Novel revolver safety

[barnbwt]

Has anyone ever heard of a revolver that can be carried hammer down, with the cylinder locked halfway between chambers? A subsequent DA trigger pull would carry the hand/cylinder the rest of the way as the hammer cocks. Seems like this would be the ultimate drop safety, and negate any need to keep a chamber empty for extra safety.

TCB

 

[rcmodel]

No, not a modern DA revolver, as it isn't needed on any modern design.
They are totally drop safe and hammer impact safe by design already.

There is no need to keep a chamber empty on any modern DA revolver.

Some of the the old Colt Cap & ball revolvers worked that way though.
They had pins located between the nipples for the hammer recess to rest on.
Course, that was 150 years ago.

The modern NAA mini-revolver works that way.
They have slots in the cylinder for the RF firing pin to rest in.
But it is a single-action too.

It didn't catch on for modern DA revolvers because like I said, it isn't needed.

rc

 

[JFrame]

Not a double action, but that's the safety mode built into the NAA mini-revolvers.

However, unless I'm mistaken, the various hammer block and transfer bar safeties implemented on modern revolvers have virtually eliminated the concern for random impact igniting a round under the hammer.

Edited to add: beat me to it, RC...


.

 

[S.B.]

I help teach a Hunters Safety Course in Illinois. They(Illinois) have published the only safe way to carry a revolver while hunting is to make sure the chamber under the hammer is empty? As a volenteer instrutor I dare not question the powers that be.
Steve

 

[bikemutt]

All the good 'ole boys I know carry on an empty cylinder chamber. I could tell them about hammer lock and transfer bars until I'm blue, they will never change.

 

[MrBorland]

They(Illinois) have published the only safe way to carry a revolver while hunting is to make sure the chamber under the hammer is empty? As a volenteer instrutor I dare not question the powers that be.

One could use a SAA (or clone) to hunt, I suppose, in which case, there is only 1 way to be sure all revolvers are safe to carry.

unless I'm mistaken, the various hammer block and transfer bar safeties implemented on modern revolvers have virtually eliminated the concern for random impact igniting a round under the hammer.

Technically, it's the rebound slide that prevents the hammer from moving forward if the gun's dropped. AFAIK, the hammer block is more of a de-cocker safety, as it's designed to block the hammer if it falls from it's cocked position (while finger's off the trigger).

 

[JFrame]

Technically, it's the rebound slide that prevents the hammer from moving forward if the gun's dropped. AFAIK, the hammer block is more of a de-cocker safety, as it's designed to block the hammer if it falls from it's cocked position (while finger's off the trigger).

Thank you for that clarification...


.

 

[Guillermo]

As RC said, there is no need for this on a modern revolver.

Heck, I am not sure I that if I were to carry my old Hand Ejector from 1928 or I-frame (32sw long) that I would keep an empty chamber. They were not easy to make go off by dropping.

Certainly no modern revolver needs this.

 

[Mizar]

The only way to put the cylinder in between the chambers on a modern DA revolver is with an in between notch for the bolt. But the bolt design and timing wouldn't allow it - the bolt will fall in the new notch with every cylinder turn. And like other wise people said - it's not needed.

Boris

P.S. Ruger DA and Colt DA revolvers (old and new actions) doesn't have rebound slides.

 

[bergmen]

All the good 'ole boys I know carry on an empty cylinder chamber. I could tell them about hammer lock and transfer bars until I'm blue, they will never change.

This always made me wonder why anyone would spend the money on a revolver with six holes and only use five of them, especially in a modern revolver that is perfectly safe with all chambers loaded.

Dan

 

[1911Tuner]

As RC said, there is no need for this on a modern revolver.

A disclaimer is in order.

There are a few modern 1873 SAA clones that aren't safe to carry with a round under the hammer. Uberti. Cimarron. USFA to name a few. To check for this, lower the hammer full down on an empty chamber. Peek through the gap between the rear of the cylinder and the recoil shield. If you can see the hammer nose or firing pin...carry it with an empty hole. Load one...skip one...load four. Cock and lower the hammer.

 

[Guillermo]

Of course Tuner is right.

I did not really consider those "modern revolvers" but rather clones of outdated designs.

That said, when dealing with this type of safety issue, it is best to err on the side of caution so that newbies understand.

Amend my statement to say "no need for this on a modern double action revolver".

As mentioned, this concept is used on NAA Mini revolvers

 

[rcmodel]

As RC said, there is no need for this on a modern revolver.

That's not what I said.

I said, no need for it on a modern DA revolver.

rc

 

[Guillermo]

I said, no need for it on a modern DA revolver

Yes RC

When I was extrapolating I mis"spoke"

Tuner was making the clarification because of me...not you.

 

[MrAcheson]

Some of the the old Colt Cap & ball revolvers worked that way though.
They had pins located between the nipples for the hammer recess to rest on.
Course, that was 150 years ago.

Remington New Model Armies also work that way. The Hammer nose slides into a safety notch in the cylinder between two percussion caps. At least some of the Howell conversion cylinders for the NMA retain this capability.

I believe you can park the firing pin between cartridge rims on Single Action Armies as well, but this is a much less secure location and nobody thinks it's a good idea.