|
Post by Plainsman on Jan 6, 2024 12:25:41 GMT -5
C’est ça! You could swap cylinders on the Colts but it was a losing proposition. The wedge had to be knocked out and the loading lever used to remove the barrel, so you were left trying to hold three different pieces, four when you removed the cylinder and five when you juggled the loaded cylinder. Undoable without a bench. The Remington is slick, with no removable parts but the cylinder. (I think Clint does that in a movie or two.) Elite cavalrymen like Stuart’s had as many as four loaded revolvers to avoid that, since Remingtons were very scarce among Confederates.
|
|
|
Post by don on Jan 6, 2024 12:33:06 GMT -5
I can break my Colt down pretty fast once it has a little wear on the wedge, but it really is a three-handed operation. Bench or table top work. The wedge doesn’t need to come all the way out, by the way. I think I would have just carried several revolvers in my belt if I had served in that era, rather than trying to swap a Remington cylinder out from horseback or under fire. From what I have read, that’s what they did.
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Jan 6, 2024 12:51:58 GMT -5
Your right, Don. My original 1860 Army’s wedge-and-retaining screw was well-worn and the wedge would always drop out when I tapped it out. I imagine sustained handgun engagements were few and far between. Remember in the old westerns when the bad guy would run out of ammo and THROW his gun at the good guy? And always missed!
|
|
|
Post by toshtego on Jan 6, 2024 14:14:28 GMT -5
C’est ça! You could swap cylinders on the Colts but it was a losing proposition. The wedge had to be knocked out and the loading lever used to remove the barrel, so you were left trying to hold three different pieces, four when you removed the cylinder and five when you juggled the loaded cylinder. Undoable without a bench. The Remington is slick, with no removable parts but the cylinder. (I think Clint does that in a movie or two.) Elite cavalrymen like Stuart’s had as many as four loaded revolvers to avoid that, since Remingtons were very scarce among Confederates. Fortunately, the also had the LaMat revolver. Nine rounds plus a 20 gauge shotgun cylinder.
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Jan 6, 2024 14:18:45 GMT -5
Not exactly a “common” weapon.. I’m sure PGT had one, but who else?
|
|
|
Post by toshtego on Jan 6, 2024 14:24:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by don on Jan 6, 2024 14:39:14 GMT -5
Not exactly a “common” weapon.. I’m sure PGT had one, but who else? Only about 2500 made it into Confederate service, so not that many rebs had them. They supposedly weighed 5lbs loaded.
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Jan 6, 2024 14:40:48 GMT -5
You hadda know that showboat Stuart would have one.😋
|
|
|
Post by lizardonarock on Jan 6, 2024 15:00:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Jan 6, 2024 16:21:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Jan 6, 2024 16:30:34 GMT -5
The problem with the lack of a recoil shield is that in case of a blow-over there will be a flame thrower of hot gas coming right back at the shooter, plus the cap. No thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Jan 6, 2024 16:43:16 GMT -5
The problem with the lack of a recoil shield is that in case of a blow-over there will be a flame thrower of hot gas coming right back at the shooter, plus the cap. No thanks. I get that, but any cap or flint gun is going to be a bit more exciting than a Glock. 😁 The people who shoot them recommended cap keepers. But no serious complaints.
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Jan 6, 2024 16:53:14 GMT -5
We need to be careful. If we turn this into a gun forum, we will start to get those testosterone fueled arguments that are too much like modern society. 😁 I'm sure we would love to talk about single shot rifles.
|
|
|
Post by trailboss on Jan 6, 2024 19:58:14 GMT -5
The problem with the lack of a recoil shield is that in case of a blow-over there will be a flame thrower of hot gas coming right back at the shooter, plus the cap. No thanks. Always fun to stand next-to a well endowed female shooter at the range with a plunging neckline as she shoots a semi-auto.
