Effectiveness of C&B Revolvers

[USMA65]

I have an Uberti 1851 Navy, .36 cal revolver. When I purchased it I decided to research the proper methods of handling the gun, and that search led me here. Over the months I have pursued this site for every little tidbit I could find. Some ideas have been incorporated into my routine, and some haven't, being put on the back burner for a later date. What I have discovered is that I am awfully glad I have not had to go into armed conflict with one of these weapons as my sole defense. I know Wild Bill Hickok used a pair of .36 1851's; fired and cleaned everyday, so the legend says. I know that they served well in the Civil War and the Indian wars....but exactly how well? I have read enough here to get the sense that they don't always go BANG when you squeeze the trigger. Anyone know from documentation just how reliable they were back in the day?

 

[cynthialee]

I have no idea about documentation but I do know that you had a choice back in the day if you wanted a pistol, a single shot, or a revolver.
If your single shot pistol misfires, or looses a cap, you now have a crappy club. If your revolver misfires or looses a cap, you have a few more chances to make a shot before you have a crappy club.

easy choice to me

 

[Robert Egler]

Good way to put it! Six chances at shooting before resorting to the crappy club is WAY better than 1 chance. :grin:

I do not know of documentation of the use 'in the day', but I do know that cleaned and loaded properly my 1858 Remington replica is very reliable.

 

[fort fireman]

You are looking at these pistols in a modern view point. What you have to realize is at the time they were the pinicle of engineering and the most modern firearms available. There are draw backs to them but compared to the options they were far and away better. Look at it this way. and 1851 colt was to a flintlock or even cap single shot as what a Glock 40 is to the C&B revolver. And some day something will out shine the Glock and people will say" How did they ever use this slow loading hard to use Glock thing.

 

[Don]

IMHO if carefully loaded and cared for a cap and ball revolver is just as reliable as any modern handgun. Their only draw back is once you've squeezed that trigger the sixth time you'd better hope your opponent is down for good.

Don

 

[crockett]

A guy at a place I worked used a 45 Govt Model 1911 and limp wristed his first shot- the gun had a stovepipe jam.
Mark Twain in Roughing It writes about a guy shot around six times in non-vital areas and surviving. I think head shots were more common and for that type shot the cap and ball was fine.
The problem with the early peacemakers wasn't the gun, it was the ammunition (as I understand it). There was a lot of variation in the powder and the point of impact was inconsistent- which MAY explain why Hickok kept the cap and ball guns- possibly more accurate.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Mis fires happen, but are largely due to failure to pay attention to detail when loading. Wrong caps, different size nipples, etc. Once the bugs are worked out, they, as said above, are pretty reliable.

Do they pack the same wallop as a modern gun? Heck no. But they are as good as some of the guns currently on the market for self defense. Frankly a 25 auto with a 2 inch barrel, isn't much of a stopper either.

They were a significant advance in fire power for their day. They are as good now as they were then and that hasn't changed despite the passage of 150yrs.

 

[necchi]

Cynthia and fort fireman summed it up well, and there was this thread just a few weeks ago, just swap out 1851 for 1858 and all the answers will be the same, :idunno: http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/271091/

Effectiveness is almost a relative term. How is it applied? Reality or Hollywood?

 

[Flash Pan Dan]

I agree with Don and necchi, after I learned how to prepare my C&B revolvers for proper functioning and how to load and care for them, I have not had a failure to fire in about 2,500 rounds. And what I mean by that is that I took my modern Italian reproductions and refitted them to be as much as possible like they would have been coming out of the Colt or Remington factories in the 1860s.

When my caps slip on to the cones (nipples, in modern parlance), I need a knife to pry them off. I have drop test cylinders with caps on them (unloaded chambers) have not had a single cap fall off.

I cringe ever time I read here how someone gets a new C&B revolver out of the box takes it to the range and shoots it with varying results and then says how they can’t imagine how those guys in the Civil War fought with these things. Then others join in and perpetuate the same false notions because they have done the same thing.

I know people shoot these guns with varying degrees of research and commitment to learn about them. And it is suppose to be for fun. But I swear, I'm baffled by the narrowest of the view that what they did is as good as it gets when shooting these pistols.

 

[smokymountainmike]

Don your right. I've shot both Colt and Remington revolvers for years. As long as I do my part and take the time to properly load my guns they are very reliable. I've had misfires but usually I've done something that contributed to it.

 

[hanshi]

I got my first c&b in 1967 and since then have never experienced a misfire. I always felt as comfortable with one as I did with a modern one.

As for effectiveness goes, they were plenty effective even compared with modern calibers. There have been numerous shootings in which assailants have absorbed dozens - yes that's right, DOZENS of 9mm, .45acp, .357 - without going down. And you were saying......

 

[Dickydalton]

I admit that my S&W Mountain gun or my 45 auto spend more time on the night table, OK?
Would I feel unarmed with one of my muzzleloaders?
NO. The last two times I had misfires was when an origional nipple broke on one of my ROA's and when the rain hit us hard while I was shooting my flintlock 50. A lot of people will be glad to own these smokepoles when the lefties start grabbing guns. :hmm:

 

[Brokenlaig]

The problem with the early peacemakers wasn't the gun, it was the ammunition (as I understand it). There was a lot of variation in the powder and the point of impact was inconsistent- which MAY explain why Hickok kept the cap and ball guns- possibly more accurate.

