Revolver Question - Why not load all six?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DougB

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
245
Location
California
I just read a thread indicating that it is common practice to load only 5 chambers on black powder revolvers - especialy when they won't be fired immediately. I've herd this before as well. I have two Pietta replicas - a Colt 1860 and a Remington 1858. Both have a place to rest the hammer BETWEEN chambers. I can't see how safety is enhanced by leaving an empty chamber when I can easily rest my hammer between the chambers where it can't hit a cap.

Do people leave the empty chamber in the next to fire position (so cocking the gun raises the hammer over an empty chamber - meaning you'd have to cock it twice to fire a shot)? If not, why leave an empty chamber at all?

I'm wondering if this practice may be because some revolvers aren't designed to easily allow resting the hammer between chambers.

I'm fairly new to black powder revolers, and I want to be safe, but I just can't make sense of this rule.

P.S. I spoke with some guys from a black powder club last weekend, and they said they only allow loading ONE chamber in revolvers at their shoots. They said this is to avoid having multiple chambers go off at once. Seems a little over-cautious to me. Maybe we should all just switch to airsoft :)

Thanks

Doug
 
The hammer is seated on the empty chamber in order to avoid accidental discharge of a loaded chamber. The Colt pins are a nice idea, but actually are inadequate for a safety as they are easily bent, and they don't always fit well into the groove on the hammer face (especially on well-used guns where the hammer face is a little worn and the groove is slightly peened). The Remingtons are a little better as they have an actual cavity between the chambers that the hammer fits into; but they, too, have been known to accidently go off given the right set of circumstances.

Pistoleros learned long, long ago that the safest route to take is to leave the hammer down on an empty chamber. This applies to cartridge guns as well. Wyatt Earp himself strongly recommended this... and he would have known as he almost started a riot once while playing a game of poker at a local saloon when his revolver fell out of its holster and accidently discharged. No one was hurt, but there was some real excitement for a few minutes amongst his fellow patrons. Here is some damned good advice from the man himself (from his autobiography). It's a little long-winded for a forum, but well worth the effort:

"I was a fair hand with pistol, rifle, or shotgun, but I learned more about gunfighting from Tom Speer's cronies during the summer of '71 than I had dreamed was in the book. Those old-timers took their gunplay seriously, which was natural under the conditions in which they lived. Shooting, to them, was considerably more than aiming at a mark and pulling a trigger. Models of weapons, methods of wearing them, means of getting them into action and operating them, all to the one end of combining high speed with absolute accuracy, contributed to the frontiersman's shooting skill. The sought-after degree of proficiency was that which could turn to most effective account the split-second between life and death. Hours upon hours of practice, and wide experience in actualities supported their arguments over style."

"The most important lesson I learned from those proficient gunfighters was the the winner of a gunplay usually was the man who took his time. The second was that, if I hoped to live long on the frontier, I would shun flashy trick-shooting -- grandstand play -- as I would poison.

"When I say that I learned to take my time in a gunfight, I do not wish to be misunderstood, for the time to be taken was only that split fraction of a second that means the difference between deadly accuracy with a sixgun and a miss. It is hard to make this clear to a man who has never been in a gunfight. Perhaps I can best describe such time taking as going into action with the greatest speed of which a man's muscles are capable, but mentally unflustered by an urge to hurry or the need for complicated nervous and muscular actions which trick-shooting involves. Mentally deliberate, but muscularly faster than thought, is what I mean.

"In all my life as a frontier police officer, I did not know a really proficient gunfighter who had anything but contempt for the gun-fanner, or the man who literally shot from the hip. In later years I read a great deal about this type of gunplay, supposedly employed by men noted for skill with a forty-five.

"From personal experience and numerous six-gun battles which I witnessed, I can only support the opinion advanced by the men who gave me my most valuable instruction in fast and accurate shooting, which was that the gun-fanner and hip-shooter stood small chance to live against a man who, as old Jack Gallagher always put it, took his time and pulled the trigger once.

"Cocking and firing mechanisms on new revolvers were almost invariably altered by their purchasers in the interests of smoother, effortless handling, usually by filing the dog which controlled the hammer, some going so far as to remove triggers entirely or lash them against the guard, in which cases the guns were fired by thumbing the hammer. This is not to be confused with fanning, in which the triggerless gun is held in one hand while the other was brushed rapidly across the hammer to cock the gun, and firing it by the weight of the hammer itself. A skillful gun-fanner could fire five shots from a forty-five so rapidly that the individual reports were indistinguishable, but what could happen to him in a gunfight was pretty close to murder.

