Single action question - empty chamber
- Thread starter Bullseye
- Start date
- Status
16 years ago my nephew had a friend with him at the cabin. I took the boys out shooting with a Hawes 22 revolver and a Winchester model 90. The boys were loading five in the Hawes and 10 in the Winchester and taking turns shooting at Rabbit sized targets in preparation for a pack trip in the next few days.
I tried to haul the gear in one day with this trike that I had made out of a walk behind tiller. I had used it in orchards to haul a half tom of fire wood in a box trailer. Well we got a half mile in and the engine gave out so I roll the trike out to my truck and run back to the cabin to get my Triumph.
I hook my bike up to the 10 cubic foot trailer that I had mad to haul behind it and start pulling after a half mile my clutch heats up and I have to pull off the trailer and limp my bike back down the trail. The boys drag the trailer down after me. I set them up with a fire so they can cook hot dogs while I limp my bike back to the cabin to get my truck.
I am back with my truck in two hours but the day is shot so we put out the fire and go back to the cabin for some movies and dinner.
Bright and early before sun up the next day we are hiking the trail with pack on our backs. One boy has the Hawes and the other the Winchester. It is a three mile hike to the meadow and stream where I placer mined. Once we get there I get the boys getting firewood and setting up camp and within an hour I am starting lunch and the boys are bored. Rabbits come out to the edge of the meadow so if you are quiet you can sit on a log and pop yourself a rabbit for dinner so I sen the boys.....half an hour later I hear this pop......ten more minutes and they come straggling in ant the boy that was not my nephew says.......I think I shot myself in the leg...... Yep he had loaded that Hawes with six instead of five and bumped the hammer against the log he was sitting on and shot himself just below the knee.
My great nephew now shoots that same Hawes and his father makes sure that it only gets loaded with five and the hammer goes down on the empty chamber.
I tried to haul the gear in one day with this trike that I had made out of a walk behind tiller. I had used it in orchards to haul a half tom of fire wood in a box trailer. Well we got a half mile in and the engine gave out so I roll the trike out to my truck and run back to the cabin to get my Triumph.
I hook my bike up to the 10 cubic foot trailer that I had mad to haul behind it and start pulling after a half mile my clutch heats up and I have to pull off the trailer and limp my bike back down the trail. The boys drag the trailer down after me. I set them up with a fire so they can cook hot dogs while I limp my bike back to the cabin to get my truck.
I am back with my truck in two hours but the day is shot so we put out the fire and go back to the cabin for some movies and dinner.
Bright and early before sun up the next day we are hiking the trail with pack on our backs. One boy has the Hawes and the other the Winchester. It is a three mile hike to the meadow and stream where I placer mined. Once we get there I get the boys getting firewood and setting up camp and within an hour I am starting lunch and the boys are bored. Rabbits come out to the edge of the meadow so if you are quiet you can sit on a log and pop yourself a rabbit for dinner so I sen the boys.....half an hour later I hear this pop......ten more minutes and they come straggling in ant the boy that was not my nephew says.......I think I shot myself in the leg...... Yep he had loaded that Hawes with six instead of five and bumped the hammer against the log he was sitting on and shot himself just below the knee.
My great nephew now shoots that same Hawes and his father makes sure that it only gets loaded with five and the hammer goes down on the empty chamber.
OP
OP
Bullseye
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 1,598
Although my initial question was more about wear and tear on a cylinder chamber that might get less use than the next ...
Watched True Grit late last nite.
Mattie Ross: [watching Rooster load his revolver] Why do you keep that one chamber empty?
Rooster Cogburn: So I won't shoot my foot off.
Watched True Grit late last nite.
Mattie Ross: [watching Rooster load his revolver] Why do you keep that one chamber empty?
Rooster Cogburn: So I won't shoot my foot off.
Driftwood Johnson
Member
Which version? John Wayne or Jeff Bridges?
The 1911 half cock is a safety in the same way the disconnector is a safety. It isn't a carry safety - that's what the inertial firing pin JMB invented was for.
Carrying a 1911 on half cock, or making it sound safe to do so, is pretty foolish. It may be more robust than a SAA, but not so much so that it is going to stop the sear from breaking if you drop the half cocked gun on the hammer.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Sure it is. Says so right there in the patents. It even provides instructions for lowering the hammer one handed to the "Safety Position." Go look it up.
