Revolver opinion

[wreave]

This here is a photo of my Uberti Cattleman, which is a new-made clone of the Colt Single Action Army. The firing pin is part of the hammer, and you'll notice that at full hammer-rest that pin would be touching the primer. Any drop on that hammer, or even a good whack, and she's going BOOM! You could carry the gun safely with the hammer on the first notch, but I'm not carrying that one anyway. Got many other pistols for that purpose.

The OP's question was specifically about double action revolvers. Yes, your SAA clone is "new", but it's not "modern". You've made a point, twice now, that's completely irrelevant to the discussion - especially considering this post is in the Concealed Carry forum.

[O2HeN2]

"Firing pin part of the hammer" is not the determining factor either. The older 'smiths that had the firing pin attached to the hammer had a hammer block that made it safe to carry one under the hammer.

With any modern revolver it's safe to load the chamber under the hammer. If in doubt, take rondog's picture as an example as how to check -- if the firing pin does not protrude from the recoil shield with the hammer at rest (as in his picture), you're good to go.

O2

[donsignalli]

Ended up buying this @ Shooting Shack in Littleton. Vintage 1st Gen Charter Arms 44 Special.

Sent with Tapatalk via Android

[rondog]

The OP's question was specifically about double action revolvers. Yes, your SAA clone is "new", but it's not "modern". You've made a point, twice now, that's completely irrelevant to the discussion - especially considering this post is in the Concealed Carry forum.

My, got your undies all in a bunch for some reason?

[Monky]

The OP's question was specifically about double action revolvers. Yes, your SAA clone is "new", but it's not "modern". You've made a point, twice now, that's completely irrelevant to the discussion - especially considering this post is in the Concealed Carry forum.

My, got your undies all in a bunch for some reason?

Mine certainly are. I don't know about the FNG. Specifically his post was more useless than yours. You were at least discussing a wheel gun, he was just trying to show off his bigger ePeen.

To the OP, I've never had an issue w/ wheel gun. I don't exactly walk gingerly or turn my hips to avoid things either.

[Zundfolge]

Modern revolvers have what is called a "Transfer Bar Safety". It's the bit with the arrow pointing at it in this illustration:


The only way the gun can fire is if the transfer bar comes up between the hammer and the firing pin, otherwise the hammer does not fall far enough to make contact with the firing pin, and the transfer bar doesn't come up unless the trigger is pulled (so the gun is drop and strike safe).

Some other guns use a hammer block, which works the opposite way (it drops down or moves up into a detent to allow the hammer to contact the firing pin, or a hammer with a firing pin on it to come in contact with the primer. Again, the hammer block doesn't drop down or move up into a detent on the hammer unless the trigger is pulled).





And its not just new revolvers with these safeties. Iver Johnson invented the transfer bar safety over a century ago ... and they made the cheap guns of their time.

The only revolvers currently made without either a transfer bar or hammer block safety are reproductions of Colt Single Action Army pistols (and some of them do ... usually a hammer block), so with a modern S&W, Ruger, Taurus, Charter or Colt (not SAA) you're fine with all cylinders loaded.

Your Charter will be perfectly safe as it has a transfer bar safety (Charter claims they invented the transfer bar, but I don't buy that ... Iver Johnson was using one long before Charter existed ... but I'll leave that argument up to the historians. Maybe Charter bought Ivers Johnson or something):

The OP's question was specifically about double action revolvers. Yes, your SAA clone is "new", but it's not "modern". You've made a point, twice now, that's completely irrelevant to the discussion - especially considering this post is in the Concealed Carry forum.

It's not irrelevant since this discussion is public and you never know, some day down the road someone may do a search, find this thread and then discover that they can't safely CCW their little birdshead gripped cowboy gun with chamber loaded under the hammer.

Yes, there are folk that CCW single action cowboy guns. And here.

No I'm not going to defend the practice (other than to say, pack what you're comfortable with ... and the first rule of a gun fight is to have a gun. ANY gun).

[MCarp71]

The OP's question was specifically about double action revolvers. Yes, your SAA clone is "new", but it's not "modern". You've made a point, twice now, that's completely irrelevant to the discussion - especially considering this post is in the Concealed Carry forum.

Wow FNG, What if Rondog does carry the single action concealed. Some do!

To the OP, I carry a Ruger LCR, loaded as much as possible!

[cstone]

I carried both a S&W Model 15 and 19 with all six chambers loaded. Never was an issue. I would trust either gun but I'm not as fast at flipping those speedloaders as I used to be. With 10, 12, or 15 round magazines, I don't need to reload nearly as much as I used to for the same number of rounds.

Wheel guns are fun to shoot.

Be safe.

[Holger Danske]

My main carry is a Ruger SP101 with all 5 in the cylinder. Never an issue.

[sabot_round]

My G2G for quick carry is a S&W 637, 5 shot, 38spl, 5 rds cylinder. I've never carry on an empty cylinder!!! No issues here as I carry it around the house doing chores or going to the 7-11. My!!