WalkerAn Uberti, but Walker? Dragoon?
So. Would it use a 60 grain charge?
Just to qualify this pistol as being a Walker. Not that I would shoot it above 35grains. I just want to have a bp supergun!So. Would it use a 60 grain charge?
I think it was called a "horse pistol" because it was carried on a horse. I think there was a double holster that draped over the saddle with a hole in the middle over the pommel to keep the rig from sliding.Rumor has it the Walker was the most powerful handgun until the .357 Magnum. But there is a good reason why it was classified as a "Horse Pistol".
Yes, I also use 50grains in my .54 Cal Jeager.Generally speaking, I believe you can put as much powder in the chamber as it will hold while still allowing the ball to seat below the chamber mouth. That doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to do so.
I would agree that the subject revolver is a reproduction of an 1847 Walker. I don’t know the capacity of its chambers.
Sixty grains is a lot for a handgun. I shoot 55 grains in my .50 caliber rifle. Take a look at the chamber walls of that Walker cylinder and ask yourself if you would shoot a rifle with a barrel wall that thin. Samuel Colt had reasons for discontinuing the Walker.
I’m sure there is a lot of cachet in shooting one of these, especially one loaded to maximum capacity. However, if I were you, I would consult a reliable black powder loading manual and follow the recommendations.
Just my opinion.
Good luck, and be safe.
Notchy Bob
Yes, it was carried in pommel holsters - because it tended to pull one pants down.I think it was called a "horse pistol" because it was carried on a horse. I think there was a double holster that draped over the saddle with a hole in the middle over the pommel to keep the rig from sliding.
Also, the Walker was made to kill Comanches' horses.
It was the metallurgy of the original Walkers’ cylinders that was the problem.The early Walkers had fluted cylinders that could blow up when max to overload.
I would agree, in that the original cylinders were made of iron. The steel cylinders in today's reproductions are almost certainly stronger. However, I don't think the metallurgy changed much between production of the Walker and the Dragoons that followed. Reducing the cylinder length of the Dragoons, as compared to the Walkers, reduced the chamber capacity so they wouldn't hold as much powder as a Walker. I'm sure that helped, with regard to safety.It was the metallurgy of the original Walkers’ cylinders that was the problem.
A replica of a Colt Walker. A horse pistol intended to be carried in a saddle holster.An Uberti, but Walker? Dragoon?
Enter your email address to join: