I have to rethink the spare cylinder idea

[Trev]

So all those CW vets and old gunfighters that Kieth interviewed and trained with just flat out lied to him?

 

[KingOfKindling]

My years of relic hunting and poring over relic websites, CW relic publications and relic shows without seeing a lone dug cylinder leads me to believe it rarely if ever happened in the CW. Check out CW relic books and metal detecting websites for recovered cylinders and draw your own conclusion. YMMV

Go check out the very first post that started this entire thread.

 

[nick_1]

ever hear a fish story? actually how many of them did say that extra cylinders were common? one guy? maybe?

 

[nick_1]

Kindeling. the Cody museum is not a civil war museum nor do I recall seeing a bunch of loose cylinders there and if so in what context? how and where were they found?

 

[Malamute]

Throwing a few random thoughts out.

"Average______" keeps being thrown out in discussion, Id suggest that the people that may have used spare cylinders were likely not "average". My personal context is not so much CW but western frontier type. In the post CW period there were scads of used CW percussion pistols on the market and in heavy use, often at pretty reasonable prices. Damaged guns may well have been scavenged for usable parts, the single most potentially usable part is the cylinder.

We of course have precedence in spare cylinders being used in the Patterson model, the question remains if spares were used much if at all by later users. The answer seems largely no, but not conclusively "never". Its quite possible it was done to some degree but not commented about by any written account thats currently known, as many people then didnt write much or survive long enough to write about it, or as some mentioned, it may not have seemed important enough to mention.

Remingtons are mentioned quite a lot. the info Ive seen on them in western cavalry use is they had problems with them bursting cylinders, to the point some officers had them turned in and they went without, as many troops didnt trust them after seeing several burst. To assume a Remington solved any perceived shortcomings of Colts pistols in that period seems to not take this into account. The Remingtons were also known to foul faster, rendering the gun difficult to use sooner. Using a repo today and assuming it accurately represents those used in the mid-late 1800s is not always a valid assumption, in either Remingtons or Colts in some aspect or another.

If stuck using a percussion revolver, Id probably want a spare cylinder. Extra guns are heavier and cost more. One spare gun may be practical to carry, and one or others on a saddle be do-able to some, but horses can only carry so much weight over time and distance, choose wisely what you can afford and take. Guns and firepower are only one aspect of life on the frontier.

I dont recall who, but they mentioned in writing of knocking the wedge loose on a saddle horn. Military saddles didnt have a horn but did have a hard front tree.

They had very different ideas about safety than today. Carrying a loaded capped cylinder likely didnt cause any particular alarm, it doesnt to me, Id carry one if relying on a percussion gun for some reason and reloading or carrying the stuff required was difficult or problematic, but being careful with one would seem prudent. Loading directly from a flask was also common, besides paper cartridges. Cappers made capping easier, I believe there were appropriate cappers for revolvers.

Average users, both in and out of military service likely didnt think through some of this much, nor practice much, some, for whatever reasons, did shoot more and attempt to up their game so to speak, theres always been that divide. Its tough to make sweeping conclusions based on "average" user assumptions.

Dunning-Kruger effect. One side is fairly well known, incompetent people assume they are competent, but dont know enough to understand their incompetence. The other side of that coin is higher competence individuals assume everyone can do what they can. An unknown Jerry Miculek/Ed McGivern etc may believe its not difficult to do the things they can, and cant understand why others cant. Not everyone is wired the same. Some choke or get nervy in tense situations, some dont*. Its difficult to say I do/dont do such and such so that means most people can/cant do or be like me. Cant swap a cylinder when riding or being shot at? Some likely can without particular difficulty. Same for reloading or whatever. Practice and experience play a part, as does the individuals temperament and physical abilities.

*An example of someone not getting ruffled, in a video shot during the second battle of Najaf, Travis Haley is engaging enemy at 7-800 yds with a precision rifle, calmly going through multiple magazines, his spotter mentioned they were shooting back, he acknowledged such "Yeah, theyre shootin back at us", apparently not at all concerned. Taking care of business.

