Bullseye Shooting with Pietta Navys, some random observations

[M. De Land]

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.

I'm beginning to wonder if folks actually know what a 50 yard 8 bull target looks like over a revolver barrel. It's actually quite a long revolver shot one handed from standing position. And this with the best target sights available. The very crude sights that were/are on 51 and 60 Colts are abysmal by comparison for accurate precision aimed fire which is why I believe these guns were designed to be used for point shooting at spitting distance .
Point shooting is a close range proposition generally and at 50 yards let alone 100 would be a mistake and inefficient use of ammo when needed much more as the distance closes.
I know if it were me I would not be anxious to be running my revolver dry until I was sure of a hit on some one actually lining up on me.
The problem in the civil war was outdated tactics (line abreast advance) used against weaponry capable of accurate aimed fire to 300 yards with the Minie ball as apposed to 50 yards with a smooth bore, round ball shooting, Brown and Bess of the revolutionary war fame.
Also the grip shape on a 60 makes me think it designed for a point shooting platform.

 

[M. De Land]

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 retard 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

The only braking action that matters is the speed/inertia check into bolt drop! Even if the hand spring actually increases pressure on the hand in the stroke ( which it doesn't on the 60, checked it last night) it's not slowing anything down.

 

[Stantheman86]

I'm beginning to wonder if folks actually know what a 50 yard 8 bull target looks like over a revolver barrel. It's actually quite a long revolver shot one handed from standing position. And this with the best target sights available. The very crude sights that were/are on 51 and 60 Colts are abysmal by comparison for accurate precision aimed fire which is why I believe these guns were designed to be used for point shooting at spitting distance .
Point shooting is a close range proposition generally and at 50 yards let alone 100 would be a mistake and inefficient use of ammo when needed much more as the distance closes.
I know if it were me I would not be anxious to be running my revolver dry until I was sure of a hit on some one actually lining up on me.
The problem in the civil war was outdated tactics (line abreast advance) used against weaponry capable of accurate aimed fire to 300 yards with the Minie ball as apposed to 50 yards with a smooth bore, round ball shooting, Brown and Bess of the revolutionary war fame.
Also the grip shape on a 60 makes me think it designed for a point shooting platform.

I did it today , one handed at 50 yards with the new Dance Brothers

I won't be winning any matches but I was hitting paper

 

[45D]

The only braking action that matters is the speed/inertia check into bolt drop! Even if the hand spring actually increases pressure on the hand in the stroke ( which it doesn't on the 60, checked it last night) it's not slowing anything down.

Oh I see, a broken / cracked / ill adjusted hand spring DOESN'T induce throw-by!! Increased hand tension as the cycle progresses DOESN'T provide a braking effect of cylinder rotation . . . Hmmmmm.

So you like Jerry Kuhnhausen except about the Colt action and its properties ( don't get the book sir, you'll be thoroughly disappointed (or amazed lol!!)) . Now he hasn't a clue and neither does Jim Martin (provider of much of the material in that book), the late Eddie Janis of Peacemaker Specialists, and all the others taught/ coached /consulted by Mr. Martin. Interesting but not surprising . . .

So your '60 Army makes no sound when you rotate or spin the cylinder when the hammer is at half cock? All mine do !!
Can you tell us how you checked your Army?

Mike

 

[45D]

Ok so, after a 4 day weekend at the beach for a 2nd cousins wedding, I figured I'd fill in the "blank" with pictures using a "cutaway" Remington revolver.
So, at rest, the spring is compressed but with the pivot point at the rear most position. Doesn't really mean anything except that that's the starting position.

The half cock position shows the spring with least compression but the pivot point has located to the center of the slot so spring tension maintains good pressure to keep the hand engaged in the cylinder ratchet.

At full cock, the spring is compressed with the pivot point at the forward position essentially "holding up" the hand while the spring exerts the most force (which is the maximum braking force).

You'll notice the rear of the cylinder is vertical while the hand slot has a forward rake as you go up. The "forward rake" is what compresses the spring as the cycle continues.
The Kuhnhausen book has even better visuals but I want to respect the copyright protection so I choose to post my own pictures. Since flat springs don't move much in their role (harder to detect), tomorrow I will take pictures of the spring positions of a typical "Ruger hand spring conversion" in a Colt action.

Mike

 

[nhmoose]

Folks need to try a silhouette target. Makes bullseye misses into OUCH!

 

[Stantheman86]

Folks need to try a silhouette target. Makes bullseye misses into OUCH!

I like to shoot at FBI Q-Targets, the big white silhouette is perfect

I shot my Walker at 100 at a Q-Target and most of then hit within the Silhouette, which means the gun is doing it's job on a man sized target, not making little groups at 15 yards.

 

[nick_1]

shooting at big targets makes you sloppy. aim small miss small. trying to put food on the table or take out a dumpster dumpling that is wearing body armor or hiding behind hard cover you can't be satisfied with c and d hits on an Ipsc target or fringe hits on a PPC silhouette.

