Can Manyirons or others with direct experience give me a step by step explaination of how a Starr Double Action works? A guy handed me a sack and said, If you can put this together, it's yours. I found out it had locked up because the double action sear/fly spring was broken. Made a new one and have it together but I don't understand it at all.
Starr Double Action
- Thread starter mec
- Start date
- Status
I've figured it out
figured it out. The trigger on this one won't catch the hammer with the hammer all the way down. I have to put it on intermediate cock and it will work from there. Probably something off about the spring I replaced.
It was made in 99 back when they had rushed them onto the market and many or most would not shoot. The hammer doesn't reach the nipples unless you modify the frame, shem the nipples or simply back them out a little.
figured it out. The trigger on this one won't catch the hammer with the hammer all the way down. I have to put it on intermediate cock and it will work from there. Probably something off about the spring I replaced.
It was made in 99 back when they had rushed them onto the market and many or most would not shoot. The hammer doesn't reach the nipples unless you modify the frame, shem the nipples or simply back them out a little.
Steve499
Member
I've heard of a pig in a poke but a sackful of Starr sounds better to me!
Steve
Steve
Old Dragoon
Member
MEC,
I have heard that the trigger itself is pulled back to a possible halfcock position, this trips the mechanism and you continue pulling on back to fire in double action. Never had one or even handled one, but that is what I have heard. If you pull the trigger all the way back and it doesn't cock and fire then you are correct that it is not picking up the hammer.
I have heard that the trigger itself is pulled back to a possible halfcock position, this trips the mechanism and you continue pulling on back to fire in double action. Never had one or even handled one, but that is what I have heard. If you pull the trigger all the way back and it doesn't cock and fire then you are correct that it is not picking up the hammer.
Wow! And i thought i was makin' out with my barrel windfall! In essence, the trigger first indexes the cylinder into position then a longer pull allows the trigger to contact the sear catch trigger to fire. 'LONG pull, pause, pull, fire' type sequence.
It is supposed to work like the old 1930s Iver Johnson target revolvers that would let you stage the trigger to full cock and then finesse it off. The double action on this one just doesn't work right. I find that I can pull the trigger enough to clear the locking bolt from the cylinder and cock it single action.
It appears that a few people have these things that work right but most find them defective in several respects- double action frequently being unworkable and ignition unreliable or absent. I don't know if Pietta has improved recent ones or not.
It appears that a few people have these things that work right but most find them defective in several respects- double action frequently being unworkable and ignition unreliable or absent. I don't know if Pietta has improved recent ones or not.
mainmech48
Member
There's a sliding selector "switch" on the back of the trigger which determines the firing mode.
In the "up" position the action should function pretty much the same as any other DA revolver, just don't try to cock it manually by pulling the hammer back!
In the "down" position the cylinder should rotate and the hammer move to the full cock position and stay there. Firing in this "SA" mode is accomplished by pressing the lever (the real trigger) at the rear of the guard.
I'm not surprised that you got it as a "basket" case, as the mechanism is rather delicate and easily damaged by improper operation. If you try to handle it like any other "conventional" revolver there's a real good chance that you'll inadvertantly damage the lockwork. The instruction sheet Pietta includes isn't very explicit about how it should work, and many folks don't seem to read it until after they've messed it up, usually by trying to manually cock the hammer to try the SA pull. It doesn't take many tries to break it. FWIW, this is inherent to the design, and not any fault of Pietta's.
I'd done some reading up on the Starrs before I bought my Pietta DA replica shortly after they became available. It saved me from screwing it up.
Personally, mine came properly assembled and required no tinkering for reliable functioning. I'd have trouble hitting a bull elephant in the butt with it consistently in DA mode. That long, heavy pull doesn't make it easy at all. In SA firing it's pretty accurate once I got the proper charge worked out and the "sights" opened up and regulated a bit better.
