[Glen]

I know this is one of those questions that comes up from time to time and has been answered over and over again, but unfortunately I am not on this site a lot and have therefore missed the answers. Please bear with me.
I have a Pietta 1858 Remington. Splendid gun. I plan to use it this winter as a primary protection arm when I am in the woods. I will carry a Bowie knife as well. The question is, how long should I keep it loaded unshot?
Any modern guns, I just unload when I come home and put in the safe. I may just go hiking or exploring or whatever. I don't always shoot when I go out. I just want the protection if necessary.
The gun is possibly subject to damp air though I don't let my guns get wet if I can help it. So we are talking about going out on weekends, in some hours of damp weather (though usually under a heavy coat as I have a concealed weapons permit) and then coming home and putting it in a nice dry safe.
You know, what did they do in 1864 or whatever year. How long did they keep 'em loaded. How long would I want to keep mine loaded before shooting it and cleaning it? What's going on or not going on in that powder filled cylinder? By the way, I use Pyrodex.
Any answers are surely welcome.

[dwave]

I can't answer on how long you can keep it loaded, but one trick to help keep the Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) out is to melt beeswax on the caps to seal them off. Biggest rule on doing that one is to keep the flame a safe distance!

[Im283]

I have some small plastic tubing, like what is used as air hoses on a aquarium. Well actually what I have was marketed as a moisture seal for caps on BP firearms. They came in a tin similar to what caps come in. And were cut to fit right.

What i do question, and certainly I mean nothing snide by this is why would you choose to carry a BP handgun for protection? Especially if you have a modern cartridge gun that can better serve the purpose. Just asking is all.

[dwave]

IM283, I know that the question wasn't directed at me, but I carry my 1851 Navy in the woods with me on nice days (key word, nice). I carry it because it is one of the best pistols I can shoot accurately. I was able to hit a target measuring 3'x3' 4 out of 6 shots at 80 yards (no groups or anything, but I was really happy getting it that many times!). Up close, I am really good with it. Now, on the foggy, moist, and wet days, it's the Taurus 608 with me, with 8 rounds of splendid .357 power. Of course around my area, I don't have bears or anything like that, just the occasional coyote or stray dog in the area.

[Pancho]

Dwave, Did you see where Glen is from? Oregon. If he weekends on the Pacific side of the mountains it's going to be damp a lot of the time.

[Misfire99]

I like the wax on the caps idea. You could even do that over the balls. Then it should be good for years unfired. Might even withstand a quick dip in the river from a misstep. I doubt if the wax over the ball would effect it's flight so accuracy wouldn't be effected.
It definitely would stop chain fires. I really like that wax idea.

[Pancho]

I'd also recomend the calvary style flap holster. They do a good job of protecting the gun from falling moister. Aside from Big foot and pumas what other cridders would you expect to hassle you. If I couldn't convience BigFoot to sit at my fire and have a few beers and talk about life in the bush Id consider stainlee steel Remington New Army in 44 cal. I like the saftey notches between the cylinders and it is the safest method when carrying 6 hot chambers The hammer locks into a notch between the cambers. The cyclinder can not rotate.

[mykeal]

I like the saftey notches between the cylinders and it is the safest method when carrying 6 hot chambers The hammer locks into a notch between the cambers. The cyclinder can not rotate.

Yes, it can.

When the hammer is placed on one of the between-chamber notches the bolt is raised but resting on they cylinder surface, not in one of the stop notches. The only thing keeping the cylinder from rotating then is the hammer engagement with the pin on the cylinder. If one removes the gun from the holster, then returns it to the holster in that configuration, it is possible (it HAS happened!) for the hammer to get caught on the edge of the holster and be pulled back off the pin enough for the cylinder to rotate, and it's a very short turn to battery. All it then takes is for the hammer to clear the edge of the holster and fall - onto a capped, loaded chamber.

Load one, skip one, load four, drop the hammer on the unloaded chamber. It's the only safe carry position.

[Malamute]

I think you can leave it loaded as long as you want to. The percussion guns I've had in the past were generally loaded as long as I owned them, and left in the tool box of my truck. They sometimes were left a year at a time and always fired.

Someone on the Leverguns forum did an experiment, he used various makes of percussion caps, 5 or 10 each, I think, and the same with centerfire primers, and put them in a cup of water outside for one week. Yes, IN the water, submerged. He then took them out, blew on them to get the excess water off, then either loaded the primers in empty cases, or with the caps, put them on the nipples of an otherwise unloaded gun, and ALL fired. I may have minor details off, but it was for one week submerged, and all fired. Will try to find a link.

