How fast can BP revolvers be reloaded?

[2 shots]

1860 speed loaders

 

[TNGhost]

No way to prove it, but I'd believe that a much higher percentage of the population has a daily carry today than in 1870-1910.

This would be an absolute certainty in blacks and women.

 

[nick_1]

Lot of folks on Here that apparently get their history from watching movies, FB and googling stuff on the internet..

 

[springfield art]

Depends upon how close the Natives are to your trail!

 

[M. De Land]

But

But what did they do after the engagement was over for the day, and it possibly being weeks before they were in the next engagement?
I am skeptical that anybody wagged around a bunch of revolvers tor days or weeks on end when not needed. Thats a lot of extra weight. Too much extra equipment to keep track of while trying to do all the day to day things a soldier has and is expected to do.
I remember reading a period account written at the beginning of the war about a new Union company that had just been formed with local volunteers. East coast city I think , maybe in Maryland?
After receiving a couple weeks of hurried, rudimentary training and a couple of days before starting the march south, several local wealthy benefactors who had pooled their money a days before the unit’s departure bought a large lot of the Colt 5-shot .36 caliber revolvers-enough to present each man with one of his own as a gesture of their gratitude to the volunteers for such a patriotic response.
The author of the account ( who was one of the volunteers ) noted that beginning of the second day of the march some of his comrades had started tossing their new pistols in the ditches and brush along the road when the officers were not looking. In the following days as the fast-paced march progressed, more and more pistols were tossed away. The reason the men were tossing them was they did not like having the extra weight of the pistols added to their already cumbersome burden of blankets, canteen of water, extra clothing, shelter half, etc. that they were required by orders to carry.
The author said that within a few days half of the pistols had been tossed, and the majority of the ones left when the unit reached their destination at a big camp, almost all the remaining pistols were sold to local civilians, and officers from other units.

My guess is they did very minor cleaning of their revolvers in war time with a wipe down and patched cleaning rod down bore and each chamber. I doubt they were very often broken down for a complete cleaning and re-lube.
It would have been very advantages acquire all extra arms of the same caliber as well so there probably was a good deal of swapping going on to achieve this very practical goal.
Also in the regular army infantry only officers were issued pistols.

 

[Kcharles]

I’ve done or still do multiple cylinders, but the most I’d put through at any given time would be three the brass frame Remington tweak from the heat the steel frame Remington’s get so hot makes you wonder if you put in a fresh cold cylinder that it wouldn’t go off because a gun so hot, I usually carry 4 extra cylinders loaded for fun fast reloading when plinking in and around the wooded countrysides

 

[Eterry]

But

But what did they do after the engagement was over for the day, and it possibly being weeks before they were in the next engagement?
I am skeptical that anybody wagged around a bunch of revolvers tor days or weeks on end when not needed. Thats a lot of extra weight. Too much extra equipment to keep track of while trying to do all the day to day things a soldier has and is expected to do.
I remember reading a period account written at the beginning of the war about a new Union company that had just been formed with local volunteers. East coast city I think , maybe in Maryland?
After receiving a couple weeks of hurried, rudimentary training and a couple of days before starting the march south, several local wealthy benefactors who had pooled their money a days before the unit’s departure bought a large lot of the Colt 5-shot .36 caliber revolvers-enough to present each man with one of his own as a gesture of their gratitude to the volunteers for such a patriotic response.
The author of the account ( who was one of the volunteers ) noted that beginning of the second day of the march some of his comrades had started tossing their new pistols in the ditches and brush along the road when the officers were not looking. In the following days as the fast-paced march progressed, more and more pistols were tossed away. The reason the men were tossing them was they did not like having the extra weight of the pistols added to their already cumbersome burden of blankets, canteen of water, extra clothing, shelter half, etc. that they were required by orders to carry.
The author said that within a few days half of the pistols had been tossed, and the majority of the ones left when the unit reached their destination at a big camp, almost all the remaining pistols were sold to local civilians, and officers from other units.

