Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2011, 10:26:47 AM
-
What is the basis and origin of the belief that revolvers are not pistols?
Thank you.
-
I don't actually know... it has always just been pistol=autoloader and revolver=revolver for most everyone I've ever talked to.
"It just is" isn't a good enough answer for you? =D
-
Revolvers are pistols.
When they were invented and marketed, they were called "revolving pistols," in contrast to the muzzle loading single shot pistols that were dominant prior to that.
There are uninformed people out there with all sorts of misconceptions.
-
Pistols have the firing chamber as part of the barrel.
That is why old single shot flintlock and percussion handguns are called pistols.
Revolver's firing chamber is in the cylinder, hence why they are not pistols.
-
Pistols have the firing chamber as part of the barrel.
Why is this so?
-
I think this is a situation where language changed.
Revolvers where pistols until semi's appeared, then someone came up with the distinction between pistol and revolver.
-
I think this is a situation where language changed.
Revolvers where pistols until semi's appeared, then someone came up with the distinction between pistol and revolver.
Actually single shot percussion and flintlock handguns were pistols first, probably why the nomenclature of pistol stayed with semi automatic handguns.
-
Pistols have the firing chamber as part of the barrel.
That is why old single shot flintlock and percussion handguns are called pistols.
Revolver's firing chamber is in the cylinder, hence why they are not pistols.
Colt's marketing department from the 19th century would disagree with you.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sportingcollectibles.com%2Fcphotos%2Fc36752broadside.jpg&hash=8ed6fab93a8d9f81b5209d7faebbfd2830076dff)
source: http://historicalephemera.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=173:1870s-advertising-piece-for-colt-new-model-army-revolving-pistol&catid=44:electronics
This is an advertisement (dated 1870's) printed on onion skin type paper for a Colt broadside new model army revolving pistol. The Colt Single Action Army, also known as the peacemaker, The Great Equalizer, or the Colt .45, is a single action revolver with a revolving cylinder holding six rounds. It was originally designed for the US government by Samuel Colt's Patent Firearms Manufacturing Company and officially adopted as the standard military service revolver in 1869. After the Civil War the Colt .45 became the weapon of choice for lawmen, outlaws, and US calvary out West. Samuel Colt is recognized by many as one of the earliest American manufacturers to develop an effective marketing program that included sales promotion, publicity, product sampling, advertising, and public relations. This advertisement is an early example.
-
It's a situation where tradition has become more important than reality. In reality all handguns can be called pistols. If you want to be technically correct you can use the terms revolver or semi-auto. Unfortunately the tradition is so ingrained with some folks they'll work themselves into a quivering froth defending their position.
Same thing with the terms motor and engine. Ask any group of mechanical engineers what the difference is, then step back so you don't get spattered with blood.
Brad
-
Actually single shot percussion and flintlock handguns were pistols first, probably why the nomenclature of pistol stayed with semi automatic handguns.
Pistol refered to ANY handgun. The distinction between pistol and revolver didn't come about until after semi autos started coming out.
-
Maybe I should ask the question this way:
How did this distinction come about? What purpose was served by excluding revolvers from the classification "pistol"?
Also, what about revolver-action rifles? Are they considered to be rifles? Why or why not? Are maxims and mini- guns machine guns or revolvers? Why or why not?
-
Maybe I should ask the question this way:
How did this distinction come about? What purpose was served by excluding automatics from the classification "pistol"?
???
Automatics are pistols.
Usually the (false) distinction is between revolvers and pistols, and people mean "automatics" or "semi-autos" are the only gun to be called "pistol."
Never met anyone that felt that semiautomatic handguns were not pistols.
-
Same thing with the terms motor and engine. Ask any group of mechanical engineers what the difference is, then step back so you don't get spattered with blood.
Hey, hey, HEY! Now, that's different.
I'm getting hit from both sides in this thread, the gunsmithing side AND the ME side! Dirty fighting! :lol:
Seriously though, handgun/pistol are interchangeable for me, and sub-categories thereof are revolver/semi/single/double, and so forth. That's how I was taught at the gunsmithing school, anyway. ;)
Maybe I should ask the question this way:
How did this distinction come about? What purpose was served by excluding automatics from the classification "pistol"?
I've never heard that one, but I assume you mean revolvers from pistol, not autos. ;)
Anyway, I have NO freaking idea. I've only run into this issue in the past few years, now. Pistol/handgun to me meant ANY gun designed to be used with one hand and it has a (duh) pistol grip.
