does anybody cc a single action revolver?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bottom line for me is...the more operational tasks you have to accomplish before pulling the trigger and sending the projectile/s that will mean the difference between life and death, the less appropriate the selection of firearm if you have other choices. In this, a S.A. revolver is about the bottom of the barrel of my handguns.
This seems to be a popular misconception, that one is "waiting" to fire until the hammer is cocked. If you're "waiting", you're doing it wrong. The hammer should start coming back as the gun clears leather. So there is no wait for the first shot. The hammer should be cocked as the gun is recovering from recoil. So there should be no wait either way. I don't fire five shots in 1.5secs by waiting for anything to happen. Further proof that most folks really don't know what they're arguing against.
 
This seems to be a popular misconception, that one is "waiting" to fire until the hammer is cocked. If you're "waiting", you're doing it wrong. The hammer should start coming back as the gun clears leather. So there is no wait for the first shot. The hammer should be cocked as the gun is recovering from recoil. So there should be no wait either way. I don't fire five shots in 1.5secs by waiting for anything to happen. Further proof that most folks really don't know what they're arguing against.

All of which drastically increased the complexity of the task at hand at the worst time to be dealing with more complexity than absolutely necessary. Talk about not knowing what you are arguing against, nowhere did I mention "waiting" to cock the hammer of a SA. I was talking about the fact you have to cock the hammer at all.

I don't have to cock anything on my glocks or Kahr at all. I can fire them just as fast with one hand as i can with two.

The fact that you have to manually cock the hammer at all puts a S.A. revolver at a distinct disadvantage and at the bottom of my list of suitable cc firearms out of all that I own.
 
Last edited:
That's your opinion but you're obviously taking familiarity and proficiency out of the decision making process.
 
Whenever things like this come up I always wonder how many of the posters have actually used a firearm in a combat situation. Just a thought.
And you're going to be left wondering. Want a story about a bear? A wolf? Starving in the wilderness? Sure. There are good reasons why some things can't be discussed.

You can also read a man wrong. Take one of my closest friends. Knew him since the first grade. He was with the patrol boats on the Mekong. Afterwards, he traveled the world doing something for the government he never laid out in any specifics. He'd seen his share of shots exchanged in anger. Years later, he kept coming back to the first one. "It was so close I could feel the round go past my head. What did he have against me? I never did anything to him."

Yet, if you met him in a gun shop in his last days, you'd never imagine such an affable outgoing man, who always went out of his way to befriend a stranger could have such a background.

I talked to him often during that last period before Agent Orange claimed him. A particular conversation comes back. I'm on the tractor, deep winter, feeding round bales, and we're on the phone. I tell him, "Hold on, a coyote." The next thing he hears is a big boom from a single shot 45-70.

He asks, "Two-legged or four?"

"Does it amount to a damn?"

There weren't many laughs left. He didn't make it through the winter.

Any personal experience I have wouldn't have the necessary depth to support any kind of conclusion. Compared to some of the people here my experience is pretty thin, and the ideas I have come from reading and talking to people. The great thing about a place like this is that you can find out that you might be wrong about a few things and live to do better.


Whenever things like this come up I always wonder how many of the posters have actually used a firearm in a combat situation. Just a thought.
 
Whenever things like this come up I always wonder how many of the posters have actually used a firearm in a combat situation. Just a thought.
If you are referring to defensive shooting, the answer is probably very, very, few.

And none would be so unwise as to discuss an incident in a public forum.

Actually, very few posters have participated in realistic FoF training, but many have learned some relevant things from those who have.
 
When I first started carrying a gun everyday I went with a short barreled .44 Ruger SA in an IWB holster then transitioned into a shoulder holster. Even against multiple adversaries there wasnt a qualm about the capacity issue ( hell, Bernie Goetz took out 4 guys with a snub .38 Smith) but the reload factor (at least to me) got me to relegate my SA guns for the range and the field. When I am hunting I don't carry my typical EDC I carry an SA or DA revolver. The problem is with today's mass shootings becoming more prolific or the bad guys becoming better armed I want to even that playing field a whole lot more. If I was in that situation I would be grateful that I had a gun at all, I would wish more for my DA .45 625 or my 1911 or my Smith m and p in 9mm but I think I would actually rather have M60/M249 really. The Single Action has seen conflict beyond the typical robber hold up but I want something more. If you rock it than that's cool I don't think less but I don't think more of you either.
 
