mechanism and excellent recoil springs to handle those kinds of pressures, which is why the Desert Eagle has a rotating bolt and dual recoil springs. You're always going to get more energy out of the revolver too, as no energy is being tapped off for cycling. An auto will be easier to reload, and take many more rounds, but again, in the hunting niche, these are not primary concerns. If you need a fast reload, it's because you're a crappy shot and you can't take your prey down with what you have. Work on that before upping your load to 8 instead of 5, or use a rifle. And of course, a good revolver trigger beats any auto trigger, in single or double action modes.
To get back to the original question, though, revolvers are only adequate or superior in niches where the advantages of autos (capacity, sights, trigger and reload ease) are not a factor, and in the micro and hunting niches, these factors are a non issue, or at the very least, not as pertinent as other factors or philosophical considerations.
|