• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Colt pistols used in Cavalry operations.

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
No horses here, I will walk and pull my six gun lead slinger. Never liked the horses to damn edgey in my opinion, ( never met one that wasnt half crazy) not to mention all that goes into taking care of them. 😉And besides theres not that many pistol slingers now of days riding one, maybe a ford mustang
 
Captain Walker wrote about routinely shooting his Walkers past 100 yards

He wrote "The Colt is as good as a rifle to 100 yards and as good as a musket to 200"

He actually used them to shoot Mexicans , not paper so I'll believe the guys who actually used original revolvers in armed combat
I can drill a man sized target all day long at 100yds but from a galloping horse?
 
I can drill a man sized target all day long at 100yds but from a galloping horse?
The whole Galloping Horse thing is irrelevant to a revolver being sighted to 75 yards, no one is hitting a man at 100 yards with a Sharps rifle, a 61 Springfield or a scoped Whitworth ,or anything else from a galloping horse either. The revolvers were designed to hit from 0 to 100 or longer because this was the dynamic of combat at this time and Sam Colt built this design feature in. If you're shooting from horseback obviously it will be harder to hit.

Rifles having a 2-300 yard battle sight zero was also the norm, this is why the Enfield rifle was used with "half sighting " and "fine sighting " at closer range and soldiers were trained this way, a full sight picture aimed at the belt of enemy soldiers allowed for hits from point blank to 300. Hitting people was the name of the game, not target shooting. Being on horseback and shooting would obviously require a change of tactics for shooting by the user.

We're talking the era of Napoleonic tactics and warfare with masses of soldiers shooting at each other, the 75 yard zero gave the user of a revolver the ability to shoot at ranges combat usually occurred at this time. If there are other factors involved it's beyond the control of a revolver, the sights are on the gun either way.
 
The whole Galloping Horse thing is irrelevant to a revolver being sighted to 75 yards, no one is hitting a man at 100 yards with a Sharps rifle, a 61 Springfield or a scoped Whitworth ,or anything else from a galloping horse either. The revolvers were designed to hit from 0 to 100 or longer because this was the dynamic of combat at this time and Sam Colt built this design feature in. If you're shooting from horseback obviously it will be harder to hit.

Rifles having a 2-300 yard battle sight zero was also the norm, this is why the Enfield rifle was used with "half sighting " and "fine sighting " at closer range and soldiers were trained this way, a full sight picture aimed at the belt of enemy soldiers allowed for hits from point blank to 300. Hitting people was the name of the game, not target shooting. Being on horseback and shooting would obviously require a change of tactics for shooting by the user.

We're talking the era of Napoleonic tactics and warfare with masses of soldiers shooting at each other, the 75 yard zero gave the user of a revolver the ability to shoot at ranges combat usually occurred at this time. If there are other factors involved it's beyond the control of a revolver, the sights are on the gun either way.
Totally off topic.....
I find it amusing that "point blank" (a medieval archery term) is still used to describe a range.
 
Totally off topic.....
I find it amusing that "point blank" (a medieval archery term) is still used to describe a range.
How is it off topic?

Weapons in the mid 1800s were designed so that soldiers could hit other soldiers . Sam Colt built this design feature into the revolvers. The revolver does not know that you are on horseback.

Point Blank is a term used to describe firearms range, Medieval Archery notwithstanding . Saying "God Bless You" when someone sneezes dates back to the Black Plague, so what 😀

Why do people refute facts about firearms technology or try to throw in other factors, for the sight regulation of Victorian Era firearms......
 
How is it off topic?

Weapons in the mid 1800s were designed so that soldiers could hit other soldiers . Sam Colt built this design feature into the revolvers. The revolver does not know that you are on horseback.

Point Blank is a term used to describe firearms range, Medieval Archery notwithstanding . Saying "God Bless You" when someone sneezes dates back to the Black Plague, so what 😀

Why do people refute facts about firearms technology or try to throw in other factors, for the sight regulation of Victorian Era firearms......
Well, it’s off topic because I was mentioning something I find amusing. I think it is so cool that terms that were coined so many years ago are still in common use.
 
Anyone ever watch mounted cowboy action shooting? They fire hundreds of rounds from horse back at a gallop. They are shooting very close targets with blanks, but it does show that shooting from horseback is possible.

But the horse is on the move at a gallop, and the riders generally do not shoot close to the head.
Very difficult to get a horse to stand still when it knows someone is going to fire a gun.
When they hear the gun cock they know what’s coming next.
 
How is it off topic?

Weapons in the mid 1800s were designed so that soldiers could hit other soldiers . Sam Colt built this design feature into the revolvers. The revolver does not know that you are on horseback.

