Revolver Handi-Cap vs. SemiAuto

[ede]

I know this is difficult to answer but was wondering what would the time disadvantage be, if any using a revolver compared to semiauto not considering reloads. Reason I ask is I finished 2nd yesterday in a Steel match shooting a revolver in rimfire iron sights behind a shooter using a SA and finished in front of all the others shooting bottom feeders.

[pskys2]

A light single action will always have an advantage on Splits over a Revo. We're talking say .16 with a 1911 and .20 with a Revo. But on Transitions, target to target, it's a wash, with proper training and practice neither have a significant advantage. That's why on Steel, your only limitation is maximum rounds you have available. In any course that has more than 1 shot per target you can start losing ground. But the good news is in the real world a committed, experienced Revo will hold his own against like skilled Semi's in the actual shooting. With the difference being in the reloads, both the number and difficulty of, and stage breakdown.

[56hawk]

It's not as much as you would think. I recently used this website (http://www.classifiercalc.com/) to figure out what times would make GM in the different divisions for CM99-23. It's three targets at 21 feet. You could look up other six round classifiers to get a decent idea.

2.18 Open

2.36 Limited

2.49 Production

2.62 Revolver

[wheelie]

A light single action will always have an advantage on Splits over a Revo. We're talking say .16 with a 1911 and .20 with a Revo. But on Transitions, target to target, it's a wash, with proper training and practice neither have a significant advantage. That's why on Steel, your only limitation is maximum rounds you have available. In any course that has more than 1 shot per target you can start losing ground. But the good news is in the real world a committed, experienced Revo will hold his own against like skilled Semi's in the actual shooting. With the difference being in the reloads, both the number and difficulty of, and stage breakdown.

^^^ This ^^^^

[pskys2]

It's not as much as you would think. I recently used this website (http://www.classifiercalc.com/) to figure out what times would make GM in the different divisions for CM99-23. It's three targets at 21 feet. You could look up other six round classifiers to get a decent idea.

2.18 Open

2.36 Limited

2.49 Production

2.62 Revolver

You have to be careful with the classifiers of old. One series (03?) actually had high hit factors figured too low and made them too easy and the ones before 03, like the 99 series, didn't use an actual Revolver HF but just figured 20%? of Limited. Which would skew the results and made it more difficult.

[hopalong]

In steel challenge, there is no difference. It is all the skill of the shooter, and not missing !!!!!!

In USPSA on the other hand.................

Hop

[MrBorland]

Based on my experience as the only revo shooter in a big rimfire steel match, I was at an advantage, as I'm the only one who didn't have to clear jams while the timer ran. After day 1 (handgun), I was top dog, IIRC (unfortunately, the rifle portion - with a 10/22 - didn't go as well). Without the jams and schadenfreude, it would've been a wash, I believe.

Tom

[bikerburgess]

with no reloads and with shooters of equal proficiency I would say on most targets there is no disadvantage to the revolver, the only ones that I think you loose time on are the close hoser's where the single action auto can run slightly faster splits. for steel challenge type shooting with 1 shot per I think it is a wash as you can run the trigger during the transition. look at the results from the 2012 steel challenge, Jerry is 6th over all right in there with the autos

Mike

[ede]

Thanks for the replies, very insightful. Guess I didn't really do as well as I thought placing in front off at the auto shooters, except one. Funny several of them said they'd never try it with a wheelie. My iron and optic scores were within 3 seconds of each other so I'm happy with that and for my 2nd palce finish even if it was just a handful of shooters.

[Carmoney]

Don't kid yourselves, boys. It's a disadvantage. It's harder having to roll through a DA trigger for every shot.

I enjoy shooting my 8-shot revolver at steel matches, and I can generally beat most of the shooters in the other divisions. But with a well-tuned, crisp-triggered, reciprocating and recoil-absorbing auto-pistol, I can beat my own revolver scores almost every time.

[Matt Griffin]

Why does it matter? Do NASCAR drivers talk about how their cars aren't competitive with F1 cars on F1 tracks? I'm still not seeing, across the multiple threads, any reason why any of this matters. If you like revolvers, shoot a revolver against other revolvers. If you, for some reason, just can't cope with a revolver in USPSA, don't shoot a revolver in USPSA. I don't like shooting 1911s in any action sports, they are left-hand unfriendly, I hate the grip angle, they're expensive and hard to maintain. Guess what I do about that?

I don't shoot 1911s.

