Ruger transfer bar question

[Red Eye Jim 214]

I first will admit that I stopped reading the EoT threads well before either one made it to the third page, because well, I can only take so much.  However, in Longhunter's thread an argument about the Ruger transfer bar came up and some of you all kept arguing about it so I've got to ask:

 

What is the actual point of removing the transfer bar?  What advantage does this actually give you?  The gun works perfectly fine as designed.  So much so that I prefer them.

 

I admit that I may at some point have action jobs and Bisley hammers installed, and maybe even the reverse pall done, but why remove transfer bar?

[Garrison Joe, SASS #60708 1,742]

To remove the possibility (a rather strong one, actually, from the history of Ruger Vaquero models) that the transfer bar tip breaks off with wear and then you can't finish shooting whatever rounds are in the gun.

 

The transfer bar also adds a slight bit of pull weight to to the trigger hammer pull, and can cause a rougher feel to the trigger hammer pull, unless care has been taken to smooth out all bumps in the bar's raceway.

 

And, very occasionally, the tip of the transfer bar can catch on the frame, blocking the trigger from completing a shot. hammer from going fully cocked.

 

Good luck, GJ

[Warden Callaway 2,324]

 

I shot this pair in a few matches then moved them along. Sawmill Mary shot them one stage and got out her Cattleman. One locked up on her.

 

Among other problems, at least one gun would lock up when trying to cock.  Turned out the transfer bar wasn't always getting pushed back by the plunger in the base pin.  The base pin would move forward just a bit and not let the plunger do its job.  A known problem and easy fix - install a stronger base pin latch.  Just more parts to have potential problems.  

[Null N. Void 313]

Once the transfer bar wears in, there is no difference in my experience.  I had one that was rough enough I could feel a catch.  I took it out, filed and polished out the rough area, and that was the end of the problem.

 

I have had two transfer bars break, both not at a match.  This was about 6 years ago with probably around 10,000 cycles, mostly in dry fire.  I believe Ruger had some issues with the transfer bars at that time.  They didn't break where I polished out the rough spot.  They sent replacements immediately.

 

I had a set of .357 Vaqueros that I've used for 5 years that had the transfer bars removed and were only used for live practice and matches.  I also had Blackhawks that have transfer bars which I did most of my dry fire practice for the same time period.  I've never had a problem with either.   

 

I've just switched to .32 H&R.  The guns have transfer bars.  I'm leaving them in as they shoot just fine.  I may replace the Transfer bars every Christmas on the match guns.

[Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 548]

My wife had one break very shortly after she received it. It may have been a bad cast. Ruger immediately sent a replacement and she has not had an issue since.

 

Someone will also chime in on how, by removing the transfer bar, less energy is required to make the firing pin actually hit the primer as you are not having to transfer the energy.  Kind of like folks putting in one piece firing pins in the rifle.

 

 

[Gray Drifter 47]

After two decades of doing product liability, catastrophic loss and death cases here is my 2-cents: a negligent discharge from a weapon which had a safety feature intentionally removed, could be a very bad thing. This is NOT legal advice, just a friendly opinion. 

[Yul Lose 4,168]

35 minutes ago, Gray Drifter said:

After two decades of doing product liability, catastrophic loss and death cases here is my 2-cents: a negligent discharge from a weapon which had a safety feature intentionally removed, could be a very bad thing. This is NOT legal advice, just a friendly opinion. 

In that line of thinking how about an AD from a firearm that’s had the trigger spring and hammer spring lightened or replaced with a much lighter spring?

[Sedalia Dave 5,311]

The removal of transfer bars came about because there was a production run of pistols where the transfer bars were improperly cast / fitted that had a tendancy to fail.

 

A properly fitted transfer bar is just as reliable as any other part of the pistol. There are shooters that have fired hundreds of thousands of rounds with no issues while a small number of people have had failures with significantly fewer rounds. One problem with having the hammer welded up is the quality of the weld.

 

I have seen two pistols where the weld was of insifficient hardness and the firing pin is creating a small dimple on the hammer where it hits the firing pin. Eventually this is going to cause the gun to fail to fire unless corrected by rewelding the hammer faces with the proper material. EVERYTHING is prone to failure due to improper manufacturing.

 

[Gray Drifter 47]

25 minutes ago, Yul Lose said:

In that line of thinking how about an AD from a firearm that’s had the trigger spring and hammer spring lightened or replaced with a much lighter spring?

 

That would be open to interpretation by experts, the court and or a jury. Removing a safety feature however is a different story. Again, just my friendly opinion. 

[Rancho Roy 186]

A transfer bar absorbs energy that could be used to set off the primer. With the transfer bar in place, the hammer spring can be made only so light or misfires are the result. Removing the transfer bar allows a much lighter hammer spring and therefore hammer pull.

