Bullseye or crescent ejector rod head?

[Kinda Sudden]

What is everyones take on bullseye vs. crescent ejector rod heads? I have never owned a six shooter with the bullseye head. What would the pros and cons be? I would think the bullseye would be faster or easier to unload with while the crescent would draw out of the holster faster with less drag. Am I missing anything here? Any problems with holsters and the bullseye head? Seems that Colt only used the bullseye for the first 6 yrs before going to the crescent on the SAA, was this a holster related improvement?

                                                          Thanks
                                                           K.S.

[Capt. John Fitzgerald]

K.S.,
Good question!  I have both and have never given it much thought.  From a practical standpoint, I can see no real advantage that one has over the other.  I suppose it could be argued that the bullseye, being a bit larger, is easier to manipulate than the crescent but let's face it, the crescent works just fine.  As for the crescent having an advantage when being drawn from a holster, it is not that much smaller than the bullseye and I have never heard of this being a problem.  So, why did they change over to the crescent?  Probably ease of production, though again, I don't see why it would be easier to make one than the other.  Most likely, someone came up with the crescent design and they felt that it was more attractive than the bullseye.  Personally, I like the looks of the crescent better.  Change for change's sake.
CJF

[Doc Sunrise]

I coudn't find any literature that definitively stated why the change took place, but the head changed at around the same time the ejector tube end was changed to eliminate it's sharp edges, which was snagging and cutting into holsters.  So, I am thinking the head was changed to address snagging concerns.

[Kinda Sudden]

Makes sense to me Doc. I have been putting together a detailed historical piece for my own use, if I ever get it near done I will make it available for anyone who is too cheap to buy the books (like me) I got 1879 around serial no. 52000 as when the change took place. I have not seen anything written as to why. Kinda funny, google results threw me right back here to my own thread.

                                                              K.S.

[Doc Sunrise]

Every once and a while the answer really is that easy.

[Wild Ben Raymond]

I'm no expert but for some reason I thought I remember either reading or someone telling me that it was done because the bulleye type ejector was more likely to break. I was larger & more likely to get caught on something. My 2 cents. WBR 

[Kinda Sudden]

Maybe breakage was a problem if they were made of iron like the frames, but even so, a bent head could tie things up too. The Holster theory seems to be the best so far but when looking at the Colt 1873, you got to admit aesthetics was a concern too and not just function. Either way, the crescent was more streamlined, less likely to hang up on the holster which had to be a real concern and less likely to get damaged. Only being used for 6 years and the fact that Colt never went back to it even after 100+ years with the crescent head leads me to believe there is little if any advantage in the two as far as reloading.

[St. George]

Here's what the Army thought about it.

From the National Armory Archives (N.A. 24):

National Armory
Springfield, Mass.
March 24,1885

Chief of Ordnance USA
Washington, D.C.

Sir -

I have the honor to inform you that I have this day sent by express to the Ordnance Office, a Colt's Revolver No. 114.475

Future contracts for revolvers should be made for revolvers of this pattern, differing from those purchased only in the form of ejector head and tube.  When the ejector-tube is dismounted from the barrel, the ejector-rod and spring can be removed from the tube.  The ejector head is sufficiently large for its office and does not project so much from the barrel and consequently is less liable to be caught in placing the revolver in the holster.

Respectfully,
Your Obedient Servant

A.R. Buffington
Lt. Colonel of Ordnance
Commanding

As soon as the crescent-shaped ejector rod head came about - the Army was interested, though they didn't receive the item until the 1885 contract, when by that time, it was commonly supplied on the civilian Colts.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

[Kinda Sudden]

The ejector head is sufficiently large for its office and does not project so much from the barrel and consequently is less liable to be caught in placing the revolver in the holster.

Keyword being in very interesting, would seem that maybe the "draw" was not affected as others here have remarked but the worry was in the reholstering.

[St. George]

Indeed.

The Army wasn't concerned with timers, blinding speed and reloading on the clock - but they were concerned with equipment and subsequent damage.

The earlier arrangement of the 'Bullseye' Ejector Rod head and the sharp-edged tube was cutting the holster interior - necessitating repair/replacement.

When you realize that the Frontier Army all too often had no operating funds, thanks to an impecunious Congress - equipment damage was the sort of thing needed to be watched for, and eliminated when possible.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

[Whiskey Hayes]

I have a pair of SAA's with the bulls eye ejector and a pair with the crescent.  Drawing the pistols I don't notice which type is in the holster.  I have a set of holsters without the rolled top edge.  The right hand gun reholsters without noticing what type of ejector head but the left hand gun sometimes will snag the holster with the bulls eye ejector.  I haven't caught the crescent doing this.  The right side butt forward holster could possibly be worse.  I'm not very knowledgable of the holster arrangement the cavalry used but this is the arrangement most often seen on TV.

I did purchase a set of holsters with the rolled top edge and don't notice the left hand gun snagging now.

[Jake MacReedy]

What is interesting, pards, is if you look at all of the Colt predecesors to the Model of 1873...the Richards Conversions and the Model 1872 Frontier Revolver (i.e., Open Top)... they all had crescent-shaped ejectors.  It seems odd that Colt opted to put the "bullseye" ejector on the Peacemaker at all!

Jake