Question! Did the "only load 5 of 6 rounds for safety"

>>31338326
Imo it doesn't apply to any revolver

>>31338342
yes it does if it doesn't have a manual safety and no hammer safety, some revolvers can literally go off just by hitting the back of the hammer on anything.

>>31338326
I don't know tho OP, I'm pretty sure it did, but people would just carry old revolvers on half cock sometimes because that was the intended safety in some designs, but some revolvers have a half cock sear that the hammer could still slip off of. Ask an actual collector about it

>>31338326
only rugers can load 6 rounds safely

>>31338326
I imagine they probably did.

>>31338342
Yes it did, there was a time when revolvers weren't drop-safe, the original Single Action Army revolvers WOULD discharge a cartridge if you dropped it on it's hammer and with a live chamber under the hammer, hence why they were left with an empty chamber under the hammer when carried.

>>31338630
Later Rast & Gasser revolvers I'm pretty sure were drop-safe, but those aren't exactly cowboy guns.

Colt pattern revolvers are the biggest offenders for this.
Some people still won't carry a round under the hammer on any revolvers.
Old habits passed down.

Historically? or for modern safety practices?
Historically, you're expected to use the half cock if you cared for safety at all. but most people didn't.

There were a fairly sizeable amount of guns that used some smart engineering.

Percussion colts had pins between the chambers. other guns had extra notches in the cylinder for the bolt to index with

Otherwise you would use the halfcock.


However, back in the day, people didn't care about safety as much, and would just rest a pin on a primer. with a fair number of incidents of guns going off from dropping em.


There are no 19th century sources that mention skipping a chamber, this is something that has been almost wholly fabricated by Hollywood and the Single Action Shooting Society. But it really doesn't matter today. if you feel unsafe just skip a chamber.

>>31338326
HERE'S THE EASY ANSWER

When dealing with Colt SAA clones, look at the hammer. If the firing pin is mounted to the hammer, it is NOT DROP SAFE. Only load 5 and rest the hammer on an empty chamber.

If the hammer looks "flat" and does not have a firing pin mounted to it (ex. newer Ruger Single Actions), then it has a transfer bar and is drop safe. You can safely load all 6 chambers.

Double action revolvers are a different breed. The rules above apply to single action only revolvers.

>>31340323
Forgot to mention. Half cock IS STILL NOT DROP SAFE.

Look at a diagram of what the half cock notch looks like. It is just a tiny little ledge cut into the hammer. If the hammer is struck hard enough, the ledge will snap off and the gun will still fire.

>>31340323
>He doesn't know there can exist a hammer block on guns with the firing pin on the primer.

>>31340560
I think you meant to say "with the firing pin on the hammer".

Yes, I know those exist, but I haven't seen ANY Colt SAA clones with this feature. I've only seen them on DA revolvers like Smith & Wesson, Ruger, etc.

>>31338326
Didn't need to, try to put it on half-cock to load any number of rounds and it will just break anyways

File: 1877.jpg (37KB, 876x461px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 876x461px

Somebody seriously needs to make a good reproduction of the 1878 DA, not sure why that isn't a thing.
Or an 1877 reproduction made with modern materials and such so that the mechanism doesn't shit itself when you look at it funny. It's such a beautiful gun

File: 6ca191655d1ad8ac108a5a2e294f7910.jpg (96KB, 736x610px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 736x610px

>>31340783
Eh, don't really care for it being DA.

I'll sure as shit take them Birds Head grips though my nigga.

>>31341112
I do love that look, but it still is a distinctly different gun. It annoyed me when some companies started offering Lightning or Thunder "reproductions" that are literally just standard SAAs with birdshead grips