Minor detail here, but it's refreshing for me to see an M1895 revolver with a rounded front sight, indicating it as a pre-1930's production. Much of media that features a Nagant revolver in a setting before WW2 often overlook this, resulting in anachronistic models with their angular front sights (e.g., Battlefield 1, Golden Kamuy).
In the Primer, it’s explained that the gun originally had an angular sight, and production was later switched to round, then switched back yet again later. Both are correct
Everyone focuses on the gas sealing, but I personally think they stuck with it for one of the other advantages... you literally can't fire the gun out of time. You'll never shave a projectile on the forcing cone, never have frame damage or excessive leading on the cone. If it's a little out, it's still shoving the nose of the cartridge into the cone for zero slop and perfect alignment. If it's a lot out, you can't cock the hammer, so it stops you from having a rapid unscheduled disassembly.
considering No3 was a top break with (not sure tho) automatic shell ejection, this was a downgrade unless you consider thr size and suppressing (which they sure considered)
"Ivan, here is new revolver." "... Is better than old revolver?" "Da, can take silencer. Boolit is of smaller, and reload time is longer" *Stares in illiterate peasant conscript *
@@danielwordsworth1843in terms of loading and unloading, but these were always supposed to be an officer's weapon, a weapon not likely to ever see any use.
@@Nukle0n Unless you count the scene in Enemy at the Gates where several officers were shooting enlisted men for trying to swim away from the boat, on their way into Stalingrad. For an actual historical account, I'd have to dig a little deeper.
They wanted to solve the gas sealing problem. They wanted to use disqualified rifle barrels from production for hand gun barrels. This specific single action was to be issued to soldiers and not officers as it eas considered that soldiers are irresponsible and will shoot all the ammo too quickly.
Only Russians can order single action guns for NCOs and same weapon in double action for officers. Did they counted that ranks would not frag officers if only having single action sidearm?
Those rounds look like modern PPU or Fiocchi loads. They fall free from my revolver as do my handloads. However, 1970's Soviet surplus is much hotter and the cases are difficult to remove. Commercial ammi clocked 650 tp 750 fps, while the surplus was aroind 900 fps.
I have heard of these but never seen one. I have an 1895 but my father had a nicer one that I sold after he passed with 1945 vintage ammo that was worth more than the gun at the time. I scored a spam can of ammo that was run up in the 70's. Corrosively primed but otherwise pretty clean.
Originally "double action" was a marketing term that was intended to distinguish a new generation of revolvers. Traditionally revolvers either could be fired by cocking the hammer and then pulling the trigger or, much more rarely, by simply pulling the trigger. The "double action" referred to the fact that the new revolvers could fire either way ie two actions in one revolver. Over the years though the original distinction became forgotten and people started calling guns that couldn't be cocked and only be fired by pulling the trigger as "double action only" and then simply "double action". So, to avoid confusion with the modern usage, this channel, and a lot of other writers, use the term "triple action" to describe the original meaning of the term "double action".
The look of a double action revolver without any benefit of a double action revolver...in 1895? Definitely a step backwards. No wonder many were converted. That single action hammer pull looked painful.
@@zerosmss Not you, Othias. Nobody calls a handgun capable of both single and double action fire "triple action." It's a made-up term, and a misleading one at that.
@@wernervoss6357 all terms are made up terms, and as I recall he's borrowing it from historical texts, Othais isn't the one who came up with triple action, he's just using it again
Mine must be the “triple action” as it works double action great with the 20 pound trigger pull. I can shoot about 14 shots before fatigue makes my hand hurt
They are still working on episodes but are currently being held up by the reproduction Colt-Root revolvers not exactly wanting to work, they discuss this quite a bit in the bimonthly podcast you get access to as a supporter.
Usually a DA revolver, if fired without cocking the hammer, performs two actions when you pull the trigger: 1) Cocks the hammer (brings it back) 2) Drops the hammer (striking the firing pin). I believe they call the Nagant "triple action" because the trigger performs _three_ functions: 1) Cocks the hammer. 2) Cams the cylinder forward to form a seal with the barrel. 3) Drops the hammer. DA revolvers usually have a trigger pull of 12-18lbs. The Nagant's trigger has to perform an additional action, so the trigger pull is something obscene like 25lbs. Imagine trying to shoot a 2.5lb revolver with a 25lb trigger pull accurately. Blech.
"Triple Action" is a term that C&Rsenal has coined to refer to any revolver that has single action and double action capabilities as compared to "single action" or "double action" because some "double action" revolvers are not capable of being fired in "single action".
