Nakanokalronin
New member
Sounds good Ozzieman....however I'll just leave alittle bit of Jack Weaver here as well...
SA self defense article in American Rifleman
- Thread starter BudAtDuke
- Start date
You can't honestly say that Jerry Miculik is not on the top list of revolver pros, are you?
No, not on the top list of pros,,,,, Mr Kiculik is GOD with a N frame!
And yes I have seen him shoot,,, in real life. The amazing thing about him is that he is not just a good FAST shot,,,, he is a nice man that likes people.
Wish I could say I have shaken his hand.
No, not on the top list of pros,,,,, Mr Kiculik is GOD with a N frame!
And yes I have seen him shoot,,, in real life. The amazing thing about him is that he is not just a good FAST shot,,,, he is a nice man that likes people.
Wish I could say I have shaken his hand.
Elmer Keith's off-hand was severely screwed up as a young man. Both burned and broken as I recall. At one point he deliberately re-broke it to put it into a better state, with no doctor involved. He never regained 100% use of it and to my knowledge was not much good shooting off-hand. Surprisingly the "home remedy" seems to have actually helped.
This is not to dismiss him at ALL, rather I'm pointing out that he may have had to do some funky stuff to adapt that we might not necessarily want to emulate.
This is not to dismiss him at ALL, rather I'm pointing out that he may have had to do some funky stuff to adapt that we might not necessarily want to emulate.
Somebody asked about my holster in private. More details:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=410544
It was influenced by the Ted Blocker CC1 designed by the late Bill Grover:
http://www.tedblockerholsters.com/product.cfm?pi=5C89D10E-0FB8-C3D9-74D157928572DFB9
Galco also has a version:
http://www.usgalco.com/HolsterPT3.asp?ProductID=3905&CatalogID=4
While mine can't "flip" like Bill's design, I have a ton of adjustments available for both ride height and tilt angle and like Bill's, I can take the holster on and off without unbuckling my belt - although I get there a different way. For the record, I stared long and hard at the Blocker CC1 before designing mine, but I would call it "influence" more than "clone".
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=410544
It was influenced by the Ted Blocker CC1 designed by the late Bill Grover:
http://www.tedblockerholsters.com/product.cfm?pi=5C89D10E-0FB8-C3D9-74D157928572DFB9
Galco also has a version:
http://www.usgalco.com/HolsterPT3.asp?ProductID=3905&CatalogID=4
While mine can't "flip" like Bill's design, I have a ton of adjustments available for both ride height and tilt angle and like Bill's, I can take the holster on and off without unbuckling my belt - although I get there a different way. For the record, I stared long and hard at the Blocker CC1 before designing mine, but I would call it "influence" more than "clone".
Nakanokalronin
New member
Quote from link to Jerry Miculik's revolver grip for those who don't want to read it, not to start a friendly squabble again :
:
Like asking Dad to re-break your fingers in hopes of getting better use of them. I'm to understand that they were all (up to that point) permanently bent back away from the palm.
I have. It's like shaking hands with Thor, except without the long, flowing hair. Or the hammer. Oh, and much more down-to-earth. He's a true gentleman, and very patient with questions he must have answered a million times before.
As far as the weak-hand finger in front of the trigger guard, I've never known an instructor who advocates it, and there are many who do their best to break the habit. The general rule of thumb I was taught is that you shouldn't have any fingers ahead of the breech besides the trigger finger.
There's also a question of safety if the weak-hand index finger should slip into the trigger guard. This was the explanation given by a couple of RSO's I've spoken with over the years who will cry foul at the practice.
From a technique standpoint, I feel that putting the finger there causes unnecessary stretching of the muscles in the weak hand, and it does weaken the grip and tire the shooter out faster. There's also something to be said for sympathetic reflex steering the trigger finger, as one previous poster mentioned.
Honestly, I can't think of a good reason to do this, but I'm open to suggestions.
Back to my other point, drawing from retention and cycling a single-action with only the strong hand is acceptable? I just found the Gunsite method to be a bit odd.
drawing from retention and cycling a single-action with only the strong hand is acceptable?
Drawing yes, for second shots, The reason I was taught to pull the hammer with the weak thumb on a single action is that 1. It’s not doing anything at the time, 2 it’s faster since you don’t have to change your strong hand grip on the gun and 3 you don’t have to change your strong hand on the gun 4 you can keep the sights on target easier.
I suggest we all stop arguing about the weak index finger on the trigger guard, no one is going to agree with any ones opposite opinion. And the safety concerns are not proven with any kind of documented proof for ALL GUNS.
