SA Revolvers for CCW

[tomrkba]

There is a trick to reloading a single action revolver between shots. Gunsite offered a defensive single action class..

The "tactical" single action revolver reload:

We learned two kinds of reloading, tactical and speed. For tactical, you eject one fired round, insert one, eject one, insert one. If you have shot one round and then cocked the gun, when the hammer goes down, then the empty is in the loading gate. If you have fired 2, remember you have cocked the gun 3 times, so you need to rotate the cylinder 5 clicks to reach the second fired round. If you fired 3 rounds, rotate the cylinder 4 clicks to reach the second fired round. You're looking for a sum of 8. If you fired 4 rounds, you've cocked the gun 5 times, so you rotate 3 clicks.

Do it if you want to, but there are better choices available. I certainly won't turn down your help in a fight.

 

[CraigC]

...is you are limiting your defensive response capabilities to 5 or 6 fairly slow shots...

Maybe your single action shooting is "fairly slow" do not assume this to be true for all.

Do it if you want to, but there are better choices available.

The mantra of those who believe equipment choice is more important than proficiency.

 

[Corpral_Agarn]

I say if you like carrying it, Go for it! Afterall, having the darn thing with you when you need it more important than what model it is.

It is my opinion that any firearm, no matter how slow the reload, is better than a sharp stick or bare hands

Now, It wouldn't be my first choice for CCW but I open carry a SAA when riding my horse in the woods and I shoot mine pretty darn well.

Yours certainly has a "Cool factor" that's tough to beat!

 

[BSA1]

Well there are a lot of Cowboy Action Shooters and Cowboy Mounted Shooters that are still alive that you can discuss how slow a single-action revolver is.

 

[MikeFrank]

Maybe your single action shooting is "fairly slow" do not assume this to be true for all.



The mantra of those who believe equipment choice is more important than proficiency.

I have and shoot a Ruger Blackhawk in .45 Colt, and I can shoot my Colt 1911 in 45 ACP quite a bit faster without sacrificing accuracy. Unless you are fanning your SA, the physical act of thumbing the hammer adds a step and a portion of a second to each successive shot.

I also tend to think if better choices were not available most police departments would be carrying SA wheelguns. They are not.

 

[CraigC]

I have and shoot a Ruger Blackhawk in .45 Colt, and I can shoot my Colt 1911 in 45 ACP quite a bit faster without sacrificing accuracy. Unless you are fanning your SA, the physical act of thumbing the hammer adds a step and a portion of a second to each successive shot.

Then obviously a single action is not the best choice, for YOU. There are those of us who a lot more time with our single actions than we do anything else and thus, we are more proficient and more comfortable with them. It's the indian, not the arrow.

I also tend to think if better choices were not available most police departments would be carrying SA wheelguns. They are not.

That might be a valid point of most police officers were also passionate single action shooters. Most are not even shooters at all. Besides that, police officers and the average citizen do not carry a sidearm for the same reasons.

 

[Joe Demko]

Single actions are a viable choice for personal self-defense. Let's not get too passionate about their place in the 21st century.

 

[montanaoffroader]

For years, I owned only one handgun - a Colt SAA in .357 with a 5.5 inch barrel. That gun served for woods carry, range use and concealed carry. It's now largely retired, only making occasional range trips.

I now have other choices for concealed carry, but if it became necessary I would not hesitate to bring the old SAA out of retirement. I have no doubts about its ability to get the job done.

 

[bannockburn]

I certainly wouldn't feel undergunned with a birdshead Ruger Vaquero in .45 Colt.

 

[tomrkba]

The mantra of those who believe equipment choice is more important than proficiency.

Don't be silly. I've attended 15 defensive handgun courses and three rifle courses that included handgun. There are obvious limiting factors with the single action revolver. The bullet will still kill, but technology has moved on. It's the person's call what they want to use and they get to pay the consequences of that choice.