In the "up" position the action should function pretty much the same as any other DA revolver, just don't try to cock it manually by pulling the hammer back!
In the "down" position the cylinder should rotate and the hammer move to the full cock position and stay there. Firing in this "SA" mode is accomplished by pressing the lever (the real trigger) at the rear of the guard.
I'm not surprised that you got it as a "basket" case, as the mechanism is rather delicate and easily damaged by improper operation. If you try to handle it like any other "conventional" revolver there's a real good chance that you'll inadvertantly damage the lockwork. The instruction sheet Pietta includes isn't very explicit about how it should work, and many folks don't seem to read it until after they've messed it up, usually by trying to manually cock the hammer to try the SA pull. It doesn't take many tries to break it. FWIW, this is inherent to the design, and not any fault of Pietta's.
I'd done some reading up on the Starrs before I bought my Pietta DA replica shortly after they became available. It saved me from screwing it up.
Personally, mine came properly assembled and required no tinkering for reliable functioning. I'd have trouble hitting a bull elephant in the butt with it consistently in DA mode. That long, heavy pull doesn't make it easy at all. In SA firing it's pretty accurate once I got the proper charge worked out and the "sights" opened up and regulated a bit better.
This one is one of the first imports from 1999. This is well before Pietta bought CNC machinery or instituted any degree of quality control. The example I have cannot be used to make generalizations about how the original or a decent replica of the revolver might work but it does possess some of the negative features mentioned in early reviews. Revolvers purchased by later buyers seem to function better and are drawing more positive comments.
It's prettier than the advertising pictures. Not quite so victorian clunk as I expected.
Early concerns included
1. Failure to fire caps. The hammer would not reach the nipples or caps placed on the nipples. This seems to have been a very common complaint and is one of the features of my revolver. Fixes have included deepening the inside curve of the hammer face to allow it to reach the nipples or shemming out the nipples. The former may be the better alternative since shemming them out makes it almost impossible to seat the caps through the miniscule capping window. (nipples very close to frame once shemmed.) Mine would not set off caps even with repeated attempts but would set them off after four or more attempts after I had gotten good contact between the hammer and caps. Early buyers blaimed either the excessive "headspace" or a weak mainspring for the failure and it looks like both might have been correct.
2. Failure to function from the onset or total and permanent lock-up after a few shots. Mine was in the latter condition. I could occasionly get it to work after a fashion. I had to replace the broken double action sear spring which might have been the cause or the result of the poorly articulated action. The internal parts showed no signs of wear or breakage other than that spring. I stoned a spare hand spring and fitted it to the sear without doing much to improve the function. Spare parts have been unavailable domestically and had to be gotten by back order to Italy. Dixie now catalogs some of the action parts. The sear spring is NOT one of them.
3. Poor timing-carry up: On those occasion when I was able to get it to function, the cylinder would carry up an lock as the hammer reached full cock
4. Poor Barrel/chamber alignment: Mine locked in perfect alignment. the chambers, like most Pietta .44s, was right for the .451 ball shaving some lead and providing a tight seal.
External fit and finish were very good and the internal parts were robust and apparently correctly hardened
The action resembles to some degree, the self cocking Iver Johnson target revolvers of the 1930s- at least in the full double action mode. With the IJs, you could stage the hammer, using the trigger to bring it to full cock and then finishing the shot at that point. A smoothly operating Starr would allow precise shots in the same manner. The Starr does have a sliding block behind the trigger that will block it from reaching the rear "hair"trigger. Set in that mode, you can cycle the revolver to full cock and then use the rear trigger to complete the shot.
I was unable to produce any accuracy work with this one but did chronograph the .451 Ball and two type of powder. These were 30 grains of
Goex 3f and the same charge of 90 year old powder removed from black powder cartridges. I was able to tollerate shooting eight of each
Goex: 710 fps/ 134 fps spread Old Powder 683/171.
