Transfer bar safety designs

[JJHACK]

Well, as luck would have it I have acquired a Freedom Arms .44 magnum. It sorta fell in my lap, not really looking to spend a lot, but I was looking for a Blackhawk with the Bisley grip. By the time I bought something I could "remodel" I would have spent more that on then this Freedom Arms gun. So What the heck.

Now, I have a gun loony friend that went off on the FA revolver yesterday because they are so "dangerous" without a transfer bar safety. He has a strong competitive streak which I really like about him. I can use reverse psychology to get him to do all sorts of stuff I'm not "good enough to do". It's also fun to chat about firearms as he is very intelligent although opinionated as possible about some things.

So I tell him I bought this bank vault that shoots .44 magnum cartridges and he has a field day with my foolish decision. He may be right, the point is irrelevant to me as I never...... NEVER carry a handgun with one up the spout until am going to shoot. For this I have good reason due to a life changing event.

About 1983-85, wish I could be remember better now but it was a while back. I was working in the Bear management program. I had a 357magnum with me in a belt holster, and my employee who was brand new at the time was packing a .44 magnum blackhawk, in a shoulder holster. As we tip toed across a creek from rock to rock trying to pick our way through the shallowest spots He slipped, and that blackhawk slid out of his holster into the creek with a discharge of the gun upon impact. Water sprayed all over both of us.

I was scared from that, but this guy was pale and if he had any sliver of a heart issue he would have died of heart attack right then. He was shook from that and destroyed that gun ( actually sawzall to bits) the day he got home. He was convinced that it was defective.

Now due to the time line, I cannot know today if this was pre-transfer bar, some fluke, or just bizzarro world at that moment. I do know that I have never carried a revolver since that time with a loaded chamber in line with the barrel. There was a lot of directions that bullet could go safely. Thank God it did. Cause that .44 mag would have killed whoever it hit as far away from help as we were.

I'm not concerned about the transfer bar safety at all. I have read the manual and it explains how to set the trigger/hammer on safe mode. I also see clearly how my Smith and Wesson Mountain gun works with the transfer bar which will only allow the gun to fire with the trigger all the way back.

A brilliant design, and likely 100% safe. I don't carry that with 6 rounds either! Just something about having a gun go off by itself when it hits the ground that changes your life for good!
_________________________

 

[Sam1911]

Yes, your pal is loony. Actually just under-informed.

There's no reason at all, in any way, to carry the way you do with a modern firearm -- including your 83 -- but if it makes you feel good, who cares?

There are things that happen to us in life that cause mental scar tissue that no amount of logic and experience seem to be able to erase. If you can't erase yours, live with it!

 

[Drail]

On a gun with no transfer bar just leave an empty chamber under the hammer. Ruger has been sued by a number of owners (or their widows) who dropped loaded non transfer bar guns and they landed on the hammer and fired. I have heard of cases where SA guns were carried in very heavy brush in a loose fitting holster and the hammer got snagged and rotated the cylinder to the next (loaded) chamber and then released and fired. In heavy brush make sure to use a flap holster or a strap so this cannot happen. Murphy runs the universe. If it's strapped to your butt it WILL snag on everything. I have read that quite a few cowboys and horses got shot by unprotected guns in loose fitting holsters. The transfer bar makes this pretty much impossible if the trigger is covered up.

 

[Sam1911]

On a gun with no transfer bar just leave an empty chamber under the hammer.

His Model 83 doesn't have a transfer bar, but it has a different kind of safety system which precludes the need to leave a chamber empty.

But yeah, a hammer loop or flap is a fine idea on an open-carried SA gun with a large hammer that could get snagged.

 

[Jim Watson]

FA has the usual lawyer driven Fear of Loading.
The 83 manual repeatedly states:
"IN THE FIELD NEVER CARRY THE
REVOLVER WITH A LIVE CARTRIDGE IN THE
CHAMBER WHICH IS IN LINE WITH THE
BARREL AND FIRING PIN."

The manual shows the hammer block and how to get on it, but does not give any indication of what it might be good for.
The monkey motion they describe for getting to the hammer block is pretty discouraging since it calls for starting with the hammer all the way down... on the firing pin.

The 97 manual describes the transfer bar, but again says: "Never place or carry your revolver in the holster with a live cartridge in the chamber in line with the firing pin."


You know what Jeff Cooper said about things like that. "You will, of course, do as you think best."

 

[Jim K]

S&W does not use a transfer bar, and never has. They use a hammer block safety that won't allow the firing pin to reach the primer unless the trigger is fully to the rear. Ruger and some other makers use a transfer bar, which does the same job, but in a different way. It imposes itself between the hammer and the firing pin when the trigger is pulled and "transfers" the force of the hammer to the firing pin.

Both are good, safe, systems. The only drawback to the transfer bar is that it is hit on every shot and can sometimes break, while the hammer block is not struck unless it actually is needed to stop the gun from firing accidentally.

Jim

 

[Jim Watson]

There does not a week go by that we are not warned that the old style S&W hammer block cannot be counted on. Your antiques are out to get you.

 

[Jim K]

Both types of the older S&W hammer block were spring operated, that is the safety itself was its own spring, and it pushed out into the path of the hammer to prevent firing. That left room for a lot of problems if the spring broke, or if dirt or grease kept the hammer block from moving. Colt used a more complex system, but it was mechanically operated in both directions so it was called a "positive" safety. Colt pushed their system to the extent of including the word "Positive" in the model name of several of their revolvers.

It was not until the last (and current) hammer block safety that S&W had a truly "positive" safety that did not depend on a spring.

