I love it when an FNG comes on board and proceeds to try and take our most respected member to task. @C.C. Baxter, you're out of your depth. I'll concede you have a better grasp of the topic than most but you're like the really smart student trying to debate the professor. Even when the professor explains why you're incorrect you won't let it go. Stop it. You're starting to embarrass yourself with established members. There's nothing you're ever going to say to convince me or almost everybody else that's been here more than a couple of months that you know more than our Professor Emeritus. On this forum @Iowegan is the G.O.A.T. and I'll take his advice/knowledge over anybody else's on anything having to do with the mechanics of Ruger revolvers. YMMV
81 - 96 of 96 Posts
Last I checked , everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if it disagrees with the prevailing wisdom and accepted norm. No need to bash anyone for having a different point of view.IMHO. Iowegan has considerable experience, but there are many "smiths" that work on SA's, perhaps their experience is/was different? I appreciate the explanation by Iowegan because he certainly understands the SA internals, Yet, I also understand what CC Baxter is saying too, that there is no documented evidence that the Ruger SA was designed to be loaded or carried that way, at least nothing readily available. So, we have an on going mystery. Is there any truly "original" manuals around or other documentation that supports either side. Darned if I know?
And the funny part is, my position is the accepted norm. I'd say that 95% of people out there load their Old Models with 5 for the reasons I've stated. Very very few people I've ever heard of say "lower the hammer between chambers." Not Ruger, and not many other people I've ever heard from.Last I checked , everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if it disagrees with the prevailing wisdom and accepted norm. No need to bash anyone for having a different point of view.IMHO. Iowegan has considerable experience, but there are many "smiths" that work on SA's, perhaps their experience is/was different? I appreciate the explanation by Iowegan because he certainly understands the SA internals, Yet, I also understand what CC Baxter is saying too, that there is no documented evidence that the Ruger SA was designed to be loaded or carried that way, at least nothing readily available. So, we have an on going mystery. Is there any truly "original" manuals around or other documentation that supports either side. Darned if I know?
"Iowegan has been here longer" doesn't mean he's right. Nothing I've said is incorrect, but I've also never said any one person shouldn't load their gun the way he says. I've just stated why I wouldn't, and why the majority of people, including Ruger, wouldn't.
At the end of the day we're just mucking it up and talking guns...Isn't that fun and what we're all here for?
Like so many things in this world, I don’t know what it’s for but I am not going to feel fulfilled until I have one.I have no idea what the relief cut in some cylinders is for? I have never found a clear, explanation that made sense. I often thought it had to do with "dry Firing", but I really do not know. Does anyone have definitive proof why there are relief cuts in the cylinder?
works for me!And the funny part is, my position is the accepted norm. I'd say that 95% of people out there load their Old Models with 5 for the reasons I've stated. Very very few people I've ever heard of say "lower the hammer between chambers." Not Ruger, and not many other people I've ever heard from.
"Iowegan has been here longer" doesn't mean he's right. Nothing I've said is incorrect, but I've also never said any one person shouldn't load their gun the way he says. I've just stated why I wouldn't, and why the majority of people, including Ruger, wouldn't.
At the end of the day we're just mucking it up and talking guns...Isn't that fun and what we're all here for?
I have two of Dougan,s books. I will need to read them again! Also a few others. I will try and find some more data!
Attachments
I finally dug out my old copy of the 1953 - 1963 "Know your Ruger Single Action Revolvers" by John C. Dougan. It's a great book if you can find a copy of it. Its publication date is 1981.
Just thought I'd post the pages that I found within the book that are relevant to this thread for future reference. Dougan doesn't really mention anything in the book related to loading, although the following are at the very beginning of the book on pages 2 and 3:
Outside of these two pages at the very beginning, Dougan only references the cylinders and "firing pin grooves" one other place in the book. It's in the "Single Six" section covering the convertibles. He's showing the 22 LR cylinder next to the WMR cylinder and notes the "firing pin groove" on the LR cylinder. The WMR cylinder of the same vintage doesn't have it.
There are also some photo copies of old manuals in the back of the book, dated to the late 1950s. They mention ammunition specs, etc., but unfortunately there is no mention of any loading techniques at all. Not sure of the book just doesn't have those pages or if they weren't part of the original manuals. I'd love to try to track one down if anyone has a copy.
I was able to track down the images of a manual from August 1959 on eBay. Pertinent pages are below. Of course there is no mention of "lowering the hammer between chambers," but surprisingly there is a mention of simply carrying all six in the quarter cock notch (safety notch). Obviously Ruger moved away from that philosophy into the 60s as later manuals simply state never do even that.
I think this is the missing mystery manual from the early days and it answers the question!
![Book Publication Font Paper Paper product]()
I think this is the missing mystery manual from the early days and it answers the question!
81 - 96 of 96 Posts
