Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by Solomonson, Nov 2, 2020.
You been watching The Blues Brothers again??
Ahhhh Bobs Country Bunker... a true classic.
Guess I have reading comprehension issues too. Muh 2nd grade edumakashun is failing me.
Revolvers aren’t rocket science these days, but they need to be well made to shoot well, and some are works of art.
They are just cool.
As a non-engineer, I can only marvel that someone once figured out how to produce shapes of metal that fit together and do all of the things a revolver needs to do.
Quote from Wikipedia: "According to Colt, he came up with the idea for the revolver while at sea, inspired by the capstan, which had a ratchet and pawl mechanism on it, a version of which was used in his guns to rotate the cylinder by cocking the hammer. This provided a reliable and repeatable way to index each round and did away with the need to manually rotate the cylinder."
Neat story, huh?
I can’t take you seriously if your using the term revo. If it’s about not wanting to type out the additional 4 symbols to complete the word revolver. I hope you did something really important with the time you saved not hitting those 12 extra buttons.
I wanna revo.. wife said NO. She had a headache.. maybe later she said ( when we have some extra money)
Ain't gonna happen. Troll got busted.
What happened to the OP? Was it a hit and run?
The part that surprises me about a revolver is how that fine lockwork assembly can take tens of thousands of rounds worth of magnum recoil and just keep ticking. You'd think that repeated sudden force would break something or knock it out of time, but mostly, revolvers gradually loosen up more than they just break.
As far as OP, I think I can decipher what he's saying. Revolvers look easy because the mfgs have just been copying and perfecting the same lockwork for the last 100 years. The S&W 500 uses the same lockwork as the Model 10 did in 1899 (S&W fans, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that one). And no, wheelguns have never been on the same order of complexity as a V8 engine or a spaceship. But to see Colt and S&W come up with the revolver designs they did at the turn of the century, with all hand tools, no computer models, no calculators, just a workbench and some trial and error, is still some seriously impressive stuff.
I don't know
Made sense to me, too. Thread would have been killed by now if it was trolled. And anyway, it sparked a pretty decent discussion...
Those things were not made with "all hand tools".
The design practices, production machinery, tooling, etc. were the same as those that used in making steam engines, reciprocating engines, electrical motors and generators, gears, semi-automatic pistols, gunboats, warships, etc.
I have no idea what "Why do so many treat the design and manufacture of double-action revos as if they're akin to designing and building space satellites or high tech automobiles?" in the OP is supposed to mean.
I agree with " If you really consider a DA revo from a machine design/product engineering standpoint, they're not that big of a deal."
The sentiment "Particularly when you consider the advanced CAD, CNC, and other high tech design tools and manufacturing processes available today" applies equally to the B-29, The Bell X-1, the F8 Crusader, the Redstone rocket, and Fat Man and Little Boy.
Revolvers are actually mechanically complicated. While a revolver's operation is more visually simple than semi-autos (rounds go in cylinder which rotates with each trigger pull) the internal works is quite complicated.
Compared to what?
Typewriters, for one.
In their day revolvers were high-tech; in their design, capability, and in the technology and skill required to make them. The revolver was one of the first widely accepted and successful repeating handguns created. It change the way people used and fought with firearms. And from a technology point of view the machine tolerances required to make them exceeded the industrial capabilities of their day; hence the requirement for hand fitting of many of the parts by skilled assemblers resulting in no interchangeable parts. To say a revolver is not hi-tech is looking back with 20/20 hindsight and comparing it to today. The revolver was near the highest technology possible for the application at it's inception and through much of it maturation (from cap&ball to cartridge, from single-action to double-action etc). This idea that the revolver was some more "elegant weapon, for a more civilized age" is again a view only capable with hindsight. Many hold that the revolver is a more noble or elegant weapon than todays whizzbang tactical Tupperware... And yet the revolver was the whizzbang tactical Tupperware of its day. The fact some think the revolver age was a more civilized age is similarly distorted by the review mirror IMHO.
The mechanically simplest multi-shot handgun is a single action, striker fired, blowback semi-auto pistol.
I just found, and read through this entire thread.
My brain hurts.
Apparently, the OP had a post deleted? And hasn't returned since to clarify just WTH sort of answers he was soliciting in his thread-starter?
It's exactly like what was said in post #9: if you have to ask ...
... you just don't get it.
Almost. A pepperbox or a three-barrel Marsten is simpler.
But that wasn't the issue.
When the DA revolver as we know it was developed, people were making mechanical clocks with chimes, planetary gear sets, internal combustion engines, steam locomotives and stationary steam engines, the Gatling gun, automatic looms, electrical power generation systems, and early automobiles, other things that were at least as "mechanically complicated" as a revolver.
The OP mentioned space satellites and high-tech automobiles. I do not know who might believe revolvers to be on a par with them.
Your model ten doesn't take off into space to beam satellite signals, or self drive you to work?
I'd let Smith and Wesson know. My model 10-5 has been doing that for ages now.
Maybe he realized that he stepped in it and regrets it?
He definitely stepped in it!
Whoa there. Back up the bus a minute!
In another life I had considerable experience both creating 3D parts on CAD, writing CNC programs, and operating CNC machines. I get the idea you have never actually done any of those things. I can assure you that in any modern manufacturing facility anybody who wastes time doing some of the things you allege, would find himself unemployed pretty quickly. Time has always been money, from Sam Colt's day right up until today. Spend company time doing something other than your job, and it will catch up with you.
Separate names with a comma.