Why Smith and Wesson's Revolver "Safety" Action is Superior to Taurus, Ruger and Others
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 окт 2024
- Showing the S&W hammer block safety VS the Taurus, Colt, Charter Arms and Ruger transfer bar safety and explaining why I think S&W is superior. Always appreciative of any channel help :) www.patreon.co...
![Gunna - HIM ALL ALONG [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HiCxoDeo0hc/mqdefault.jpg)
I want to point out that I am not saying that the S&W revolvers in and of themselves are better than Ruger or any other brand, I am just saying that the design of the action makes more sense for reliability. I do carry a Ruger LCR as my EDC without concern. My video is sort of like if I said, "the reason why leather holsters are better than Kydex" and listed a bunch of reasons.
When I say "superior", this does not suggest that other designs don't work. I kind of got that impression from people that they think I am saying S&W works and Ruger doesn't work. Not what I am saying at all. Within two or three GOOD designs, there can be something that is superior even if all work just fine.
I'd say that's what Taurii are for, the folks who are going to put a box of ammo a year through it. I own a few Smiths, and while my EDC is a Taurus, I'm not going to make a PPC gun out of one. 06:25 I'm also not a fan of the factory installed stress riser notch in the hammer strut on the 856. I swapped in a solid one out of an 85, and bobbed the hammer to make it DA only, so the interference with the trigger strut when cocked SA is moot.
Excellent explanation. Very few channels do actual mechanical breakdowns, but if you do more, I bet your viewers will like them.
Thank you. I am not great with technical stuff other than revolvers. Wasn't but two years ago someone explained to me what the difference between blowback and gas operated was lol.
@@GunSam that response says a lot about you that’s admirable. 👍🏻
I’ve been carrying/shooting S&W revolvers over 50 yrs and never really understood how they worked, just knew I had a ton of confidence in them. Thanks for another well thought out lesson for this old man
Thanks for watching! LRN for the WIN. Half the time!
Ditto.
Never really understood the purpose of the transfer bar. But after watching this video and looking at my sp101 definitely made more appreciative about YT and the individual who spend their time helping others.
Thanks you sir for your detailed explanation and the differences between the 2.
Thank you. Now I understand the difference between the 2 designs because you actually showed how they function. You are greatly appreciated.
Thank you
Many think that the older S&W with hammer mounted firing pin arent drop safe. But that is not true. They also have the hammer block. I dont know exactly but S&W at least from 1950ies are drop safe.
Yes and I like it better than a floating frame mounted firing pin with a little spring.
Hmmm - interesting. I didn't know this until now. I have a couple of Tauruses and Rugers, with only a few hundred rounds through each of them... This makes me glad I got a S&W 686; my dependable zombie apocalypse gun!
I think Taurus design is more reliable in the snow and ice inside action conditions. The Taurus firing block can push out excess of the snow or ice building inside the action. S&W will get ice and snow buildup inside the action will get stuck to the point where hammer can not get to a firing pin due to a snow and ice blocking the way ( also pocket dust - lint can play a role )
Interesting point, thanks for sharing.
This is a very unique and important topic, thanks for discussing it.
Thanks for watching.
Really good video. We were having these conversations in the 70s and 80s, and I even recall writings of one experienced gun writer who’s still around today singing the praises of a S&W action over a Ruger Security Six - and he may have been writing an article about some flavor of Ruger DA revolver. In their defense, Ruger Speed and Security Six actions tended to smooth out decently the more they were cycled, but still not the same as a S&W. S&W vs Colt is another matter best left up to the taste of the wheel gunner - but a particular run of Colt Troopers and Border Patrol models that came new-in-box with innovative 19-pound DA pulls is worthy of mention. I’m actually surprised that Taurus was that much different than Smith because I was under the impression that Taurus originally manufactured revolver under license from S&W, and because most of their revolving cylinder line still resembles S&W revolvers.