 

[CraigC]

Don't be silly. I've attended 15 defensive handgun courses and three rifle courses that included handgun. There are obvious limiting factors with the single action revolver. The bullet will still kill, but technology has moved on. It's the person's call what they want to use and they get to pay the consequences of that choice.

No, what is silly is to believe that a more socially acceptable firearm is a better choice even when the individual is MORE proficient with a less socially acceptable platform. You're imposing your own choices onto others. If I spent as many hours working with Glocks as I do single action revolvers, then it would be the better choice. I do not and will not. Ever. I carry autos more than revolvers but the fact remains that I do often carry a single action revolver when it may be concealed under a jacket or sport coat. I do so because I am imminently familiar, comfortable and proficient with the sixgun. Not as a fashion statement. I didn't get to where I can fire five shots, reload and fire five more in 15secs by sitting here pecking on this keyboard.

Mindset, situational awareness and proficiency trump equipment. It's the indian, not the arrow.

 

[ZVP]

The SA has been around a long time and proven it's worth over and over but compared to the mega magazine autos of today it just appears to be unsubstatial. Heck all you need is a good hit to end violence and you have 5 or 6 chances to hit as many bad guys! Sometimes all you have to do is hit one and they scatter.
The most important thing is choosing good cover to fire from if possible aside from being a decent shot.
Personally, I have shot SA's all my life and feel most comfortable with one. They're just a bit large to hide. Most are large revolvers.
A good holster. cover, practice and good ammo (not necessarily in that order) is all important.
I am trying to learn DA and carry a Chief now but my .357 Vaquero is pretty dangerous in my hands!
If you want to use a SA, go head it's been a longtime favorite of many including Bill Jordan. Heck Hickock was truely deadly with a C&B!

 

[mr.scott]

Don't get me wrong, I love my SA smoke wagons, but something you need to consider is when/if you have to be in a defensive shooting, you aren't going to be squaring off in the deserted streets of deadwood. You most likely are going to be fairly close and if you need a hand to hold off your attacker while you pull your gun and fire you are going to be at a sever disadvantage. God forbid you get shot in an arm or have an arm incapacitated during an altercation, your Single Action is now going to be a lot slower as you try to thumb the hammer back under real stress.
They are beautiful guns no doubt, but if you really want to uses gun as a defensive weapon, you have to realize that auto loader or a da/SA revolver is a better choice. The only time my s/a rides on my hip is at the BBQ.

 

[Old Fuff]

it's been a longtime favorite of many including Bill Jordan.

Speaking as one who knew him, he diid indeed enjoy the "old thumb-buster" in a recreational context. However when working as a border patrolman his holster was usually filled with one or another Smith & Wesson model chambered in .357 Magnum. His favorite was the model 19 (.357 Combat Magnum) that he helped S&W develop.

 

[RealGun]

I have considered carrying my Vaquero, and it always seemed like a bad idea. The gun was never designed for concealment, and the grips are more for show than modern functional considerations. I don't care what those in their ivory tower say. I have better choices of what gun to carry.

It's less a matter of proficiency than a concern for being outgunned by someone who needs only the skill to pull the trigger again.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Right, just how Jerry Miculek isn't a reliable comparison of skill with a DA revolver. Most people aren't as good as those two people when it comes to revolver shooting.

 

[tomrkba]

No, what is silly is to believe that a more socially acceptable firearm is a better choice even when the individual is MORE proficient with a less socially acceptable platform. You're imposing your own choices onto others. If I spent as many hours working with Glocks as I do single action revolvers, then it would be the better choice. I do not and will not. Ever. I carry autos more than revolvers but the fact remains that I do often carry a single action revolver when it may be concealed under a jacket or sport coat. I do so because I am imminently familiar, comfortable and proficient with the sixgun. Not as a fashion statement. I didn't get to where I can fire five shots, reload and fire five more in 15secs by sitting here pecking on this keyboard.

Mindset, situational awareness and proficiency trump equipment. It's the indian, not the arrow.

