1873 revolver question

[Thumbcocker]

I know it is standard practice to load Colts and clones with 5 rounds hammer resting on an empty chamber. My questions are

1. Was this the practice when the revolvers were in military use? And if so

2. Why would the government issue a weapon that was unsafe when fully loaded?

It seems that if the contracting agency i.e. the army told Colt " great pistol but fix it so our troopers don't get shot when something hits the hammer " Colt's response would have been "we are on it."

John Browning took several tries to get the 1911 the way the government wanted it. So what was the deal with the 1873?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[USSR]

I imagine they were so happy to have a gun capable of firing so many rounds at once and reload so quickly, that they were willing to overlook that.

Don

[Thumbcocker]

Some precussion revolvers could be carried safely fully loaded.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[KCSO]

The Army carried the guns in a FLAP holster with the hammer covered and the gun on the safety notch. There was no problem when carried that way, the problem arose with the civilian holster and strong side carry. Although I'll bet a few of the guns dropped on the barracks floor might have went bang.

[Thumbcocker]

I was looking for references to the manual for the Colt but haven't been able to find any.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[GOPHER SLAYER]

There is nothing quick about loading the 1873 Colt. You load one at a time and unload one case at a time. The S&W could be unloaded all at once. The problem with the S&W was the cartridge. The S&W 45 case was a little shorter than the Colt's 45. The Army asked S&W to make their case and chamber a little longer but Daniel Wesson was just too stubborn to comply. The Army did not want to stock two kinds of pistol ammo so S&W lost out. The Army also felt they owed Colt a lot for all the help they got during the war. Colt kept the Army well supplied with pistols during the conflict. Also, the Colt factory had burned, Colt had died leaving his widow to manage the factory. She gambled everything on the new pistol and cartridge. The Army just couldn't let her down. When it comes to reloading the Colt 1873 pistol it really isn't a problem, at least in movies, I have seen heroes shoot as many as a dozen rounds without loading.

[smkummer]

I am guessing the “new” safety notch on the hammer seemed like an improvement over the safety nibs on the percussion revolvers. Maybe not enough real world testing before the design was included with the new 1873. Not all dropped guns fired. Back then if someone shot themselves in the foot or other places, they would been considered negligent. It appears users and real world experiences over time might have beat Colt into recommending only loading 5. Does someone know when colt recommended only 5?

[GOPHER SLAYER]

Wyatt Earp was sitting in chair in one of the Dodge City saloons when his pistol fell out of the holster, hit the floor and went off. Fortunately no on was hit. He apparently had loaded all six rounds.

[USSR]

There is nothing quick about loading the 1873 Colt. You load one at a time and unload one case at a time.

Uh, the revolvers it replaced were percussion guns. The Colt SAA was comparably fast.

Don

[Petrol & Powder]

To address the questions:

1. Was this (loading 5 rounds and resting the hammer on an empty chamber) the practice when the revolvers were in military use?
I suspect it BECAME the practice with use. The people that work with potentially dangerous tools tend develop and adopt safety procedures on their own.

2. Why would the government issue a weapon that was unsafe when fully loaded?
Thumbcocker - You should know that attempting to apply logic to the government is pure folly.
I suspect the government didn't perceive the issue as a "safety" problem, assuming they even detected the issue to begin with.


John Browning took several tries to get the 1911 the way the government wanted it. So what was the deal with the 1873?
That was 25+ years later, perhaps they (the ordinance dept) were beginning to take safety a bit more seriously by then ?

[alfadan]

From my understanding of frontier army life, most of it was incredibly boring with little to do. No arms we're carried and were stored away. I imagine when on patrol where action was anticipated, they loaded all 6, as a revolver falling on the hammer was the least dangerous thing they could face and, well, guns are dangerous. Just my opinion as these details seem to be sorely lacking

[Outpost75]

The pre-WW2 S&W hammer block was deemed fine until negligent discharges occurred on naval ships dropping revolvers down hatches, striking the deck below, or falling out of aviator vests while disembarking from an open hatched Daughtless...