@rdrrr I own one of these while the DA trigger is obscenely heavy compared to a lot of other DA revolvers, especially modern ones. It's really not that bad atleast for an average sized male. The girls may have a hard time with it though.
@@ztaylor0224 Can you shoot it reasonably accurately in DA mode? Of course you're capable of pulling the trigger but with that long, heavy, gritty trigger it must be pretty hard to shoot accurately.
I believe it’s referring to the fact that pulling the trigger does three things: moves the hammer back, rotates the cylinder, and forces the cylinder forward to seal the cartridge in the forcing cone. Or something like that. The nagant is a weird one, and shoots weird ammo.
@@clarkedawe3464 I thought they called the Nagant M1895 "triple action" because the trigger performs _three actions:_ 1) Cocks the hammer. 2) Cams the cylinder forward to form a perfect chamber seal. 3) Drops the hammer.
@@rdrrrbut don't these cam the cylinder forward when you cock the hammer too? So wouldn't that make them double action in this scheme? It's really not very logical.
Does Mae get to take home any of the firearms that she reviews? Imagine breaking into her house & getting smoked by a firearm that was made before her parents were even born.
I have one, I could be wrong but not sure if that counts as triple acrion. However, I could be wrong. Either way it is an odd sort when it comes to revolvers. Double action trigger pull is horrible.
Not going to lie. I cringe whenever you say "triple action." There's only two actions: cocking the hammer and releasing it. Single action, you thumb back the hammer, the trigger releases it. Double action: the trigger cocks and releases the hammer. There is no third option. Nobody calls a Beretta 92 or a Sig P220 a "triple action." The only possible exception is something like a Daewoo DP51 or a Browning Hi Power with the SFS, where there is some trickery involved in providing a single action-esque pull with the hammer beginning in the decocked position.
@@wernervoss6357 ...no... in a Paterson the trigger acomplishes only one action - to release the hammer. The other two actions are done manually by the thumb. In a triple action Nagant, the trigger is capable of doing all three actions - cocking, firing, and cycling the cylinder.
The release of the hammer is mechanically distinct when operated as single vs double. It’s essentially an attempt to clean up the awkward and non-standard distinctions people have come up with to distinguish revolvers capable of both with revolvers only capable of double. 1 + 2 = 3
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Minor detail here, but it's refreshing for me to see an M1895 revolver with a rounded front sight, indicating it as a pre-1930's production.
Much of media that features a Nagant revolver in a setting before WW2 often overlook this, resulting in anachronistic models with their angular front sights (e.g., Battlefield 1, Golden Kamuy).
It's hard to see but it appears to have a Tula arsenal marking, rather than the star, indicating Imperial Tsarist.
In the Primer, it’s explained that the gun originally had an angular sight, and production was later switched to round, then switched back yet again later. Both are correct
Everyone focuses on the gas sealing, but I personally think they stuck with it for one of the other advantages... you literally can't fire the gun out of time. You'll never shave a projectile on the forcing cone, never have frame damage or excessive leading on the cone. If it's a little out, it's still shoving the nose of the cartridge into the cone for zero slop and perfect alignment. If it's a lot out, you can't cock the hammer, so it stops you from having a rapid unscheduled disassembly.
"Our model 3s are obsolete, We need a modern pistol!" * adopts another obsolete revolver *
considering No3 was a top break with (not sure tho) automatic shell ejection, this was a downgrade
unless you consider thr size and suppressing (which they sure considered)
"Ivan, here is new revolver."
"... Is better than old revolver?"
"Da, can take silencer. Boolit is of smaller, and reload time is longer"
*Stares in illiterate peasant conscript *
@@notreallymyname3736 Had Hiram Maxim even INVENTED the suppressor yet?? (yes, THAT Hiram Maxim - the same guy who designed the Maxim machine gun....)
@@danielwordsworth1843in terms of loading and unloading, but these were always supposed to be an officer's weapon, a weapon not likely to ever see any use.
@@Nukle0n Unless you count the scene in Enemy at the Gates where several officers were shooting enlisted men for trying to swim away from the boat, on their way into Stalingrad. For an actual historical account, I'd have to dig a little deeper.
never tought of seeing this particular model on youtube.
great job as always
I have no idea what the Russians were thinking when they set out the specs for this gun
Sounds like a good excuse to watch the primer episode.
They wanted to solve the gas sealing problem.
They wanted to use disqualified rifle barrels from production for hand gun barrels.
This specific single action was to be issued to soldiers and not officers as it eas considered that soldiers are irresponsible and will shoot all the ammo too quickly.
They were buying essentially off-the-shelf; in that case, you've got Hobson's Choice.