[dwave]

Hey MyKeal, my 1858 with the safty notches, the hammer does not rest on a pin, but a deep notch, the hammer has to be pulled to the half cock mark to rotate the cylinder. I take the 1858 with 6 loaded, however I never carry the 1851 with 6 loaded.

Pancho, I did see where he was from, but the question wasn't directed at me, so I figured it wouldn't matter that much, just throwing an opinion out there as to why I will carry my 1851 in the woods with me.

[mykeal]

my 1858 with the safty notches, the hammer does not rest on a pin, but a deep notch, the hammer has to be pulled to the half cock mark to rotate the cylinder.

dWave - Your 1858 Remington and mine are quite different, then. On mine the hammer does rest in a notch like yours, but once the hammer clears the 'safety' notch, the cylinder is free to rotate - the hand does not move it, but it is free to move because the bolt is not engaged.

In the half cock position the hammer is well clear of the frame - there's quite a bit of distance between the point when the hammer clears the 'safety' notch and the half cock point. On your gun, what prevents free cylinder rotation after the hammer clears the notch but before the half cock position?

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Dwave, rest your hammer in the safety notch. Now, ease the hammer back just enough so that it's not in the safety notch. With one hand holding the hammer just out of the safety notch, take your other hand and turn the cylinder. See? It's easy to mess up and get a live cap under the hammer. Also notice how easy and how such little effort is required to lift the hammer from the safety notch and thus allowing the cylinder to rotate a live cap into battery.......

[Marlin 45 carbine]

I've carried my '58 Rem 'Buffalo' model and ROA for woods bumming many times. I load all cylinders and rest hammer in the notch between chambers, never had any problem. I suppose it's a little risky. I place a felt I punch out of Duro-Felt over powder and then a lubed slug pressed atop. #10 caps I CAREFULLY squeeze tightly onto the nipples with thumb pressure on the hammer, pointed downrange of course. it's humid around here and I go out in snow/sleet but not steady rain. never a problem over a week of carrying loaded but I always shoot the revolver some before I head home and do a good clean-up when I arrive.

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Does the Ruger Old Army have a transfer bar?.....

[Preposterous!]

Evening GoTCha! - It's a while since I sold my ROA but IIRC there's no transfer bar. 99.8% positive..


Preposterous!

[dwave]

Hey, it take a little more than a little bit of the hammer moved to get it out of the safty notch (which are deep on my pietta compaired to my ASM which are shallow), I don't know about you guys, but I am not afraid to use it, and have been for years. My holster has a strap that goes over the hammer too, so you can't pull it back while in the holster. As far as the cylinder goes, it will freespin if you push on it, but as I said, I have to pull the hammer a bit to get it out of the notches. I'll continue to load 6 in my Pietta 58.

As for what stops it, nothing. The deep pockets and the fact that the gun doesn't rotate the cylinder until the half mark. If I grab it right before the half, I can turn the cylinder.

Also notice how easy and how such little effort is required to lift the hammer from the safety notch and thus allowing the cylinder to rotate a live cap into battery.......

No, it's not easy to pull back. New spring and deep notches provides well enough protection (For me). As I said, they are deep. My ASM are not and that could happen, but I am not worried on my Pietta.

EDIT:
Here is my gun, look at the notches, they are cut lower than the nipples sit.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=205646

And a quote from MEC:
the five beans in the wheel rull came along sometime after the Single Action Army arrived. there were not safety pins/notches between chambers only a notch in the hammer that allowed it to be cocked just enough to hold the firing pin away from the primer. this was clearly intended to serve as the safety position. .
At some time during single action history it was determined that the hammer notch or the sear step on the trigger might break if the gun was dropped and result in a discharge.
As late as 1963, the booklet that came with Ruger Single actions said that " in most cases, it is safe to carry the revolver..." -with the hammer drawn back to the first notch. I expect that those who have not seen the 1963 booklet will deny this. ruger certainly doesn't recommend carrying pre New Model Revolvers this way any more.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=233131

Of course, it's my life, and I'll live it the way I want too, for true safeties sake leaving one unloaded would be safer than what I do, but I have never worried about shooting myself in the foot, or elsewhere.

[mykeal]

dwave -

It was not my intention to say that you are wrong in what you are doing with one of your guns. You may have, for some reason I still do not understand, a unique revolver that truly operates differently than I'm used to, and you are free to carry it with all six loaded if you wish.

