My thought are this which may have been covered, I imagine that some still carried 6 until accident occurred, and those that knew to carry 5 would load 6 if expecting trouble.
When did carrying 5 rounds in a Colt SAA become the norm?
- Thread starter sigp220.45
- Start date
jimgoldth
US Veteran
When I was in the Army (1959-62) I was told that that there was an army reg. that stated that the chamber of a Pistol or Revolver under the hammer could not be carried loaded. I did not read it I just was told.
That is almost correct. Half cock, load one, skip one, load four, FULL COCK THE HAMMER and then lower it.
rednichols
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,745
- Reaction score
- 8,484
True today; yet, realise that they were meant to be carried fully loaded with the hammer on the safety notch. Only today do we 'know' that the safety notch does not guarantee safety. More evidence that the 'empty chamber under the hammer' was not standard practice for the Colt 'in the day', when even Ruger didn't think of it for their original revolvers.
Which brings us back to the O.P.'s query: can it be proven that it was standard practice during the earliest years of the Colt SAA to carry with an empty chamber under the hammer. No; in fact the evidence in this thread, is that it was standard practice to carry with all six chambers loaded, hammer lowered onto the safety notch.
And from the evidence (in this thread) of Ruger owners shooting themselves with the early Rugers, it never did become 'standard practice' and because Ruger changed it's revolvers a half century ago, it is STILL not 'standard practice'. Instead it's something that trained shooters know about. Newbies and oldies kill themselves regularly on motorcycles because they don't know about 'target fixation' (motorcycle physics and human behaviour combine to force the motorcycle into striking the object the rider is looking at).
forrestinmathews
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,063
- Reaction score
- 725
And here I thought he just wanted to show off his shooters....
Here is an interesting look at the 19th century mindset. In early 1876, a newspaper correspondent by the name of John Finerty accompanied Gen. Crook’s expedition from Ft. Fetterman to the Yellowstone. One day, while remounting after a rest stop, the barrel of Finerty’s carbine struck the hammer of his revolver. He had 6 in the cylinder and the weapon discharged, the ball passing through his pants but not actually striking him. Capt. Guy Henry galloped back from the column and asked, “Is the bullet in your person?” Finerty replied that he did not know. “Then, by Jove, it is about time you found out,” Henry answered, and rode away laughing.
Note there was no wringing of hands or gnashing of teeth, and no one told Finerty he should only load 5 in the future. The Captain laughed at him and that was it. I think people in those days were far less safety conscious and much more willing to say “s..t happens” and move on. I suspect many people knew they were taking a chance, in an academic sort of way, when loading six but they did it anyway ‘cause it just wasn’t that important to them. I think, most of the time, it just wasn’t in their heads.
Note there was no wringing of hands or gnashing of teeth, and no one told Finerty he should only load 5 in the future. The Captain laughed at him and that was it. I think people in those days were far less safety conscious and much more willing to say “s..t happens” and move on. I suspect many people knew they were taking a chance, in an academic sort of way, when loading six but they did it anyway ‘cause it just wasn’t that important to them. I think, most of the time, it just wasn’t in their heads.
Last edited:
Years ago I found a copy of what appears to have been the first book published in the US specifically on pistol shooting, written anonymously and titled "The Pistol in Defense And On the Road", dated 1875. I brought it to the attention of Paladin Press, which published a run of them. I'd have to find my copy and check, but to the best of my recollection there was no mention of only carrying 5 in the wheel.
There was a real dearth of literature on hand gunning in those years--unless you count dime novels.
There was a real dearth of literature on hand gunning in those years--unless you count dime novels.
There is a saying in my business. Safety rules are written in someone"s blood.
A young lady I grew up with had a slightly older brother. In his mid 20s he owned a Ruger Blackhawk in 41 mag. He kept it fully loaded on a shelf in his gun cabinet. Cabinet was struck by children playing, Blackhawk fell off its shelf, fired, striking his little girl. Luckily she lived. After that to him all handguns were unsafe and evil. I don't think he could handle the fact that his mistake was a root cause of the incident. I never spend any effort to convince him otherwise.
