Why do folks like SA revolvers still?

[westernrover]

I forgot one of the criteria for knocking the gate open -- when the cylinder is partially charged. Sorry, it's been a while since I shot that gun. If a stout load is fired and there is no cartridge under the loading gate, it will pop open under recoil, not when the hammer is subsequently cocked. When the hammer is subsequently cocked with the partially opened loading gate, the cylinder stop mars the cylinder, not just slightly ringing it, but badly marring it. If the cylinder was recessed, there would be no need to support the loading gate with the cartridge rim, because the cylinder itself would do it.

 

[hawg]

Rugers and S&W's are going to get one no matter what. A Colt style only gets one from operator error. Letting the hammer down from half cock will ring a cylinder quick. It should be fully cocked before letting it down. Letting it down from half cock lets the bolt come up against the cylinder between the cylinder notches and the cylinder is free to turn until it locks in. I have seen people let one down from half cock and deliberately turn the cylinder until it locks. I know y'all are tired of looking at this thing but it was made in 2000 and has been fired a lot. It was even used in CAS. No ring.

 

[35 Whelen]

Single action revolvers are simply better for deliberate, accurate shooting. This is why serious handgun hunters by-and-large use SA handguns and why hunting handguns such as Ruger Blackhawks, Magnum Research, Freedom Arms, etc. are single action.
If speed of firing and reloading is what's most important to a revolver shooting handgunner, then they should choose a DA.

So for me it's not nostalgia, it's accuracy and practicality. While I shoot DA's a lot, I've been hunting with handguns for several years now and have only used SA's. I find that I shoot them far more accurately than any other handgun.

Regarding the Ruger ringing the cylinder, I personally think it's a result of lazy engineering. Nothing says "cheesy" like a ring around the cylinder of a single action revolver. But in the case of a Ruger it can be corrected by altering the length of the hammer plunger.

35W

 

[hawg]

I can answer the opposite question. That is, why I don't like SA revolvers. It's really simple, the grip shape is absolutely awful. I can't hold it well at all. Recoil makes it twist around in my hand. That single handedly drives me away from them.

To me they feel natural but I've been shooting them for 55 years. A single action rolls up in your hand putting the hammer closer to your thumb for easier cocking of the next shot.

 

[Scout21]

To me they feel natural but I've been shooting them for 55 years.

That makes sense. I grew up shooting Smiths, so they feel pretty nice to me.

A single action rolls up in your hand putting the hammer closer to your thumb for easier cocking of the next shot.

I didn't think about that. That's really cool. Was this part of the design or was it an unintended benefit?

 

[CraigC]

In my opinion, if your Ruger doesn’t have a cylinder ring you ain’t shooting it enough.
I have never understood this fixation on cylinder rings. All my revolvers have them SA’s and DA’s, Rugers and Smith & Wessons. All the guns I have sold did as well. As long as the wear isn’t excessive it’s pretty much normal. If it isn’t normal, then all 12 of my existing revolvers are malfunctioning.

Because on Colt pattern guns, replicas, Old Model Rugers, etc., it's a sign of mishandling. It's ugly, unnecessary and totally avoidable.

 

[chicharrones]

I forgot one of the criteria for knocking the gate open -- when the cylinder is partially charged. Sorry, it's been a while since I shot that gun. If a stout load is fired and there is no cartridge under the loading gate, it will pop open under recoil, not when the hammer is subsequently cocked. When the hammer is subsequently cocked with the partially opened loading gate, the cylinder stop mars the cylinder, not just slightly ringing it, but badly marring it. If the cylinder was recessed, there would be no need to support the loading gate with the cartridge rim, because the cylinder itself would do it.

Now that makes me understand it fully. I guess having dummy cartridges to fill up the cylinder is the “cure” if one can’t fill up the cylinder with live ammo.

 

[hawg]

That makes sense. I grew up shooting Smiths, so they feel pretty nice to me.


I didn't think about that. That's really cool. Was this part of the design or was it an unintended benefit?

I don't know, probably unintended but you'd have to ask Sam Colt to know for sure and he died in 1862. Maybe a Ouija board.

 

[chicharrones]

Too small.

Certainly a factor for those that don’t want a small frame .22.

 

[Pat Riot]

Because on Colt pattern guns, replicas, Old Model Rugers, etc., it's a sign of mishandling. It's ugly, unnecessary and totally avoidable.

Yep, that’s why I mentioned the brands of guns I have. I didn’t know this about the old model Rugers though. Thanks for that info.

 

[Seedy Character]

The style, look, feel, nostalgia. The are fun, accurate, and comfortable.
Calibers from .22 to .500, .45-70, and .410 shotshell.

