Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns If you could only have one revolver........

As much as I like my 44's and 45's, my "last resort" revolver would be a DA 357 Magnum, a 4- or 5-inch S&W 686. I have several of these in my safe and shoot them a lot. In my view, the 686 is more versatile than any big revolver ever could be. With light loads it's suitable for small game. Medium loads are more than adequate for personal defense. And heavy loads will work to bring down any large game in North America short of the big bears.

A 4" L-frame S&W is the best-balanced DA revolver I've ever found, with the slightly heavier Ruger GP100 a close second. Both closely match for balance and pointability the best-balanced revolver of all time, the Colt Single Action Army 4.75". The primary reason I didn't choose the SAA is that in my opinion single action revolvers are simply not as ergonomically effective for rapid deployment in defensive/tactical situations. I'm including defense against 4-legged as well as 2-legged varmints, here.

The N-frame Smiths are bigger, heavier, harder to shoot rapidly... at least in my hands. The Ruger Redhawk is even more so. The K-frame S&W's are too light to stand up to heavy duty loads. The heavier Ruger single actions, while wonderful hunting guns, lack the efficiency of a DA trigger.

The 357 Magnum revolver has the advantage of easy ammo availability. You can fire just about any 38 caliber rimmed cartridge in it, and I predict you'll be able to buy 38 Special ammunition almost anywhere in America until the Second Coming.

Just my dos centavos.

Jack Huntington, did the wizardry.

Outstanding choice. For me it would be either that or my 4 inch Redhawk 45 Colt.

4 inch barrel model 19, S&W, .357 magnum. It does it all. Thanks goodness I have one.

The 4" M19/M66 is almost as close to a perfect packin' pistol as you can get... except for the M686. I've had several M19's and M66's, but just have one now.

The M19/66 is, like all K-frames, just a little too lightly built to tolerate heavier loads. I shot a M65 out of time in less than 2 years using full-power 357 loads on a regular basis (admittedly, it had seen a lot of time as a police service revolver before I got it and fugged it up). I learned with that K-frame gun that stout 180 gr loads are beyond the K-frame's design parameters.

I can and do shoot heavy-loaded 158 gr and 180 gr bullets in my L-frames, and do so without any fear of damage to them. I admit I rarely shoot 180's any more, because I can do anything I need to with 158's. I reserve the 180's for my 357 lever rifles, where the longer barrel and slow-ish powders can really wring some performance out of them.

I agree & I love the one I have, but if I could only have one, it would be a 6" Model 57.

Had a great one, no-dash, & in a fit of stupidity, sold it.

MM

The new L-Frame S&W Model 69 in .44 mag sure are nice.

As far as K-Frames go, the 3" Model 66 is close to perfection IMO.

Gotta agree. Really been loving mine. Not sure if it would get the nod over my 5.5" Redhawk but it would definitely be in the running.

Hard to argue with a 4" DA 357. Mine is a Security Six.

I already have my "one" revolver, my SW Mountain Gun in 41mag.

Mine won't impress anyone, but does all I need it to. Ideal trail gun, and I like it.

38 S&W




DMc

Not to covet of course, only if he'd sell.

For any of us on the campfire to only have one revolver would require some cataclysmic, apocalyptic, end-of-world, Armageddon-esque event; or perhaps a Hillary presidency (if that's not redundant). In any case, the need for a gun to withstand the potential abuse of competition or the constant use of magnum ammo would be unrealistic; nice perhaps, but not necessary. Therefore I'd be hard pressed to decide between these two:



…..concealability would be a perq, but not a requirement during a melt down of society….consistent-carry would trump concealed-carry and the model 19/66 is about as easy a full sized gun to carry as there is. My first revolver was a 2 1/2" model 19 and it was a wonderful handgun that I wish that I had kept.

Let's pray that we never have to "grab and go" with just one gun!!

S&W 629 Mountain Gun, plenty of power and utility.

A 629 mountain gun or 4" Redhawk would be a pretty practical choice for those living in areas with large predators and/or frequently around large stock animals.

I find the .44 mag and .45 Colt to be extremely versatile, with lots of practical loads available to the handloader, from snake shot to heavy for caliber bull stompers.

Tough call. It would be one of these. Probably the 629. Specials for SD and full house loads for hunting situations. But the 19 wouldn't be a bad choice either.

I have a 2 1/2" 66 that goes most everywhere I do. I can't imagine not having it.

Exactly, as they can be loaded from mild to wild to handle any situation perfectly. Not so with the 357 as it is light in the loafers for really large game.

I would like a .45 Colt/ACP, Ruger Bisley Vaquero in SS with adjustable sights, 4"+ barrel, aluminum ejector rod housing and aluminum Bisley frame, heavily fluted/chamfered cylinders and scalloped recoil shields.

I'm guessing it can get down to 31 oz

…..fully agreed to…..however, in time of disruption (not necessarily a criteria according to the OP), .38 spl. and/or .357 will certainly be easier to come by than .44 mag/spl. or .45 lc. The only reason that I'd have only one revolver is because of some severe disruption.