The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Black Powder and Cowboy Action Shooting

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 28, 2012, 06:50 PM   #51
MJN77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2009
Location: on a hill in West Virginia
Posts: 687
Quote:
If you have time to reload something, it would probably be your rifle. Depends on the heat of action. I can just see men reloading a colt or rem on the field during the action.
Quote:
You would have to be hid out to relaod anything from the muzzle. You couldn't do it on a horse
Actually, I have read extensively about Mosby's rangers in the ACW. There are more than a few accounts of reloading revolvers in combat. Even in the Mexican war, I have read about Texas rangers reloading their revolvers in a fight. In one account, "Jack" Hay's men reloaded their Walkers and Patersons on the run, on horseback, after emptying them into an overwhelming group of Mexican lancers that surprised them near Izucar de Matamoros. After reloading, the rangers then turned, charged the lancers and emptied them again, before repeating the scene a few more times. So it was done. Probably more often than you or I will ever know. I have also read about rangers reloading revolvers in the battles of Monterey, San Juan Teotihuacan, and Zacualtipan, not to mention countless fights with Mexican guerrillas. That's probably why combustable revolver cartridges have been around since at least the late 1840s or early 1850s. So, yeah folks did reload in battle, and they could do it on a horse.

Last edited by MJN77; March 28, 2012 at 06:57 PM.
MJN77 is offline  
Old March 28, 2012, 08:19 PM   #52
noelf2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stafford, VA
Posts: 1,744
Well let's scale it down a bit. We both start with empty revolvers. A colt for you, and a remmy for me. You start loading yours and I'll run directly at you and try to crack your head with the butt of mine. No cheating! Once and for all, that should prove the remmy is better....
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither.
noelf2 is offline  
Old March 29, 2012, 09:47 AM   #53
Noz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2009
Posts: 643
How far apart are we? I can get one loaded and capped pretty quick.
Noz is offline  
Old March 29, 2012, 11:26 AM   #54
zullo74
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Posts: 374
Noz,

Why don't you just charge him first and club him to death.
zullo74 is offline  
Old March 29, 2012, 11:30 AM   #55
maillemaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2010
Posts: 1,010
I count 61 revolvers up there.

At $300 a piece, that's an $18,000 wall of revolvers. Probably warrants an insurance rider.

Steve
maillemaker is offline  
Old March 29, 2012, 01:09 PM   #56
noelf2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stafford, VA
Posts: 1,744
Quote:
How far apart are we? I can get one loaded and capped pretty quick.
The distance would be inversely proportional to the probability of your success.


Quote:
Noz,

Why don't you just charge him first and club him to death.
I said "no cheating"...
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither.
noelf2 is offline  
Old March 29, 2012, 09:04 PM   #57
MJN77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2009
Location: on a hill in West Virginia
Posts: 687
What makes you think the empty revolver would be my only revolver?
MJN77 is offline  
Old March 29, 2012, 09:35 PM   #58
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
From a mechanical point of view, I would imagine the Remingtons would take top honors for their solid frame and relative few parts.

It seems to me that increased frame strength+fewer parts=superior weapon.
gyvel is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 01:40 AM   #59
arcticap
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2005
Location: Central Connecticut
Posts: 2,973
That would be true if placing form over function.
But if putting function first, then its harder to judge which one actually functions better.

It could also be judged based on accuracy instead of strength, or accuracy instead of function.
So then what should the criterion be?
The criterion should be based on what's most important to each individual consumer. Then each consumer judges or votes using their own pocketbook when they decide which one to purchase.
And since every gun has its own quirks, then maybe one particular Colt is better than an individual Remington, and then yet another particular Remington is better than another totally different Colt than the 1st.
Some may just be better than others, but maybe not better than all of the them.

Last edited by arcticap; March 30, 2012 at 01:48 AM.
arcticap is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 05:39 AM   #60
radom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 21, 2000
Posts: 1,296
Acutully from the idea in 1865 was the rem is a total fail due to the soild frame. If its a .44 mag with 2400 for sure but BP its a total fail. The top frame deflects all the BP gunk down into the action and the things jam like a 1930 M-1 trial gun. Plus they are hard as all heck to cap so there is a reason why they surplused all of them in 1865-66. also you can tear down a gunked up colt faster.
radom is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 06:01 PM   #61
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 11,693
Quote:
there is a reason why they surplused all of them in 1865-66.
Can you give any documentation for that? It's my understanding that a fire at Colt halted production for quite some time and the Remington became the number one issued sidearm until Colt got back up.
Hawg is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 09:09 PM   #62
HisSoldier
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 9, 2007
Location: Oregoncoast
Posts: 1,467
It has been said that soldiers later in the war tossed their Colts to the sides of the trails when they got a Remington.

