Why is it called a semi-automatic?

[Barms 98]

Pistols I mean. Revolver: squeeze trigger it goes bang. Hold trigger in no bang. Release trigger pull it again it goes bang.

 

My M&P 9mm semi automatic: squeeze trigger it goes bang. Hold trigger in no bang. release trigger pul it again it goes bang.

 

What's the difference? How come they don't call it a semiautomatic revolver?

 

Rifles? I get it because rifles are automatic in the military.

 

So basically I think it's bullshit they call pistols semiautomatic. If I was a manufacturer i wouldn't use that term in my marketing.

 

(What's the point of this rant? Too much flak "semi autos" take in the news.).

[effd27145 0]

So by your post you are implying that there are no automatic pistols out there (which if you are referring to NJ only, you are correct)

 

But fully automatic pistols do exist out there, so therefore semi automatic pistols must also exist by the logic in your post?

 

Aside from that.

Generally I see the term semi automatic referring to the action of the pistol in its operation preparing to fire after discharging while feeding from a magazine, compared to a cylinder in a revolver, anyone please correct me if I am wrong. 

 

Technically a semi automatic handgun, like a semi auto rifle, does everything needed to fire the next round apart from actually discharging. Where as a revolver, after the gun is discharged the cylinder still needs to be rotated to the next live round which is usually done by cocking the hammer on single actions or pulling the trigger on double actions. The revolver in the course of discharging the round is not completing all the steps needed to be prepared to fire the next round.

[HBecwithFn7 296]

So by your post you are implying that there are no automatic pistols out there (which if you are referring to NJ only, you are correct)

 

But fully automatic pistols do exist out there, so therefore semi automatic pistols must also exist by the logic in your post?

 

Aside from that.

Generally I see the term semi automatic referring to the action of the pistol in its operation preparing to fire after discharging while feeding from a magazine, compared to a cylinder in a revolver, anyone please correct me if I am wrong. 

 

That would be my "intuitive" understanding as well.  Because a semi-auto's action can eject spent shells/brass, it's what makes it a semi-auto. Same with a semi-auto vs. pump or O/U shotgun. Semi-Auto requires one press of the trigger for each round fired.  A full auto, obviously being able to fire/eject multiple rounds with only one trigger press.

[JT Custom Guns 957]

Pistols I mean. Revolver: squeeze trigger it goes bang. Hold trigger in no bang. Release trigger pull it again it goes bang.

 

My M&P 9mm semi automatic: squeeze trigger it goes bang. Hold trigger in no bang. release trigger pul it again it goes bang.

 

What's the difference? How come they don't call it a semiautomatic revolver?

 

Rifles? I get it because rifles are automatic in the military.

 

So basically I think it's bullshit they call pistols semiautomatic. If I was a manufacturer i wouldn't use that term in my marketing.

 

(What's the point of this rant? Too much flak "semi autos" take in the news.).

 

Ah - because it doesn't revolve.....................

[effd27145 0]

Ah - because it doesn't revolve.....................

 

 

But each one still goes boom the same way!!!!!!!!   :mail:

[Vicious 138]

 

I've wanted this for a long time. It's an oddball for sure. The Mateba Autorevolver.

[GRIZ 3,369]

To add to your confusion there was another semi automatic revolver made AFAIK. The Webley Fosbery started production about the turn of the century. Not sure when they ceased production but it's greatest achievement was being mentioned as the weapon that killed his partner by Sam Spade (Bogart) in the Maltese Falcon.

 

The way it worked was when you fired it the upper part of the frame and cylinder would recoil back, turn the cylinder, and cock the hammer. You can find videos on You Tube.

 

If you want to blame someone for using the term automatic for a semi automatic pistol you can start with John Browning who referred to his designs, including the 1911, as automatic pistols.

