Bullseye Shooting with Pietta Navys, some random observations

[Stantheman86]

I think Elmer Kieth had that to say of percussion revolvers shooting high on purpose but don't have the exact quote reference right at hand. I'll do some research and see what I can find on this. He actually knew and spent time with living Civil war cavalry veterans that taught him a lot about their use.
I always replace the front sight blade to hit center with a six o'clock hold on a 25 yard bull. This is best done by cutting a dovetail in lieu of the original barrel sight cut or hole,. then one has some windage adjustment without bending the front blade, holding Kentucky or turning past TDC on solid frame guns.
Also an early bolt drop is no problem if the bolt itself is polished on it's dome and has all the corners dressed,. It actually has a benefit in bleeding off (reducing) cylinder inertia by the braking action of the spring tension on it riding the cylinder circumference before it drops into the lead cut and the stop knock. If it's dressed properly as Kuanhuasen teaches it will make a rub line but will not gall the cylinder. Actually all bolts noses , single or double action, need to be dressed in this manor for smoothest performance.

The rub line or "beauty ring" is of 0 concern to me , if I had a revolver I was that protective of I wouldn't shoot it. I also have bunches of Rugers , both SA/DA and I've done the "fluff and buff" as it used to be called, to a few of them and it works well.

I actually think a percussion Ruger GP100 would sell like hotcakes

Early bolt drop is oddly much less apparent on my revolvers with plain cylinders , as that deep , now laser engraved "roll engraving " on the Pietta cylinders can really be felt as the bolt rides across it

 

[Stantheman86]

Yup. According to Henry Heth's drill manual the 100 yard target was like 6 feet tall and 22" wide. As the range went farther out the width got progressively wider.

Some of our modern day recreational shooters have a hard time understanding that these weapons are reproductions of defensive and combat weapons and the Italian gun makers kept the original sight configuration.

Pietta finally tweaked the sights , I wouldn't be surprised if Pedersoli started soon.

The Colt revolver was designed by Sam Colt to be able to hit a man sized target from point blank to 100 yards, he was making the gun usable for his intended customer base. He probably would have thought a 25 yard zero for target shooting was silly. Remington did the same and I assume most revolver makers also did.

The rifled muskets were designed to shoot within an acceptable standard at 100 yards, to hit a man with most shots at 300 and to hit a company face sized target at 600. People can tweak loads and Minie sizes, to get better accuracy but that's outside the design of these weapons . People use mouse fart charges in revolvers to bring the POI down or they file on rear sights but that's a workaround for the original design .

All of my repro rifle muskets hit high at 100 , people who don't get the original design think this is a "flaw" .

Even the 03 Springfield had like a what, 347 yard battle sight zero and men were trained to aim at the belt of a soldier. The idea went on through today, we zeroed our M16s to hit pop up targets with Iron Sights from 25m to 300m

 

[gunpa]

As for shooting high watch Mike Bellevue. He says they were designed that way for the Civil war. He knows more than a little about such things.

 

[Stantheman86]

I notice that recent-manufacture Pietta Remington NMA revolvers have a taller, and dovetailed, front sight also.

I just think Pietta got tired of people thinking there was something wrong with the guns

My brand new Uberti 1858 has a dovetailed front sight too.

 

[M. De Land]

Well there is a proper timing sequence ( by design) and unsightly "Beauty rings" are pretty much relegated to the Ruger NM SA revolvers and the variants. The bolt only needs 3-4 lb pressure to operate correctly. The hand is the primary "braking force" for cyl lockup and that is the inherent problem with the Ruger action. The spring and sensplunger for the pawl ( hand) is too weak to begin with and with it's stationary position in the frame, it looses mechanical advantage as the cycle continues. The "braking " effect is at its least when it is needed the most.
The hand spring in the Colt action is carried with the hand and is progressively compressed as the cycle progresses . . . which delivers maximum braking force when it is needed most. This is also why the (reproductions) hand springs break frequently.
So, what to do ??? Jim Martin ( my mentor) is against the "Ruger" hand spring conversion for Colt actions because of the introduction of "throw-by " problems that come with it ( only do that for competition guns Mike, they're not concerned about looks!). So, my customers want the "coil and plunger" - I just needed one that would actually work!!! My answer was a larger Dia. pin that is also longer ( to combat linear binding) with a shorter/stouter spring. I call it a "spring and pushrod" (influenced by my auto mechanic background). Anyway, it doesn't allow the "Gee whizz" cylinder spinning in half **** but it does exactly what it's supposed to do and doesn't break!! In competition ROA's, it takes away the "Ruger runaround" !! Lol

