Why do folks like SA revolvers still?

[Driftwood Johnson]

Some of us devolve even further back...

Savage North Navy Revolver 1861-1862.

 

[CraigC]

A couple years of shooting USPSA/IDPA/ICORE with a revolver will teach you to shoot DA every bit as good as SA.

That is highly doubtful. If it were possible to shoot DA as accurately as SA, then the quality/weight/length of the trigger pull would never matter.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Before I bought my Ruger Wrangler .22 LR SA I was at first puzzled because it did not have the half cock position. I thought something was wrong with the gun and the sales person did not know. A different sales person, a revolver guy, came out and explained it to me. Seemed like a convenience so I bought it. My Interarms Virginian Dragoon .44 Magnum has the half cock loading position, and I like that better but it does add a step to reloading.

I wonder if the Ruger style with no half cock is a relatively new thing or did that occur on some guns in the olden days of SA revolvers.

Ruger has been making revolvers with 'no half cock' since the mid 1970s. That was when Ruger changed their design to include a transfer bar, because they lost several very expensive lawsuits to morons who did not know to only load five rounds and lower the hammer on an empty chamber.

I bought this 45 Colt/45 ACP convertible Blackhawk brand-spanky new in 1975, shortly after Ruger redesigned their revolvers to have the transfer bar and eliminated the half cock.






These Three Screw Rugers are all older and do have a half cock loading position. Ruger stopped making these to avoid the type of costly lawsuits I mentioned above.

 

[westernrover]

I wonder if the Ruger style with no half cock is a relatively new thing or did that occur on some guns in the olden days of SA revolvers.

Ruger introduced it in 1973. There are much older examples of transfer bars and other various features, but for all intents and purposes, we're talking about a 1973 Ruger thing.

 

[westernrover]

The Ruger transfer bar is not a totally lamentable thing. I think hammer blocks (S&W) are better because they don't get repeatedly beaten with every shot like a transfer bar. Blocks move out of the way of the hammer when the trigger is pulled and so they don't get beaten on except when there is a blow to the hammer like what might happen if the gun is dropped. Transfer bars get beaten by the hammer with every shot and transfer the blow to the firing pin. So they wear and eventually break. Even so, I don't consider them "unreliable."

What is lamentable is the combination of a loading gate that drops the cylinder stop that is part of this same design, and the omission by Ruger of recessing the cylinders for the cartridge rims on most of their single action revolvers. As mentioned already, the cartridge rim will knock the gate open during recoil and then the partially lowered cylinder stop will mar the cylinder. Ruger recesses the cylinders on a couple of their Super Blackhawk models -- the 454 Casull and the 480 Ruger. They're aware that it is necessary, but apparently believe that these are the only chamberings that recoil enough for the design to mar itself. The fact is, even a hot 357 will knock the gate open. Ruger is just too cheap to recess the cylinders.

 

[hawg]

Uberti uses a retractable firing pin so they're safe to carry with all six chambers loaded. There's a rod that runs up through the hammer that's operated by a lever on the trigger. The firing pin can't contact a primer unless the trigger is pulled. When the trigger is pulled the firing pin is moved forward so the gun will fire. When the trigger is released the firing pin moves back into the hammer. Here you can see the rod that runs up inside the hammer and the lever that actuates it.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Iver Johnson invented the Transfer Bar in 1896.

Here is the patent drawing:

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

As mentioned already, the cartridge rim will knock the gate open during recoil and then the partially lowered cylinder stop will mar the cylinder.

I have bunches of Rugers with Transfer bars.

I have never heard of that happening, and I fired some pretty stout Black Powder 45 Colt loads in my Vaqueros for years.

I suspect something else is happening to partially open the loading gate.

 

[hawg]

As mentioned already, the cartridge rim will knock the gate open during recoil and then the partially lowered cylinder stop will mar the cylinder.

No, that's not what's happening. It's a design defect. The bolt on a Ruger rides the cylinder all the way around. There's no way to stop a Ruger from ringing the cylinder.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

No, that's not what's happening. It's a design defect. The bolt on a Ruger rides the cylinder all the way around. There's no way to stop a Ruger from ringing the cylinder.

The bolt on a Ruger does not ride the cylinder all the way around.

If it does, something is wrong.

Yes, the bolt on a New Model Ruger rises earlier than it does on a Colt, but it does not ride the cylinder all the way around.

Look closely at the line on the cylinder of my Blackhawk. You can clearly see where the bolt has popped up for 45 years, about halfway between the chambers. The bolt then rides the cylinder for the rest of the way until it enters the tear drop shaped lead to the cylinder locking slot. So yes, there is a ring, but the bolt does not ride the cylinder all the way around.






It is late right now, and I will check this out in the morning, but I do not understand why the bolt riding partway around the cylinder should open the loading gate.

 

[hawg]

I stand corrected. It only rides about 3/4 of the way around. The bolt riding the cylinder can't open the gate.

 

[Tallinar]

The fact is, even a hot 357 will knock the gate open. Ruger is just too cheap to recess the cylinders.

I’m struggling to understand what the benefit of recessed cylinders would be on modern, non-rimfire revolver cylinders. Can you elaborate more?

I’m not disagreeing. Just trying to understand. Does the extra material on the cylinder put some back pressure on the loading gate or something?

I’ve never experienced anything like what you’re describing, but the hottest things I’ve shot in a Ruger is only full house .44 magnum. Can’t speak for .480 Ruger or similar. Certainly never experienced a problem with any .357 magnum.

Could it be that the problem is more theoretical than actual?

I guess I’ve always assumed recessed cylinders were a thing of the bygone balloon head era or rim fire cartridges. I had a .44 magnum EAA Bounty Hunter briefly many years ago, and it had recessed chambers, but felt out of place to me. Never thought of recessed chambers as a benefit. I like how a non-recessed cylinder can (mostly) be deemed loaded or unloaded at a mere glance from the side of the frame.

 

[Hal]

IMHO - nothing beats the feel of a Colt 1851 Navy.
I can see why it was Wild Bill's choice.

My Italian clone from the 1970s no longer works, but, it still has that great feel to it.
I just haven't decided after all these years whether I prefer the brass frame to be all shined up or have that nice patina - so - every once in a while I get out the old can of Brasso and polish it, then set it aside where I can watch it fade over time.

 

[Pat Riot]

I did not vote as my vote would include 1 & 2 plus;
Simpler design
Easy to work on
They are cool!

Seriously though, I really never thought much about single actions until I saw my first Cowboy Action Shooting match in early 1997. I was at a Sporting Clays range in Southern California doing miserably when I heard some fast shooting going on a couple of hundred yards away and there was a large group of colorfully dressed people in cowboy hats in one of the outdoor shooting bays / lanes.
I asked the range guy what was going on and he said “Oh, that’s those crazy cowboy shooters.”
That’s when I remembered reading about SASS and Cowboy Action Shooting. My interest was peaked.
We weren’t finished with our clays session, but I was. I said my goodbyes and took my shotgun to my truck snd headed over to see about this “Cowboy Shooting”.
I talked with some folks and I was hooked!

I left SASS in 2005 and sold off all my single actions over time but got back into it in 2016. I haven’t shot a match since June 2019 due to injuries from a motorcycle crash and an accident at work. I currently only own 2 single actions.
Ruger Vaquero (original) .45 Colt, 7.5” barrel, stainless.
Ruger New Vaquero .45 Colt, 5.5” barrel, stainless.
I slightly slicked both of them up and installed different springs.
I do not care for the little grip on the New Vaqueros, now called “Vaquero” again - Thanks for finding a way to add more confusion to you product line, Ruger.
I have installed a Vaquero/Blackhawk grip frame in the New Vaquero and I must say that it is now a great shooting revolver for me. I also had a .45 ACP cylinder made for it. I do not own a .45 ACP semiauto.

I have my Glocks and I have my DA revolvers, which I shoot SA 2/3rds of the time and even though I currently only own 2 SA revolvers I do like them very much.

By the way, 2 of my favorite actors are John Wayne and Clint Eastwood. If you watch the Dirty Harry series of movies you will see that Dirty Harry shoots his “most powerful handgun in the world…” Single Action

 

[Smaug]

In this day and age, many wonder why people still like any type of revolver, or any type of single-shot, or any type of double barrel.

The "low drag, high speed" crowd tend to think that if you can't mag dump 17 rounds in 4 seconds, or 30 rounds in 6 seconds, you are some kind of antique. However, some of us know better.

I think it’s the run and gun games, which are suited to shooting a lot quickly.

…but even in a real life defense scenario SAs are slow to get that critical first shot off.

 

[Pat Riot]

I think it’s the run and gun games, which are suited to shooting a lot quickly.