[DeerSlayer 241]

But each one still goes boom the same way!!!!!!!! :mail:

No they don't. (I know your being facetious)

 

To the OP:

One has a revolving cylinder, that rotates after each trigger pull. the other "auto loads" usually from a spring loaded removable magazine, with each trigger pull. Definitely mechanically different.

 

Please refrain from questioning John M. Browning's genius ideas. & just accept that this just how it is.

 

But yes each trigger pull from either type of firearm yields the same result. A bang, along with a projectile being expelled down the barrel exerting kinetic energy. How each firearm made that happen is different, so that's why they are classified differently.

 

[illy 1]

The OP is right. Semi-auto is a term invented to differentiate guns that fire one round per trigger press from full auto firearms.

 

But the correct name is autoloader/autoloading which describes the fact that the gun automatically chambers the next round after it's fired. Hence ACP- Automatic Colt Pistol.

 

But everyone uses semi, so it is what it is.

[Barms 98]

I get it that you guys guys are getting all engineering about it by talking about a cylinder moving to get into battery versus the slide moving back and forth.

 

But just take a step back for a minute. Who gives a crap whether the next round got ready to go boom via a cylinder rotation vs a slide moving back and forth. ?

 

One trigger pull one boom. Revovler and M&P. that's my point.

 

Yet the pistol gets tagged with the evil "semi automatic" label all the time.

 

I'm just ranting. They say the father of one of the kids shot in the San Diego thing his mission is to ban all semi autos for civilians. So that's why I was like "well what's so semi automatic about it vs revolver ". (Round count obviously )

[illy 1]

So that's why I was like "well what's so semi automatic about it vs revolver ". (Round count obviously )

 

Yeah, I completely agree. There really is no noticeable difference in terms of how fast one shoots vs the other.

Plus in CA, round count is already limited to 10.

 

But whatever. Logic, reason and facts mean nothing to the antis. Anything they can point to and claim that it's extra dangerous, they will.

[Mr.Stu 1,921]

It is a distinction between what causes the next round to be made ready to be fired. A DA revolver requires manual effort by the shooter to index the cylinder and cock the hammer before the next round can be fired. A semi-auto does that by its self utilizing the energy from the last round fired so only a trigger press to release the hammer/striker is necessary. A full-auto does not even require and additional trigger press.

 

This is not rocket science

[Old Dog 19]

There are full automatic pistols and rifles but no full automatic revolvers so no need to differentiate between revolvers.

[illy 1]

It is a distinction between what causes the next round to be made ready to be fired. A DA revolver requires manual effort by the shooter to index the cylinder and cock the hammer before the next round can be fired. A semi-auto does that by its self utilizing the energy from the last round fired so only a trigger press to release tlong.he hammer/striker is necessary. A full-auto does not even require and additional trigger press.

 

This is not rocket science

 

Actually, and admittedly I'm no rocket scientist, one trigger press is also all that's needed to fire a DA revolver, it's just a longer one.

 

Unless we're talking about a DA or DAO "semi-auto", in which case the trigger pull will be equally long and stiff*. 

 

 

*what she said joke not intended.

[illy 1]

There are full automatic pistols and rifles but no full automatic revolvers so no need to differentiate between revolvers.

 

That's right.

 

Which makes the OP's point all the more valid- The differences between auto-loading pistols and revolvers have nothing to do with how they function. Both are one trigger press = one bullet fired and the next round is ready to be fired.

 

It's just a feeding mechanism. 

[effd27145 0]

Actually, and admittedly I'm no rocket scientist, one trigger press is also all that's needed to fire a DA revolver, it's just a longer one.

 

But it is a separate action and not as a result of the firearm discharging the previous round. 

 

 

If your looking for someone to say that a semi auto pistol and revolver both go boom each time the trigger is pulled? 

 

Then yes they do, but the mechanism by which they do that is different which is why revolvers are on a technical level not considered a semi-automatic firearm.

[illy 1]

But it is a separate action and not as a result of the firearm discharging the previous round.