But

But what did they do after the engagement was over for the day, and it possibly being weeks before they were in the next engagement?
I am skeptical that anybody wagged around a bunch of revolvers tor days or weeks on end when not needed. Thats a lot of extra weight. Too much extra equipment to keep track of while trying to do all the day to day things a soldier has and is expected to do.
I remember reading a period account written at the beginning of the war about a new Union company that had just been formed with local volunteers. East coast city I think , maybe in Maryland?
After receiving a couple weeks of hurried, rudimentary training and a couple of days before starting the march south, several local wealthy benefactors who had pooled their money a days before the unit’s departure bought a large lot of the Colt 5-shot .36 caliber revolvers-enough to present each man with one of his own as a gesture of their gratitude to the volunteers for such a patriotic response.
The author of the account ( who was one of the volunteers ) noted that beginning of the second day of the march some of his comrades had started tossing their new pistols in the ditches and brush along the road when the officers were not looking. In the following days as the fast-paced march progressed, more and more pistols were tossed away. The reason the men were tossing them was they did not like having the extra weight of the pistols added to their already cumbersome burden of blankets, canteen of water, extra clothing, shelter half, etc. that they were required by orders to carry.
The author said that within a few days half of the pistols had been tossed, and the majority of the ones left when the unit reached their destination at a big camp, almost all the remaining pistols were sold to local civilians, and officers from other units.

I was only referring to mounted units. They had the luxury of saddle bags and carrying a revolver or two in a voluminous pocket was of little concern if old Puddin Foot was packing you and the rest of your gear.
My understanding is, especially at the beginning of the conflict, when EVERYONE said it would be a 90 day war, no one thought they'd need a defensive weapon, and troops were green and not used to forced marches. Then casting aside a handgun might seem handy.
I've read, somewhere years ago, any photography studio worth its tintype had handguns, sabers and Spencer carbines as props, so they seemed well heeled. But reading the many journals and watching documentaries of combatants I've read no foot soldier write of using his handgun and rarely his Saber, unless an Officer.
I think the common ground pounder especially at the entry of the conflict had little use for a handgun or Saber. An Officer with only has Saber definitely needed and carried one.
Scrounging after a battle was common, either for trade, sale, or personal use.

 

[nick_1]

even horse troops did not have multiple revolvers. That was the Kansas regulators and Missouri bushwackers that had loads of revolvers in saddle holsters. regular army you have what is issued to you.

 

[Trev]

It's certainly true that in the beginning regulars would only have what was issued, I'm not so sure that was enforced throughout the conflict and it is also only the horse troops that had sabers. Artillerymen had Artillery Swords, NCOs had Noncommissioned Officers’ Swords, Officers had swords that pertained to their type of duty, as example there was a Army Staff & Field Officers’ Sword. These swords would be a recognizable part of the uniforms.
I can imagine that the veterans of two or more battles probably traded some issued items for some acquired items, but in the case of side arms, having found a revolver didn't give you ammunition for it, that too was only issued to selected units, being the military every item was scheduled and counted.

 

[smoothshooter]

I was only referring to mounted units. They had the luxury of saddle bags and carrying a revolver or two in a voluminous pocket was of little concern if old Puddin Foot was packing you and the rest of your gear.
My understanding is, especially at the beginning of the conflict, when EVERYONE said it would be a 90 day war, no one thought they'd need a defensive weapon, and troops were green and not used to forced marches. Then casting aside a handgun might seem handy.
I've read, somewhere years ago, any photography studio worth its tintype had handguns, sabers and Spencer carbines as props, so they seemed well heeled. But reading the many journals and watching documentaries of combatants I've read no foot soldier write of using his handgun and rarely his Saber, unless an Officer.
I think the common ground pounder especially at the entry of the conflict had little use for a handgun or Saber. An Officer with only has Saber definitely needed and carried one.
Scrounging after a battle was common, either for trade, sale, or personal use.

Being mounted would make transporting all that extra weight easier, but even cavalry did not travel all the time.
Having to care for a horse under field conditions leaves even less time to be fussing with extra firearms.
I figure three guns or less was about the limit the vast majority of cavalry soldiers wanted to deal with.
I wouldn’t want more than two revolvers myself, I think.

 

[smoothshooter]

Back about 20 years ago, the year I used seven pounds of Goex in the NMA, I practiced fast reloads and adjusted my accoutrements to accommodate it; with a double belt pouch (Mil surplus leather cartridge box) containing wads in one, balls in the other, my flask with measue hanging crossbody and the capper on the flask strap; my load time with powder, wonderwad, ball and cap ran about 90-100 seconds. with just powder, ball and caps it was a little under a minute each on average for three cylinders.
I don't know who made the inline capper but it works with the Pietta .44 like it was made special for it. I did not load one chamber at a time but spun through six of powder, then six of wads or balls, then six of caps. This actually went faster for me away from any table, because there is no tendency to lay something down when standing at the firing spot.
The cylinder change in the Remington should take less than ten seconds and probably nearer to five seconds with daily use.
At that time I could still ride and I'm certain that a cylinder swap on horse back would be easier with that revolver than trying to reload it and also easier than trying to shoot a carbine from a moving horse. (Well, I never had a real carbine but I carried a lever action Marlin on my horse many times, key word being carried, as a kid I had learned that accurately shooting a bow from a horse was much easier than hitting anything with a rifle)
I'm not sure that paper cartridges would be much faster to load, but they would have the supply advantage of always using the minimum charge which could save a lot of powder for an army, and would require less thought on the soldiers part. All those wooden boxes though!

