Springfield Arms Double Trigger Navy Revolver

/ forgottenweapons
Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! shop.bbtv.com/c...
The Springfield Arms Company existed only for a brief period in 1850 and 1851, making revolvers designed by its chief engineer, James Warner, before being driven out of business by Colt patent lawyers. During that time, Springfield (no relation to the arsenal) made a variety of models in .28, .31, and .36 caliber and with a variety of barrel lengths and other features (including a well-designed safety notch to allow the guns to be carried fully loaded safely). In an attempt to avoid patent infringement, Warner separated the cylinder rotation and firing mechanisms into two different triggers on some models, including this Navy pattern example. The front trigger would rotate and lock the cylinder, and then it would trip the rear trigger which released the sear and fired the gun. This was not sufficient to save him from copyright infringement suits, though, and only about 125 of the double-trigger Navy revolvers were made.
Contact:
Forgotten Weapons
PO Box 87647
Tucson, AZ 85754

[@patrickgoodhart9294]

Someday you might do a family tree of all the Massachusetts and Connecticut gun manufacturers. I think some names have existed in five unrelated instances.

[@yazman4040]

Right there with you, I keep seeing the manufactures on the sides of these guns and it's all towns with ten minutes of me here in CT. One of which being the town I live in, which Ian pronounced wrong and it was hilarious.

[@roguetorino]

It's sad that both my home state of MA and CT are so anti-gun these days considering we are the birthplace of many famous firearm companies.

[@Ulquiorra4163]

I never knew that's what the 'Army' and 'Navy' stood for, thanks Ian ^^

[@arisukak]

The reason for those designations was because Colt had the cylinder of the 1851 revolver stamped with a scene of Battle of Campeche where the Texas navy defeated the Mexican navy (as a thank you to Texas for keeping him in business). His 1851 revolver became known as the "Navy Model" because of that. Colt then later developed the 1861 revolver which was .44 caliber that the army wanted. Note that the 1861 revolver also had the exact same naval scene on the cylinder and the army and navy used both models of revolvers.

[@stalkinghorse883]

Were the 28 and 31 caliber for Coast Guard and Marines?

[@Calvin_Coolage]

@ Maybe the intention was to reduce the chance of friendly sailors catching a stray bullet from trying to stop a boarding party. It could also be a cost thing, since naval personnel don't typically use small arms on ships.

[@ArchieKeen1]

Thinking about it this revolver is only a few steps away from a double action.....

[@skepticalbadger]

Adams released the true double action revolver only a year later.

[@pricklydingus8604]

Remember guys, smokeless powder self-loading firearms are just a passing fad.

[@mesa7336]

@@tyrssen1 Let's not forget those anemic "Intermediate" rounds! What're you gonna do with that, fight the war on gophers? Hah!

[@charlesoconnor6247]

Black powder is the supreme firearm I can literally make every component I need endlessly

[@andywilson8698]

Nice

[@rustyteague8574]

its f'd up but you may be more correct than this humorous anecdote suggests,

[@demtricolor]

It is, soon we will have phaser rifles and laser blasters.

[@tjroelsma]

For all it's manipulations with patents and lawsuits, resulting in forcing many competitors to go out of business, Colt has done rather miserably. They managed to create a virtual monopoly for themselves only to squander it by bad business decisions.

[@john-paulsilke893]

So many Springfields. Next thing you are going to say Mr Burns owns all three companies.

[@john-paulsilke893]

Release the hounds!

[@bellakaldera3305]

It looks like it would be particularly easy to turn it into a "Mormon Avenger" belly gun by removing the barrel, and securing the cylinder so that it could be fired without the barrel like a Pepperbox revolver. This revolver looks like it had some design advantages over the Colt, I think it is very cool.

[@kevinlee6580]

Legend says that Ian stores all the knowledge of guns in his hair and if you watch in a high enough quality you can see it grow just slightly as he talks.

[@lwilton]

That gun looks like it has seen one heck of a lot of use.

[@VTPSTTU]

If I'd been on the jury, I think I would have voted against this design being an infringement on the patent. The differences seem great enough to me that Colt should have lost.

[@rotwang2000]

Another off the "Ian should look at these guns some day" list ...

