calvary carbines were one shot. so you have proof of Colt saying he invented a repeating carbine. why wasnt there a shoulder stock for the walker. when the rangers fighting Commanches both on galloping horses what would be easier to hit? the horse or the indian. with the indian on foot he was easy prey.in WWI almost everything was moved by horses. Even in WWII when the Germans went into Russia more then half their gear was moved by horses. they were always a target
Who Needs A Rifle? The Walker At 100 Yards
- Thread starter TNGhost
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
that is exactly what I have been saying that the Walker had to have enough power to take down a horse.
And the go where no ATV can, most of the rugged terrain of the US southern border is still patrolled by the fine men and women of the US Border Patrol on horseback…and yes, the horses and horsemen are trained to shoot off the horses back!Because horses are a time-tested alternative to the dangers of climate change?
The second video looks like it was a bit more edited. I have yet to see a video of a walker in action that did not require two hands to both deal with the loading lever and the turning the cylinder past the cap jams...
Just finished re reading W. T Hamiltons book My 60 years on the plains.
He made every shot count in battle. They picked good ground and dug rifle pits. They even added logs on top when available to have firing ports below the logs. kept their war horses saddled and under cover if possible inside the circle of fighting holes that usually surrounded a grove of trees that the horses were sheltered in. Did not engage the charging Indians with rifles untill they reached 50 yards. The 2nd volley was at 40 ft with shotguns, that usually broke the charge. They then mounted their horses and chased the retreating Indians down on horseback firing at close range. Each man having two pistols at his disposal. They practiced shooting a 10 inch thick pole at a gallop at close range so when they galloped in amongst the Indians with revolvers it was a slaughter. They never lost an engagement and had very few of their bunch wounded or killed. They even thought to approach on the right side of the horse because you cant shoot an arrow to your right while galloping on a horse. I have no doubt they were excellent shots at longer range but when It counted they got close. Think of it. If you waste your walker rounds at 100yards you are empty by the time they close. He never specified which model. Always simply said Colts Pistols. He wrote the book in 1905 and died in 1908 so don't know how accurately he remembered everything???? Or what he thought was important enough to put down in ink.
Just finished re reading W. T Hamiltons book My 60 years on the plains.
He made every shot count in battle. They picked good ground and dug rifle pits. They even added logs on top when available to have firing ports below the logs. kept their war horses saddled and under cover if possible inside the circle of fighting holes that usually surrounded a grove of trees that the horses were sheltered in. Did not engage the charging Indians with rifles untill they reached 50 yards. The 2nd volley was at 40 ft with shotguns, that usually broke the charge. They then mounted their horses and chased the retreating Indians down on horseback firing at close range. Each man having two pistols at his disposal. They practiced shooting a 10 inch thick pole at a gallop at close range so when they galloped in amongst the Indians with revolvers it was a slaughter. They never lost an engagement and had very few of their bunch wounded or killed. They even thought to approach on the right side of the horse because you cant shoot an arrow to your right while galloping on a horse. I have no doubt they were excellent shots at longer range but when It counted they got close. Think of it. If you waste your walker rounds at 100yards you are empty by the time they close. He never specified which model. Always simply said Colts Pistols. He wrote the book in 1905 and died in 1908 so don't know how accurately he remembered everything???? Or what he thought was important enough to put down in ink.
Last edited:
Not sure where you're going with this one. Are you implying that such a shot is not possible or that I made it up? I don't use scopes on pistols, my eyes are still remarkably good for my age and when those shots were made I was doing a lot of handgun shooting and chasing jackrabbits around the country in Nevada. The range of 130yds was confirmed with a range finder and I had a witness.
yes the BP are fine men and women to oversee 30 million illegals invade the US. a fine job indeed
Malamute
40 Cal
Thanks for the book reference, its not one Im familiar with. Looks good.
Any comments about longer distance shooting with pistols is nearly always met with a combination of skepticism, disbelief and sometimes implied or direct accusations of lying.
Its not really that difficult to hit with a pistol at longer distances, the method of using the sights can make a significant difference in the results, as does practice, who knew? We had an 18"w x36"h plate in arizona set at 300 yards, we shot everything at it, It amazed many people, but in 5 minutes or less I could generally get them hitting it with a 22 pistol or whatever they had and were familiar with. Its nearly always a rough start with widely missing shots, but with the feedback of dry ground and seeing hits, corrections and a concerted focus on the basics of sights and smooth trigger pull, its certainly doable. On that one at that time, Ive done 6/6 with s&w 22, and 5/6 with model 29 4" and medium loads.
Fast forward, 20 more years of practice, mostly one handed, and 18" round plate @ 300 yards isnt really that challenging with modern arms, and standing offhand. Kneeling or other cheating methods improve the results. First round hits on game at up to 200 yards by one moderately practiced in the longer distance shooting game isnt the least bit surprising. I made a little over 200 yard shot on a coyote, first round hit, 4" 44. I cheated, was sitting against dirt bank, two hands, resting on knees.