Yeah I recall that, sometime in the 70s or 80s or whatever, Taurus was making some S&W's, contract was up, S&W didn't want their machines back so Taurus just used them to make their own stuff. I don't know, maybe 40 years ago Taurus used a different design. The side plates are near identical now so I could see how the main cutouts of the frame and side plate could be the same, just slightly different internal cuts and nubs.
I've had a ruger 41 mag with a transfer bar since I bought it new in 82. Never had a problem with it. Have a great day.
I had a few Rugers that were fine as well. They seem well made.
This is the best description of a S&W revolver's safety mechanism (ditto Taurus) that I've ever seen, and presented in an easily understood format. Well done indeed! I've owned S&W revolvers since I was 20 years old (sooo ... 35 years now, as of a couple weeks ago, LOL). I've shot Smiths, Colts, Taurus, Ruger, Charter Arms, et al. and to me the S&W is always the best. That's mostly subjective, of course, and each has its merits and negatives (Colts, for instance, have bank-vault tight lockup but at the expense of putting pressure on the pawl meaning they're more likely to go out of time).
Thank you
I've got S&W and Rugers. only ever had to return the S&W's to get worked on. Both times failure to fire, twice a 686 and once a 629, both started with double action failure and progressed into single act failures. Had 2 Taurus, 44m went back 3 times for failure to advance cylinder and to lock in battery. Taurus 357 barrel had scratches in bottom of rifling grooves from a stainless steel bush, soft meta, both gone.. I only trust Rugers to use some hot 357 reloads, and then only the six cylinder model. My 686 started having cylinder advance issue, ok with factory ammo.
I have sent in a S&W once and a Ruger once, both for reasons sort of caused by myself. The Ruger was my LCR that I disassembled, and for whatever reason I could not get it back together correctly. The S&W was for a similar issue, but it was with my Governor and something just wasn't right with the ejector spring. Never had a real issue with either brand and I have owned quite a few of both brands.
Over 40 years of shooting and IMO Ruger makes the most durable (especially for heavy loads) revolvers.
Excellent Video and explanation of Hammer strike vs hammer bar. I do enjoy your videos. As an experienced shooter, I know most of what you show/explain. However, every once in a while I learn something new. Keep up the excellent work!
Thanks!
@@GunSam Welcome
Great video very informative and I'm a big Smith and Wesson revolver fan. I have owned colts, Ruger, Rossi I sold everything but the Smith and Wesson guns. I just like Smith guns looks and feel N Frame and L Frame are my favorite guns.
My daily carry is my S&W 637 Airweight. I like to practice a lot and over the past 10 years have fired in excess of 15,000 rounds of hand cast and hand loaded standard pressure round nose lead ammo through it. At around 9,000 rounds the factory boot grips cracked and came loose from the frame, so I replaced the grips. Also at around this point, I switched over to appendix carry and bobbed the hammer to make it more comfortable on my belly. At around 12,000 rounds the Hillary hole lock mechanism broke loose inside and completely jammed the action. I removed it. At 14,000 rounds the firing pin broke and I had to replace it. But I've never had any hammer block safety issues.
On the other hand, 6 years ago I bought a Taurus Single Action Army clone with a transfer bar safety mechanism. Part way through the second cylinder full of 45 Colt cowboy loads, the transfer bar broke and "transfered" the revolver into an expensive paperweight.
I have three other Taurus revolvers that have performed perfectly over many hundreds of rounds, but I always wonder when, and if, a transfer bar is going to break...
That's just what i was going to ask about, the absurd S&W hillary hole locks, and whether they ever do break, or if it's just rumors. Well, you answered that question!
@@leaonardland9001 The Hillary Hole will eventually break, but in fairness only after many thousands of rounds that very few revolvers will ever see. In my case the tiny lock mechanism fell in and bound up the revolver's lockwork making it totally non-op.
Once at my workbench I removed the broken bits and simply plugged the H Hole, then went back to carrying and shooting the 637. I also took that opportunity to bob the hammer spur.
@@paulkleinkramer5065 The times i've had one of those stupid things i was proactive and did what u did to the hh, and i've also bobbed hammers.
