lee n. field
New member
clarify
I expect Jim March to chime in soon.
(He uses a Ruger Blackhawk in .357)
I expect Jim March to chime in soon.
(He uses a Ruger Blackhawk in .357)
Last edited:
SA self defense article in American Rifleman
- Thread starter BudAtDuke
- Start date
HighValleyRanch
New member
SD with a SA
Funny this is coming up, because I brought my SA out to the range today, to see how functional it would really be for SD.
Of course there are so many thread about the need for reload. In most senarios, there is no reloading.
So the only other consideration in hampering the use of a SA is the time between shots.
I was able to do double taps almost as fast as I can practically with my glock, if I count using the sights. Cocking during the recoil and coming back down into sights is not really that much slower. If I am hammering my glock without the second sight picture, yes it is faster.
But I was shooting out at 15 yards keeping almost all in the six inch black with the double taps, and I doubt that I would have been much faster with the glock using a sight picture.
and yes, I was faster cocking with the off hand than with the shooting hand, although I can do with either. No, I never wrap my finger round the trigger guard.
I was testing this out, simply because I want to carry a SA for my woods gun, so I am giving it fair consideration for all aspects.
Funny this is coming up, because I brought my SA out to the range today, to see how functional it would really be for SD.
Of course there are so many thread about the need for reload. In most senarios, there is no reloading.
So the only other consideration in hampering the use of a SA is the time between shots.
I was able to do double taps almost as fast as I can practically with my glock, if I count using the sights. Cocking during the recoil and coming back down into sights is not really that much slower. If I am hammering my glock without the second sight picture, yes it is faster.
But I was shooting out at 15 yards keeping almost all in the six inch black with the double taps, and I doubt that I would have been much faster with the glock using a sight picture.
and yes, I was faster cocking with the off hand than with the shooting hand, although I can do with either. No, I never wrap my finger round the trigger guard.
I was testing this out, simply because I want to carry a SA for my woods gun, so I am giving it fair consideration for all aspects.
SundownRider
New member
I spent ten years competing in CAS and would not feel under-gunned in any situation. I have practiced and can shoot two single actions at the same time, and am able to reload faster than most could load their magazines or double action revolvers.
If you practice with it and it is comfortable for you, why the heck not?
Many an old timer only had a single action as their gun, and they were deadly with them. They hit what they were aiming at and made every shot count.
If you practice with it and it is comfortable for you, why the heck not?
Many an old timer only had a single action as their gun, and they were deadly with them. They hit what they were aiming at and made every shot count.
Jeff Cooper said he carried a Colt SAA into the Pacific based on the advice of a "still current gunwriter". That had to be Elmer Keith. Anyway Jeff said trying to load the thing in the dark convinced him that a M1911 was a better choice.
I have shot thousands of rounds through single action revolvers. Even shot one in IPSC competition for a grin. You can shoot six powerful rounds fast and accurate.
However rounds seven and up are a bit on the slow side.
A SAA in 45 LC makes for a very compact package. I don't think you can find a smaller revolver in that class. All of my double action big bore revolvers are taller and longer.
As much as I like the 45 LC, a SAA would not be my first choice for a self defense pistol . But it is a great gun to play with.
I have shot thousands of rounds through single action revolvers. Even shot one in IPSC competition for a grin. You can shoot six powerful rounds fast and accurate.
However rounds seven and up are a bit on the slow side.
A SAA in 45 LC makes for a very compact package. I don't think you can find a smaller revolver in that class. All of my double action big bore revolvers are taller and longer.
As much as I like the 45 LC, a SAA would not be my first choice for a self defense pistol . But it is a great gun to play with.
I'm with Daryl on this one. I take offense at the insinuation that anybody who carries a SA automatically has a Billy The Kid complex- and is a threat to the 2A effort. You know what hurts the 2A effort more than anything else? It is our inability to ignore our difference and vote together for the common, and noble, cause of preserving that which separates freedom from subjugation.
If you can conceal the SAA and shoot it well, more power to you. Fact is, I carry one frequently when working firewood or clearing fence around one of the farms. I don't switch guns (or loads) if I need to run into town, either.
If you can hide it, shoot it well and you will use it to save your life or someone else's the equipment becomes secondary. I believe Jeff Cooper said "Better a Class A shooter with a Class C weapon than the other way around."
If you can conceal the SAA and shoot it well, more power to you. Fact is, I carry one frequently when working firewood or clearing fence around one of the farms. I don't switch guns (or loads) if I need to run into town, either.
