Something for the plinkers
- Thread starter Hammock Hamster
- Start date
I had the chance to meet the BBC armourer many moons ago, he told a few of us about the good old cowboys and what a load of nonsense most of the TV/movie interpretation is of the job.
They were, according to his information, unlikely to have any leather gun belts full of bullets and with a leather holster for the pistol, they would be unlikely to fire bullets into the air to move the herd forward and as for "fast draw" that was totally out of the question as these early pistols were very heavy, some almost three pounds in weight. Also bullets were expensive in comparison to wages of the day. most of them would likely have been rusty through lake of care, remember that black powder was the propellant of the day which was corrosive so when fired left trace on the metal work, unlikely they would have the finances or the time or the discipline to sit around cleaning their guns once a day.
"professional" gun slingers who might have the money would often have a swivel holster on their belt so as to "rotate and fire" rather than fast draw, and after the first shot if they missed they could hide behind the smoke produced from the black powder, the chances of hitting anything smaller than a barn door, in his opinion, was not an easy task...
But a good talking point anyway...
They were, according to his information, unlikely to have any leather gun belts full of bullets and with a leather holster for the pistol, they would be unlikely to fire bullets into the air to move the herd forward and as for "fast draw" that was totally out of the question as these early pistols were very heavy, some almost three pounds in weight. Also bullets were expensive in comparison to wages of the day. most of them would likely have been rusty through lake of care, remember that black powder was the propellant of the day which was corrosive so when fired left trace on the metal work, unlikely they would have the finances or the time or the discipline to sit around cleaning their guns once a day.
"professional" gun slingers who might have the money would often have a swivel holster on their belt so as to "rotate and fire" rather than fast draw, and after the first shot if they missed they could hide behind the smoke produced from the black powder, the chances of hitting anything smaller than a barn door, in his opinion, was not an easy task...
But a good talking point anyway...
I strongly suspect he had not much experience in actually shooting then.
When I was a teenager, I belonged to a pistol shooting club in Western Australia, which had a black powder shooting license (hard to get in WA, due to risk of fires). I had the luck to be allowed to shoot a members Navy colt percussion revolver. Now I was a lousy shot, but the owner of this pistol had no problem producing 4" groups at 25metres. The clouds of smoke were certainly not big enough to hide behind.
But could he have done it with an original 1800's colt when in a bar fight with more than a single malt and a racing heart, rather than on a range with good conditions, and also using authentic black powder of the era
Last edited:
Hand guns of all sorts are remarkably accurate. Clamp the pistol into a Ransom Rest and take 5 shots at 25m (10m for air pistols).
Elite-level shooting is easier with target grade equipment (eg Feinwerkbau) but beyond that, the gun has very little to do with accuracy.
Elite-level shooting is easier with target grade equipment (eg Feinwerkbau) but beyond that, the gun has very little to do with accuracy.
But could he have done it with an original 1800's colt when in a bar fight with more than a single malt and a racing heart, rather than on a range with good conditions, and also using authentic black powder of the era
Most of Hollywood's version is inaccurate, that's true; and it's also true that most cowboys didn't carry handguns. That said, holsters did indeed exist, both hip holsters and shoulder holsters (John Wesley Hardin favored twin shoulder holsters saying it facilitated a fast draw (whether it did or not is another question)
Regarding accuracy, Bill Hickock fought one duel (the first true fast draw duel) and killed his opponent from a distance of 75 yards with a single shot. I used to shoot black powder quite a bit and frankly it's just as accurate as modern smokeless powder (or modern black powder substitutes. I still hunt with black powder and accuracy is not one of its problems.
Says pretty much what i was told 40 years ago...
http://www.neatorama.com/2012/06/07/the-truth-about-gunfights-in-the-old-west/
" James Butler Hickok ("Wild Bill" Hickok) had a bad quarrel with Davis Tutt in Springfield, Missouri. The fight was over a debt. At around 6PM, the two advanced on each other in the town square. The men drew guns at a distance of around 50 yards and blasted away. Tutt missed. Wild Bill didn't. Tutt fell with a bullet through his heart."