And the disconnect isn't a safety by any stretch of the term.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Here ya go. Read lines 8-45.
Yeah, you've shown me that before, and I pointed out to you before that patents have sections that describe the historical context that an innovation addresses. That is not a section dealing with safety notches, it is the section dealing with the grips safety design that assists decocking. Taking that as advocacy of half cock carry in a new firearm that doesn't publicly exist outside of the patent is ludicrous.
If you feel like reading patents, find Brownings Sight Safety and Inertial Firing Pin patents and read the explanation in them for their addition to the design. They are there to replace dangerous half cock carry.
And the disconnector is a safety - it prevents out of battery firing, and is called a "safety-piece" in Browning's Colt patents:
http://www.google.com/patents/US580924
Please, please stop suggesting to your fan club and others who read this stuff that half cock carry is anything but a the most dangerous way to keep a 1911. You drop that gun on its half cocked hammer and it will fire straight up at the guy who dropped it. You are going to contribute to a death.
In the 1911 and other handguns, half cock is a safety device to prevent accidental firing when the full cock notched is missed when cocking the piece or due to sear bounce. In a SAA it is there to load the cylinder.
If you feel like reading patents, find Brownings Sight Safety and Inertial Firing Pin patents and read the explanation in them for their addition to the design. They are there to replace dangerous half cock carry.
And the disconnector is a safety - it prevents out of battery firing, and is called a "safety-piece" in Browning's Colt patents:
http://www.google.com/patents/US580924
Please, please stop suggesting to your fan club and others who read this stuff that half cock carry is anything but a the most dangerous way to keep a 1911. You drop that gun on its half cocked hammer and it will fire straight up at the guy who dropped it. You are going to contribute to a death.
In the 1911 and other handguns, half cock is a safety device to prevent accidental firing when the full cock notched is missed when cocking the piece or due to sear bounce. In a SAA it is there to load the cylinder.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Hey! I didn't design the gun. Go argue with John Browning. He used the half cock for a safety on his rifles and pistols long before he got involved with the 1911.
And for the record, I've never advised anybody to use the half cock as a safe carry option.
What makes you think that I haven't dropped one with the hammer at half cock to see what it would take to cause a discharge?
I have...straight down onto concrete...and never got it to happen. Never shattered a sear or broke a half cock notch.
Then why go to the trouble to machine a captive notch when a flat shelf would serve the same purpose? It would be a lot faster, simpler, and cheaper. Why do that if that was all it was meant to be?
No, you didn't design the gun. But you're talking about it as if you did based on your misreadings of the patents. "Disconnect isn't a safety". Where do you get this stuff from?
And I don't really care what you managed to get away with doing a single test with one or two. It really isn't a question of will it hold, but what will happen when it does not. I doubt you tried it with a cast or MIM sear or hammer. But even the tougest tool steel part will shatter if struck hard enough.
Half cock is a hook so the gun can't be fired from anything but full cock, and so it has a better chance of stopping the hammer. It also informs the user that the hammer has fallen to half cock because of how it feels on the trigger. It is a perfectly reasonable design to combat both a slipped thumb and sear bounce.
You didn't "tell" anyone to use the half cock. Instead you keep provocatively suggesting that everyone's favorite firearms genius designed the gun to be carried that way. He didn't, and you aren't referencing a manual but an obscure preamble to a description of a decocking mechanism in a patent.
The fact that you disagree with Browning about whether a disconnector is a safety device should tell you something about your creative interpretation. People misunderstand safety devices enough already to have the local "guru" muddying the waters even more with his wacky interpretations of firearms mechanics.
It isn't likely to kill anyone when you insist barrel links are superfluous and 1911s are blowback, but this will. Again, please stop bringing this up for everyone's safety.
And I don't really care what you managed to get away with doing a single test with one or two. It really isn't a question of will it hold, but what will happen when it does not. I doubt you tried it with a cast or MIM sear or hammer. But even the tougest tool steel part will shatter if struck hard enough.