From an engineering standpoint the Colt is very poorly designed, so much so that I have to wonder what possible reason Sam Colt had for the cantilever design, as it has no advantages (Except in ease of manufacture) and many weaknesses. Weakness is weakness, and saying that since it was a BP arm weakness doesn't matter is baffling to me, why would one design a firearm to be weak?

What happened is that competition resulted in a superior design, which is why a competitive manufacturing world is good for everyone. If the open top design were superior newly designed revolvers would have them today.

Also, theoretically the Remington should be more accurate, not less, and if they are less accurate it has to be because of something other than the solid frame causing it. I suppose with the hammer back the sight length is slightly longer on the Colt, but the fact of the rear sight's tiny available area and it's movement should more than offset any such advantage.

Even Colt abandoned the cantilever frame later, long before smokeless powder came along, by the way.
__________________
I have CNC produced 416 stainless triggers to replace the plastic triggers on Colt Mustangs, Mustang Plus II's, MK IV Government .380's and Sig P-238's. Video on installation in Sig;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh2v_-87DRM
HisSoldier is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 09:18 PM   #63
zullo74
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Posts: 374
You are entitled to your opinion.............even if it is bogus!
zullo74 is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 09:26 PM   #64
Smokin'Joe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 27, 2010
Posts: 133
The open top design is not weak. And Colt had a top strap design 20 years before Remington.
Smokin'Joe is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 09:33 PM   #65
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 11,693
Quote:
It has been said that soldiers later in the war tossed their Colts to the sides of the trails when they got a Remington.
Infantrymen were issued sidearms at the beginning of the war but soon tossed everything they didn't have to have including revolvers and bayonets. The only ones to have revolvers for the rest of the war were cavalry, officers and some artillerymen. C.S. cavalry carried from 4-6 revolvers of whatever make they could get. U.S. cavalry used what they were issued.

Quote:
Even Colt abandoned the cantilever frame later, long before smokeless powder came along, by the way.
Colt went to a top strap because the military wanted it.
Hawg is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 10:04 PM   #66
mykeal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2006
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 2,757
Don't confuse him with facts. He wants to believe it, let him. He'll sleep better.
mykeal is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 10:16 PM   #67
noelf2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stafford, VA
Posts: 1,744
Quote:
The open top design is not weak. And Colt had a top strap design 20 years before Remington.
The open top wasn't weak considering what it was designed to shoot. The top strap design was obviously superior in withstanding higher pressures from BP cartridges and later, smokeless powder cartridges. I doubt the idea for the top strap design was to make a more solid frame as much as it was to ease disassembly, but turns out it does make a stronger frame. Thanks to Colt, or whoever thought of it. As HisSOLDIER said, the top strap design has survived to this day and the open top is history. To argue this is to lie to yourself.
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither.
noelf2 is offline  
Old March 31, 2012, 05:15 AM   #68
4V50 Gary
Staff
 
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 16,754
Handguns were not issued items to infantry privates.

The early war (1861) line infantryman was as adventurous and obsessed with gear like our couch commandos are today. First long march and a lot of things were tossed including big knives, revolvers, clothing and other non issue items. After the first battle where they were proven useless , the bullet proof vests (they weren't) were tossed. The lighter the better.

I suspect that a lot of guns in the tintypes or other images belonged to the photographer's studio. There's an image of Geronimo with a Dance revolver. I doubt he ever used one.
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe!
4V50 Gary is offline  
Old March 31, 2012, 05:47 AM   #69
Smokin'Joe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 27, 2010
Posts: 133
Quote:
The open top wasn't weak considering what it was designed to shoot.
Isn't that the way it's supposed to be? Engineers design products to perform a certain function. Then they add in a safety factor to prevent catastrophic failures. This is true of cars, buildings, dams, aircraft and guns. Neither the Colt open top design nor the Remington top strap design could handle a modern magnum load. They were not designed to.
Smokin'Joe is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10563 seconds with 9 queries