Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Handguns in British Service

A Russian issued revolver ? The Red Army used semi-autos from the mid 1930s, first the Tokarev TT-33 using a 7.62mm cartridge, then the Makarov using the Soviet 9x18mm cartridge.
The last Russian issued military revolver AFAIK was the Nagant M1895. That was a fine weapon, where the cylinder moved forward just before the round fired in order to seal the cylinder gap. The 7.62 rimmed cartridge was odd, in that the bullet was completely enclosed by the brass case

Gun Jesus did a vid on the Nagant. The cylinder moving forward to seal did the job of sealing the gas, but the mechanism prevented rapid reloading. Probably not an issue if there were only a few fuzzy wuzzies to smite.

 

tgo

War Hero
Gun Jesus did a vid on the Nagant. The cylinder moving forward to seal did the job of sealing the gas, but the mechanism prevented rapid reloading. Probably not an issue if there were only a few fuzzy wuzzies to smite.

Quite informative, would make it viable for a suppressor equipped revolver.
Regarding reloading, it would most likely be quicker to have a few spare cylinders pre loaded and just yank the whole cylinder, watching the individual ejection and then individual chamber reloading was just... painful to watch.
 

TamH70

MIA
Quite informative, would make it viable for a suppressor equipped revolver.
Regarding reloading, it would most likely be quicker to have a few spare cylinders pre loaded and just yank the whole cylinder, watching the individual ejection and then individual chamber reloading was just... painful to watch.

Yep. The NKVD and Cheka both used suppressed Nagants as stealth weapons, but there isn't much documentation online.

Silenced 7.62 mm Nagant Revolver (connect.fi) has some pictures of the weapon and a brief description of what provenance that particular one had.
 
Gun Jesus did a vid on the Nagant. The cylinder moving forward to seal did the job of sealing the gas, but the mechanism prevented rapid reloading. Probably not an issue if there were only a few fuzzy wuzzies to smite.
That's a good video. The effect of blast from the cylinder gap of a revolver is very well demonstrated, and shows why social distancing was adopted by revolver shooters on the range long before Covid arrived on the scene !

I don't really recall the trigger pull as being noticeably heavy, compared to most d/a revolvers, but as many people comment on it, then I suppose they must have had a point. One of the reasons, obviously, is that the trigger pull had not only to lift the hammer, rotate the cylinder as in most revolvers, but also provide the effort to push that cylinder forward.

Loading/reloading through a reloading date, and having to eject spent cases with the ejector rod was a pain, and a contemporary Webley could have probably blasted off about 20 rounds in the time the Nagant took to fire six.

Nevertheless, I still liked the thing and found it endlessly fascinating to watch that cylinder shifting back and forth as the trigger was pulled.
 

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
Correct training, but insufficient practice.

Do it often enough, you wind up doing it without thinking, irrespective of all other factors, just like blinking.
I was fortunate to spend a couple of years in a job where pistol competency was mandatory, along with some training that didn’t often make it into the pamphlet such as cocking your pistol on your heel, table edge or other hard edge in order to keep the other hand free. Also taught was a push on the slide after cocking, to ensure the round was fully seated. As for cocking the pistol, as someone has said, you don’t pull the slide to the rear with your left hand, you hold it in place and push the pistol forward. I was never an awesome shot with the Browning but when I was issued a Sig for HERRICK, I decided that a couple of hours training wasn’t enough and took a Browning instead, having attached some Pachmayr grips to it.
 
Last edited:

mrboo

War Hero
Gun Jesus did a vid on the Nagant. The cylinder moving forward to seal did the job of sealing the gas, but the mechanism prevented rapid reloading. Probably not an issue if there were only a few fuzzy wuzzies to smite.

I was using a Nagant a few years ago in the USA having a problem finding 7.62mm ended up using .32 and also .32 magnum rounds
 

4(T)

LE
Yep. The NKVD and Cheka both used suppressed Nagants as stealth weapons, but there isn't much documentation online.

