A discussion in this thread here got me thinking about single-action revolver and I realised I couldn’t think of many single-action revolver designs from after about the 1880s.
This in turn prompts the question “What was the last single-action revolver design?”
I’m going to bold this next part because it’s very important:
The Colt Single Action Army and its countless modern versions do not count, nor do modern reproductions of Old West revolvers.
There’s basically a period between the 1880s and about 1950 where, as far as I can tell, the only single-action revolver in production was the Colt Peacemaker (later joined by the Ruger Blackhawk in the 1950s and then later all the modern reproductions of Old West guns once Cowboy Action Shooting became popular).
The last revolver I’m aware of that was produced in a single-action configuration were some of the Russian late Tsarist-era Nagant M1895 revolvers, of which there was a single-action NCOs model and a double-action Officer’s model.
Hi again my friend,
Thinking about your quest for a new design in SAR’s is a streach of sorts and in looking for something to apply to this I was thinking about the Freedom Arms SAR’s and of course I do have a Model 83
Where I believe there is a newness to this is it of course looks and functions like the old Peacemaker but is not fired that way.
these Big Super Magnums are designed and required to be fired with 2 hands much unlike the oldies. The grip is different and is not designed to “Roll-up” in your hand with recoil. I was watching the Sportsmanship Channel on the tube just yesterday and the hosts were doing a Revolver Challenge, and these two were not SAR gurus and they were talking about their problems with the revolver “Rolling-up” and their not being able to get back on target.
Then in reading Massad Ayoob in his article, Here; http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob101.html
He tells the same story.
And I can relate to that when shooting mine a couple years back I injured my shooting hand when shooting from a rest and not allowing my arm to lift like it will when I shoot off hand using the Chapman stance which I promote when shooting Big Magnuns over the Isosceles stance where the big heavy recoiling guns can come back and Clock the shooter.
And in agreement with Mass, I was told by a frend that, when he shot his big X frame S&W .500 that the recoil was such that when he fired the first shot he, in retaining the revolver from coming out of his hands ripped off another round and that one was way over the target backstop! And that man was over 400lbs so he could grip, but just wasn’t ready for what that gun had to offer.
There are a number modern SAs. For uses other than personal defense, it is far easier to shoot accurately SA than DA, and DA revolvers are frequently fired single action when time allows for that. Single action designs are a little stronger, and a little easier to maintain correct timing, so are preferable for very powerful rounds. The traditional grip configurations may also allow a shooter to handle magnum recoil a little better than the higher grip of a DA design.
Finally the popularity of cowboy style shooting competition provides a significant market for traditional looking single actions. While many look like Colt Single Action Army, or Navy revolovers on the surface, the internals are largely engineered from a blank sheet of drafting velum. Nearly all of the flat leaf springs are replaced by coil springs. Most of the need for precision hand fitting has been designed out. Transfer bar systems have eliminated the need to carry with an empty chamber under the hammer. Loading is sometimes simplified with cylinders that spin freely when the loading gate is open. Cylinders are often easy to remove, sometimes even without tools to facilitate cleaning and/or different chamberings of the same caliber. (.22LR/.22WRM*, 38spl/9mm*, .45LC/.45AP)
*Yes these use slightly different bullet diameters, but SA pistols with spare cylinders are indeed offered to allow firing either through the same barrel.
I don’t understand why the OP is discounting the Ruger Blackhawk. It was designed as a cowboy style shooter in the 1950s specifically to fill a market need for that style of weapon, and while it does admittedly have some similarities to the Colt SAR it’s not a clone. I don’t think it should be discounted just because it was designed to be a similar old fashioned style cowboy shooter. Similar or not, it was a new design. There were even a couple of patents filed related to its design.
I don’t know much about the Ruger Vaquero, but it’s design dates to the 1970s. The thing I don’t know is how much of its design is based on earlier Ruger models so I can’t say if you would call it a variant or not.
However, if you are looking for something that wasn’t specifically designed to be “old fashioned style” at the time of its design, then I can’t beat the Nagant M1895 either. I can think of quite a few double action revolvers designed after that date but not single action.
I too think the OP is needlessly restrictive. But, hey, it’s not my thread.
The reason I think that there is a lack of (radically) new designs is that it would be really hard to improve upon the basic revolver. Autos and semi-autos that use gas have much more design possibilities. Double action revolvers as they exist are a small step above falling blocks.
Though I believe some of the improvements in modern cowboy styles could be considered a “new” design. The new model Vaquero comes to mind.
The reason I’m discounting the Ruger Blackhawk and Vaquero et al is I’m trying to establish the last single-action revolver design that wasn’t intended to be a “Cowboy gun”, if that makes sense. Whilst I acknowledge the internals on things like the Blackhawk are radically different from the old Single Action Army, (and that the Blackhawk/Vaquero are fine guns in their own right), they’re still really only being made to cater to people who want a gun that looks like it belongs in a John Wayne film (and there is nothing wrong with that!)
I guess the sort of thing I was looking for was perhaps a specialised target shooting revolver or perhaps a military revolver (maybe intended for reserve troops or from a country that wasn’t likely to get involved in large conflicts, for example).
I mean, there are plenty of “modern” single-shot target pistols (things like the Thompson Contender, for example) - I’m just surprised there doesn’t appear to have been a single-action revolver that wasn’t designed to look like a Colt Peacemaker/ Old West Gun since, well, the turn of the century.
The magnum research BFR doesn’t look like a cowboy gun, and while the 45-70 has been around since the age when bison were commonplace, chambering a handgun for it is just nucking futz. So of course I bought one.
From my own research, it looks like variants of the S&W Third Model (and the Model 1891 you’ve mentioned) may have been the last “original” dedicated single-action designs, if that makes sense.
They’re not cowboy guns and they are reminiscent of early rimfire revolvers (especially with the lack of trigger guard) but for the purposes of my OP I’ll say they count as a “modern” single action revolver. I wonder who their market is?
One potential market was for places that prohibited concealed carry, but not open carry. At one time (don’t know if it’s still available) you could get a big cowboy style belt buckle that held the revolver in plain view. The casual observer would think it was gaudy, but not deadly.
A side note to anyone considering this weapon - if you don’t pay attention to how it functions, it’s easier to end up in a dangerous situation than with most modern weapons I.E., read the owners manual, for sure.
I remember seeing those in a book years ago and wondering if it was ever intended to be any more than a novelty. The idea it was intended for actual use never occurred to me, but when you mention it in that context, it does sort of make sense.
And that NAA mini was the first of Freedom Arms developments. The designer of the .454 Magnum (CASULL) was a founder of the company and that Mini was sold to NAA
The Pfieffer-Zeliska 600 is an odd bird; is it actually in production or is a “one-off”? I guess it counts, but I doubt you could actually fire it with one hand, which is generally a requirement for handguns.
Well I don’t have $16,000.00 in disposable income to find out.
The BFR and Modle 87 in .454Casull, and the S$W X-Frame’s are not one handed guns either.
TBS I had always intended to fire mine with one hand and after shooting it and mostly after the injury from shooting it, I have nixed that plan.
I’m not sure what the market is, but I bought the NAA mini Magnum because I thought it looked neat. It’s really easy to conceal, but it’s a lot harder to shoot accurate than my LCP.