@@leaonardland9001 It was smart too get the Hilary Hole out of there right away. It's of no benefit and only a risk of failure to fire. I don't own any other Smith with a HH but if I did, I'd remove it right away.
@@paulkleinkramer5065 I'd never buy another one with it. Besides that, S&W quality isn't what it used to be.
Excellent video here. Thank you for sharing 👍🏻🤠
@GunSam I am currently enrolled @SDI taking classes. This video is very, very helpful. I also wanted you to know that I thoroughly enjoy your ammo tests. I know where to go when I need reliable information concerning REVOLVERS. Thanks for your work. #fistbump
This makes me glad I bought a 686-6 instead of a GP101
I really appreciate the revolver content.
Good explanation!
I attended the S&W LEO armorer's course, along with Colt, Glock, Remington and Ruger.
I too prefer S&W revolvers and own a 686 and a 25-5 (.45 LC).
Transfer Bar created by Charter Arms. Some DA pistols have basically transfer blocks that roll or move up into place.
Iver Johnson sold the Safety Automatic revolver beginning in 1905, and it wasn't the first revolver with a transfer bar...much older than the Charter Arms company.
Thanks for the great explanation of the two systems.
New colt cobra has had 2 broken trigger return springs, pressed in firing pin bushing fell out and a broken hammer "hook" (where the hammer spring stirrup attaches to the hamme)
Ruger LCR broken trigger return spring
Ruger sp101 excessive cylinder gap.
Ruger gp100 misaligned barrel.
I have a dozen smith and wesson revolvers and have had one firing pin break.
The most important factor is "SMITH AND WESSON SELLS PARTS".
With every other revolver manufacturer, if you break anything other than a spring, you have to send the gun in.
Yeah I even had to use a S&W J-frame cylinder screw on a Taurus small frame where the screw broke completely, had to dig it out and turn it carefully. To my surprise the threads were identical on the S&W screw, at least identical enough there was no stripping.
Bought my first Ruger during the Carter Administration and have put thousands of rounds through it since with never a problem. Nor have I had any trouble with any of the Rugers over the years since. Never owned a Taurus so can't comment on that, though have owned a bunch of Charter arms with no trouble. JMHO I think you over blowing the unreliability of the transfer bar system.
Having said all that WHAT A GREAT VIDEO! Well done thanks
I don't think having one snap, then having another one snap and having a lot of people tell me they have had them snap, is overblowing based on just your experience.
I’ve been happy with my Colts. Zero issues. But I have experienced a broken transfer bar with a few of my Taurus. Last one was on a 608, locked the whole thing up till I could get home and get the side plate off. Needless to say my Taurus revolver collection has been diminishing over the last few years.
Good to know! I have a 608 and I'm starting to wonder about its reliability...
Well good thing I got a Smith. I’ve never been much of a revolver guy till recently. But I’ve always heard that S&W is the best for the money. Especially, for like .44 mag and under.
Thank you Sam, you have shown me here why I have always preferred Smith & Like shooting Smith's.
Excellent video. I won't do Taurus anymore. Had two out of three break on me. Never had a Smith or Ruger do that. I prefer Smith for the lockwork and action smoothness. Ruger's uses investment casting for a lot of their parts which is a lot stronger than the Taurus casting. They cost more but you are paying for your quality control on the front end rather than the back end as with Taurus.
Even my Manhurin mr73, have the Hammer block instead of the transfer bar, also because they have the barbed firing pin on the hammer
I knew most of this BUT it's always nice to have a refresher from someone else's perspective 👍.
Great video and simple explanation of the two designs. I own both designs and use to work in a gunsmith shop many years ago. It was my experience that the S&W actions were capable of more fine tuning for a wicked sweet trigger. The other side of that equation was that I saw my fair share of S&W actions get gummed up or "binding" once any type of dirt and debris worked its way into the action. Prob not an issue for most folks. As for the Taurus designs they were easier/faster to play with the hammer/trigger return springs to adjust the trigger pull without much work. The Rugers were in my opinion the most robust design, yet a little harder to smooth and adjust the trigger pulls. The new cam action on the Ruger lcr's are a marvel in design, strong, robust yet smooth. As far as colts went they just seemed to get out of time more than any other brand. I left those up to the real gunsmiths to repair. Great content and information. Keep em coming.