Mike

The rub line or "beauty ring" is of 0 concern to me , if I had a revolver I was that protective of I wouldn't shoot it. I also have bunches of Rugers , both SA/DA and I've done the "fluff and buff" as it used to be called, to a few of them and it works well.

I actually think a percussion Ruger GP100 would sell like hotcakes

Early bolt drop is oddly much less apparent on my revolvers with plain cylinders , as that deep , now laser engraved "roll engraving " on the Pietta cylinders can really be felt as the bolt rides across it

I like what Jerry Kuanhausen has to say in his gun smithing manual about Ruger security six Revolvers. He doesn't see many of them because they almost never break. The same is true of the rest of the Ruger line from my experience. Sure they can be tuned up to function more smoothly and have much better trigger pulls but they're generally all plenty reliable from the factory as is.
The only design weakness I can see in the ROA is the loading lever linkage from a reliability view and even that won't bend/ break if the owner remembers to turn the lock screw before reloadiing. Just about all Ruger single or double actions I have worked over have an early bolt drop. The notion the bolt nose must drop only in the lead in cut or the gun is out of time is nonsense from a function and reliability stand point.

 

[Stantheman86]

I like what Jerry Kuanhausen has to say in his gun smithing manual about Ruger security six Revolvers. He doesn't see many of them because they almost never break. The same is true of the rest of the Ruger line from my experience. Sure they can be tuned up to function more smoothly and have much better trigger pulls but they're generally all plenty reliable from the factory as is.
The only design weakness I can see in the ROA is the loading lever linkage from a reliability view and even that won't bend/ break if the owner remembers to turn the lock screw before reloadiing. Just about all Ruger single or double actions I have worked over have an early bolt drop. The notion the bolt nose must drop only in the lead in cut or the gun is out of time is nonsense from a function and reliability stand point.

I have more Six series revolvers and GPs than I can count off hand , I love them. I used to take a particular favorite GP100 and a 1000 round case of .38 , and burn it all up at the range in one day. All of my Rugers have early bolt drop and nice, early carry up. They just don't wear out .

 

[Stantheman86]

I swapped hammers around in my 4 Pietta brassers , apparently two have sloppily fitted cams.

So I now have two perfectly timed Schneider & Glassicks that drop the bolt right before the leade and two guns in pieces that are now "projects" that I can hopefully do something with

 

[M. De Land]

the remington front sight is taller. I havent had a standard model since I was a kid but remeber that one shot just fine. I mostly point shot my 51 navys back then so don't remember haveing to deal with much kentucky windage. I bet it was partially just saveing money. that little bead was cheaper to instal than a blade front sight. i have yet to find anything official that the high point of aim was intentional. the only place I find that theory is on these forums which indicates to me that its just opinions??????

I'm quite sure most calvary shooting was point shooting as it would be near impossible to line up sights from a moving horse or even a standing one for that matter. Actually it's quite amazing what one can hit with a bit of practice at point shooting.

 

[45D]

I like what Jerry Kuanhausen has to say in his gun smithing manual about Ruger security six Revolvers. He doesn't see many of them because they almost never break. The same is true of the rest of the Ruger line from my experience. Sure they can be tuned up to function more smoothly and have much better trigger pulls but they're generally all plenty reliable from the factory as is.
The only design weakness I can see in the ROA is the loading lever linkage from a reliability view and even that won't bend/ break if the owner remembers to turn the lock screw before reloadiing. Just about all Ruger single or double actions I have worked over have an early bolt drop. The notion the bolt nose must drop only in the lead in cut or the gun is out of time is nonsense from a function and reliability stand point.