However, not all of us have such a gun, and I believe the majority of c&b revolvers available today do not have the features you describe. For those of us who are less fortunate carrying on an empty cylinder is the better way to go, and my messages were intended for that audience. I note that you agree with that in your last sentence.

[Glen]

Yes, you are right, I would be wiser to carry the ..44 Mag that I have for protection in the woods. Sometimes I get nostalgic though and do something less than perfectly logical.

[dwave]

Mykeal,

My gun is not special in any way really. It just has deeper notches cut thats all. If you pull the hammer out past the notch, the cylinder can still turn if you move it. What I meant was you have to pull the hammer back over half way for the gun to move the cylinder. All I am saying is that the deep notch and my strong spring, I myself am not afraid to load all 6 and take it out, especially with the strap that goes over the hammer. Nothing special about my gun at all. I'll agree with you, 5 IS safer, but I feel safe with 6.

EDIT: I want to add that I did not mean to offend anyone, and I was not offended myself. Also thinking about it, I wonder if maybe cutting an extra cylinder stop and having one position would work well? Just a thought.

[Misfire99]

I have a couple 1858 revolvers. On both of mine I needed to do some major work on the hammer and cylinder to get the hammer to fit down nice in the safety slots. I suspect that this is not a high priority item in the manufacture. So some come out with a proper fit to the hammer and cylinder safety slot and some don't. Now that I have fit the hammer to the cylinder I trust it much more then I did before.

[Blacksmoke]

Like Pancho says, flap holsters were used for a reason and it had nothing to do with the ACLU.

Yes, muskets and pistols failed to ignite in damp weather. Which is why that pointy thing is on the end of the infantry musket and why the officers and cavalry troopers had that brush wacker hanging on the side opposite.

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Dwave, can't argue with you. Hell, I carry all six loaded to, even on my . 44 Walker and it dosen't have any notches at all!
The 1858 I have and the Cattleman'e Carbine both have the safety notches. I use them. (sometimes) As long as you have a good holster with no loose strings and all, and reach your hand down and sort of cover and guide your gun as you're moving through brush and all you won't have a problem.
I didn't mean to insinuate you didn't know what you were doing.
My Walker holster has a strap. My 1858 has a flap holster. My carbine, well, it's just there unless I'm in the rain and then I have a special piece of Gore Tex I wrap around the cylinder and hammer and all to keep the nerve center dry, and maybe slip a small balloon over the muzzle to keep rain from finding it's way into the bore. I'm pretty new to the carbine, and I am VERY new to the 58. But me and that Walker? We'vd been together for awhile. It has fed me and protected me and built my fires and I have slept beside of it, around it, across it, sideways with it, under it, and on top of it, and ever which way you could think of and it has never went off unless I wanted it to. Well, anyway, didn't mean to try and sound like a smartass in that post....

[Macmac]

GofC, The ROA does NOT have a transfer bar. It has notches like remington clones. You may load all 6 chambers and lower the hammer into a deep notch.

[Macmac]

As to the topic:

I have caps well over 10 years old, more like 20, and there is nothing wrong with them.

I have real BP over 50 years old, that was given to me, in a coffee can no less, and there is nothing wrong with that either. It was given to me to dispose of because somebody thought it was too old.

I will take care of that little by little. The method will be done under paper punching, as standard practice.

A loaded rifle, loaded properly, to include flinters can stay loaded more than 100 years. In northern New England these are sometimes discovered in attics, and they usually go boom. Of course it is a good idea to look over a gun found like that before it "speaks".

A sealed charged tends to stay sealed. If done with a bit of care, there is no reason anything will occur to ruin the charge.

I tend to melt bee's wax and paint it on warmed parts, warming in a warm room, then loading the gun, (ie leaving the gun 1 hour near a furnace) and capping last as normal. That way the wax is adheard to the metal parts. Over the top grease gets painted on, over each ball, and then is mopped up, leaving grease in the chambers at the edges, since this load is expected to be there in the future.

With a loaded flinter, you wax a feather in the vent, or if you want the prime you wax the pan, frizzen closed and primed with a acid brush, making sure it is sealed all the way around.

An old trick was to wax the prime, over the top to create a mis fire the first try, on purpose. The sencond try ususally got spark into the prime.

The idea being part of the game under Dueling. The idea to fake the other guy out, and make him believe you were helpless.