I really enjoyed the mechanical breakdown. Also you just justified my S&W 686 plus purchase.
The transfer bar in my Ruger SBH broke some time ago. That revolver was one of the guns I have been using for polar bear defence at Spitsbergen here in Norway. Well, not any more. Now I rather bring a .30-06 rifle or my 590A1. I have a Ruger SRH in .454 Casull, but that revolver also has a transfer bar. I do not trust transfer bar revolvers any more. Excellent video. Thanks!
I still have my 19-5 S&W old hammer with firing pin.
U da man Mr. Gun Sam!
Over 200,000 rounds through my Ruger revolvers with transfer bars, and zero breakage. And as a range officer and competitor, I've seen millions of rounds fired from Rugers, and have seen one (1) transfer bar failure, and no others that would render the gun useless. I have seen a couple Smiths crap out (broken firing pin, broken mainspring, several tied up when the base pin backed out), so my personal experience leads me to the conclusion that the Ruger actions are more robust than any other, and they are widely considered to be the toughest mass-produced revolvers available. I'll bite my tongue on Taurus revolvers...😆
I didn’t know the diff biff, thanks. I will get the S&W revolver now.
Excellent demonstration sir!!! Had a feeling ruger had that type of system. Notice cast parts in Taurus. Smith doesn’t. Makes a difference in feel.
Thanks. Ruger's is definitely a transfer bar but done quite a bit differently being all in one in the pull out trigger group. If I had a Ruger as a main range toy I would feel totally fine about it, as you could buy a transfer bar for one at Brownell's or wherever and have it on you in case the main one breaks, swapping a broken one is a 3 minute process. You can't even buy Taurus parts other than from private ebay sellers and changing one isn't so easy.
@@GunSam another reason Taurus doesn’t make my buy list. 👌🏻I have a few but won’t get any more.
Charter Arms founder Douglas McClenahan who had worked at Colt and Ruger and High Standard was the inventor of the transfer par system if memory serves. it is a brilliant idea, for making a simpler more economical action. In a SA revolver it is even more useful. Manurhin uses the S&W system in most of their designs like the MR73. The sliding hammer block inside the sideplae is an after thought, and was not always used. It is not strictly needed. My removing it makes no improvement to the action either.
Transfer bars predate Charter by decades. Iver Johnson sold the Safety Automatic revolver beginning in 1895, and it wasn't the first revolver with a transfer bar.
Douglas M. claim to fame was that he had pioneered the a revolver with no side plate. Frame is solid steel on both sides.
m.ruclips.net/video/Jo-7NL7yWeE/видео.html There are a few obvious incorrect statements in that video though.
Just got my Charter Undercover a few days ago. Hope it will be reliable for home defense.
@@robertonavarro7713 With occasional use and avoiding abuse (flipping the cylinder shut) I think it should last a while.
I love this kind of technical explanation. I am in AWE of the three-dimensional visualizations of the designers! That was done long before computer animations, only with human genius. I worked with a "manufacturing engineer" for a while years ago, and he used stiff paper cutouts and thumbtacks for a lot of his thinking, before drafting the drawings for parts. Amazing! Now, I would love to see a feature on the design of Charter Arms revolvers----they are DIFFERENT ya know...........................elsullo
nice lesson on s&w i have never had a smith revolver. just transfer bar rugers, tauri, an astra and a llama.
First time I've heard this. Thanks.
Love your ammo test but learning this was awesome! Keep up the great work
Excellent advice about how using single action on transfer bar puts extra stress. But also good to remember if you have a light primer strike that single action gives extra energy. As for Ruger v Charter v Taurus, I agree Ruger is built like a tank.
