|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 2, 2017, 10:29 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 17, 2015
Posts: 355
|
Speed Loading a Cap and Ball
I have couple of cap and ball revolvers.
There is no such thing as speed loading one, of these is there? I have CVA Capper which like to shuck primers some times, and a bit difficult getting caps seated at times. A long time ago when I had another muzzle loader, I made cartridges by soaking onion skin paper in whatever the stuff is. Brain freeze. I 'm tired. I got varying results. Used thin coat of Elmers to stick the cartridges together, not the best idea and made them more narrow than the chamber. United the end of cartridge. Using the rammer to seat ball on to pof two lubed felt wads ruptured the remainder. I don't believe it was any faster. Of course some of our Ancestors carried two or more loaded cylinders. Always wondered about the caps staying on and charge not rattling out. Anyone "speed load" or extra loaded cylinders? |
May 2, 2017, 11:10 PM | #2 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 20, 2012
Posts: 5,854
|
The old timers carried extra cylinders for there caps and balls, especially the remy 58s. They use what is known as a "paper cartirdge" to reload cylinders but had spares for a fast reload when on the back of horse. The early Petterson revos had to use them, later they had the carts.
|
May 3, 2017, 12:33 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 22, 2016
Posts: 3,879
|
The speed load during the days of percussion caps and ball was the New York reload. Cavalry troops would often have more than one pistol because the horses could carry them. Bill Hickok carried two revolvers, not to shoot one in each hand.
Today, the 1858 and its easy to remove cylinder makes reloading cap and ball revolvers as fast as can be without having a second revolver and is the fastest reload you can get.
__________________
"We always think there's gonna be more time... then it runs out."
|
May 3, 2017, 07:59 AM | #4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
|
Quote:
|
|
May 3, 2017, 01:37 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 30, 2010
Posts: 1,635
|
There is not much, if any, evidence to suggest that soldiers, at any rate, carried extra cylinders. There are no issue records that I am aware of.
Steve |
May 3, 2017, 03:17 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 13, 2013
Posts: 173
|
The only written record I've ever seen of a reload done by swapping cylinders was in reference to Texas Rangers using the Colt Paterson. It should be noted that this was before one could reload a Percussion revolver on the gun itself (ie. without disassembly).
Ignoring the aforementioned source, there's no primary sources suggesting it was done (at least in the military (that I know about, I'm not perfect and neither is my research)), and no battlefield finds that support the idea either. It could have been done by civilians, but would have required hand fitting. Given the abundance of military surplus revolvers in those days, I think the few people who would carry a revolver expecting to have to reload it in a fight would probably just buy a spare pistol. And keep in mind, the average person almost certainly wouldn't have needed that much firepower. Last edited by Trum4n1208; May 3, 2017 at 03:31 PM. |
May 3, 2017, 06:04 PM | #7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
|
Quote:
|
|
May 3, 2017, 06:20 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 9, 2016
Posts: 270
|
Totally agree
|
May 3, 2017, 06:53 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 20, 2011
Posts: 564
|
I doubt if cylinder changes were done back in the 19th Century. Some, like Hickock, carried at least two revolvers for more than six shots, and some, like Jesse James carried four or more during the Civil War.
|
May 3, 2017, 07:11 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
|
If people would just put some rational thought or at least do some research and quit trying to give people back then a modern mindset they would realize most of the stuff perpetuated by Hollyweird didn't happen or was very unlikely. I never heard of anyone swapping cylinders on a 58 until Eastwood did it in Pale Rider and after that it was all over the place.
|
May 3, 2017, 08:32 PM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 20, 2011
Posts: 564
|
Quote:
|
|
May 4, 2017, 10:23 AM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 13, 2013
Posts: 173
|
I actually think one of the more realistic depictions of a realistic "gunfighter" type of person in a movie was Clint Eastwood in "the Outlaw Josey Wales." One man carrying a large number of pistols, especially in the percussion era is WAY more historically accurate than the idea of someone swapping out an unloaded cylinder for a loaded one. That movie has its flaws of course, as do they all.
Having said that, the cylinder swapping scenes in "Pale Rider" or "Hell on Wheels" is about as cool as can be. Folks just need to remember that's all it is, and that it isn't historically accurate, at all. Quote:
|
|
May 4, 2017, 11:09 AM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 19, 2008
Location: High & Dry in Missouri Ozarks
Posts: 2,113
|
Quote:
__________________
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 |
|
May 4, 2017, 11:32 AM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Model12Win tripped the triggers.
Hey, I trust Clint Eastwood to let me know everything I need to know about the history of swapping cylinders !!!
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. |
May 4, 2017, 12:02 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 30, 2010
Posts: 1,635
|
I did see someone post on facebook a few days ago a supposedly dug-condition revolver cylinder. Of course it doesn't mean it was a spare. But it was, supposedly, a dug cylinder.