Now with that in mind, I doubt that shooting either revolver or carbine from horse back happened other than in military drill or during a cavalry action. A lone civilian or scout would be hiding or running, gunfights were most often ambushes. The little I know about cavalry tactics from what I've read makes believe that carbines were shot while dismounted and that revolvers were shot during a charge and that sabers were the main cavalry weapon.
Think about how long a charge lasts, say 200 yards run in at about 9-10 yards per second, somewhere between 20 and 30 seconds in which to empty the revolver, reholster the revolver and draw the saber; well actually if you don't shoot until 75 yards only 6-8 seconds.
Once in the melee the revolver would as dangerous to your own troops as to the others as the horses rear and plunge.
Not much spare time to juggle another revolver or to reload, but I imagine, and that's all it is- I wasn't there, that after a very few minutes of hacking and bashing with the sabers that the horse soldiers would break off and put some distance between them and the enemy. Regroup, reload, repeat. Horses are not designed for stand still and fight tactics, they are designed to move quickly. Hit and run.
Why two revolvers? Of course men have two hands and given that all the shooters are moving and all the targets are moving, even unaimed or poorly aimed fire will cause some causalities during that minute or less that closes to saber fighting distance, and of course war horse trampling distance too.

A second pistol would be handy if you had a cap jam with the first gun.

 

[bpd303]

and when this fella did, he stated they "poured a canteen of water" on the gun to allow it to rotate for reloading.

My grandfather told me a story told to him by his father who was a Captain in the 23rd Ohio during the ACW. He said that water was precious and not to be wasted on a gun. Hence the term pizz on it was used.
I just thought I would time myself on loading the Walker, not including capping. It took me 68 seconds (according to my Timex) to charge 6 chambers and seat 6 balls, using a flask & loading stand... tomorrow I will time capping with my capper.

 

[M. De Land]

My grandfather told me a story told to him by his father who was a Captain in the 23rd Ohio during the ACW. He said that water was precious and not to be wasted on a gun. Hence the term pizz on it was used.
I just thought I would time myself on loading the Walker, not including capping. It took me 68 seconds (according to my Timex) to charge 6 chambers and seat 6 balls, using a flask & loading stand... tomorrow I will time capping with my capper.
View attachment 379188

One thing us reloaders all have in common......................... cluttered up loading benches !

 

[Eterry]

One thing us reloaders all have in common......................... cluttered up loading benches !

Compared to mine... it looks neat as a pin.

 

[bpd303]

One thing us reloaders all have in common......................... cluttered up loading benches !

One year my wife decided to give me a birthday present, a Lee shotgun loader and as an after thought she "cleaned up and organized" the loading bench, which is an old kitchen table with 1/2 in plywood top. That was about 10 years ago and I still have a hard time finding some stuff.
She was downstairs where the bench is while i was loading the cylinder of the Walker. She said it's about time to organize that again. I replied with our standing statement, "Organized folks are just too lazy to look for stuff".

 

[bpd303]

tomorrow I will time capping with my capper.

I fired the Walker again today and using the straight line capper it added 11 seconds (1.8) seconds per cap and I dropped one. So the time it took me to load it 79 seconds.
The .445 undersized balls did not give any problems like moving under recoil or chain fires.
I dug out my Lee lead hardness tester and checked the .451 balls that I couldn't get loaded and they are a BHN29, pure lead is BHN5, no wonder I couldn't cut a ring with them.
Today I threw them back in the lead pot and brought it to temperature to drain the pot. Found some ingots that checked a BHN8 and cast up 24 balls. Right now I had better give the Walker a thorough cleaning.

 

[stephenprops1]

Been watching these threads and digging through my Colt books and I’m not finding evidence of spare cylinders being sold in any great numbers to the military or the public. I have found that the war department purchased a few thousand frames and many wedges though the reason for them is lost to history.
I have no doubt that some people sourced spare cylinders. Just doesn’t seem as if it was a common practice.

As some guns wore out or were damaged it is possible that someone else acquired the leftover cylinder and utilized it.