Holster carry of charged and capped percussion revolvers

[Rusty Shakleford]

If my '51 Navy was in good enough condition to fire, I'd keep one chamber empty for sure. As for the "keep one chamber uncapped", I personally wouldn't....don't like the idea of iron on iron right on top of a loaded chamber. I open carry my '58 everywhere, all capped and ready.

 

[Old Fuff]

Not only that, but if you leave one chamber loaded - but uncapped - you're asking for two chambers to go off at once (chain fire) as the flash from the chamber you fire can ignite the one next to it.

Another reason I doubt that very few (if any) carried with the chambers loaded but the nipples uncapped. Wind borne dust and dirt could enter and plug the nipple, or moisture might get to the powder charge. Think of the consequences if one had to cross a river on horseback.

 

[OYE]

I take it that having charged , but uncapped percussion revolvers

Pretty sure this started in Texas pretty early on but can't remember where I read it. Makes sense too. It always sounded like something a Texan would do. And explains the fact they were always whining for reinforcements to bail them out every little squabble they had with the "south of the border" folks. OYE

 

[44 Dave]

Some older Pietta '51s do not have the cylinder safety pins between the chambers.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

The "only load five" is a modern thing that I believe is a result of rules in Cowboy Action Shooting (CAS). I am not a cowboy action shooter, so I do not follow their rules and do it like they did in the 19th century.

You have it backwards. CAS rules specify carrying with an empty chamber under the hammer precisely because it is a well known fact that a Colt or other similar revolver is likely to discharge if dropped on the hammer with a live round under the hammer. The so called 'safety notch' is very weak and will shear off without a great deal of force.

Just ask Bill Ruger. Why do you think he completely redesigned his Blackhawk line back in the 1970s? Lawsuits from guys who 'knew better' and then were injured or killed when they dropped one of his Three Screw revolvers were liable to put him out of business. That's why even today Ruger will retrofit an old Three Screw Blackhawk with a transfer bar free of cost. Goes to showing good intent in case of a lawsuit.

 

[44 Dave]

Let's not cross cartridge and ball and cap. The Remington notch or the Colt pin are as safe as an empty cylinder in a cartridge gun.

 

[Crawdad1]

I ask, why tempt fate? Is there a loaded firearm, regardless of action, safer than a revolver with its hammer resting on an empty cylinder? And from that 'safe' position is there a firearm, regardless of action, quicker into battery than a revolver?

 

[rodwha]

I am far from any sort of expert, but it seems as though whatever could possibly happen to engage my hammer when it's resting in a safety notch would be no different were the hammer resting on an empty chamber. I'm not certain what the benefit is. And I did test my ROA.

I don't own a Colt clone and so have no idea if they behave any different when resting on a pin, but I'd imagine they're no different.

 

[Willie Sutton]

"I ask, why tempt fate? Is there a loaded firearm, regardless of action, safer than a revolver with its hammer resting on an empty cylinder?"

Yeah... a cap and ball pistol with it's hammer resting *between* cylinders...


Smile,


Willie

.

 

[Ephraim Kibbey]

Maybe this will help:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1861-Volunt...055?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item339c4270d7

Anyone have $750 that they do not have earmarked for something that goes BANG!

 

[Stormson]

Does it really matter if its a modern invention? Whether you are on an empty chamber or a notch you will STILL have pull the hammer back before it will fire, right? That being the case is there really any reason NOT to be as safe as possible? I mean... if you really think youre going to be in a situation that CANT be handled by 5 well placed round balls,then shouldnt you be using an AK-47 in the first place? A law-72? A-10 Warthog maybe? LOL

Seriously... All my weapons are "working guns"... And yes I keep my BP revs loaded, but they are resting on an empty chamber for now. I MAY change that in the future by cutting my 1858 hammers down to a 45' bevel and seeing if that makes the safety notches operate more securely.. But probably not in all honesty. I mean why even risk it... ANY amount of risk? If things get that rough then it wont be ANY handgun I choose first, it will be a semi-auto rifle, pump shotgun or long range centerfire rifle. If I lived in an area I felt that I needed more then 5 rounds of a very devastating round for every day carry then, again, I probably wouldnt want to be relying on ANY weapon I had to cock each and every round either...

Is ANY amount of risk to your children,wife or grandkids an "acceptable" amount of risk?

 

[rodwha]

I reshaped my Pietta '58's hammer nose so that it locked up properly. No point in it otherwise...

 

[StrawHat]

... That being the case is there really any reason NOT to be as safe as possible? I mean... if you really think youre going to be in a situation that CANT be handled by 5 well placed round balls,then shouldnt you be using an AK-47 in the first place? A law-72? A-10 Warthog maybe? LOL : ... Is ANY amount of risk to your children,wife or grandkids an "acceptable" amount of risk?

