...asked and answered.
And empirically so, as a good scientist should do.
Well, I think they are answered. I don't own a Ruger Redhawk, nor a Super Redhawk, but I think I can answer the questions anyway.
Hokay, kids, so here's the problem. It is technically possible to fan a single-action revolver. Now, I'll grant the idea of laying down a lot of firepower, but six don't much do that in my mind. Still, I'll grant the concept. But having just played with my 1851 Navy SA revolver (I don't have an 1873 SA Army, though I'd like to) I don't think it's useful to do so.
But to the meat of the post:
As I mentioned, I don't own a Ruger Redhawk (or Super Redhawk) but I think the argument still applies. For one thing, I don't think it's possible to fan, without doing major (and painful) damage to one's hand, a DA revolver. Just the shape of the hammer would rule that out.
Beyond that, I have to assume that the Ruger DAs and the Smith and Wesson DAs are similarly configured (I don't know that this is so, but it's likely). As it happens, I own a S&W DA revolver, in .44 Mag. So I pulled it out and played with it. It seems that, if the trigger is not held back, cocking the hammer will revolve the cylinder to the next cartridge and be ready to shoot.
HOWEVER: After that first shot (which, BTW, is necessarily either DA or "cock, then pull the trigger"), if one holds back the trigger and attempts to "fan" the revolver (which, empirically, hurts like hell on the left hand) the hammer goes back and falls on the previously fired shell casing, it does not revolve the cylinder to the next cartridge. I don't have detailed knowledge of the revolver's mechanism but after firing, if one does not release the trigger, cocking and releasing the hammer does NOT move the cylinder.
Bottom Line: If one tries to "fan" a DA revolver, (1) the first shot is necessarily DA (or at least, "cock then shoot" SA), and (2) "fanning" in the usual sense is impossible, because you will be dropping the hammer on an expended cartridge.
Iz out!
2 months ago
4 comments:
No argument about the many reasons why fanning a revolver is not a good idea, Ken. There's a reason why the original M16 was full auto, and the latest versions (M16A2) has a three round burst mode.
But I recall reading of the concept in old magazines. Either this is a very old "urban legend" perpetuated by pulp magazines and Hollywood, or there is a core element of truth in the story.
And I commend your devotion to the scientific method!
Rats! I meant to type "(M16A2 and M16A4)".
Well, could be a core element of truth. My guess, though, is that is probably originated with Bret Harte or a compatriot dime-novelist. God love 'em, they wrote fun stories but not historically accurate ones.
Like, much as I love "Big Iron", that kind of "meet in the street" just didn't really happen.
Whew...maybe it's just because I'm more of a shotgun/rifle guy, but when I read "revolver fanning" for a second there I figured that was an actor and you had gone all tabloid on us. ;)
Post a Comment