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Jan 6, 2024 20:27:17 GMT -5
We need to be careful. If we turn this into a gun forum, we will start to get those testosterone fueled arguments that are too much like modern society. 😁 I'm sure we would love to talk about single shot rifles. Yes, we’ve been really active today. But I wish to state that I have been puffing away at my Petes with every post! Single shot rifles? Of course. My family had a Winchester Windner Musket given to my g-father by a friend at Fort Sam in San Antonio. My mother kept us in quail with it when I was just a tyke. Later it was stolen in a burglary and cut down for a robber’s gun. It was recovered, but of course mutilated. Just a couple of years ago I sold the action to a builder in New Zealand (!) and he built it into a custom single shot, but I got no details about it. A nice end for an otherwise abused classic.
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Jan 6, 2024 20:33:26 GMT -5
Good story. A lot of good stories about guns. They are a tool of life.
|
|
|
Post by trailboss on Jan 6, 2024 20:38:35 GMT -5
My favorite gun to shoot is my Mossberg M44 US, bolt action/ single shot that shoots .22 longs or shorts.
A fun gun!
|
|
|
Post by urbino on Jan 6, 2024 20:42:10 GMT -5
I would have no objection to a Ruger No. 1 in 6.5x55 or similar, with a Mannlicher stock, preferably.
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Jan 6, 2024 20:58:37 GMT -5
I have a MINT #1 in .223. I lucked out: it’s a tack-driver, but a 1:12 barrel. Got it only a few years ago for $500. I should feel guilty. Ask me if I do.
|
|
|
Post by urbino on Jan 6, 2024 21:10:56 GMT -5
Things are damn near bombproof.
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Jan 6, 2024 22:19:24 GMT -5
I have a MINT #1 in .223. I lucked out: it’s a tack-driver, but a 1:12 barrel. Got it only a few years ago for $500. I should feel guilty. Ask me if I do. You could re-barrel or re-boar it and still be way ahead.
|
|
|
Post by trailboss on Jan 6, 2024 22:29:27 GMT -5
I have a MINT #1 in .223. I lucked out: it’s a tack-driver, but a 1:12 barrel. Got it only a few years ago for $500. I should feel guilty. Ask me if I do. You could re-barrel or re-boar it and still be way ahead. Better yet, he could sell it to me for $550.00 and pocket that serious windfall. Anything to help a brother out.
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Jan 7, 2024 8:56:08 GMT -5
No need to do anything to it. I just use lighter .223 bullets, of which there are many. My CZ 527 .223 is also 1:12.
|
|
|
Post by toshtego on Jan 7, 2024 16:04:57 GMT -5
I see this thread is meandering again....
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Jan 7, 2024 18:22:57 GMT -5
It’s all Ron’s fault.
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Jan 7, 2024 18:30:49 GMT -5
I blame'a myself. 😣
|
|
|
Post by don on Jan 7, 2024 19:30:15 GMT -5
I have a MINT #1 in .223. I lucked out: it’s a tack-driver, but a 1:12 barrel. Got it only a few years ago for $500. I should feel guilty. Ask me if I do. Do you feel guilty, Bob? (I do what my elders tell me😉)
|
|
|
Post by don on Jan 7, 2024 19:33:10 GMT -5
I have a MINT #1 in .223. I lucked out: it’s a tack-driver, but a 1:12 barrel. Got it only a few years ago for $500. I should feel guilty. Ask me if I do. I used to have one in 25-06. It was only so-so accurate. I wasn’t into reloading at the time. I could probably fine tune a load for it now, but I barely shoot rifle anymore. Pretty guns, they are.
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Jan 7, 2024 19:49:10 GMT -5
According to what I have read, #1s are notoriously variable in their accuracy. The worst are said to be the International (full-stock) models. I know this is definitely true of bolt guns.
|
|
|
Post by don on Jan 7, 2024 20:41:13 GMT -5
According to what I have read, #1s are notoriously variable in their accuracy. The worst are said to be the International (full-stock) models. I know this is definitely true of bolt guns. That’s true Bob. The tension on the screw in the fore-end hanger can be problematic.
|
|