Colt Pocket .31?

ZVP · July 23, 2011, 11:02 AM

Does anyone know why Colt sold the Pocket with and without a Loading Handle?
I have herd to load the "Wells Fargo" model, that you ram the balls home with the center pin.This sure seems like a wobbly way to load!
I think the revolver with the short Loading Lever looks the best of the pair! The Wells Fargo looks naked!
I have seen Pommel Holsters for these little Pistols in the book Packing Iron, but I can't see these little pistols as Horse Pistols! In the book are several pictures of nice origonal Belt Holsters for the .31 due to the popularity of this model.
Even though low powered, they are beautifull revolvers!
ZVP

Doc Hoy · July 23, 2011, 01:31 PM

The revolver sans loading lever would have been lighter, probably cheaper and perhaps easier concealed (or easier removed from concealment quickly.)

I don't know how many of these revolvers were manufactured (in the two variations). It would be an interesting piece to the conversation.

I think the production of the two variants reflects Colt's perception of the market which, we already know, may or may apply logic or behave in a logical way.

I have often wondered about the leverless version from a user's standpoint. For personal protection, it is unlikely that a carrier would feel the need for more than five shots, although if it were me I would want 500.

The idea of loading with the arbor is a philosophical red herring. I have never tried it, but I doubt that it works very well. If someone on the forum has loaded in that way, I would be happy to read about it.

I agree with you that the variant with the lever is a better looking pistol.

Fingers McGee · July 23, 2011, 02:21 PM

The 1848 Pocket pistol was the first pocket revolver after the Paterson and carried the same barrel profile as the Paterson, the improvement being the lockwork. There were less than 10,000 of these pocket pistols made with barrel lengths of 3, 4, 5, and 6 inches, squarebacked triggerguard, oval bolt stops, and having only one safety pin on the cylinder.

In 1849, Colt came out with the Improved Pocket Pistol that had the round triggerguard, rectangular bolt stops with leads, Dragoon style loading lever, and five safety pins on the cylinder. The 1849 could be had with 3, 4, 5, or 6 inch barrels like the 1848 model.

In 1850, the pocket pistol could be had with a six shot cylinder as well as the normal 5 shot.

Production of 1848/49/and 50 pocket models totaled 340,000 when they were discontinued in 1873.

DrLaw · July 23, 2011, 08:33 PM

Yes, the ram-less 'Wells Fargo' or 'Baby' Dragoon can be loaded by putting the cylinder down on a hard surface and using the arbor as a ram. You need really soft lead to do this, sized just over the size of the cylinder chamber, so as to shave off a tiny bit of lead, but still be able to force the ball in without leverage.
I've done it with mine, but I was one of the lucky ones that was able to get the Triple-P loader before it was stopped in production. Since I would have to take the revolver apart anyway to load, it is no big deal using that.

My advice, get a loader.

The Doc is out now.

Newton24b · July 23, 2011, 09:03 PM

well if youve noticed colt started with small pocket pistols without a lever. then went out of business. then he created teh patterson, without a lever. after a short while customers complained about the crappy loading and he created the loading lever. then he went back to pocket guns based on his new frame style, and left out the loading lever.

as far as why he would leave the lever out...

1. gun shoots empty fast, reloads slow if you need to remove the barrel and find a hard surface to load on. try that in the field. so make it so everyone buys 2 guns that are hard to load fast.

2. product testing. dont put all the final cosmetic finishs on a product till you see customer demand. remember the funny "rust coat" line in Fargo?

Newton24b · July 23, 2011, 09:05 PM

loading levers were an afterthought to colt. most likely the intention was to make customers buy two hard to reload guns so you could shoot 10 times THEN worry about fidning a stump or log to load on top of. instead of every 5 shots.

madcratebuilder · July 24, 2011, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newton24b

well if youve noticed colt started with small pocket pistols without a lever. then went out of business. then he created teh patterson, without a lever. after a short while customers complained about the crappy loading and he created the loading lever. then he went back to pocket guns based on his new frame style, and left out the loading lever.