 

 

If your looking for someone to say that a semi auto pistol and revolver both go boom each time the trigger is pulled?

 

Then yes they do, but the mechanism by which they do that is different which is why revolvers are on a technical level not considered a semi-automatic firearm.

We're in agreement here.

 

The only point I've been making is that, internal mechanisms aside (i.e. how rounds are loaded in the chamber), semi-auto handguns and DA revolvers are indistinguishable in the way they fire.

 

The distinction between auto loading long guns and non auto loaders (bolt/pump/lever) is much more well-defined.

A more accurate comparison would be auto loading pistols vs single-action revolvers.

 

Why all of this matters, returning to the OP's original point, is that the gun grabbers exploit this artificial difference to incrementally attack our rights.

 

Take the NY SAFE act, with its original 7 round limit: No one thinks that a Mark III with a 10 round magazine is more dangerous than an 8 shot .357 S&W revolver, but the former was categorized as an "assault weapon" based on this false distinction.

[GRIZ 3,369]

Yeah, I completely agree. There really is no noticeable difference in terms of how fast one shoots vs the other.

Plus in CA, round count is already limited to 10.

But whatever. Logic, reason and facts mean nothing to the antis. Anything they can point to and claim that it's extra dangerous, they will.

 

 

To most there is no noticeable difference but it's pretty clear a revolver can be fired faster. All handgun speed shooting records were done with revolvers

 

That's right.

Which makes the OP's point all the more valid- The differences between auto-loading pistols and revolvers have nothing to do with how they function. Both are one trigger press = one bullet fired and the next round is ready to be fired.

It's just a feeding mechanism.

 

There is a world of difference in how they function. The shooter preloads the chambers of a revolver. Cock in the hammer, either by SA or DA, and the cylinder rotates bringing up a new chamber. Semi autos are self loading. When you fire the first shot the slide comes back,the fired brass is ejected, the weapon is recocked and a new round is fed into the chamber. Very different in how they function.

[Mr.Stu 1,921]

The only point I've been making is that, internal mechanisms aside (i.e. how rounds are loaded in the chamber), semi-auto handguns and DA revolvers are indistinguishable in the way they fire.

 

...and apart from the color, blue and green are the same.

[Sandy 44]

The thermos..it keeps things hot , it keeps things cold. How does it know?

[Barms 98]

Alpo got my point 100%.

 

I've been in this hobby long enough to know the difference between the mechanics. And if the tag of semi automatic was truly meant to describe just that a round is extracted or not. Or how a round enters the chamber, the truth of the matter is now that "semi auto" means MORE DEADLIER and more evil and no place for civilians... And I wish it would just be PISTOL.

 

"The shooter used a 9mm semi automatic pistol..."

 

"The driver of the car used a hemispherical combustion engine car to flee the scene.."

 

That's all. Rant off, we can move on.

[lunker 274]

To add to your confusion there was another semi automatic revolver made AFAIK. The Webley Fosbery started production about the turn of the century. Not sure when they ceased production but it's greatest achievement was being mentioned as the weapon that killed his partner by Sam Spade (Bogart) in the Maltese Falcon.

 

The way it worked was when you fired it the upper part of the frame and cylinder would recoil back, turn the cylinder, and cock the hammer. You can find videos on You Tube.

 

If you want to blame someone for using the term automatic for a semi automatic pistol you can start with John Browning who referred to his designs, including the 1911, as automatic pistols.

 

 

Zardoz!

Yes, that is Sean Connery in those red diapers holding a Fosbery.  This is one of the weirdest movies I have ever seen. Right up there with Zappa 200 Motels. 

 

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Zardoz

[illy 1]

[Carcano 14]

I've shot fully automatic Glocks and even a S&W 39 this SOT had, so yes fully automatic handguns exist.

 

Semi-automatic pistols? I've never called them semi autos I just call them "autoloaders"