Suppose you lived in the 1860s and had enough cash/coinage, whatever, to buy any one cap and ball revolver to use for self defense from outlaws, drunks and Indians on the war path. What revolver would you choose? I'd get a LeMat. Nine shots in the main cylinder plus a shotgun barrel rigged below the main barrel, all in one convenient pistol.
If you enjoyed reading about "Cap and Ball for self defense" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MCgunner
March 1, 2006, 10:18 PM
Nine shots in the main cylinder plus a shotgun barrel rigged below the main barrel, all in one convenient pistol.....
.........the size of a small artillery piece. :D I think a Remington converted to .44 henry rimfire with several cylinders to switch out ala Pale Rider.
ribbonstone
March 1, 2006, 10:26 PM
Think there were conversion by the gun companies, had to be some made on an indivial basis...local gun smith jobs. Probably shortly after the introduction of the .44Henry there were gunsmiths figuring out how to convert percussions to that caliber.
But sticking to cap and ball...might have to give the British Adams a look-see, but wuld probably keep it more portable than the LaMat or a Dragoon...not much wrong with a basic 1860 or 1851.
RyanM
March 1, 2006, 10:52 PM
Probably an 1862 Pocket Police, with a 3 1/2" barrel and no rammer. Small, light, and concealable. A lot of towns back then had laws against open carry, but nothing banning concealed carry.
Steve499
March 1, 2006, 11:53 PM
1858 Remington .44 with 3 or 4 extra cylinders.
Steve
RON in PA
March 2, 2006, 01:39 AM
Colt 1851 or 1861 Navies. Good enough for Wild Bill. If I wanted to shoot a horse than I'd want an 1860 Army.
Low Key
March 2, 2006, 07:09 AM
1858 Remington .44 with 3 or 4 extra cylinders.
Steve
+1 Steve, another vote for the 58 from me also. :)
JMusic
March 2, 2006, 09:15 AM
Colt Navy:evil:
Cap n Ball
March 2, 2006, 09:48 AM
1858 Remington with extra cylinders in bandolier...and a really good Bowie knife.
armoredman
March 2, 2006, 09:59 AM
+1
BP Hunter
March 2, 2006, 12:58 PM
my ruger old army. but i wished i had spare cylinders. thinking of getting the 1858 from cabelas. just received a $20 off coupon from the yesterday. so an 1858 blued 5 1/2" barrel would come out to be only $179. should i, should i not? am leaving for a hawaii vacation next month. need evey penny. argh. decisions. decisions.:confused: :banghead:
RyanM
March 2, 2006, 01:18 PM
Will the coupon still be good after your vacation? If so, save it. I doubt Cabelas will stop selling 1858s any time soon. A vacation to Hawaii can't be put off as easily.
Weird Guy
March 2, 2006, 04:35 PM
I would want my Ruger Old Army.
......But I would want three of them. Two on my hips, and a short barreled one hidden from view.
dwave
March 2, 2006, 04:47 PM
I would have to go with my 51 navy. I shoot it more than any other gun I own, and would be the most confident hitting my target with it.
bakert
March 2, 2006, 05:03 PM
Colt 1851 Navy, 1860 or Remington 1858 would all be pretty good choices. In his book Sixguns, Elmer Keith states; "Great Grand Dad was far from being disarmed or helpless with a cap and ball pistol, fully loaded and capped, swinging from his hip".
ArmedBear
March 2, 2006, 06:33 PM
Cabela's $20 coupon is good 'til 3/31/06.:)
I would want my Ruger Old Army.
......But I would want three of them. Two on my hips, and a short barreled one hidden from view.
You'd also need some chewing tobacco so you could spit before you used 'em.
Manyirons
March 2, 2006, 06:37 PM
Got FOUR Old Armies, and ya didn't see me spit? Pity ya missed it cause.... :)
saboteur
March 2, 2006, 07:18 PM
But do you have a .45 ACP Cylinder for that Old Armyhttp://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=186248?