Socially acceptable? The idea is ludicrous. I imposed nothing; I stated technology has marched on and replaced the single action revolver. Semi-Autos require less training and have higher capacities than most revolvers. You are correct that proficiency is key, but do not use that as the sole justification for your choice. The single action revolver gives up reload and split times to the double action revolver, just as the DA revolver gives up reload time, split times for most shooters, ease of use and training and capacity to the semi-auto. It is not a correct statement to say that nothing is lost by going to the SA revolver. If you choose to carry the SA revolver, then it certainly makes sense to be exceptionally proficient with it. Such shooters are few and far between.

We will have these arguments in 50 years when the first blaster pistol with 50 shot power pack is released. Knowing my luck, they will build it on the Colt Single Action Army platform. You will then see me on the line with other Cowboy Action Blaster Shooters...

 

[CraigC]

Socially acceptable? The idea is ludicrous.

Is that why we're having this discussion?

Semi-Autos require less training and have higher capacities than most revolvers.

There's no doubting that. All else being equal, a high capacity auto is a better tool for combat. That's the problem, all is not equal. The fact remains that my time with the single action vastly outweighs that for any other platform. What you seem to have a hard time grasping is that I'm not choosing to become proficient with the SA because it's what I want to carry. I carry the SA because it's what I've chosen to become more proficient with. I simply do not have the time or inclination to build skill with a firearm YOU deem more acceptable. Life is short and I'm not going to trade my time spent with SA's to build skill with a Glock.

I imposed nothing

But you did. YOUR skill with other platforms is higher than YOUR skill with a single action. You impose your own limitations upon others who may not share them. In other words, an auto or DA might be the better tool for you but it is not necessarily the better tool for everyone. Because MY skill with the SA trumps MY skill with an auto, making them equal (or close to it) in MY hands. The relative skill levels of any other shooter are irrelevant.

The single action revolver gives up reload...

I don't carry a reload for anything I carry so reload time is a moot point.

The single action revolver gives up...split times to the double action revolver...

If that's the case for you then I suggest you don't carry one.

It is not a correct statement to say that nothing is lost by going to the SA revolver.

That is 100% dependent on the individual.

 

[dickydalton]

Right, just how Jerry Miculek isn't a reliable comparison of skill with a DA revolver. Most people aren't as good as those two people when it comes to revolver shooting.

And Bon Munden either but...... I've seen a lot of Cowboy Action shooters that are awful fast and accurate.

That said, I hardly ever carry a SA for defense, but would hardly feel unsafe armed with one.

 

[tomrkba]

Socially acceptable? The idea is ludicrous.

Is that why we're having this discussion?

You brought this idea up. Gun types are all socially acceptable on the range. Guns may or may not be socially acceptable in public depending upon location and who is present. It has nothing to do with anything else.

Semi-Autos require less training and have higher capacities than most revolvers.

There's no doubting that. All else being equal, a high capacity auto is a better tool for combat. That's the problem, all is not equal. The fact remains that my time with the single action vastly outweighs that for any other platform. What you seem to have a hard time grasping is that I'm not choosing to become proficient with the SA because it's what I want to carry. I carry the SA because it's what I've chosen to become more proficient with. I simply do not have the time or inclination to build skill with a firearm YOU deem more acceptable. Life is short and I'm not going to trade my time spent with SA's to build skill with a Glock.

I got that from your first post.

What I am doing, which you so obviously fail to recognize, is to point out the disadvantages of the SA platform for the purposes of training. As you implied before, it requires a certain dedication to master. However, that mastery is still limited by the platform. I pointed out that defensive gun courses have been run at Gunsite for the SA revolver. Those techniques would be useful in maximizing the performance of the platform should a person wish to use it. It is not a common choice for carry, so people would have to seek advice from CAS shooters and similar.

In Fast and Fancy Revolver Shooting, Ed McGivern speaks about the reasons why he chose the double action revolver over the 1911 and Colt single action revolver. I will not review that material here because he dedicates many pages to the topic.