There are those of us who refer a revolver to any self loader. Myself being one of them. The handling of a revolver is second nature to me and has been for about 50 years. I recently have started to train with a 1911 but still have to think about it each time I draw from the holster. So, no, it is not worth the risk of using a firearm with unfamiliar technology to try to defend my loved ones.

When things go bump in the night I grab my N frame and know I am well armed, mentally and physically, to handle the situation.

Kevin

 

[Officers'Wife]

There are those of us who refer a revolver to any self loader. Myself being one of them. The handling of a revolver is second nature to me and has been for about 50 years. I recently have started to train with a 1911 but still have to think about it each time I draw from the holster. So, no, it is not worth the risk of using a firearm with unfamiliar technology to try to defend my loved ones.

When things go bump in the night I grab my N frame and know I am well armed, mentally and physically, to handle the situation.

Kevin

We have a winner! To StrawHat a revolver is 2nd nature in both safety and mindset. To me, a revolver in general and a cap and ball in particular are "practice" weapons and a bow to my ancestors that depended on them. The couple hours a week practicing I have spent with my Commander since I was 19 makes my mindset towards that particular platform. StrawHat has (I assume) far more quality time with his revolver which makes it a superior tool than my Commander in his hands.

The ancestor that carried the Walker pistol that Dad has in a frame over his fireplace may have or may not have carried it with all six loaded and uncapped. Considering he was on a business trip with "Uncle Billy" Sherman suggests (to me anyway) it was loaded for bear at all times. I have to take on faith that his constant exposure to the weapon forced him to learn the safest way to carry it. What that method was is pretty well lost to the passage of time. I equally take on faith that the methods he used may have been safe carry for him does not make those methods safe for me.

 

[Stormson]

I agree that many are more comfortable with a rev, and thats fine, but isnt that N frame a double action that has safety features DESIGNED to make it safe wile resting on a loaded chamber? And wernt the men who rode with Sherman engaged in military action that demanded the very best technology of the time, while also precluding accidents to those mens loved ones? If one of them dropped a weapon and it accidentally killed a fellow soldier was that risk of being killed not an agreed upon and acceptable risk in that situation?

If something went bump tonight I have a few different choices, but at this point in time and in this place, I certainly would not feel outgunned with 5 very hot loaded rounds from either of my '58s... If that ever changes then I, like those men under sheman, will want the very best technology available to me. If that is a rev then it will be one designed to SAFELY carry all 6 and not one that involves ANY level of risk to my loved ones, who certainly did NOT sign up for it.

This is JMHO... But to me, I dont see anything threatening me TODAY that demands I put me and mine at risk with safety features that are "iffy" at best... Nor can I think of anyone around here, even high on meth, that I couldnt handle with 5 rounds of .454 over 35grns of T7... If I ever do run across him, my 12G is within easy reach.

 

[Officers'Wife]

Not my point, my ancestor with Uncle Billy was in a military situation, I'll grant you that although the relevance escapes me. My point was and is that he was familiar with the weapon in both it's strengths, weaknesses and peculiarities. Technology, whether old or new, is only as good as the training of the operator.

I could mention a certain idiot that shall remain my brother and an antique 30-30 he received when he was in Jr High school. He can lay a field of fire down with that bottom feeder as well as if not better than my Dad can with his M1A. No so much because the Winchester is a better platform than the M1A but because the idiot has used the weapon so much for so long he has a personal relationship to it.

I have seen a lot of people operation a variety of equipment in conditions that would make the reasonable person question their sanity. More than a few of the stunts I've seen would be crazy dangerous if I were to attempt them but each person is either still alive or died of natural causes simply because they knew what the heck they were doing.

Built in "safety features" on any machine are in general ineffective since there is no fool proof system and a higher standard of fools appear every day. C&B revolvers had few safety systems in the day yet the majority of the ppl that carried them managed to live through the lack of them. The techniques they used would be interesting knowledge for modern ppl that use the weapons simply because the knowledge would inspire a greater skill level. And the skill level is a far greater safety feature than anything that can be tacked onto the machine at manufacture. As in all things, it's not the machine you have to worry about, it's the operator.

(Rant over)

 

[Crawdad1]

As in all things, it's not the machine you have to worry about, it's the operator.

Good point. Hickok was identified by his ivory handled '51 Navys throughout the west using them exclusively because he know them well and knew what he could do with them.