Jerry's books are fantastic and since the revolvers we usually discuss here have a Colt type action, it does little good to compare Ruger actions to Colt actions. The Colt SA Revolvers shop manual that Kuhnhausen published would be the "go to" book for Colt /Colt reproductions. The 3 screw Ruger action is the same setup as Colt but actuated with coil and plungers / coil torsion springs. The timing of is the same as Colts. That's why the ROA ( which was the continuation of the 3 screw action) can be improved substantially with correct tuning. Obviously incorporating an action stop and bolt block in them makes them incredibly reliable and mechanically accurate. Replacing the trigger spring and plunger to an in the frame direct return spring is a nice upgrade. Most that show up here have a good amount of corrosion and or dirt which can be felt as you pull the trigger. The "protection" from the elements and continuous lube with the "in frame" upgrade is a definite plus!!
(Apparently Ruger thought so as well since it wasn't carried over to the NM.)

Mike

 

[mushka]

I have found that point shooting works better for me with the percussion revolvers than trying to use the rear hammer sight. It's just the way I look at things and my arthritic hands.

 

[kid_couteau]

Maybe since it has such a short front sight it was set to hit high so you could file the notch in the hammer lower to drop it to where you liked it.
Just a guess

 

[45D]

Maybe since it has such a short front sight it was set to hit high so you could file the notch in the hammer lower to drop it to where you liked it.
Just a guess

There ya go, reduce it very much and you can't see the front sight!! Why is it so hard to understand our forefathers didn't want to fight a war at 10 - 15 yards but more like 100 yards? Are you really serious?? I can't even believe this is a topic!!!

Hand to hand or nothing right ???!

Mike

 

[M. De Land]

There ya go, reduce it very much and you can't see the front sight!! Why is it so hard to understand our forefathers didn't want to fight a war at 10 - 15 yards but more like 100 yards? Are you really serious?? I can't even believe this is a topic!!!

Hand to hand or nothing right ???!

Mike

Mike, the truth is most soldiers or police could no more hit a man at 100 yards ( let alone keep em in the kill zone) regularly with a hand gun while standing, then any more than now. If you don't believe that then your not spending much time at the range. The majority can't keep em consistently in the kill zone of a man size silhouette at 50 yards from a standing position. The Weaver stance helps a great deal but for get it one handed with most shooters and especially when hot lead is whizzing by their ears.

 

[45D]

Mike, the truth is most soldiers or police could no more hit a man at 100 yards ( let alone keep em in the kill zone) regularly with a hand gun while standing, then any more than now. If you don't believe that then your not spending much time at the range. The majority can't keep em consistently in the kill zone of a man size silhouette at 50 yards from a standing position. The Weaver stance helps a great deal but for get it one handed with most shooters and especially when hot lead is whizzing by their ears.

I wouldn't know, I wasn't there.

I'm pretty sure that comparing "pristine" examples show a long range sight picture. It can't be that hard to extrapolate the intended range. So, I would consider any "closer" range by anyone to be "nonsense".

Folks today have the advantage of time, they didn't. This was all new to them.

Mike

 

[Stantheman86]

These were combat weapons, not target pistols. They were designed to hit enemy soldiers . Whether the individual user had the skill or not, the point was to get bullets into the enemy. The sights were set by Sam Colts design this way in 1836 because he was paid good $$ to deliver a usable weapon that his buyers could use to kill other men with. Hitting these men is up to you, but the sights gave you the zero to hit at combat ranges common to that era. Hitting low at 50 would be useless and looking at a 100 yard target, it isn't very far.

Walker's Rangers were known to hit Mexicans at 100 yards or greater with their Walkers. I've fired mine to 100 , using a regular sight picture and put hits on a silhouette target. A hit is a hit, a man hit in the leg is out of the fight the same as a Center Mass hit. These were fighting guns.

The cap cutout is to the right because the revolver was to be held in the left hand, the sabre in the right.