-
I've never heard that one, but I assume you mean revolvers from pistol, not autos. ;)
Yeah, sorry.
-
Same reason that there are "Mac's" and "PC's", except that technically, Mac's are PC's too.
-
Same reason that there are "Mac's" and "PC's", except that technically, Mac's are PC's too.
But that would be a matter convenience. If we didn't call them PCs, what would we call them?
-
But that would be a matter convenience. If we didn't call them PCs, what would we call them?
Toys.
Chris
-
Timelining might help, as we tend to make false brightline distinctions when the evolution of handguns was really a (well, sorta) slow process of adoption. Also, there's always a distinction between what something "is" and what we happen to call it. When we confuse the two is where some of these angry nomenclature fights come from.
"Pistol", single shot (mostly) from the first hand gonne up into the 1800's; but we want "moar dakka", so we try pepperboxes and duckbills and odder stuff, including hand-rotated multiple barrel pistols.
Metallurgy and genius and such come together with the realization that if you can separate barrel and chamber to load a single-shot, why not use a bunch of chambers with just one barrel? And here comes Sam Colt.
But how to sell the moar dakka? Have to reference something people know and yet distinguish your product.
Aha! "Revolving pistol".
Which then, like everything in English, gets shortened to a more handy word size.
"Got a pistol?" "Yeah, I got one of them revolve-ers."
Since non-revolving pistols still existed ("old-fashioned" large caliber muzzle loaders, derringers and various pocket single shots) during that overlap you had the distinction develop and harden.
Then just barely a generation later along comes even MOAR dakka, but how to market it?
By this point most of the non-revolver handguns were a thing of the past (or had their own non-pistol names, like the generic "derringer"), so you had the new "(semi-)automatic pistols" and what were now ingrained as simply "revolvers" (as opposed to "revolving pistols", which is a mouthful).
Since the revolvers had "given up" the "pistol" part of their name in the last century (the before time), the auto's claimed and kept it in the minds of pseudo-pedants everywhere.
And here we are...
-
Toys.
Chris
inferior crap
-
So it's now okay to bash people's brand choices again? Great. =|
-
Actually, the "Personal" in PC is kind of redundant anyway, a hold over from when you had to make a distinction that someone's computer was indeed "personal", and not a server/timeshare/mainframe of some sort.
Now it's the opposite, you say "Computer", and you have to make the distinction if it's some sort of centralized enterprise class machine.
At least "Computer" itself is probably not going to go away, because even if the end-result meta-output for the end user is not mathematical or numeric per-se, there was a hell of a lot of computation involved in displaying it still, be it fonts, graphics, sound or video.
So count me as "does not matter" in the pistol vs. revolver debate.
Yes, revolvers are pistols, in terms of being a firearm designed to be used by one hand, either derived from the Italian gunmakers of the town of Pistoia, or possibly from the word pistala, of the Hussites for their one handed short cavalry firearms from what is now the Czech Republic region However, it's a common appellation to use "pistol" to talk about single shots or automatics that do not revolve as well. Possibly common enough it's now "official", in terms of dictionaries or whatnot.
I think there's definitely more leeway between pistol/revolver than there is magazine/clip.
-
But what do you do when reporters refer to "semi-automatic revolvers"? (Other than point them to a Webley?)
-
But what do you do when reporters refer to "semi-automatic revolvers"? (Other than point them to a Webley?)
Slap them. With a fish.
-
Slap them. With a fish.
Or a Mateba.
-
So it's now okay to bash people's brand choices again? Great. =|
It was good-natured ribbing. Get over it.
Chris
-
So it's now okay to bash people's brand choices again? Great. =|
I work on PC's and Mac's everyday, trying to be funny.
-
Simply refer to single-hand-held firearms as handguns for general purposes, revolver and semi-auto for specifics. Neatly sidesteps all the sematics nonsense. Unfortunately, it would also probably kill about 90% of all internet discussion boards as they would have nothing to argue about.
Brad
-
We kid, we kid :laugh:
-
Simply refer to single-hand-held firearms as handguns for general purposes, revolver and semi-auto for specifics. Neatly sidesteps all the sematics nonsense. Unfortunately, it would also probably kill about 90% of all internet discussion boards as they would have nothing to argue about.
Brad
"sidearm" =)
-
Amateurs.
Hand Gonne.
-
Devil's Right Hand
-
Revolvers are pistols.
When they were invented and marketed, they were called "revolving pistols," in contrast to the muzzle loading single shot pistols that were dominant prior to that.