Half cock is a hook so the gun can't be fired from anything but full cock, and so it has a better chance of stopping the hammer. It also informs the user that the hammer has fallen to half cock because of how it feels on the trigger. It is a perfectly reasonable design to combat both a slipped thumb and sear bounce.
You didn't "tell" anyone to use the half cock. Instead you keep provocatively suggesting that everyone's favorite firearms genius designed the gun to be carried that way. He didn't, and you aren't referencing a manual but an obscure preamble to a description of a decocking mechanism in a patent.
The fact that you disagree with Browning about whether a disconnector is a safety device should tell you something about your creative interpretation. People misunderstand safety devices enough already to have the local "guru" muddying the waters even more with his wacky interpretations of firearms mechanics.
It isn't likely to kill anyone when you insist barrel links are superfluous and 1911s are blowback, but this will. Again, please stop bringing this up for everyone's safety.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Provocatively? Lad, I don't even advise anyone to carry it cocked and locked. I tell them that they can if they want to. The gun was designed to carry pretty much any way the owner chooses.
One or two? Surely you jest. Seriously, though...the hammer and sear just aren't that fragile.
And you still dance around the simple question. Why a captive notch instead of a simple shelf?
I know this is probably fruitless, but I'll try again.
First, a primer in the realities of manufacturing.
Machining that captive notch instead of a flat shelf requires an extra operation...extra tooling like jigs fixtures,cutters and the like...as well as an extra setup.
It also ties up a machine and a machine operator.
These things cost time and money. If a step can be eliminated without compromising function...it will be eliminated because it increases the bottom line. Colt bid on the contract for one reason. To make money. Unnecessary expenditures cost money. Do the math.
If all the half cock was ever meant to do was arrest an errant hammer, it would've been a flat shelf from the beginning because a flat shelf will do.
But it was also designed to lock the hammer and sear solidly together, preventing a discharge from inadvertently pulling the trigger, and it does that very well.
If that doesn't meet the criteria for a safety...tell me do...what does?
Is gun. Gun not safe.
I already gave you two answers:
A hook more effectively captures the sear when it bounces, or if it has the tip break off.
It leaves the gun in a state that prevents repeating the initial issue when the trigger is pulled again after the disconnector resets. And it gives the user a tactile signal what state the gun is in.
AND, a working half cock is better than a shelf if people don't read the directions and insist on carrying it wrong. That doesn't make it safe, just not as insanely dangerous as a half cock shelf would be.
Why did he add this extra manufacturing step? For the same reason he put sight safeties on some guns and inertial firing pins on later ones: To make the gun safer to use. These were all designed with horseback use in mind - they had to be tough and as fumble proof as possible for people using them with one hand. Apparently, JMB thought a safer gun was more valuable than the cost of adding a machine step.
There are three designed ways to carry a loaded 1911 safely. Half cock is not, and never was, one of them.
A hook more effectively captures the sear when it bounces, or if it has the tip break off.
It leaves the gun in a state that prevents repeating the initial issue when the trigger is pulled again after the disconnector resets. And it gives the user a tactile signal what state the gun is in.
AND, a working half cock is better than a shelf if people don't read the directions and insist on carrying it wrong. That doesn't make it safe, just not as insanely dangerous as a half cock shelf would be.
Why did he add this extra manufacturing step? For the same reason he put sight safeties on some guns and inertial firing pins on later ones: To make the gun safer to use. These were all designed with horseback use in mind - they had to be tough and as fumble proof as possible for people using them with one hand. Apparently, JMB thought a safer gun was more valuable than the cost of adding a machine step.
There are three designed ways to carry a loaded 1911 safely. Half cock is not, and never was, one of them.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
I whacked on a Colt MIM sear with a 4-ounce hammer once to prove to a guy that MIM wasn't the problem it's made out to be... and didn't break the tip off. In fact, when I installed it in another gun...it functioned.
The sear isn't that fragile.
And yet, the man himself called it a safety position. What an idiot he must've been!
Yes. The gun just isn't that fragile.
Actually, there's only one way to carry it safely. If the chamber is loaded, it's not safe. It's a gun.
Tell you what - just post a manual excerpt referencing half cock carry on this gun. Not a patent background reference to half cocks in general, some of which are intended to be used that way.
