[gbelleh]

I was just wondering if there are or have ever been any revolvers that used a striker mechanism (like a Glock or Kahr) rather than a hammer.

Anyone know of anything like that? Would it work?

[gvass]

hi,
there were such "striker-fired" revolvers for the Dreyse paper-cartridges in the 19th century Germany.

[Ric]

What about the S&W enclosed hammer snubbies. Could they be called "striker" they are called "hammerless" which isn't exactly accurate.

[gbelleh]

Don't those "hammerless" revolvers just have their hammers concealed? They still use a hammer that rotates forward, not a striker that travels horizontally.

[Jim K]

Those S&W guns and similar older revolvers are really concealed hammer revolvers, not hammerless. I also assume you mean true striker firing, not just a striker or firing pin that is hit by a conventional hammer.

There were some striker fired revolvers. One, made in Belgium, has a true striker system rather like the Glock, with a tail on the firing pin that is pushed back by a bar from the trigger. I think it was chambered in the 5.5mm Velodog. There are some British patents from the percussion era, such as Needham's of 1853 and Harvey's of 1854, both of which were striker fired. Neither was produced in any quantity, if at all.

One of the design problems is that a striker must move some distance to pick up momentum to fire the round unless the spring is quite strong. The auto pistol slide has that room, but the revolver does not. So either the revolver would have to have a fairly large extension at the top (the above guns do) or have a horrendous trigger pull. (Can you imagine a DA pull that would compress the mainspring of a Mauser rifle?)

There were a couple of guns where multiple barrels were fixed and the striker turned. The Lancaster was one, the Sharps derringer another, though the latter had a hammer.

You are right, there weren't many. Maybe it is an idea whose time has come. Or maybe gone.

Jim