The "Myth" of Cylinder Swapping?

[Rob Hall]

It does not take long to swap a cylinder in a Colt. 15-20 seconds maybe. Less time than capping a revolver. Not something to be done in close contact with the enemy, go to the saber.
Being horse back is not a plus for sure. But most re-enactors are not as good on a horse as the cavalry man of the 1850s-60s. The horse basically being a part of their costume not a part of their everyday life. Just as importantly their HORSES know/learn they are not all that skilled and will take "liberties".
If you think it would be impossible watch "Stagecoach" the first version with John Wayne and look at the horsemanship displayed by some of the "indians" in reloading TD Springfields at a dead run.

But still there needs to be some documentation for historical use of this technique. I am SURE its out there. But it could be legend just as easy. We could be applying "modern think" which is familiar with "magazine changes" to the mid-19th century which was not.

Dan

John McCorkle as related by him in Three Years with Quantrill (University of Oklahoma Press, 1992), pp. 167-68: following the action at Goslin’s Lane near today’s Woodlandville, Missouri, and after the battle at Centralia, McCorkle and troop went back through the Goslin’s Lane site and two women from a house there asked if any of the boys had lost “part of a pistol” in the fight a few days prior. Jim Younger said he had, and the women produced a revolver cylinder they had found in the road, and it was in fact the cylinder Younger had dropped. I cannot fathom why Younger would have dropped a cylinder unless he was attempting to reload by swapping cylinders. I expect these individuals were far from the norm: all were outstanding horsemen and extremely adept with the percussion revolvers of the time.

 

[Widows Son]

The old west is constantly romanticised and mythologised. Victorian era dime novels and then western movies perpetrated unrealistic and historically inaccurate situations.

I remember my grandad talking about ‘the family gun’, a single barrel shotgun. Every individual wasn’t armed to the teeth like we imagine and try to emulate. Yes, some persons occasionally were, but not most.

The American gun culture of today didn’t exist then like it does now. It exists now partly because of the mythology. Life imitates art.

Yes, it is completely feasible and evident that a spare cylinder was carried for fast reloading. I think it was rare. Civilians just didn’t get into the big shootouts on tv and cinema. Yes, some did happen, but it wasn’t a feature of daily life.

 

[Kansas Jake]

Widow's Son makes a good point. Most of us here are "gun nuts" to one extent or another. The larger population is not. I suspect back in the day that was also true. A few people were adept at using firearms but most probably had one gun. Most probably didn't have a handgun even in war.

 

[GomezMunoz1951]

I came across this on the Missouri Partisan Rangers:
Clothing And Weapons Guerrillas - Partisan Rangers


When not wearing Union blue, Missouri Bushwhackers favored a peculiar piece of clothing called the "guerrilla shirt," a variation of the coat worn by hunters on the Great Plains. It was a pullover item open, sometimes deeply, down the front. Four large pockets, two in the breast and two on the sides, were big enough to hold cartridges, preloaded spare revolver cylinders or even small pistols. They came in a variety of colors, and the shawl-coliar front, cuffs and pockets were often decorated with elaborate ribbonwork and needlework by a female relative or sweetheart. The Bushwhackers favored wide-brimmed slouch hats ranging in color from buff to dark brown and black, and often wore their hair shoulder-length. The guerrilla's whole ensemble was meant to create the image of a jaunty, brave, independent cavalier.


Fashion aside, what made the greatest impression was the small arsenal carried by Bushwhackers. Each armed himself with revolvers carried on a gunbelt, in pockets and saddle holsters; some carried as many as six, and their instant firepower against soldiers carrying single-shot, muzzle-loading rifle-muskets gave them a considerable edge. The favorite pistol was the Colt, especially the lighter .36cal Colt Navy, which was considered better for firing from horseback. A Bowie knife or even a tomahawk would be carried for hand-to-hand fighting. The favorite longarm was the breech-loading .52cal Sharps rifle, both for its accuracy and its speed in reloading; a trained marksman could fire this rifle up to ten times a minute. It had a maximum range of 800 yards and an effective range of about half that. Because the Sharps was a breech-loader, it could be reloaded while on horseback or lying down - a clumsy task with a standard muzzle-loader. A carbine version was also produced for cavalry work.