I Counter you're video with my 3 reasons a Ruger GP100 is actually stronger than 686 THAT isn't about the outdated bs about forged vs cast. If you like them and they throw lead faster than you can they are all great! I'd like a 3" 686+ to match
I know being heavier and their simple action can take a lot of power, and longer cylinder etc. Good revolver, nice an heavy is a main good point to how much power it can handle.
I enjoyed learning something new in your video. I have a Chiappa Rhino (200DS). Looking at the documentation, they have a "transfer bar", but they are using that term differently than what I would expect in a revolver. So, the question I have is this: could you figure out if there is any type of internal safety mechanism that would effectively work to stop a hammer strike?
Friends don’t let friends buy Taurus
Or Glocks
Glocktard checking in
I prefer the Ruger trigger to S&W. When I checked out revolvers several years ago I ended up getting a Ruger and later a Taurus. Both had better feeling triggers than S&W. The S&Ws all felt gritty and much worse. I grew up with guns well before hammer blocks or transfer bars. I still have revolvers with neither and that isn’t really a concern to me. It just means I carry empty under the hammer. My wife has an S&W EZ .380 and the trigger on it is good but I have never been expressed with their revolver triggers. It was an excellent video and very informative.
Thank you my friend, I learned something new tonight!
Great explanation! And I agree 100%. I had a transfer bar break on a Pietta single action revolver. And like you, I've never had a problem with a Ruger but the S&W is a better design from an engineering standpoint. I think you just talked me into buying another revolver! Thanks alot!
Great explanation. Really learned some things! I do imagine the biggest issue is the quality (or lack thereof) of the Taurus transfer bar steel. Haven’t heard of Rugers having that issue. My Ruger feels like a tank!
They are both reliable drop/hit safeties. The biggest difference is if the hammer block fails, (breaks) the revolver is less safe as it loses the drop/hit prevention. BUT, it will still fire when one wants it to. If a transfer bar fails (breaks), your loaded revolver is now nothing more than a club....a striking weapon. Ok if your at the range. Not ok if you need a shot at an alarmed and angry she bear. Ruger has an extremely low incidence of transfer bar failure when compared to less expensive brands. Their bars are made from billet steel, where Taurus and others use a cast powdered metal bar. Good vijeo explaining the workings. Most revolver 'reviews' don't even mention this important part of the firearm. I own several Rugers and am comfortable with their quality. I have a stainless .357 Security Six that I bought in Kodiak Alaska in 1979. After about 7,000 rounds it needed some smithing for timing issues, but the original transfer bar still doing its job to this day. I shot it about 2 months ago at a bowling pin shoot using 158 gr .357 loads.
This guy is very educational, great stuff 👍 I want to see more of this please, and maybe some revolver maintenance & or repair
Thanks a lot for the explanation and editing.
Great explanation and breakdown showing how the internals actually work, thank you for the info.
Thank you
@@GunSam I've been on the fence about purchasing another revolver, I have the Taurus 605 which is a great gun for the money but have always wanted a S&W revolver and haven't bought one because I'm always hesitant when I see the price tag. After watching this video I literally said to my self, stop being such a cheap ass and I bought a S&W model 66 combat 357 this morning. Merry Christmas to me, pray that my wife doesn't go insane when she sees it on the credit card bill next month and shoot me with it LOL
Interesting. Thanks for sharing. Take care. Merry Christmas.
Thank you. Merry Christmas
I've always liked S&W revolvers better because they're uber simple to slick up and get an awesome trigger pull out of.
Some are amazing out of the box too. I don't know what it is about this model 69 here, but it's like glass. There is no friction, it is amazing. My 686 is good, but it's not this good.
@@GunSamIf you watch my video on the Model 10, 2" that I had the guys that shot it couldn't believe what a nice trigger pull it had and all I did was install a Wolff factory power hammer spring and a 13# trigger rebound with a bit of polishing.
Your excellent detailed content is why I subscribed
Love the video! I love my gp 100 for ease of disaasembly, and the transfer bar seems robust
I remember taking apart an SP101 I had. Fun experience, sort of like the Ruger system as it actually is quite simple in design.