In 44 special loading, the older powder was about 50 fps slower than goex. In the current example, the extreme spreads are so wide as to render the results fairly useless for comparison. This may have been because of the very large barrel-cylinder gap or the intermitten end float of the cylinder.
rounds fired in this order-first to last:
Goex: 655, 679,654,655,780,788,761
90 Year old: 702,752,696,589,589(duplicate),760,690.
It's prettier than the advertising pictures. Not quite so victorian clunk as I expected.
Early concerns included
1. Failure to fire caps. The hammer would not reach the nipples or caps placed on the nipples. This seems to have been a very common complaint and is one of the features of my revolver. Fixes have included deepening the inside curve of the hammer face to allow it to reach the nipples or shemming out the nipples. The former may be the better alternative since shemming them out makes it almost impossible to seat the caps through the miniscule capping window. (nipples very close to frame once shemmed.) Mine would not set off caps even with repeated attempts but would set them off after four or more attempts after I had gotten good contact between the hammer and caps. Early buyers blaimed either the excessive "headspace" or a weak mainspring for the failure and it looks like both might have been correct.
2. Failure to function from the onset or total and permanent lock-up after a few shots. Mine was in the latter condition. I could occasionly get it to work after a fashion. I had to replace the broken double action sear spring which might have been the cause or the result of the poorly articulated action. The internal parts showed no signs of wear or breakage other than that spring. I stoned a spare hand spring and fitted it to the sear without doing much to improve the function. Spare parts have been unavailable domestically and had to be gotten by back order to Italy. Dixie now catalogs some of the action parts. The sear spring is NOT one of them.
3. Poor timing-carry up: On those occasion when I was able to get it to function, the cylinder would carry up an lock as the hammer reached full cock
4. Poor Barrel/chamber alignment: Mine locked in perfect alignment. the chambers, like most Pietta .44s, was right for the .451 ball shaving some lead and providing a tight seal.
External fit and finish were very good and the internal parts were robust and apparently correctly hardened
The action resembles to some degree, the self cocking Iver Johnson target revolvers of the 1930s- at least in the full double action mode. With the IJs, you could stage the hammer, using the trigger to bring it to full cock and then finishing the shot at that point. A smoothly operating Starr would allow precise shots in the same manner. The Starr does have a sliding block behind the trigger that will block it from reaching the rear "hair"trigger. Set in that mode, you can cycle the revolver to full cock and then use the rear trigger to complete the shot.
I was unable to produce any accuracy work with this one but did chronograph the .451 Ball and two type of powder. These were 30 grains of
Goex 3f and the same charge of 90 year old powder removed from black powder cartridges. I was able to tollerate shooting eight of each
Goex: 710 fps/ 134 fps spread Old Powder 683/171.
In 44 special loading, the older powder was about 50 fps slower than goex. In the current example, the extreme spreads are so wide as to render the results fairly useless for comparison. This may have been because of the very large barrel-cylinder gap or the intermitten end float of the cylinder.
rounds fired in this order-first to last:
Goex: 655, 679,654,655,780,788,761
90 Year old: 702,752,696,589,589(duplicate),760,690.
Last edited:
LAH
Member
Sounds like a rough day at the office Mike.........Creeker
Beartracker
Member
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2005
- Messages
- 447
Mec, Now that one looks like a challenge and something that would keep me awake at night until I got it to go Bang! every time.
It has me wandering if they had problems with the originals also or is it just a Pietta screw up or the inherent problem from Star?
The revolver is a good looking one from the pic you posted and I feel that there has to be some simple tricks to make this thing work properly but I would like to see more history on it before making any alterations. Mike
It has me wandering if they had problems with the originals also or is it just a Pietta screw up or the inherent problem from Star?
The revolver is a good looking one from the pic you posted and I feel that there has to be some simple tricks to make this thing work properly but I would like to see more history on it before making any alterations. Mike
I've heard both sides on that. One guy says his original works fine. Another says the originals were as glitchy as the piettas. One officer during the civil war said that whoever foisted the revolver on the nation in war time should have been strung up as a traitor.