[Mustanger1]

I'm curious to a couple of statements more or less implying that a cylinder loaded with black powder and then sealed with wax on the nipple and over the ball could remain that way for an extended time. Black powder is extremely corrosive to steel especially with rusting, the wax seal would prevent the rusting? Also in regard to the cap it will fire through the wax on the nipple and ignite the cylinder? Asking because I live in SD and we have sleet, rain and snow in the winter and I would like to be able to leave my BP revolvers loaded for some time but I'm talking temps of 78 in the house to -25 outside and then back to the warm house temp and then cold again and so on and so on.

[Pancho]

Mustanger1, In my experience temperature variation is a problem. It may be cold and dry outside but step inside to the warmth of a fire and friendship, coffee brewing, people giving off moisture with a cold gun and you might have a problem. For me it's not that big a deal to shoot out, swab out, and reload the next morning. In my hunting camp it is a ritual to all shoot out before the first bourbon is poured.

[dwave]

Black powder is extremely corrosive to steel especially with rusting, the wax seal would prevent the rusting?

BP isn't corrosive when unfired, it is the residue after being fired that is corrosive.

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

If you seal up those chambers you can keep the powder in them for a long, long time.
How you seal them just depend's on however you want to do it. I very seldom go past Crisco on the mouths of the chambers. (over the balls)
I have never sealed the caps. I change them if they are exposed to rain or something. Even when the caps remain seemingly dry (no rain, sleet, snow, I didn't fall in the river, etc) I still change them about once a week. Maybe every once in a while I might change them twice a week. I have fired caps that were on the gun and had just been exposed to driving rain for a couple of hours while I was wearing the gun in an open holster with no cover. But they were shot right away. It's not like I waited 2 or 3 days to try and shoot them.
I fire Remington # 10's and Remington #11's. I don't 'pinch' caps although I guess I would if I ran out of #10's and #11's was all I had left. I use #11's on the revolver that call's for # 11's and I use #10's on the revolver that call's for #10's.
I have never (knock on wood) had a problem with 'loose caps' and my caps fire when the hammer falls.
I'm sure moisture would hurt them. (IF THE MOISTURE CAN GET TO THEM OVER A PERIOD OF TIME) You need to keep your powder and caps sealed up tight. Hell, I even keep a piece of cotton in the spout on my flask to help insure that no moisture can find it's way into the flask.
I'll tell ya'll one thing. My guns shoot first time, every time, and that's the truth. If they didn't, and I knew I'd done everything I could, then I'd throw them away and start looking for something else...Respectfully...

[Coyote Hunter]

Here is my consideration for carrying a BP revolver over modern cartridge around the farm...MY EARS.. let's be honest, if a mad possum or coyote or big mean skunk or snake needs to be taken care of, you usually don't have the means to cover your ears. 20 to 30 grains of BP does not hurt my ear drums, modern powder does hurt and ring them.

Now, I admit I've begun to merge the best of both worlds. I now reload my .45 cases with BP and can have the the same effect, just in a cartidge. But, I still love to carry that navy, it just points soo good for a snap shot.


CH

[Macmac]

A thin coating of wax painted on the nipple isn't ramming a nipple bore full of wax.. With a loaded cylinder perhaps out of the frame painting a dob more wax at the cap base isn't going to do anything but seal the cap.

I never usually load a six gun this way, but if I did I could remove the grips and soak it in a pond over night, and expect it to fire the next day..

Wil my flinter smooth bores I load for a game animal and unless that animal changes from bird to deer, the load stays in the gun.

Since I loaded a clean gun there is nothing to rust, and or corrode.

Punching paper with round ball in a flinter I use real honest spit patches.

I never have a patch I spit on in the gun very long.. When I load to hunt knowing that charge might be there 3 months I use a grease, tallow and wax mix I make, made to deal with rain and snow..

The wads I use in the 6 guns are soaked in the same grease mix warm and melted. My coat usually covers my gun... I don't normally store these all that long, but if I wanted to a dob of melted wax over the caps sides to seal them is easy..

Once sealed that way, I would bet money the gun will go off in say 200 years still.. I can back tha up as on occasions guns discovered in attics are brought to me loaded...

They are brought to me to see if they are in fact loaded and some of them are. If they are not the guns gets cleaned up and a coating of oils for wood, metal and leather is applied and that's that..

If the gun is loaded it is then inspected to see if it is safe to fire one last time.. Some are deemed fit while others are not..

If not the charge is pulled.