I don't know why anyone would go out of their way to argue FOR something this dangerous. It really doesn't matter if the sear SHOULD be able to take it - when it breaks, you're dead. It isn't a safe carry mode. There's nothing comparable to it.
I don't know why anyone would go out of their way to argue FOR something this dangerous. It really doesn't matter if the sear SHOULD be able to take it - when it breaks, you're dead. It isn't a safe carry mode. There's nothing comparable to it.
RetiredUSNChief
Member
Lordy, lordy...
Patents describe the functions and features of their innovations, as well. In this instance, if something is called a "safety", then that is the intent of the innovation, regardless of what anybody else may think.
Page 1 of the patent:
"The main object of the present invention is to produce a firearm of this class which, in order to be specially adapted for the military service, shall be not only practical, efficient and perfectly safe in use, but strong and capable of withstanding the exposure and rough usage of service in the field..."
Page 7 of the patent:
"...then the trigger may be operated with the first finger of the same hand to release the hammer and finally the thumb, still applied tor the hammer, may
allow the same to slowly descend to the safety position..."
Whether you or I agree with this or not, JMB CLEARLY intended what we call "half-cock" to be a safety because THAT'S WHAT HE CALLS THAT POSITION. Nowhere does he ever qualify this position as only being there "when the full cock notched is missed when cocking the piece or due to sear bounce".
What you refer to as a "grips safety design", however, is never referred to as a "safety" anywhere in the patent. The stated functions are to lock trigger against operation in its normal position, to release the trigger either during the act of firing, and to allow one handed decocking of the pistol to the safety position. The grip lever is thus a trigger release, not what Browning called a "safety".
From these functions, however, people derive the name "grip safety". But it's never described that way by Browning.
There are two integral components referred to as a "safety" in the patent: The safety lever itself and the safety position on the hammer.
The purpose of the disconnect is to prevent multiple discharges on a single trigger pull.
From your own cited reference of patent 580924, Browning has this to say about why this design was incorporated:
"The movements of the parts take place so rapidly, that unless means were provided to prevent, the trigger could not be released before several shots in succession would be fired; but, as already explained, the trigger is at each opening movement of the breech disconnected from the sear, thus releasing the latter and allowing it to reengage the hammer as soon as the same is again cocked, even though the trigger has not been released."
So it's NOT a safety...it's there to prevent multiple shots from being fired on a single trigger pull. To prevent "full auto" operation, if you will.
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
Regardless of all that.
It has nothing at all to do with the OP's question of why load 5 beans in the hole in a Single-Action revolver!
Comparing the hammer & sear design and strength of a 1911 to those on a 1873 Colt SAA or modern clone is like comparing the transmission gears on a Model-T Ford to those on a 426 Cobra.
rc
It has nothing at all to do with the OP's question of why load 5 beans in the hole in a Single-Action revolver!
Comparing the hammer & sear design and strength of a 1911 to those on a 1873 Colt SAA or modern clone is like comparing the transmission gears on a Model-T Ford to those on a 426 Cobra.
rc
RetiredUSNChief
Member
Oh, yeah...forgot to address the SAA aspect:
You are correct that the "half cock" position is for loading the cylinder. This is why it's also called the "loading position". There are also two other positions, the "hammer safety position" and "cocked position".
However, the SAA manual clearly describes two of these positions as "safety positions":
"There are three distinct hammer positions on a Colt revolver; two, which are described below, are safety features, while the third, which will be described later, is the COCKED position for firing."
The SAA manual goes on to say that the SAA should be carried with the hammer in the "safety" position over an empty chamber, yet on the next page says that the SAA should NOT be carried with the hammer in the "half cock" or "loading" position.
This is because, unlike the "safety position", the "half cock" position allows the cylinder to rotate freely, which means that you can't be certain that the empty cylinder will be under the hammer should the revolver be dropped.
So the "half cock" position is a safety which prevents the hammer from being dropped should the trigger be pulled while loading or unloading the cylinders.
Last edited:
Just FWIW, can ANYONE cite ANY references prior to, say, 1960, for the term "five beans in the wheel" or a bill (of any denomination) carried in a chamber to keep a round from being inserted?
