I have a friend that when I mention single action revolvers to him he always asks "Old West style"? I see single actions in the frame styles like the Ruger Blackhawks / Vaqueros but not in the SP101 / GP100 and no double actions in the BH / Vaq. I use Ruger only as an example because they make both SA and DA revolvers. I see the same styles in othe manufacturers. Is there a functional reason for these frame designs dependent upon firing action? Are there exceptions to this rule? Can some one possibly direct me to a link for internal diagrams of SA and DA revolvers so maybe I can see the need for each frame style? Obviously I have never disassembled either type of revolver that far. Thanks.
Western / Modern frame styles
- Thread starter KMAX
- Start date
I believe what he may be referring to are the differences between the 'modern' Ruger style 'safe single action' with the transfer bar system, as opposed to the old Colt '4-click' style that need to have the hammer down on an empty chamber for carry...
A dropped '4-click' with the hammer/firing-pin resting on the primer of a loaded round is an accident waiting to happen...
He also could be referring to the difference between the frame styles of the Blackhawks, and Vaqueros, etc...
Ask him
A dropped '4-click' with the hammer/firing-pin resting on the primer of a loaded round is an accident waiting to happen...
He also could be referring to the difference between the frame styles of the Blackhawks, and Vaqueros, etc...
Ask him
Salmoneye; He is referring to the general style of the frame, not the hammer/ firing system. Where I really noticed this was when we talked about 41Mag revolvers. Had it been a 45 Colt he would have known exactly what I meant because in his mind there is no 45 Colt double action revolver. Thanks for your suggestion though. He does know there is the difference you pointed out.
I believe I read some time back on this forum about a "Cowboy style" 22lr that was double action, but can't remember who made it. I was really more interested in larger caliber guns.
I believe I read some time back on this forum about a "Cowboy style" 22lr that was double action, but can't remember who made it. I was really more interested in larger caliber guns.
Last edited:
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Lots of companies make "cowboy style" .22 revolvers. Colt used to make them. Ruger makes them. A couple of companies in Germany have made them at various times -- I used to own one back in the 1970s. Heritage Arms in the U.S. makes one. And at least one of the Italian SAA clone makers offers a .22 -- I think it's sold by/through European American Armory (EAA).
OldMarksman
Staff
The 'frame style' of the single actions to which you refer has to do with the grip shape and the configuration of the part of the frame that holds the trigger mechanism.
The early Colt Walker and Dragoon revolvers (or, as Sam Colt called them, pistols) were the first; the 1851 Navy Colt was among the most numerous of the cap and ball types; and the Model P, or Colt Single Action Army, retained the style of the Navy revolver. There were similar Remington designs, both cap and ball and metallic cartridge. The Colts were and remain among the best handling handguns ever devised, at least in my opinion.
Adding the double action feature necessitated two changes: a change to the grip frame to enable the shooter to handle the much longer trigger pull; and redesigning the frame to accommodate the DA mechanism and on all but a few, the crane and swing-out cylinder. Hammer block safeties were added about the same time.
Ruger later added a transfer bar to enable their SA design to be safely carried with all six chambers loaded; their Single Six and Blackhawk design retained the SA mechanism, solid frame, and grip frame of the original Colt.
The Colt and Smith DA designs came along in the late i9th century. The early S&W DA revolvers were top-break designs, as were their first single actions.
The Colt Army, Army Special, Police Positive, and Shooting Master, and the Smith M&P and similarly configured large frame designs such as the Triple Lock, pushed the old single action out of production before WWII. It was only after the Western movie and TV craze that the old favorite came back onto the shelves.
The DA arms were far superior in terms of firepower (DA fire and rapid ejection and reloading); with the exception of the later Rugers, they were safer; and they provided the advantage of a long and heavy trigger pull that is less apt to cause a negligent discharge when the shooter is under great stress.
However, for me anyway, none of them has ever come close to the Navy and SAA in terms of grip and balance.