If they are ok the charge is fired.... So far none fired have misfired.

Attics in New England , like northern New Hampshire and Maine, are as cold as SD is... Probably more humid than SD ever is..

[RecoilRob]

IIRC, General Lee loaded a Navy at the onset of the War of Northern Aggression and carried it unfired through the entire conflict. It was passed down to his son (?) and, on some anniversary years later fired without fail.

So long as the pistol isn't dropped into a pond, I'd imagine it will fire years after loading.

[Glen]

This is pretty darn well covering the subject. By the way, I do live in the western part of Oregon, and it gets wet around here.
Yes, I was curious not only about how long the charges in the cylinder might last as far as being able to fire is concerned, but I was also curious about any rust that could happen.
It sounds like the charge is going to go off and that there will be no rust even after the BP firearm has been loaded for "some time." Under extreme circumstances, or even just to be safe, you could do some wax around the nipples. It certainly appears that there would be no problem at all with keeping a BP firearm loaded and ready to go for two or three weeks at a time. I would certainly shoot it within a month and then clean it nicely. Maybe that's about how it went in 1864 (if you weren't in the war that is).
I sure appreciate everyone who has responded--and this does not mean that the subject is over if we want to keep going.
Thanks all!

[Omnivore]

Just fired my Colt repro revolver Saturday after leaving 5 chambers loaded, with no caps, since last September. The revolver spent most of that time in my pickup in weather ranging from hot to near zero F in rain, snow, the whole deal here during this North Idaho winter.

These were charges of 29 grains of FFF, a wonderwad, then a 454 round ball, and Bore Butter over the ball. The first shot was so mild that I actually took the barrel off to look for a ball stuck in the barrel. It was clear, so I fired the other 4 shots. Very little smoke. They were all weak, and where the balls hit the paper target they left a black, tar-like goo on the paper. All shots went low at 25 yards, and some had a slight delay of around 25 to 35 milliseconds, but thay all fired.

Subsequent shots all performed as normal, hitting one string of 6 within 2.5" at 25 paces from standing-- probably the best I've done with any handgun. Chrono'ed, this load produces an average velocity of 841 fps over 12 shots.

Bottom line-- I wouldn't ever leave a loaded BP revolver out in the cold like this, or through wide temperature swings, as this is how moisture gets pulled into the chambers. This was done intentionally as a test. Otherwise, if kept nice and dry (and that's a big "if") I'd have no worries about long-term storage while loaded. On the other hand, how hard can it be to fire the thing once a month and keep the charges more fresh?

[Pancho]

Mustanger, At Deer Camp we generally after a cold dry day leave our guns outside. We do this to eliminate the sweats the guns take on after bringing them into a hot cabin with all the cooking going on and the heated BS flying. If it has been a wet day we shoot out and bring the guns inside to be reloaded in the morning.

[JJBlanche]

I don't know about the Remington, but I know the Ruger Old Army is as safe in a safety notch as it is on an unloaded chamber.

[mykeal]

I know the Ruger Old Army is as safe in a safety notch as it is on an unloaded chamber.
And you know this because...? I'd be interested to know the reasoning that brought you to this conclusion.

[whosyrdaddy]

And you know this because...? I'd be interested to know the reasoning that brought you to this conclusion.

I can't speak for JJ, but I suspect, in a nut shell, it goes something like this:

'Round and 'round she goes, where she stops, nobody knows.

In other words, once the hammer is retracted to the point that the cylinder is free to spin, the amount of rotation is determined by unknown variables, thus making irrelevant the point of beginning.;)

[JJBlanche]

whosyrdaddy: Exactly...

[Macmac]

The ROA has very deep notches and the hammer is seated deeply into them, deeper than if the hammer was left on a uncapped nipple.

In the event the hammer was brought up and then some how dropped any BP six gun will stand a chance of going off, if the next clyinder is loaded.

[Macmac]

You guys have 1851's with notches? I just had IM 284's 51' here for some work and i don't recall notches, and I was comparing it to my 1860 EMF clone which for sure has no notches.. The 60' has pins, which are just like brand new because they scare me...

[Preposterous!]

On the subject of corrosion:

I believe that the corrosive effect associated with black powder/pyrodex is caused by it attracting moisture. Therefore if the cylinder is loaded without an air gap and then sealed with wax or whatever, it will not allow the ingress of moisture and corrosion will not occur.

I'd be interested to hear from anyone here who can confirm this?