"I saw Jack Gallagher's theory borne out so many times in deadly operation that I was never tempted to forsake the principles of gunfighting as I had them from him and his associates.

"There was no man in the Kansas City group who was Wild Bill's equal with a six-gun. Bill's correct name, by the way, was James B. Hickok. Legend and the imaginations of certain people have exaggerated the number of men he killed in gunfights and have misrepresented the manner in which he did his killing. At that, they could not very well overdo his skill with pistols.

"Hickok knew all the fancy tricks and was as good as the best at that sort of gunplay, but when he had serious business at hand, a man to get, the acid test of marksmanship, I doubt if he employed them. At least, he told me that he did not. I have seen him in action and I never saw him fan a gun, shoot from the hip, or try to fire two pistols simultaneously. Neither have I ever heard a reliable old-timer tell of any trick-shooting employed by Hickok when fast straight-shooting meant life or death.

"That two-gun business is another matter that can stand some truth before the last of the old-time gunfighters has gone on. They wore two guns, most of six-gun toters did, and when the time came for action went after them with both hands. But they didn't shoot them that way.

"Primarily, two guns made the threat of something in reserve; they were useful as a display of force when a lone man stacked up against a crowd. Some men could shoot equally well with either hand, and in a gunplay might alternate their fire; others exhausted the loads from the gun on the right, or the left, as the case might be, then shifted the reserve weapon to the natural shooting hand if that was necessary and possible. Such a move -- the border shift -- could be made faster than the eye could follow a top-notch gun-thrower, but if the man was as good as that, the shift would seldom be required.

"Whenever you see a picture of some two-gun man in action with both weapons held closely against his hips and both spitting smoke together, you can put it down that you are looking at the picture of a fool, or a fake. I remember quite a few of these so-called two-gun men who tried to operate everything at once, but like the fanners, they didn't last long in proficient company.

"In the days of which I am talking, among men whom I have in mind, when a man went after his guns, he did so with a single, serious purpose. There was no such thing as a bluff; when a gunfighter reached for his forty-five, every faculty he owned was keyed to shooting as speedily and as accurately as possible, to making his first shot the last of the fight. He just had to think of his gun solely as something with which to kill another before he himself could be killed. The possiblity of intimidating an antagonist was remote, although the 'drop' was thoroughly respected, and few men in the West would draw against it. I have seen men so fast and so sure of themselves that they did go after their guns while men who intended to kill them had them covered, and what is more win out in the play. They were rare. It is safe to say, for all general purposes, that anything in gunfighting that smacked of show-off or bluff was left to braggarts who were ignorant or careless of their lives.

"I might add that I never knew a man who amounted to anything to notch his gun with 'credits,' as they were called, for men he had killed. Outlaws, gunmen of the wild crew who killed for the sake of brag, followedthis custom. I have worked with most of the noted peace officers -- Hickok, Billy Tilghman, Pat Sughre, Bat Masterson, Charlie Basset, and others of like caliber -- have handled their weapons many times, but never knew one of them to carry a notched gun.

"There are two other points about the old-time method of using six-guns most effectively that do not seem to be generally known. One is that the gun was not cocked with the ball of the thumb. As his gun was jerked into action, the old-timer closed the whole joint of his thumb over the hammer and the gun was cocked in that fashion. The soft flesh of the thumb ball might slip if a man's hands were moist, and a slip was not to be chanced if humanly avoidable. This thumb-joint method was employed whether or not a man used the trigger for firing.

"On the second point, I have often been asked why five shots without reloading were all a top-notch gunfighter fired, when his guns were chambered for six cartridges. The answer is, merely, safety. To ensure against accidental discharge of the gun while in the holster, due to hair-trigger adjustment, the hammer rested upon an empty chamber. As widely as this was known and practiced, the number of cartridges a man carried in his six-gun may be taken as an indication of a man's rank with the gunfighters of the old school. Practiced gun-wielders had too much respect for their weapons to take unnecessary chances with them; it was only with tyros and would-bes that you heard of accidental discharges or didn't-know-it-was-loaded injuries in the country where carrying a Colt's was a man's prerogative." (Bold and italics are mine -J.T.)

There are also stories of the old timers using the empty chamber for storage of bail money and other sundry items.