[@charlesoconnor6247]

This is by far my favorite channel and you do a great justice too these pieces of art ........ bravo my friend

[@FrodoSantana]

Sitting here at 7am like “What is Gun Jesus up to?”

[@thezucc2927]

Try 5 AM, man. Gun Jesus is always worth staying up for.

[@davidherbst]

Which Colt patent(s) did this infringe? I have been under the impression that the one typically responsible for providing an obstacle for their competition was regarding the cylinder rotating when the hammer was cocked.

[@tjroelsma]

@ David Herbst Just like with modern day patents Colt's patents were as generically worded as possible so they could be applied in the broadest sense. Anything vaguely simular to a Colt patent was attacked vigorously with lawsuits and as Colt was mostly the biggest and therefore wealthiest gun manufacturer of the time they crushed opponents. Compare it to the ridiculous lawsuits of the modern telephone/computer industry where a company like Apple have a patent that covers something like "a device that can translate a directional movement on a flat surface to a movement of the cursor on a computer screen." This does not only catch the traditional mouse, but also a pen and a trackball. So if you carefully describe your patent as broad as possible and even take into account features that aren't technically possible at that time, you can block almost all your competitors from developing simular techniques. And that includes a "work-around" like this, because it basically does the same thing as described in Colt's patent.

[@Giloup92]

David Herbst Colt, patent troll!

[@tjroelsma]

@TheRealColBosch Yes, it really looks like Colt was the one that kicked of the patent troll phenomenum the world still suffers badly from and that has killed of a lot of innovation.

[@lukerickert5203]

You can tell the timing isn't very reliable given all the peening around the cap pocket areas. Wonder how it was when new?

[@chriscone2684]

Cocking and firing double trigger is reminiscent of the 1858 Starr DA percussion revolver.

[@STB-jh7od]

I love the rest space on the cylinder. Wonder why more manufacturers at the time didn't follow suit.

[@shawnr771]

The safety notch is ingenious. Disassembly seems fairly straightforward for the 1850s.

[@Siskiyous6]

SO happy to see you back at RIA

[@hugebartlett1884]

As the cylinder is turned by the front trigger,the hammer accidentally knocked back then falling forward would not fire the gun,as the hammer would all on the same cap,the cylinder not having turned at all. An ingenious gun I reckon,one I would have willingly carried at the time.

[@kylecerneka8964]

Love the recent revolvers

[@brianmiller9365]

I like ALL forgotten revolvers... read pre- selfloading/semi-auto handguns. Just a cool era of firearms design and development. I do love acp's too. Thanks for the vid.

[@MB-nn3jw]

Number 108, the next revolver from this one, has just come up for auction in Australia.

[@uzi75020]

I'm thinking that even if they hadn't been sued, market forces would probably have put an end to this clunky design before too long.

[@joearnold6881]

When the flathead screw holding your gun together looks more like a rear sight than the rear sight....

[@richb313]

This really is a "Forgotten Weapon". Thanks Ian.

[@TheThingOneAndThingTwoSisters]

Cool revolver. Thanks for the history lesson Ian.

[@worldtraveler930]

I am thinking today's modern lawyers could have won that one for this company.

[@brooksman10]

Not against a behemoth like Colt. What puts companies out of business is not being able to pay the legal fees.

[@worldtraveler930]

@@brooksman10 Back in the day yes, today's Colt is not able to field the lawyers it once could.

[@flavortown3781]

Bore axis looks low bet it shoots prettybokay

[@tafino]

It’s 0600 and I’m wondering what odd firearm will be for visual breakfast today, followed by the first [odd] viewer comments. Bravo - Today will be hard to beat!

[@Arbiter099]

it's also a perfect time to get your breakfast out onto a tray.

[@acleme1709]

that's an awkward place for a hammer, better than blocking the sights I guess.

[@sethrich5998]

andrew clement Why would blocking the sights matter. On a single action the hammer has to be cocked to fire anyway. The down hammer blocking the sights is actually a feature to indicate it’s not ready to fire.

[@MrChrischi81]

Hi Ian I have been watching your vids for a few years now and just wanted to write it's nice to be able to escape from all the political stuff once and awhile thanks

[@leppeppel]

Two revolver videos in a row, score!