Please, I mean real citations, not "someone said" or "I read somewhere" or "my cousin Pete told me ..." or "a Colt ad said ..."
The "$20 bill story" appears to have originated with Colt's lawyers at some time in the last 30 years, and I never heard the "beans in a wheel" business until years after that.
So, how about it? Any letters by Wyatt Earp or Billy the Kid about beans or "burying money"?
Jim
Please, I mean real citations, not "someone said" or "I read somewhere" or "my cousin Pete told me ..." or "a Colt ad said ..."
The "$20 bill story" appears to have originated with Colt's lawyers at some time in the last 30 years, and I never heard the "beans in a wheel" business until years after that.
So, how about it? Any letters by Wyatt Earp or Billy the Kid about beans or "burying money"?
Jim
RetiredUSNChief
Member
"Burying money" always seems to be an unsubstantiated rumor. I've never been able to find any reliable reference to this in any books or online; several internet links which debunk it, however.
I've never run across any reference to anybody sticking anything into a cylinder to prevent loading a chamber, either. Seems like a practice that's liable to gum up the works just when you need the revolver the most.
I've never run across any reference to anybody sticking anything into a cylinder to prevent loading a chamber, either. Seems like a practice that's liable to gum up the works just when you need the revolver the most.
35 Whelen
Member
This is getting funny....
I own a MK IV Series 70 and Pg. 16 of the manual clearly states the purpose of the half-cock notch (notice, it's not referred to as a safety on this page):
Even Marlin in their manuals for their lever actions warn against relying on the half-cock "safety".
So, as I stated many posts back, the use of the notch, safety, first cock position, whatever it's called, regardless of the firearm is a personal choice and should be done so with an understanding of the risks. I've no doubt that most folks here will spend infinitely more time discussing the dangers, or lack thereof, of carrying a loaded firearm than they will actually carry a firearm.
Last weekend I installed a front sight on a Uberti Old Model for a fella and while I had the revolver disassembled, took a close look at the relation between the trigger sear and the first cock notch. I'm of the opinion it'd be very difficult to "break" a sear by dropping the handgun due to the way the two parts mate. Any blow to the hammer will exert force directly up into the thick part of the hammer and directly down into the trigger body and the trigger screw. Now with the hammer in the first cock position, I'd imagine some ham-handed knucklehead could squeeze the trigger hard enough to snap either the trigger sear of the notch in the hammer, but then that wouldn't be an accident, now would it?
FWIW, over the course of the last week or so I've carried my single action Colt repro, all six chambers loaded and the hammer on the "first cock" position, while checking cattle, pushing brush with the tractor, tilling the garden, target shooting and on two spring turkey hunts. Many hours in other words, and have, once again, lived to tell about it!
35W
I own a MK IV Series 70 and Pg. 16 of the manual clearly states the purpose of the half-cock notch (notice, it's not referred to as a safety on this page):
Even Marlin in their manuals for their lever actions warn against relying on the half-cock "safety".
So, as I stated many posts back, the use of the notch, safety, first cock position, whatever it's called, regardless of the firearm is a personal choice and should be done so with an understanding of the risks. I've no doubt that most folks here will spend infinitely more time discussing the dangers, or lack thereof, of carrying a loaded firearm than they will actually carry a firearm.
Last weekend I installed a front sight on a Uberti Old Model for a fella and while I had the revolver disassembled, took a close look at the relation between the trigger sear and the first cock notch. I'm of the opinion it'd be very difficult to "break" a sear by dropping the handgun due to the way the two parts mate. Any blow to the hammer will exert force directly up into the thick part of the hammer and directly down into the trigger body and the trigger screw. Now with the hammer in the first cock position, I'd imagine some ham-handed knucklehead could squeeze the trigger hard enough to snap either the trigger sear of the notch in the hammer, but then that wouldn't be an accident, now would it?
FWIW, over the course of the last week or so I've carried my single action Colt repro, all six chambers loaded and the hammer on the "first cock" position, while checking cattle, pushing brush with the tractor, tilling the garden, target shooting and on two spring turkey hunts. Many hours in other words, and have, once again, lived to tell about it!
35W
RetiredUSNChief
Member
This is getting funny....
