Swing out revolvers
- Thread starter Doc Hoy
- Start date
Flipping the cylinder open is going to be more "dangerous" than flipping it closed. The weight of the cylinder would act to twist the crane as the assembly comes to a stop.
Flipping it closed is sort of like letting the slide slam shut on an empty chamber in an auto pistol, in that the gun is supposed to work that way, but the excess forces applied to all of the associated parts is greater than necessary.
Flipping it closed is sort of like letting the slide slam shut on an empty chamber in an auto pistol, in that the gun is supposed to work that way, but the excess forces applied to all of the associated parts is greater than necessary.
Claude Clay
New member
look along the turn-line, if you notice dings outside the scalloped area chance is it has been wrist flipped. so besides stressing the cranes, it stress the bolt and causes additional mars along the turn-line.
Bogarting closed shouldnt damage the crane. I will often times do it with my 686+ out of convenience not style. IMO its similar to slingshoting a 1911. Flicking/bogarting open leaves the crane in a bad position. Probably would still be fine with fired ammo. You have to push the cartridges out anyway so I dont see a good reason to open by flicking.
I've been performing that same test since the 1980s on my Redhawk and GP100. I had always heard Rugers were more durable, so I guess its a good thing I never got one of those dainty high dollar guns. If the guns don't last longer than I do, I will be sure to post it.
I'm not a sad guy, but I do want to appear tough.
I agree with RickB. The potential for damage is greater in flipping it open.
I would treat old collector pieces a little more gingerly than modern work guns, though.
From the OP
When I first posed this question I was somewhat certain the answers I would get.
Owners don't like to do it to their pistols, and they don't like it when others do it to their pistols. They don't flick pistols that belong to other folks. An experienced handler simply does not do it.
But you have to look long and hard for definitive evidence that it will damage a revolver (Of course it is harder on a revolver than handling it gently, just as Plus P rounds exert more force than light loads) or to find a revolver that has damage which can clearly be declared to have been caused by this behavior. At least this is what people (admittedly not all people) seem to be saying. The negative reaction to the practice seems to be as much driven by the behavior itself. It looks cowboyish, disrespectful, and sophomoric.
I don't know what the tests are like that Smith and Wesson or Colt perform on their revolvers and revolver designs but my sense is that at some point this kind of abuse is meted out on the revolver just to see how it stands up.
When I first posed this question I was somewhat certain the answers I would get.
Owners don't like to do it to their pistols, and they don't like it when others do it to their pistols. They don't flick pistols that belong to other folks. An experienced handler simply does not do it.
But you have to look long and hard for definitive evidence that it will damage a revolver (Of course it is harder on a revolver than handling it gently, just as Plus P rounds exert more force than light loads) or to find a revolver that has damage which can clearly be declared to have been caused by this behavior. At least this is what people (admittedly not all people) seem to be saying. The negative reaction to the practice seems to be as much driven by the behavior itself. It looks cowboyish, disrespectful, and sophomoric.
I don't know what the tests are like that Smith and Wesson or Colt perform on their revolvers and revolver designs but my sense is that at some point this kind of abuse is meted out on the revolver just to see how it stands up.
I think they did try it. Some folks might not be aware of it, but at one time, S&W had a spring and plunger in the crane for the specific purpose of putting a brake on crane movement. Whether that was to slow "flipping" or to keep an open cylinder in position for loading, I don't know. But that was eliminated, I think during or after WWII. It seems logical that S&W found that damage to the crane or frame was not significant enough to warrant the cost and trouble of installing the plunger. (Colt never had it at all.)
But actual damage to the gun is rather irrelevant to the true believers on the issue. Even a mention of "flipping" arouses such virulent passion as to result in, if not actual threats, at least the urging of grievous bodily harm for those who would engage in such an evil action. It seems that "flipping" is right up there with drawing pictures of The Prophet as a way of arousing folks, so maybe some of us need armed guards
Jim
But actual damage to the gun is rather irrelevant to the true believers on the issue. Even a mention of "flipping" arouses such virulent passion as to result in, if not actual threats, at least the urging of grievous bodily harm for those who would engage in such an evil action. It seems that "flipping" is right up there with drawing pictures of The Prophet as a way of arousing folks, so maybe some of us need armed guards
Jim
Armed guards . . . who don't flip their cylinders open and closed?
I was watching a movie the other night, in which a meek/mild character is revealed to be an expert pistolero via his flipping open and closed the cylinder on a revolver.
It reminded me how often movie and TV characters are established as weapons experts via their portrayal of dangerous, or, at least, less-than-optimum gunhandling?
Sweeping everyone while spinning the gun, hip-shooting, dropping the slide on an empty chamber, flipping the cylinder open and closed, using the gun as a pointer with their finger on the trigger, etc.; we're exposed to it all the time.
I was watching a movie the other night, in which a meek/mild character is revealed to be an expert pistolero via his flipping open and closed the cylinder on a revolver.
It reminded me how often movie and TV characters are established as weapons experts via their portrayal of dangerous, or, at least, less-than-optimum gunhandling?
Sweeping everyone while spinning the gun, hip-shooting, dropping the slide on an empty chamber, flipping the cylinder open and closed, using the gun as a pointer with their finger on the trigger, etc.; we're exposed to it all the time.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"But actual damage to the gun is rather irrelevant to the true believers on the issue. Even a mention of "flipping" arouses such virulent passion as to result in, if not actual threats, at least the urging of grievous bodily harm for those who would engage in such an evil action. It seems that "flipping" is right up there with drawing pictures of The Prophet as a way of arousing folks, so maybe some of us need armed guards."
Yeah, I'm very well known for going full geehawdi bomb thrower and lopping the heads off the infidels who abuse MY property by treating it in such a callous and disrespectful manner.
It's not been definitively proven that wrist flicking will cause damage.
At the same time, it has not been definitively DISPROVEN, either.
You treat me and my property with care and respect, and I'll treat you and your property with care and respect.
Is that REALLY so much to ask for?
Yeah, I'm very well known for going full geehawdi bomb thrower and lopping the heads off the infidels who abuse MY property by treating it in such a callous and disrespectful manner.
It's not been definitively proven that wrist flicking will cause damage.
At the same time, it has not been definitively DISPROVEN, either.
You treat me and my property with care and respect, and I'll treat you and your property with care and respect.
Is that REALLY so much to ask for?
Come on Mike, you know you want to... 
Go ahead....Do it!Mike Irwin
Staff
Actually, I don't.
I, personally, consider it to be abusive of the gun and shows a monumental lack of knowledge and understanding of an expensive object.
I, personally, consider it to be abusive of the gun and shows a monumental lack of knowledge and understanding of an expensive object.