Shooters Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,753 Posts
They are top of the line, for sure! Nice revolvers, congratulations, look forward to a range report.
As nothing more than a curiosity, I've wondered; Why not just bore the cylinder with either four (or five) chambers and put the 'blank' (non bored, other than for a firing pin 'relief' hole)) portion under the hammer? Of course, you would then not have a place to store your rolled up $20 bill!:);)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I don't understand why they think transfer bars are trashy. I want a gun I can pack with ALL holes loaded! Especially at that price!
You can always get a Ruger or BFR both god guns. I carry my model 83s with four rounds and the 5th round is irrelevant to me, I will never get off more than 2 rounds if an animal attacks me, same in an hunting situation. To be honest I delayed buying my first model 83 by 3 years because of the 4 round situation but as I shot them more and more that concern faded away. Guns are nothing but trade offs, always trading something off for something else. Thanks for your reply
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,753 Posts
Not a problem.

Between the cost of ammo, and arthritis developing in my hands, it's about all I could handle :)
I understand that! My first generation 454 Casull BRF has the Ruger SBH square back grip frame with 'standard size' grip panels (meaning not Pachmayr oversize rubber grips). Anyone that can shoot a cylinder full, five shots....or even four, or three, with a ungloved hand and comes away with a smile on their face, and no tear running down their cheek, will definitely deserve (and get) a 'tip of the hat' from me.....might even buy them lunch! That square back guard hits the middle finger like laying your hand down on a bench and taking a hammer to it. Maybe I'm just a 'wuss' at my age, but the only way that thing is any fun to shoot is loading it down to semi-heavy Colt loads. There is no comparison between that and a 44 mag SBH with the square guard. How do you spell 'discomfort'!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,133 Posts
I built this .41 mag from a found .357 in 1989. The grip frame was SBH but I shortened it 5/16" and moved the grip back a fraction. Either my knuckle has gotten larger or the gun kicks harder. It's painful to shoot now. I'm about to drop down from 255 hard cast at 1080 to 225 grain at about 900 as a result.
Chukars are now hiding in rockslides steeper than before, too!
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
311 Posts
Jack,
What is it about the Freedom Arms that requires us to carry with hammer on empty chamber?
I gave mine (454 Casull) my Grandson because i don't have the grip strength anymore(knuckles bleed too).
But, the "Safety Bar/ Hammer Block" is secondary to the Hammer Safe Position and if used properly can be a Safe way of carrying with 5 chambered.
I take it as the hammer safe position isn't passive like a transfer bar/drop Safety is Passive?
"As long as Bubba didn't do a trigger job on the New Model Ruger Super Blackhawk".
I did carry mine with 4 but i wasn't in Big Bear country either.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,133 Posts
The FA '83 doesn't have a traditional 'half cock/quarter cock' 'safety notch' of the Colt SAA family. Instead, it has a unique hammer block that interposes steel between steel parts and makes it safe. BUT, to get the hammer into that safe position it must be drawn back so far that a 'slip-off' results in a fire. Test prove it has enough energy to set off factory ammo and handloads with rifle primers. Also, the safety notch in the FA '83 is far enough back to unlock the cylinder and start the hand rotating it before the safety notch is engaged. That means putting the gun 'on safe' is a two step operation of setting the hammer in the proper position, then also rotating the cylinder back into lock. If not rotated back into lock, the gun is 'jammed up' when the hammer is attempted to be drawn back.
The guns were ten years obsolete when first made and not 'state of the art' due to the game changing Ruger transfer bar system.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
311 Posts
The FA '83 doesn't have a traditional 'half cock/quarter cock' 'safety notch' of the Colt SAA family. Instead, it has a unique hammer block that interposes steel between steel parts and makes it safe. BUT, to get the hammer into that safe position it must be drawn back so far that a 'slip-off' results in a fire. Test prove it has enough energy to set off factory ammo and handloads with rifle primers. Also, the safety notch in the FA '83 is far enough back to unlock the cylinder and start the hand rotating it before the safety notch is engaged. That means putting the gun 'on safe' is a two step operation of setting the hammer in the proper position, then also rotating the cylinder back into lock. If not rotated back into lock, the gun is 'jammed up' when the hammer is attempted to be drawn back.
The guns were ten years obsolete when first made and not 'state of the art' due to the game changing Ruger transfer bar system.
I spent a good deal of time with the FA '83 this evening and did not understand THAT that I thought I understood for the last 12 years.
The hammer drawback is certainly far enough that a slip could cause a discharge.
I had thought that the need for "Indexing" the cylinder or confirming the cylinder is properly indexed every time the hammer is put in the "Hammer Safe" position was due to the degrees of rotation due to the 5 hole platform.
I have always stressed the need to check for proper cylinder indexing in large revolvers in the Handgun class i teach.
Thanks Jack for the excellent information.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
You can always get a Ruger or BFR both god guns. I carry my model 83s with four rounds and the 5th round is irrelevant to me, I will never get off more than 2 rounds if an animal attacks me, same in an hunting situation. To be honest I delayed buying my first model 83 by 3 years because of the 4 round situation but as I shot them more and more that concern faded away. Guns are nothing but trade offs, always trading something off for something else. Thanks for your reply
I have a 6” BFR Custom Shop .475 Linebaugh, and a 4 5/8” Bisley Super Blackhawl .480. Both are wonderfull revolvers. I recent;u acquired a 6” Model 83 in .454 Casull with the optional .45 Colt cylinder. It is far beyond my expectations. The precision built into the F/A is with comparison in all but a very few customs. My next revolver will be a Model 83 if I can ever lay my hands on one chambered in 500 Linebaugh.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
I've owned a Freedom Arms Model 83 454 Casull revolver with the ejector length barrel for about 30 years now---nothing made better! Four shots doesn't bother me cause you would be lucky to off two in an attack situation... My revolver was ordered with two extra fitted cylinders---45 Colt and 45 ACP. The 45 Colt cylinder is still unused! The 45 ACP cylinder is great, low recoil fun...
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top