If you can hide it, shoot it well and you will use it to save your life or someone else's the equipment becomes secondary. I believe Jeff Cooper said "Better a Class A shooter with a Class C weapon than the other way around."
Hey, if it works, why not? I've seen some amazing shooting from guys who dedicate themselves to it.
Heck, some people act like I've passed wind in a crowded elevator when they find I'm carrying a double-action revolver. Apparently, those are now passé as well.
I do have some question about technique, however. In the article, the shooter is shown using the weak hand to cock the gun. This seems a bit suspect for defensive shooting, as the user's weak hand might be injured or otherwise occupied. Is there an accepted alternate technique that involves the strong hand cocking the hammer?
Heck, some people act like I've passed wind in a crowded elevator when they find I'm carrying a double-action revolver. Apparently, those are now passé as well.
I do have some question about technique, however. In the article, the shooter is shown using the weak hand to cock the gun. This seems a bit suspect for defensive shooting, as the user's weak hand might be injured or otherwise occupied. Is there an accepted alternate technique that involves the strong hand cocking the hammer?
The show Shooting Gallery on the Outdoor channel had an episode filmed at Gunsite (http://gunsite.com/) in-which the single action revolver was shown to be an excellent self defense gun.
Guess I'd better stop carrying my Super Blackhawk 44 mag. Oh, wait a minute, Wyatt Earp didn't wear a low slung holster and neither do I. He carried a 45 colt with a 7 1/2" barrel and went through several of them in his career, he also gave several away to fellow lawmen as gifts. Nobody gets mine until I reach room temperature.
Nothing wrong with that article and being a dinosaur myself with nearly as much trigger time with my SA revolvers as I do my pistols I wouldn't be a bit concerned about which one was in my hand in a social situation gone sour. I would really hate it if I had to reload but that isn't very likely. Unlike the movies I can't fire my shotgun 12 times without reloading and I can't get 32 rounds out of my revolvers without reloading so I'm a little more careful about shot placement.
More likely to meet a wild boar in my woods than I am a herd of jihadists so I guess I'll just hang on to my old gun a little longer.
Nothing wrong with that article and being a dinosaur myself with nearly as much trigger time with my SA revolvers as I do my pistols I wouldn't be a bit concerned about which one was in my hand in a social situation gone sour. I would really hate it if I had to reload but that isn't very likely. Unlike the movies I can't fire my shotgun 12 times without reloading and I can't get 32 rounds out of my revolvers without reloading so I'm a little more careful about shot placement.
More likely to meet a wild boar in my woods than I am a herd of jihadists so I guess I'll just hang on to my old gun a little longer.
Coltman 77
New member
I've always loved the way a Colt Peacemaker in .45 Colt shoots. It just feels right to me, the pistol points naturally, balances well and has a pleasant felt recoil.
Do I use one for carry or home defense? No.
But if I had to use a SAA, I'd be very comfortable with it. Just look at the amazing history behind this revolver.
Do I use one for carry or home defense? No.
But if I had to use a SAA, I'd be very comfortable with it. Just look at the amazing history behind this revolver.
Oh, I know. I was curious as to the approach used in the article. With a traditional draw-stroke, you should be able to fire the weapon from retention, while held low and close.
The technique in the article doesn't address this, as the gun is not cocked until the arms are extended and the hands meet. It seems a bit odd for a gun that lends itself very well to being handled one-handed.
HighValleyRanch
New member
Gun site type presentation
I haven't read the article, but it is easy to nit pick details. I am sure that they are emphasizing safety considerations. I see too many people doing their presentations with their fingers on the trigger before they are on target.
Although we do practice the ability to fire from the close step 3 or 4 position, I do think that it is better practice to keep the finger off the trigger until extending unless you intend to fire immediately from close retention. The reason is that it is better to train yourself to do the presentation with the finger out, and have the ability to transition to finger in at any point. But always practicing finger immediately into the trigger position can manifest some pretty bad practices.
Back onto the subject of when to cock with the SA in the presentation.
I practice cocking with the strong hand, only when the gun is in both of my hands. The gun is level, and MY FINGER IS OUTSIDE THE TRIGGER! Think about the fact with a SA that if you train with you finger on the trigger and cock as you bring your hands together, that with a slip cock, you might shoot your own hand!
AGAIN, WHEN I AM COCKING WITH THE STRONG HAND THUMB, MY TRIGGER FINGER IS OUTSIDE THE TRIGGER GUARD! It might be a little slower, but it is safer.
I know the same is true with my glock, so I practice safety on both weapons..