 

[GomezMunoz1951]

I also found this:
https://www.battleofpilotknob.org/u...fare_during_prices_raid_by_maj_dale_davis.pdf
"Guerrilla bands also maintained an advantage over Federal forces in tactics based on the revolver. The guerrillas were experts at ambushes where they would wait for the Federal force to come within range; then they would open fire and charge. The guerrillas would strip the bodies of anything useful, round up the horses, and disperse into their sanctuaries. Though usually dressed in whatever clothing was available, most guerrillas wore a “guerrilla shirt” worn over a civilian shirt. The guerrilla shirt was a loose fitting blouse made of homespun with a low cut neckline and a big, deep pocket for holding extra cylinders of ammunition (NOTE from poster: In reading this, this could mean extra loaded cylinders or extra pre-rolled ammunition for the cylinders, not sure which it could be) for their revolvers. They usually completed their “uniform” with baggy trousers tucked into high jack-boots and a round-rimmed hat. "

 

[GomezMunoz1951]

Widow's Son makes a good point. Most of us here are "gun nuts" to one extent or another. The larger population is not. I suspect back in the day that was also true. A few people were adept at using firearms but most probably had one gun. Most probably didn't have a handgun even in war.

"Not all guerrillas went into battle so well armed. In poorer areas such as western Virginia, Louisiana, or the Ozarks, they might be armed only with a shotgun or captured musket. Not surprisingly, these groups tended to avoid fights with large detachments of Federals, preferring to ambush stragglers or loot civilians. Because this meant fewer opportunities to capture weapons, they stayed poorly armed and peripheral to the main struggle."

 

[GomezMunoz1951]

I have a Uberi and have 4 cylinders for it. Have never had to time each cylinder for the gun. They worked coming straight out of the shipping box....

I have 3 Pietta 1858 .44 Remington revolvers with a total of 16 spare cylinders. I loaded them all when I was shooting in CAS since trying to reload and get ready between stages was a pain in the butt. I never had any "out of time" and they all shot perfectly no matter what gun I put them in and used. I made my own cylinder pouches and when I went out wandering in the desert I had the cylinder in my revolver, and three spare loaded on my belt. Never had problems with the weight. I got so I could change cylinders very quickly...

 

[appalichian hunter]

Gomez practice make perfection.

 

[B P Arn]

(post deleted)

 

[M. De Land]

Having had an interest in the Civil War weapons and accompanying literature and lore, I have yet to find a credible reference to the practice of carrying additional preloaded cylinders for cap and ball pistols. I've seen it written in modern articles, but cannot find mention of it in any writing contemporary to the war or from that period.

In the past couple of weeks, I've viewed perhaps 25 or 30 cased sets of Colt cap and ball revolvers, and with the exception of two (one Patterson and one was a cased pair of "51" Navies) There were no other accessory cylinders.

In the case of the Pattersons, since they were not supplied with a loading lever on the weapon, I can see where it may be been of interest to the owner to have an extra cylinder when away from his accessories. In the case of the cased pair of Navies, it appeared the extra cylinder was special ordered. At the same time, I have several photos in books in which there are matching pairs of cap and ball pistols in cased sets without additional cylinders in evidence.

I would be interested to know of any period literature in which the practice of swapping out cylinders was referenced.

Regards

Dan

My guess is it was a great theory that proved dangerous as hell, carrying around loaded and primed extra cylinders! Might as well carry a loaded and cocked revolver.

 

[toot]

if a guy carried a LEMAT, revolver no quick changing was necessary, you just shot it all day.

 

[GomezMunoz1951]

Oops posted twice for some reason Sorry There was a movie on the Partisan Rangers called "Ride with the Devil" and it showed them carrying extra cylinders. Someone must have done some research for it.

 

[BuffaloSoldier]

I'm in the camp that thinks extra revolvers were probably a whole lot more common than extra cylinders. I just can't picture a cavalryman or guerilla fumbling with both hands to swap out cylinders, on a moving horse in the heat of battle... and they were the ones likely to be armed with revolvers instead of long guns.