 

[Stantheman86]

shooting at big targets makes you sloppy. aim small miss small. trying to put food on the table or take out a dumpster dumpling that is wearing body armor or hiding behind hard cover you can't be satisfied with c and d hits on an Ipsc target or fringe hits on a PPC silhouette.

I just shot both of these guns at 25 yard NRA targets and they are unforgiving. I put up one solid 12 shot group from a sandbag so I know the guns are capable

Any mistakes in trigger pull or sight picture resulted in a miss of the entire scoring area

 

[nick_1]

the sandbag is a task master.. I know both my Remingtons shoot pretty decent from a rest and my trapper shoots excellent from a rest so its all on me when I miss off hand...

 

[Stantheman86]

the sandbag is a task master.. I know both my Remingtons shoot pretty decent from a rest and my trapper shoots excellent from a rest so its all on me when I miss off hand...

I've seen these two Piettas put up Quarter sized groups at 25 with light 10 grain loads, from a sandbag and if I really get the fundamentals in order, so now that I know they are mechanically capable of this , when I shoot offhand everything that happens is all me

 

[M. De Land]

I've seen these two Piettas put up Quarter sized groups at 25 with light 10 grain loads, from a sandbag and if I really get the fundamentals in order, so now that I know they are mechanically capable of this , when I shoot offhand everything that happens is all me

The thing about group shooting one learns over time is that as the distance increases a small group at one distance does not necessarily translate to a proportional group growth size at the next distance , all else being precisely the same. Some times on rare occasions they are even smaller at increased distance but usually they grow in size and dispersion consistency.
One sees this a lot in .22 LR 10 shot group shooting out to 2 and 3 hundred yards. Three shot tight groups are easy, 5 shot more challenging but 10 shot groups really tell the accuracy story.

 

[nick_1]

400 or so rounds through the 8" Remington .44 decent 25yrd groups from a rest. lucky to keep them all on an 8.5x11in paper at 50. no problem dinging an 8" plate from a rest at 50 and ocasional 6" from the rest. Off hand i can consistently hit the turkey and pig silouetts at 50 yrds. can't throw it far enough to hit the 8"plate off hand at 50. 25yrds I can consistently hit the 8" plate off hand and get some hits on the 6"plates

 

[Roady Fanelli]

I'd be interested to know how different original black powder performed vs modern equivalents.
Then there is a difference in metals in that era. Was 19th century lead heavier? I know steel from thst era was higher quality because of the ore which has been ehausted.
Then there's the obvious- it's much easier to raise POA than lower it.

 

[stikshooter]

wasent meaning to doubt you guys just trying to find out if anyone had a link to an army specifications or training manuel, or anything from one of the manufacturers.. I know Colt had a fire..

Bad Karma replaces the training manual in case you didn't know , heard he shoots them pretty good too!/Ed

 

[Steve Busch]

Original revolvers shoot high too. I suspect it was so that hits on vertical targets like enemy soldiers are likely at any range from handshake to a hundred yard. Put the front sight on the belly and you will hit roughly center mass. Colt and Remington certainly had the tech knowledge to build revolvers that hit point of aim at 25 yards but they didn’t do it.

I believe that was an army requirement

 

[Bad Karma]

I believe that was an army requirement

Yes, essentially the pistol is not a primary weapon. It’s a weapon of last resort and should be used to fight your way to a rifle, which is then used to fight your way to your squad and their rifles. These are used to rally the company and reinforce the basic idea that it’s a bad idea to screw around with a Marine armed with a pistol.

 

[Stantheman86]

Recently, I've just been shooting my revolvers at "across the street" distance one handed, because I get tired of all this walking back and forth at the rifle range , and I can kill paper much more conveniently at closer range as I fight my way back to my cup of coffee

Plus if I actually want to hit something consistently, with one hand, 25 yards is probably my limit.

The 75 Yard Zero made sense back when battles were fought using Napoleonic tactics , and in generally big open spaces involving 1000s of combatants. Or shooting at hostiles on an open plain

They were most likely, more commonly used at 50 yards or less , probably much less. Plus shooting these with a two hand hold feels weird because they would not have been fired this way. Guys weren't taking an Isosceles or Weaver stance on the battlefield, these were one handed fightin guns. There wasn't time to stand there and take a fine bead with those sights with lead or arrows flying through the air, guys just used point shooting

 

[M. De Land]

I'd be interested to know how different original black powder performed vs modern equivalents.
Then there is a difference in metals in that era. Was 19th century lead heavier? I know steel from thst era was higher quality because of the ore which has been ehausted.
Then there's the obvious- it's much easier to raise POA than lower it.

The steel used then was no near as well refined or strength tested as now. Gun quality certified steel currenty has to pass rigid, compression, elongation , elasticity and impact testing among other qualifiers to be used in modern gun construction including reproduction guns.
We use steel alloys now that early gun makers had no knowledge or understanding of.
The rub in gun quality now comes in the absence of hand fitting of parts that was common in the old days that cannot be afforded from labor cost now days. CNC driven machinery does help quality control in modern fire arms but even these machines are only as good as they are calibrated and maintained.

 

[Mica]

Stan, I read your previous posts about antiquing the brassies with vinegar, and I tried it. I worked perfectly.