Jim

 

[Boxhead]

I would not carry FA 83 with five in the cylinder. Same with OM unconverted Ruger's running a full cylinder. The FA 97, NM Ruger and long dated S&W method noted above leave me absolutely comfortable carrying a cylinder full.

 

[farm23]

I have a 83 and usually carry with 4 chambers loaded but I have carried with all 5 loaded and did not feel in danger.

 

[JJHACK]

I'm trying to get something clear in my mind.

FA says no round in the chamber under the hammer. But there is a hammer block safety. Why exactly is there a hammer block safety with no round in line with the barrel?

If it's in safe mode and the hammer gets accidentally pulled back from clothing weeds branches or whatever and then slips loose does the hammer block stay in place if the trigger is not all the way back?

After it's in safe mode does the trigger need to be pulled back to fire?
If not, then what's the point if the safety if you can't carry with 5 loaded rounds??

 

[Boxhead]

FA had their bottom line hit hard by lawsuits from M83's going bang when unintended hence their position. The M97 is a far better design IMO.

 

[Jim Watson]

I guess it would be too much trouble to revise the 83 with a true transfer bar like the 97.
They sell all they can make, so why bother?

 

[bergmen]

I'm trying to get something clear in my mind.

FA says no round in the chamber under the hammer. But there is a hammer block safety. Why exactly is there a hammer block safety with no round in line with the barrel?

If it's in safe mode and the hammer gets accidentally pulled back from clothing weeds branches or whatever and then slips loose does the hammer block stay in place if the trigger is not all the way back?

After it's in safe mode does the trigger need to be pulled back to fire?
If not, then what's the point if the safety if you can't carry with 5 loaded rounds??

With the trigger not pulled back, the hammer would fall against the hammer block safety. If it gets pulled back further it would fall against the half-cock notch (still safe since the trigger is locked). Pulling even further would result in a full-cock state.

Without the trigger being pulled, all above positions are safe. Even if a solid impact would fracture the full-cock or half-cock positions, the hammer block safety should stop everything right there. They designed it to be tough because of the lawsuit.

I would have absolutely zero problems with carrying my Model 83 with all five loaded and on safe. If I slip and fall at my age I'm far more worried about cracking my head wide open and dying of that than getting shot with my own gun (that is in a restrained holster and protected from impact).

OTOH, the Ruger transfer bar system is in my opinion one of the more brilliant designs in all of handguns. You could throw a loaded New Model Blackhawk off the Empire State Building and all it would do is wreck the sidewalk and destroy the gun.

Dan

 

[JJHACK]

I have a FA revolver here in my hands now. The trigger must be at the back of the trigger guard to allow the hammer to impact the firing pin.

Maybe because this one is brand new manufacture they have done something different? At full cock if I hold the hammer with my thumb and pull the trigger, it releases, but stops at half cock if the trigger is not pulled back. If I pull the trigger again while holding the hammer, it stops again at the safety catch unless the trigger remains at the back of the trigger guard.

The only way I see an AD occuring is if the hammer is resting on a primer and gets hit hard enough to ignite that primer. With a Blackhawk this cannot happen because the whole operation is automatic. Where with the FA it must be selectively put in the safe notch to activate that condition.

I have tried this for about 30 minutes now trying to figure out how this gun can have a AD if set into the safe mode and I cannot figure it out. I also cannot see "so far" how having the hammer pulled back will allow it to snap forward and fire the primer. The hammer will not fall on the primer unless the trigger is back.

There is a tiny gap that would allow the hammer to have a snap back condition, but I wonder if it's enough inertia and strike force to ignite the primer? Probably could. If the snap back goes any further then the .025" of reaward movement it goes into safe mode.

I guess that is the crux of the issue then. If the hammer can get snapped back at some distance great enough to impact and ignite the primer but less then .025 that is the problem. If it goes to .026 ( or thereabout) it is in safe mode.

If placed in safe mode then the trigger needs to be held back to allow the hammer to fall. Otherwise you cannot make the hammer close the gap with that block of steel in the way of the hammer.

 

[Coal Dragger]

As described by others the FA 83 does have a safety, but it relies on the user to know how to activate it, and for maximum safety (if you will carry with a live round under the hammer) your holster will need a good tight fitting hammer strap to ensure to unintentional hammer movement to the rear that could result in the safety being disengaged.

I have carried both ways and did not feel that it was dangerous, but I also do not carry my FA 83 in an open top holster with no retention strap securing the gun in the holster and also covering the hammer.

Most of the time I carry with 4 rounds over an empty chamber, because frankly if I can't accomplish the job with 4 rounds of full house .454 Casull one more is probably a moot point.

 

[JJHACK]

Well I have to agree, having been a hunting guide in Alaska for 12 years and a Professional Hunter now in Africa for 20. With the .44 magnum I feel the same, and the 454 is significanlty more.

I've taken out several non-cooperative species with the 44 mag without needing 4 shots. Using this far more diminutive cartridge.

 

[Coal Dragger]

Also in my rather limited experience if I don't connect with the first shot the furry critter that is the focus of my efforts usually doesn't stick around for round two, and if they do and I miss again they sure as hell don't stick around for round three.

Now dangerous game that are after me to deliver some claws, teeth, horns or hoofs I might be able to shoot at more than once or twice (maybe) before they reach me. So I'm reasonably comfortable with 4 rounds on board. I suppose if I knew I were going to be in a situation where I was going to shoot at something big and mean I would top off with 5 rounds. In fact if you cock the hammer you will immediately roll the empty chamber right under the loading gate. Not that you should plan on fiddling about with such things with a cocked weapon with a live round under the hammer.... but it is possible and I have practiced it with snap caps to test it out.

Of course in a dangerous game hunting situation I'd rather have someone backing me up with a 2nd gun in that situation if possible.