 

[KingOfKindling]

Kindeling. the Cody museum is not a civil war museum nor do I recall seeing a bunch of loose cylinders there and if so in what context? how and where were they found?

Didn't say anything about the civil war. Whitworth wasn't strictly looking for civil war sources either. See the bolded quote below. Was just pointing out to him a source of found loose cylinders. This thread has gotten so gigantic it's almost impossible to keep up with everything.

My years of relic hunting and poring over relic websites, CW relic publications and relic shows without seeing a lone dug cylinder leads me to believe it rarely if ever happened in the CW. Check out CW relic books and metal detecting websites for recovered cylinders and draw your own conclusion. YMMV

 

[fireman1]

Throwing a few random thoughts out.

"Average______" keeps being thrown out in discussion, Id suggest that the people that may have used spare cylinders were likely not "average". My personal context is not so much CW but western frontier type. In the post CW period there were scads of used CW percussion pistols on the market and in heavy use, often at pretty reasonable prices. Damaged guns may well have been scavenged for usable parts, the single most potentially usable part is the cylinder.

We of course have precedence in spare cylinders being used in the Patterson model, the question remains if spares were used much if at all by later users. The answer seems largely no, but not conclusively "never". Its quite possible it was done to some degree but not commented about by any written account thats currently known, as many people then didnt write much or survive long enough to write about it, or as some mentioned, it may not have seemed important enough to mention.

Remingtons are mentioned quite a lot. the info Ive seen on them in western cavalry use is they had problems with them bursting cylinders, to the point some officers had them turned in and they went without, as many troops didnt trust them after seeing several burst. To assume a Remington solved any perceived shortcomings of Colts pistols in that period seems to not take this into account. The Remingtons were also known to foul faster, rendering the gun difficult to use sooner. Using a repo today and assuming it accurately represents those used in the mid-late 1800s is not always a valid assumption, in either Remingtons or Colts in some aspect or another.

If stuck using a percussion revolver, Id probably want a spare cylinder. Extra guns are heavier and cost more. One spare gun may be practical to carry, and one or others on a saddle be do-able to some, but horses can only carry so much weight over time and distance, choose wisely what you can afford and take. Guns and firepower are only one aspect of life on the frontier.

I dont recall who, but they mentioned in writing of knocking the wedge loose on a saddle horn. Military saddles didnt have a horn but did have a hard front tree.

They had very different ideas about safety than today. Carrying a loaded capped cylinder likely didnt cause any particular alarm, it doesnt to me, Id carry one if relying on a percussion gun for some reason and reloading or carrying the stuff required was difficult or problematic, but being careful with one would seem prudent. Loading directly from a flask was also common, besides paper cartridges. Cappers made capping easier, I believe there were appropriate cappers for revolvers.

Average users, both in and out of military service likely didnt think through some of this much, nor practice much, some, for whatever reasons, did shoot more and attempt to up their game so to speak, theres always been that divide. Its tough to make sweeping conclusions based on "average" user assumptions.

Dunning-Kruger effect. One side is fairly well known, incompetent people assume they are competent, but dont know enough to understand their incompetence. The other side of that coin is higher competence individuals assume everyone can do what they can. An unknown Jerry Miculek/Ed McGivern etc may believe its not difficult to do the things they can, and cant understand why others cant. Not everyone is wired the same. Some choke or get nervy in tense situations, some dont*. Its difficult to say I do/dont do such and such so that means most people can/cant do or be like me. Cant swap a cylinder when riding or being shot at? Some likely can without particular difficulty. Same for reloading or whatever. Practice and experience play a part, as does the individuals temperament and physical abilities.

*An example of someone not getting ruffled, in a video shot during the second battle of Najaf, Travis Haley is engaging enemy at 7-800 yds with a precision rifle, calmly going through multiple magazines, his spotter mentioned they were shooting back, he acknowledged such "Yeah, theyre shootin back at us", apparently not at all concerned. Taking care of business.

When asked about shooting his handgun at 400 yards, Elmer Keith would reply, ''just put the sight over the target and squeeze.'' I'd be all ''where is the target? I can't see that far!"