I've been a single-action fan since long before it was cool, or the internet was even a thought on the horizon. The first gun I ever purchased was a Ruger Blackhawk 357 magnum 4-5/8' from Wal-Mart for the princely sum of $112. This was a then "New Model" that had only recently been introduced, ditching the 3-screw design for the newer, 2-pin version with built-in transfer bar, and the cylinder being unlocked by opening the loading gate - albeit slightly "off" from the gate opening so one always has to manipulate the cylinder slightly to align it for ejection or admission of cartridges. [Genuine Colt pattern revolvers index perfectly at half-cock] Of course Ruger built their SA reputation on guns that can take the hottest charges you can stuff into the case - true for the .357M, but not quite so for the .44M as I discovered a few years later while hot-rodding handloads.
Genuine Colts have long been too expensive for anyone but devotees to own, and they end up in display boxes rather than riding on hips in holsters which is what happens when owning a particular gun becomes more about status than need. Luckily, way back in the 1960's Spain, then Italy, even Germany saw the market for "cheap" single-actions - a market they serve to this day, but as with everything, they've had to up their quality, which just happens to coincide with advanced manufacturing methods not even imagined 60 years ago.
I got my first Dakota revolver "kit" from EMF along about the '80s and applied an interesting, pale, "rust blue" that certainly looked nothing like the real thing, but it was fun and it was a genuine, 3-screw, C.O.L.T single-action and needed no apology. I was impressed that Sam'l Colt had managed to shoehorn such a powerful cartridge into such a compact package. I've also always been fascinated that the .45 bore cartridge seems perfect for all the needs of a handgun at such low chamber pressures. One never doubts that touching off a 45 Colt round will resolve all issues.
Over the eons I've amassed my share of single-action 1873s, Uberti, Pietta, never Colt because I just can't drop that kind of money on a gun I will never shoot because it's a born safe queen.
I've also dabbled in black powder C&B revolvers - even carried an Uberti 1860 Army chopped to 6" loaded with Buffalo Bore 180gr. conicals over all the fffG I could stuff in the chambers behind 'em!
So all this brings me to my one, major pet peeve about single-action "lore" or perhaps mythology that doesn't just persist, it's been repeated so much by faux experts, it's taken on the trappings of truth, though not even, or ever true at all!
That's the myth of loading an 1873 with five rounds and leaving an empty chamber. I don't know where it started, but it seems to have really gown wings in the internet era.
Let's consider real facts. The 1873 Colt followed on the highly successful 1860, and 1851 model C&B Colts. Those revolvers came into existence when the standard "handgun" held just ONE shot. If EVER anyone was going to come up with the notion of only loading five shots, it would have been when stepping UP to a multishot handgun with the mindset that 5 shots beats one shot! But that is not how the entire C&B era unfolded. They loaded their C&B pistols to the max - a full 6 shots and they didn't all have special cylinder pins, and only Remington offered between chamber notches, but they loaded ALL SIX and eased the flat-faced hammer down on STEEL between chambers! Even in the highly, HIGHLY unlikely event the cylinder might get rotated with the C&B hammer down on the space between chambers, it was unlikely to detonate a cap!
So then comes the mighty 1873! A genuine step forward in terms of an extremely powerful, self-contained metallic cartridge! Revolvers were chambered for six rounds. To load only five would be to place themselves at a major disadvantage to the man carrying an 1860 with all six chambers loaded! Plus, since the entire concept of lowering the hammer between chambers was WELL KNOWN with C&B revolvers, it didn't take rocket scientists to wonder, "Why not load SIX chambers on my 1873 and just ease the hammer firing pin down in between cartridge rims?" That's not exactly college degree reasoning considering they already had a superhighway blueprint to the idea! And you know what they discovered? They discovered the 1873 firing pin will sit quite nicely and securely in the space between cartridge rims! it's no more complicated than loading all six chambers with the hammer on half-cock, then rotating the cylinder to the mid-point and easing the hammer down with a slight rotation forward or back to "feel" the firing pin drop into the space. Once there the cylinder is effectively LOCKED from rotation until the hammer is cocked to fire. THIS is how the 1873 was loaded and carried "back in the day," because to do otherwise was to deliberately disadvantage oneself when one's life depended on that shot!
The entire rational used by the 9mm crowd is that 2 extra mediocre rounds are BETTER than more powerful rounds, so WHY would anyone think our ancestors were somehow less savvy than today - in an age when depending on a gun for survival was a lot closer to reality than today!
I know I would not have carried a brace of "six-shooters" with only 10 shots between 'em, and don't today.
[When I carry a pair of FN FiveSeven pistols I don't carry them with just 20 rounds in each gun, I carry them with 21 rounds in each gun! Sure, 2 "extra" rounds out of 40 may SEEM a bit overboard to those who've never exchanged shots with another human, but I want EVERY SHOT POSSIBLE loaded up and ready!
And that's just a 5% reduction in shots available]
When my 1873s are loaded they're FULLY loaded with all six chambers filled and the hammer set down between rims, just as my ancestors did.
The further myth of carrying one's "burying money" in the empty chamber which presumes everyone carrying a revolver was somehow living on the edge, is equally idiotic. Unless they ascribe to the fatalistic notion that since they're only loading five shots, they'll NEED to be buried when the other guy pumps "lucky number 6" into their face! We won't even delve into the foolishness of having a plug of rolled up paper in a chamber to confound reloading when in dire need to get the gun recharged and back in action.
I'm all for the "lore" of the old west, but fact is, NOBODY deliberately walked around with 17% FEWER shots on tap, any more than they would today!
Again, this is a pet peeve of mine that has been growing over the last few decades as I see more and more "experts" and pretend experts and pretend expert sycophants faithfully regurgitate such patent nonsense.
And one last point, when I chose to carry a G17 with a +2 mag for 20 shots all up, I don't carry 17 shot reloads, I carry 30 shot reloads x 4! Understanding the logic behind carrying all the rounds you can LOADED should clarify the foolishness of ever choosing to carry a piddling 5 shots when you COULD have had SIX! Indeed the difference between a trip to "Boot Hill" or having one's scalp lifted!