I imposed nothing

But you did. YOUR skill with other platforms is higher than YOUR skill with a single action. You impose your own limitations upon others who may not share them. In other words, an auto or DA might be the better tool for you but it is not necessarily the better tool for everyone. Because MY skill with the SA trumps MY skill with an auto, making them equal (or close to it) in MY hands. The relative skill levels of any other shooter are irrelevant.

This is your incorrect assessment of the situation and intent. I am pointing out the limitations of the platform while attempting to provide training opportunities. Unfortunately, Gunsite is not offering the defensive SA revolver class as a regular class. Thunder Ranch would be able to provide training (after seeing Smith's "Shoot what ya got" video that demonstrates the use of various guns such as a break action single shot shotgun).

My shooting skill with SA revolvers is quite good and I enjoy 45 Colt. Only my SA revolver speed reloading skills are deficient. This does not matter in CAS.

The single action revolver gives up reload...

I don't carry a reload for anything I carry so reload time is a moot point.

The conclusion of police and court records, analysis of gun fights, decades of training--as passed to many thousands of students across this country by many trainers--is to carry at least one full reload. Failing to carry a reload is not a wise decision because the participants do not dictate the fight.

Carrying one full reload is easy. People who refuse to do so are not making rational decisions for responsible carry. I see this occasionally on the range and with open carry activists. Sometimes I can get them to change their ways, but many dig in out of ignorance or stubbornness. John Farnham relyed on his "Quips" blog one or two incidents were police officers were killed because they did not carry a reload. There were bullet holes in the victims' hands. Think about the significance of that.

The single action revolver gives up...split times to the double action revolver...

If that's the case for you then I suggest you don't carry one.

I will not unless the law or circumstance requires me to do so. Your response does not acknowledge the difference.

It is not a correct statement to say that nothing is lost by going to the SA revolver.

That is 100% dependent on the individual.

That is not correct. The choice is 100% on the individual, but getting the maximum performance out of the gun is affected by the design. Less skilled shooters may see no difference in performance between any handgun platform. Master shooters will find those hard limits and will train around them as much as possible. Even Jerry Miculek acknowledges the split time difference between DA revolvers and semi-autos in his videos. You can see this in several of his range clips by reviewing what he says about expected times as he looks at his timer.

In summary, it is important that we make rational decisions regarding carry. Serious students of the defensive firearm arts carry at least one reload because fights progress in unexpected ways. People become afficionados of guns and platforms. Much ink was spilled ("flame wars") in gun periodicals in the 1920's and early 1930's between Ed McGivern and others over the deficiencies of the single action revolver. We should not let our emotions run wild over our choices and instead use the wisdom given to us by people with gun fighting experience. The single action revolver is a gun that can be effective for personal defense. It has limitations that even the best handgunners in the world see. Training around those limitations is essential. Pretending they do not exist does not assist future High Road readers in making the best decision.

 

[popbang]

I use a single action revolver exclusively for hunting and concealed carry. It is not the best choice, but there are some circumstances That it is a good choice. I have issues with my hands and arms that the roll of a single action affect less than other platforms. It is a viable choice, but does require dedication.

 

[HexHead]

The conclusion of police and court records, analysis of gun fights, decades of training--as passed to many thousands of students across this country by many trainers--is to carry at least one full reload. Failing to carry a reload is not a wise decision because the participants do not dictate the fight.

Carrying one full reload is easy. People who refuse to do so are not making rational decisions for responsible carry.

And yet according to some FBI statistics that the "average" gunfight took place at 7 yards and was 2.5 rounds. And lasted 3-5 seconds.

 

[CraigC]

Gun types are all socially acceptable on the range.

We're not at the range. We're having this argument specifically because 'some' participants don't consider the single action to be a valid concealed carry weapon. Whether they have any familiarity with the platform or not. Usually folks who believe in equipment above all else.