…but even in a real life defense scenario SAs are slow to get that critical first shot off.

I think you need to check out some cowboy action shooting videos. Not the “top guns”, just some video showing how quickly folks can put s single action to work. Shooting two handed using the offhand thumb to cock the hammer one can get pretty quick pretty fast with a little practice.

 

[chicharrones]

I'm curious about this Ruger loading gate issue, too.

The loading gate opens to the right, not backwards or forwards. Recoil does some strange stuff, but for a right opening gate it would seem the only thing that wouldn't hold it shut would be a misshapened camming surface that the gate spring presses against. Or maybe the spring, but those things appear fairly robust. Basically, I'm thinking if the gate is a bit too easy to open, I could see recoil making it open.

The other thought is that when cocking the gun, the cylinder rotates clockwise. Which makes me think that possibly a cartridge rim could catch on the gate if the gate isn't below flush with the frame of the gun. I could see how a recessed chambered cylinder would prevent that from happening as the cartridges would be at the same level as the cylinder. A non-recessed cylinder has the cartridges rims exposed, possibly catching on an ill fitted loading gate as the cylinder rotates.

So, having thought that out loud to myself. I could see a "loose" loading gate sliding forward several thousandths under recoil. Then when the gun is cocked again, a high sitting cartridge rim catches on the gate and opens it. Or simply gets hung on it.

Maybe a fix would be to chamfer/bevel/whatever the edge of the loading gate at a very shallow angle to allow the next cartridge to slide over it?

Of course, I'm just spit ballin' here.

 

[chicharrones]

By the way, if anyone does want a new production Ruger single action revolver that has a transfer bar and loads on the half cock . . . Bearcat.

 

[hawg]

By the way, if anyone does want a new production Ruger single action revolver that has a transfer bar and loads on the half cock . . . Bearcat.

Too small.

 

[CoalTrain49]

My first revolver was a single action. My second revolver was a double action. I have never come back to single action revolvers, yet. I do almost all of my revolver shooting double action, cant remember the last time I cocked the hammer of one of my revolvers or the last time I had that old Blackhawk out.

Same here. First revolver was a Blackhawk. Second one a Smith. I shoot my S&W's single action though. I just like the swing out cylinder better then a loading gate. Just bought another S&W. Thought about a single action army for a long time but finally decided I didn't really want one. I'm not a cowboy and don't want to play one on YT.

 

[jmohme]

• I chose something else, but I do like the more deliberate way of doing things at a slower pace. That is why my favorite guns are my single shots. I don't own any SA revolvers though. I just don't care for them and think them kind of ugly.

 

[Scout21]

I can answer the opposite question. That is, why I don't like SA revolvers. It's really simple, the grip shape is absolutely awful. I can't hold it well at all. Recoil makes it twist around in my hand. That single handedly drives me away from them.

 

[CraigC]

You can modify a New Model to not ring the cylinder as it's being cocked but it's more trouble than it's worth. You would also have to take care to never close the gate unless the bolt was under a notch or leede.

I've never heard of this loading gate problem with standard chamberings. However, it is the reason why most of your custom five-shots have recessed chambers, to fully support the loading gate. Bowen wrote of this in his book.

Because they're awesome.

Best answer yet.

 

[35 Whelen]

I'm not criticizing the choice, but just want to understand it better. I think I'm younger than the typical SA revolver aficionado. (45) With respect, maybe it's a generational thing?

To me, a DA revolver that has a SA option does the same thing, and more efficiently, while retaining the same fixed barrel accuracy:

• Faster lock time
• Faster reloading
• DA option

Is it a nostalgia thing, for folks who grew up watching cowboy shows, or is there something more to it? For example, I've read that SA revolvers with the traditional cowboy grip tend to rotate upwards in recoil rather than push back. From the few times I've shot one, that arch still gives a pretty good thump right in the palm of the hand.

Is it akin to choosing a lever action rifle over an automatic rifle, where a slower, more deliberate way of doing things can be more satisfying?

 

[Pat Riot]

In my opinion, if your Ruger doesn’t have a cylinder ring you ain’t shooting it enough.
I have never understood this fixation on cylinder rings. All my revolvers have them SA’s and DA’s, Rugers and Smith & Wessons. All the guns I have sold did as well. As long as the wear isn’t excessive it’s pretty much normal. If it isn’t normal, then all 12 of my existing revolvers are malfunctioning.