Colt 1851 Navy—120 yards?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Looked in my Lyman black powder ballistics book
A .36 revolver can get 900+fps
A .350 ball at 900 FPS at 100 yards slows to 617 and has 54 foot pounds of energy
Tut was killed at seventy five yards . A 36 should be about 738 fps and 77 ft lbs
Ain’t a high powered rifle for sure.
But
I wouldn’t want Hicock shooting at me at a hundred yards
 
He was just testing to see if his point of aim was changing due to a loose wedge after he saw it was staying put he didn’t do it on the next round volley.

Well, its been my experience that if you're tapping a wedge in with a powder flask, it isn't tight enough anyway. If you smack it in good with a machinist hammer (hard plastic heads), you can get a good seat.
He may be a good shot but that doesn't mean he understands the mechanics of the revolver he's shooting, especially the open-top platform.
It's quite possible that he decided that it wasn't going to lock up the cylinder to smack the wedge in so he did!!

Mike
 
Hey, If Louis L'Amour could stretch credibility to the breaking point with some of his characters shooting ability so can you. After all, embellishing some of the finer points of a story is in the finest Western story telling tradition.
Great point, thanks!
 
Just a comment for Smokerr and Tenngun and then I’m gonna step off this merry-go-round. Most of us have made our share of difficult shots over the years, some of them the stuff of tall tales, yet they happened. We know they can, at least once. Some of us know that getting hit by ANY bullet at ANY range hurts, even if it’s nearly spent when it gets there. I once hit a running jackrabbit in the head with a single snap shot from a handgun while standing in the bed of a moving pickup truck, at a range of about 20 yards.— with several witnesses, which cinched my rep as “H*ll on wheels with a pistol” at that duty station. Naturally, I claimed that I did it because I didn’t want to spoil the meat, and when one of the witnesses said “Bet you can’t do that again” I answered, “I don’t have to. I did it the first time.” And I once had the priveledge of watching a CWO named William Ridley make 39 hits on a standard silhouette target in 60 seconds —- at 600 yards, with iron sights. It happens — but it’s rare, and you’d be wise not to bet the ranch on it unless you have rock on one side and hard place on the other. There floats my stick.
 
Looked in my Lyman black powder ballistics book
A .36 revolver can get 900+fps
A .350 ball at 900 FPS at 100 yards slows to 617 and has 54 foot pounds of energy
Tut was killed at seventy five yards . A 36 should be about 738 fps and 77 ft lbs
Ain’t a high powered rifle for sure.
But
I wouldn’t want Hicock shooting at me at a hundred yards
75 yards and a hole lotta luck, he wanted his daddy’s hand me down pocket watch back really bad. LOL
 
I’m writing a frontier novel set in 1870. One of my characters is an exceptionally gifted marksman, and has a Colt 1851 Navy revolver. In one scene, he is in a gunfight with an opponent at 100-120 yards.

I read that this gun’s effective firing range is about 75 yards. In a work of fiction, is it *plausible* to hit an 8-inch target (a person’s face) at 100-120 yards with the Colt Navy? Or is that completely absurd?

I may shorten the distance to 90 yards. But I’m wondering how much distance I can get away with before it becomes silly.
Everyone assumes Hickok was using an 1851 Navy on that day in Springfield, MO.
Was that actually the case? Is there any supporting documentation to that effect?
I believe Hickok was known to have used a .44 two or before and during the war.
 
Yes, we talked extensively about it several months back. He DOESN'T tap the wedge when shooting the longer ranges. There's no break from shot to shot so no editing.
You guess the wedge swelled up and got tighter?
It's just like my friend's Navy in the pic I posted.

Mike

This needs to be put in perspective. At 120 yard with a Cap and Ball or any pistol, its a lob shot. Its not a sharpshooter shot. Sharpshooters did not shoot their targets with pistols, they shot them with a rifled gun and depending on what era and whose side etc etc etc.

So, yes you can take a shot at a mile if you want, once in a millions tried you hit what you are shooting at (note I did not say aiming). 120 yards with a pistol there is no aiming, you angel it up and guess.

Its why snipers have spotters. They see where the shot hit the ground and tell the shooter his setup is off and by how much. Then a 2nd shot (may or may not hit).

A sharpshooter and a pistol shoot are pretty close to being oxymoronic. No one sharp shot with a pistol.

So, 2.5 inches is considered acceptable with a modern pistol and certainly some finely tune BP will exceed that. Post Civil War was there any such thing? At 100 yards you are 10 inches (hoping there is no wind). So being generous lets call it 13 inches at 120 yards.

