I've been focused on trying to shoot handguns at 100yds lately. I find 2 revolvers, a S&W 586 6.5" and SRH 7.5" are able to shoot 5.5" pretty consistently off a bench rest at this distance. These two revolvers are exceptionally accurate even at shorter ranges. My autoloaders, even very accurate ones at shorter ranges, are 12 to 14" or worse for me at 100yds. Is it just the shorter sight plane? An autoloader shooting out of the same chamber each time should be more accurate, right? Any silhouette shooters have any observations on distance shooting with revolvers vs autoloaders? Any autoloaders that do well at distance?

I have always found revolvers to be more accurate at longer ranges than autos.

Hmm. You don't think that perhaps sight radius has something to do with open sight accuracy, especially at longer ranges? Your example are 6.5 and 7.5 inch barrel lengths. What autos have this kind of sight radius? My High Standard wears a 6 7/8 inch barrel for 50 yard slow fire. I find it more accurate than a 5 1/2 inch heavy barrel, but this is a 22lr. Having said that, the best test of weapon accuracy is, IMHO a Ransom rest. It takes the sight radius and ergonomics out of the equation and just leaves the basic accuracy of the handgun.
Having said all that, my S&W 629 in 44mag, Ruger SBH in 44mag all wear long barrels and offer excellent accuracy. However, my Ruger SBH in 45 Colt has a 4 5/8 inch barrel is also very accurate, but has a red dot sight (1 MOA).
FWIW.
Peter.

More likely has to do with the fix barrels like your high standard compared to.

The moving barrels on a lot of semi autos.

Valid point about "moving barrels" p dog. However I have posted a picture of a 2" 50 yard group shot from a Ransom rest using a Kimber Target Match 9 mm fitted with a KKM barrel and using a standard Sams load. So, repeatability rules!
having said that, the "bullet jump" which was supposed to limit the accuracy of revolvers has not been shown to be that significant! Still, my Model 52 has proven to be more accurate than my Target Masterpiece. Ergonomice perhaps?
Peter.

There's also the 6 separate chambers that you're firing out of with a revolver. The chances that they're all cut and aligned exactly the same seems remote. Competitors sometimes number the chambers and know which one is most likely to throw a flyer.

Im sure revolvers are more accurate at 100 yards, not so at 25 yards where tuned up automatics seem to best the revolver..No science here just what appears to me to be the case..

I have a Keith # 5 in 44 mag w/ a 5" bbl. that off-hand will put them inside 3" at 50 yds. I have not tried 100 yds off a bench rest but I agree that the revolver rules in distance shooting. At 25 yds. my S+W model 41 in 22 will outshine most pistols but it wasn't cheap by any means.

Never really thought about this. I have never seriously shot a semi-auto at anything past 50 yards, but have shot scoped revolvers -- mostly Super Blackhawks in .44 Magnum -- at 100. Scopes were all Leupold EER 2X. Never got groups much smaller than 3 inches. Did much better, of course, with scoped T/C Contenders. The .30 Herrett was a favorite.

True, the T/C is a different platform. I recall my old buddy Dave that bought one of the 1st 30-30 bbls in the early 70s + would continue to bore everyone with his litany of Clint's famous speil, "This is the most powerful handgun in the world + it can blow your head clean off; so I know what you're thinking punk + asking yourself if you feel lucky. Did he shoot one or none?"

Seems that this is a lost art. The choice is not between offhand and from a bench. Ol' Elmer showed how to do it way back when. I used to shoot lying on my back, head propped up, and gun, two handed hold braced between my knees, shooting at a metal gong so I knew my success, or lack thereof. Bullet impacts on the sand berm behind helped with sight/hold adjustment.
Peter.
PS. Some ranges might not like you shooting like this!

I had a buddy show me this routine several years ago + it worked but whether I could do it again today is debatable. Watching your first shots POI, then adjust that much muzzle rise; within 3 shots you should be on the POI. I know, easier said than done but I did do it once so I know it can be done.

