Huh? Wha?
Can someone explain to me how that would work?

Er, you'd have to install a motorized cocking mechanism then to fire the second and third bullet?

Because in a double action revolver the thing that pulls the hammer back is your finger via pulling the trigger. If you're only pulling the trigger one time, what is pulling the hammer back for the second and third shots?

There is the Mateba revolver, which is a odd duck that has an automatic's slide action grafted onto a revolver so every other shot is semi-auto. I suppose you could modify those to get a two-round burst.

Heh, good luck hitting anything that way - there's no evidence that the "fan the hammer" technique has ever worked to any degree of effectiveness outside of the movies.


-karma

"Fanning the hammer" results in your aim bobbling up and down. Plus you can't use the sights to aim. I am fairly certain in a competition you'd want to HIT the targets, not just send a lot of lead in the air.

The only time you see fanning is in old cowboy movies where they're not really even aiming, just shooting from the hip. It's done cos it looks cool, not because it's effective.


-karma

Sure. I intended that the computer circuitry that times the hammer and rotation could also handle the cocking mechanism of the hammer. Depending on how you want to do it, maybe when the revolver is set to BF the rotation of the barrel also cocks the hammer. Describe the mechanism as you see fit, I was just throwing out a possibility as proof of concept.

<john_wayne>They ain't missin' when they shoot yer hat of, pilgrim</john_wayne>

Fanning had two purposes. First, to put a whole bunch of lead in the air, like suppressive fire on a smaller scale. It wasn't going to hit anything, but it made your opponents keep their heads down. Second, to belch out a pretty significant cloud of smoke to make targeting you harder (and you'd be surprised at how MUCH smoke).

At the other end of the spectrum... As a child I used to watch the Paul Daniels Magic Show a lot. Daniels used to have a wide variety of special guests on (I still remember the "riverboat gambler" - a tourist attraction riverboat, that is - who could shuffle the deck once and deal any hand you liked). One of these was a professional trick shooter. Because of the confines of the studio, he did his tricks by bursting balloons with the wad that fires out of a blank (I'm sure Raygun or similar could explain how that works). The culmination of his act was to burst two balloons from a slick draw so fast that it sounded like he'd fired only the once - in fact they had to run the film in slow motion for you to see how it worked. He definitely fanned the second shot; I think what he did was draw and shoot (you all know how the quick-draw works, right?) then hold down the trigger and fan the second shot. Bloody impressive, even if it was at close range (it's a long time ago, but I think it was about 8-10 feet).

Incidentally, he was also the source of a fantastic piece of trivia. At that time (which would have been in the early 80's) the fastest gun in Hollywood was - the comedian Jerry Lewis. Go figure

I consider the Super Warhawk to be more like the Super Blackhawk because of the single action trigger, though with a more modern grip frame.

The +1 cylinder probably isn't going to happen as these large frame revolvers are just about near their max cylinder capacity when they're made. They can usually accept a slightly larger cartridge (say .454 to .475; Ruger's Super Redhawk is chambered for both .454 Casull and .480 Ruger, but the case rims of the .480 are within a couple hundredths of actually touching each other), but aren't big enough to add another chamber entirely. There are exceptions to the rule (for example, S&W's K-frame model 686 takes 6 rounds of .357 mag and the 686P takes 7 rounds in the same frame, while the larger N-frame 627 can take 8 rounds).

The Taurus Multi-6 is an SA revolver, from what I hear. There's precidence in canon for you. Anyway, it makes perfect sense that single actions would be SS and double actions would be SA.

Someone probably could, but that someone should also have to explain why one would want to do such a silly thing. They make semi-autos for a reason.

You'd need a bigger frame, then (hahahaha! well, for a troll... *sigh*). 7 rounds of .500 Mag aren't going to fit into that cylinder. Though 7 rounds of .44 Mag might.

If you want a good canon SA revolver, use the Cavalier Deputy. Its cheaper, has a larger capacity, and a better damage code than the Taurus. The Taurus does have a better conceal but also has to fire in SA mode when using "Heavy Pistol Ammo" and even that only gives it a DC of 7M. SA mode is a lousy 6L.

Might as well use harsh language in that case.