[@GavynTheNoob]

Rumor has it that when Gun Jesus runs out of ammo in a gunfight, he catches your bullet, loads it, and fires 300 shots

[@Trashcansam123]

This might be a stupid question, but were old revolvers like this cast or milled? The metalwork on the cylinder looks very intricate, and I'm not sure how pre 20th century steel manufacturing worked.

[@loupiscanis9449]

Thank you , Ian .

[@musikSkool]

Only one of them actually fires the gun, so I would argue that it only has one trigger, and one indexer. "Trigger" actually means "device that releases a spring or catch and so sets off a mechanism".

[@920utdoors9]

That safety catch is cool

[@rezlogan4787]

Neat design, but I’m glad these aren’t made as replicas. The combination of pulling the hammer AND a long pseudo double action trigger would drive me nuts.

[@KyriosMirage]

I really like that safety rest! Bloody patent lawyers.

[@AndrewAMartin]

The Remington 1858 has safety notches between every chamber...

[@sudmuck]

Cool gun! Now I wish to have one.

[@dasaggropop1244]

this is so much more stylish than later revolver designs

[@waldo865sti]

Holy crap you had an ad, I watch for you :3

[@jerryjohnsonii4181]

Interesting revolver Sir

[@flypaper2222]

so nice to see a real forgotten weapon..

[@PavarottiAardvark]

Remember kids, if you want to be a great inventor, think like Colt and Edison: take someone else's ideas, patent your version of it, and then sue everyone else out of business!

[@sethmerriman7743]

At this point what assholes are disliking gun Jesus videos??? Makes no damn sense. Love you Ian, your videos are the highlight of my day

[@r6984]

Thank you gun Jesus

[@kenhelmers2603]

Thanks Ian :)

[@JonVonBasslake]

Too bad Ian didn't actually explain how Springfield were in violation of Colts patent... I'm personally only a gun fan, not a collector or a historian and as such i wouldn't (and don't) know which patent(s) this may have been in violation of...

[@john-paulsilke893]

Jon Von Basslake patent trolls. If one patent failed to be described as a design used they would simply have moved on to another similar patent. Often the patent descriptions were so brad as to describe nearly anything. Probably something to do with cylinder rotation and firing with a single pull of the trigger.

[@vrisbrianm4720]

Ya, Colt's main patent is the cylinder and the trigger. I think Ian already mentioned this in other revolver videos

[@jackandersen1262]

Jon Von Basslake when colt patented a way of automatically rotating the cylinder, it was worded so that any method of automatically indexing the cylinder would infringe on his patent.

[@JonVonBasslake]

@@jackandersen1262 Vague patents are the worst... Though without seeing both this and Colt's designs up close, i can't really say how right or wrong Colt were in suing these guys...

[@samholdsworth3957]

A trve forgotten weapon! 🕺

[@blackwolf7777]

I would love to know more about how that court case played out.

[@jarink1]

Who else thought that rear sight was just a screw head?

[@randywatson8347]

Nice one.

[@angelbrown-8545]

Unusual revolver😮.

[@trainsbangsandautomobiles824]

I notice you dont link to your own site no more with another link to RIA. KZbin finally shut that down as well?

[@SoMDHarleyRider]

Seems like a worthy attempt. But I guess trying to fight Colt was futile.

[@Matt_The_Hugenot]

A very low bore axis for a revolver, must be sweet to shoot.

[@tim18wheels76]

It has two triggers and no shotgun barrel! No thanks I'll take a LeMat.

[@Noddy1103]

is there information about how these guns were manufactured back in the day? ie what tools and resources did they have?

[@Ksportin]

I wonder how that trigger pull compares to other double action revolvers. It looks bad but i suppose might not be any worse than normal

[@horisontial]

Adorable

[@YaBoiKennyG]

I'd agree good sir

[@BaronSamedi1959]

It's so funny many viewers commenting on the patent issue without even having read the patent claims Colt made in their patent application. Unless you do that, you have absolutely no leg to stand on.

[@DeadBaron]

I love black powder revolvers. If you think about it, they could still be viable carry choices today. Most self defense situations would be close range, you wouldn't need many shots, and the odds of you needing to reload like you're in a full firefight are almost 0%. People carrying 15 round double-stack magazines with spare mags are either paranoid, or *really* need to find a better place to live instead of a gang warzone.

[@hugebartlett1884]

I cannot honestly see how Colt was able to bring a lawsuit against this gun,as the mechanism is quite different from Colt's. Or was this an example of a famous man buying the Law to suit himself?

[@robertwesolowski2383]

May I ask why you wear gloves In Some videos but not in others. Like what is the criteria that you have for wearing gloves

[@randompanda876]

He’s answered before that he only wears gloves if the person that owns the gun also wears gloves. Guns aren’t that fragile and dropping a gun due to cotton gloves would be way worse than some oil from your hands that can just be wiped down after

[@Stannum-Aura]

I am doing a report in school, and I would like to be able to use this channel as a source for ww2 guns, but I need to know what he sources for these videos are, so I can verify the information

[@commentername9737]

The Order Of DCLXVI email Ian and ask him. His email is on the website.

[@picklewiickle.1583]

how he manage to get that patent. that design was around 200 years before he was born

[@Giloup92]

Colt, patent troll!

[@ForgottenWeapons]

There is a difference between a patent troll and a legitimate enforcement of a legitimate patent. Colt revolutionized small arms, and we have patent law to incentivize exactly that sort of innovation.

[@ukaszwalczak1154]

It's so weird, i like it-

[@paulEG6]

Is it just me or is the cylinder stamped 44?

[@jerryryan2925]

Have they ever reviewed the m44 mosin Carbine on this channel ? I've owned this weapon it was reliable,accuracy real good easy to field strip and the ammo was dirt cheap i sold it ten years ago I've regretted ever since

[@idontwanttoputmyname403]

I doubt it. The M44 isn't really special or forgotten.

[@foxtraner]

Anyone knows how much it was sold?

[@anonymous2513456]

what stops the ball falling out in the holster?

[@AndrewAMartin]

Friction. When you seat the ball in a percussion revolver, the cylinder face actually trims a small ring of lead from the slightly oversize ball, sealing the chamber tightly. This also helps somewhat to prevent chain firing (pulling the trigger and firing all of the chambers in quick succession) but it's a common practice to fill the front of the chamber with grease (lard or shortening), and/or to use wads between the powder and ball. My Remington 1858 Navy is nominally a .36, but you use .375 lead ball to load it.

[@philipvarga53]

So are SteveMRE and FW brothers?

[@chqara]

Cool

[@recipio6561]

Did it need percussion caps as well ?

[@MosoKaiser]

Yep.

[@RyeOnHam]

2 dislikes from Colt.

[@kylekomicbro1836]

Modelers take notes from this

[@martinmurd4495]

So that's where the Tranter revolver started out from?

[@SlowrideSteve]

Why did so many wild west gunslingers prefer navy models?

[@AndrewAMartin]

The Navy (.36) models were somewhat smaller and lighter than the Army (.44), but still powerful enough to be deadly at typical gun fight ranges; a lighter Navy model would be quicker handling. Pocket models in .31 were for much closer range and would be the hideout/backup piece.

[@badfoody]

Pretty sure this is how gun's work in warcraft hahaha

[@benbilbrey749]

My god those sights are TERRIBLE.

[@tejasborse2643]

Forgotten weapons plz take my comment seriously plz . There is a Gun called as INSAS assault rifle which is a totally made in India rifles , plz make a vedio on it if you get hands on one INSAS assault rifle , a rare assault rifle in world

[@xriz00]

So the company was sued out of buisness, but we're the people that bought the guns forced or supposed to give them up, legally?

[@pepperspray7386]

"For better or worse, patents exist in this country." FW Arguably patent laws are part of what makes the West great.

[@axelpatrickb.pingol3228]

It could have been worse had Colonel John Stevens not challenged the government over what the patent law means as the current understanding of the time is that the idea the patent wrote (no matter how different it is) is an exclusive domain of the patentee granted wth one...

[@OneShotNick92]

Russian roulette anyone?

[@ЗаурБорисович]

А где русские????