IIRC, 777 is very low in sulphur and therefore would be even better.

Preposterous!

[dwave]

You guys have 1851's with notches?

No, we are talking about the 1858 New Army and the Ruger Old Army. 1851's have pins that the hammer sits on, if they have them. I have 2 Pietta 51s and one has pins, the other doesn't.

[Macmac]

Opps! 51 colt-58 remington.. Maybe one day i will post on the same page.

Just as soon as i get my head out of the sand. :banghead:

[mykeal]

Well, I asked for the source of the knowledge, and I don't think that was provided. Macmac started down the right road but didn't get the right result. So I'll give it a shot. The source is to take the guns out and actually test the function. Here's a composite picture: the left frame shows the ROA hammer fully engaged in a between-chamber 'safety' notch on the back of the cylinder. Keep in mind that in this position the bolt is not engaged in a cylinder stop notch, so all one has to do to move the cylinder is raise the hammer enough to clear the 'safety' notch. The middle frame shows just that condition: the hammer has been drawn back so that it just clears the notch, and the cylinder is free to rotate. In this case it needs to rotate only 30 degrees and the bolt will drop into a cylinder stop notch, stopping the rotation with a capped, loaded chamber in battery. The right frame shows the hammer being drawn back from a nipple; the starting position was down on the uncapped nipple. In this starting position the bolt is engaged in a cylinder stop notch. The hammer has long since cleared the nipple but the cylinder was stopped from rotating until the bolt retracted. The picture was taken at that point; notice the difference in hammer position between the middle and right frames - in the case when the hammer starts from an empty chamber it has to move much further before the cylinder is capable of being rotated. In addition, the cylinder has to rotate twice as far - 60 degrees - before a capped, loaded chamber is in battery for the hammer to fall on it. Clearly the case where the hammer starts out on an empty chamber is significantly safer than the case where it is in one of the 'safety' notches.
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/mykealsm/Guns/ROAcomposite.jpg

The same is true for the 1858 Remington:
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/mykealsm/Guns/Remcomposite.jpg

And no, gentlemen, the amount of rotation is not controlled by 'unknown variables'. It will be stopped by the bolt dropping into the first cylinder stop notch it encounters. Which is the in battery position for a loaded chamber. Of course, if you wish to continue that line of reasoning, the addition of 'unknown variables' creates the classic extreme unsafe condition...since the variables are unknown and control the situation, one must assume they will cause a catastrophic event. That's the basic tenant of safety engineering. You just lost your own argument.

[Tommygunn]

MyKeal, my Pietta Remington allows the hammer to rest far more deeply in the grooves than does that particular Remmie, which I think is Uberti (?).
I think it might be a tad safer ... unless it has a weak mainspring. But a weak mainspring might also leave it easier to accidently jar the revolver into firing even if the hammer was down on an empty chamber if it recieved a hard blow.
I am not arguing for using these safety notches over the empty chamber.
There are always "degrees" of danger. If I don't want a gun to pose a possible danger of going off I unload it.
In fact, I have never been in a situation where I've really considered using these safeties; the one time I did keep a BP revolver loaded I had the hammer down on an empty chamber. But OTOH it was a Colt design, and it did not have the safety pins, so the question was "pre-answered" by the particular gun.

IIRC, even way 'back the empty chamber was considered the best way of carrying.

[mykeal]

Tommygunn - Nope, it's a Pietta, made in 1981. However, the depth of the grooves isn't a major factor, as you can see on the ROA - those grooves are much deeper. The fact that the bolt isn't engaged, combined with the shorter rotation required to come into battery, is what makes using the 'safety' notches less safe than carrying on empty.

You are right - deeper grooves are a 'tad' safer, but the difference is miniscule when compared with the empty chamber scenario.

Safety design, and safety decisions, are all a matter of 'degree' - the product of the likelihood of an event occuring times the damage it will cause when it does occur. In this case, the damage is significant personal injury, even death. It takes one heckuva lot of reduction in the likelihood to make the risk acceptable.

[dwave]

IIRC, even way 'back the empty chamber was considered the best way of carrying.

According to MEC, not until the SAA was made.

[JJBlanche]

mykeal: I think you and I both know this is just an academic exercise. You can post all the pictures you want, but the hammer on the ROA needs a decent amount of force to raise it out of the safety recess, and only a tiny, tiny bit more to raise it to the point where the cylinder will rotate freely -- which is something you can't show over the internet. The circumstances required for an ROA to fire accidentally with the hammer in a recess are so unfathomable and fantastic, that I'd challenge anyone to come up with a senario where the gun is more likely to fire while in a recess than it is on an unloaded chamber. If one thinks about it, the required conditions are identical.