I have CCW'd a SA revolver in the past and would have no qualm do so in the future. The fact I don't own one at the time is the limiting factor at this time. With practice one can accurately place three or four rapid shots on target with ease. I carried mine in a high ride pancake holster just behind my hip. I hardly noticed it was there after a short time. I found it very reassuring to carry.
Currently I carry either of my semi autos or my DA revolver depending on my dress code or where I'm headed. I'd go back to a SA revolver in a heartbeat.
 
With practice one can accurately place three or four rapid shots on target with ease.
Standards vary. I used a Colt SAA for years, but I cannot begin to use one to achieve the balance of speed and precision called for in training sessions I have attended.

I found it very reassuring to carry.
A rather useless commodity.....
 
I grew up with sa's. Its in my muscle memory to draw, cock hammer(hammer is already cocked by the time barrel is pointed at target) aim, shoot.
Ex. Bowfishing, cottonmouth emerges 10' out from bank, coming my way fast! Draw, blam! Dead snake(handloaded snake shot from a 45 colt, i'm not that good). Its ingrained from use.
 
Here's some interesting thoughts on the issue. What if you don't have to shoot? You draw and the target gives up but you want to cover him or her? Or the threat is over and you now have to holster a cocked revolver. You are under tremendous stress and folks should keep their finger off the trigger unless you are pulling it.

In the first case, you have your finger on a light trigger pull gun. While resource shows that various startles, sympathetic hand movements, stumble, yips can pull the trigger of even DA revolvers or DA/SA, DAO semis - the lighter trigger is more of a risk.

In the second, you have to decock and you might be under stress and shakey. Here's an article on decocking revolvers - its not a SAA gun but has some good ideas.

Light trigger pulls can produce more NDs. Just a thought of a risk for a gun that is not optimal.
 
Here's some interesting thoughts on the issue. What if you don't have to shoot? You draw and the target gives up but you want to cover him or her? Or the threat is over and you now have to holster a cocked revolver. You are under tremendous stress and folks should keep their finger off the trigger unless you are pulling it.

In the first case, you have your finger on a light trigger pull gun. While resource shows that various startles, sympathetic hand movements, stumble, yips can pull the trigger of even DA revolvers or DA/SA, DAO semis - the lighter trigger is more of a risk.

In the second, you have to decock and you might be under stress and shakey. Here's an article on decocking revolvers - its not a SAA gun but has some good ideas.

Light trigger pulls can produce more NDs. Just a thought of a risk for a gun that is not optimal.

If the threat is only a potential one, rather than an imminent and immediate one, no finger on the trigger. When I decock a single action revolver to reholster, (Ruger with transfer bar), I do this:

Support thumb goes between hammer and frame; thumb of gun hand goes on hammer and pulls back; trigger is pulled and hammer lower past the sear; finger removed from trigger and from inside trigger guard; hammer is lowered and support thumb removed as a block when there is no room left for it.

That might sound like a lot, but just like driving a stick shift, when you do it enough, the action becomes unconscious.
 
Good for you. I know you have showed that one before but I don’t remember what it is. Most of the time I carry a revolver and often a SA.
 
To answer the OP’s question: No.

There are far better options for self defense, be it of your home or yourself while out and about than a single action revolver. If you have other options and the means to acquire something more useful than a single action revolver you should. If you’re willing to train with the SA revolver then train with a DA revolver or semiauto pistol instead. For self defense purposes training with a single action revolver is a waste of your time, and buying one is a waste of your money. If you can afford only one handgun and need it to fill multiple roles don’t buy a single action revolver.

Instead choose something you can run one handed, even with an injured single hand. We’re talking about life saving equipment, it should be as easy to use as possible. Anything that detracts from your ability to focus on managing the trigger and your sights while you worry about everything else going on is a big detriment. No one daily drives a Model T these days, so why would you EDC the handgun equivalent?
 