Finger outside the trigger until I am going out.
But if I am practicing firing from close retention with one hand, then finger instantly on trigger as gun levels.
One should be adaptive, but practice automatic safety first.
Slowly and smoothly and repetitive.
I haven't read the article, but it is easy to nit pick details. I am sure that they are emphasizing safety considerations. I see too many people doing their presentations with their fingers on the trigger before they are on target.
Although we do practice the ability to fire from the close step 3 or 4 position, I do think that it is better practice to keep the finger off the trigger until extending unless you intend to fire immediately from close retention. The reason is that it is better to train yourself to do the presentation with the finger out, and have the ability to transition to finger in at any point. But always practicing finger immediately into the trigger position can manifest some pretty bad practices.
Back onto the subject of when to cock with the SA in the presentation.
I practice cocking with the strong hand, only when the gun is in both of my hands. The gun is level, and MY FINGER IS OUTSIDE THE TRIGGER! Think about the fact with a SA that if you train with you finger on the trigger and cock as you bring your hands together, that with a slip cock, you might shoot your own hand!
AGAIN, WHEN I AM COCKING WITH THE STRONG HAND THUMB, MY TRIGGER FINGER IS OUTSIDE THE TRIGGER GUARD! It might be a little slower, but it is safer.
I know the same is true with my glock, so I practice safety on both weapons..
Finger outside the trigger until I am going out.
But if I am practicing firing from close retention with one hand, then finger instantly on trigger as gun levels.
One should be adaptive, but practice automatic safety first.
Slowly and smoothly and repetitive.
the357plan
New member
Link to article...
Here is a link to the online version of the article for those who don't get American Rifleman:
http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/Single-Action-Shootout-Gunsite-Academy/
I would feel more psychologically comfortable carrying a nice SA than the 5 shot 357 air weight I typically carry. However, concealment is an issue and maybe the weight. I've gotten use to carrying the real light stuff and it's hard to go back.
Here is a link to the online version of the article for those who don't get American Rifleman:
http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/Single-Action-Shootout-Gunsite-Academy/
I would feel more psychologically comfortable carrying a nice SA than the 5 shot 357 air weight I typically carry. However, concealment is an issue and maybe the weight. I've gotten use to carrying the real light stuff and it's hard to go back.
Last edited:
One thing nobody ever seems to comment on, with the SA revolver, the tendancy of the shooter to spray and pray drops dramatically!
5 or 6 shots with the slowest reload of a cartridge repeater really makes it important to make each shot count.
As to the article, I found it both interesting and laughable. Interesting that there is a course for defensive shooting with the SA, and laughable as to the technique illustrated. Using both hands and cocking with the off hand when speed shooting the SA is just alien to me. It may be the pinnacle of modern thought, but it isn't the way I learned, nor the way the gun was intended to be fired.
So, I'm a dinosaur, but not yet fully extinct. I see no problem with someone using the SA revolver for self defense, and if it is what they are best with, for CCW as well. It worked then, it will work today. And considering the improvements in ammo, I think it will work even better today than it did 150 years ago.
I won't (and don't know anybody who will) claim it is the best possible choice, but I won't sneer at the man who uses it. Odds are, he just might know what he is doing!
We make a big deal of quick reloads and capacity, but the figures have shown for many, many years that in a self defense gunfight, it is rare to fire more than 2 or 3 rounds. Hollywood and our TVs always show the opposite, but then, the rest of what they show isn't real either.
No doubt someone will get around to fretting about the overpenetration of typical big bore SA rounds, and how dangerous that is, as yet another reason not to choose one for self defense. But is the penetration of a couple of big bore rounds actually a greater risk than 7 or 10 9mm rounds (with three hits?)
Sure, I'm making an overblown case, but look at some of the police shootings in the last few years. 40+ rounds fired by two cops with 6 hits? And done in less than a dozen seconds? Maybe if they carried SA revolvers, it might become more important to actually aim?!
Ordinary citizens shooting only in gravest extreme are not helpless with a SA revolver. And no, I don't really think the police ought to go back to them, but when you look at how much lead goes flying from high capacity autos, and how much actually hits the intended target, one has to wonder.
5 or 6 shots with the slowest reload of a cartridge repeater really makes it important to make each shot count.
As to the article, I found it both interesting and laughable. Interesting that there is a course for defensive shooting with the SA, and laughable as to the technique illustrated. Using both hands and cocking with the off hand when speed shooting the SA is just alien to me. It may be the pinnacle of modern thought, but it isn't the way I learned, nor the way the gun was intended to be fired.
