Glock or Revolver:which is more durable

Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Messages
1
Likes
1
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
I'm a huge fan of the Glock series and also a lover of fan's favourite"The Revolver" but I'm finding it hard to choose a durable fire arm.
Pls help out
 
IMHO nothing beats a quality revolver, but what is your criteria?

Durable as in able to take abuse and not get banged up cosmetically, or is it function, the ability to go bang every time?

If I put my Model 60 next to my Glock 26, and I want the one that is going to go bang every time, I'm picking up the Smith.

Toss some Pachmayer grips on the Model 60 and you would be hard pressed to do much cosmetic damage, short of throwing it or dropping it on the hammer and breaking it off, but even then it would still function.
 
Dare I ask what you plan on doing with the winner? What type of durability are you looking for?
 
throw some dirt or sand at a revolver and a glock, then see what happens. as much as I love revolvers, when they go down it's rarely something that can be cleared in the field. in contrast a glock can be rinsed out and will run completely dry.

the notion that revolvers are "more reliable" is old brain thinking. i am a revolver nut but there's just no way to put them up against a modern semi auto. one exception is the small j-frames and LCR types where they do shine in the role of carry, but again throw some sand at an LCR and I would be shocked if the thing doesn't seize up.
 
throw some dirt or sand at a revolver and a glock, then see what happens. as much as I love revolvers, when they go down it's rarely something that can be cleared in the field. in contrast a glock can be rinsed out and will run completely dry.
very true.
 
Second Squib308. Glock hands down. The timing parts on any revolver are relatively flimsy, and the cylinder can bind up with even a little bit of residue. Flip the cylinder closed on a revolver, and watch the revolver's owner flip out like you kicked him in the b*lls. Even the legendary Python will experience timing problems. In contrast, the Glock is a beast. There is a video of a Glock put through a torture test: frozen, soaked in salt water, caked in mud, dropped from a plane, etc. and still functioning. There is another video of a Glock converted to full auto and melted down from the heat of hundreds of rounds and still running. Unbelievable how tough they are.
 
It's true revolvers are very reliable But when they do fail it's usually something that will prevent the revolver from working at all. Many years ago I had a Colt 38spl. revolver, and when the cylinder locked that was it. It took a gunsmith to free it up. Fortunately at the time I was at the range and not in a gunfight. I would say, go with the Glock.
 
Glocks are for the police. Buy yourself a break action shotgun. Anything more is too dangerous. Call 911 and wait patiently for the professionals to arrive.

Glock.
My M n' P is solid as a rock too.
 
Totally depends on the environment.

Something for home defense and will never get dirty? I'd go revolver. No chance for any FTF's or FTE's, which can happen with any semi- yes, even Glocks.

Any chance of exposure to dirt, grit, or other debris? Glock. You could literally hose out any sand or mud and just shoot the damn thing. Heck, you could probably skip the hosing off step so long as the barrel was not obstructed.
 
I've got a Charter Arms Undercover that my dad had, first centerfire gun I ever shot when I was a kid. I can't get it through 15 rounds nowadays without the latch binding. I know how to adjust the latch. That's not it. Something's probably bent so that it works well enough when clean and lubed but not well enough once a little carbon works in. I'm not going to bother having a gunsmith look at it--it's just an heirloom of sentimental value now, and I'm done trying to shoot it. Even so, I have no doubt that it will fire a full cylinder every time without binding.

Had a lot of trouble with my first SP-101, but it was a lemon. It never failed to go boom, though. I've seen light primer strikes from revolvers with reduced-power springs and from standard springs on Smiths when the strain screw had worked its way out. I've seen rounds jump the crimp in a revolver, and I've seen a primer back out and lock one up (special situation--I'm not worried about it happening again). Haven't had any issues with my GP100.

Had plenty of failures with semi-autos, too. FTE's and some double-feeds. Had a striker pin break twice, though it wasn't a Glock (Ruger LC9s--think its long firing pin doesn't like the Laserlyte trainer for some reason). I don't have a Glock, but I would say my M&P 9c is probably the most reliable handgun I have. And yet, I would have ZERO qualms about carrying a revolver. In fact, I might start doing that once I get a holster setup that works me. BTW, not that the effect of dropping a revolver in the mud particularly interests me, but I've seen videos of revolvers passing this test and semi-autos failing it. It seems like more of a military consideration than anything of interest for home defense or urban/suburban concealed carry.

But specifically durable? Not sure why that would be the main criterion, but I'd probably have to go with my M&P there.
 
Last edited:
One other thing... if u do go glock and live in mass, dont forget to pick up a 25+ year old u-notch standard magazine here on NES for 90 bucks. For that price, perfection.
 
OP - welcome to NES! You really picked an awesome subject for you first thread. You ask a great question and will get some great answers. All of the answers to your question will be wrong, except mine of course, because this is NES.

