Carrying Six

[Dave T]

Leaving out the Ruger Vaquero (when uglier guns are built, Ruger will build them) which of the "safety" mechanisms the various makers have come up with for carrying a chambered round under the hammer, is the most dependable, reliable, and trouble free? Inquiring minds want to know (smile).

Dave

[Coffinmaker]

Actually, "SAFETY MECHANISMS" Leaves out some possibilities.  There are, however a couple.  Uberti came up with a real neat mechanical, Whereby lowering the hammer to the "safety notch" pushed a spring loaded pin that extended a hammer block into a recess in the frame that effectively prevented the hammer from contacting the firing pin.  It was not real popular because it was visible on the hammer and some folks told real exception as it wasn't "Authentic."  Who cares.  It actually worked.

Next up is the Two Position Base Pin.  Simply an overly long base pin, with TWO recesses to place the Base Pin completely through the frame stopping the forward travel of the Hammer.  Simple.  Effective.  However, If you Happen to run the Pin all the way into it's "safety" position, and your Significant Other steps to the line to shoot a stage .............. Don't plan on a hot meal (for about a week).

Next up is the Transfer Bar.  Not limited to Ruger.  Both Uberti and Pietta have built SAA replicas with transfer bars.  Very effective.  May well break at the worst possible time (Murphy's Law).

For mechanicals, Bout it although I may have missed something

[Buckaroo Lou]

There is the new Uberti safety which is inside the hammer and nothing shows outside. The firing pin stays retracted in the hammer and cannot reach the cartridge primer unless the trigger is pulled which then causes the firing pin to extend further out in order to strike a cartridge primer. As soon as the trigger is released the spring loaded firing pin again retracts into the hammer enough that it cannot touch the cartridge primer.

I just bought my first single action revolver the has this type safety so will see how well it works when I take it to the range.

[Advertising]

[Dave T]

Lou,

I will look forward to hearing about your new gun's range day.

Coffin,

The extra long cylinder pin is just too cumbersome to use when drawing the gun to shoot it. I was asking about the various firing pin blocks and which one is most reliable. I've head complaints about the new Uberti system and don't know much about any of the others.

A Ruger would be the easiest solution but I haven't yet got past how ugly they are. (lol)

Dave

[Capt Quirk]

I take exception to calling the Rugers "ugly". They are fine pistols, and work well. After decades, I finally added a new style 44 Blackhawk to my meager arsonal, the gun I learned to shoot with. So far, I have no issues with their safety setup. I do, however, have to get used to having no half cock on the hammer again.

[Coffinmaker]

Dave,

Well ..... Heck.  You did ask about the "Safety" mechanisms (plural) without restricting to the hammer and you didn't specify you wanted to be able to use the gun "in a hurry"     Since Uberti dropped the old "in hammer" hammer block and went to the two position Base Pin, most of us (gunplumbers) just whack off the last 3/32 of the pin, dress it and shove 'er in ..... then just load 5.

I'm retired now for several years, so I'm not working on the new(er) SAs with STUPID firing pins, but I have heard the new idea works just fine, so long as you don't want to go fast.  Were it mine, I stick that firing pin permanently FULL FORWARD and forget about it.  While it (the stupid firing pin) is a marvel of engineering and execution, it's STUPID as hell (my Opine)

[Dave T]

Capt,

I wasn't trying to offend anyone. Rugers are safe, well made, dependable revolvers. I just don't personally like the looks of the Vaquero. They tried to make it look like a SAA, but missed.

Coffin,

You are correct. I didn't specify what kind of safety I was asking about. I'll try to do better next time. (smile0

Dave

[willy]

You could have one extra cylinder locking notch cut between chambers on your cylinder and use that as a safety notch...(Something Colt should have done back in the 1870s)

[Coffinmaker]

Hi Willy,

Aummmmm,  Colt DID put safety notches between cylinders on early cartridge conversions.  Then Colt discontinued the 12 stop cylinder for safety reasons.  Didn't work so Bueno.

[Cholla Hill Tirador]

 Dave Coffinmaker pretty much covered them all. I personally detest transfer bars primarily because of what they do to the trigger, that is it forces the trigger to sit out toward the center of the trigger guard. That and Ruger chooses to put a silver trigger in a blue revolver thereby giving a Baikal-esque look. I've always said of Ruger's- They're built like tanks, they look like tanks, and they feel like tanks. I own three Ruger's, so I have the right to my opinion on the matter.  