@@GunSam I wish taurus or s&w would make a .44 sp j frame. My Charter arms does not strike me as being robust, and has not been reliable.
Excellent breakdown. I did not know there was a difference.
Very interesting and informative. I guess I just assumed they all worked with similar designs.
Regarding Kimber revolvers: Best I can make out, going off the owner's manual, the Kimber "DASA" model revolvers (which is all their external hammer revolvers) use a transfer-bar system, like Ruger, Taurus, and Charter Arms, while the rest of their revolver models (which is all their internal hammer revolvers) use a hammer-block system, like S&W. In short, with Kimber, if external hammer, then its using a transfer-bar system; if internal hammer, then its using a hammer-block system.
Awesome GS《☆》Nice comparison Brother👍🏾My only S&W is a Bodyguard 38spl +P. It's hammer is concealed, If it's an actual hammer or more of a striker not sure. It prints less than my Sig P365 in my riding jacket so I carry it when I'm on my bike✌😎☮
Thanks. I am not an expert on the Bodyguard, fired one before but that's it. If it's like a normal S&W J-frame, there's a hammer. Looks identical to the one in my S&W in this video, just rounded at the top with no hammer spur. There is also a sear that is not on DAO revolvers so the hammer strike will always be rather light compared to a single action shot with a hammer spur.
Agree! This was a fun video. Thank you Sam!
Curious what you think about the Colt design. It has fewer parts than the S&W based systems, making it operate smoother, and there are fewer parts that can fail. It locks up the cylinder tighter, making the design potentially more accurate. The more positive lockup may also improve reliability when dirty. However, the same advantages make it more prone to going out of time - because the pawl is pressing on the cylinder as the shot goes off, and putting a lot more stress on the lock work and trigger components. So not sure what to make of it, and how it all works in practice.
Interesting take. The only DA centerfire revolver I own is a S&W which I've never had any problems at all with. I own five Ruger SA revolvers (what can I say - I love the old west, SA revolvers, and I shoot SASS) and I've had no problems at all with them either. Your experience sounds more like an indictment of Taurus's materials, and/or maybe manufacturing quality, than the design itself, though I certainly understand your point as well. I've also never shot a thousand rounds through one in one weekend. A few hundred combined practice and SASS club match has been my biggest weekends.
The only revolver I've ever known among myself or friends that was not reliable was a Taurus a friend bought used from a range and gun shop. It had severe timing issues and would never get through an entire cylinder without binding. The shop worked on it and couldn't get it going and refunded her money. Maybe if it had been sent to Taurus they might have taken care of it.
Very good explanation, thank you.
Thanks
Good video. - Do you have access to any Armscor/RIA or Alpha Proj Revolvers for videos?
Not yet
Real good info! Thx!
Thanks
This is an awesome video, thanks Sam
I've had transfer bars break on both Ruger and Taurus revolvers that completely locked the gun up. I also have an old Rossi with a clone of the S&W action with the hammer block and it has never failed.
Rossi made a inexpensive dependable revolver
I'm very late to this video, but I wanted to stop by and say you're absolutely right. The transfer bar on my Charter Arms Bulldog broke today at the range. Completely non-functional now
I knew the system in my 66-8 was a block and not a transfer bar. What I did NOT know until this video was that it was in addition to the rebound slide safety. It's almost as if the hammer block is just a failsafe incase the detents on the rebound slide get worn over time.
That was an eye opener. I wonder what intricacies there are in the European brands that have survived on the market like Alfa (RIA), Weihrauch, Manurhin, Korth.
I'm also intrigued about Mauser revolvers that obviously were discontinued.
I learned alot...
Thanks for the tutorial.
God bless brother
Thanks for watching
Good point, Sam! Also, on some other revolvers I feel the trigger spring is less springy, I may lock up the action or jump a chamber more easily than with a smith.
Glad you bought that Smith back when we "Smithers" recommended it to you! Now, you know why. 😉
What a great video. Thank you.