Steve |
May 4, 2017, 12:47 PM | #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
|
Quote:
|
|
May 4, 2017, 03:33 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,246
|
I'd have a VERY hard time believing that the only thing that made it was the cylinder alone, that the rest disintegrated. Wood is certainly a much different situation. One cylinder by itself certainly implies it was solo. But maybe it was removed from the gun and dropped there for whatever reason.
And I'm not pushing that spare cylinders were a thing then. |
May 4, 2017, 03:45 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,246
|
Those who used the Patterson would have certainly understood the value in a swapped cylinder as a reload. Not many of those fighting in the Civil War I'd imagine though. But then to find spare cylinders buried you'd REALLY have to luck on them as they likely weren't common.
Not everyone could afford several handguns and going into war I'd suppose one would do whatever they could to give them an advantage. And I'm sure this sounds as though I'm advocating for the use of spare cylinders, and maybe I am to an extremely small degree. Common? No. Done? Quite possibly. |
May 4, 2017, 04:37 PM | #19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
|
Quote:
|
|
May 4, 2017, 05:10 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Well in the movies, when someone discards a gun, they take off the slide and toss pieces in opposite directions. Maybe that's what the did with revolvers back in the day too!
But also, when you fire off all five shots (because nobody loaded six for safety reasons), the cylinder becomes a pretty good weapon to throw at someone, and the rest makes a pretty good war hammer. Prolly why you just found the cylinder. . </troll>
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. |
May 4, 2017, 05:21 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,246
|
Hard to believe farm equipment separated it so far as well, especially as metal rusts together. Not that likely in my opinion, though I'm hardly a metallurgist. I don't buy that one, especially as farm equipment hasn't been that powerful for long.
|
May 4, 2017, 05:53 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
|
You haven't dug up some of the stuff I have. Farm equipment drags stuff and beats stuff all to heck.
|
May 5, 2017, 04:37 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 17, 2015
Location: South Central MO / Africa
Posts: 1,111
|
Below is taken from:
http://www.civilwarhome.com/capballrevolver.html Interesting read on carrying multiple revolvers (4+) per person / cavalryman. Seems, high capacity was as big as an issue back then as it is now. "Officers like partisan leader John Singleton Mosby believed the revolver was the ideal cavalryman's weapon. Countering the opinions of officers who argued that a saber was "always loaded," Mosby believed edged weapons were "of no use against gunpowder." Mosby's men, who favored the .44 Colt Model 1860 Army above all other revolvers, found rapid-fire handguns ideal for close range surprise charges on supply wagons or Federal patrols. James J. Williamson, one of Mosby's men, remembered that: "with us the fighting was mostly at close quarters and the revolver was then used with deadly effect." Many Yanks agreed with Mosby. A Federal officer wrote that his regiment "had never yet drawn the saber in a charge, and never would charge with anything but pistols." Perhaps the most significant devotees of the six-gun during the Civil War were the irregular warriors of the Border States. In contrast to Mosby, whose men were enlisted in a recognized unit which had had a clear military purpose and value, Kentucky, Missouri and Arkansas guerillas, whether they professed loyalty to the Union or the Confederacy, were often little better than bandits - a trade many adopted as a postwar career. Like Mosby, however, the guerillas found six-guns ideal for ambushes, where a blizzard of bullets rapidly delivered at close range negated the range advantage of rifle-muskets or breech loading single shot carbines. Men who relied on the revolver as a primary weapon often carried a number of them. Many of Mosby's troopers holstered two handguns on their belts and another two on their saddles. Rebel guerillas in Missouri outdid the Virginia partisans and often carried as many as five six-guns. In September, 1864, Federal soldiers in Missouri "killed six of ["Bloody Bill"] Anderson's gang, taking from their bodies 30 revolvers." Bloody Bill himself met his end shortly afterward, and the Yankees removed "four revolvers, two watches, and about $500 in gold and greenbacks" from his body. When another bushwacker, Bill Stewart, was killed by cattleman W. H. Busford, who he was attempting to rob: "four revolvers were taken from his person."
__________________
NRA Life Member |
May 5, 2017, 05:08 PM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,487
|
I was assured by a reenactor* last week that he could change cylinders in his Remington on horseback. He admitted that he could find no example or description of a means to carry extra cylinders.
Changing cylinders on a Colt would be more problematical, since you would 1. have to free the wedge and 2. keep track of the separated barrel as well as the receiver and two cylinders. * This was the same guy who said the 1859 Sharps could be fired ten times in ten seconds. When questioned, he confirmed, a round a second. I would grant you a round every ten seconds, maybe ten a minute under good conditions, but a shot a second was arrant nonsense. |
May 6, 2017, 07:32 AM | #25 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 13, 2013
Posts: 173
|
Quote:
No criticism meant to you at all, Jim Watson. Hope it wasn't taken that way. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|