Only Russians can order single action guns for NCOs and same weapon in double action for officers. Did they counted that ranks would not frag officers if only having single action sidearm?
"It's gotta stop a horse!" Army Procurement Offices c1890
Спасибо!
The fact that the casings fall out like that is pretty cool though
Those rounds look like modern PPU or Fiocchi loads. They fall free from my revolver as do my handloads. However, 1970's Soviet surplus is much hotter and the cases are difficult to remove. Commercial ammi clocked 650 tp 750 fps, while the surplus was aroind 900 fps.
Feels like forever since I last saw a minute with May. I blame ButTube!!!
More amazing work from the team, many thanks
Great Job Mae 🎉🎉🎉🎉
I have heard of these but never seen one. I have an 1895 but my father had a nicer one that I sold after he passed with 1945 vintage ammo that was worth more than the gun at the time. I scored a spam can of ammo that was run up in the 70's. Corrosively primed but otherwise pretty clean.
Triple Action? Did I miss a vid?
Capable of both single action and double action, Othais goes over this more in their revolver terminology video.
@zerosmss as sketchy as the DA trigger is on that gun I'm a bit surprised that the SA version has one no better.
@@zerosmss
Thank you!
@@dbmail545There's only so much you can do to make that trigger pull better when your lockwork has that much to do.
Originally "double action" was a marketing term that was intended to distinguish a new generation of revolvers. Traditionally revolvers either could be fired by cocking the hammer and then pulling the trigger or, much more rarely, by simply pulling the trigger. The "double action" referred to the fact that the new revolvers could fire either way ie two actions in one revolver.
Over the years though the original distinction became forgotten and people started calling guns that couldn't be cocked and only be fired by pulling the trigger as "double action only" and then simply "double action". So, to avoid confusion with the modern usage, this channel, and a lot of other writers, use the term "triple action" to describe the original meaning of the term "double action".
Great shootin' - thanks!😮💯💥👍!
The look of a double action revolver without any benefit of a double action revolver...in 1895? Definitely a step backwards. No wonder many were converted. That single action hammer pull looked painful.
These were issued to soldiers and sergeants, officers were issued double action revolvers
The only thing more painful the the single action hammer pull on an 1895 Nagant is its double action trigger pull.
@@StacheMan26 - true - but fear and adrenaline has a way of making any trigger pull manageable!
Lower Ranked were given the Single Action version of the Nagant 1895 in comparison to higher ranked since they got the D.A. Version
triple action?
Capable of both single action and double action, Othais goes over this more in their revolver terminology video.
@@zerosmssPretty sure he's wrong.
@@wernervoss6357 wrong about what?
@@zerosmss Not you, Othias. Nobody calls a handgun capable of both single and double action fire "triple action." It's a made-up term, and a misleading one at that.
@@wernervoss6357 all terms are made up terms, and as I recall he's borrowing it from historical texts, Othais isn't the one who came up with triple action, he's just using it again
Whoot whoot
Hunt Showdown here I come
Mine must be the “triple action” as it works double action great with the 20 pound trigger pull. I can shoot about 14 shots before fatigue makes my hand hurt
20lb actually isn't bad, I've seen a WWII production M1895 take a fish scale up to 49lbs before
Well it looks cool
Visions of Mae fleeing with Anastasia to a safe country in 1917.
I think these kinda videos should be called, "Mae's Minutes".
I have a 1945 production one and i love it.
When you can’t trust a conscript
Ah, a «soldier version».
Now i want to know if it's possible to fan this revolver
Mechanically yes, but it’d be difficult to actually do
Oh hey! I know him from my Video Games.
Any plans to finish the reprocussion series?
They are still working on episodes but are currently being held up by the reproduction Colt-Root revolvers not exactly wanting to work, they discuss this quite a bit in the bimonthly podcast you get access to as a supporter.
Bu kız harika
How do line up the sights? Top of the front with the too of the rear?
Triple action. That's a new term I learned today. I should go look that up.
Usually a DA revolver, if fired without cocking the hammer, performs two actions when you pull the trigger:
1) Cocks the hammer (brings it back)
2) Drops the hammer (striking the firing pin).
I believe they call the Nagant "triple action" because the trigger performs _three_ functions:
1) Cocks the hammer.
2) Cams the cylinder forward to form a seal with the barrel.
3) Drops the hammer.
DA revolvers usually have a trigger pull of 12-18lbs. The Nagant's trigger has to perform an additional action, so the trigger pull is something obscene like 25lbs.
Imagine trying to shoot a 2.5lb revolver with a 25lb trigger pull accurately. Blech.