[The Original Lumpy Gritz 5,163]

The t-bar can and does break. I have had it happen to me, more than once.

It is the weakest part of the design.

EVERY t-bar I have replaced, has broken in the same spot on the t-bar.

I just called Ruger and got replacements delivered free. Even a couple of spares.

My trigger pull weight is the same, with or with out the t-bar in place.

OLG

[Red Eye Jim 214]

Thank you everyone for the clarifications.

 

[Duffield, SASS #23454 394]

5 hours ago, Rancho Roy said:

A transfer bar absorbs energy that could be used to set off the primer. With the transfer bar in place, the hammer spring can be made only so light or misfires are the result. Removing the transfer bar allows a much lighter hammer spring and therefore hammer pull.

This is quite true, and I like the feel of the revolver with the lighter hammer springs.

However, at some point the hammer springs become light enough that increased lock time becomes noticeable.

 

Duffield

[Cowboy Junky 600]

I can feel the difference for sure...…..if you have shot thousands of rounds through a gun without and then grab one that has it's noticeable. I'm not saying it would make you faster or slower but you can feel the difference. IMHO it's just like the 66 v 73 thing. People freak out when you remove the lever safety on a 73 and think nothing of a guy shooting a 66...……..lol

 

Are we going to out law Colts too? Since they have no safety at all...…..or is is just unsafe to modify a newer gun to that same level?  

[Dusty Devil Dale 271]

I have never understood why SASS allowed T bar removal--or rifle lever safety, for that matter-- in the first place, given 1) their emphasis on redundant layers of safety, 2) the fact that the missing T-bar and welded hammer notch are both visible from the outside of the gun, and 3) the fact that the revolver can be modified with regard to its  hammer notches, shortened hammer/timing stroke, etc., all with T-bar left in place. 

[Warden Callaway 2,324]

25 minutes ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

I have never understood why SASS allowed T bar removal--or rifle lever safety, for that matter-- in the first place, given 1) their emphasis on redundant layers of safety, 2) the fact that the missing T-bar and welded hammer notch are both visible from the outside of the gun, and 3) the fact that the revolver can be modified with regard to its  hammer notches, shortened hammer/timing stroke, etc., all with T-bar left in place. 

 

Because Ruger is a very popular brand in CAS.  The "visible from the outside" is probably viewed with hammer down.  With the hammer cocked, it doesn't look like a pre-1900 single action anyway - stock or welded. 

[Sawhorse Kid 192]

Interesting stuff,  I wasn't aware the gun could be fired without the transfer bar.

[Rancho Roy 186]

The Ruger revolver will not fire with simply removing transfer bar. The hammer face will not touch the firing pin. The hammer face needs to be welded and reshaped and a half cock notch created. If no half cock notch, the firing pin will not allow the cylinder to rotate to load.

[McCandless 1,192]

1.  We are talking about CAS, where a gun is only allowed to be loaded with 5 rounds.  There is an empty under the hammer, the condition is checked by another at the loading table.  How do you get a ND without a round under the hammer?    Please stop this lawyering, lawsuit stuff.  It makes the gun no different than than all the other brands of guns out there without the Transfer Bars.  USFA. Pietta, Standard, Colt, every Percussion revolver with or without conversion cylinder, Uberti Richards-Mason, 1872, Uberti BP frame, older Blackhawks... just stop the lawyering!!  Please.

 

2.  Yes, I have had a Ruger T-Bar break during a match.  Maybe I should replace them every year, just in case.

3.  Pietta T-Bars models have their fragile T-Bars break regularly.  Pietta will send replacements promptly, but it made their T-Bar models unreliable.  Yes, there are gunsmiths working on Pietta, (and the Uberti T-Bar model), to make them run without their Transfer Bars.  There are gunsmiths who are working on the Uberti retractable firing pin mechanism to make them function like the older Ubertis.  There are folks who bought up the remaining older hammers and replaced the 3-click with the 4-click.

 

4.  I don't know why/how the subject got into a general bashing of SASS/Matches/How-it-used-to-be vs. How-it-is-now/let's shoot our own...  

 

5. The SASS Wire has recently become a place where we seem to shoot ourselves in the foot!  Misty asked us to consider a post before hitting the submit button:  - Does this message add value to the forum?  

 

 

[Captain Bill Burt 1,417]

No T/bars

 

[Captain Bill Burt 1,417]

No lever safety.

[Captain Bill Burt 1,417]

No safety at all!

[Kingsley 16]

Bill, just curious why you deleted the lever safety?  Yet you still have the 1/2 cock notch on the hammer.  I did the opposite of you, removed the 1/2 cock yet retained the lever safety.