When carrying a loaded pistol in the field, always leave one chamber empty under the hammer. Better to load only five rounds than to have the hammer get caught in the brush and come down on a live cap or cartridge.
 
Last edited:
I've been through this subject on this and other forums, and will say right off that nobody will be convinced they were wrong and change the way they carry regardless of who says what. There are those of us that believe carrying 6 loaded is unsafe and there are those of us that believe it's perfectly safe. So, knowing in advance what the outcome will be I'll just attempt to portray the facts. You can then distort them all you want to justify your own position.

The crux of the situation is in how the bp single action revolver action is designed. When you let the hammer down on the between-chamber notch, or pin, or whatever clever feature your particular gun has, the bolt is raised but does NOT reside in a cylinder stop notch. Thus the only thing preventing the cylinder from rotating is the hammer itself.

I'll digress a bit here and say that the Ruger Old Army has the best between-chamber notches in terms of securing the hammer; the Remington 1858 New Army (or Navy) is next, and the Colt pins are last.

Ok, so we have the hammer down between chambers, the bolt raised and resting on the cylinder face between notches. Contrast that with the case when the hammer is down on an empty chamber - in that condition the bolt is raised and resting in a cylinder stop notch; both the hammer and the bolt are securing the cylinder from rotation.

In the next step you need to make an assumption that the hammer is pulled back from it's resting place by some unintentional means. There are plenty of scenarios that can make that happen, and this is where the between-chamber fans usually claim safety occurs - they don't agree that this mysterious outside influence can occur. Whatever. We'll get into that later. For now, just assume it can happen.

Now, pull the hammer back slightly. As you pull back there will come a point where the hammer is no longer preventing cylinder movement. If you started the hammer back from the between-chamber position the cylinder can then move because the bolt is between notches. If you have 6 loaded chambers the cylinder need rotate only 30 degrees before the hammer drops onto a loaded, capped chamber. The only thing that would prevent that from happening is pulling the hammer all the way back to half cock, which is much further back than when the hammer cleared the cylinder and allowed it to move.

Notice that the hand, although moving, is not a player in the above scenario, it not having engaged any of the ratchet teeth on the back of the cylinder. Thus the cylinder rotation is not being cause by the hammer coming back - some other force must be applied to make it move. We therefore need two forces - one pulling the hammer and another turning the cylinder. Also notice that the bolt does not encounter any cylinder stop notches until the adjacent chamber is in battery - it's not been retracted by the hammer movement either.

Now, in the case where the hammer is on a empty chamber: pull the hammer back in the same manner as above. The point where the cylinder is free to rotate occurs at a point when the hammer is further back than the between-chamber case because the bolt restrains the cylinder. The hammer is closer to the half cock position where it would be held from falling back on the cylinder. Also, the cylinder must rotate twice as far, 60 degrees, before a full chamber is in battery.

So, which condition is 'safer' - one where the cylinder rotates only 30 degrees to go into battery and can start as soon as the hammer clears the 'safety device', or one where the cylinder must rotate 60 degrees to battery and can't start until the bolt clears the cylinder notch?

Now the question of what mysterious, unintentional outside force can pull the hammer back and rotate the cylinder at the same time. This is where the between-chamber fans shine. The above descriptions are simply renditions of the facts of the design, but here we get into philosophy, speculation and just plain story telling (by the way, the worst defense here is that 'I've been doing it this way for xx years and never had a problem' - the post hoc ergo proctor hoc logical fallacy).

My favorite mysterious force is the edge of the holster while putting the gun away. A holster that's poorly designed, damaged or just not right for the particular gun can (and has) caught the hammer, pulling it back as the gun is allowed to fall into the holster, while the cylinder is turned as it rubs against the holster against the user's leg. There are plenty of others.

In the end it doesn't matter. Carrying 6 loaded with the hammer down is not as safe as carrying with the hammer down on an empty chamber; that's clear from the design details. Whether it's safe ENOUGH is a different question and involves each person answering for themselves the classic, age old safety question: what are the consequences, and do they justify taking the extra step of additional safety measures?

Personally, on the firing line I load all 6. Unless the range happens to have a rule against it, in which case I smile politely and follow the rules (I try to get along). However, when carrying in a holster off the line, I load one, skip one, load four, and put the hammer down on an empty chamber. The consequences just are not worth the extra round. IMHO.
 