I know from personal experience that a cocked and locked M1911 dropped onto a steel flight deck striking on the muzzle from a height of ten feet will discharge every time, but that the none fire height is only 4 feet.

[Texas by God]

The first cowboy who had the stirrup fall on his Colts hammer when saddling his horse probably adopted the " five beans in a wheel" loading method (and possibly a limp) soon thereafter.....

Sent from my SM-A716U using Tapatalk

[leadeye]

We all tend to see things in the past through today's or more recent history's lens. Early Colt autos like the 1902 and Pocket Hammer had no safety at all other than a half cock notch. It's just the way it was, Colt later released the 1903 Hammerless, a completely different gun, but it had a safety. The 1873 had it's issues and I think people just found a work around like they always do, so the five and an empty just evolved from this.

[rintinglen]

In 1871, when work began on the SAA, there were no other revolvers that were truly safe if the hammer was lowered on a loaded chamber. True, many cap and ball revolvers had pins or notches that the hammer nose could engage, but a stout blow could still fire the gun, if the hammer was let down on a capped cylinder. The various continental revolvers of that era were no better than the Colt. In December of 1872, Captain John R. Edie of the Bureau of Ordnance examined the new Colt and one of the things he noted was the safety notch on the hammer which made it safer than the Older (by a year) 1872 open top revolvers then being issued. It was more reliable than either the 1872 or S&W Number 3. The S&W was also less accurate and was considered needlessly complex, having "too many parts" for use in the field by ordinary troopers. (The officers of the day looked pretty far down their noses at the enlisted men.)

Now the Colt was primarily a cavalry arm. Speedy reloading was not particularly a necessity, most charges consisted of one or two shots fired as the mounted trooper swept through the enemy, and for hand to hand work, the sabre was still at the ready. Reliability, durability and ease of maintenance were considered the strong points of the Colt. The safety notch was considered adequate, especially when coupled with the full flap holsters used in those days.

It is a mistake to put too much emphasis on the military's use of the gun for Colt's prosperity. Colt sold about 8 SAA or Bisleys to the general public for every one the U. S. government bought, and at a 20% higher price. And at the same time, they were making about a quarter of million of other firearms: New Line, Lightning, Thunderer, 1878, New Model Navy, not to mention shotguns and slide action rifles. Colt was a very well run business in the later part of the nineteenth century.

[Dan Cash]

Back in the day, there were so many things that could kill you like falling off or being kicked by a horse, buggy wrecks, food poisonings, blood poisoning from minor cuts, a cold that turns into pneumonia and on and on, that 6 in a single action was scarcely a blip on the yet to be invented radar.

[country gent]

The colt was way ahead of the other and with the military flap holster was pretty safe those holsters were some heavy leather. Open topped holster or carry in a pants or chapps pocket was a different story. The requirements and people were different then to. Few firearms had safeties, most were dependent on a half cock notch. The high walls actually cocked on opening the breech. The other was the notches and springs were heavier and didnt release as easily.

the forst passive saftey was introduced in the early 1900s with the transfer bar

[missionary5155]

And hey where else would you want to carry your last dollar ?

[Prairie Cowboy]

I suppose that:

1) the officer who carried one would not have regarded the loss of one shot much of a problem and so left one chamber empty.

2) the cartridge Colt wasn't much different from the percussion models that it replaced, apart from being a breech loader, so they didn't regard it as being any less safe.

My own opinion is that those who wanted to adopt the 1911 were being met with stiff opposition from the traditionalists who did not want to adopt anything but a revolver.
So they continually demanded changes, hoping that it would just go away.
Also, for the same reasons, they kept demanding standards of reliability that no revolver had ever been required to meet.
But some concerns with parts breakage were genuine, and better steel parts were developed as a result.

With the 1873, I think that everyone in the military was happy from the beginning.
It was a traditional revolver, yet a breech-loader.
It was more reliable, stronger, more powerful, and easy to load.
And, it fit in the same holsters as the percussion revolvers, saving money.

[GasGuzzler]

Not all people agree they're unsafe on six so the rest is moot.