If people shot their revolvers as much as they yapped about shooting revolvers (or reasons why they don't) every match would be Memphis. There is NO WAY and NO RULE that is going to bring out revolver shooters in numbers that are significant compared to semiauto shooters, other than at dedicated matches. Six or eight, it's always going to be a heavier, more expensive, harder to shoot, harder to reload gun. If you somehow manage to triple participation, you would have 21 shooters at the best-attended match so far this year, for a salty 5% of the total shooters.

I think the real answer is this: If you want more revolver shooters, hold more revolver-only matches. Have a prize table, and have all three divisions or five divisions recognized, 8-shot, 6-shot, Open-8, Open-6, Speedloader. Kill one division at the end of the year based on participation and let whoever gets left out suck it up.

[Carmoney]

I think the real answer is this: If you want more revolver shooters, hold more revolver-only matches. Have a prize table, and have all three divisions or five divisions recognized, 8-shot, 6-shot, Open-8, Open-6, Speedloader. Kill one division at the end of the year based on participation and let whoever gets left out suck it up.

That's a great idea......we could give these special matches a name.....hey I know, we could call it the "International Confederation of Revolver Enthusiasts"!

Unless that name has already been taken by another organization who is trying to do exactly what you have described.

Edited March 12, 2013 by Carmoney

[pskys2]

Matt this thread was just a technical question about Revo vs SA, it could also pretty much be talking of DA Semi Auto or Safe Actions. The original question could also be asked in deference to the fact that most of those who do shoot Revo at a local match have no competition and some newer competitors are curious as to how they may fare against the other more popular platforms heads up. And my intent was to share my experiences about the perceived differences.

But I do agree with you about more platform specific prize matches in USPSA, whether it be Revo, SS or any other. As for including non-USPSA legal Revo's in it, well that's another thread, of course that one is getting a bit loooooooong.

I love shooting my 625 in USPSA, but I also love my 1911 or 2011. Sorry Glock Jockeys, I like my 34 but it just doesn't call to me like my fav's. And at local matches I tend to shoot what I'm prepping with for a big match, or what will have the most competition locally, of my fav's. Here I go rambling now.....

Edited March 12, 2013 by pskys2

[Matt Griffin]

I think the real answer is this: If you want more revolver shooters, hold more revolver-only matches. Have a prize table, and have all three divisions or five divisions recognized, 8-shot, 6-shot, Open-8, Open-6, Speedloader. Kill one division at the end of the year based on participation and let whoever gets left out suck it up.

That's a great idea......we could give these special matches a name.....hey I know, we could call it the "International Confederation of Revolver Enthusiasts"!

Unless that name has already been taken by another organization who is trying to do exactly what you have described.

Not really, it's entirely different scoring and different stage design. If you want revolver participation in a USPSA match, the only way yet demonstrated is to have a standalone match. Also, apparently, ICORE doesn't satisfy the 8-shot diehard crowd who are asking that USPSA be altered to give them a berth. I find the logic suspect, since at best you might double attendance, which would still be dismal, again demonstrably, at matches.

[Bones]

It's all perspective Matt.

I just left the FL State IDPA Championships and 27 revolver shooters managed to trick over 200 semi-auto competitors into subsidizing the entire match for them. What a scam, eh?

IDPA stage design is about as revolver-neutral as it gets outside of Bianch Cup and the winning SSR and ESR scopre(s) were about 80% of their corresponding (Classification/Div) semi-auto scores.

Don't kid yourself. Revolver shooters lose a little until they have to reload. Then they lose a lot.

Maybe all those 627 owners are just looking for somewhere else to ply thier wears because there aren't enough ICORE events in thier area? Let's face it, 625s and 627s are a subset of an already small population - people willing to compete side by side with semi-automatics in a game the requires reloads.

The best bet is probably to make it easier for more dedicated revolver shooters to be reasonably competitive with each other. USPSA admin and rule structures are far superior to just about all others. If USPSA cannot accomodate them, no one can.

Craig

[GOF]

Hey Bones, great to see you at FL IDPA. After watching you shoot stage 10 I told the SO "I'm throwing this brief case right at you"

But, you're dead on right. The split time for a revo to deliver an accurate hit is slightly longer than a semi-auto, and when a revo shooter has to make an extra reload, the time lost is immense. In addition, a revo shooter has to 'play it safe' on every stage, to avoid that extra reload, and they can't afford a miss.

The FL State match was about as revolver neutral as you can get, but no revo could keep up with autos... the 'risk/reward' was too great. I can see why you (SSR DM) switched to CDP. I'm going back to bottom feeders also. I'm tired of every stage being Limited (for me) and look forward to the option of tossing a few extra rounds and not having to 'play it safe' on every stage.