No doubt some used leather, but a cowboy? A dollar a day cowboy paying to have leather holsters?
http://www.neatorama.com/2012/06/07/the-truth-about-gunfights-in-the-old-west/
" James Butler Hickok ("Wild Bill" Hickok) had a bad quarrel with Davis Tutt in Springfield, Missouri. The fight was over a debt. At around 6PM, the two advanced on each other in the town square. The men drew guns at a distance of around 50 yards and blasted away. Tutt missed. Wild Bill didn't. Tutt fell with a bullet through his heart."
No doubt some used leather, but a cowboy? A dollar a day cowboy paying to have leather holsters?
Last edited:
Oops, I got home this evening and my Colt seems to have multiplied (and into a .177 pellet version no less). Not sure but walking past my local air gun dealer on the way home may have played a part! 🙄
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How does the .177 pellet version shoot compared to the BB? I assume the pellet version has a rifles barrel?
Me and my wife are avid shooters. Wife is much better than I am, medallist on Island Games.
Even a standard US made revolver ( .38, .357, 9mm ) does under 2 cm on 25 meters resting.
A quality one, Manurhin, does under 1cm on 30 meters.
A modern black powder revolver with hand cast ball, not accurised, is still enough accurate, about 3 cm on 25 meters, resting on sandbag.
Never shot an authentic 1800's revolver, but I do not believe they were any worse than todays massproduced US junk.
I have just spent about $700 and maybe 25 hours on tuning and accurising a 9mm S&W revolver. It was supposed to be "tuned" by Performance Center . Not.
Even a standard US made revolver ( .38, .357, 9mm ) does under 2 cm on 25 meters resting.
A quality one, Manurhin, does under 1cm on 30 meters.
A modern black powder revolver with hand cast ball, not accurised, is still enough accurate, about 3 cm on 25 meters, resting on sandbag.
Never shot an authentic 1800's revolver, but I do not believe they were any worse than todays massproduced US junk.
I have just spent about $700 and maybe 25 hours on tuning and accurising a 9mm S&W revolver. It was supposed to be "tuned" by Performance Center . Not.
Last edited:
Colt is still producing them. They "re-introduced" them a few decades ago. Same patent as the original Colt cap & ball revolvers. I can't afford a genuine Colt, but it's nice to know they're still being made.
Yes, but they are made using modern metallurgy and production methods.
I used to own a repro of Remington 1858 ( made by Uberti) and that one shot very well.
My best revolver ever was a Python I had custom made by Colt.
Most of what I've read also indicates they (the cowboys) didn't often use holsters. I doubt if the cost had much to do with that though. After all, leather and workmanship were both cheap. A good hand made holster of the time (albeit plain) would have only cost a dollar, five at the most, compared to the Colt it secured which listed for $17 at the time. If they could afford the gun, the holster would have been nothing.
I've shot a couple of Pythons but never owned one. I still have a blued Colt Trooper Mk 3 with a 4 inch barrel. It's one of three Troopers I've owned. The other two were chrome finish (one with a 4 inch barrel, and the other with a 6 inch barrel) I carried the shorter chrome one as a duty gun when I worked private security. I also have a Colt detective Special and a Colt SAA. Those are the only Colt revolvers I've owned (although I've had revolvers from other companies and semiautomatic Colts) Today Colts are just too expensive to carry regularly.
Yep, collectors items.
I never understood why Colt stopped the production of modern revolvers. They were the best US made ones.
The Python was a notch better than the Trooper Anaconda and others. Almost as good as a Manurhin.
I never understood why Colt stopped the production of modern revolvers. They were the best US made ones.
The Python was a notch better than the Trooper Anaconda and others. Almost as good as a Manurhin.
They stopped because they simply couldn't produce then at a competitive price for everyday carry (Colt came within a hair's breadth of bankruptcy) Their custom shop is still open though.
It's pretty good in comparison and does indeed have a rifled barrel.
The strange thing is I have also been shooting pellets from the smooth bore barrel of the BB version and accuracy wise there is not a huge difference.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
At what range were you shooting? Short range - no difference but if you go for a distance of 20m + there should be.
Very short range, about 8m as that's the space I have available.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That can explain the similar accurancy. If you open up the space you will see a difference, as the pellet from smooth barell will deviate more and more ( incinsistent pellet)
Similar threads