Last edited:
Just make sure you clean the unused chamber well. I have 2 revolvers that somebody did this and chambers are pitted bad on them. Some contemplation on this and the solution is to rotate the empty chamber. This will even out the wear
on all chambers.
By the way when I am hog hunting I carry loaded on all six on the ROA. On the Remmie notches were redone, colt load 5 no more. Just my opinion your mileage may vary. PeashooterJoe
 
Great post on gunfighters, J.T. Gerrity. That is a copy, paste and save.

What about force on the hammer that might cause the loaded round under the hammer to go BOOM, with no cylinder rotation, from (for example) dropping the gun?
Someone mentioned in a post awhile back that he dropped a capped cylinder at the range and one cap popped and sent a roundball into someone's shoulder nearby. Didn't do much damage but it was probably embarrassing. Does anyone remember that post?
I can honestly say that I've never carried a BP gun in a holster, loaded or not, but I do carry a Ruger Speed Six .357/.38 and for years I've loaded all six, but recently I've only loaded five. What made me change my mind, I'm not sure. Might be a media-caused fear of liability here in MA.
When I was a cop and carried the S & W .357 revolvers, we always loaded all six. Then when we switched to the Sig .9mm we carried one in the chamber, though I know it's a different scenerio with a semi-auto.
 
What about force on the hammer that might cause the loaded round under the hammer to go BOOM, with no cylinder rotation, from (for example) dropping the gun?

I don't think anyone was talking about carrying with the hammer down on a loaded chamber. I've not run into anyone who advocates that with a c&b revolver.

The issue here is carrying a c&b revolver. LEO's live with entirely different scenarios than the recreational shooter, thus what the cops have to do doesn't really apply to making a decision about how to load/carry a c&b revolver. Of course, concealed carry is another set of scenarios, and how one approaches that decision should also be different than the recreational bp shooter.
 
OK, so all summed up -
putting the hammer on a loaded cap or round is inherently dangerous, not because the hammer might be cocked and then dropped, but beause any pressure on the hammer might cause the round or cap to fire.
putting the hammer on the "safety pin" on a C&B revolver only protects from the above mentioned force on the hammer. Any accidental cocking of a hammer will occur whether the hammer is on a round or halfway between.
Modern revolvers do not have safety pins between cylinders - probably because they are useless. Does it make sense to carry 5 rounds in a modern revolver, or will I get hell for asking this question on a BP forum?
Any accidental firings of a handgun that I've ever heard of were due to human stupidity, not mechanical design of the gun. I didn't know it was loaded...
A dropped, loaded and capped, BP cylinder can be dangerous.
Driving a car is dangerous.
 
A modern revolver, unless it is a very close replica of a 1873 Colt, should be fully loaded. All modern designs incorporate safeties that prevent the hammer hitting the primer unless the trigger is pulled.
 
All modern designs incorporate safeties that prevent the hammer hitting the primer unless the trigger is pulled.

I will admit that I do not know alot about modern handgun designs. With that in mind, and what you said about modern handguns, what is the basis of the MA "drop test"? I'm guessing that it's a load of crap but I'd like some info to back up my argument.
I know this is a BP forum, but gun design is a progression from old to new, and the info that I look for could relate to any gun that has a hammer, trigger, bullet, etc.
 
Thanks all for your replies - all interesting. Mykeal, yours, in particular, was very informative. From your detailed explanation, I do now see how carrying with an empty chamber does, at least marginally, enhance safety. I still have a little bit of a hard time envisioning a scenario in which I would partially cock the hammer, rotate the cylinder, and have the hammer strike a cap with sufficient force to fire the gun, but I have to agree that this is less likely to happen with the hammer down on an empty chamber. I can see how opinions on this issue differ, and how individual curcumstances (type of holster, etc.) might lead to different decisions at different times - even by the same shooter. I think Mykeal covered the details of the issue about as well as can be done.

Thanks

Doug
 
Most older single actions that shot brass cases didn't have transfer bars and the like. There were off shoots of the BP guns before them.

So with the BP guns and their brass clone case ammo, the idea of the day was load one skip on and load 4.

Doing this places the hammer on the empty cylinder. It does it with out looking into the barrel of the gun.

The idea of loading 5 to be safe was more when you planned to carry the gun and not shoot it right away.

So perhaps at the bench on the firing line you can add all 6 caps and shoot the gun, with out ever holstering the piece.

Hunting, and or just walking about with the gun going in a holster is another game altogether.

Then you are not thinking of that gun as much, since it should be safe in the holster.