The Colt Paterson was first, well before (12 years) the pocket .31's. You had the Walker and Dragon, with loading levers between the Paterson and pocket .31.

The first pocket .31's did not have a loading lever to reduce cost and weight. Feed back from users convinced Colt to add a loading lever. They later Wells Fargo contract did not have loading levers because of cost and concealment factors.

Colts personal favorite revolver was the Trapper model. It did not have a loading lever but did have a hole in the front of the frame to allow the chambers to be charged with a "Mushroom" tool.

Doc Hoy · July 24, 2011, 09:14 AM

.....just by shear dumb luck, I get it right.

And now out of unabashed self agrandisement I must hasten to point out that in my post, I guessed .....and it was a guess.....that cost, weight and issues relating to concealment were among the consideration for including or not including a loading lever.

and now, the eminent scholar, MR. MCB has verified that I guessed right.

Sometimes luck is as good as erudition. A fortunate thing for me and the reason why I am so rarely right.....I am neither lucky nor learned.

Hawg · July 24, 2011, 09:34 AM

Quote:

I am neither lucky nor learned.

I'd argue both of those statements Doc.

ZVP · July 24, 2011, 08:38 PM

The .31 is not that much smaller than the .36 and I am sure owners felt safe with the smaller framed revolver. It had a good muzzleblast therefore it made owners think they had some power. In truth the .36 is a lot more gun!
I can totally see why the little revolvers sold so well! Heck I want one cause they are just cool!
I'd get the Loading Lever model since I plan to holster it.
ZVP

madcratebuilder · July 25, 2011, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Good Doctor

and now, the eminent scholar, MR. MCB has verified that I guessed right.

I've been called a scoundrel but never a scholar

Most of us grew up watching westerns on TV and at the movies. All the cowboys carried iron on their hip. In reality many towns, villages and almost all large cities had laws against open carry. Concealed carry was the choice of many who wanted some means to protect life, limb and property.

July 23, 2011, 11:02 AM	#1
ZVP Senior Member Join Date: June 20, 2009 Posts: 1,102	Colt Pocket .31? Does anyone know why Colt sold the Pocket with and without a Loading Handle? I have herd to load the "Wells Fargo" model, that you ram the balls home with the center pin.This sure seems like a wobbly way to load! I think the revolver with the short Loading Lever looks the best of the pair! The Wells Fargo looks naked! I have seen Pommel Holsters for these little Pistols in the book Packing Iron, but I can't see these little pistols as Horse Pistols! In the book are several pictures of nice origonal Belt Holsters for the .31 due to the popularity of this model. Even though low powered, they are beautifull revolvers! ZVP

July 23, 2011, 01:31 PM	#2
Doc Hoy Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Naples, Fl Posts: 5,440	Zee The revolver sans loading lever would have been lighter, probably cheaper and perhaps easier concealed (or easier removed from concealment quickly.) I don't know how many of these revolvers were manufactured (in the two variations). It would be an interesting piece to the conversation. I think the production of the two variants reflects Colt's perception of the market which, we already know, may or may apply logic or behave in a logical way. I have often wondered about the leverless version from a user's standpoint. For personal protection, it is unlikely that a carrier would feel the need for more than five shots, although if it were me I would want 500. The idea of loading with the arbor is a philosophical red herring. I have never tried it, but I doubt that it works very well. If someone on the forum has loaded in that way, I would be happy to read about it. I agree with you that the variant with the lever is a better looking pistol. __________________ Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath.