If one never does something enough, or doesnt get good basic instructions, it can seem impossible to do many things, but because one person is incapable hardy means nobody can do it. Good eyesight helps tremendously of course. The optical aids with the adjustable hole aperture can help get a clearer sight picture.
Last edited:
Malamute
40 Cal
I generally ignore politically oriented stuff, but the implied accusation against the BP is ill informed and lacks judgement on the subject. The BP is doing exactly what their superiors tell them to do. They are not able to make their own choices on what to do.
I can shoot my pistol really far, just can’t hit anything.
I bet you are right. I took several reports while on the PD, involving self inflected wounds while carrying in the pocket.I bet there’s been a few pockets taken out by pocket pistols over the years.
rodwha
58 Cal.
Mexicans…I thought they were made for killin Comanches
gordy850
32 Cal
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2022
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 12
I like watching the videos anyway. It's better than most everything else on TV!
I had a diamond shaped road sighn the Twisty road arrow type about 220yrds from my cabin when I was a 19yr old irresponsible young man. I thought it was hillarious how long it took a .22 to get there and make a plink and how long it took for the sound to come back.. A friend stopped by with a .44 redhawk. I allready had the range with my .357 Security six so i nailed the sign first shot with the red hawk. All my cap and ball rigs from the 70s were shot out and broken at that time..
LOL, you are the type of guy that will blame the troops for losing the Korean, Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan wars!!! Try to listen to real news once in a while!
Trev
36 Cl.
Wasn't the Walker commissioned and purchased by the USA Army for use in the Mexican War? Were Comanches a big part of the Mexican Army? Wasn't Ranger's fighting pistol the hand-me-down Patterson that the Texas Navy didn't want? Some confusion between these two perhaps?
I think the selling point of these guns was the repeat firing rather than any other factor. In opposition to a force armed with single shots, the ability to shoot six times between reloads would have been an advantage.
I think the selling point of these guns was the repeat firing rather than any other factor. In opposition to a force armed with single shots, the ability to shoot six times between reloads would have been an advantage.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2014
- Messages
- 7,264
- Reaction score
- 10,533
Yeah, in the first vid he had some jams and issues with the loading lever. In the second (which is actually posted third here) he has a blue twist tie around the barrel to help with the lever and even stops once to put it on when he forgot.
As far as emptying your pistols at distance, on doctrine employed by military cavalry was to use them to close and then once close, use the saber which required no reloading. Don't know if the Rangers used that tactic as well, and I am sure fighting opposing military cavalry had its differences from fighting mounted Comanches with bows.
rangers from accounts that I have read closed and then engaged accurately with revolvers. Perhaps the army did not trust its cavalry to be accurate so told them to go ahead, empty the gun, make a bunch of noise and use the swords.
Trev
36 Cl.
The great Ranger battle at Little Robe Creek seems to have had the strategy of attacking a sleeping Comanche camp and killing as many as possible before they could run away?
I saw a guy kill a seagull at 100 yards with a pistol and one shot. I cut a card in half with a 22 when I was a kid (no I never repeated it)
There are some shooters who can indeed make some shots impossible to the rest of us. It can be amazing. That seagull deserved its fate, it was getting to our fish in the nets before we could and the fish buyers were not taking pecked fish (also illegal but hey, I did not do the shooting!)
How many of use could pass the SEALS tests? Even when I was young and tough I doubt it. A lot of its mental and I had no desire to go do that sort of thing. Physically I could have done it easily, mentally, no way.
So the real question is, out of 1000 Troopers, how many were deadly pistol shots at long range? Probably none. Lawmen? 1 in a thousand? Scaliwags? 1 in tend thousand (did Scalawags even train?)
I don't doubt for a 2nd that some of the people on this forum can do what they say. Shoot, I saw my brother run 100 yards, drop to a Moss Hummock and drop a Caribou another (paced) 400 yards away and said Caribou was moving full tilt left to right. He had more than one impossible shot to his credit. Yea he missed some to, but he had a tendency to pull them off. I sure could not.
So, I am going to keep the pistols for target shooting at 25 yards and the rifles for target shooting 100 yards (I do not hunt anymore).
There are some shooters who can indeed make some shots impossible to the rest of us. It can be amazing. That seagull deserved its fate, it was getting to our fish in the nets before we could and the fish buyers were not taking pecked fish (also illegal but hey, I did not do the shooting!)
How many of use could pass the SEALS tests? Even when I was young and tough I doubt it. A lot of its mental and I had no desire to go do that sort of thing. Physically I could have done it easily, mentally, no way.
So the real question is, out of 1000 Troopers, how many were deadly pistol shots at long range? Probably none. Lawmen? 1 in a thousand? Scaliwags? 1 in tend thousand (did Scalawags even train?)
I don't doubt for a 2nd that some of the people on this forum can do what they say. Shoot, I saw my brother run 100 yards, drop to a Moss Hummock and drop a Caribou another (paced) 400 yards away and said Caribou was moving full tilt left to right. He had more than one impossible shot to his credit. Yea he missed some to, but he had a tendency to pull them off. I sure could not.
So, I am going to keep the pistols for target shooting at 25 yards and the rifles for target shooting 100 yards (I do not hunt anymore).