@@rdrrr Doesn't sound like a good time.
"Triple Action" is a term that C&Rsenal has coined to refer to any revolver that has single action and double action capabilities as compared to "single action" or "double action" because some "double action" revolvers are not capable of being fired in "single action".
@rdrrr I own one of these while the DA trigger is obscenely heavy compared to a lot of other DA revolvers, especially modern ones. It's really not that bad atleast for an average sized male. The girls may have a hard time with it though.
@@ztaylor0224 Can you shoot it reasonably accurately in DA mode?
Of course you're capable of pulling the trigger but with that long, heavy, gritty trigger it must be pretty hard to shoot accurately.
Only the enlisted troops got the single action. The double action was reserved for officers.
RHIP
double action revolvers suck
In ww1 yes, by the revolution they were hall made triple action.
If you want details, just watch the full Primer episode. It’s all there
Arme BELGE fabriquée à Herstal par les frères Nagan..... et vendue au Tsar de Russie😊
What is triple action,,?
I believe it’s referring to the fact that pulling the trigger does three things: moves the hammer back, rotates the cylinder, and forces the cylinder forward to seal the cartridge in the forcing cone. Or something like that. The nagant is a weird one, and shoots weird ammo.
Some term they made up to describe a revolver doing both double and single action instead of just saying "double and single action".
Capable of both single action and double action, Othais goes over this more in their revolver terminology video.
@@clarkedawe3464 I thought they called the Nagant M1895 "triple action" because the trigger performs _three actions:_
1) Cocks the hammer.
2) Cams the cylinder forward to form a perfect chamber seal.
3) Drops the hammer.
@@rdrrrbut don't these cam the cylinder forward when you cock the hammer too? So wouldn't that make them double action in this scheme? It's really not very logical.
I have a double action version of this and the trigger pull is bad in single action and in double action is worse
Krag Pettersen rifle pleeease
If you have one to lend them they'd be more than happy to do a vid on it. They're extremely rare to the point even Ian hasn't done a vid on one.
@@ES90344 Ian was just at Royal Armouries, and I know they have a Krag Pettersen because I tweeted Jonathan Ferguson confirming its existence.
16th, 29 August 2024
I'm feeling kind of dumb now. What's triple action?
Capable of both single and double action operation. 1 + 2 = 3
I'll take 'baffling decisions from military procurement' for 200, Alex.
What means tripple action ?
All M1895s are single action only if your trigger finger is weak enough.
i think mae is doing most guns from Hunt: Showdown on purpose
This seems worse in every way than a Colt 20 years it's senior.
Rank and file
No wonder Russian commanders were so bad in WW1, the were too busy loading their Nagants
Clunky, as always
Bought one when they were 99 Rubles. Still regret it. Worthless wheel gun.
your smile after shooting seems a bit sadistic to me😆👹
Triple action sounds like the kind of saturday mornings I sometimes had in my late 20s.
Does Mae get to take home any of the firearms that she reviews?
Imagine breaking into her house & getting smoked by a firearm that was made before her parents were even born.
Most of them are loaners
It is double action, but it has a 15-20# trigger pull! I have had a couple over the years!😇
No, early on there were specific single action only variants
I have one, I could be wrong but not sure if that counts as triple acrion. However, I could be wrong. Either way it is an odd sort when it comes to revolvers. Double action trigger pull is horrible.
Capable of operation as single and double. 1 + 2 = 3
Not going to lie. I cringe whenever you say "triple action." There's only two actions: cocking the hammer and releasing it. Single action, you thumb back the hammer, the trigger releases it. Double action: the trigger cocks and releases the hammer. There is no third option. Nobody calls a Beretta 92 or a Sig P220 a "triple action." The only possible exception is something like a Daewoo DP51 or a Browning Hi Power with the SFS, where there is some trickery involved in providing a single action-esque pull with the hammer beginning in the decocked position.
The third action is rotating the cylinder; something not found in double action semi-autos, or in all revolvers.
@@judgeroybean6231By that logic, a Colt Paterson is a double action, as is the Nagant 1895 revolver featured in this video.
@@wernervoss6357 ...no... in a Paterson the trigger acomplishes only one action - to release the hammer. The other two actions are done manually by the thumb. In a triple action Nagant, the trigger is capable of doing all three actions - cocking, firing, and cycling the cylinder.
The release of the hammer is mechanically distinct when operated as single vs double. It’s essentially an attempt to clean up the awkward and non-standard distinctions people have come up with to distinguish revolvers capable of both with revolvers only capable of double. 1 + 2 = 3
The Nagant IS THE WORST PISTOL EVER MADE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!