July 23, 2011, 02:21 PM	#3
Fingers McGee Senior Member Join Date: March 19, 2008 Location: High & Dry in Missouri Ozarks Posts: 2,113	The 1848 Pocket pistol was the first pocket revolver after the Paterson and carried the same barrel profile as the Paterson, the improvement being the lockwork. There were less than 10,000 of these pocket pistols made with barrel lengths of 3, 4, 5, and 6 inches, squarebacked triggerguard, oval bolt stops, and having only one safety pin on the cylinder. In 1849, Colt came out with the Improved Pocket Pistol that had the round triggerguard, rectangular bolt stops with leads, Dragoon style loading lever, and five safety pins on the cylinder. The 1849 could be had with 3, 4, 5, or 6 inch barrels like the 1848 model. In 1850, the pocket pistol could be had with a six shot cylinder as well as the normal 5 shot. Production of 1848/49/and 50 pocket models totaled 340,000 when they were discontinued in 1873. __________________ Fingers (Show Me MO smoke) McGee - AKA Man of Many Colts - Alter ego of Diabolical Ken; SASS Regulator 28564-L-TG; Rangemaster and stage writer extraordinaire; Frontiersman, Pistoleer, NRA Endowment Life, NMLRA, SAF, CCRKBA, STORM 327, SV115; Charter member, Central Ozarks Western Shooters Cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision see things as they are, not as they should be. Ambrose Bierce

July 23, 2011, 08:33 PM	#4
DrLaw Senior Member Join Date: June 3, 2007 Location: Wild Western Illinois Posts: 559	Yes, the ram-less 'Wells Fargo' or 'Baby' Dragoon can be loaded by putting the cylinder down on a hard surface and using the arbor as a ram. You need really soft lead to do this, sized just over the size of the cylinder chamber, so as to shave off a tiny bit of lead, but still be able to force the ball in without leverage. I've done it with mine, but I was one of the lucky ones that was able to get the Triple-P loader before it was stopped in production. Since I would have to take the revolver apart anyway to load, it is no big deal using that. My advice, get a loader. The Doc is out now. __________________ General McAuliffe said it best "Nuts."

July 24, 2011, 09:14 AM	#8
Doc Hoy Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Naples, Fl Posts: 5,440	Every once in a while.... .....just by shear dumb luck, I get it right. And now out of unabashed self agrandisement I must hasten to point out that in my post, I guessed .....and it was a guess.....that cost, weight and issues relating to concealment were among the consideration for including or not including a loading lever. and now, the eminent scholar, MR. MCB has verified that I guessed right. Sometimes luck is as good as erudition. A fortunate thing for me and the reason why I am so rarely right.....I am neither lucky nor learned. __________________ Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath. Last edited by Doc Hoy; July 24, 2011 at 09:24 AM.

July 23, 2011, 09:03 PM	#5
Newton24b Junior member Join Date: February 10, 2009 Posts: 974	well if youve noticed colt started with small pocket pistols without a lever. then went out of business. then he created teh patterson, without a lever. after a short while customers complained about the crappy loading and he created the loading lever. then he went back to pocket guns based on his new frame style, and left out the loading lever. as far as why he would leave the lever out... 1. gun shoots empty fast, reloads slow if you need to remove the barrel and find a hard surface to load on. try that in the field. so make it so everyone buys 2 guns that are hard to load fast. 2. product testing. dont put all the final cosmetic finishs on a product till you see customer demand. remember the funny "rust coat" line in Fargo?

July 23, 2011, 09:05 PM	#6
Newton24b Junior member Join Date: February 10, 2009 Posts: 974	loading levers were an afterthought to colt. most likely the intention was to make customers buy two hard to reload guns so you could shoot 10 times THEN worry about fidning a stump or log to load on top of. instead of every 5 shots.

July 24, 2011, 08:38 PM	#10
ZVP Senior Member Join Date: June 20, 2009 Posts: 1,102	Thanks guys! The .31 is not that much smaller than the .36 and I am sure owners felt safe with the smaller framed revolver. It had a good muzzleblast therefore it made owners think they had some power. In truth the .36 is a lot more gun! I can totally see why the little revolvers sold so well! Heck I want one cause they are just cool! I'd get the Loading Lever model since I plan to holster it. ZVP

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search