Thanks
Thanks for taking apart your revolvers so we don't have to! Good video!
Thanks
Sammy excellent explanation of why Smith & Wesson revolvers are superior to almost all other brands and that is fact not opinion
The hammer block is a back-up safety to the hammer seat/rebound slide seat. Should the hammer seat/rebound slide seat get excessively worn or shatter, then the hammer block comes into play. It's a very safe system.
I think it would be interesting to measure the lock time between the S&W system and the transfer bar system if Taurus, Colt, and Ruger. Any guesses which is faster?
Great video as usual! I used to be a die-hard Colt DA ONLY wheel gun proponent. I used to regularly hunt black bear with my Colt Anaconda .44magnum, as I thought their DA revolvers were superior to S&W. Then I was educated about S&W and switched to a Model 29 .44magnum.
I’ve only had cylinder timing issues with Colt DA revolvers, like my 1970’s produced Python .357mag. None of my S&W wheel guns have ever worn out their timing like my or my dad’s Colts. And I’m a Colt fanatic, just look at my user name!
…I used to also feel that Ford made the best modern day 4x4’s….. that is until I switched to GMC trucks. 😂😂😂
Thanks. I really need to try some Colts. I haven't even fired one before.
@@GunSam Beautiful smooth actions from the factory, especially in SA Mode. But yeah, their timing just doesn’t hold up to a Smith.
@@colt10mmsecurity68 With me asking questions on other revolvers, one might wonder my name choice. Aficionado lol. Basically a lot of people kept telling me I was the revolver guy, kept pressuring me to not be just "Gun Sam" like I was for years. Probably 2017-2018 or so I stole a name from a "Revolver Aficionado" group on Facebook, thought that sounds catchy. I went from only trying to make it clear I do revolver content in addition to semi autos, to people starting thinking I was an expert lol.
@@GunSam Great content and presentations!! Do you know if Kimber uses the transfer bar as well? I'd be interested to know your thoughts on their revolvers. Thanks!
Completely agree. I am curious as to how much the new Rossi revolvers duplicate the S&W design.
I had a Rossi many years ago, it was the oldschool S&W design with firing pin on the hammer, suggesting hammer block. The Turkish made SAR revolvers use a S&W style hammer block as well.
A great video. Nicely done sir. 👍🏻 Subbed.
I was an armorer and rso, all the pilots used Rugers to qualify and practice, never had a problem with them, that said I liked the S&Ws better
Nice video. I own a few Ruger revolvers and their transfer bar rattle is pretty annoying sometimes..
Great explanation and demonstration of these two actions Sam. Glad you provided the insight. ♠️🎩🎱🎯🇺🇲🏁🇺🇦🔱🌻💮🏵️🌸🌼🏴☠️🏹
Thank you
Well done. A lot of people do not understand these systems.
One thing I know, cops prefered the hammer block system. Generally if it DID break, the gun would still fire, even though not drop safe. If a transfer bar system breaks it is a paper weight till you get it fixed. Not that I have ever heard of either of them breaking without being monkeyed with by a shade tree gunsmith.
How did you manage to break 2 of them? Curious.
Thanks. These were Taurus 94 .22 LR rimfire revolvers. Just normal firing, first one I shot about a brick and a half or 750 rounds, snapped off. I didn't dry fire them or anything. They replaced with a new gun, shot 500 rounds over the course of a couple weeks, snapped off in normal firing. No different than I fire any revolver I have ever owned.
@@GunSam Interesting. I have owned Taurus revolvers, and we still have one as our bedside table gun, with zero issues, but i have never shot them a lot. Maybe 200 rounds through my current 38 spcl model 85. My Smith 686 is the one I have put 1000s through. No issues.
I guess I am not surprised that Taurus uses inferior metal though. Got a lot though my Ruger single actions as well (all transfer bar guns) without breakage. Thanks for telling me.
I’d say that the transfer bar is a fine design, as long as good steel is used. Taurus isn’t using good steel.
Excellent knowledge!