Drawing yes, for second shots, The reason I was taught to pull the hammer with the weak thumb on a single action is that 1. It’s not doing anything at the time, 2 it’s faster since you don’t have to change your strong hand grip on the gun and 3 you don’t have to change your strong hand on the gun 4 you can keep the sights on target easier.
I suggest we all stop arguing about the weak index finger on the trigger guard, no one is going to agree with any ones opposite opinion. And the safety concerns are not proven with any kind of documented proof for ALL GUNS.
Ironic. Keith convinced Cooper with that magic gun rag quill that a pistol that was outdated 50-70 years prior was the preferred weapon for combat, then Cooper is guilty of doing the same thing for the subsequent generation.
There were quite a few of the WWII types still convinced that the weapons of the 1800s were superior to what they carried. Several generals carried SAAs. All the men in the know claimed that small bore .30 rounds couldn't knock a man down and only the 45/70 was fit for combat. Amazing what gun rags can do.
HighValleyRanch
New member
Some reloading time experiments
This thread got me wondering what the real world differences might be in the SA reloading. Sure it is coming to come in last , but how much slower?
Thinking that any reloading is going to be during (hopefully!LOL) a lull or behind cover, does ten seconds count?
I am only average as far as speed, and I haven't practiced the SA reloading until today for speed, so I might be a fair guinea pig.
Here are the results.
All reloading is from a real life senario that my mag, speed loader or speed strip will be in my pants pocket, just to be fair to all three tests.
I pretended that I went empty, and then hit my watch timer, and went through the process of ejecting casings or reload a mag.
Here are the times I came up with. You can try these at home yourself, but be sure everything is safe!!!!!
Glock reload from pocket, average 5 to 7 seconds.
.38 spl Colt revolver with HK speed loader with six round nose loaded.
Pretty much right on 7 seconds every time.
Hawes single action with half cock rotating only. Maybe a Ruger would have been faster without having to go to half cock?
Ejecting took average of 7 seconds.
Ejecting and loading from a speed strip in my pocket (speed strip was loaded two and two, so only four rounds reloaded)
Fastest time was 15 seconds and average was easily 17 seconds.
No, I did not try it in the dark, but it was possible to reload slower with my eyes close.
So we are talking about only a difference of ten seconds to get back into some sort of action! Maybe not the most realistic, but it is a starting point of conversation. I was surprised that it was that small a difference, because I assumed it would be more like a minute.
This thread got me wondering what the real world differences might be in the SA reloading. Sure it is coming to come in last , but how much slower?
Thinking that any reloading is going to be during (hopefully!LOL) a lull or behind cover, does ten seconds count?
I am only average as far as speed, and I haven't practiced the SA reloading until today for speed, so I might be a fair guinea pig.
Here are the results.
All reloading is from a real life senario that my mag, speed loader or speed strip will be in my pants pocket, just to be fair to all three tests.
I pretended that I went empty, and then hit my watch timer, and went through the process of ejecting casings or reload a mag.
Here are the times I came up with. You can try these at home yourself, but be sure everything is safe!!!!!
Glock reload from pocket, average 5 to 7 seconds.
.38 spl Colt revolver with HK speed loader with six round nose loaded.
Pretty much right on 7 seconds every time.
Hawes single action with half cock rotating only. Maybe a Ruger would have been faster without having to go to half cock?
Ejecting took average of 7 seconds.
Ejecting and loading from a speed strip in my pocket (speed strip was loaded two and two, so only four rounds reloaded)
Fastest time was 15 seconds and average was easily 17 seconds.
No, I did not try it in the dark, but it was possible to reload slower with my eyes close.
So we are talking about only a difference of ten seconds to get back into some sort of action! Maybe not the most realistic, but it is a starting point of conversation. I was surprised that it was that small a difference, because I assumed it would be more like a minute.
Fastest reload I've figured out is, use fully loaded six-shot speed strips. What you do is, you grab all six rounds between thumb and forefinger and yank the strip off all six at once with your teeth. Yeah, seriously. You're only fighting the tension of one round at a time, it's not so crazy.
Then all six are in perfect position for feeding.
Then all six are in perfect position for feeding.
In the end, it's all about what you want to carry, and knowing how to use it.
Each has it's advantages and disadvantages.
I've defended the SA as a SD gun, and truly believe that it's up to the task when the shooter knows how to use it.
Would the same shooter be better off with a semi-auto? Maybe. Most semi-autos these days have a higher capacity than a revolver. That's an advantage in some situations, but probably not too many.
If I didn't live in an area known for heavy drug and human smuggling, I'd likely still be carrying a revolver of one flavor or another. Since I do live in such an area, the idea of 27 rounds with one reload seems better than 15 or 18 with two reloads.
Carry what you will, and heaven forbid we're ever forced to use it.