 

Cardboard Cowboy

[Captain Bill Burt 1,417]

Hi CC,

 

I hope you're well.  Sorry we didn't get to catch up at GA State!  

 

In answer to your question, several years ago I was in the market for a new rifle and I wanted the absolute best I could get.  I went to Fast Eddie and asked him who he would have build a rifle for him if he wasn't going to do it himself.  He said, Harlan Wolff, he's pricey, but he's the best, so I contacted Harlan and a few months later I had my rifle.  My prior rifle didn't have a lever safety, so it didn't bother me that Harlan made his that way.  I think the whole OOBD issue is 'overblown'  I've never had one, and I don't know of anyone who has reported an OOBD due to lack of a lever safety.  They may not be commenting on here, but there are plenty of cowboys out there shooting 66s and 73 with no lever safety, so why aren't we hearing about all these dangerous OOBDs?

 

But Phantom may be right, maybe we need a lawyer on every stage, pre-clearing our guns and ammo before we shoot.  Checking BP smoke, some people have respiratory problems, might need to put some limits on that,  some of that ammo is awful loud, could cause hearing damage, might need to put a stop to that, or sue.  Maybe they need to be making sure we have safeties in all our guns.  They might need to be checking our rigs too, some of those don't look like they have good retention, might be a lawsuit in there.   Those targets are pretty close, someone could get hurt, might be able to sue, better let the lawyers determine how close they should be.  There are some pretty long runs on some stages, some of our older shooters might have a heart attack, might need lawyers to tell us how far apart the stations should be.  I've seen some low berms too, better bring in more lawyers for that. Those cap and ball guns are really a threat, might have a chain fire, probably should figure out a way to make them 'safe' or get rid of them.  Running on boardwalks with leather soled boots in the morning, definitely a hazard there, might be able to sue the range, might need to mandate non-skid decking.  Some of those facades are definitely not up to code, might need an inspector of some kind to go over them. 

 

What we really need is for every shooter to come to the match with their own personal attorney to go through the match with them to make sure they don't do anything dangerous.  You know, kind of like the military under a previous administration.

 

Or we could just stick with what we've been doing, seems to be working fine.

 

[Tyrel Cody 2,998]

2 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

I think the whole OOBD issue is 'overblown'  I've never had one, and I don't know of anyone who has reported an OOBD due to lack of a lever safety.  They may not be commenting on here, but there are plenty of cowboys out there shooting 66s and 73 with no lever safety, so why aren't we hearing about all these dangerous OOBDs?

 

 

 

Then you must not be reading. I have and others have. I have reported it happening with a '66 myself; that is the reason I sold mine and won't buy another.  I recently had a conversation with a well respected(not well known outside of East Tennessee) gunsmith and he's had OOBD with a 66' and won't remove the trigger safety on a 73' for that reason. 

 

As far as I know(because I haven't met you or shot with you) I like you and think we'd get along just fine in person; BUT I 100% disagree with you on the matter of removing a lever safety from a 73'. I truly hope you never have one because it really hurts when that lever gets thrown open and in my opinion is it is not worth the risk. I'll leave the name calling and demeaning statements to others here

 

[Kingsley 16]

Ha.  Well I will tell you I did have several OOB with my original 73, that was built by Cody.  No lever safety.  But they were very slight and I did not know I was even having them.  I noticed it when I started have failure to extract empties, at Ide's many years ago.  For whatever reason I measured my lever against Foxy's and noticed my throw was almost 3/4 inch shorter.  Yet both Cody guns were built at the same time.  Yep, had slowly bent the heck out of the lever.  Cody fixed for me, and installed the safety back in.  Back in those days he was not having the safety in the gun.

 

But I will also tell you I had a few OOB on my WB rifle, that had a lever safety in, and was fully functional.  So the safety is not a 100% sure OOB guarantee.  I figured out on that rifle I had distorted/warped the carrier and the rounds were getting hung up when cycling through the carrier.  After about 40 rounds, and the gun was all nice and hot it would swell and restrict the feeding of the round enough for an OOB, got to love free floating firing pins.

 

Have a great weekend, Foxy, Nicki and I are off to a several week adventure shooting.

 

CC

[Smokey Dave 108]

16 minutes ago, Tyrel Cody said:

 

Then you must not be reading. I have and others have. I have reported it happening with a '66 myself; that is the reason I sold mine and won't buy another.  I recently had a conversation with a well respected(not well known outside of East Tennessee) gunsmith and he's had OOBD with a 66' and won't remove the trigger safety on a 73' for that reason. 

