[Wisconsin]

Speaking from a gunsmithing viewpoint, a revolver is generally less sturdy than an automatic. I am not sure that you could not make a sturdy one, but most aren't.

The problems incude the frame shape, the necessity for a pawl to move the cylinder, some pretty significant considerations of headspace, and firing pin design.

Of course there are hermaphrodites....
I once had the pleasure of shooting a Webley .455 automatic revolver. One pulled the trigger it shot, then there were all kinds of noises and different forces on your wrist before it returned "to battery". I would seriously dounbt the accuracy of anyone's second shot.

The entire upper frame and barrel slides back in recoil, a stub rides in an angled groove on the cylinder to rotate it, and from the sounds a pair of gnomes come out and ring the clock tower bell on the hour.

[300winmag]

I once had the pleasure of shooting a Webley .455 automatic revolver. One pulled the trigger it shot, then there were all kinds of noises and different forces on your wrist before it returned "to battery". I would seriously dounbt the accuracy of anyone's second shot.

Ah, the Webley-Fosberry "Zig-Zag". One of the world's truly whacky weapons. I've only seen one fired on "Tales of the Gun', but I'd give my eye teeth to own one. It just reeks of British "oddball scientist" (or gun designer), and seems so charming.