Free Spin Pawl on an Outlaw?

[Outrider #72622]

I asked this on another forum too but I also wanted to ask my SCORRS pards.
Anybody out there ever put a "Free Spin Pawl" on a '75 Remington clone (or even a Colt clone)?  Can it even be done?
I have a couple '75 Outlaws I would like to do this to

[Flint]

It would take some study.  I believe the Ruger gate has an internal projection that pulls back the pawl...  I don't have one, (and don't plan to) so I'm not sure.  Someting internal, the gate, or half-cocked hammer would have to pull the modified hand back.

My question is Why?  The pawl with the hammer at half cock usually, and should, place a chamber in line with the loading port and ejector rod, and ejection is easy.  A free spin pawl requires the shooter to manually locate the chamber by sight and by braille to eject, and in a Ruger, which does not align, (The Old New Model), this makes sense, but in a half-cock loader like the Colt or Remington, I see a free spin pawl as a detriment....

[Fox Creek Kid]

...I see a free spin pawl as a detriment....

DITTO!! I have seen more problems with these in Roogers  at CAS events. The dreaded Bang! Click! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Several times at a loading table I have corrected many Rooger shooters with free spin pawls as they are letting the hammer (transfer bar) down on a loaded round. 

[Steel Horse Bailey]

DITTO!! I have seen more problems with these in Roogers  at CAS events. The dreaded Bang! Click! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Several times at a loading table I have corrected many Rooger shooters with free spin pawls as they are letting the hammer (transfer bar) down on a loaded round. 

Outrider and all, Howdy!

FCK, I have one of those on my remaining Ruger.  I don't see it as a detriment, but to you, Outrider, I also don't see the point.  The load one, skip one, load 4 drill goes out the window with Rugers and free spin pawls.  The problems you've noted, FCK, is NOT because of the pawl; it's because the SHOOTER hasn't bothered to thoroughly learn how to properly use their equipment.  (It's kinda like the media and some politicians blaming guns for crimes, NOT the criminals.  But in a minor - but possibly unsafe - way!  )  In other words, IMHO, learn the quirks of the equipment and then - presto-changeo - no problems at FCK's loading table!  You're right, Kid, to look, 'cause the pawl WILL allow a mistake, if not done properly.

[Marshal Will Wingam]

The free-spin pawl is made to overcome the Ruger mis-alignment with the loading gate open, as near as I can tell. There are 'smiths out there converting the new Rugers to work like the old 3-screw, which was the same as a Colt or Remington. That would be my choice, although I'm sure one could learn how to work the free-spin pawl and use it as nicely as anything else and possibly to an advantage. I prefer the detent because I can align the cylinder by feel but that's merely preference. I've seen shooters with Rugers, Colts and Remingtons set the hammer down on a loaded round so that is an operator error, not an equipment issue.

[rickk]

All it takes to see which cylinder is empty in a Ruger is to look.

it seems like to correct someone who does it wrong you would just have to ask him to look at the back of his cylinder and tell you if there is a loaded round under the hammer. If he didn't grasp how to do it beforehand, he would then, and hopefully forever.