I own a MK IV Series 70 and Pg. 16 of the manual clearly states the purpose of the half-cock notch (notice, it's not referred to as a safety on this page):
Awesome!
Still doesn't change the designed function description by JMB, though.
What many of you seem to be missing is that the half cock was a safety - until people started discovering that it didn't work well enough and folks were getting killed because a 3 lbs gun will hit rocky ground hard enough to break something and drive the hammer into the primer. So the five shot work around evolved. For rifles, with larger sears and hammers shielded by the stocks, the half cock worked better. And when the first external hammer autos came around, the same problem popped up again, but without the workaround of loading down one round.
What modern folks forget is that when you hand a cowboy a Mauser 1896 with a full length firing pin, he doesn't look for the safety, but lowers the hammer. JMB was aware of this, and the Army cavalry preferred to carry hammer down like they carried their revolvers, rather than safety on a hammerless pistol like the Luger and other Browning designs. So JMB came up with three innovations to make hammer down carry safer:
1. A decocking helper, built into the grip safety. (And it is a grip safety, but that part has two functions.
2. The "sight safety" - essentially a manual firing pin safety that makes the hammer position unimportant.
3. The inertial firing pin, which offers the revolutionary ability to decock full down on a loaded chamber.
Meanwhile, S&W came up with a hammer block system that solved the problem with revolvers, but wasn't applicable to the moving breaches of automatics.
The 1911 has many different types of safeties. (USN Chief ->)The disconnector, which JMB also called a "Safety piece", is an internal safety that prevents out of battery firing. It has a trigger blocking grip safety, a sear blocking manual safety, an inertial firing pin safety and a half cock safety.
A device can be a "safety" without promising to be a carry safety or manual safety. A safety is a safety when it has a feature that prevents the gun firing when it should not.
Like the disconnector or a automatic firing pin block, the half cock serves several passive safety functions, even though it is a leftover from a failed revolver manual safety system. If misused as a manual safety it works as well as it can, but exposed hammer at half cock can never be accident proof without a firing pin block safety.
Today, the 1911 is a mish-mash of features that don't all make any sense for how Jeff Cooper says we have to use it. As a cocked and locked pistol, the 1911 requires no external hammer, inertial firing pin or decocking hammer/grip safety. But it has all that stuff, and a really nicely made half cock, too. But, 150 years later, we know not to use it.
What modern folks forget is that when you hand a cowboy a Mauser 1896 with a full length firing pin, he doesn't look for the safety, but lowers the hammer. JMB was aware of this, and the Army cavalry preferred to carry hammer down like they carried their revolvers, rather than safety on a hammerless pistol like the Luger and other Browning designs. So JMB came up with three innovations to make hammer down carry safer:
1. A decocking helper, built into the grip safety. (And it is a grip safety, but that part has two functions.
2. The "sight safety" - essentially a manual firing pin safety that makes the hammer position unimportant.
3. The inertial firing pin, which offers the revolutionary ability to decock full down on a loaded chamber.
Meanwhile, S&W came up with a hammer block system that solved the problem with revolvers, but wasn't applicable to the moving breaches of automatics.
The 1911 has many different types of safeties. (USN Chief ->)The disconnector, which JMB also called a "Safety piece", is an internal safety that prevents out of battery firing. It has a trigger blocking grip safety, a sear blocking manual safety, an inertial firing pin safety and a half cock safety.
A device can be a "safety" without promising to be a carry safety or manual safety. A safety is a safety when it has a feature that prevents the gun firing when it should not.
Like the disconnector or a automatic firing pin block, the half cock serves several passive safety functions, even though it is a leftover from a failed revolver manual safety system. If misused as a manual safety it works as well as it can, but exposed hammer at half cock can never be accident proof without a firing pin block safety.
Today, the 1911 is a mish-mash of features that don't all make any sense for how Jeff Cooper says we have to use it. As a cocked and locked pistol, the 1911 requires no external hammer, inertial firing pin or decocking hammer/grip safety. But it has all that stuff, and a really nicely made half cock, too. But, 150 years later, we know not to use it.
Last edited:
Field Tester
Member
What is a "sight safety"?
- Status