Thus, my argument that the ROA is just as safe in a notch as it is on an empty. Ruger, so concerned with litigation that they put a "read manual" stamp on the barrel, would be the last people to say "put it in a safety notch" if it was not, in fact, quite safe in a notch.

For that matter, and I mean this without irony or sarcasm, I am aware enough, when handling my guns, that the hammer stays where it should until I engage it.

...and I really must say this again: the amount of difference between safety notch and empty chamber safety is negligible and moot when one considers the conditions required for either to present a problem. Sure, I suppose you could come up with formulas and government approved reports that say the Ruger Old Army is 3% safer when the hammer is lowered on an empty chamber...but what happens when someone tells you that a cartridge revolver, with its smokeless powder and transfer-bar system, is 10,000% safer than an Old Army...do you just throw the ROA in the trash and get the modern iteration? No, you use reason, and weigh the variables.

Therefore, the benefits of the extra shot and the safety notch far outweigh any "advantages" to carrying on an unloaded chamber. A modern and legal conscious manufacturer like Ruger would not put safety notches on a gun, and go so far as to recommend using them in the manual, if they were not 100% functional.

Now, far be it from me to tell someone what to do with their gun. If lowering on an empty makes you feel better, than by all means. ...but when someone tells me point blank I'm wrong, I have to provide an explanation for my reasoning.

[Tommygunn]

Tommygunn - Nope, it's a Pietta, made in 1981.

Well, oooooooops. Yes, looking more carefully at the cylinder rather than at the hammer/cylinder interface, I see the typical deep Pietta notches. My goof.
In any case I would agree that empty chamber is certainly safer than safety notch/pin so I guess the rest is really poofery of a kind.

[Tommygunn]

Okay, it took five minutes for a "quick post" to take so I did a accidental double tap while rapping my fingers impatiently .... sue me.

[whosyrdaddy]

in the case when the hammer starts from an empty chamber it has to move much further before the cylinder is capable of being rotated.

First, " much " is a relative term. Relative to the entire possible range of hammer travel, " minuscule " would be a more accurate description.

Secondly, this statement tends to imply that the likelihood of hammer travel decreases as it moved off the nipple. Since the force causing the hammer to move is the second unknown variable, such implication cannot be supported without imposing artificial limits and/or ranges to this variable.

In addition, the cylinder has to rotate twice as far - 60 degrees - before a capped, loaded chamber is in battery for the hammer to fall on it.

Again, this statement implies likelihood decreases as rotation increases from the onset of motion. Again imposes invalid parameters for an unknown variable.

Hence, Clearly the case where the hammer starts out on an empty chamber is significantly safer than the case where it is in one of the 'safety' notches. This statement is invalid.


And no, gentlemen, the amount of rotation is not controlled by 'unknown variables'. It will be stopped by the bolt dropping into the first cylinder stop notch it encounters. Which is the in battery position for a loaded chamber.

Now pull that hammer back just a tad bit further and give that cylinder a good spin. Do you here that CLICKITY..CLICK..CLICK....CLICK......CLICK......CLICK ? That would be the sound of your argument flying out the window.:eek:

Of course, if you wish to continue that line of reasoning, the addition of 'unknown variables' creates the classic extreme unsafe condition..

As well as the classic extreme safe condition and everything in between. ( see def. of "unknown" and "variable" )

since the variables are unknown and control the situation, one must assume they will cause a catastrophic event.

IIRC it was my third grade teacher who said to assume anything is to make an ASSout ofUandME


That's the basic tenant of safety engineering.

The thing about engineers, and I've known more than a few, is that they tend to exist in their own reality so to speak. They leave no room for those things that cannot be assigned a specific value or set of properties, They absolutely despise unpredictability and the indefinable. In short, they seem to have a lot of trouble comprehending the human element.

Most of the rest of us live in the real world where bumble bees do fly, despite the laws of physics.:neener:

[happybrew]

I, too, reside in Oregon. In my limited experience, a black powder revolver will go off reliably after being loaded for a month. After three months in this climate, you cannot rely on it and you will have hang fires and failures to fire. I would recommend #11 caps rather than #10 caps as the #10's hang fire more in our climate.

