How the No2 Revolver Lost its Hammer Spur (A Correction & A Story)

Published on December 6, 2022
Duration: 12:46

This video by Ian McCollum of Forgotten Weapons corrects a long-standing misconception about the Enfield No. 2 Revolver's hammer spur. The original Mk I had a spur for single-action capability, but the Mk I* was redesigned as double-action-only without a spur. McCollum clarifies that the primary reason for this change, as documented in British List of Changes B2289 (1938), was to simplify training and standardize trigger pull for all troops, not solely for the Tank Corps as previously believed. The video details the official reasons and debunks the persistent myth, highlighting the challenges of historical accuracy and misinformation.

Quick Summary

The hammer spur was removed from the Enfield No. 2 Mk I* Revolver primarily to simplify training for general issue troops by providing a consistent double-action-only trigger pull for every shot, rather than for specific issues like snagging in tank crews. Official documentation like List of Changes B2289 (1938) cites training simplification and standardized trigger pull as key reasons.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction: Why No Hammer Spur?
  2. 00:03Book Mention: 380 Enfield No. 2 Revolver
  3. 00:09Enfield No. 2 Mk I (with spur)
  4. 01:12Enfield No. 2 Mk I* (without spur)
  5. 01:52Official Document: B2289 (1938)
  6. 02:07Reason 1: Consistent Trigger Pull
  7. 03:15Reason 2: Increased Confidence/Safety
  8. 03:55Reason 3: Accuracy vs. Simplicity
  9. 04:25Reason 4: Training Simplification
  10. 05:07Source Document Details
  11. 05:25Book as a Source of Error
  12. 06:08Curator's Misinformation
  13. 07:15Origin of the Tank Corps Myth
  14. 09:14Holster Demonstration & Personal Verification
  15. 10:13British Document Accessibility
  16. 11:49Conclusion: Hammer Spur Removal

Frequently Asked Questions

Why was the hammer spur removed from the Enfield No. 2 Revolver?

The hammer spur was removed from the Enfield No. 2 Mk I* Revolver primarily to simplify training for general issue troops by providing a consistent double-action-only trigger pull for every shot, rather than for specific issues like snagging in tank crews.

What was the official reason for the Enfield No. 2 Mk I* design change?

According to British List of Changes B2289 from 1938, the official reasons included simplifying training, standardizing trigger pull, increasing confidence in handling, and reducing snagging points, all contributing to easier use for the average soldier.

Did the British Tank Corps influence the removal of the hammer spur?

While the Tank Corps did express concerns about snagging in 1936, this was a contributing factor to the discussion, not the primary official reason for the Mk I* design's adoption. The main driver was broader training simplification for all troops.

How does the Enfield No. 2 Mk I* differ from the Mk I?

The original Mk I had a hammer spur and could be fired single-action or double-action. The Mk I* variant removed the hammer spur and became double-action-only, ensuring a consistent trigger pull for all shots and simplifying training.

More General Videos You Might Like

More from Forgotten Weapons

View all →