 

[DD4lifeusmc]

5 or 6

My two colts (1851-44 and walker) have the pins but i really don't trust them.
Still I load and cap all 6.
I generally use my Remingtons (44's) more often. Has a better safety between cylinders I think. Still not full proof though.
And even with it, I still load and cap all 6.
In another month the weather should start warming up here so will go shoot everything clean and reload

 

[Stormson]

You guys do as you will... But as for me, since I am not in a situation that demands I fight off hoards of enemy combatants but I DO carry my weapons day to day in situations that involve those I hold dear to me, I can think of no greater safety 'mechanism' then an empty chamber. Where I not confident in my skill level I wouldnt trust even that, however I too carry and have carried and used my weapons daily for years.... And those years have taught me that taking ANY chance, when it is unnecessary, is fool hardy and is an accident waiting to happen. If I ever have reason to fear Santa Anna's troops breaking into my home in the middle of night, then I may rethink that stance... Until then I will continue to hold and value the safety of my loved ones as dear as I do now.

Conversely, cloth is generally deemed a fairly safe object in most cases as well... In fact I use it VERY safely, each and every day of my life. Yet I still wouldnt put some of it over my eyes and drive around town with the grandkids in the car.

 

[Officers'Wife]

You guys do as you will... But as for me, since I am not in a situation that demands I fight off hoards of enemy combatants but I DO carry my weapons day to day in situations that involve those I hold dear to me, I can think of no greater safety 'mechanism' then an empty chamber. Where I not confident in my skill level I wouldnt trust even that, however I too carry and have carried and used my weapons daily for years.... And those years have taught me that taking ANY chance, when it is unnecessary, is fool hardy and is an accident waiting to happen. If I ever have reason to fear Santa Anna's troops breaking into my home in the middle of night, then I may rethink that stance... Until then I will continue to hold and value the safety of my loved ones as dear as I do now.

Conversely, cloth is generally deemed a fairly safe object in most cases as well... In fact I use it VERY safely, each and every day of my life. Yet I still wouldnt put some of it over my eyes and drive around town with the grandkids in the car.

Exactly my point Stormson, like you I have no confidence in my ability to carry a fully loaded C&B revolver. As a result, one chamber is left empty. I will not say that someone before 1870 or even up to the 20th century did not have the skill level to carry one fully loaded though. Since I have never had the opportunity to talk to someone that has actually carried such technology as a working tool there is simply no way to know. Billy Bonny, Wyatt Earp, the James and Cole brothers all died long before I was born and without someone that has rode that river to teach me otherwise I will continue to load five and carry the hammer on the sixth.

But the OP is the question was it common practice in the days when C&B were new technology. Unless I am visited by the shade of William Hickok or my 2nd or 3rd great grandfather it's not a question I can comfortably answer nor out of respect for the last two gentlemen would I even try.

 

[StrawHat]

I will see if I can locate any of my Elmer Keith books where he writes about what he learned from the ODGs. If I can find it, I will copy and post the page.

But as for me, the C&B Colts were redesigned to be carried with 6 and it works. Maybe not for everyone but neither are Chevies.

Kevin

 

[rodwha]

As I stated I tried this in my empty ROA. I saw difference between set in a safety notch vs sitting on an empty in regards to what it took to cock it. If just dropped there's no issue, and if the hammer is caught by something to the point it's an issue it's been cocked regardless. I'm not sure why the safety notch is an issue, and can only assume a safety pin works no differently as I assume a Remington safety notch works the same as my Ruger's, though I have no Colt (yet).

 

[PRM]

... I have no confidence in my ability to carry a fully loaded C&B revolver. As a result, one chamber is left empty.- Officers Wife

And that's an honest answer based on individual comfort zone. I do respect that.

When I started shooting and carrying C&B revolvers in the 1970s, I was taught to use the safety pins on the Colts and load all six or five depending on the gun. In over 40+ years the practice has never failed me and I carry them a lot. That's probably not going to change at this point in my life.

 

[44 Dave]

As I stated I tried this in my empty ROA. I saw difference between set in a safety notch vs sitting on an empty in regards to what it took to cock it. If just dropped there's no issue, and if the hammer is caught by something to the point it's an issue it's been cocked regardless. I'm not sure why the safety notch is an issue, and can only assume a safety pin works no differently as I assume a Remington safety notch works the same as my Ruger's, though I have no Colt (yet).

The hammer has to come back far enough for the hand to move the cylinder in line, even if on an empty when the hammer gets moved enough it will then be on a loaded one. On my cap and ball revolvers I have and will always (except when shooting SASS) loaded all 6,even slept with one under my pillow.
Guess you Patterson guys can load 5.
We can discuss this to death but we are set in our minds and ain't changing!

 

[Panzerschwein]

Sorry! I had my head in the cap n' ball world. That's what I shoot the most.

In CAS, it is common practice and may be in the rule book to only load a 6 shot percussion revolver 5 times, with one chamber empty. As far as I know, using the safety pins on the cylinder is not recommended in CAS circles.