At times like that when hunting, which I no longer do withy BP 6 shooters, but did, entering a thicket, I would hold the hammer down on the empty chamber with my hand.

Branches, jackets and just things can partly cock the hammer when you may not be aware.

Less than half cock drop can and will fire a loaded chamber if there is a jump in the action, and a loaded cap lies beneath.

I have a living cousin, who got lazy with a cap lock rifle. He stuffed it behind the seat of his pick up truck at days end of a hunt, and drove home.

Once there he tipped the seat back forward and grabbed the rifle by the barrel and gave it a tugg.

That hammer peeled back and dropped, firing that gun, and just missing him, and anything else of importance.. He got lucky.

These days I shoot mostly flinters, and then I dump the prime and stuff a snugg fitting feather in my long guns. My flinters don't need priming to go off, but it helps..
 
I have heard that the saying "Passing the buck" started with only loading five of the six cylinders. The unloaded cylinder had a dollar bill rolled up in it. This was to pay for a proper burial is the shooter got killed. So he passed the buck when he cocked his pistol. If he lived great but if he died he would be given a proper burial from the buck in the cylinder.

How true it is I don't know but it does make a good story. Of course with the way I shoot I would have two cylinders with bucks in them so I could buy drinks all around.
 
There were some revolvers made - I don't recall if by Colt or a copy - with a double set of cylinder bolt notches so the gun would be fully locked with the hammer down between chambers. So the problem was recognized in the day. But Colt meant the safety pins to be depended on and said so in instructions of the period. Fewer lawsuits for careless use back then, don'cha know.

By the way, a gunzine writer, Mike Venturino, I think, tried the "banknote in the empty chamber" legend and found his money badly burnt after firing five shots.
 
By the way, a gunzine writer, Mike Venturino, I think, tried the "banknote in the empty chamber" legend and found his money badly burnt after firing five shots.

Did he grease the cylinder like it had a ball in it. He lives around here I'm sure I will bump into him some day and will ask him. I just need to make it to more bpcr matches.
 
DA Ruger safe w/ 6

Pohill, the transfer bar on our Ruger double actions will not allow the weapon to discharge if dropped on the hammer with a loaded cylinder. When full cocked the bar drops exposing a bearing like ball the gets hit by the hammer driving the firing pin to the cartridge primer and discharging it. Unlike the S&W you carried that had a firing pin on the hammer. Six is safe in the Ruger Service 6.

SG
 
I load all six unless it's a colt with the safey pins damaged from mishandling. Also, the Rogers and Spencer has no detents between chambers. It is possibel that brushing the hammer against brush or other objects could cause it to partially cock and move the cylinder out of register with the safety pin but this hasn't (yet) been an issue with the holsters I used.
 
Interesting thread. Has anyone tried to see if a vintage bank note will survive six BP loads going off around it? Seems to me it would get burned up in the process unless you actually greased it in.
 
five beans and a dollar bill?

Howdy Folks,

Gotta play "Mythbusters" on this one...

I tried using a greasy piece of paper currency as a "placeholder" in the empty chamber of a Colt SAA clone in .45 Colt firing BP handloads. Five dollar bill to reflect effect of inflation.:rolleyes:

First try...recoil caused roled up bill to slide forward and jam cylinder:scrutiny:

Second try...bill was re-rolled for tighter fit. Twenty shots were fired and bill was ( with some difficulty ) shoved out of cylinder chamber.

results: filthy greasy five dollar bill with the end facing the barrel badly burned

Conclusion; a black powder revolver's chamber poor storage for paper money !

Best use for such battle damaged currency; shoved into the "slot-box" at one of the overpriced surface parking lots in the downtown area...;)

Cheers,

Slim
 
J.T: Great post. Earp sounds like he knew what he was doing. Thanks.

The "pass the buck" thing smacks of pure Hollywood/myth/nonsense, IMO.

Modern revolvers have either a "transfer bar" that must move into place by deliberate trigger pull in order to transfer the hammer blow to a seperate firing pin, or they have a "hammer block" safety that works to block the hammer from the firing pin until the trugger is pulled to move it out of the way. They both serve the same purpose, just in different ways.

Also, in order to put a C&B, revolver in the "safety" notch or pin, you must first bring the hammer to full cock over a live chamber, wheras if you do the five-beans routine properly, you don't ever have a cocked hammer over a live chamber. Just sayin'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top