Silenced 7.62 mm Nagant Revolver (connect.fi) has some pictures of the weapon and a brief description of what provenance that particular one had.


They also apparently used them for executions. The Soviets executed hundreds of thousands of people from the 1920s to the 1950s. Individual NKVD executioners ran up such huge tallies that they became fatigued by the noise and recoil of even mild weapons like the Nagant revolver. Blokhin, for example switched to using PPKs and Walther M2s in .25 ACP in order to reduce shooting strain for the hundreds he'd off in one day. It seems that the NKVD eventually came up with the suppressed Nagant as a general issue implement.
 

Blogg

LE
The police bodyguard was using a Walther PPK chambered for 7.65 Browning aka .32 ACP. As far as I can recall, the first round fired because it was chambered. However, the next round jammed, and this was later put down to the fact that the mag had been kept fully charged for a long period and the mag spring had weakened and failed to lift the next round into the boltway sufficiently.

Heard a varient of that story: same round being manually ejected during make safe and then being stuffed back into mag many, many, many times led to case getting rounded off and a failure to eject.
 
If I recall correctly, the first time I fired the Browning Hi Power it tried to make a bee line for my forehead. Jumped up and back. Long time ago, but I don't think I was expecting that much recoil firing a pistol so I had a weak arm lock. Always fired it two handed though, and only on the range.
 
The earliest reference that I can find to grip safeties at the moment is when John M. Browning in June 1900, wrote to the editor of American sporting magazine that he had experimented with various types of safeties, both grip and thumb actuated.


Meanwhile as I prefer written sources, I expect one of the Arrse keyboard warriors will sweep in with their googlefu and prove me wrong.

Smith & Wesson Safety Hammerless Revolver, 1887.

Googling that suggests it was inspired by an accident involving the child of a neighbour of one of the Wesson brothers.

PS Reading the thread, I see Idlerx got there about a fortnight ago.
 
Last edited:

Pteranadon

LE
Book Reviewer
As I have mentioned elsewhere, the depth of ignorance on Quora cannot be fathomed- it requires a bathyscaphe .

Occasionally ,someone posts a response which makes sense:

David Rendahl
·
Updated November 2
Former Intelligence Analyst at British Army


Why did the British military keep issuing revolvers long after everyone else (more or less) switched to pistols?
To answer this question you have to ask why the revolver/pistol was needed in the first place. Neither have any practical value if your enemy was more than 50yds away. Close range fighting was rare in the period 1870–1914, your first generation smokeless rifles were reaching out to 1,800yds and military planners worked their requirements around that.
Apologies if these points have already been made.

1. Pistols had been part of the arms of horsemen since the C16th. They were more use than a sword if you wanted to kill someone wearing light armour or a thick clothing. Pistols used mounted were at point blank range. Revolvers were the latest update in the mid C19th. There were stories of pistol and shotgun armed Confederate cavalry getting the better of the sabre armed US troopers.

2. Despite long range small arms, close range fighting was always likely. It was the goal of offensive action in conventional war, and took place in the 187-0-71 Franco German war, 1904-05 Russo Japanese war and even on occasions the Boer war. Against what was known then as uncivilised enemies, the Zulus, and fuzzy wuzzies came en masse. The wily Afghans and Pathans on the North West Frontier were occasionally inclined to attempt close range assassinations by suicide squads - the same reason that modern forces are given side arms.

3. Reliability mattered more than accuracy. The owner of a gun in a knife fight is at a disadvantage if the gun jams. At the time revolvers were seen as more reliable.
 
Gun Jesus did a vid on the Nagant. The cylinder moving forward to seal did the job of sealing the gas, but the mechanism prevented rapid reloading. Probably not an issue if there were only a few fuzzy wuzzies to smite.