As previous replies have indicated, the intended use and firearm knowledge has a lot to do with any recommendation. Also, there is a pretty big quality difference between revolvers. A nice S&W is very different from some of the budget guns on the market, in the same way there is a big difference between a Glock and many semi autos.
Revolvers are a good choice for people that like the simplicity they offer. No slide to rack, no uncertainty if a round is chambered etc. The original point and click interface.
The weakest point of any semi auto is the magazine and most failures are magazine related, even with Glocks. The most obvious advantage to a quality semi is ease of reloading and capacity. They can also be easier to carry because they are slimmer in general. I usually carry a semi, but my wife prefers a revolver because she is concerned that under stress she will freak out and not chamber a round.
My 4" - 686 has sometimes served as my nightstand gun, and I tend to agree with Carl at Four Seasons when he says that if he could own only one handgun he would strongly consider a 686 as the one.
As a carry gun, it is hard to beat a Glock. I hate them, but you can't argue about how reliable they are.
 
Just about any part in a Glock can be replaced with armorer level maintenance (very easy to learn), not fitting or complex assembly.

I've seen three breakages on S&W revolvers that required factory work - hammer stud; trigger pivot stud; and the internal part that connects the cylinder release control the the part that holds the cylinder in place. All three took the gun completely out of service. I have seen very minor breakages on Glocks, and two (locking block and large pin) had no effect on the operation. The trigger return spring breakage would still allow the gun work as long as you know the operational trick.
 
Last edited:
Not just one shot. Two blasts.
I'm still surprised that he even said double barrel shotgun. I mean, who needs more than one barrel on a shotgun? Mass shooters, that's who!

Joe probably got a talking to by Hilary after that one. Probably told him that it should be a flintlock musket loaded with powder and no shot, that way when gravity finally pulled the lead down to Earth, no one would be in danger.
 
The Glock has fewer parts and is significantly easier to work on than a revolver.
 
I love the simple manual of arms and the "old timey" vibe of revolvers, but I carry a Glock as my EDC.

I carried a Ruger SP-101 for a while after testing a couple boxes of carry ammo. I generally try to practice with my carry guns every week or so, and one day the Ruger started binding up in the same spot with every type of ammo. I got some help from a member here who looked at it, but the problem wasn't fixed so it's off to Ruger. I'm just glad that the failure was discovered during practice and not in a real life-or-death event.

The Glock 19, on the other hand, has had thousands of rounds through it with zero FTFs/FTEs, even with the crappiest aluminum cased ammo. Simple manual of arms, lightweight and easy to conceal and carry, reliable as all hell. Definitely Glock for me.
 
I love revolvers, they're my favorite style of guns, but I'll have to say that it's the Glock here. Revolvers over time will have to deal with mechanical wear, the hand, ratchets of the cylinder, main springs, hand springs, trigger springs... all these things will wear and while springs are easy to replace, the hand and ratchet teeth are not.

Glocks, yes they have springs, but that's about all. Everything can be easily replaced in a Glock once they get worn, but it takes a long, long time to wear out a Glock.

Then when you factor in any dirt, debris, etc... that stuff will mess up a revolver, but a Glock it won't.

You're question is about durability and revolvers are still durable, they're just not as rugged. There are still percussion revolvers out there from the 1850's that are still being shot and that was back when the quality of the steels was far from the quality we have today!

Pretty much any gun you buy today is going to last you the rest of your life. Idk how the polymer that's been used for firearms going back 30+ years up to today is going to last, but if the Gen 1 Glocks are still going strong after 3 decades, I see no reason they won't last another 3 decades.

BTW, I'd still rely on a revolver to save my life.
 
I carried a revolver (SW 337) for a while (this was back in the early 2000's.) I had a Glock 27 and hated carrying it. Blocky and no good holsters (unlike today) back then. Sold it and Bought the Smith. The Smith is an Air Weight Ti. model so incredibly light and incredibly easy to carry (even did Mexican carry when I went for a quick errand). BUT, only 5 rounds and difficult to reload. Speed loaders are bulky to carry ans speed strips suck IMHO.

Now all these years later I exclusively carry an Auto and went full circle back to Glock and a G26 (Have the G42, G43 and a G19 also, and a few full size). Now I'm NOT a Glock fan Boi, but they work, they are simple, no (manual) safety, reasonably light, tons of holster options and the ability to quickly reload is why I mostly carry a Glock. I like cool guns, and the Glock is not cool (except here in MA, lol).

I still have my 337 and will not sell it. But Autos for me.
 
It's really hard to argue about the durability, reliability and stupid elegant simplicity of a Glock. There are so many things that can go wrong with a revolver due to mishandling and poor maintenance, where a glock is pretty much designed to run dry and never be cleaned (although i don't recommend that).
I love all guns and I am a sucker for a well made revolver, but if I had to chose one only one gun for the rest of my life or to go to war with a Glock would be a top contender.
 
Back
Top Bottom