Col. LeMat’s Grapeshot Revolvers?

[Smokey Plainsman]

Hey black powder buddies!

Guys a couple years back I purchased a Pietta LeMat “cavalry” off someone on a Civil War forum. Got it for a very good price, advertised as unfired new in box. What the ass forgot to tell me that the central ramrod was missing and even worse, the cylinder release latch was rusted in place so tight there was nothing I could do to free it. There was also a nasty scratch on the side plate. Enraged, I demanded a refund and thankfully he accepted and I sent the gun back to him.

Fast forward to now and I never got another LeMat. But guys, let me tell you one thing, that handgun was perhaps the single most impressive gun I have ever held in my hands. The workmanship, fit and finish, were just absolutely stunning. The heft, thumbing the action, the sheer size and uniqueness of it, has left an impression on me that I won’t soon forget. I didn’t know Pietta could make a replica that good. The price tag suddenly seemed like a bargain, it was that good.

I have recently experienced a windfall of extra cash and my thoughts keep drifting back to one of “Colonel LeMat’s Grapeshot Revolvers”. But I never have fired one... and I’m curious as to how they do. I’m not too interested in the shotgun barrel, I’ve right light strikes are a problem with them but it doesn’t concern me. But how does the gun doing firing its nine .44 balls? I know the design is inherently awkward and inefficient compared to something like a .44 Remington, but I don’t so much care about that as to how well it functions.

So do they shot alright, as in are they fairly reliable? If so, heck even if NOT so, one day I want to get one back. What a beast!

Thanks all!

-Smokey

 

[Artificer]

Smokey,

This information is dated back to the late 1980's and early 1990's, so please take it with a grain of salt.

Back then the cylinders went out of timing fairly easily and the internal parts were not that good of quality and didn't last as long as parts in other repro revolvers. These things came up often even in revolvers just used for re-enacting and very little or no live shooting done.

Now I have no information on whether they got those problems fixed more recently and they may have done it. I just don't know one way or another.

Gus

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

Not good.

 

[Artificer]

Smokey,

That is the reason I decided not to buy a Lemat back then.

Gus

 

[TFoley]

Watch Mike Beliveau shooting his and make your own mind up. Duellist1954 will het him on Youtube.

 

[Zonie]

The LeMat was a fairly complicated gun and from what I've read about them, the Italians didn't do it any favors when they started making reproductions of them.

The worst thing I've heard about them is the loading levers are weak. Also, because of their design, any attempt to remove the sideplate and remove any of the internal parts for cleaning etc. ended up with problems trying to get the thing back together right.

Several of our members have bought them and they were quite excited about the idea of owning one. After they got theirs, they pointed out these problems and rarely if ever talked about their LeMat's again.

Like others have said, it is an interesting gun to look at and for show and tell but with the user problems I've read about I don't think I would want one.

 

[rodwha]

I’m a bit curious how useful the central barrel was and what it was typically loaded with. Seems most people feel a smooth barrel handgun is about worthless with shot.

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

The LeMat was a fairly complicated gun and from what I've read about them, the Italians didn't do it any favors when they started making reproductions of them.

The worst thing I've heard about them is the loading levers are weak. Also, because of their design, any attempt to remove the sideplate and remove any of the internal parts for cleaning etc. ended up with problems trying to get the thing back together right.

Several of our members have bought them and they were quite excited about the idea of owning one. After they got theirs, they pointed out these problems and rarely if ever talked about their LeMat's again.

Like others have said, it is an interesting gun to look at and for show and tell but with the user problems I've read about I don't think I would want one.

I... I see.

As impressive as that gun was, the more I research, the more I don’t like what I read. Disassembly, durability, spare parts availability, the list goes on. You have to make special screwdriver bits just to get the thing apart, they lose timing, yeah... I might just stick with my Uberti Remington New Model Army. That gun has been highly reliable and it seems maintenance and parts availability are MUCH less of a headache with that model.

Ah well, was hoping the LeMats would live up to there good looks. But I’m a shooter first and don’t have money to drop on a $1000 handgun that isn’t going to be dependable or serviceable in the long haul. Thanks for steering me back on course, gang. I have a project with my Remington in mind where I’m going to get a Civil War period correct belt, holster, and cartridge box and in the cartridge box have extra ammo and a cleaning kit. That way I can grab the rig on a whim and go a blastin’ and have spare ammo AND a way to thoroughly clean the gun all on the rig! Stay tuned for that one, guys, going to show it for sure.