There are uninformed people out there with all sorts of misconceptions.
^^^ (https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.runemasterstudios.com%2Fgraemlins%2Fimages%2Fagree.gif&hash=27ccf2130f108d6122cc0e19e85f0930efd4bd81)
Correct.
Terminology gets fuzzed over time. Let's not forget that what today we call a "semi-automatic" or "self-loading" pistol was originally an "automatic." The "ACP" is .45 ACP, after all, is an acronym for Automatic Colt Pistol.
-
Devil's Right Hand
Heh. A whole song about revolvers, and he calls them pistols.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeP220xx7Bs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeP220xx7Bs)
....because the Sex Revolvers are something completely different.... :cool:
-
Oklahoma actually makes a legal distinction as it applies to our CCW permits /Concealed weapon License.
Derringer, Revlover, Semi-auto. If you take the shooting portion of the course with a semi-auto it qualifies you to be able to carry all 3 types, otherwise you are restricted to the type you used in the course.
-
Heh. A whole song about revolvers, and he calls them pistols.
That's the way they do it down on Copperhead Road.
-
My daddy was a pistol, I'm a son-of-a-gun!
-
Derringer, Revlover, Semi-auto.
Are we talking firearms or motorsports? =D
Brad
-
Coming in on this late I guess. I never noticed anyone defining revolvers as not covered under the term "pistol". Maybe I just didn't notice.
-
Revolvers are not pistols now for the same reason gay people aren't happy people now... Language changes.
-
Revolvers are not pistols now for the same reason gay people aren't happy people now... Language changes.
But there is no consensus that revolvers are not pistols. Just a portion of the small fraction of Anglophones that know one gun from another.
I suppose this controversy may affect other languages too, but having seen no evidence of that, I see no reason to assume that it does. Maybe if there were some reasoning behind the revolver/pistol dichotomy, I could, but the whole point of this thread is that no reasoning has been shown.
-
Reason has nothing to do with it. It is all about popular usage. That means that those who are rational are trying to communicate with those who aren't... ;)
-
Reason has nothing to do with it. It is all about popular usage. That means that those who are rational are trying to communicate with those who aren't... ;)
What is the popular usage?
I disagree with your first sentence. Reason does have something to do with it.
-
I wouldn't worry about it so much if I were you
-
Aren't there some trash cans in the mall that need to be emptied? Or a light bulb that needs changed ??
:facepalm: :facepalm:
-
My own personal peeve is "double-action only", which pretty much an oxymoron.
-
Aren't there some trash cans in the mall that need to be emptied? Or a light bulb that needs changed ??
:facepalm: :facepalm:
The trash cans are housekeeping's job. :P Hey, my employer wanted me to get a smart-phone to have at work. My conscience is clear. =)
My own personal peeve is "double-action only", which pretty much an oxymoron.
No, Col. Cooper, it is not. "Double-action" means that the trigger performs two actions. Which is exactly what a double-action-only does, and that's all it does.
-
My own personal peeve is "double-action only", which pretty much an oxymoron.
Mine is the fact that "double-action only" isn't defined more specifically....esp. in cases involving the newer poly-pistols....I mean, why is the Glock action defined as DAO and the Springfield XD action defined as SA?..... =|
-
Yeah, I have several of those Single Action Only revolving pistol thingies.
-
"Double-action" means that the trigger performs two actions. Which is exactly what a double-action-only does, and that's all it does.
(Summarized) The only thing it does is two things.
"Paging Mr Moron, Mr Oxy Moron..."
Brad
-
(Summarized) The only thing it does is two things.
Hence, double-action only.
The mistake of zahc, Jeff Cooper, et al, is in thinking that "double-action" comes from the fact that the gun can be fired in two different ways (by trigger-cocking or thumb-cocking). It actually comes from the ability of the trigger pull to both cock and release the hammer or striker. That's why, when someone thumbs the hammer back on their revolver, we say that they are firing in single action. They are only using the trigger to perform one action. When they cock the hammer with the trigger, we call it a double-action trigger pull, because the trigger pull is performing two actions. If zahc is right, then those both become single-action trigger pulls.
Also, instead of the SA, DA/SA, DAO nomenclature, we would have to move to something like Single-Action-Non-Trigger-Cocking, Double-Action, Single-Action-Trigger-Cocking. Or something.
-
Mine is the fact that "double-action only" isn't defined more specifically....esp. in cases involving the newer poly-pistols....I mean, why is the Glock action defined as DAO and the Springfield XD action defined as SA?..... =|
Because DAO ain't.