So, I'm a dinosaur, but not yet fully extinct. I see no problem with someone using the SA revolver for self defense, and if it is what they are best with, for CCW as well. It worked then, it will work today. And considering the improvements in ammo, I think it will work even better today than it did 150 years ago.
I won't (and don't know anybody who will) claim it is the best possible choice, but I won't sneer at the man who uses it. Odds are, he just might know what he is doing!
We make a big deal of quick reloads and capacity, but the figures have shown for many, many years that in a self defense gunfight, it is rare to fire more than 2 or 3 rounds. Hollywood and our TVs always show the opposite, but then, the rest of what they show isn't real either.
No doubt someone will get around to fretting about the overpenetration of typical big bore SA rounds, and how dangerous that is, as yet another reason not to choose one for self defense. But is the penetration of a couple of big bore rounds actually a greater risk than 7 or 10 9mm rounds (with three hits?)
Sure, I'm making an overblown case, but look at some of the police shootings in the last few years. 40+ rounds fired by two cops with 6 hits? And done in less than a dozen seconds? Maybe if they carried SA revolvers, it might become more important to actually aim?!
Ordinary citizens shooting only in gravest extreme are not helpless with a SA revolver. And no, I don't really think the police ought to go back to them, but when you look at how much lead goes flying from high capacity autos, and how much actually hits the intended target, one has to wonder.
The early tone of this thread seems to be pointing fingers at the American Rifleman magazine for have the stones to suggest folks consider carrying single action revolvers for defense.
I read the article... and didn't get that impression. Seemed to me to be more of a review of the Gunsite offering of their tactical class.
I'm not sure that a single action tactical class is on my short list of things to do, but the article seemed much more like a review of the class offering rather than a suggestion to go out and have high noon showdowns at the base of Boot Hill.
I read the article... and didn't get that impression. Seemed to me to be more of a review of the Gunsite offering of their tactical class.
I'm not sure that a single action tactical class is on my short list of things to do, but the article seemed much more like a review of the class offering rather than a suggestion to go out and have high noon showdowns at the base of Boot Hill.
SA for SD
Y'all might get a kick outta this, but the gun I used for my CCW course (and my first handgun) is a Heritage Arms single action .22 Mag revolver. It's a tad difficult to conceal in the summer time, but during the rest of the year, not an issue. It lacks the stopping power of my .40 Sigma, but any gun in a SD situation is better than no gun, IMO.
I haven't read the article, won't be back home for another week.
Y'all might get a kick outta this, but the gun I used for my CCW course (and my first handgun) is a Heritage Arms single action .22 Mag revolver. It's a tad difficult to conceal in the summer time, but during the rest of the year, not an issue. It lacks the stopping power of my .40 Sigma, but any gun in a SD situation is better than no gun, IMO.
I haven't read the article, won't be back home for another week.
This is a very good article...
Single-Action Self-Defense
Do single-action sixguns have a place in self-defense?
By Bart Skelton
http://www.gunsandammo.com/content/single-action-self-defense
Single-Action Self-Defense
Do single-action sixguns have a place in self-defense?
By Bart Skelton
http://www.gunsandammo.com/content/single-action-self-defense
Well I guess I ought to chime in 
.
Yeah, I only own one centerfire gun. Period. It's a NewVaq357, heavily modified. The transfer bar safety is intact and factory-stock, and I carry six-up. Loads are by DoubleTap ammo, based on the 125gr Gold Dot slug going fast enough that the energy levels are deep into 10mm territory.
Hammer is the lowered SuperBlackhawk type. I'm a "strong side thumber". At the end of the cocking strong I drop my strong-side thumb off the side of the hammer and right on top of my weak side thumb, both pointing forward, forming a grip in a Weaver-ish hold that is very similar to current thinking on 1911s and the like.
My sights are better than almost any other CCW setup available. Only a glass red dot with conventional backup sights comes close. I use a homebrew clone of the Goshen Enterprises Hexsite:
That's the "Mk4". There's a "Mk5" improved version built but not installed yet. I won't be able to show a picture, because it uses design elements Tim Sheehan at Goshen came up with but hasn't yet published. The holster for it will have to be customized to hide the sight. Yeah, I'm serious.
I do NOT carry in a low-slung "Western" holster. I don't own one and don't like them. If it's at all "jacket weather" it's in a very high-ride-and-forward crossdraw rig of my own design:
In the worst AZ summer months, it's in a fanny pack. With a peace sign on it. Because that's where my piece is.
