Six shooter C&B

[SDSmlf]

Question for the load six crowd. What would you tell your child or grandchild in a noncombat situation? Load six and trust the .06 diameter by .03 high pin on an Italian reproduction handgun? Or keep the hammer down on an empty chamber?

 

[azmntman]

:hmm: Which kid or grand kid? :slap:

 

[Gene L]

The safest way to carry any gun is unloaded. I don't choose to do that, and not just because it's not practical. And why if five, why not four chambers loaded to be extra safe?

Shooting a C&B revolver is to me at least a range situation. CASS shooting is way different from casual range shooting. Do as you please, for me that's six, and I suppose for cowboy shooting where safety and speed is enhanced, I can see that. I've been range officer before and an ounce of prevention...you know the rest.

Are there any data on injuries for unintentional discharges from hammer down on a safety pin? From my limited testing procedure, albeit primitive, I couldn't make the revolver fire on a safety pin safety, and I don't carry one much outside the safe range. So, my grandson would be perfectly safe with six.

 

[SDSmlf]

The one that is easily distracted. Can’t have different rules for different groups.

I believe argument here is about carrying a sixshooter, not how you would load and shoot one at the range. Or am I missing something?

 

[Gene L]

Of course there are different rules for carrying and shooting. Just like in the real world.

I think it's accepted that there is an acceptable level of risk to shooting a firearm. With care, this level can be minimized, but with a careless level of gun handling, the risks are a lot more.

My point is to not necessarily accept 19th century rules unconditionally for 20th century applications.

 

[nkbj]

Not fighting for our lives we seldom have the occasion to load five.
But if we were to start we wouldn't load five.
So maybe we should... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHdU5sHigYQ

 

[azmntman]

I will carry 6 in my revolvers that have the safety slots and a flap over holster. Only real test would be to load six, hammer in safety slot an continually throw, in a bowling ball fashion, the revolver down a hill making it tumble as far as possible. 75 times. I guess that would do. Also gotta re-cap as needed between "frames" :idunno:

When pop was a cop he had a cop buddy that was on a foot chase with a bad guy running through a trailer park. The cop had his revolver out, tripped, fell and shot a guy asleep in a trailer. .38 SW model 10. Bad guy got away, hurt guy lived, cop suspended. I was a boy but I am betting cop either had cocked the pistol or had a finger in the trigger guard? (or both). If cop had pistol in holster (flap style), I'm betting the bad guy goes to jail, the hurt guy sleeps through the whole thing and the story at dinner that night woulda been about something entirely boring :idunno:

 

[rodwha]

As I pointed out the recpercussions for loading five and setting the hammer on an empty chamber or loading six and using the designed safety is the same. If something bad were to happen the cylinder must rotate to the next chamber, which is loaded. So this is a pointless argument as to carrying. You’d need to load four leaving the next chamber empty as well to ensure the safety you are championing.

 

[Grenadier1758]

I have a Navy Arms (Uberti) brass framed revolver. In their catalog it was called the "Reb". This revolver has no pins. Therefore if I were to carry that pistol, the safe method of carry is five loaded cylinders and rest the hammer on the empty chamber.

Mostly I shoot this pistol for target shooting so the carry method doesn't come into play.

 

[Zonie]

Good point Grenadier.

I've seen a lot of Italian reproduction Colts that did not have the safety pins on the rear of the cylinder.

It seems to be common on the less expensive models like the brass framed guns but it can also be the case on steel framed guns.

For those of you who have been looking at your Colt replica and you don't see any pins (or slots in the case of the Remington), what we're talking about when we say "safety pins" are small diameter pins sticking out of the rear of the cylinder.
They are about the same distance from the center of the cylinder as the nipples are.
There are usually 6 of them, located between the chambers and nipples.
(I do recall seeing at least one cylinder that only had a few safety pins but I don't know what company made it.)

 

[necchi]

I have a Navy Arms (Uberti) brass framed revolver. In their catalog it was called the "Reb". This revolver has no pins.

Come`on now,, tell the whole truth.
They don't have the "pins" but they do have the slot.
I'm not advocating one way or the other,, but let's not mix or sparse reality.

 

[Zonie]

The brass framed gun your thinking of is the Remington. It may (or may not depending on who made it) have slots in the back of its cylinder but, if he is talking about brass framed replicas of the open top Colt design, he, and I are correct. There are replicas of the Colt that do not have safety pins.