 

[satx78247]

I’m a bit curious how useful the central barrel was and what it was typically loaded with. Seems most people feel a smooth barrel handgun is about worthless with shot.

rodwha,

MOST people, who owned an original LeMat's, loaded the smoothbore barrel with buckshot.

yours, satx

 

[TFoley]

I’m a bit curious how useful the central barrel was and what it was typically loaded with. Seems most people feel a smooth barrel handgun is about worthless with shot.

So I'm guessing that standing ten feet away looking at that barrel loaded with BB-sized shot wouldn't impress you, eh?

 

[rodwha]

So I'm guessing that standing ten feet away looking at that barrel loaded with BB-sized shot wouldn't impress you, eh?

I wouldn’t want to be standing there for sure. But it seems people feel a smoothbore handgun is about worthless with shot for any reasonable use at any reasonable range. 3 yds is awful close and I’d think even BBs would put a hurt on you. But then that barrel seems rather short (~6”) and so I’m not so sure it would be all that effective, especially with BBs, and even less so in the winters.

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

In my ‘lil percussion revolver book, the author claimed buckshot just bounced off a seasoned board and only made it about an inch in soft pine. He didn’t test roundballs.

 

[MikeEasy]

So

In my ‘lil percussion revolver book, the author claimed buckshot just bounced off a seasoned board and only made it about an inch in soft pine. He didn’t test roundballs.

Assuming your "'lil percussion revolver book" is correct, perhaps someone here can convert "an inch in soft pine" into "inches of human flesh" for us?

Seems it might not be so effective on the ribcage but would be fatal in the gut. But I await an expert opinion.

 

[satx78247]

Mike Easy,

The curator of the Museum of Civil War Medicine says that period documents of TWBTS describes buckshot wounds from the LeMat's shotgun barrel as "hideous & almost always lethal", when fired from horseback at close range.
(Remember, in a time W/O either modern "cleanliness of the body" and/or antibiotics, being "gut shot" was a "ticket to the grave, by slow boat", due to infections. - MANY a soldier of TWBTS went years W/O bathing or changing their clothing.)

Note: DeAnn Blanton, author of THEY FOUGHT LIKE DEMONS: WOMEN SOLDIERS in the CIVIL WAR says that the major reason that numerous women managed to "pass" & serve for years as "teen-aged boys" was that FEW service-members of TWBTS era ever bathed or changed either their outer and/or under garments for months/years.
That commonplace lack of personal hygiene was a major reason that ANY wound might eventually prove to be fatal.

yours, satx

 

[satx78247]

To All,

Fwiw, cavalrymen of TWBTS (especially mounted troopers of the CSA) often "sawed off " double-barrel shotguns into "pistol-like weapons" that were DEADLY fired from horseback & from "fairly close" to just outside "saber range". = At 10-15 yards, a blast of 00 or smaller buckshot into the face/thorax would be lethal, whether the shot killed immediately or after a long/painful/infected wound.

Furthermore, COL LeMat's revolvers were expensive, almost always privately owned & mostly holstered by senior officers. = The LeMat revolvers were as much "badges of rank", as they were firearms & also the LeMat was suitable for "last ditch self-defense".
(Some owners loaded the central barrel with a heavy charge of BP & a "palm-full of heavy shot". = At 6-10 feet,i.e., just outside a saber's or bayonet's "swing & thrust", those buckshot would likely be immediately fatal in every case.)

Note: Rebel cavalrymen SELDOM carried a saber after 1861 but instead carried SEVERAL loaded revolvers/shotguns.
(BG Joe Wheeler, when mounted, routinely carried/used EIGHT revolvers during the WBTS & his use of numerous revolvers was far from uncommon among cavalry troopers of the era.)

yours, satx

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

Mike Easy,

The curator of the Museum of Civil War Medicine says that period documents of TWBTS describes buckshot wounds from the LeMat's shotgun barrel as "hideous & almost always lethal", when fired from horseback at close range.
(Remember, in a time W/O either modern "cleanliness of the body" and/or antibiotics, being "gut shot" was a "ticket to the grave, by slow boat", due to infections. - MANY a soldier of TWBTS went years W/O bathing or changing their clothing.)