Point Blank is a term used to describe firearms range, Medieval Archery notwithstanding . Saying "God Bless You" when someone sneezes dates back to the Black Plague, so what 😀

Why do people refute facts about firearms technology or try to throw in other factors, for the sight regulation of Victorian Era firearms......

Not likely the horse in question mentioned by the OP had the benefit of such extensive training.
 
With good training, horses can be desensitized to just about anything. Case in point, there exists a WW1 film of horses pulling wagons not far below the level of field guns on a hill sending a salvo downrange.
People associate the WWII German army with Panzers and Stukas. Few realize that the WWII German army was mostly horse drawn. Clearly, they were desensitized.
When Rommel inspected a captured US Army truck his comment was that Germany would loose the war.
 
Isn't that what the OP is about???
I'm honestly not even sure the OP knows what the point of this is and neither do I

Galloping Horses, shooting Colts at spitting distance, I don't know

Yes, I agree. You will not be able to shoot on a galloping horse as well as if you were standing on the ground, I don't know what else to add here

All this "Colt revolvers are for close range combat and hitting high is a design flaw" stuff is getting absurd
 
https://civilwartalk.com/threads/a-question-on-cavalry-firing-carbines-from-horseback.177517/
From "Lampass Bill":

Cavalry skirmishers often fired their carbines from horseback, usually when at the halt. During Price's Raid in 1864, most of his men were armed with infantry rifles. They generally fought dismounted, but not always; at Mine Creek, Kansas, Marmaduke's Division, being pursued by Federal cavalry, formed a mounted battle line while halted. This give them a chance to reload from the saddle, and they temporarily halted a Federal charge, but the Yankees rallied and charged home with sabers and routed Marmaduke's men.

Here's an example of a fight with firearms near Doniphan, Missouri, during Price's Raid, as recalled by Sergt. J. C. Steakley, 3rd Missouri State Militia Cavalry:

The enemy made their attack from the north, where they were formed in a terrible thicket of timber, large and small, interlaced with underbrush. They were about one hundred and fifty yards from us. We charged at once and they counter charged. We were fighting up on an ordinary 'point' ridge, high in the center, and by the time our third charge had been made our command had become divided. . . . We seventeen men on the east side [of the ridge] had enough to employ us, for we were only about thirty yards from the Confederates and plenty of them in front of us too. I glanced around and saw that I was the only officer of any rank there. "Let's charge them once again!" I shouted. "Come on, boys, let's give 'em hell!"

Oh how badly we needed our sabers and how we wanted them! The seventeen of us dashed right into their midst. But we were not fighting 'paper collars' or 'greenies'; we were fighting Joe Shelby's veterans, who knew nothing but fight. I emptied a double-barrelled shot-gun and two eight-inch revolvers at them and then called to the men to stop and form and load up, as I knew that their weapons were about all as empty as my own.

We formed up and began to load up, when it seemed as if providentially, I dropped the pistol caps which belonged with a bunch of cartridges. I slid from my saddle and while stooping to pick them up, happened to glance beneath the underbrush. . . . What did I see but one hundred or more of the enemy advancing upon us in line of battle. It was evidently another command which had come up the river, heard the firing, found our camp, and pursued us up the ridge on our rear. I picked up that bunch of pistol caps, sprang into my saddle and shouted: "Boys, this won't do. Look yonder. Let's get out of here!"

Our guns were empty. I directed one of my company buglers to run out eastward about one mile and stop, so that we might load, none of us having even two chambers of a pistol loaded. I learned subsequently that the bugler and a private who went with him never stopped till they reached Poplar Bluff, fifteen miles or more away. . . . .

If we had had our sabers we would have been able in the dense underbrush to slaughter them in the confusion; for they were mounted, their lines were in no sort of order and their long guns were empty. However the fourteen men with me said they would follow me where ever I went. I assured them that if they did, I would take them out safely or die in the attempt.
 
Captain Walker wrote about routinely shooting his Walkers past 100 yards

He wrote "The Colt is as good as a rifle to 100 yards and as good as a musket to 200"

He actually used them to shoot Mexicans , not paper so I'll believe the guys who actually used original revolvers in

https://civilwartalk.com/threads/a-question-on-cavalry-firing-carbines-from-horseback.177517/
From "Lampass Bill":

Cavalry skirmishers often fired their carbines from horseback, usually when at the halt. During Price's Raid in 1864, most of his men were armed with infantry rifles. They generally fought dismounted, but not always; at Mine Creek, Kansas, Marmaduke's Division, being pursued by Federal cavalry, formed a mounted battle line while halted. This give them a chance to reload from the saddle, and they temporarily halted a Federal charge, but the Yankees rallied and charged home with sabers and routed Marmaduke's men.