 

As far as I know(because I haven't met you or shot with you) I like you and think we'd get along just fine in person; BUT I 100% disagree with you on the matter of removing a lever safety from a 73'. I truly hope you never have one because it really hurts when that lever gets thrown open and in my opinion is it is not worth the risk. I'll leave the name calling and demeaning statements to others here

 

 

 

I had an OOBD week before last, with my 66. Scared the crap out of me. Wasn't fun at all. 

[Captain Bill Burt 1,417]

17 minutes ago, Tyrel Cody said:

 

Then you must not be reading. I have and others have. I have reported it happening with a '66 myself; that is the reason I sold mine and won't buy another.  I recently had a conversation with a well respected(not well known outside of East Tennessee) gunsmith and he's had OOBD with a 66' and won't remove the trigger safety on a 73' for that reason. 

 

As far as I know(because I haven't met you or shot with you) I like you and think we'd get along just fine in person; BUT I 100% disagree with you on the matter of removing a lever safety from a 73'. I truly hope you never have one because it really hurts when that lever gets thrown open and in my opinion is it is not worth the risk. I'll leave the name calling and demeaning statements to others here

 

I should have been more clear.  I've heard of OOBDs, but I've never heard of an OOBD that occurred due to lack of a lever safety and resulted in someone being injured.  I was right next to a shooter who had an OOBD once, not due to a lever safety issue.  It was loud, scared me a bit nobody was hurt.  We stopped the shooter, who gathered herself and within a few minutes continued the match. 

 

I think we would get along just fine.  I hope we can shoot together someday, but I won't have a lever safety so you may prefer a different posse.

[Captain Bill Burt 1,417]

10 minutes ago, Kingsley said:

Ha.  Well I will tell you I did have several OOB with my original 73, that was built by Cody.  No lever safety.  But they were very slight and I did not know I was even having them.  I noticed it when I started have failure to extract empties, at Ide's many years ago.  For whatever reason I measured my lever against Foxy's and noticed my throw was almost 3/4 inch shorter.  Yet both Cody guns were built at the same time.  Yep, had slowly bent the heck out of the lever.  Cody fixed for me, and installed the safety back in.  Back in those days he was not having the safety in the gun.

 

But I will also tell you I had a few OOB on my WB rifle, that had a lever safety in, and was fully functional.  So the safety is not a 100% sure OOB guarantee.  I figured out on that rifle I had distorted/warped the carrier and the rounds were getting hung up when cycling through the carrier.  After about 40 rounds, and the gun was all nice and hot it would swell and restrict the feeding of the round enough for an OOB, got to love free floating firing pins.

 

Have a great weekend, Foxy, Nicki and I are off to a several week adventure shooting.

 

CC

Thanks CC!  Have fun with your adventure shooting!  

[Sawhorse Kid 192]

7 hours ago, Rancho Roy said:

The Ruger revolver will not fire with simply removing transfer bar. The hammer face will not touch the firing pin. The hammer face needs to be welded and reshaped and a half cock notch created. If no half cock notch, the firing pin will not allow the cylinder to rotate to load.

 

Thank You.

[Tyrel Cody 2,998]

1 hour ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

I think we would get along just fine.  I hope we can shoot together someday, but I won't have a lever safety so you may prefer a different posse.

 

Didn't say I wouldn't posse with you,  just disagree on removing the lever safety.  I'm sure I do things that others don't agree with, but I hope that doesn't keep us from shooting together.

[Clint Steele 15]

If you are a lawyer, the lawyering never stops.  Dagnabit Lawyers!!!!!!

[watab kid 246]

its just another bit to give you trouble , but then there are a lot of bits that give us trouble , if yours are shooting well enjoy them , if not consider the mods ... i have not had issues with my NV revolvers , i did with my taurus but that has been fixed , on the other hand i did with my hammer mounted pins as well , just enjoy what your doing - life is short , 

[Yul Lose 4,168]

1 hour ago, Clint Steele said:

If you are a lawyer, the lawyering never stops.  Dagnabit Lawyers!!!!!!

I believe you know a little bit about what you speak, counselor..

[Dusty Devil Dale 271]

1 hour ago, Yul Lose said:

3 hours ago, Clint Steele said:

If you are a lawyer, the lawyering never stops.  Dagnabit Lawyers!!!!!!

I believe you know a little bit about what you speak, counselor.

AGREE. 

The lawsuit and discovery processes are both usually brutal and costly in terms of money, stress, and friendships.  Anyone who has been through either of them will tell you to avoid it if at all possible.  I have, and I can tell you that the convenience of removing a transfer bar or lever safety certainly to me is NOT worth the grief and life disruption it could cause. 

 

But the wonderful thing about America is that everyone gets to make their own choices, and live with the consequences, good or bad.