I'm not sure where it exactly lies as far as accuracy at "extreme" range for handguns.

My best is a SW Hunter 657 .41 mag that I can get 1-1.5" groups for 6 shots with one load. Of course that is with a scope off a bench with sandbags.

Shooting it with irons and I get 6".

Ransom rest and its about 2-3" at 100, unless you play with the sights to make sure it returns to the same place. I've been told there is a technique you need to do, but I haven't fount it. I think the inserts shift, as does the gun in the inserts. I do note that typically the autos shoot better in a ransom rest than I can do even with a moderately high magnification scope. Contenders/encores, XP100, and some revolvers I outshoot it given a decent scope. I am not really that impressed with the ransom rest- I inherited it from my late uncle, who thought it would be a great idea. We could never get the same results as the gunwriters did.

I never tried the goofy (in my mind) contortions that the silhouette handgun guys used. Do they work? Obviously, or they wouldn't do it. But for me (since I don't shoot that game) a bench with a rest and sandbag work better than any attempt to not rest the gun.

Also, I have never been able to get a .22 pistol to get anywhere near top grade accuracy past 25 yards, even with a scope and rest. Ive got a slug of S&W41's and they just don't group like the big bores (or the higher end rifle target .22's like Anschutz- and even then its a pain to find ammo they really like... the benchrest rimfire boys are way better at this than me...)

It seems like the ones I shoot at 60-100 yards lately have been mostly autos. That's probably because I have way more autos than revolvers but also I carry auto for CC.

My object is shooting these longer distances is not necessarily to see how tight my groups are but rather to try and improve my shooting skills. By that I mean if I'm shooting a Glock 19 at 60 yards and finch a wee bit, I could end up missing the target or balloon by 5-6 feet or more. Move that back to 100 yards with the same Glock 19 or Glock 22 or Sig 229 in a .40 and a flinch at that distance can mean a miss of 15-20 feet or more.

Have your shooting buddy load you gun, sometimes live and sometimes not, and then shoot it without knowing if it is hot at those distances and wait for the cheers or the laughs. Very revealing and many times embarrassing.

I'm much better distance shooting with a revolver, because, that is what I have practiced with for 45 years.

Too many variables to come up with any meaningful comparison.

With respect to revolvers, the cylinders in which the cartridge rests are generally inconsistent, as is the gap between the face of the cylinder and the chamber of the barrel. Cylinder lockup and the indexing of the axis of a cylinder and the axis of the barrel will differ. Not all revolvers have a forcing cone. Not all forcing cones are universal in depth. Length, weight and rigidity of the barrel are factors as well.The engineering of the top strap may also play a role.

And then there is the matter of cartridge. Not all cartridges are the same with respect to accuracy. Nor are bullets, even in the same caliber and with the same weight and shape.

Sight radius is a factor related to ergonomics, not engineering, as Peter alludes to .

As far as autos go, as P Dog pointed out, lets start with barrels that move vs those that don't. Not all autos have bushings. Then there is the matter of the slide's relationship to the frame and how well they work together. The angle and shape of the loading ramp probably also plays a role. As might the lips of the magazinie. The specific cartridge and bullet selection will be factors.

I think this is a fun problem to consider, but I don't see a measurable way to make a comparison. Just too many variables.

Good thread, though.

Best.....

quote:

Originally posted by buckeyeshooter:
I'm much better distance shooting with a revolver, because, that is what I have practiced with for 45 years.

That is my personal experience but I have to say I never had an auto I could afford made to the same tolerances/quality as my best revolvers. Not that they don't exist. I bought a Colt 22LR Diamondback in the 70s that cured me of that misconception and later (80s) a really accurate Dan Wesson 357 that confirmed my faith in revolvers for deliberate shooting. Those two are long gone to my regret but I just ordered a Manhurin M73 from Kebco and I'm looking forward to having a great revolver again.