I'm ready to do some 'spraying & praying'.

Chris

[Matt Griffin]

It's all perspective Matt.

I just left the FL State IDPA Championships and 27 revolver shooters managed to trick over 200 semi-auto competitors into subsidizing the entire match for them. What a scam, eh?

IDPA stage design is about as revolver-neutral as it gets outside of Bianch Cup and the winning SSR and ESR scopre(s) were about 80% of their corresponding (Classification/Div) semi-auto scores.

Don't kid yourself. Revolver shooters lose a little until they have to reload. Then they lose a lot.

Maybe all those 627 owners are just looking for somewhere else to ply thier wears because there aren't enough ICORE events in thier area? Let's face it, 625s and 627s are a subset of an already small population - people willing to compete side by side with semi-automatics in a game the requires reloads.

The best bet is probably to make it easier for more dedicated revolver shooters to be reasonably competitive with each other. USPSA admin and rule structures are far superior to just about all others. If USPSA cannot accomodate them, no one can.

Craig

What were the participation numbers for ESR vs. SSR? I'm going to guess that SSR had quite a few more than ESR. Let's compare that to the Florida State USPSA match, conveniently already held this year as well: 7. Seven participants out of 218 entries, or 3.4 percent, vs. 10% for the IDPA match. Triple the participation.

So before I see the breakdown, I'm going to remind everyone that several times the idea was put forth to recognize a speedloader division in USPSA rather than allow 8-shots in order to increase participation. Nobody from the "we have to make changes to increase participation" seems to discuss speedloaders, while there were a number of other folks that expressed interest. I think between IDPA, ICORE, and our own shooters the choice is clear: Forget 8-shots, make minor-6-shots attractive.

Edited March 12, 2013 by Matt Griffin

[Dragon11]

It's all perspective Matt.

I just left the FL State IDPA Championships and 27 revolver shooters managed to trick over 200 semi-auto competitors into subsidizing the entire match for them. What a scam, eh?

IDPA stage design is about as revolver-neutral as it gets outside of Bianch Cup and the winning SSR and ESR scopre(s) were about 80% of their corresponding (Classification/Div) semi-auto scores.

Don't kid yourself. Revolver shooters lose a little until they have to reload. Then they lose a lot.

Maybe all those 627 owners are just looking for somewhere else to ply thier wears because there aren't enough ICORE events in thier area? Let's face it, 625s and 627s are a subset of an already small population - people willing to compete side by side with semi-automatics in a game the requires reloads.

The best bet is probably to make it easier for more dedicated revolver shooters to be reasonably competitive with each other. USPSA admin and rule structures are far superior to just about all others. If USPSA cannot accomodate them, no one can.

Craig

What were the participation numbers for ESR vs. SSR? I'm going to guess that SSR had quite a few more than ESR. Let's compare that to the Florida State USPSA match, conveniently already held this year as well: 7. Seven participants out of 218 entries, or 3.4 percent, vs. 10% for the IDPA match. Triple the participation.

So before I see the breakdown, I'm going to remind everyone that several times the idea was put forth to recognize a speedloader division in USPSA rather than allow 8-shots in order to increase participation. Nobody from the "we have to make changes to increase participation" seems to discuss speedloaders, while there were a number of other folks that expressed interest. I think between IDPA, ICORE, and our own shooters the choice is clear: Forget 8-shots, make minor-6-shots attractive.

In terms of creating participation for the division I agree with that, bringing in 6 shot minor. Others, including myself, have already made this argument. If we want to TRY something to bring in more shooters why not try, again, pulling from the larger pool of people. Its been argued that with the 625's and the like we currently have a one gun division, which, if it changes to bringing in 8 shots, I can't help but feel that the same thing would happen.

But by having more revolver dedicated matches, and offering different divisions within the match like you said, might make this happen, and go a long way in making everyone happier. We're all going to have our opinions, but if we are going to make a change that could dramatically change the division, why not try to make the change to include options that meets the needs and wants of more people.

Edited March 12, 2013 by Dragon11

[Cd662]

At the risk of sounding like the snarky internet guy, don't we already have a thread about this? I think bones is the only one who really adequately answered the OP's question. OP, if the steel match you shot was steel challenge or in that style, it lessens the revolver to automatic pistol gap.

[Dragon11]

Your right. But we like to multi-task when discussing things.

[Racinready300ex]

It's all perspective Matt.

I just left the FL State IDPA Championships and 27 revolver shooters managed to trick over 200 semi-auto competitors into subsidizing the entire match for them. What a scam, eh?