While we're talking about replicas that lack safety devices, I am looking at a Italian replica of a .36 caliber Whitney and a .36 caliber Spiller & Burr Confederate copy of the Whitney.

Neither of these reproduction revolvers have a safety device on the rear of the cylinder.

I can't speak for the Whitney because I don't have much good information about that pistol however I do have good information about the Spiller & Burr's safety.

The originals had a 6 milled slots in the backface of the cylinder. The nose of the hammer would go into these slots to put it on "safe", somewhat like the 1858 Remington notches. Obviously the maker of this replica either did not know about the original guns safety slots or, more than likely, the maker decided to save some money and not machine the slots.

While looking at my C&B pistols I also looked at my .44 caliber Rogers & Spencer.

It has no safety notches or safety pins on the rear of the cylinder and because of the size of the cutouts around the nipples, there is no place to be able to create such a safety feature.

Again, I do not have much information about the Rogers & Spencer revolvers so I don't know exactly how they might have been made to provide some type of safety.

I do know (because I just tested it), the Whitney, Spiller & Burr and the Rogers & Spencer can all have their hammer lowered onto an area at the back of the cylinder, between the nipples.

Once this is done, it is easy to turn the cylinder and cause the hammer to drop onto the nipples.

 

[necchi]

There are replicas of the Colt that do not have safety pins.

I said that,, they do not have safety pins.
But there is still a section of the cylinder for the hammer to fit between the nipples.
I don't have my brass Uberti 51 handy,, I'm moving and it's packed in a box!! :redface: I won't see it for a few weeks

 

[Grenadier1758]

I have a Navy Arms (Uberti) brass framed revolver. In their catalog it was called the "Reb". This revolver has no pins.

Come`on now,, tell the whole truth.
They don't have the "pins" but they do have the slot.
I'm not advocating one way or the other,, but let's not mix or sparse reality.

Its the Colt Navy copy. I bought the brass framed revolver because it was $49 and the steel framed "Yank" was $99.

There are no slots.

 

[Flintlock_bob]

I would be more concerned with packing a well known brand name unmentionable with the "safety" built into the trigger which has been known to have accidental discharges due to things pulling on the trigger other than the proper finger.

 

[nhmoose]

I have 3 Italy made Colt style 44's and one in 36 cal. NONE, note None have pins or slots.

Tried all there with hammer on the cylinder between cones all could spin so the next cone or Nipple was under the hammer.

Trust them all loaded, hammer down between I DON'T

Lets not get caught up in the difference. The leave 1 unloaded started AFTER percussion era with the 1873 Colt Center fire gun ;.

Arguing whether to keep a chamber empty in this age is stupid.

Loading all six on the line and then firing at the firing line no problem, UNLESS your range prohibits it.

Carrying it loaded without the safety pins, slotted hammers for them,

Remington styles not let down into the safety notches is plain dangerous bordering on criminal negligence per lawyers and just plain stupid by laymen.

Wake up folks ranges saying 5 only take all types into consideration and use the common easiest to make rules.

At the range follow the rules, what you do when your by yourself WHO cares, but do not complain if you shoot yourself or who ever is with you at the time.

I have nothing invested in that it is on you period.

 

[Grenadier1758]

I have a Navy Arms (Uberti) brass framed revolver. In their catalog it was called the "Reb". This revolver has no pins.

Come`on now,, tell the whole truth.
They don't have the "pins" but they do have the slot.
I'm not advocating one way or the other,, but let's not mix or sparse reality.

Its the Colt Navy copy. I bought the brass framed revolver because it was $49 and the steel framed "Yank" was $99.

There are no slots.

Just to be clear, here are the photos.

Navy Arms (Uberti) "Reb"

Yup, no pins.

EDG steel frame:

No pins on this Colt copy either.

Uberti Remington:

The Remington copies do have the between the cylinder safety slots and when the hammer is down, the cylinder can't rotate.

 

[ZUG]

I bought one of those 1851 .36 cal EDG pistols in 1969 (?) for my brother as a Christmas present and it also does not have the "safety pins". As I recall it also was a tad bit smaller in frame size as the 1851 are now :hmm: .

 

[M. De Land]

Looks like a short hand on the Remington allowing the hammer strike on the nipple well right corner.

 

[nkbj]

I drop mine about as often as I use them to drive wire staples into box cedar fence posts. But working up a rocky slope I have dropped a revolver out of a holster and never even knew it was missing until getting back to camp. Not a good fitting holster, not even a little bit.