A young lady I grew up with had a slightly older brother. In his mid 20s he owned a Ruger Blackhawk in 41 mag. He kept it fully loaded on a shelf in his gun cabinet. Cabinet was struck by children playing, Blackhawk fell off its shelf, fired, striking his little girl. Luckily she lived. After that to him all handguns were unsafe and evil. I don't think he could handle the fact that his mistake was a root cause of the incident. I never spend any effort to convince him otherwise.
DWalt
Member
Then of course there's the the well known story of the sailor who dropped his Victory on the deck. It went off and killed him, leading to the implementation of the 1945 S&W improved hammer safety block.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,391
- Reaction score
- 1,298
Based on what I have seen of human behavior over the years I would agree with the idea that most people loaded six and depended on luck and the little "safety notch". Those who had or observed an accident were more likely to get the idea that five just might be safer and to recommend that carry mode to others. Over time some people got the five round mindset, when I was younger I knew more than one adult who would not carry a modern double action with all six loaded. The idea had got into their heads and different designs and modern safety features weren't going to change it!
As to percussion revolvers, Colt was concerned about safe carry and developed the safety pin as a way to hold the hammer away from the cap and between chambers. Early guns had a single pin, it was a small part and if it became damaged or worn could not be relied on so they soon had pins between each chamber. The pins were still small, easily damaged and certainly not foolproof but they were there. On many original guns they have been battered out of any usefulness over time (on some I have looked at they are pretty much gone). Many replicas didn't bother to include them at all. When the 1873 was developed it would seem that most felt the safety notch was acceptable, especially since it was military practice to carry in a flap holster which would provide some protection. I doubt they worried much about other users at all.
If you look at most contemporary handguns from other makers of the era you will find that many have no better safety system than the same type of "safety notch" Colt used. Some developed rebounding hammers (which were safer but not foolproof) or concealed hammers on double actions (which were free of the danger of something hitting the hammer). Eventually Iver Johnson came up with the transfer bar and both Colt and Smith & Wesson developed internal safety blocks for their double actions but many of the old designs kept right on being made and sold without change.
As to percussion revolvers, Colt was concerned about safe carry and developed the safety pin as a way to hold the hammer away from the cap and between chambers. Early guns had a single pin, it was a small part and if it became damaged or worn could not be relied on so they soon had pins between each chamber. The pins were still small, easily damaged and certainly not foolproof but they were there. On many original guns they have been battered out of any usefulness over time (on some I have looked at they are pretty much gone). Many replicas didn't bother to include them at all. When the 1873 was developed it would seem that most felt the safety notch was acceptable, especially since it was military practice to carry in a flap holster which would provide some protection. I doubt they worried much about other users at all.
If you look at most contemporary handguns from other makers of the era you will find that many have no better safety system than the same type of "safety notch" Colt used. Some developed rebounding hammers (which were safer but not foolproof) or concealed hammers on double actions (which were free of the danger of something hitting the hammer). Eventually Iver Johnson came up with the transfer bar and both Colt and Smith & Wesson developed internal safety blocks for their double actions but many of the old designs kept right on being made and sold without change.
keith44spl
Member
My O' My,
I seem to recall one of those..........
Wyo, ya ought to think about giftin' me that nickel one.
.
You do know that is one of a matched pair, right?
If I remember right a guy from Alaska shot himself with a Ruger
Blackhawk and sued. He won a big settlement. Shortly after the
Ruger New Model came out.
When in Army state side when on duty that required carry 1911
we weren't allowed to have a loaded magazine in the pistol. The
mag was carried between holster and web belt. This may have
not been Army regs, it might have been base SOP. In RVn we
carried fully loaded on safe. I never herd of a accidental 1911
discharge. The only accidental discharges were guys that got
ahold of a Chicom pistol and discharged it because they didn't
know what they were doing. Lucky I never knew of any deaths
or wounds from this, but it made the culpert unpopular with his
piers.