IDPA stage design is about as revolver-neutral as it gets outside of Bianch Cup and the winning SSR and ESR scopre(s) were about 80% of their corresponding (Classification/Div) semi-auto scores.

Don't kid yourself. Revolver shooters lose a little until they have to reload. Then they lose a lot.

Maybe all those 627 owners are just looking for somewhere else to ply thier wears because there aren't enough ICORE events in thier area? Let's face it, 625s and 627s are a subset of an already small population - people willing to compete side by side with semi-automatics in a game the requires reloads.

The best bet is probably to make it easier for more dedicated revolver shooters to be reasonably competitive with each other. USPSA admin and rule structures are far superior to just about all others. If USPSA cannot accomodate them, no one can.

Craig

What were the participation numbers for ESR vs. SSR? I'm going to guess that SSR had quite a few more than ESR. Let's compare that to the Florida State USPSA match, conveniently already held this year as well: 7. Seven participants out of 218 entries, or 3.4 percent, vs. 10% for the IDPA match. Triple the participation.

So before I see the breakdown, I'm going to remind everyone that several times the idea was put forth to recognize a speedloader division in USPSA rather than allow 8-shots in order to increase participation. Nobody from the "we have to make changes to increase participation" seems to discuss speedloaders, while there were a number of other folks that expressed interest. I think between IDPA, ICORE, and our own shooters the choice is clear: Forget 8-shots, make minor-6-shots attractive.

I just registered for a IDPA match up in PA, and there are currently 75 shooters total. And 8 of them are shooting SSR, and 3 in ESR.

[Matt Griffin]

IDPA Florida State is up, 2 to 1 SSR vs. ESR. 27 total, for what I guess is a bit more than 10%. Bringing in the speedloader crowd makes sense and doesn't change the game.

[Bones]

You may be on to something Matt -someone once said that a revolver Division in a shooting sport that does not accommodate 6 shot speed-loaded revolvers is doomed to obscurity. I'll have to search the archives and remind myself who that might have been.

The IDPA and USPSA data over the last decade show a minority population (~10% on average at best) of competitors are willing to seriously shoot a revolver in games clearly biased toward semi-autos. Given that, and the fact that there are more K and L-framed 6 shot revolvers in circulation than all other DA revolvers combined, you quickly realize that there is little hope of successfully growing a revolver Division without accommodating the overwhelming majority of the minority.

The additional cost of acquiring a 625 or 627 and making it competitive is another barrier when compared to a 66 or 586 - the delta is easily 2 or 3X. I spent exactly $400 and about 8 hours on my favorite police trade-in Model 19 that's won me a lot of plywood. There is no way to make a 625 or 627 work for that price that doesn't put one at serious risk of a larceny conviction. One could easily set up a 1911 for SS or CDP for less or a plastic gun for about 70% of that.

Add in the additional cost of shooting 45ACP vs 38 Special and the price gap increases significantly over time. Oh yeah - and the recoil of shooting Major out of a revolver vs minor - gotta factor that in.

The bottom line is that shooting revolvers in IDPA or USPSA is hard. Make it expensive, painful and uncompetitive as well and the data show it is a barrier 90% of the competitors will not cross.

Craig

Edited March 16, 2013 by Bones

[Carmoney]

Revolver Division already accommodates 6-shot revolvers and speedloaders. Perfectly legal for those who think shooting USPSA with speedloaders sounds fun. Personally, I think it sounds awful--but that's just one person's opinion.

Obviously, nothing is going to make a 686 with speedloaders competitive with moonclip guns, so to create incentive you would have to set up a separate division or category, like "Classic" or "SSR" in the other games. I guess we could do that, but the real idea is to make the division more inclusive, not divide it up and make it more unwieldy.

Let's admit that the organization barely tolerates us as it is. Demanding that we have recognition for more than one type of revolver, whether classic or open or whatever, is not going to be particularly well-received, unless it brings in hordes of new shooters--which it won't.

[Bones]

Both of us can be correct Mike.

I do not see "accommodate" and "competitive" as mutually exclusive terms.

The primary reason it (speed loaders scored as minor) is "awful" is that, though "accommodated", it is - like the also-accommodated flap holsters, dump pouches and 38 wad cutters - highly uncompetitive.

That said, anything that expands franchise is good - so accommodating 627s and 686+s is better than nothing and I personally support it for that reason. It's hard to deny that the larger gain is to be had with speed loaded revolvers. There are simply many, many more of them.

If any organization can make any of it (revolver) work, it is probably USPSA. It took me some time to figure that out.

Craig

Edited March 16, 2013 by Bones