Darby eyelet attached to C, levels of solidity/security?

There seems to be different ways they are connected to the C of the handcuffs. My R.C.S pair have a nice smooth transition from the C of the cuff till it becomes the eyelet or whatever which the chain link goes through. My Hiatt best is an abrupt rectangle, almost like it's stuck on there. But I highly doubt it would just be "stuck" on to the C. Does anyone have any info on this and how they are done and if they are a strong  connection to the C so it would not merely snap off on the Hiatt?

2 images on here showing what I mean:

The C(?) as you call it, is known as the bow or shackle. The 'Clevis; is either riveted to the bow, or cast as integral.  If you put audio to your videos, you add correct terminology and educate the wider community. 

Normally I call that the bow, but I have been hearing it referred to on Darby cuffs as the C and the D to refer to the lock tube, by people in a Discord I am in, so I started using that short-hand myself. I have audio on my videos. I stay silent because my videos are intended as a primarily visual look at the features, the build/design and how they are used. If English is their language they can choose to scroll down and read what I have put in the description for opinions and other details.

be leader and not a follower, don't use their slang, next they might start used all other letters of the alphabet. 

It's like curb bit chain being called "waffle" link because people are to lazy to research or don't care, others pick it up and then many are talking nonsense,

Short-hand is about a quicker way of conveying information like LOL instead of taking the time to write "I am laughing out loud!". I used C which is the shape of the part of the handcuff I am talking about, because I am trying to get some information on the type of strength or possible weakness of the different ways the eyelet or I suppose "Clevis" might be the right term, are connected to the cuffs them selves. But so far I am just getting comments about my use of short-hand, the fact I don't talk in my videos and that I should be a leader and not a follower, by following your example.

I remember reading "Clevis" on this forum in regards to Darby handcuffs recently, but when I googled it to see what part of the handcuff that was I got absolutely nowhere, other than seeing things bolted together which made zero sense to me when trying to understand what part of the handcuff the clevis is. So rather than assume I guessed correctly and pretend I know what I am talking about, I talk about things like "eyelet area where the chain link goes through" or the "swivel connector" because while it might not be the exact terminology, it gets the point across about what I am asking about.

$

Mark Lyons O--O Cuffs wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2021

Sorry the image has not shown up.

silentbd wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2021

Mark Lyons O--O Cuffs wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2021

Sorry the image has not shown up.

Ah I loaded it up in Chrome and I see it now. That looks like a genius design. Though I am not sure what you are referring to with this image?

LOL I get it. My logo lol. Excellent :D

I was referencing the verbal abuse that you just received  for naming a handcuff part after the letter that is similar.

God forbid if you were to call the cuff in my picture a $ cuff.  I wonder what would happen to you!

Yeah. I'm just asking a genuine question because I want to understand how strong that connection is, since it seems to me as if it might not be as strong on the Hiatt BEST as it appears it might be on the R.C.S.  But I know Hiatt do/did good quality work so I just want to understand it and whether it might snap off or something etc.

I don't believe I have ever seen a clevis separate on a cuff that was pounded or riveted together like your example in photo 1.
The forged one in #2 appears that it would be the stronger of the two. 

I am not sure if this answers your question but as all the other answers you received so far, offered only negative comments and direct orders on how to conduct yourself when engaged in conversation, I hope my answer helps answer the question.

SBD, have you considered all the years of manufacturing experience that have gone into the darby?  Add to this the limited design changes in construction which may have lead to a better cuff?  I am sure you could draw your own conclusion for that and the lack of stories told about cuffs broken at that point.  

Ian McColl wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2021

SBD, have you considered all the years of manufacturing experience that have gone into the darby?  Add to this the limited design changes in construction which may have lead to a better cuff?  I am sure you could draw your own conclusion for that and the lack of stories told about cuffs broken at that point.  

The lack of stories or having seen no cuffs for sale in a broken manner as I was wondering about, was the only thing I had to go on. But just because I have not seen it, does not mean it is a non-issue. So I thought I would come here and ask people who have way more protracted experience with such cuffs. I think my assumption of it being secure is possibly accurate. I know the Darby design has been around for yonks, in little varying design differences.

Hi, I know your OP hasn't been up for many days so we won't know otherwise until more have seen your post.  I think most will consider it a secure cuff, Having said that, there are other issues with the cuff that would have been up for questioning more than the clevis, eg. the practical application of the cuff and lock security.  Going back to your original question. The tang of the clevis which goes through the bow and is peined over, is only half the width of the clevis proper. Therefore, inherently has less strength than the integral design. I don't think that this was the consideration for moving to the stronger design, moreover a cost saving,  

Many years ago there was an eBay seller with maybe 100 or more broken Darbies and half cuffs. I bought a few which had keys because it was easier and cheaper than finding original keys. These must have come from someone doing repairs. But I recall that many had damage in the clevis area, Either the clevis had pulled out or the bow was bent near the clevis etc. You might think that a cast bow with integral clevis might be weaker than hand wrought steel (either hard or soft) but I've not seen a broken cast clevis, only broken cast hinges - then you just through it out. Wrought steel can be repaired, but I don't know about cast clevis'.  I guess almost every cuff has its weak point. 

Hi Paul, I wondered where  and why you had the half cuff (104 and 115) you kindly gave to me. I thank you for them as I use them all the time for testing darby keys I make. BTW, they all came with clevis in place and not bent or fractured.

Can the chain be locked up on the derby cuff like S&W and Peerless ?

Trevor1954 wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2021

Can the chain be locked up on the derby cuff like S&W and Peerless ?

I just tried with my R.C.S pair and I was able to get the chain to bind, not sure how much force would be able to be applied and stay bound but it definitely got bound seemingly solidly.

In 1919 a patent was granted to SMCo
It is shown in Alex Nichols book page 344 and is attached with kind permission from Alex.

SBD I am sure you would damage wrists well before damaging the cuffs.  I'm told  it takes about a tonne of mass to shear 6.4mm bolt. The dimension of the tang of a darby clevis is approx. 4x4.