So that is what we call a manure shoot. Not given I am being shot at be the guy has a pistol or a rifle, its worth a try though at best you are likely to distract him (I am going to assume a guy here).

Your best shooter is limited by the equipment (and the equipment is limited capability wise to the skill of the shooter).

Now does a sharpshooter translate to a good pistol shot? No. Is it possible? yea. But would someone practice to hit things at 120 yard with a pistol. Oh hell no. That is what a rifle is for.

30-30? There is a reason its called minute of deer. Its more an Eastern US thing where the cover is thick and the shots are under 75 yards. More like 50.

I got pretty good with a modern pistol. 1.5 inches at 25 yards. I shot 100s of rounds to get there. How many people old west had the time to practice? Yea a few did but it was not a routine thing.

There were two phenomenal shots by a Baker Rifle in the Peninsula War. both by the same guy. Range is unknown, 400 yards probably a minimum. Pure luck (they laid on their back and supported the rifle with their feet for those longer shots). Was it worth a whack at 200 yards? Sure (you had a buddy to cover you while you reloaded). Worst case you just missed and you might well hit an adjacent person.

Sharpshooter and pistol shooter are a misnomer. Amazing shots were pulled off, but like the Baker shoots, a why not but you sure aren't counting on it.

For a guy with a Sharps? Yea, easy shot but even that is not guaranteed. You need a gun that is sub 1 MOA and a person who can shoot sub 1 MOA (a 2.5 inch at 25 is 10 MOA).

Longest sniper shot ever was proceeded by 2 shots. His spotter walked him in and the guys being shot at (3 as I recall) just stood there. No one ever said which of the 3 he was shooting at so the kill shot may have hit the adjacent guy.
Apparently you have not read much of Elmer Keith material and his gold barred front sight for long range hand gun shooting. I've tried his sit down revolver shooting over drawn up knees, back against a support and laid on side shooting over one drawn up knee propped on your elbow and I have hit a rock a good deal smaller than a man silhouette nearly every time once I got the wind at ranges well over 200 yards. Most folks can do the same with a bit of practice if they don't flinch.
 
Well you got it right as you were doing wind and range adjustments at the same time. So yea, given enough shots you can walk it in.

Just a comment for Smokerr and Tenngun and then I’m gonna step off this merry-go-round. Most of us have made our share of difficult shots over the years, some of them the stuff of tall tales, yet they happened.

Note I am not saying it would not hurt a lot to get hit with any bullet at 120 yards. Wounded, killed or just smacked hard.

What I am saying is you are not going to be doing it like a Sharpshooter with a rifle. Keeping in mind a difference between a sniper and a Sharpshooter (DM in today's terms).

When I was in 2nd grade I cut a card in half edge wise with a 22 (30 feet or so). And no I could not do it twice in a row.

I can lob 22s into a disk at 100 yards. 6 inch drop so you have to guess how much over to hold it.

At best a BP Revolver at 120 yard would be called suppressive fire.

Nothing wrong with doing that if you need to, but as noted, its in the ream of lucky not skilled.
 
Everyone assumes Hickok was using an 1851 Navy on that day in Springfield, MO.
Was that actually the case? Is there any supporting documentation to that effect?
I believe Hickok was known to have used a .44 two or before and during the war.
I've read several articles on the event and they all say it was a .36 cal 51 Colt which was known to be his daily carry weapons.
I have never heard what his load was however.
 
I’m writing a frontier novel set in 1870. One of my characters is an exceptionally gifted marksman, and has a Colt 1851 Navy revolver. In one scene, he is in a gunfight with an opponent at 100-120 yards.

I read that this gun’s effective firing range is about 75 yards. In a work of fiction, is it *plausible* to hit an 8-inch target (a person’s face) at 100-120 yards with the Colt Navy? Or is that completely absurd?

I may shorten the distance to 90 yards. But I’m wondering how much distance I can get away with before it becomes silly.
If that is the yardage you need to use to fit your story I’d just go with it. If it makes the story better that would be preferable to historically accurate, and I don’t really find that to be a to outrageous stretch of the truth.
If I read that in a book I would understand that I am reading a work of fiction for entertainment, not a dissertation on the capabilities of a colt revolver. Plus 99% of the people in America have no idea of the capabilities of the pistol, or that it even existed and would have no reason to question that aspect of the story.
 
