Quote:
Hellgate wrote:
I also recommended he not bother to install safety notches in hammers (flat faced) on those revolvers for which there are no safety pins on the backs of the cylinders anyway and got no reply from him.
|
Exactly. What is up with that? All my 1851 & 1860 Pietta's have the safety pin slot on the hammer but NONE of my 1851 or 1860 Pietta's have safety pins on their cylinder backs. Why?
I can certainly understand Pietta omitting the safety pins on the cylinder backs to speed up production (while creating the same exact liability the Pietta rep was worried that the filled in hammer slots would). But what I can't understand is if he was worried about liability of filling in the hammer slot, why isn't he worried about the cylinder's not having pins???? That just doesn't make any sense.
Also if Pietta omits the cylinder safety pins, then as you stated....why have a hammer slot for cylinder pins that aren't there? Also why go to the trouble, time and expense to mill that hammer slot when it isn't going to be used on revolvers that do not have cylinder pins???
The reason he probably never got back with you is because your questions made sense and he had no answers for that and Pietta probably has their tooling set up to make the hammer safety slots and they just don't want to bother changing it even though many if not MOST of their BP revolvers are made without cylinder safety pins.
It's like they are making a parachute but omit the ripcord. Where's the safety in that? There isn't. A hammer safety slot with no safety pins on the back of the cylinder is not only useless, but a waste of time milling since it isn't going to do anything but pull caps off and cause jams.
Completely illogical from a production, mechanical and liability standpoint.
.
.