And nobody's come up with a good acronym for "Half Cocked Striker Fired Integral Trigger Safety" yet. HCSFIT does not exactly roll off the palate. =D
So some say DAO, and some say SA, because the actual user experience in terms of the manual of arms and the trigger pull is somewhat similar to certain aspects of both functions.
DAO, could probably more accurately be called TCO, for "Trigger Cocking Only".
-
Anyone ever have their pistol go off half-glocked ? :lol:
-
And nobody's come up with a good acronym for "Half Cocked Striker Fired Integral Trigger Safety" yet. HCSFIT does not exactly roll off the palate. =D
.
The glock "DA" claim irks me. If the striker is 85% cocked... it ain't DA. Add to that they market it as "Safe Action" which carries the subliminal "SA" acronym which correlates to Single Action "SA" and I consider a Glock to be a single action gun.
If you have to cycle the slide to reset the trigger's relationship to the firing pin, or to reset the firing pin to a particular position to be ready to strike by a trigger pull... it ain't double action in my opinion.
Beretta/CZ/S&W 2nd and 3rd gen autos/most Sigs/many Tauruses = DA.
Glock/XD/M&P/1911 = SA.
Basically, my own requirement for something to earn the "DA" monicker is an ability to perform a "second strike" on a cartridge that failed to ignite on a first strike, or to advance to a waiting cartridge (like a revolver).
Not that the industry consulted with me on the matter... but I'm right in my own mind. I think. :lol:
-
Hence, double-action only.
Literal-O-Meter: Off
Sarcasm-O-Meter: On
Brad
-
Mine is the fact that "double-action only" isn't defined more specifically....esp. in cases involving the newer poly-pistols....I mean, why is the Glock action defined as DAO and the Springfield XD action defined as SA?..... =|
There madness lies.
-
HCSFIT does not exactly roll off the palate. =D
Sounds like an acronym fit for the DSM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disorders).
-
The glock "DA" claim irks me. If the striker is 85% cocked... it ain't DA. Add to that they market it as "Safe Action" which carries the subliminal "SA" acronym which correlates to Single Action "SA" and I consider a Glock to be a single action gun.
If you have to cycle the slide to reset the trigger's relationship to the firing pin, or to reset the firing pin to a particular position to be ready to strike by a trigger pull... it ain't double action in my opinion.
Beretta/CZ/S&W 2nd and 3rd gen autos/most Sigs/many Tauruses = DA.
Glock/XD/M&P/1911 = SA.
Basically, my own requirement for something to earn the "DA" monicker is an ability to perform a "second strike" on a cartridge that failed to ignite on a first strike, or to advance to a waiting cartridge (like a revolver).
Not that the industry consulted with me on the matter... but I'm right in my own mind. I think. :lol:
Good point, despite owning a G26 and G21, I did not consider the lack of any second-strike capability. :facepalm:
So yeah, I'll agree, a Glock is about 85% SA in nature at least.
-
Mine is the fact that "double-action only" isn't defined more specifically....esp. in cases involving the newer poly-pistols....I mean, why is the Glock action defined as DAO and the Springfield XD action defined as SA?..... =|
Because Glock gamed the definition?
-
Basically, my own requirement for something to earn the "DA" monicker is an ability to perform a "second strike" on a cartridge that failed to ignite on a first strike, or to advance to a waiting cartridge (like a revolver).
I agree with that. It's a good working definition. Glocks are not double action, IMHO. Neither is Para's LDA ("Light Double Action"), because it doesn't have a second strike capability, either. There's an internal mechanism that's pre-cocked by the slide, and then an external hammer that's down until the trigger moves it back and releases the internal spring. If the hammer drops on a dud round, there is no second strike available. (The fact that's probably a GOOD thing when dealing with a semi-auto and a dud round doesn't affect the definition.)
-
I agree with that. It's a good working definition. Glocks are not double action, IMHO. Neither is Para's LDA ("Light Double Action"), because it doesn't have a second strike capability, either. There's an internal mechanism that's pre-cocked by the slide, and then an external hammer that's down until the trigger moves it back and releases the internal spring. If the hammer drops on a dud round, there is no second strike available. (The fact that's probably a GOOD thing when dealing with a semi-auto and a dud round doesn't affect the definition.)
Good point...maybe we need to define those as Partial-Single-Action (PSA)....
...so now we have PSA, TDA, SAO, DAO, and EIEIO...... =D