  My personal favorite is the pivoting hammer block which Uberti used until the advent of the retracting firing pin (RFP). It is actuated when the hammer is pulled back to the first notch. In my opinion it's very unobtrusive, and although I've yet to drop a revolver and test it, I'm sure it's quite effective.

 

 

 

 I still say the standard safety notch is more effective than given credit. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: For more than a century and a half hunters, soldiers and shooters in general have galivanted about the woods, plains and battlefields carrying all manner of rifles and shotguns with caps on the nipples/rounds chambered and their hammers pulled back to the safety notch. Stop and think for a minute how many long guns utilize the half cock safety; all manner of muzzle loaders, the Henry, 1866, 1873, 1876, 1886, 1892, 1894, the Colt Lightning, '97 Winchester and many more. Yet for some reason many of the same people consider it fool-hardy to do the same with a revolver.

  I've heard every excuse imaginable as to why it's OK with an 8 lb. long gun, but not a 2 1/2 lb. revolver. I think my favorite is that the safety notches on the hammers of long guns are "stronger". A couple of weeks ago I was perusing eBay and Gunbroker looking for a new hammer for an old '94 Winchester. I kid you not, there were TWO '94 Winchester hammers with broken safety notches on Gunbroker.

    

    

   The most effective safety lies squarely between your ears. I've always felt that when carrying a revolver, a fella should always have in the back of his mind where it is relative to ones activity. Last week I was sorting through some cattle, climbing in and out of the lot, in and out of the loading chute, loading calves, etc. As always a Uberti SA was on my hip and as always, where that revolver was never left my mind.

 Cholla

[Dave T]

CHT,

Thanks for the informative and illustrative (smile) post. I was thinking about this in terms of a truck gun or even an occasional carry gun (concealed carry permit holder). My USFAs are just too expensive for this so I was going to look at the Italian offerings and the idea of actually carrying 6 instead of my normal 5 rounds came to mind. Since I can't realistically try the various solutions different makers have come up with I thought I would just ask.

I agree with your "tank" comments about Rugers. At one time I had a good collection of Old Model Flat-tops. They were always deemed "unsafe" with 6 rounds loaded, as are all modern copies of the Colt lock work.

Your comments about the original safety notch make sense but I've been told since I started this single action revolver business in the late 1960s that loading six is dangerous, stupid, foolish, and in some circles flat out forbidden (SASS would be an example). Noit sure I'm ready to break with all that tradition and habit. But...thanks again for your comments and pictures.

Dave

[Cholla Hill Tirador]

  Dave you should certainly do that which is most comfortable to you. But remember we were told that eating chocolate caused acne, a certain amount of bullet "energy" is required to kill an animal, and that self-gratification would cause blindness (Now what'd I do with my glasses..... ).

  CHT

[Trailrider]

The so-called "safety" notches are intended to prevent the gun from firing should the hammer inadvertently slip off the sear! They were never intended as a carry position! The idea may seem like a good one for that purpose, but that wasn't the intent of the original designers. As you can see by the photo, these are very thin, and subject to break if the gun is dropped on the hammer spur! The "five beans in the wheel" concept probably was okay in the days when people were more knowledgeable about guns, but Ruger found out the hard way that wasn't the case anymore, which is why they came up with the transfer bar design. They even offered a conversion for the old Flat Top's, which they would install for free. In actuality, the conversion transfer bar was a little different from the later ones that we see today.  I haven't seen all that many broken transfer bars over the years. So far as a 'truck gun" or CCW is concerned, I would NOT use any single action revolver unless it was absolutely necessary! There are better choices in DA revolvers or semi-auto pistols.  Just sayin'...

[willy]

Hi Willy,

Aummmmm,  Colt DID put safety notches between cylinders on early cartridge conversions.  Then Colt discontinued the 12 stop cylinder for safety reasons.  Didn't work so Bueno.

Whoa,,,hold on there..Ya can't just leave me hanging out here,,,
WHY???.Wouldn't they work?

