What kind of gun did Wild Bill Hickock and Wyatt Earp use?
- Thread starter 45automan
- Start date
FreakGasolineFight
New member
How so?
FreakGasolineFight
New member
Oh, you meant the original post. I suppose it sort of is out of left field. I thought you meant my post.
'Tis disgusting nonetheless.
'Tis disgusting nonetheless.
As B.N.Real pointed out, this thread is about 10 years old, you guys do realize that, right?
In my opinion, ZVP resurrected the thread for a legitimate reason (and that's rare for such an old thread), but arguing about anything other than Hickock's pistol choice just seems silly at this point.
In my opinion, ZVP resurrected the thread for a legitimate reason (and that's rare for such an old thread), but arguing about anything other than Hickock's pistol choice just seems silly at this point.
cloudcroft
New member
True. Besides, Earp (and his kin) was as much a criminal as lawman, so let's not glamorize the bum.
-- John D.
-- John D.
Hickok was known to have owned a number of different pistols, including I believe an 1860 Army Colt, and at least one S&W .44 cartridge pistol, I believe a single action American model, a top break with an 8" barrel. I believe he simply liked the Navies, and their feel, and shot them well. As to their power level, comparing them to a 380 may not be entirely accurate. Keith wrote of talking with Civil war vets and others that had used various pistols in fights, and they generally thought tha Navy was a decent fighting pistol for it's day, even comparing it to the 38 spl 158 gr RNL load, and feeling that the stopping power was superior to that load. Notice I did not say "any load ever made" for the 38 spl. The old 158 gr RN lead load didnt enjoy a very good reputation for stopping power. The difference was most liekly, as Keith mentioned, that the 36 cal soft lead ball, while lighter, tended to deform like a hollow point does, and make a more serious wound than a harder RN bullet. This was a well known phenomenon back in the day, and the round ball was generally thought a better stopper on men than the conical bullets available for the 36, tho the latter had better penetration.
There are also known pictures of Hickok carrying pistols in holsters. Because he carried his pistols in one particular way at one time doesnt mean thats the only way he ever carried them. Same as the Navies themselves. They are what he's best knwon for, but he also was known to have owned, and used various guns over time. I believe in the Tuttle fight he used either an 1860 or a Dragoon, I don't recall which.
I for one, also believe that Hickok may have had more than the one pair of Colts Navies, just as many serious shooters today, and over time, have had a number of guns, and spares.
There are also known pictures of Hickok carrying pistols in holsters. Because he carried his pistols in one particular way at one time doesnt mean thats the only way he ever carried them. Same as the Navies themselves. They are what he's best knwon for, but he also was known to have owned, and used various guns over time. I believe in the Tuttle fight he used either an 1860 or a Dragoon, I don't recall which.
I for one, also believe that Hickok may have had more than the one pair of Colts Navies, just as many serious shooters today, and over time, have had a number of guns, and spares.
I just don't get it???? How could either one defend themselves and or enforce the laws of the old west without a semi auto gun made of plastic, high capacity magazines, night sights,and high tech self defense ammo???? And neither one has been through an "internet forum approved" self defense combat course!!!
I mean, come on guys, ask any Mall Ninja worth his salt; you cannot defend yourself properly without modern high tech weapons and lots of training certificates!!!
I suspect that both Earp and Hicock were fictional characters in dime store novels...
I mean, come on guys, ask any Mall Ninja worth his salt; you cannot defend yourself properly without modern high tech weapons and lots of training certificates!!!
I suspect that both Earp and Hicock were fictional characters in dime store novels...
Mike Irwin
Staff
"well the folks the original question was about carried those guns ...what? a hundred and 30 years ago?"
That's called history.
This is just raking up an old, dead thread.
That's called history.
This is just raking up an old, dead thread.
cloudcroft
New member
blume357,
Thanks, but I'd rather hang out with John Wesley Hardin...at least I'd know which side of the law he was on that particular week.
-- John D.
Thanks, but I'd rather hang out with John Wesley Hardin...at least I'd know which side of the law he was on that particular week.
-- John D.
Last edited:
cloudcroft
New member
Yes, like when "lawman" John Selman walked up behind John Wesley Hardin (Acme Saloon, El Paso, TX) and shot him in the back. I guess he knew he'd not survive a face-to-face encounter. Or "lawman" Pat Garrett, who is suspected of having done something similar (shoot first) to Billy the Kid, despite Garrett's words to the contrary.
"Back shooting" wasn't considered honorable -- and certainly not something to brag about without bringing cowardly shame upon yourself -- but apparently, even "the law" did it back then...
-- John D.
"Back shooting" wasn't considered honorable -- and certainly not something to brag about without bringing cowardly shame upon yourself -- but apparently, even "the law" did it back then...
-- John D.
Last edited:
At least some members of the Clanton family are not only still around, they have a *website* up arguing their side of the affair and discussing Wyatt's shortcomings.
While we can chuckle at this being discussed on the Internet (me, I think it's hilarious) they have copies of some of Wyatt's court testimony after the fact that really does look screwball.
And Doc was a definite maniac...
While we can chuckle at this being discussed on the Internet (me, I think it's hilarious) they have copies of some of Wyatt's court testimony after the fact that really does look screwball.
And Doc was a definite maniac...
As to whether an SA is still a valid personal defense choice, my daily carry rig and the only centerfire gun I own...
To be fair, the sights are massively upgraded, it's a 357 loaded red-hot, reloads are in Bianchi speed strips
and being a Ruger it's safe to carry six-up. But it's otherwise a decent replica of the 1873 Colt...
To be fair, the sights are massively upgraded, it's a 357 loaded red-hot, reloads are in Bianchi speed strips
and being a Ruger it's safe to carry six-up. But it's otherwise a decent replica of the 1873 Colt...Mike Irwin
Staff
""Back shooting" wasn't considered honorable -- and certainly not something to brag about without bringing cowardly shame upon yourself -- but apparently, even "the law" did it back then..."
First rule of gunfighting.
Survive.
First rule of gunfighting.
Survive.
"This is just raking up an old, dead thread."
I thought it was a "classic, timeless" thread?
I believe the Navies with a full charge and round ball runs a little over 1000 fps vel.
Someone mentioned having to take a percussion gun completely apart every time you shot it. I havent found that to be neccesary, only taken the cylinder out and cleaned it and the barrel in hot water, and wiping off what I could of the frame and hammer, reloading it, and never had any trouble with them, including leaving them loaded for a year or more. I should say I've had an occasional fast hang fire when leaving them loaded that long, but they always did fire.
Yes, grease over the balls is a nuisance, but it wasnt done all the time back in the day from what I understand. The chain fire question is more of a cap problem than grease over the balls. The grease does help lube the bullet, and keep fouling soft.
I thought it was a "classic, timeless" thread?
I believe the Navies with a full charge and round ball runs a little over 1000 fps vel.
Someone mentioned having to take a percussion gun completely apart every time you shot it. I havent found that to be neccesary, only taken the cylinder out and cleaned it and the barrel in hot water, and wiping off what I could of the frame and hammer, reloading it, and never had any trouble with them, including leaving them loaded for a year or more. I should say I've had an occasional fast hang fire when leaving them loaded that long, but they always did fire.
Yes, grease over the balls is a nuisance, but it wasnt done all the time back in the day from what I understand. The chain fire question is more of a cap problem than grease over the balls. The grease does help lube the bullet, and keep fouling soft.
Bill DeShivs
New member
For the record, Hickock often carried a cut down 10 ga. double barrel under his coat.
Gun was cut to pistol configuration and slung over the shoulder.
Gun was cut to pistol configuration and slung over the shoulder.