Savage revolver

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jim K

Member.
Joined
Dec 31, 2002
Messages
17,847
I just acquired a gun I have been wanting for some time, but was unable to find at the right price, a Savage revolver. About 20,000 were made in Middletown, CT, c. 1861-1863 by the Savage Revolving Firearms Co., founded by Edward B. Savage, under the patents of Simeon North. AFAIK, there was no connection between Edward B. Savage and Arthur Savage of the later Savage Arms Co.

The Civil War gun is often confused with the earlier and much rarer (and more valuable) "figure 8" North & Savage revolver, which it resembles, but it is a different gun.

These are sometimes referred to as "double action" but, like some other revolvers of that era and later, the "double action" actually involves what is called "trigger cocking" wherein one trigger or one part of the trigger is used to cock the gun, while another part is used to fire it. In this gun, the bottom ring of the trigger lever is pulled to the rear, cocking the hammer, pulling the cylinder to the rear about 1/8 inch and out of engagement with the barrel, and revolving the cylinder. The lever is then released, leaving the hammer cocked, and letting the cylinder move forward under spring pressure so the chamber countersink will fit over the forcing cone of the barrel. Then the small trigger in the top of the trigger lever is pulled to release the hammer and fire the gun.

It is a heavy and awkward gun, much more massive and cumbersome than the Colt 1860, which is about the same size, though the Savage is only .36 caliber. They were, not surprisingly, disliked. Army Ordnance turned them down, but Savage exercised influence, and they were ultimately bought by that Army as well as 500 on contract to the Navy, where they would probably have been suitable for boat anchors.

I have not fired it, and probably won't, but it is an interesting piece of history, and uses a system of closing the barrel-cylinder gap that anticipates the Russian Nagant by some 30 years (the Nagant seal is much better, since it uses the cartridge case to effect the seal).

Here are some pics, not too good, but it's late at night.

Jim
 

Attachments

  • Savage left.jpg
    Savage left.jpg
    49.9 KB · Views: 71
  • Savage right.jpg
    Savage right.jpg
    59.1 KB · Views: 63
"Lever action revolver" is not a bad description. I see I made an error in my post, though. The cylinder is not forced ahead by a spring, it is forced back by a spring around the cylinder pin. It is forced ahead by a toggle link arrangement which does resemble that of the Henry or the much later Borchardt/Luger.

A very interesting gun. But crotchety old General Ripley was right* when he wrote that "The Savage pistol is not, in my opinion, a desirable arm for the service... unless in case of emergency." Had I been a Cavalryman in the Civil War, I have no doubt I would have much preferred a Colt or Remington.

*Ripley, much beset by dozens of naive inventors then and by hundreds of ignorant writers since, was right more often than he is given credit for. All he wanted was a sufficient supply of simple rifle-muskets, which could be turned out at minimal cost and which would be as good as, or better than, than anything the CS Army had or could obtain.

Jim
 
Cocking and shooting with two fingers is very fast - faster than with a thumb and finger (once you get the hang of it).
If you ever strip it down, take pics as you go along.
IMG_0429_zpsaff6fa72.gif
 
Pohill - how's the recoil compared to a Colt or Remington? I imagine it would be more controllable.
 
With a gun that is in good condition, the cylinder can't be turned when it is forward because the cylinder counterbore is fitting over the end of the barrel. But in guns like mine, where black powder corrosion has eaten away the end of the barrel, the cylinder can be turned when it is forward.

Jim

P.S. I have had it down; it is nowhere near the most complex gun I ever disassembled, the Campo-Giro taking that "honor."

JK
 
The gun should have been a .44 - the recoil is slight. I also use light loads in my antiques.
There is a screwdriver slot in the face of the recoil shield. To adjust the cylinder's tension in the frame, you turn that slot to loosen it, which allows you to loosen and adjust the rounded section at the opposite side. Once the rounded end is extended to where it should be (trial and error) the screwdriver slot in the face is then tightened to hold that position.
DSCF4577_zps9e590e50.gif
DSCF4579_zps1c677cc9.gif
You can see where the rounded section fits into the toggle. The recoil shield/plate then holds the cylinder in place, forcing it forward to form a gas seal when the gun is at full cock. Cocking the hammer by itself does not turn the cylinder. The long metal piece that has two screws holding its right side is actually the hand that advances the cylinder.
IMG_0254_zpsb6b30e23.gif
 
Last edited:
"nothing new...?"

The Savage cylinder rotation reminds me of something a bit newer - the S&W Bodyguard .38.

Jim
 
But in guns like mine, where black powder corrosion has eaten away the end of the barrel, the cylinder can be turned when it is forward.

I posted the pics and info in case you did not know about that adjustment. Apparently you know it already.
 
Thanks, but I am afraid the corrosion at the end of the barrel is too great to be compensated for with that adjustment. The little flange on the barrel that fits into the recess is completely gone, so the seal would not be there anyway. I am just going to leave it as is. But your information and pictures have been invaluable in helping me and others understand those guns.

BTW, as I get more familiar with the gun, I see your point that it is reasonably fast and could have been cocked without as much movement off target as with a conventional SA. If it just weren't so darned heavy!

Jim
 
Rebarrelling the Savage would not be easy; the barrel is screwed into the receiver and so precisely fitted it took me a while to see the joint. I think I will just leave it as is, as a collector piece, not a shooter. I have no need for another C&B shooter revolver.

I have noted that link for parts, though, and thanks. Actually, the Savage seems pretty rugged and not likely to break anything. In truth, most of the CW revolvers I have examined (a lot) showed use, sometimes heavy, but those that were not messed with have held up quite well; most had the original parts and original springs. It is only the ones that were played with (either by little kids or by big kids) that show damaged and broken parts.

I have an 1860 that is in perfect working condition, and all the parts are original. Yet the gun did not spend the war in a desk drawer. It has been fired, plenty. It is without finish and the sides of the muzzle are badly worn. That comes only from many miles of bouncing up and down in a holster. It fires as well as the day the trooper turned it in, or maybe just took it home.

Jim
 
Here's a couple, the one on top is mine, the bottom is one I rebuilt, notice the Colt type loading lever. Get a .390 mold and send some lead down range... Hi Pohill
 

Attachments

  • BothSavages.jpg
    BothSavages.jpg
    44.2 KB · Views: 18
That's the one Kaeto, and Pohill sold me the grips for a fair price to complete the metamorphis
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top