Links:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.peacemakerspecialists.com/art/explodedgunbig.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.peacemakerspecialists.com/parts.html&h=861&w=1000&sz=115&tbnid=KqZBkttAHxSuYM:&tbnh=81&tbnw=94&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dcolt%2B45%2Bpeacemaker%2Bdiagram%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=colt+45+peacemaker+diagram&usg=__0vBpGxlwN-Dmvb7JF4QaVgWtUvU=&docid=17y6lvsI1glBKM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=36zXT57DEseg2AXXu7GjDw&ved=0CF4Q9QEwAA&dur=3100
http://www.allworldwars.com/Colt's%20Double-Action%20Revolver%20Caliber%2045%201909.html
He's apparently not aware of all the different calibers that DA revolvers come in. The S&W M25, S&W Governor, Ruger Redhawk, Colt Anaconda, Taurus 450, and Taurus Judge are all DA revolvers that have been made in at least one variation to fire .45 Long Colt ammunition.
As to the difference in the frame shape/style, there are a couple of reasons why they're different. The most obvious is that the double action mechanism is more complicated and thus requires more room, and therefore a different shape to the frame. The other reason is that most DA revolver incorporate some sort of "hump" into the frame at the top of the grip in order to keep the gun from rolling up in the hand during recoil. Single-actions, by and large, do not have a "hump" because they are meant to roll up in the hand in order to facilitate cocking with the strong hand thumb.
The double action revolvers which bear the most similarities to single actions are probably the Colt Model 1877 "Rainmaker," "Lightning," and "Thunderer" and the Colt Model 1878 "Double Action Frontier". The single action revolvers which probably more closely resemble double actions are the S&W Model 3 American, Russian, and Schofield.
OldMarksman
Staff
The mention of the "hump" for DA firing is a good point.
That brings up the "Bisley" grip design that was used for target shooting on SAA variations....
http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/colt-bisley-revolver/
That brings up the "Bisley" grip design that was used for target shooting on SAA variations....
http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/colt-bisley-revolver/
OldMarksman and Webleymkv
Thanks for the info. If I had really thought about it much I might have realized some of the things you pointed out such as cylinder swing out. I did realize the trigger mechanisms are more complicated on DA, but what you said makes me think more about the actual space requirements involved. I would still like to study the different firing systems, both on revolvers and semis. I have very little experience with SA revolvers. I had never considered the hump and roll aspect. Good point. Thanks again.
Thanks for the info. If I had really thought about it much I might have realized some of the things you pointed out such as cylinder swing out. I did realize the trigger mechanisms are more complicated on DA, but what you said makes me think more about the actual space requirements involved. I would still like to study the different firing systems, both on revolvers and semis. I have very little experience with SA revolvers. I had never considered the hump and roll aspect. Good point. Thanks again.
The main reason that more internal room is required for a double action revolver than a single action is because of the larger arc that the trigger must travel through in a DA revolver. In a single action revolver, the trigger's only function is to release the hammer, so its arc of travel is relatively short. In most single actions like the Colt SAA or Ruger Blackhawk, the hand (sometimes called the pawl depending on the manufacturer) is connected to the hammer, so it is the arc of the hammer's travel that raises the hand/pawl and thus rotates the cylinder. The trigger itself only has to move very slightly in order to engage the full cock and, if present, half cock notches on the hammer. Because the largest part of the hammer is outside the frame, the internal room needed is quite small.
In a double action revolver, however, the trigger actually accomplishes five different functions: it cocks the hammer, releases the hammer, lifts the hand/pawl, withdraws the cylinder stop, and releases the cylinder stop. The part of the hammer which is inside the frame of a double action revolver is much larger than that of a single action because there are three different parts that it acts upon (hammer, hand/pawl, and cylinder stop). Also the arc of travel required to cock the hammer from the inside is much larger and requires a bigger part than the arc necessary to release the hammer only.
In a double action revolver, however, the trigger actually accomplishes five different functions: it cocks the hammer, releases the hammer, lifts the hand/pawl, withdraws the cylinder stop, and releases the cylinder stop. The part of the hammer which is inside the frame of a double action revolver is much larger than that of a single action because there are three different parts that it acts upon (hammer, hand/pawl, and cylinder stop). Also the arc of travel required to cock the hammer from the inside is much larger and requires a bigger part than the arc necessary to release the hammer only.
There's several things that affected the designs. DA vs. SA is only one.
At the time the SAA first shipped and through WW2 and a bit past, most handgun defensive shooting was thought to be a hip-level affair, or a bit higher. Well into the early 1960s the FBI was teaching low-hold point firing, one-handed...check out this 16min. bit of history dated 1961:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-GxzWHs7lI
By 1961 those techniques were already obsolete, to be replaced over the next decade-plus by what the Leatherslap guys in the mid to late 1950s learned, starting with Jack Weaver and then guys like Cooper and Chapman who documented the improvements.