Bart Noir
March 2, 2006, 10:29 PM
I'd have the Remington Army on my strong side hip, and for that "New Mexico reload", the Remington .36 carried crossdraw on the other side. I think the second one may have been called a "Navy" to imitate Colts, but I'm not sure.
The idea of carrying extra, loaded cylinders bothers me a bunch, if you mean ones that are already capped. I think you can figure out why.
Bart Noir
Manyirons
March 3, 2006, 01:49 PM
No need for an ACP cylinder, beyond that with the local smiths 'Power-Pills' aint an acp load in tha book can touch the ballistics and thats if i don't use one of my .50 caliber conversions!
I carry routinely four extra loaded&capped cylinders, (For Remington) velocity from cylinder only is under 200fps (Tested!) and i read today in 'SHOOT' magazine and previous sources, Quantrills raiders carried CAPPED cylinders they wer'nt ABOUT to try capping one while riding hell for leather!
Course iffin yer a clumsy type or twit as friend Duncan in France would say.....yer probably already called 'Three toes' by yer buddies.....:neener:
Steve499
March 3, 2006, 09:57 PM
Well, Bart, I'd take a chance on carrying a few capped, loaded Remington cylinders if the alternative was the certainty of becoming a pincushion full of arrows if I had to try to load without'em.
Steve
oneshooter
March 3, 2006, 10:06 PM
Hey guys! Remember that the RUGER Old Army was NOT available in 1860!!!
Oneshooter
Livin in Texas
PS: A matched pair of Fluted cylinder 44cal 1860's, strong side carry and crossdraw.:D
Old Dragoon
March 4, 2006, 01:05 AM
Crap! I just counted and I have 4 '58 Remmys and a '58 Remmy Carbine. Bring them on!
sundance44s
March 6, 2006, 02:15 PM
good greif Charlie .. i just took a head count 5 remmies ...lol oh lord someone stop me ! :what:
Manyirons
March 6, 2006, 03:20 PM
Ruger Old Armies not around but Gatlings were! Now just what was that scene from Terminator with tha mini-gun?
Across The Pond
March 6, 2006, 05:26 PM
a '51 Navy and a Rogers & Spencer, '49 Pocket for backup!
Ooops, just checked and the R+S was first manufactured in 1863.. is that allowed? If not I guess that I'll make that a pair of '51 Navies.
(of course in 1860, I might have actually been allowed to carry these in Britain ;) )
Dr.Rob
March 6, 2006, 09:09 PM
Colt 1860 Army has a better balanced grip (bigger anyway) than the 1851 Navy, held a bigger bullet and the same charge (a little more perhaps) of powder.
Colts have the cylinder pins that allow you to rest the hammer down with 6 loaded chambers.
.36 vs. 44 is rather like the 9mm/45 discussions of today... the .36 has a lot more velocity (supersonic crack) .44 goes boom. I have both.
Both smoke a lot.
I'd rather take up my Pedersoli 12 ga double barrel Bp shotgun and carry one of those as back-up. The Army is a little better engineered, takes conical bullets better. The Navy is a little 'fancier' with it's engraved cylinder. Slight edge to the army for better balance, blade front sight and better engineered loading lever.
Boom-stick
March 9, 2006, 09:36 AM
.68cal single shot loaded with chain shot and rusty nails
and......
a side by side 12g shotgun barrels cut to 12" and loaded with a roll of coins instead of shot (William H Bonney in Young Guns)
These just seem more fun than a CnB?
:)
TexasRifleman
March 9, 2006, 09:45 AM
I'm voting for the brace of 1860 Colts as well.....
Since money is no object I considered the Walkers (they were high dollar even back then) but I just wouldn't want to carry the darn things around.
Maybe if I had a caddy......
dwave
March 9, 2006, 11:09 AM
a side by side 12g shotgun barrels cut to 12" and loaded with a roll of coins instead of shot (William H Bonney in Young Guns)
I seen a show on TV where they loaded money into a B/P shotgun and hit a target with it, and it didn't even penetrate the target. After some tests they concluded that a B/P shotgun with coins as ammo was no good and wouldn't kill somebody.