According to legend, all six chambers of the pistol used to kill Hickok were loaded. Mcall fired the first one into Hickok and killed him. The other five shells were duds. Knowing the general reliability of the ammunition of the age, this is entirely possible.
Hickok was also noted for shooting the chambers of his Navies empty each morning, cleaning and reloading them. Not only would this give one a bit of practice each day, but would ensure a fresh load that had not drawn moisture overnight. He was a careful man, old Bill was.

Edit to add: and yes, a C&B revolver will kill you just as dead as any other gun, and might be better at it than some more modern ones. With modern powder and caps that fit properly they're plenty reliable. I'd take shot with 9mm FMJ over a .36 lead ball any day. That 9 will just zip on through, even if it hits bone; that .36 will flatten out and make a bigger wound track.

 

[USMA65]

"He was a careful man"........
most of the time !!!

 

[fort fireman]

One screw up can be all it takes. :thumbsup:

 

[Dphar]

I have an Uberti 1851 Navy, .36 cal revolver. When I purchased it I decided to research the proper methods of handling the gun, and that search led me here. Over the months I have pursued this site for every little tidbit I could find. Some ideas have been incorporated into my routine, and some haven't, being put on the back burner for a later date. What I have discovered is that I am awfully glad I have not had to go into armed conflict with one of these weapons as my sole defense. I know Wild Bill Hickok used a pair of .36 1851's; fired and cleaned everyday, so the legend says. I know that they served well in the Civil War and the Indian wars....but exactly how well? I have read enough here to get the sense that they don't always go BANG when you squeeze the trigger. Anyone know from documentation just how reliable they were back in the day?

I shot one of the bulk boxes of 22 LR ammo through 2 S&W semi-auto pistols a month or so ago and had far more misfires than I ever had with a C&B revolver in a similar number of shots.
Bill Hickok was carrying Navies well after (6 years) then S&W #3 came out. The #3 is a great revolver but it is inferior to the Colt C&B for fast work. The Colt SAA was available only in limited numbers initially all production going to the military, but there were various conversions and open tops. But other than a small S&W pocket revolver Wild Bill seemed to have preferred the Navies.
Properly cared for a good C&B revolver is very reliable. But back in the day there were a lot of people who did not bother to take proper care...
In a gun fight first round hits are important and the Colt Navy/Army revolvers are very efficient at this.
C&B revolvers more powerful than the Colts had handling problems either due to weight or ergonomics.
If a person is used to a Colt 1860 for example even the Colt SAA takes some adjustments/relearning due to the top strap.

Dan

 

[PRM]

I know Wild Bill Hickok used a pair of .36 1851's; fired and cleaned everyday, so the legend says.

Not only would this give one a bit of practice each day, but would ensure a fresh load that had not drawn moisture overnight.

Often wondered about that tale. Looking at most surviving guns of that era - most were not cleaned on any regular basis. In fact its rare to find one without corrosion in the barrel from the powder residue.

As far as keeping one loaded, I have on several occasions had one loaded for 6-12 months between getting that particular gun back to the range with no problems. In fact, unless you are in a habit of swimming with you gun - moisture will probably never be an issue. The powder in your cylinder should be no more affected by the elements than when its stored in a can or flask.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

130 years ago, buildings and houses were drafty and far more subject subject to dampness from the elements. No vapor barriers and rarely any form of insulation.

People lived in the elements many more hours of the day.

 

[Dphar]

I know Wild Bill Hickok used a pair of .36 1851's; fired and cleaned everyday, so the legend says.

Not only would this give one a bit of practice each day, but would ensure a fresh load that had not drawn moisture overnight.

Often wondered about that tale. Looking at most surviving guns of that era - most were not cleaned on any regular basis. In fact its rare to find one without corrosion in the barrel from the powder residue.

As far as keeping one loaded, I have on several occasions had one loaded for 6-12 months between getting that particular gun back to the range with no problems. In fact, unless you are in a habit of swimming with you gun - moisture will probably never be an issue. The powder in your cylinder should be no more affected by the elements than when its stored in a can or flask.

First not eveyone was a dunce and let their guns rust. In addition I would add that the pitting may have come from some kid shooting it with matchheads or it was given to some kid late in its service life and nobody cared if he cleaned it or not since it was worth virtually nothing by the 1890s into the 1940s.
Bill Hickok's habit is documented but I can't cite it right now.
When I carried a C&B all the time I shot and cleaned it at least every other day sometimes more often if I felt like shooting.
Remember, Hickok did not have to saddle up and ride out of town to shoot his revolvers. In Deadwood, I have read, he shot them at his back door. Cleaned and reloaded one then did the same for the other. He did not have a job after all but lived off gambling as near as I can tell so he likely slept late and did not have to be to work all that early.
I looked in "Triggernometry", "Gunfighters of the Kansas Cowtowns", "Encyclopaedia of Western Gunfighters" and "Firearms of The American West" and did not find it.
So someone else will have to confirm or debunk.

Dan

 

[crockett]

Hickok was a gun crank to a great degree. I read somewhere he had about 130 guns when he died. He used a Dragoon in one fight (Tuttle? -I forget the name of the other guy.) Hickok had a S&W 32 rimfire, etc. I would tend to believe he took good care of his pistols. When he was in Abilene (?) the town supplied ammunition to practice and they got a little upset when he shot off 6,000 rounds in a fairly short period of time. (I think that was in a "Gunfighter" book if I recall).