What's not to like?

 

[Tallball]

I have a lot of nice DA handguns. The N-frames in particular are very accurate for me.

If my friend invites me to go handgun hunting with him, deer or hogs, I have a quite a selection of handguns to choose from.

The decision wouldn't even take one second. It would obviously be my Old Model Super Blackhawk. Nice big sights, very long sight radius, extremely light trigger. It's easily the most accurate centerfire handgun I own. A bunch are tied for second place.

Super Blackhawk

• Tallball
• Nov 23, 2017

 

[Jack B.]

Accuracy

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I love a SA. The nicest one I have at the moment is a (new) Vaquero in 357 (which is pretty much the only handgun cartridge I have or use). However, I almost never shoot the Vaquero because I can't hit with it. With my DA revolver, I break clays at 80 yards off-hand in double-action. Other than the trajectory, it rivals any rifle I have, but the biggest difference between the Vaquero and the double-action (S&W) is the sites. The vaquero sites are awful. The S&W has a Trijicon reflex site. There's just no comparison. Now could I put a dot on the Vaquero? Not practically. A Blackhawk or something else that's drilled and tapped would be easier.

I bought the Vaquero for the iconic (1873 Colt SAA) style. I didn't buy a Colt because of the cost, unavailability (I think the wait times were two years at the time), and because it lacks a hammer block or transfer bar. I also bought the Vaquero for what I heard was an ideal grip for instinctive point-shooting. I found that I was better point-shooting the Vaquero than I was a j-frame, but that I was at least as good point shooting a long-barrel L-frame as I was with the Vaquero.

From time to time I still think about trying to make the SA revolver useful to me. Besides the sites, I detest this thing about the Vaquero:
The loading gate actuates the cylinder stop.
The rims of the cartridges are not supported by a recess in the cylinder.
Therefore under recoil, the loading gate pops part way open and cocking the hammer will rotate the cylinder causing the cylinder stop to mar it.

It's just a stupid design flaw that Ruger should have avoided. Recess the cylinder or use a half-cock position instead of the loading gate to drop the cylinder stop.

So… it sounds kinda busted so maybe you’ll be looking for a trade or sale cheap? Better to have something you can shoot over something busted that you can’t.

 

[45/30-06OKIE]

I'm not criticizing the choice, but just want to understand it better. I think I'm younger than the typical SA revolver aficionado. (45) With respect, maybe it's a generational thing?

To me, a DA revolver that has a SA option does the same thing, and more efficiently, while retaining the same fixed barrel accuracy:

• Faster lock time
• Faster reloading
• DA option

Is it a nostalgia thing, for folks who grew up watching cowboy shows, or is there something more to it? For example, I've read that SA revolvers with the traditional cowboy grip tend to rotate upwards in recoil rather than push back. From the few times I've shot one, that arch still gives a pretty good thump right in the palm of the hand.

Is it akin to choosing a lever action rifle over an automatic rifle, where a slower, more deliberate way of doing things can be more satisfying?

I just think cowboy guns are cool! My Pietta SAA in 45C is very nice for the 425 bucks I paid for it last year. Now, do I want a DA revolver someday? Yeah, but idk what caliber, probably 44Mag...

 

[NeroM]

When I learned to shoot a revolver - My father would only allow me to shoot his S&W Victory in SA [i believe to save on ammo and make sure I was certain of the target and sight line]. When I got to getting my own, selected SA. Have and shoot both types .... My favorites are a S&W M10 and a FA 83, M10 is a utility firearm. Hunting I prefer the FA. Have more SA and DA - Variety is a spice of life.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

I didn't think about that. That's really cool. Was this part of the design or was it an unintended benefit?

Howdy

Probably an unexpected benefit.

This is my old Uberti replica 1851 Colt Navy Cap & Ball revolver. Although it is historically incorrect in several details; the 1851 Navy was never chambered in 44 caliber, and it never had a brass frame, notice the shape of the grip. That is correct for the 1851 36 caliber Colt Navy.






When Colt brought out the 44 caliber 1860 Army Colt, the grip was about 1/4" longer than the grip of the 1851 Navy. The revolver at the top of this photo is a Pietta replica of the 44 caliber Cap & Ball Colt Army. Although the grip shape is a little bit incorrect, you can see how much longer it is than the earlier 1851 Colt Navy.

When William Mason, designed the Colt Single Action Army cartridge revolver, he chose to revert to the grip shape of the 1851 Navy, rather than the longer grip of the 1860 Colt. The revolver at the bottom of this photo is a 2nd Generation Colt SAA, to show the different grip shape.