With that said, I will still take my 51 navy, but I want to add a cannon to my front yard! :cool:
chaim
March 9, 2006, 12:20 PM
Give me a pair of Colt 1836 Navies or Remington 1858 New Armies. If I needed a little more concealability I'd go with an 1862 Pocket Navy or Police. I'd also feel OK with the 1848 Baby Dragoon or 1849 Wells Fargo if I needed a concealable gun.
Duncaninfrance
March 9, 2006, 01:11 PM
Has to be an 1858 New Model Army with spare cylinders - about 20 should do, STYLE!
I would also consider a Henry Knox 9 barrel gun, keep em at bay and heads down!
Duncan
Derek
March 9, 2006, 04:01 PM
Duncan, I used to get in trouble telling my instructors this in the RCAF but it's still true. they refered to Knox form, the flat on top of the breech of a Lee Enfield and just about everything else. IT IS NOCK"S FORM. the style of breech patented by Henry Nock. His 7 barrel volley gun is very famous, I don't know of a 9 barrel A better alley cleaner was Henry the VIII's little wheellock carbine. Four barrels and a center tube. The center tube was loaded with a slower burning compound than normal powder, the right hand barrel had one normal load, the upper, lower and left barrels had 9 carefully measured stacked loads. When the right barrel was fired, it lit the center fuse which fired off the next 27 loads Roman-candle style.28 rounds,BRRRRRRUP, just like a Sten-gun!With couple of spare loaded barrel-clusters, it would really have had shock effect on anybody in the 18th-19th century.
Duncaninfrance
March 9, 2006, 04:46 PM
Brain in neutral again Derek, trying to do too many jobs at once!
I hope Henry VIII gun was safer than a Sten, they are a bloody nightmare in squaddie hands. All those who have hit the dirt on a range with recruites firing Stens put your hands up now!! " Sarge, it's stopped firing!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Duncan
Sistema1927
March 9, 2006, 05:54 PM
Seeing as Colt sold more .31 Pocket Pistols than anything else in that era, and based upon the fact that I probably wouldn't go looking for trouble (just like today), I would probably buy an 1849.
Same thinking:
If we were talking about the early cartridge era, a S&W Top-break .32.
If early 20th Century, a 1903 or 1908 Colt.
If post WWII, probably a small S&W.38.
Today, a 642 or Kahr PM9.
ribbonstone
March 9, 2006, 08:01 PM
Seems that by the end of the War, the trend was to carry as many revovlers as you could...wasn't just a Hollywood invention...the horse carried the weight. When the killed 6 of 'Bloody Bill' anderson's men in 1864, 30 revovlers were collected...when they got Anderson himself, they took 4 revolvers from his body.
Don't think as much cylinder swapping was going on by he last years of the war...by then, through battle field pick-ups or otehr supply, those who relied on them had more than one.
Georgian87
March 19, 2006, 02:49 AM
Well, given that I have the most experience in the Colt type revolvers, in repairing and such, I'd have to take a brace of Colts. For over all power, I'd have to say two 1860 Armies, but very maneurability and handling, two Navies. Or possibly a pairing of .36 backup and .44 main. Heck, you cant go wrong with a Colt nohow, so it really dont matter. More of a decision of what you prefer. I definitely want a revolver I'm gonna be able to handle with ease. For that, a pair of '51 Navies will fit the bill right nice.
Beartracker
March 19, 2006, 07:19 AM
Remington .44 with a 200gr. conical and 40gr. of powder as my main go to gun and a 51 Navy/Colt .36 with a .380 ball and 26 gr. of powder as my back up.Then I want my wife standing beside me with a double barrel 10 gage loaded with nails.:evil:
If you enjoyed reading about "Cap and Ball for self defense" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!