We can't look at technology from the 1830s-1860s under the lens of guys who punch paper at 15 yards with Italian repros

 

[Bad Karma]

Mike, the truth is most soldiers or police could no more hit a man at 100 yards ( let alone keep em in the kill zone) regularly with a hand gun while standing, then any more than now. If you don't believe that then your not spending much time at the range. The majority can't keep em consistently in the kill zone of a man size silhouette at 50 yards from a standing position. The Weaver stance helps a great deal but for get it one handed with most shooters and especially when hot lead is whizzing by their ears.

Most is the operative word here… it has long been recognized that most soldiers are not terribly effective. But it’s the function of the arms manufacturer and the designers to provide a weapon that can be used to good effect at the desired range. This is when your good men come into play, steady, accurate, sustained fires from a few good men can have a demoralizing effect on enemy soldiers. Doctrine back then was to use the pistol on your hind legs, one handed but I’ll bet money that the hunters among the Corps realized that they could produce hits using cover and resting the pistol on the handiest trees, rocks or buildings.

“Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn’t even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back.”​

— Heraclitus

 

[M. De Land]

Well there is a proper timing sequence ( by design) and unsightly "Beauty rings" are pretty much relegated to the Ruger NM SA revolvers and the variants. The bolt only needs 3-4 lb pressure to operate correctly. The hand is the primary "braking force" for cyl lockup and that is the inherent problem with the Ruger action. The spring and plunger for the pawl ( hand) is too weak to begin with and with it's stationary position in the frame, it looses mechanical advantage as the cycle continues. The "braking " effect is at its least when it is needed the most.
The hand spring in the Colt action is carried with the hand and is progressively compressed as the cycle progresses . . . which delivers maximum braking force when it is needed most. This is also why the (reproductions) hand springs break frequently.
So, what to do ??? Jim Martin ( my mentor) is against the "Ruger" hand spring conversion for Colt actions because of the introduction of "throw-by " problems that come with it ( only do that for competition guns Mike, they're not concerned about looks!). So, my customers want the "coil and plunger" - I just needed one that would actually work!!! My answer was a larger Dia. pin that is also longer ( to combat linear binding) with a shorter/stouter spring. I call it a "spring and pushrod" (influenced by my auto mechanic background). Anyway, it doesn't allow the "Gee whizz" cylinder spinning in half **** but it does exactly what it's supposed to do and doesn't break!! In competition ROA's, it takes away the "Ruger runaround" !! Lol

Mike

Mike, I've heard you say that the hand brakes the cylinder inertia several times but I don't see how that is possible as it is pushing on the ratchet tooth through the whole stroke. The hand end engages the ratchet tooth at an angle, passes perpendicular and proceeds into the reverse angle in carry up until bolt drop. That's the reason for cylinder drag testing to make sure the hand is long enough. The velocity of the hammer being retracted usually increases until lock up thus also the cylinder inertia. I don't see how the down pressure from the hand spring is braking the cylinder speed it's just keeping the hand nose in contact with the ratchet tooth until lock up.
The hand width plays a part as well in cylinder velocity because at battery the outside of the hand width engages the ratchet tooth angle farther away from center ( more leverage less travel) and in carry up and into reverse tooth angle contact the inside of the hand width is making contact with the tooth although the angle incline is increasing. As the hand end and tooth move from outside contact to inside contact into lock up the contact moves closer to center which make less leverage and more travel hence increase cylinder speed/inertia.
I realize the orbit of the ratchet ring is also moving the contact with the hand nose width in it's perpendicular circular motion to the hand nose but still fail to see any braking action as the movement and contact is always forward and gaining velocity and inertia.

 

[M. De Land]

Most is the operative word here… it has long been recognized that most soldiers are not terribly effective. But it’s the function of the arms manufacturer and the designers to provide a weapon that can be used to good effect at the desired range. This is when your good men come into play, steady, accurate, sustained fires from a few good men can have a demoralizing effect on enemy soldiers. Doctrine back then was to use the pistol on your hind legs, one handed but I’ll bet money that the hunters among the Corps realized that they could produce hits using cover and resting the pistol on the handiest trees, rocks or buildings.

“Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn’t even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back.”​

— Heraclitus

I believe the only ones who were authorized to carry revolvers were officers and calvary troops and most likely the officers leading infantry charges ( infantry used rifles) weren't shooting until much closer than 100 yards, Calvary would also not waste ammo until much closer in a charge where positive hits could be more assured. I think the whole notion of 100 yard engagement with hand guns in the Civil war was not a regular event. One would not want to waste shots that are hard to reload in battle until more assured of a hit.

 

[45D]

Mike, I've heard you say that the hand brakes the cylinder inertia several times but I don't see how that is possible as it is pushing on the ratchet tooth through the whole stroke. The hand end engages the ratchet tooth at an angle, passes perpendicular and proceeds into the reverse angle in carry up until bolt drop. That's the reason for cylinder drag testing to make sure the hand is long enough. The velocity of the hammer being retracted usually increases until lock up thus also the cylinder inertia. I don't see how the down pressure from the hand spring is braking the cylinder speed it's just keeping the hand nose in contact with the ratchet tooth until lock up.
The hand width plays a part as well in cylinder velocity because at battery the outside of the hand width engages the ratchet tooth angle farther away from center ( more leverage less travel) and in carry up and into reverse tooth angle contact the inside of the hand width is making contact with the tooth although the angle incline is increasing. As the hand end and tooth move from outside contact to inside contact into lock up the contact moves closer to center which make less leverage and more travel hence increase cylinder speed/inertia.
I realize the orbit of the ratchet ring is also moving the contact with the hand nose width in it's perpendicular circular motion to the hand nose but still fail to see any braking action as the movement and contact is always forward and gaining velocity and inertia.

Yes, the hand stays engaged with the ratchet as long as the cylinder is installed. It is the hand spring pressure that prevents the cylinder from "freewheeling" while the action is being cycled. In fact, throw-by (over rotation) is the first symptom of a cracked or broken hand spring. So, the braking action is the ability for the hand to ****** the inertia ( what was originally called "cost") and is a constant force.
Therefore, if the spring is too weak, throw-by will be a problem. In the Kuhnhausen book for the Colt SAA, Jim Martin explains this and gives instructions for "testing" spring pressure using 2 dummy cartridges loaded with appropriate bullets. This gives a simulation of an eccentricity weighted cylinder one would have in actual use.
The Ruger "factory" setup will fail this test and is why you can demonstrate "throw-by" with the Ruger ( OM or NM even without the dummy rounds).
My answer to the problem with the Ruger setup isn't necessarily "perfect" but, it is much closer to passing the "test" than the Ruger. There is no real advantage for a "Gee whizz " watch my cylinder freewheel except for just that . . . Gee whizz!! The only thing easy spinning cylinders get you closer to is failure ( and is why cowboy shooters have heard of Ruger runaround).

Mike

 

[Stantheman86]

I believe the only ones who were authorized to carry revolvers were officers and calvary troops and most likely the officers leading infantry charges ( infantry used rifles) weren't shooting until much closer than 100 yards, Calvary would also not waste ammo until much closer in a charge where positive hits could be more assured. I think the whole notion of 100 yard engagement with hand guns in the Civil war was not a regular event. One would not want to waste shots that are hard to reload in battle until more assured of a hit.

The mathematical average of combat range in the Civil War was figured to be 117 yards , by experts using all available data.

The best, most probable use of revolvers in combat in the Civil War was shown in Gettysburg, with Jeff Daniels using his 1860 Army. I'd guess he's shooting at about 50 yards in some of the sequences, because there was a Battalion of Confederate Infantry. He is of course shown using his Colt point blank as well.

That movie strived for historical accuracy so I use it as kind of an example.

During the Picketts Charge scene , Union Officers are shown shooting at range with revolvers. If I was a Company Commander, with a Colt .44 I'd be shooting at a mass of charging Infantry too. You're definitely going to hit something at 100 or more. "Sympathetic Fire" is a phenomenon seen in police shootings. When everyone is shooting you tend to shoot too. You're trying to survive and kill them before they kill you.