I am pointing out the limitations of the platform while attempting to provide training opportunities.

What I am doing, which you so obviously fail to recognize, is to point out the disadvantages of the SA platform for the purposes of training.

The limitations of the platform are well known. Blah, blah, blah, we've heard it all before and are more aware of them then you are.

Those techniques would be useful in maximizing the performance of the platform should a person wish to use it.

I'm not sold on the technique but because we're so busy getting defensive over the platform, we're unable to discuss the particulars of this particular subject. It happens every time the subject comes up. Somebody just has to interject and tell us all what dummies we are for carrying single actions.

Only my SA revolver speed reloading skills are deficient.

Yet you're qualified to "provide training opportunities"??? Due to your own admitted deficiencies, perhaps you should be listening instead of telling the rest of us what we are doing wrong?

The conclusion of police and court records, analysis of gun fights, decades of training--as passed to many thousands of students across this country by many trainers--is to carry at least one full reload.

These the same studies that concluded that most gunfights are over in only a handful of rounds fired? The same studies that conclude an infinitesimal number of legal shootings required a reload?

Failing to carry a reload is not a wise decision because the participants do not dictate the fight. Carrying one full reload is easy.....People who refuse to do so are not making rational decisions for responsible carry.

Sometimes I can get them to change their ways, but many dig in out of ignorance or stubbornness.

So now I'm unwise, lazy, irrational, irresponsible, ignorant and stubborn because I don't carry a reload? Got anything to say about my momma while you're at it??? No, you're not imposing at all. To make such broad sweeping generalizations given the likelihood of ever even being in a gunfight, let alone one requiring a tactical reload, is not only offensive but could be construed as unwise, lazy, irrational, irresponsible, ignorant and stubborn. I would suggest trimming back the condescension and offensive generalizations if this discussion is going to stay civil. Or since you have nothing useful to add to a discussion about carrying single action revolvers it might be a good idea to just bow out now.

Pretending they do not exist does not assist future High Road readers in making the best decision.

No one is pretending they don't exist, smart guy. I'm apparently more aware of them than you will ever be. I'm sorry that it is beyond your comprehension that a shooter's proficiency with what you deem an unacceptable platform makes you so uncomfortable that you have to make such veiled personal insults.

 

[CraigC]

On familiarity, to get away from the nonsense above. I am primarily a single action revolver shooter. Probably 90% of my shooting is with single actions. I shoot them at all ranges from short range point shooting to long range knocking over paint cans or busting rocks. I run them slow, I run them fast, I work on clearing leather quickly and even though I do not carry a reload, I reload like my life depends on it 99% of the time. I do enough shooting/training with the 1911 to be very comfortable carrying one and just enough fast work with a DA to not look like an idiot running one. I would consider my skill with the 1911 to be acceptable and my skill with a DA to be deficient.

Most of my fast DA work has been in short range point shooting. I have simply never done much using the sights at ranges for which I would need the sights. I know that I am at a disadvantage when carrying a DA but for the purposes to which a hammerless J-frame snub is appropriate, it is an acceptable compromise. I am truly better armed with an SAA-sized single action but they are more difficult to conceal.

If I pick up a striker fired auto, it might as well be a hot glue gun. Even though I shot Glocks for 15yrs, it is almost completely foreign to me because I have not shot one in 10rs. I have spent so little time with them that it takes me 100rds to get back to yeoman level trigger control. I don't shoot them very well because I don't shoot them. I don't shoot them because I don't like them. While a Glock may be a superior fighting weapon to a Colt SAA in general, if I am at the helm it is not.

The point being that not everyone wants to spend hours and hours with Glocks or DA's. I certainly don't and that is not going to change. It is quantifiable fact (if I am allowed to assess my own handling/shooting skill) that some folks are simply better with guns less "socially acceptable" to 'some' folks.

 

[jeepnik]

Well, yes I do from time to time. But, on those occasions when I'm feeling born in the wrong century, I will carry this.