Note: DeAnn Blanton, author of THEY FOUGHT LIKE DEMONS: WOMEN SOLDIERS in the CIVIL WAR says that the major reason that numerous women managed to "pass" & serve for years as "teen-aged boys" was that FEW service-members of TWBTS era ever bathed or changed either their outer and/or under garments for months/years.
That commonplace lack of personal hygiene was a major reason that ANY wound might eventually prove to be fatal.

yours, satx

Yuck! I feel nasty and grimy if I don’t shower after taking a walk outside. Can’t imagine fightin’ battles days in and marching in hot weather and never taking a shower. Those guys must’ve not known any better but I would’ve felt disgusting!

Back to LeMats, anyone actually OWN one and shoot it? I have a lil’ book on LeMats, too, and it’s a fun read. If I DID get one, it’d be the improved Navy version and I’d wear it to town proudly in a cross draw slim Jim!

 

[satx78247]

The LeMat was a fairly complicated gun and from what I've read about them, the Italians didn't do it any favors when they started making reproductions of them.

The worst thing I've heard about them is the loading levers are weak. Also, because of their design, any attempt to remove the sideplate and remove any of the internal parts for cleaning etc. ended up with problems trying to get the thing back together right.

Several of our members have bought them and they were quite excited about the idea of owning one. After they got theirs, they pointed out these problems and rarely if ever talked about their LeMat's again.

Like others have said, it is an interesting gun to look at and for show and tell but with the user problems I've read about I don't think I would want one.

Zonie,

ImVho, what you said about the LeMat's reproduction revolver is SPOT ON but the originals were as fine quality as the best quality clocks & watches of that era. = BEAUTIFULLY made by skilled gunsmiths describes the European revolvers.
(Fwiw, in 1976 I was a volunteer at the Confederate Museum & got to actually hold & "carefully examine" an original LeMat, that reportedly once belonged to one of our family's ancestors, COL Smith P. Bankhead of the CSA's State Artillery. - The revolver appeared to me, as a shooter/hunter but "non expert", to be of EXCELLENT quality.)

yours, satx

 

[Artificer]

Yuck! I feel nasty and grimy if I don’t shower after taking a walk outside. Can’t imagine fightin’ battles days in and marching in hot weather and never taking a shower. Those guys must’ve not known any better but I would’ve felt disgusting!

Back to LeMats, anyone actually OWN one and shoot it? I have a lil’ book on LeMats, too, and it’s a fun read. If I DID get one, it’d be the improved Navy version and I’d wear it to town proudly in a cross draw slim Jim!

Smokey,

It wasn't just back during the UnCivil War, troops in Viet Nam and Columbia were often forced to wear their fatigues/utilities until they rotted on their bodies. In Somalia and in the safe areas, we usually only got one bucket bath a day, didn't take long for the heat to get one almost as grimy/sweaty as before taking a bucket bath. I brought baby wipes with me to keep my hands and face clean, as there was only so much water available for cleaning/bathing. Heck, even in peace time "Exercises/Maneuvers/War Games" and in the High Desert of 29 Palms, CA; we only got one bucket bath a day and perhaps a full shower once a week.

The information I gave on problems experienced with LeMat's came from many people who owned and shot them with blanks and live rounds, but also and perhaps most importantly, the Head "Gun Fixer" at Navy Arms for a number of years. He never claimed to be a gunsmith, but did a lot of repair/replacement work on the Lemat's for Navy Arms.

Gus

 

[Eutycus]

Was the LeMat a .44? I always heard they were closer to a 40 cal.

 

[Zonie]

According to "FLAYDERMAN'S GUIDE TO ANTIQUE AMERICAN FIREARMS...and their value", the LeMat was a .42 caliber 9 shot revolver + a .63 caliber smoothbore center barrel.
Between 1856 and 1865, less than 2000 of them were made. In 2007, the originals in good condition were worth $15,000 and in fine condition they were worth $25,000.
There also was a "Baby LeMat which was a .32 caliber 9 shot revolver with the cylinder revolving on a .41 caliber smoothbore barrel.
The Baby was worth $17,500 in good condition and $40,000 in fine condition.