Who Knows?
Who Knows?
Beartracker
Member
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2005
- Messages
- 447
"whoever foisted the revolver on the nation in war time should have been strung up as a traitor."
That tells me something!
I'm going to do a little searching on this revolver and see what I can find out. If I find anything that may interest you I'll pass it on, Mike
That tells me something!
I'm going to do a little searching on this revolver and see what I can find out. If I find anything that may interest you I'll pass it on, Mike
The originals were well made and in my experience work well. I suspect that many who cuss them don't understand them. The repros I have seen were not well made, although some seem to work OK.
To amplify on what Mec says, it is neither a double action revolver, nor a single action revolver. It is a trigger cocking revolver.
First, leave the hammer spur alone! The gun is NOT designed to be cocked that way; the spur should be ONLY to lower the hammer without firing. Trying to cock it like a regular SA won't work and if force is used can break the gun.
To fire the gun single action, set the selector slide in the DOWN position. Then pull the trigger all the way back. The hammer will be cocked but the gun won't fire. Then release the trigger. Insert the index finger into the trigger guard BEHIND the trigger and pull the small secondary trigger (actually the sear).
To fire the gun "double action", set the selector slide in the UP position. Pull the trigger. Now, the hammer will cock, then immediately be released by the trigger striking the sear, giving the effect of double action, though it is not a true DA.
To make a capped gun safe, pull the trigger to ease the hammer back a bit, then turn the cylinder so the hammer is between nipples and let the trigger go. Wiggle the cylinder a bit to engage the cylinder stop in the safety notch. Now the gun can be carried in perfect safety.
Jim
To amplify on what Mec says, it is neither a double action revolver, nor a single action revolver. It is a trigger cocking revolver.
First, leave the hammer spur alone! The gun is NOT designed to be cocked that way; the spur should be ONLY to lower the hammer without firing. Trying to cock it like a regular SA won't work and if force is used can break the gun.
To fire the gun single action, set the selector slide in the DOWN position. Then pull the trigger all the way back. The hammer will be cocked but the gun won't fire. Then release the trigger. Insert the index finger into the trigger guard BEHIND the trigger and pull the small secondary trigger (actually the sear).
To fire the gun "double action", set the selector slide in the UP position. Pull the trigger. Now, the hammer will cock, then immediately be released by the trigger striking the sear, giving the effect of double action, though it is not a true DA.
To make a capped gun safe, pull the trigger to ease the hammer back a bit, then turn the cylinder so the hammer is between nipples and let the trigger go. Wiggle the cylinder a bit to engage the cylinder stop in the safety notch. Now the gun can be carried in perfect safety.
Jim
mainmech48
Member
The contemporary comment(s) about stringing up the designer were probably warranted to some extent. The original trigger-cocking models weren't very well suited to hard use under adverse conditions, nor anywhere near as tolerant of neglect or abuse as a Colt 1860 or Remington New Model. It didn't help matters, IMO, that the standard charge recommended for them at the time was a feeble 20 grs. either. It'd be hard enough to hit your adversary (deliberately) with it compared to the above pair without having to worry about needing to do it more than once to get the same effect.
Both governments were buying about anything that would shoot at the time. But many units on both sides were recruited and equipped privately, and often by persons with little or no military experience or expertise whatsoever. Given the hyperbole that passed as advertising, it would be interesting if one could sort out which outfits actually got saddled with inferior arms by mischance and which by the poor choices of ignorant or gullible leaders.
Both governments were buying about anything that would shoot at the time. But many units on both sides were recruited and equipped privately, and often by persons with little or no military experience or expertise whatsoever. Given the hyperbole that passed as advertising, it would be interesting if one could sort out which outfits actually got saddled with inferior arms by mischance and which by the poor choices of ignorant or gullible leaders.
- Status
