.png)
The Illogical Magic of the Revolver
- Jun 10
- 6 min read
Updated: Jun 11
by Matt Covert
It’s Thursday. Jim and Shane are off at the 41st Shootist Holiday signing books like reluctant celebrities, and I’m here at home base putting the final touches on our book launch plan for Saturday. Somewhere in the back of my mind I’m already scheming the next big move for Gun Tales. But for today, two things feel important: Shane keeps encouraging me to take off my editor hat and write an article, and there’s no one here to stop me. Can you see where this is going?
I’m quite familiar with writing. I used to write for a handful of small car magazines, and the formula was easy. Drive a new vehicle, come up with some absurd similes that can’t possibly be true, avoid specs at all costs, and focus on how it feels. Easy, when you know absolutely everything about the automotive industry. But there’s no hiding the fact that my knowledge about revolvers is tenuous at best. If someone told me their favorite round was the wildly popular 43.7 caliber millimeter, I would politely nod my head and make a note to look it up later.
But then again, there’s value in new perspectives too. Here are mine. —Matt
Revolvers are a questionable choice. In fact, there is almost no way to make a logical argument that revolvers are better than a modern polymer-frame pistol. They’re slow to load. They’re slow to unload. They have a low capacity. The sights are old. They’re heavy. They’re wide. They’re long. They take an hour to reload under stress. And they haven’t adapted to the modern accessory ecosystem. But at least they’re much more expensive, and ammunition is harder to find, and is also much more expensive.