The SAA was of course considerably more powerful than any of its Cap & Ball predecessors, firing a 250 grain bullet with a charge of 40 grains of Black Powder. This caused it to develop considerably more recoil than the earlier Cap & Ball designs.

When I first started shooting Cowboy Action, I remember one of my friends would wrap a band aide around the knuckle of his middle finger before shooting his 45 Colt revolvers. He was shooting relatively mild loads, but cramming his entire hand onto the grip resulted in the knuckle of his middle finger being in direct contact with the rear of the trigger guard. So every time he fired, the trigger guard was whacking the knuckle of his middle finger. The band aide around the knuckle was his solution.

It was about that time that I realized if I curled my pinky below the grip, that would lower my grasp on the grip of the revolver, and open up a space about 1/4" between the rear of the trigger guard and the knuckle of my middle finger. The 1/4" of space prevented the trigger guard from whacking my knuckle.

I learned not to hold the revolver in a vice like grip, instead I allow the grip to rotate slightly in my hand in recoil. The pinky is still below the grip, but I can control my stout Black Powder 45 Colt loads just fine this way, and my knuckle never gets whacked in recoil. With the muzzle up in recoil, that brings the hammer spur a bit closer to my thumb, which makes it easier to cock the hammer as I lower the revolver for a follow up shot. (Yes, I always fire a single action revolver with just one hand, always cocking the hammer with the thumb of my right hand. None of that two handed grip stuff for me with a Colt.)

So whether Mason reverted to the Navy style grip because he knew it would rotate better in the hand, he probably did know that, or whether it is an unintended benefit, it certainly works for me. With the muzzle rising during recoil, some of the energy of recoil is dissipated and the pistol tends to not smack the hand so hard in recoil as when the revolver is held with a vice like grip.

 

[hawg]

Howdy
This is my old Uberti replica 1851 Colt Navy Cap & Ball revolver. Although it is historically incorrect in several details; the 1851 Navy was never chambered in 44 caliber, and it never had a brass frame, notice the shape of the grip. That is correct for the 1851 36 caliber Colt Navy.

View attachment 1099031

That's a Griswold & Gunnison which was never made in .44

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

That's a Griswold & Gunnison which was never made in .44

I have heard that before.

Back when I bought it in 1968, Navy Arms was calling it the Army 60, or some such incorrect name. I did not know back then that the 1851 Navy was never made in 44 caliber and never had a brass frame. Yes, the Confederacy contracted for the Griswold and Gunnison with the brass frame, probably because brass was easier to machine then iron, and probably because they did not have a great supply of iron.

But Navy Arms was not calling this model a Griswold & Gunnison when I bought it in 1968.

 

[hawg]

It looks more like a Griswold than a navy. If it had an octagonal barrel and a brass frame it would be a Schneider & Glassick. A round barrel like in the pic and a steel frame would be a Leech & Rigdon. Confederate made guns weren't made out of brass. They were made out of gunmetal or red brass which is a bronze alloy.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

It is not an exact replica of anything.

Just what Uberti cobbled together back in 1968 when I bought it.

 

[hawg]

Just sayin lol

 

[Sacramento Johnson]

I forgot one of the criteria for knocking the gate open -- when the cylinder is partially charged. Sorry, it's been a while since I shot that gun. If a stout load is fired and there is no cartridge under the loading gate, it will pop open under recoil, not when the hammer is subsequently cocked. When the hammer is subsequently cocked with the partially opened loading gate, the cylinder stop mars the cylinder, not just slightly ringing it, but badly marring it. If the cylinder was recessed, there would be no need to support the loading gate with the cartridge rim, because the cylinder itself would do it.

If your loading gate is popping open under recoil in your Ruger single action, there is something wrong with the revolver/loading gate and I'd send it back to Ruger for repair. The loading gate should not be popping open under recoil. It is not designed that way; if it's happening, it's broken. I have shot many Ruger single actions over the last 25 years+ in all types of calibers and have never had this happen.

 

[murf]

If your loading gate is popping open under recoil in your Ruger single action, there is something wrong with the revolver/loading gate and I'd send it back to Ruger for repair. The loading gate should not be popping open under recoil. It is not designed that way; if it's happening, it's broken. I have shot many Ruger single actions over the last 25 years+ in all types of calibers and have never had this happen.

or the loading gate spring is out of position. this is easy to do when reassembling the gun.

murf

 

[stanley_white]

They are great sock drawer guns for people that lack the strength or confidence to pull a double action trigger.

-Stan