People living in different climates may have different experiences, but that is what I have experienced in Western Oregon's climate.

happybrew

[Macmac]

My ROA is of 1972 vintage, so has no Bible warning stamped on the barrel. I kind of like not having that.

This gun was used when I bought it, and I never ran the numbers to know if even Ruger keeps track of dates of manufactor.

Maybe I am just carefull, as no gun I ever owned went off "by itself", but so far since I have owned the ROA and set the hammer in the safe notch, I have never found it off the safe notch.

The same can be said for my EMF colt clone kit gun, when left on a un-loaded clyinder.

OT maybe but the worst scare I have suffered so far has been with a Kimber CDP pro II, where I find the holster can trip the dual safety to "FIRE" with out me knowing that happened. Since this is a safety issure I feel it is correct to mention this flaw of action, which may or not be my fault.

Point in case: With my ruger if I plan to holster it I will still leave one chamber empty, and still use the safe notch. The empty chamber being the next in line.

This forces me to cock the piece twice to be able to fire it from the holster.

Being holstered means I don't have immediate intent to fire, so there should be time. I don't carry BP guns for ccw..

I follow many of these debates to learn.. learn I do...

These debates force me to look at items and design in ways, that other wise I would not.

Perhaps one more reason my six guns stay where I set them is most of my open top holters have a hammer thong.

[Pancho]

Mykeal, You are welcome in my deercamp anytime and we only invite back the ones that can prove by action that they are safe to hunt with but I might interject that arguing about the safety notch guns being 100% safe is like arguing religion. NO LOADED GUN IS 100% SAFE! Living is dangerous and only less so if you live in a closet. Manufacturers have tried their best to make guns fool proof to the point that they are so complicated you need to take a refresher course every morning before you strap on your concealed carry Glock.
I guess what I'm saying is that our father's accepted a certain amount of risk just to get out of bed. Today we have this thought ,with our technology, that we can live life risk free.
Anyone who carries a loaded firearm is a potential danger to himself and others. I would also argue that a certain amount of complacency could occur with a person having a completely safe loaded firearm.
In summation I would repeat "never say never but never let never toolblock you from living prudently.

[mykeal]

Pancho -

Thanks for the invite. I'm afraid my contributions to deer camps the last few years have been cooking breakfast and telling bigger lies, but should I find myself wandering about southern Ohio in need of a cup of coffee or a nice cold beer I'll take you up on it. The wife has acquired a high powered centerfire VISA with a Leupold scope that she uses for antique china cups and saucers in that area on occasion...I get to drive and hold the light.

I don't believe I've ever said that carrying on empty was 100% safe. I know that goal is unreachable. My intent was to get people to think about how their revolvers work and in so doing understand there may be alternatives that would make things safer for them. Sadly, in a couple of cases, I did not achieve that result.

[Perk]

mykeal - Don't be too awful disappointed. 'Bout the only thing one will likely get everyone to agree upon, is at which end of the gun it is better to stand. And, sometimes I wonder about even that.

[Pancho]

A high powered centerfire Visa. Heaven Help Us All. Sorry Mykeal we can never let our wives meet. My lady is into cups and saucers too, the kind that you can't stick your finger through the handle.
I appreciate what you're saying about safety and my intent was to take it beyond just the Remingtions and the Rugers and shout out that the best safety is to always be aware when one has a loaded weapon and never to depend on mechanics to let your brain go on coast. You screw up once and you ain't ever going to be invited back to deer camp.

[dwave]

My intent was to get people to think about how their revolvers work and in so doing understand there may be alternatives that would make things safer for them. Sadly, in a couple of cases, I did not achieve that result.

I agree that one empty is safer, but I do not worry about having all 6 loaded in my 1858. I do carry my colts loaded with 5 though.

[enfield]

Bill Hickok reloaded his Navy's every morning.

[scrat]

So does this emply he fired them every night

[dwave]

According to TV, he fired them, cleaned them, and reloaded them every morning.

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Well, all I'vd got to say about the matter is that it's just a damn good thing I wasn't
around back then. I would have kicked Wild Bill's ass around the block for him a couple of times, .36's and all..!!!!!

[Pancho]

Oh Boy! G of the C. You make that statement into a thread and you'll be busy till Spring. HEH, Heh, Heh.

[dwave]

Well, all I'vd got to say about the matter is that it's just a damn good thing I wasn't
around back then. I would have kicked Wild Bill's ass around the block for him a couple of times, .36's and all..!!!!!

I hope that is before he shots you for your troubles.