Revolver grips changed a lot after eye-level fire became popular.
So you have THREE different "cosmetic eras" of fighting revolvers, not two:
Fully modern:
The old-school SAA types *can* be fired at eye level but they weren't optimized for it in either the sights or grips. They'll still work though with a modern two-handed hold.
The Colt Bisley was an early and somewhat questionable attempt to specialize a handgun for eye-level shooting - worked fairly well for one-handed sighted fire, less successful for two-handed:
This issue of "how it's supposed to be shot" had a lot of impact on the final cosmetics and grip shape.
At the time the SAA first shipped and through WW2 and a bit past, most handgun defensive shooting was thought to be a hip-level affair, or a bit higher. Well into the early 1960s the FBI was teaching low-hold point firing, one-handed...check out this 16min. bit of history dated 1961:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-GxzWHs7lI
By 1961 those techniques were already obsolete, to be replaced over the next decade-plus by what the Leatherslap guys in the mid to late 1950s learned, starting with Jack Weaver and then guys like Cooper and Chapman who documented the improvements.
Revolver grips changed a lot after eye-level fire became popular.
So you have THREE different "cosmetic eras" of fighting revolvers, not two:
Fully modern:
The old-school SAA types *can* be fired at eye level but they weren't optimized for it in either the sights or grips. They'll still work though with a modern two-handed hold.
The Colt Bisley was an early and somewhat questionable attempt to specialize a handgun for eye-level shooting - worked fairly well for one-handed sighted fire, less successful for two-handed:
This issue of "how it's supposed to be shot" had a lot of impact on the final cosmetics and grip shape.
Ideal Tool
Moderator
Hello, KMAX. Just wondering if your friend is refering to the "Black Powder" frame style? This has a set screw in front portion of frame to hold cylinder pin in place. This was original style from the Peacemakers inception to around 1896 or so, when they introduced the spring loaded cross pin take down system in use today on most modern single actions.
The frame "hump" has nothing to do with the gun "rolling" in the hand. A double action revolver needs purchase at the back of the hand to allow the index finger to pull the trigger; without that "hump" using the revolver DA is quite difficult and requires a very hard grip.
Some early designs, like the Colt 1877 and 1878 models, had somewhat excessive 'humps" and those can be almost painful with heavy recoiling cartridges. Later designs, like the Colt New Service and Official Police, as well as comparable S&W models used grip styles that allowed realistic use of double action with reasonable comfort.
Jim
Some early designs, like the Colt 1877 and 1878 models, had somewhat excessive 'humps" and those can be almost painful with heavy recoiling cartridges. Later designs, like the Colt New Service and Official Police, as well as comparable S&W models used grip styles that allowed realistic use of double action with reasonable comfort.
Jim
OldMarksman
Staff
^^^^^
Makes sense.
Makes sense.
While that may be part of its purpose, I do not think that DA trigger control is the only reason for the "hump". The S&W Model 3 Russian which was first produced in 1871, several years before most successful DA revolvers, has the "hump" as well as this was one of the changes that the Russians wanted over the Model 3 American.
Likewise, there were some quite successful DA revolvers which lacked the feature. While the Webley Mk. I, which was introduced in 1887, had the "hump", the feature was deleted on the Mk. II which was introduced in 1894 and would not reappear until the introduction of the Mk. VI in 1915. Of course, the recoil of the .455 Webley cartridge from a large frame revolver is quite mild due to its rather sedate ballistics (262gr bullet at approximately 620fps) so the amount of "roll" produced by it is unlikely to be problematic, even without a "hump".
It is hard (though obviously not impossible) to fire one of those Webleys DA; you have to have a good grip. Is is also hard (though again not impossible) to fire a Colt Model 1878 single action since your thumb has to reach up around the "hump".
Still, until DA became common, there was really no need for the "hump", and it was not used; the "roll in the hand on recoil" was more an idea promoted by SA fanciers after those guns became part of the romance of the Old West rather than guns in daily use.
Jim
Still, until DA became common, there was really no need for the "hump", and it was not used; the "roll in the hand on recoil" was more an idea promoted by SA fanciers after those guns became part of the romance of the Old West rather than guns in daily use.
Jim