Uncommon revolvers

I suspect that you wouldn't carry a revolver like that, other than in your hands.

I suspect that some of them were developed for very specific applications, like ship board encounters or possibly stage drivers, where lots of firepower is a good thing.
 
A few more uncommon revolvers.

Russian/Slavik grenade launcher.
eff8cc6170879ddbdda22ac0bfb68tt.jpg


Crudely made, open bolt, full auto machine revolver.
927a61685b9ab5620518f461b5989.jpg


The "zulacia" semi-auto revolver. (The Webley Fosberry wasn't the only one)
688285d0870ede86bb5ef5d3ea899tt.jpg


The "Union" semi-auto revolver is another example of a semi-auto revolver.
bc6a990283557427ec86c89ac1ba3tt.jpg


Eli Whitney (same guy who invented the "cotton gin") hooded cylinder, percussion revolver.
79.jpg


Below is the 1839 Wesson-Leavitt revolver, not to be confused with Smith and Wesson. Winfield Scott carried a gun of this type during the Mexican War, but few were produced before Colt's lawsuit (based on the loading lever's similarity to his own Dragoon) ended production.
6337934096_0f6649f51d.jpg





.
 
Last edited:
Some more:....

Below is the "Puckle Gun" (revolver) invented by James Puckle. It fired round bullets at Christians and square ones at Turks.
PuckleGun-1.gif


Below is a German flintlock revolver from the late 16th century.
snaplock-revolver.jpg


Below, I'm not completely sure if this gun rotates or not, and thus if it's truly a "revolver" or not, because of the trunnions that intimate that it was carriage mounted and I can't tell if it would still rotate or not. That large hole in it center though does intimate that is a hole for an arbor, so perhaps it did rotate but I can't tell for sure. But I included this nine barreled Turkish cannon for the "wow!" factor anyway, and maybe it DID rotate, but I can't say for sure.
538px-Early_16th_century_Ottoman_volley_gun.jpg


Below, a Russian revolving mortar. Reminds me of the one drawn by Da Vinci.
machinemortar.jpg


Below, flintlock pepperbox revolver.
flintlock-pepperbox.jpg


Below, three rotating barrels, matchlock revolver.
attachment.jpg



.
 
Allright, the "Russian Revolving Mortar" scares the bejesus out of me.

There's just really no good space a human can occupy near THAT thing when it's loaded. And since all of us here stick to the same four rules, I would have to assume that we can all (or most of us?) agree that loaded or unloaded, there's no "safe" spot to be with that thing, even if you are the guy operating the device. :eek:
 
More....

A revolving barrel flintlock revolver, that has a separate pan for each barrel.
796px-Pistol_28429.jpg


Below, a wheel lock revolver.
6-chamered_wheel-lock_revolver_Germany_1590_by_Wendelin_Boeheim.jpg


Below, a revolving rifle owned by King of France Louis XIII.
rewolving_matchlock_3.jpg


Below, a high capacity "Pepperbox".
tumblr_mdryv1Demb1qel1wd.jpg


Below, a "Rhino" revolver. The barrel aligns with the bottom most cylinder chamber, theoretically reducing muzzle jump.
3530992_orig.jpg


Below, a Confederate States revolving cannon.
800px-ConfederateRevolvingCannon.jpg




.
 
Last edited:
Sevens wrote:
Allright, the "Russian Revolving Mortar" scares the bejesus out of me.
There's just really no good space a human can occupy near THAT thing when it's loaded. And since all of us here stick to the same four rules, I would have to assume that we can all (or most of us?) agree that loaded or unloaded, there's no "safe" spot to be with that thing, even if you are the guy operating the device.
Click to expand...

On that Russian revolving mortar, it appears that inside the circle there are four positions in which one could stand up between the spokes of the "wheel". So either four different people could each occupy a space between each "spoke", and each of the four people could be responsible for an area of fire for their guns that they would fire and reload, or else one guy could operate the whole thing by ducking down and going under each spoke and then rise up and fire the motors in that spoke's battery.

It doesn't look any more dangerous to stand BEHIND the mortars than it would to stand behind a small single FIXED POSITION mortar or cannon. Obviously they aren't going to recoil back and hit you since they are attached to the rim of the "wheel" and it appears they don't all fire at the same time. I'd rather be standing inside the wheel firing than to be on the outside where the barrels are firing. It doesn't really appear that dangerous when you think about it. Plus I doubt if the Czar gave much worry to whether or not anyone would get hurt firing it, as long as most of the damage was done to the enemy.

Below, here's another view of the previously mentioned Hotchkiss revolving cannon. Similar to the Gatling concept.
resized5888.jpg




.
 
Last edited:
Years ago I worked for the Pennsylvania State Museum and Historical Commission. We were doing a system-wide inventory, and one of our stops was the Pennsylvania Military Museum and 28th Division Shrine in Boalsburg.

We were going through one of the out sheds, which involved unloading everything, and near the bottom of everything we came across a huge crate with lots of military markings, but no museum accession numbers.

We got it out and found an absolutely pristine Imperial German 37mm Hotchkiss Naval Cannon of the kind that can be see in the photos here: http://landships.activeboard.com/t43039340/37mm-hotchkiss-revolving-cannon-2-new-photographs/

We were never able to find anything on it. There were absolutely no records of any kind in the museum, no accession numbers on either the crate or the gun, nothing.

The best guess is that it was captured during World War I, or possibly WW II, became part of the items that the 28th Division got, and were given to the PA military museum when it was created in the late 1960s.
 
Who had rightful ownership of it Mike? The museum because it was found on their property even though there were no records of any kind? Possession being 9/10ths of the law and all that?



.
 
There were a couple of theories, and I'm not sure if they were ever solved.

Theory one is that it was the personal property of Theodore Boal. He came from a wealthy family (Boalsburg is named for his family), served in the 28th Division, and after the war shipped back quite a few items for the 28th Division shrine he built plus a planned museum (not built).

Second theory is that it was part of stores captured by the 28th Division during either WW I or WW II, and later accessioned to the museum.

I don't think there was ever really any doubt about the ownership of the gun. It was intended to be at Boalsburg, it's just not (or wasn't when I left) known exactly how it got there.
 
Hello webleymkv,,,

...as well as a M1892 Lebel that's been converted to .22 LR for sale.
Click to expand...

Oh man! :eek:

You do know I have a propensity towards owning centerfire/rimfire pairs,,,
But $675.00 is just a bit more than I can spend this month.

I've bookmarked the website though,,,
I'll keep checking and hope for some disposable cash to come my way.

Aarond

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top