Thanks.
Thank you for the comparison lesson. Direct impacts should be more reliable. I guess it is just as safe. Repeatedly striking the transfer bar can not add to reliability.
I have a Taurus 66 in 357. It works good right now. But, not sure I can depend on it forever. I just bought a S&W 686 Pro Series. I pick it up in a couple weeks when I get home. I'll put them up against each other and see which one is better.
Wondering if I should remove the lock on the S&W. I see there are plugs to fill in the lock hole.
@@richdoherty64 I guess it would take some debate with yourself. Do you think you will ever have a chance for self defense use? Then ask if it's worth it that the one in a million chance the defense use is questioned, and taken to court. Then a prosecutor telling a jury who don't know better "ladies and gentlemen the defendant did take out the safety to make sure his gun was more deadly and would fire with half as much trigger press" or some other lie. If it's a range toy, or a house gun in a castle doctrine state I might remove it, if I was carrying on the street, maybe not.
Never knew. Excellent. Five stars. ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Good point in some of your answers, it's about Design and Metal fatigue or Quality of Metal. Your point is well taken just that maybe how your word it it may seam bias . But is not , one has to remember this guns have advantages and disadvantages depending on the use and or intended purpose. How much use and or abuse all needed to be taken into consideration!
These machan-ism were put in for Safety
Because "We" sometimes forget the We aRe the Safety and overs-safety can work against the original safety of oneself for which the gun/Pistola were invented just an afterthought in my humble opinion!
Great Video in any Case .!!👍👍👍🤙🤙
I do carry a Ruger.
@@GunSam yeah 👍 ..!
They are good 👍
Back in 79 then 80's the Pistola design started to change most revolvers did not had that extra Mayal Onder the barrel, Which to me added a design to the eye that was pleasing not to mention functionality, to me it has to have the proportion design thus proving it ergonomic.
That comey first!
To me the old Colt single Six or the Remington same with that heft in it have no equal, but we have the issue of that hammer Pin on a live bullet (No Bueno 😁) how ever the only one in that configuration but in a more robust round 44 Mag. By Ruger (44 Hunter) mixes both old School new metal and a "Transfer Bar" really like that mix !
But it is for s certain purpose how ever with a few tweaks it can make a certain one bullet stoper...transfer bar and all .
Revolvers offer a more think first than shot first mentality, cause if we talk about bullet quantities I rather carry an MP5 type , but there is to much glorification in fads of the industries, for semi auto pistolas, and there is such a thing as thinking on fun and ability to plinking and not necessarily a self defense mode all the time, when you grow up I. Turmoil it is not a glad thing to witness the death and destruction of what is around you.
But shooting and Plinking will always be fun !
Particularly with a 22 😁😁😁👍 for family fun for grown up little kids in Us a good old fay 45 single action the best , or fast shooting nothing beat a 1911 .
My taste and opinion .
Every one is different!
Found your channel recently and like it 😉👍 , I tend to open Avery thing to see how it works and if can be improved that me .
Great info...thank you
Thanks for watching.
Thanks, very informative.
Sam, I totally agree. Smith and Wesson are the most reliable revolvers I've ever used. I have one 856 heavy 2" and it just has a cheap feel. I can honestly say that I have not had any problems so far but based on a few problems I've seen on RUclips with Taurus I would never use mine as a main gun.
A transfer bar is great but it is taking the impact of the hammer falling all the time. I have seen one break into pieces. It made the revolver completely nonfunctional. I prefer Smith's rebound slide method. Some of their J-frames do not have that L-shaped hammer block, instead using the rebound slide alone.
I have even heard of Ruger's breaking them. I don't know why some break and some don't really.
Very good presentation. Remove the hammer machine a new one not requiring a transfer block or figure a way to lengthen the hammer face to allow firing pin strike....the old colts have an insert that is pinned into the hammer face. Kinda free floats too. Just some movement not sloppy wiggle. That is the fire pin and can be replaced if fractured or worn enough to produce lite strikes....carry on empty cylinder...