My thinking goes like this:
First, I like this gun a lot. Best piece I've ever owned and until I can score a Freedom Arms '97, best piece I'm likely to own. I've been shooting it and modifying it since 2005, and it's basically like a part of me now.
I can very quickly and accurately deliver a monster of a first shot. One that sounds like a grenade going off and puts out a big hurt. After that, IF I can keep my head (and I suspect I can), I can deliver more very accurate shots. I'm a "pure sighted fire" shooter who sucks completely at point shooting...sighted fire from a Weaver-ish hold is absolutely the gameplan, along with as much movement as I can scrape together.
Will this solve all problems? Hell no. I full well realize that. But the other thing is, I'm unlikely to get in a mess that six accurate and massively potent shots can't deal with.
And finally, there's that question of "can I shoot it?" I sometimes open carry in AZ. I was talking to somebody at a very gun-friendly store who kinda chuckled at it...and then went serious. I saw exactly what he was looking at.
.Yeah, I only own one centerfire gun. Period. It's a NewVaq357, heavily modified. The transfer bar safety is intact and factory-stock, and I carry six-up. Loads are by DoubleTap ammo, based on the 125gr Gold Dot slug going fast enough that the energy levels are deep into 10mm territory.
Hammer is the lowered SuperBlackhawk type. I'm a "strong side thumber". At the end of the cocking strong I drop my strong-side thumb off the side of the hammer and right on top of my weak side thumb, both pointing forward, forming a grip in a Weaver-ish hold that is very similar to current thinking on 1911s and the like.
My sights are better than almost any other CCW setup available. Only a glass red dot with conventional backup sights comes close. I use a homebrew clone of the Goshen Enterprises Hexsite:
That's the "Mk4". There's a "Mk5" improved version built but not installed yet. I won't be able to show a picture, because it uses design elements Tim Sheehan at Goshen came up with but hasn't yet published. The holster for it will have to be customized to hide the sight. Yeah, I'm serious
.I do NOT carry in a low-slung "Western" holster. I don't own one and don't like them. If it's at all "jacket weather" it's in a very high-ride-and-forward crossdraw rig of my own design:
In the worst AZ summer months, it's in a fanny pack. With a peace sign on it. Because that's where my piece is
.My thinking goes like this:
First, I like this gun a lot. Best piece I've ever owned and until I can score a Freedom Arms '97, best piece I'm likely to own. I've been shooting it and modifying it since 2005, and it's basically like a part of me now.
I can very quickly and accurately deliver a monster of a first shot. One that sounds like a grenade going off and puts out a big hurt. After that, IF I can keep my head (and I suspect I can), I can deliver more very accurate shots. I'm a "pure sighted fire" shooter who sucks completely at point shooting...sighted fire from a Weaver-ish hold is absolutely the gameplan, along with as much movement as I can scrape together.
Will this solve all problems? Hell no. I full well realize that. But the other thing is, I'm unlikely to get in a mess that six accurate and massively potent shots can't deal with.
And finally, there's that question of "can I shoot it?" I sometimes open carry in AZ. I was talking to somebody at a very gun-friendly store who kinda chuckled at it...and then went serious. I saw exactly what he was looking at.
bamaranger
New member
read it
I enjoyed the article. Always have liked Hacker's tone.
A quality SA like a Ruger offers a good bit more confidence than some of the budget autos, or any auto w/ a reliability problem. The old "6 for sure" thing. A cocked and leveled SA in a serious caliber is no laughing matter to the person its aimed at. (poor grammar, but it sounds good, huh?).
The cowboy shooters have been cocking the SA with the off hand for some time now, and their speed is impressive and shows the potential of the technique.
My SA's get pressed into the SD role, usually because there along. Seems foolish to have two pistols, one for woods roaming, and another to strap on for the trip home. First choice, nah.....but better than nothing and still capable.
Obsolete does not always equate w/ ineffective or impractical.
I enjoyed the article. Always have liked Hacker's tone.
A quality SA like a Ruger offers a good bit more confidence than some of the budget autos, or any auto w/ a reliability problem. The old "6 for sure" thing. A cocked and leveled SA in a serious caliber is no laughing matter to the person its aimed at. (poor grammar, but it sounds good, huh?).
The cowboy shooters have been cocking the SA with the off hand for some time now, and their speed is impressive and shows the potential of the technique.
My SA's get pressed into the SD role, usually because there along. Seems foolish to have two pistols, one for woods roaming, and another to strap on for the trip home. First choice, nah.....but better than nothing and still capable.
Obsolete does not always equate w/ ineffective or impractical.