If that is the yardage you need to use to fit your story I’d just go with it. If it makes the story better that would be preferable to historically accurate, and I don’t really find that to be a to outrageous stretch of the truth.
If I read that in a book I would understand that I am reading a work of fiction for entertainment, not a dissertation on the capabilities of a colt revolver. Plus 99% of the people in America have no idea of the capabilities of the pistol, or that it even existed and would have no reason to question that aspect of the story.
Probably the best answer I can be given. You’re right, excitement and entertainment are the top priority. I at least wanted to remain in the realm of plausibility, if not perfect realism.
 
If that is the yardage you need to use to fit your story I’d just go with it. If it makes the story better that would be preferable to historically accurate, and I don’t really find that to be a to outrageous stretch of the truth.
If I read that in a book I would understand that I am reading a work of fiction for entertainment, not a dissertation on the capabilities of a colt revolver. Plus 99% of the people in America have no idea of the capabilities of the pistol, or that it even existed and would have no reason to question that aspect of the story.
Probably the best answer I can be given. You’re right, excitement and entertainment are the top priority. I at least wanted to remain in the realm of plausibility, if not perfect realism.
 
I've read several articles on the event and they all say it was a .36 cal 51 Colt which was known to be his daily carry weapons.
I have never heard what his load was however.
Well, you know what his load WASN'T, anyway...
I can't fit more than 30gr of 3F in any of my Navy revolvers. It's possible he was using 4F which could give you a boost. Even though a .44 in a Dragoon or Walker (as are sometimes rumored to be the weapon of choice that day), you're looking at having to hold more elevation at 75 yards. I vote for the Navy Colt. It makes more sense, especially as he was very well practiced with them.
 
Probably the best answer I can be given. You’re right, excitement and entertainment are the top priority. I at least wanted to remain in the realm of plausibility, if not perfect realism.
If I may offer a suggestion...
As a writer myself, I tend not to exaggerate reality beyond the scope of believable...in your case, I would head off to the range with a Navy Colt and put 2 dozen rounds down range at a steel plate at 120 yards. If you can ring it more than once, it's believable. If not, well, you be the judge of that. Oft times you'll find your most avid readers will also be the ones to call you out on things they can't swallow.
Good luck in your endeavor!
 
Also, you need to ask the hard questions. Like Quigley, a 'sharpshooter' (like modern day snipers) would be intimately trained with his weapon (a rifle) and probably wouldn't "have much use for" a handgun other than a close-range defense weapon. Any real sharpshooter would probably wear his long gun like a pair of socks and never be more than an arm's length away from it (again; Quigley) for more than a short time.
It always bugs me when cowboys dismount for a long range gun fight and leave the rifle in the scabbard. Just sayin'...
 
Here you go @StoryWriter85 ....I tried it. 6 shots at 121yards. Only had six cartridges. Now that I know the sight picture, I believe that this would become an easy shot with a little practice. 20240814_174101.jpg
Conicals seem to make the 36cal's way better at long range.

6th shot at 121 Yards, Kneeling
36cal 1851 London
Lee conical/GOTOW paper cartridge

20240814_191616.jpg
 
Last edited:
Actually, he doesn't "destroy" anything of the kind!! The revolver he's shooting was made in '63 and one of Uberti's earliest. You nor I don't KNOW if the arbor is short or not and there's a good chance it isn't!! I posted about a 1960 made revolver that had a correct length arbor back around November. So, there's a good possibility the early Uberti revolvers were correct as well ( till money got in the way . . . ).
Good try though.
Here's the GU revolver I posted about with the correct length arbor-

View attachment 341392

Mike

Here you go @StoryWriter85 ....I tried it. 6 shots at 121yards. Only had six cartridges. Now that I know the sight picture, I believe that this would become an easy shot with a little practice. View attachment 341884
Conicals seem to make the 36cal's way better at long range.

6th shot at 121 Yards, Kneeling
36cal 1851 London
Lee conical/GOTOW paper cartridge

View attachment 341885
How many hits total out of six?Looks to me like they were striking with lethal force.
 
If I may offer a suggestion...
As a writer myself, I tend not to exaggerate reality beyond the scope of believable...in your case, I would head off to the range with a Navy Colt and put 2 dozen rounds down range at a steel plate at 120 yards. If you can ring it more than once, it's believable. If not, well, you be the judge of that. Oft times you'll find your most avid readers will also be the ones to call you out on things they can't swallow.
Good luck in your endeavor!
 
Fair enough, thank you! My character is a former Sharpshooter of the Civil War, so hopefully that helps the believability factor a bit.
 
Back
Top