Speed Loading a Cap and Ball

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.
 
You haven't dug up some of the stuff I have. Farm equipment drags stuff and beats stuff all to heck.
 
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."
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: I'd bet money he couldn't do it under fire, at a hard gallop. A lot of folks seem to forget that doing this during a range trip or a horseback ride is significantly different than doing it during a firefight.

No criticism meant to you at all, Jim Watson. Hope it wasn't taken that way.
 
I'd bet money he couldn't do it under fire, at a hard gallop. A lot of folks seem to forget that doing this during a range trip or a horseback ride is significantly different than doing it during a firefight.
Click to expand...

He might can do it sitting on a horse that's not moving but I've owned horses and I'd bet money he couldn't do it at a walk let alone a hard gallop.
 
I think the percussin' revolvers are why the two gun rig made it into Hollywood. If you needed more than 6 shots you packed a second revolver. The six shooters were a huge leap in firepower over the single shots so fast reloading was never considered an issue for them. You shot them dry and either pulled out another one or a big fighting knife. They were reloaded at a less frantic time.
 
spare cylinders

They make holsters for spare cylinders I have two.If you have concerns about the caps coming loose a slight pinch before putting them on tightens them up
 
I have done a bit of shooting with a Sharps and would like very much to see (or see a movie) of someone firing ten rounds in ten seconds with even a metallic cartridge one.

Jim
 
I have done a bit of shooting with a Sharps and would like very much to see (or see a movie) of someone firing ten rounds in ten seconds with even a metallic cartridge one.
Click to expand...

It can't be done, not with a paper cutter anyway and a cartridge model would have to be held at waist level and just loading and firing and not trying to hit anything. I seriously doubt it could even be done then.
 
* 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.
Click to expand...


Hahahahah! I shoot combustible cartridges in my Sharps in competition. I can get off about 16 shots in a 5 minute course of fire. But I'm pretty new at shooting it.

Steve
 
It's like I have read about old battlefields from time began, archeologists dig these expecting a trove of weapons from them. Vary rarely do they find any. Most of all the weapons finds of any era have been from burial sites rather than battlefields. From time immemorial battlefields have been picked clean of weapons and anything else useful. Battle of Little Big Horn there should have been at least 600-700 weapons of some kind from the US Calvary left on the battlefield when it was over. During the late 1990's archeological dig they found mostly lead bullets and cartridge cases. The site had been picked clean within hours of the outcome, just like almost all of them since mankind embarked on wars.
 
Didn't Sitting Bull warn his people of dire consequences if they took anything from the dead soldiers? Nobody ever listens to the prophet!

I would think that period cased sets of percussion revolvers would have come with extra cylinders (as some Paterson sets did) if swapping was much in vogue.
 
Didn't Sitting Bull warn his people of dire consequences if they took anything from the dead soldiers? Nobody ever listens to the prophet!
Click to expand...

Not to my knowledge. Even if so he wasn't the only war chief there. Crazy Horse and Gall were there among others. What weapons were left on the battlefield were junk not worth salvaging.
 
I had read that the revolvers taken from the soldiers were dumped by the Indians into a river during a crossing to get rid of them as it was evident they were from Custer and the possessor might get hung/captured/ill treated if they had a cavalry pistol. I don't know if the carbines met a similar fate. I see where the serial number range of "Custer guns" (TDs) are listed in the back of the Dixie Gun Works catalog. The rifles were much more useful to an Indian than a revolver so getting rid of the pistols was not as much of a sacrifice.
 
I had read that the revolvers taken from the soldiers were dumped by the Indians into a river during a crossing to get rid of them as it was evident they were from Custer
Click to expand...

Why would it be evident they came from Custer? A lot of Indians carried revolvers and most of those were cavalry revolvers.
 
The vast majority of SAAs produced were under contract to the US Army until the mid to late 1870s. An Indian in possession of a cavalry revolver at that time would be assumed to have taken it from a dead cavalryman as very few civilians were yet to have them. I don't know if the pistols were martially marked with inspector's marks or not. There were not that many produced for civilian use. As usual, many bandits had them (either stolen or purchased from a soldier who would report it "lost").
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top