Daryl
Each has it's advantages and disadvantages.
I've defended the SA as a SD gun, and truly believe that it's up to the task when the shooter knows how to use it.
Would the same shooter be better off with a semi-auto? Maybe. Most semi-autos these days have a higher capacity than a revolver. That's an advantage in some situations, but probably not too many.
If I didn't live in an area known for heavy drug and human smuggling, I'd likely still be carrying a revolver of one flavor or another. Since I do live in such an area, the idea of 27 rounds with one reload seems better than 15 or 18 with two reloads.
Carry what you will, and heaven forbid we're ever forced to use it.
Daryl
I used a Ruger .45 Blackhawk for SD for more than 15 years simply because it was the only gun I ever had which went BANG! every time I pulled the trigger. Yes, I carried it - not concealed carry, but I always found a way (briefcase, lunchbox, glove box, etc.).
You young guys may laugh, but a reliable gun is the only gun for me.
Plus, the .45 Colt round filled me with confidence. I felt I only needed one good shot, and this attitude made me be careful and quick.
Only this year - when my arthritic fingers made reloading the SA too much trouble - did I sell my last Blackhawk.
Don't sell the single action short.
You young guys may laugh, but a reliable gun is the only gun for me.
Plus, the .45 Colt round filled me with confidence. I felt I only needed one good shot, and this attitude made me be careful and quick.
Only this year - when my arthritic fingers made reloading the SA too much trouble - did I sell my last Blackhawk.
Don't sell the single action short.
I don't think that single action revolvers are the best choice for defense guns if other options are available. However, in the hands of a skilled user they can no doubt do the job.
Guns and shooting are very much gear based "latest is greatest" hobbies. For most of us a defensive gun is something of a security blanket; great to have available and makes us feel better, but not something that is going to actually be used "for real". A lot of us (and I'm guilty of it too) spend a lot of time worrying or otherwise thinking about our defensive gun choices and wondering if we are carrying "enough".
Single actions don't seem like "enough" to a lot of us, they are slow to load, they have a limited capacity, and for all but the most skilled they are slower into action than other systems.
On the other hand, the system is proven, reliable, and SA revolvers are often chambered for cartridges that can throw big, heavy bullets fast. All guns have advantages and disadvantages, the Single Action is no different.
My department wouldn't approve a SA revolver for carry. If they would, I wouldn't feel ill armed with something along the lines of a .44 Special Blackhawk off-duty.
Guns and shooting are very much gear based "latest is greatest" hobbies. For most of us a defensive gun is something of a security blanket; great to have available and makes us feel better, but not something that is going to actually be used "for real". A lot of us (and I'm guilty of it too) spend a lot of time worrying or otherwise thinking about our defensive gun choices and wondering if we are carrying "enough".
Single actions don't seem like "enough" to a lot of us, they are slow to load, they have a limited capacity, and for all but the most skilled they are slower into action than other systems.
On the other hand, the system is proven, reliable, and SA revolvers are often chambered for cartridges that can throw big, heavy bullets fast. All guns have advantages and disadvantages, the Single Action is no different.
My department wouldn't approve a SA revolver for carry. If they would, I wouldn't feel ill armed with something along the lines of a .44 Special Blackhawk off-duty.
seeker_two
New member
Is a .357Mag/.41Mag/.44SPL/.44Mag/.45LC/.45ACP/etc. any less effective coming out of the barrel of a SA revolver than from a DA revolver?..... 
The short answer is "No".
It is not a function of the action, the one thing for sure that would possibly affect accuracy or speed, . . . the space between the cylinder and the forcing cone. It can more or less be predicted that cheaper guns (SA and DA) will have a greater space, . . . giving greater release of gasses, etc.
Accuracy would probably be affected more, but it is only on a gun by gun assessment.
But you have to remember that we truly are splitting hairs here in that statement. Either one will do well for hunting, SD, HD, or pleasure shooting.
May God bless,
Dwight
CarbineCaleb
New member
HighValleyRanch said:
I've used the same technique on a DA revolver to fire in SA mode.
Also when you draw from belt holster, if you drop your thumb on the hammer when the gun is low, it naturally cocks when the gun is thrust forward and up.
Single action is not ideal, IMO, but it's not nearly as slow as some people say.
To add insult to injury I just fired my S&W M57 41 mag alongside my Ruger old army shooting 30 gr of FFFg and round ball at 25 yards. The single action black powder gun had half the group size of the 41 mag. Hits count, missed don't, doesn't matter what the action is. It was a good day today except for the mosquitoes but I really didn't expect these results. Might be a little smoky inside the house and might not have the same amount of punch as the modern gun but the old single action is definitely a viable defensive tool if that's all you have handy.