Here's some interesting thoughts on the issue. What if you don't have to shoot? You draw and the target gives up but you want to cover him or her? Or the threat is over and you now have to holster a cocked revolver. You are under tremendous stress and folks should keep their finger off the trigger unless you are pulling it.

In the first case, you have your finger on a light trigger pull gun. While resource shows that various startles, sympathetic hand movements, stumble, yips can pull the trigger of even DA revolvers or DA/SA, DAO semis - the lighter trigger is more of a risk.

In the second, you have to decock and you might be under stress and shakey. Here's an article on decocking revolvers - its not a SAA gun but has some good ideas.

Light trigger pulls can produce more NDs. Just a thought of a risk for a gun that is not optimal.
Hmmm, seems to me that the human race has been using exposed hammer guns for A LOT longer than they have not. Good Lord, what did we do before Glock triggers. :confused:


To answer the OP’s question: No.

There are far better options for self defense, be it of your home or yourself while out and about than a single action revolver. If you have other options and the means to acquire something more useful than a single action revolver you should. If you’re willing to train with the SA revolver then train with a DA revolver or semiauto pistol instead. For self defense purposes training with a single action revolver is a waste of your time, and buying one is a waste of your money. If you can afford only one handgun and need it to fill multiple roles don’t buy a single action revolver.

Instead choose something you can run one handed, even with an injured single hand. We’re talking about life saving equipment, it should be as easy to use as possible. Anything that detracts from your ability to focus on managing the trigger and your sights while you worry about everything else going on is a big detriment. No one daily drives a Model T these days, so why would you EDC the handgun equivalent?
I have to wonder how much single action experience is behind this post??? I would guess, not much.
 
I have to wonder how much experience you have using firearms for fighting then? My guess is none. Not one single fight using a firearm of any description. My experience isn't vast, but I do have experience in that arena, and I would never for any reason choose a single action revolver as a fighting tool given the option of a semiautomatic or a double action revolver. Strangely no one with loads of experience shooting people that are also shooting back is out advocating for single action revolvers as a solution to anything either. This is called a clue. If you want to remain clueless that's on you.

I understand that you like single action revolvers, so do I. I grew up shooting them. They're fun, they look good. They're also hopelessly obsolete, and only an utter fool would select one as a self defensive weapon given the far far better choices available today. I'm sorry if that seems harsh, but that is the truth.

Why don't you go take a class where there is force on force work, and see how well you think you could employ a single action while some dude beats the crap out of you while you're on the ground. It's tough to just get the gun out, assuming you're not fighting to keep control of it, see how much fun it would be to add needing to cock the hammer to make it work too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GEM
Expect for rimfire weapons I only have 44 & 45. I have been shooting SA probably longer than most here are old. That said like many I can shoot one hand [either hand] a SA 44 or 45 very fast and they go where I want them to go. I am fortunate to live where mobs and gangs are not a problem but when I have to do security I do carry 45acp and I am very competent with it. Because of my background and experience a revolver is second nature and my preference is a SA revolver. If that puts me in the dark ages I am happy to be there.
 
I think it would be largely appreciated if the naysayers could refrain from derailing this thread. We're on The High Road, after all.

I'd say if you want to start a thread on the reasons why single action revolvers are terrible for self defense, that'd be just fine. But that's not what this thread is about. No, I'm not a moderator. And Yes, you might feel like your opinion is noteworthy. But it seems to me that it would be much more respectful to the other members of the forum, if you could stay on topic, or stay off the thread.
 
i picked up a ruger birdshead ruger new vaquero with a 3 3/4'' barrel in 45 acp. i bought a a pancake holster for it and i carry it, my other carry is a ruger sr1911 commander in 9mm. does anybody ever carry a cowboy gun?

What a dilemma for a moderator. The OP wants to know who carries a cowboy. Now we have reasonable sample. Then the issue turn to the efficacious of the gun as a carry weapon, and it is clear that they can shoot someone but aren't the optimal choice for more than the one guy critical incident given modern DA/SA and semis. If it worked for Whatsit Burp, way back when - that's nice, doesn't mean they are comparable to the modern guns despite square range times for 6 shots.

Since that's about all there is to the thread - carry what you want based an empirical analysis and not your ego defending your choice despite evidence.

On that note - to control the bickering - closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top