[Spurzmaker]

Does anyone know why Ruger implemented the transfer bar into the design of their revolvers, and later copied by taurus, or am I misinformed???

[madcratebuilder]

safety reasons, lawyer reasons.

[nathangdad]

just as they do with miserable trigger systems. Ruger needs to spend less time listening to their legal department and more time listening to shooters.

[neophyte]

Spurzmaker: Sir; this is copied from

Ruger’s 50th Anniversary Blackhawk

The Blackhawk soldiered on with these two frame sizes and the additions of some new calibers until 1973. This year marked the introduction of the New model Blackhawk. The new model incorporated the most major change ever made to the Blackhawk line, the transfer bar safety system. Before the invention of the transfer bar safety system, it was safest to carry the single action revolver with only 5 rounds and the hammer resting on the empty chamber. If the hammer was allowed to rest on a loaded chamber any bump to it could set off that round. With the transfer bar safety system Ruger single actions could now safely be carried with 6 rounds because the hammer did not and could not hit the firing pin unless the trigger was pulled. Another feature added at this time was to have the opening of the loading gate unlatch the cylinder. This allowed the cylinder to spin for loading and unloading eliminating the need for a half cock notch on the hammer.

[Spurzmaker]

Thanks Neophyte,

That answered the whole question.

The trigger must be pulled to implement the safety transfer bar into position to make contact with the firing pin. Thus prevents accidental firing of the gun.

My girlfriend is prosecuting a felony case in which the convicted felon had a stolen gun, and shot at the highway patrol officers when he got out of a stolen vehicle that "ON STAR" had notified State Authorities had been reported stolen, and it's location.


He said that the gun accidentally went off 5 times, shooting at highway patrol officers whom stopped him in a stolen SUV with possession of a "stolen Taurus M85" hammerless revolver.

DPS officers shot him 5 times, and the #$(*) actually lived, of course after several operations. He says he is only guilty of carrying a weapon while being a prohibited possessor. He is not guilty of any of the other charges.

Yeah, that gun accidentally went off like The spoon made Rosie O'Donnell FAT!

[DaTeacha]

I had a stolen Diamondback recovered after the kid who had it threw it at the cop who was chasing him. The pawl was broken so the cylinder didn't revolve. He was found guilty of possessing stolen property after I showed evidence that the gun was stolen from me about 4 years prior to his court date, in another state yet. Apparently he never tried to shoot it after he stole it from someone else. The only thing wrong with it was the broken pawl -- even the bluing was still nearly perfect.

I guess he could have claimed he didn't throw it at the officer, that it just slipped from his hand while he was quickly putting them up just before he started to run away.

[neophyte]

Spurzmaker: Sir; you're welcome.

[Mooseman684]

Criminals for the Most Part are STUPID....