[Cholla Hill Tirador]

The so-called "safety" notches are intended to prevent the gun from firing should the hammer inadvertently slip off the sear! They were never intended as a carry position! The idea may seem like a good one for that purpose, but that wasn't the intent of the original designers. As you can see by the photo, these are very thin, and subject to break if the gun is dropped on the hammer spur! The "five beans in the wheel" concept probably was okay in the days when people were more knowledgeable about guns, but Ruger found out the hard way that wasn't the case anymore, which is why they came up with the transfer bar design. They even offered a conversion for the old Flat Top's, which they would install for free. In actuality, the conversion transfer bar was a little different from the later ones that we see today.  I haven't seen all that many broken transfer bars over the years. So far as a 'truck gun" or CCW is concerned, I would NOT use any single action revolver unless it was absolutely necessary! There are better choices in DA revolvers or semi-auto pistols.  Just sayin'...

  Of course they were intended as carry positions, why else would they be there?? The current Colt Single Action Army Manual refers to the first "click", repeatedly, as the "safety notch" and "safety position". The Uberti manual for their single actions refer to the first click as "Basic Safety", "At Rest" and "Transport Position".

 Did you read with the post with the photos of the hammers? The hammers are out of rifles, rifles that most consider safe to carry with a round chambered and the hammer in the safety notch. Although I have no empirical data, my bet is that the broken safety notches we see on SA revolvers are not from being dropped, but from the trigger being pulled while the sear is in the safety notch. Going back to the current Colt Single Action Army Manual, on page 19 they warn of this stating that excessive trigger force can break the safety notch.

    As far as your recommendation for "better" choices for defense, I take firm issue with your assertion. I get that for most shooters, SA revolvers are nothing more than novelties. However there are those of us who have fired SA's to the extent that they are merely extensions of our arms. I have some fine semi-autos and DA revolvers and shoot them regularly, but don't even come close to shooting them with the same efficiency or accuracy as I do my SA's.

   NOW....we've strayed from the OP's question, which was answered a bit ago.

 CHT

[LonesomePigeon]

I read somewhere that when Sam Colt and Sam Walker were developing the 1847 Walker it was said that the benefit of a trigger guard(as oppsed to the Paterson which had no trigger guard) was that now it could be safely carried with the hammer cocked.

 

[Capt Quirk]

I agree with CHT, while there are other options, a good SA is fine for carry. It shows the person has conviction, and won't waste shots like the "spray and pray" people of today. Not to mention, when you do go click, a hog leg is a better bludgeon than a plastic pistol any day.

[Dave T]

My original question was about which of the Italian makers has the better "Safety Hammer". Not sure I ever got a clear answer to that but the responses were informative none the less.

As to carrying a single action revolver, or having one in my truck for emergencies, I've always been fascinated to here the arguments against, then those same people will turn around and admit to carrying a J-frame S&W with only 5 rounds on board. I guarantee you I can shoot one of my single actions better than I can a Chief's special and I'm pretty sure the 45 Colt round is more effective in stopping a fight than the 38 Special.

CHT, I think you may be on to something in saying the broken trigger sears we've all seen pictured are more likely from Joe Funk, the cowboy wanna-be, pulling hard on the trigger when the gun was cocked to the first notch. And I don't think the hammer has enough inertia to fire a round from there. So Joe probably didn't shoot himself or anyone else...thank goodness.

Dave

[45 Dragoon]

Hey Dave,
  I agree with others here that the hammer block safety is my favorite of the Italian offerings. My El Patron Comp had that safety and I felt very comfortable with it. I say that because I just got my first "retracting" firing pin which seems to be a "sound" system that will allow a "safe to carry" fully loaded S.A. with hammer fully down. I've read that some of the comp.crowd have had ftf's and light primer strikes (caused by early trigger release during rapid fire). This, I think, can be remedied with an accelerated hammer while still reducing the hammer draw to "normal" Comp. strength main spring tension. Hopefully, the hammer will outrun the early trigger release. I guess we will see .  .  . 

Mike

[Dave T]

Mike,

I'm too old and busted up to compete any more so early release of the trigger shouldn't be a problem for me (smile).

It's probably time to get my hands on a couple of these Italian single actions with the various safeties so I can see and feel what they are like up close and personal.

Thanks to all for the feed back,
Dave