Here's an example of a fight with firearms near Doniphan, Missouri, during Price's Raid, as recalled by Sergt. J. C. Steakley, 3rd Missouri State Militia Cavalry:

The enemy made their attack from the north, where they were formed in a terrible thicket of timber, large and small, interlaced with underbrush. They were about one hundred and fifty yards from us. We charged at once and they counter charged. We were fighting up on an ordinary 'point' ridge, high in the center, and by the time our third charge had been made our command had become divided. . . . We seventeen men on the east side [of the ridge] had enough to employ us, for we were only about thirty yards from the Confederates and plenty of them in front of us too. I glanced around and saw that I was the only officer of any rank there. "Let's charge them once again!" I shouted. "Come on, boys, let's give 'em hell!"

Oh how badly we needed our sabers and how we wanted them! The seventeen of us dashed right into their midst. But we were not fighting 'paper collars' or 'greenies'; we were fighting Joe Shelby's veterans, who knew nothing but fight. I emptied a double-barrelled shot-gun and two eight-inch revolvers at them and then called to the men to stop and form and load up, as I knew that their weapons were about all as empty as my own.

We formed up and began to load up, when it seemed as if providentially, I dropped the pistol caps which belonged with a bunch of cartridges. I slid from my saddle and while stooping to pick them up, happened to glance beneath the underbrush. . . . What did I see but one hundred or more of the enemy advancing upon us in line of battle. It was evidently another command which had come up the river, heard the firing, found our camp, and pursued us up the ridge on our rear. I picked up that bunch of pistol caps, sprang into my saddle and shouted: "Boys, this won't do. Look yonder. Let's get out of here!"

Our guns were empty. I directed one of my company buglers to run out eastward about one mile and stop, so that we might load, none of us having even two chambers of a pistol loaded. I learned subsequently that the bugler and a private who went with him never stopped till they reached Poplar Bluff, fifteen miles or more away. . . . .

If we had had our sabers we would have been able in the dense underbrush to slaughter them in the confusion; for they were mounted, their lines were in no sort of order and their long guns were empty. However the fourteen men with me said they would follow me where ever I went. I assured them that if they did, I would take them out safely or die in the attempt.
Yeah, that says it all................ spitting distance on horse back with pistol,carbine and saber ! No doubt some revolver hits were made at long range but it certainly wasn't regular cavalry tactic . I've also read this type of cavalry assault in one of Kieths books as told to him in person by a civil war cavalry vet and alluded to in this post that the troop would charge in shoot the revolvers and carbines dry then cut there way out with the saber, dash out of range to reload,regroup and charge again if needed . From what I gather almost always from a flanking angle if possible.
My great great grandfather was a cavalry captain in the civil war from Michigan and lost his arm in the war. The family still has his Sharps paper cartridge saddle ring carbine that I examined some years back.
 
Last edited:
All this "Colt revolvers are for close range combat and hitting high is a design flaw" stuff is getting absurd
Well that is definitely true. Some folks have a hard time judging history by today's standards and practices. If you think about it, it's rather brilliant. A 100yd zero for when you really need the sights. "Aim for the buckle" for up to 50yd shots and point shooting at close range. I have found no other firearm more suited to point-shooting than the Colt 1860.
 
I seriously doubt anyone was shooting people at 100yds with a sixgun, from the saddle. The saber was the primary weapon, which is why the sixgun was carried on the right side, butt forward for twist draw action.

I'm not saying they weren't implemented in that way but traditionally, cavalry was trained to fight on horseback. Dragoons were mounted infantry, they were not trained to fight on horseback and fought on foot. They were used as a cheaper alternative, as it was much more expensive and time consuming to produce competent cavalry.
By the time of the Civil War the carbine was the primary weapon of cavalry, with the revolver used for close-end work. Mounted soldiers even in the 1850s often commented that the saber was left behind when on active campaign. One of the best examples of cavalry used as skirmishers was Buford's men on the first day at Gettysburg. More often cavalry was effective on raids, and reconnaissance missions. The most famous cavalry battle with charges was at Brandy Station just before Gettysburg.
 
What's even "funnier" is that Colt's Paterson revolving "carbines" ( they were handguns) , in .525" cal. had adjustable rear sights with a taller front sight. Evidence that they fully understood a "sighting system" for a handgun.
Therefore, the idea that a sight system would be an afterthought is ridiculous and the sights on following examples (1840's and on) are purpose related sights designed for handguns and not be cumbersome appendages . . . more "utilitarian".
Even then ( back when engineers were "brainless") they probably knew the formula for poi with known sight radius, powder charge, bullet weight . . . well, maybe.

Mike
 
I think some of the SASS events are on horseback. As I understand it you need to use sort of a downward, tomahawk motion, firing at the downward stroke. Point blank- pretty much.
In the Civil War the revolvers were almost (always) loaded with combustible cartridges. The long pointy bullets tended to twist and get out of line as they were rammed. In short, not very accurate so usually point blank range.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top