I would have to agree with this scenario. Pull out a second, third...handgun or trying to swap out a cylinder while on a running horse.

 

[BuffaloSoldier]

if a guy carried a LEMAT, revolver no quick changing was necessary, you just shot it all day.

But eventually even they ran out of ammunition.

 

[hawkeye2]

Oops posted twice for some reason Sorry There was a movie on the Partisan Rangers called "Ride with the Devil" and it showed them carrying extra cylinders. Someone must have done some research for it.

From Wikipedia:
"Ride with the Devil is a 1999 American revisionist Western film (The Revisionist Western, Anti-Western or Post-Western is a subgenre of the Western film that subverts the standard format or theme of the Western)."

Major box office bomb. From what I read of the plot John Wayne's "Alamo" was more historically accurate.

 

[Coot]

Much Hollywood "research" consists of "whats in the prop warehouse?", "would it look neat?", "but it makes a better story", "needs more *** if we are to do well at the box office" and "nobody will know or care about the difference".

 

[M. De Land]

I would have to agree with this scenario. Pull out a second, third...handgun or trying to swap out a cylinder while on a running horse.

I can agree that multiple revolver carry was far more practical and can be documented, than multiple cylinder carry. The tactic for Cavalrymen was to run through the infantry and break up unit cohesion with pistol and saber then retreat out of range and under cover to reload until another charge could be organized if needed. It was not uncommon for cavalrymen to carry up to half a dozen revolvers on person and saddle. Thirty six shots without a reload in a troop of horse solders would be amazing fire power for the era.

 

[Stantheman86]

I would think that modern, CNC produced replica percussion revolvers cannot be compared to originals which required hand fitting.

Also , people back in "the day" couldn't just run to Cabelas and buy extra cylinders.

There's a reason there are pictures of Condederate cavalrymen carrying 6 or more revolvers , would they not just carry extra cylinders then? Also, just drawing another loaded gun was far more practical than disassembling a Colt or dropping a cylinder in a Remington in the heat of a gunfight. This is why horse pistols like Dragoons were issued in pairs.

Patersons and Navies in cased sets with an extra matched and fitted cylinder are probably more of an item for a well heeled Gentleman who might keep a loaded spare cylinder in a vest pocket while out Fox hunting or something. I don't think the average guy was concerned with this.

 

[FiremanBrad]

From Wikipedia:
"Ride with the Devil is a 1999 American revisionist Western film (The Revisionist Western, Anti-Western or Post-Western is a subgenre of the Western film that subverts the standard format or theme of the Western)."

Major box office bomb. From what I read of the plot John Wayne's "Alamo" was more historically accurate.

You use Wikipedia for a movie review lol???

Ride with the devil is likely the most historically correct CW movie ever made!!!

 

[SOLANCO]

I can agree that multiple revolver carry was far more practical and can be documented, than multiple cylinder carry. The tactic for Cavalrymen was to run through the infantry and break up unit cohesion with pistol and saber then retreat out of range and under cover to reload until another charge could be organized if needed. It was not uncommon for cavalrymen to carry up to half a dozen revolvers on person and saddle. Thirty six shots without a reload in a troop of horse solders would be amazing fire power for the era.

I would think that modern, CNC produced replica percussion revolvers cannot be compared to originals which required hand fitting.

Also , people back in "the day" couldn't just run to Cabelas and buy extra cylinders.

There's a reason there are pictures of Condederate cavalrymen carrying 6 or more revolvers , would they not just carry extra cylinders then? Also, just drawing another loaded gun was far more practical than disassembling a Colt or dropping a cylinder in a Remington in the heat of a gunfight. This is why horse pistols like Dragoons were issued in pairs.

Patersons and Navies in cased sets with an extra matched and fitted cylinder are probably more of an item for a well heeled Gentleman who might keep a loaded spare cylinder in a vest pocket while out Fox hunting or something. I don't think the average guy was concerned with this.

How would you carry extra cylinders in a way to keep them reliably capped? Capping them at the time of swap would negate their advantage. Swapping in a loaded cylinder with caps missing would not make your day.
The weight of four or five extra revolvers would not faze your horse.