WWI Old Pattern Substitute Revolver

I just purchased a Spanish "Old Pattern" revolver. It has all the proper British proof marks and the acceptance mark.. The gun has little if any original finish but the grips are very good and the gun is tight for a Spanish make. It is double action only. These were substitute standard revolvers used by the British army in WWI. It is chambered for .455.

In that fact is my question. I notice that the cylinder does not lock up except when the trigger is pulled. It stays locked until the trigger is released. The questions are:

Is this manner of cylinder locking correct?
Should this gun be double action only?
Is this safe to shoot with light loads (probably Trail Boss under a 250 LRN) assuming the mechanics of the gun are correct?

The gun was made by Orbea Hermanos. Cylinder and barrel look very good with no rust or pitting. Thanks for any and all replies. John McP

The lock up is probably correct.

Whether it's a shooter...no. Unless you can find a good gunsmith who competent to declare it such.

My understanding is that is how the lockup is on webley type revolvers. Try asking at britishmilitariaforums.yuku.com. There is a forum for british revolvers and someone there can help you out.
john

OP-1 and OP-2 are all the same. The cylinders do rotate without locking. They are a bit scary at first look, but do work well and were better than nothing. Some are quite well made as they were made by a consortium of makers. You can use a S & W Victory mainspring in them, by the way, if yours breaks.

I also posted in the Yuku site and got similar replies. One big question was that my pistol is double action only, the hammer will not cock back. Today I took the pistol apart and found that indeed there is no internal mechanism for single action, the gun was purpose built as a double action only. All internal parts large enough to be stamped were numbered the same as the pistol and I found no reason to think that any of the parts are not original. The action is very simple and straight forward. I do know that at various times the British dictated double action only except for Officers with respect to pistols. The famous Grant R stated his two OP pistols were capable of single action and one other also confirms single action ability. Since the gun has British military acceptance markings it must be correct. However, I am looking for conformation that at least some of the OP pistols were designated double action only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdmcomp

I do know that at various times the British dictated double action only except for Officers with respect to pistols..

---

This is totally untrue. From the adoption of the Beaumont-Adams in 1855 until the Mark I* 38 Enfield in 1939 British Service revolvers were all true double-action; that is they had both hammer and trigger cocking mechanisms. It was not until during the First World War that officers could be supplied with issue revolvers, and until then all such pistols were for other ranks. Officers had to supply their own revolvers and the only stipulation was that they should take the issue cartridge; this was often ignored. When the Mk I* Enfield was introduced, with only trigger cocking, it was because the army had finally accepted that a revolver was for quick short range work and not for careful slow fire target shooting.

QUOTE Today I took the pistol apart and found that indeed there is no internal mechanism for single action, the gun was purpose built as a double action only. However, I am looking for conformation that at least some of the OP pistols were designated double action only. UNQUOTE The OP revolvers are all true double-action (trigger and hammer cocking). However, there is no extra mechanism for "single action". When the hammer is pulled back its toe picks up the nose of the trigger and tips the trigger forward. This raises the pawl (hand) and rotates the cylinder. At full cock the trigger nose catches in the bent on the hammer. I suspect that you will find that the bent on your hammer is worn, or badly cut in the first place.

Peter