Loading gates and ejector rods were pretty much standard on nearly all early cartridge revolvers. The Nagant was perhaps a bit dated in still using such a feature in a new design at the end of the 19th century, but there were loads of other revolvers in service which weren't any different in that respect.
 
That's a good video. The effect of blast from the cylinder gap of a revolver is very well demonstrated, and shows why social distancing was adopted by revolver shooters on the range long before Covid arrived on the scene !

I don't really recall the trigger pull as being noticeably heavy, compared to most d/a revolvers, but as many people comment on it, then I suppose they must have had a point. One of the reasons, obviously, is that the trigger pull had not only to lift the hammer, rotate the cylinder as in most revolvers, but also provide the effort to push that cylinder forward.

Loading/reloading through a reloading date, and having to eject spent cases with the ejector rod was a pain, and a contemporary Webley could have probably blasted off about 20 rounds in the time the Nagant took to fire six.

Nevertheless, I still liked the thing and found it endlessly fascinating to watch that cylinder shifting back and forth as the trigger was pulled.
The Nagant was actually a 7 shot revolver, not 6.
 
A Russian issued revolver ? The Red Army used semi-autos from the mid 1930s, first the Tokarev TT-33 using a 7.62mm cartridge, then the Makarov using the Soviet 9x18mm cartridge.
The last Russian issued military revolver AFAIK was the Nagant M1895. That was a fine weapon, where the cylinder moved forward just before the round fired in order to seal the cylinder gap. The 7.62 rimmed cartridge was odd, in that the bullet was completely enclosed by the brass case
I wouldn't call the Japanese revolver a fine weapon, it's a pain in the arse to reload and the double action trigger pull is atrocious. The only plus was it was only $99 when I brought it.

Sent from my SM-T510 using Tapatalk
 
. . . .when I was issued a Sig for HERRICK, I decided that a couple of hours training wasn’t enough and took a Browning instead, having attached some Pachmayr grips to it.
Probably a good call.

Handguns - this is what they're all about:


If you ever need another pair of Pachmayr grips for a BHP, you know where to find me.
 
I've often wondered if the pistols used in films are adapted to make them easier for actresses to 'rack the slide'. I remember the Browning being quite stiff. Even after a pretty minor injury to my thumb (the day before being on the range) it was an effort to cock the weapon and not wave it about.

I've only fired a few other hand guns (a S+W .40 the most often) and I don't remember them being as tricky.

Or maybe I'm just puny.

Quite a lot of airsoft used in the industry. Gas blowback airsoft pistols look the part and go through all the correct motions - except for spitting a bit of fire, and a bang, which can easily be added in during post-production/editing as an SFX. Screw a faux suppressor on the end of the barrel and most airsoft pistols and military style tanks assault weapons look and sound (to the civvy ear) like the suppressed business. There is a whole market out there to make them look as realistic as possible. I saw one upgrade kit a couple of weeks ago that takes a 500 quid airsoft M4 clone and turns it into a SF issue look HK 416. The conversion kit alone cost $1000, which is more than quite a few real M4's would cost.

The benefit of airsoft is that actors can't top themselves, or crew, there is less worry about legalities, and you may not even need to pay for a full on armourer. Added to which weapon rentals are not cheap, even in places like la la land where California has tight restrictions on types.
 
Last edited:
I was fortunate to spend a couple of years in a job where pistol competency was mandatory, along with some training that didn’t often make it into the pamphlet such as cocking your pistol on your heel, table edge or other hard edge in order to keep the other hand free. Also taught was a push on the slide after cocking, to ensure the round was fully seated. As for cocking the pistol, as someone has said, you don’t pull the slide to the rear with your left hand, you hold it in place and push the pistol forward. I was never an awesome shot with the Browning but when I was issued a Sig for HERRICK, I decided that a couple of hours training wasn’t enough and took a Browning instead, having attached some Pachmayr grips to it.

You don't see Pachmayrs too often anymore, apart from revolvers, as most have moved on to plastic pistols.
 

Latest Threads

Top