Blackhawk and sued. He won a big settlement. Shortly after the
Ruger New Model came out.
When in Army state side when on duty that required carry 1911
we weren't allowed to have a loaded magazine in the pistol. The
mag was carried between holster and web belt. This may have
not been Army regs, it might have been base SOP. In RVn we
carried fully loaded on safe. I never herd of a accidental 1911
discharge. The only accidental discharges were guys that got
ahold of a Chicom pistol and discharged it because they didn't
know what they were doing. Lucky I never knew of any deaths
or wounds from this, but it made the culpert unpopular with his
piers.
In my career I found that what ever weapon officers were issue (da/sa, dao, revolver,semi auto) they would find a way to have a "AD".
smoothshooter
Member
I accidently dropped a fully-loaded Uberti Remington 1858 .44 percussion revolver on a concrete floor one night when I was about 16 years old ( am 61 now ) that I would have sworn had the hammer down in a notch between the nipples. I was about half awake when I accidently raked it off the top of a table when removing a blanket. The sound of the shot, and the heat from the burning powder along my entire left leg and groin ( I was only wearing underwear ) woke me up in a hurry.
The gun hit the concrete between my feet, and fired the bullet up and along my left thigh, missing it and my torso by a few inches, judging from the location of the bullet hole in the ceiling I found later.
Made me even more careful about single-action revolvers than I already was. Am lucky to still be here to tell the tale.
Last edited:
smoothshooter
Member
Of course when they used the word "ball", they meant "round-nosed or pointed bullet", as that was the vernacular of the day as a holdover from pre-metallic cartridge days.
A 230 grain bullet at 750 fps is still a serious load, as demonstrated by the excellent reputation that the .45ACP has in that regard.
If I recall correctly, the shorter Schoffield .45 cartridge became the general issue cartridge because it could be fired in both the Colt and Schoffield revolvers that were being issued at the time.
Also, most recruits then ( as now ) were not familiar with handguns and were miserable shots on average-a problem further aggravated by little or no ammunition allotted for target practice. Under these circumstances, the lighter loading would be a little more user friendly in untrained hands.
Last edited:
Elmer Keith was not of the 1870s but was a kid and a young man while that generation were adults. He wrote that a stirrup could fall off the horn with enough force to break the safety notch. He listed more than one case of folks being shot in the leg from this. Meanwhile he said his 38-40 was loaded with 3 factory JSP and 3 cast rifle bullets on an elk hunt. I think that loading five was normal in the teens and twenties, but people still loaded 6 under certain conditions.
Permit me to issue a warning. If you thought that all S&W double action revolvers are safe to carry with all chambers loaded, you have another think coming.
Let me introduce you to my grandfather's Model 1902 Smith, shipped in 1904. As I found out, you can press the lowered hammer forward with your thumb and the firing pin on the nose of the hammer will protrude through the recoil shield. If you drop the gun with a round under the hammer, and it falls on the hammer, you might be in for a world of hurt.
Here is a picture of this gun's internals. You will note that there is no hammer safety block of any kind present. While the hammer rebounds after firing, there is nothing solid to prevent the hammer from going further forward.
Just a reminder of this!
John
Let me introduce you to my grandfather's Model 1902 Smith, shipped in 1904. As I found out, you can press the lowered hammer forward with your thumb and the firing pin on the nose of the hammer will protrude through the recoil shield. If you drop the gun with a round under the hammer, and it falls on the hammer, you might be in for a world of hurt.
Here is a picture of this gun's internals. You will note that there is no hammer safety block of any kind present. While the hammer rebounds after firing, there is nothing solid to prevent the hammer from going further forward.
Just a reminder of this!
John
smoothshooter
Member
Similar threads
