[Dithsoer]

For years I've read about 19th century examples of marksmanship by our western heroes (and villains). I'm not talking about hip-shooting moving mounted men at 50 yards, I mean real, practical shooting as well as some of the more amazing (and believable) stuff, such as Hickok and Hardin's skill with the revolver. There were many men of that time who were quite skilled with the pistol, but my question is, how did they get so good? Ammunition at the time was quite expensive (for the era) on the frontier, not to mention hard to get. True, most of the more famous shootist attained their fame with the percussion revolver. But that, too has a weak link, the percussion cap. Many of the great marksmen of the day were counted among the poorer class of society so money, or lack thereof, was a valid consideration. Moreover, 19th century society, especially on the frontier required a lot of time and work, including things that most of us today either take for granted or wouldn't even consider. So not only where did they get the money, but where did they find the time? Our modern replicas, with better steels and manufacturing techniques, require quite a bit of fiddling, not to mention a reasonable supply of spare parts, to keep in shooting condition. There was no Dixie Gun Works and telephone orders, with same day shipping and get it early next week. If you needed a part, you either ordered it and waited or made it (or had it made) yourself. Which all took MORE time and money. Also, it takes quite a bit of shooting to even get proficient with most handguns, let alone to be able to reach the level of skill that those great men possessed. Guns wear out and need to be replaced. So I wonder, how did the 19th century shootist find the time and money to become a legend 150 years later? Of course I'm not talking about the average ruffian who shot his man in the back or whatever, I'm referring to the honest-to-goodness marksmen who had to "learn the hard way." Any thoughts?

[RDF]

The trouble with history is that it is written after the fact and filtered through the author.

I'm sure there were many skilled marksmen/women and the exceptional ones stood out in history. Were they really that good. By all accounts and witness reports, there were some really great individuals. Trouble in my opinion is that it involves more opinions and witness reports than known facts available to us now.

Back then many folks grew up having to shoot game to put meat on the table; and as you said ammo/guns were expensive. So they had to make each shot count.

If it was a matter of a rabbit in the pot or go hungry, versus punching holes in a target, I'd be more motivated to get "good."

Several modern days marksmen are true Shootists, but I suspect, like in the 1800s they are few and far between.

RDF

[DrLaw]

Like the story of a more modern rifleman, Audie Murphy, of whom it is said he had to get rabbits with a .22 for the family dinner.

I suspect that a few of them got their money by card and other games of chance, which were the big thing back then. After all, Hitchcock was killed playing poker and was too wanting of the game to wait for his prefered seat.

The other thing is that while we hear of proficient gunmen, they are also few and far between when you consider the rest of the population. People like Billy the Kid are considered gunmen, but you never hear HOW they shot, well or not.

Anybody remember that line from the movie "THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALENCE" at the end of the movie? Something about when the legend becomes truth, print the legend. I, too, suspect that is also the way it was.

The Doc is out now. :cool:

[J.T. Gerrity]

Back then many folks grew up having to shoot game to put meat on the table; and as you said ammo/guns were expensive. So they had to make each shot count.

Annie Oakley is a prime example; she was responsible for bringing meat home from an early age. It was out of necessity that she learned to hit what she aimed at. She became one of the greatest sure-shot shootists of the Nineteenth Century and, fortunately, we have it on film to prove it.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=97220&stc=1&d=1241007926

[JWHardin]

ammo wasn't cheap in 19th or the early 20th centuries. People couldnt go out and burn up a 100 rounds blasting away...each shot meant going hungry or not. Most of the nation was simply rural until the 1950s.
Another point is that the vast number of "shootists" shot their victims either in the back or from ambush and were often close enough to reach out and touch them. Hickock while a great marksmen was as well known for backshooting and ambushing his victims as was Hardin and other famed men with guns
As for the guns themselves my own great grandfather ran a dray between Deadwood and Fort Abraham Lincoln in the 1870s...the only gun he owned was a Springfield percussion rifle bored out to 20 gauge. He saw no use in sidearms nor could he fathom the necessity of the new repeaters as they were too delicate and required ammo that was hard to come by on the frontier, not to mention expensive. Until the laws were changed in MN and the Dakotas the most popular Deer rifle round was the .22LR. Have a good number of early hunting photos of sodbusters from the early 20th century in the upper Great Plains with a half dozen often more deer dead and a hunting party proudly standing at attention, over maybe 40 odd photos one can MAYBE pick out a dozen centerfire rifles with the vast bulk being .22s or shotguns.
shot placement is everything

[Old Fuff]

If you get away from fictional books, movies and television shows; and read some original contemporary documents – which fortunately have been reproduced in books verbatim, you will find some examples of excellent shooting combined with some that were so bad they were funny. :D

First of all, those old timers didn’t engage in spray & pray. The good ones were cool under fire and made each shot count. When they practiced they didn’t see how fast they could go, but rather how fast they could hit. :scrutiny:

As for the revolvers – Colt Single Action style in particular. We have better materials, but the older guns were better fitted up, and as a consequences were less likely to break small parts and springs. Also everybody in the Wild West wasn’t armed exclusively with Colt’s and Winchesters.

Years ago I had the opportunity to have a short interview with one of the last living Arizona Territorial Rangers. He was well into his 90’s, physically feeble, but his mind was sharp as a tack. In that few minutes I learned far more about western lawmen and gunfights then I’ve ever got out of books.

One of the things he told me was that that when approaching an outlaw to make an arrest they were under specific orders to have their revolver “in hand,” and not “in the scabbard (holster).” Also, never go with a six-shooter, when they could use their rifle instead. He died in bed of old age, with his boots off. Can’t say that was always true concerning some of those he encountered. ;)

[DrLaw]

My mind has a hard time wrapping around the fact of shooting deer with a
.22.

Oh, I know it can be done, as I know of a case in my county of a kid who took a deer near his house with a .22, out of season, etc...

It's just that I cannot wrap my mind around using a .22 when this state only allows pistols of certain calibers and muzzle energy, muzzleloaders or shotgun with slugs, no buckshot for firearm seasons. (and of course, I know of other states that allow centerfire rifles). :eek:

I guess it is a matter of conditioning.

Also, I would have prefaced JW's remarks about backshooting, but I was being nice this morning. :p

The Doc is out now. :cool:

[steveracer]

The one famous shot Hickock made was at 75 yards, one shot, right in the guy's heart. I'd call that "good enough".
As has been stated before, most gunfights were at contact distance.
It's easy to kill a deer with a .22, and I killed several as a young boy with .22MAG out of a single shot Ivor Johnson. Laws have changed, and now I'd end up in a cell.
Deer are plentiful, and in the right part of the world, they come right up to you. Lots of us have shot them with our CCW guns.
I know, "they aren't shooting back", but in the old West, they weren't always shooting back, either.
steve

[desidog]

This brings up an question i've thought of for a while now: what was the cost per shot in 1700, 1800, 1880, etc?

I know scarcity of gunpowder on the frontier played a factor in conserving shots, but was wondering of cost/round, mainly in comparison with current, modern cartridges; and taking inflation and buying power of money into account.

Also, at the time of the Revolution, flintlock guns cost exorbitant amounts, like the equivalent of a years' pay. I think that by the conclusion Civil War there were many (comparatively) cheap guns to be had.

With a flintlock, when subsistence hunting, you pretty much have one opportunity to get it right; or starve.

[NobleSniper]

Alot of the skill and popularity of the early shootists I beleive is attributed to the pen. Most were not that skilled. Only a handful I would call true shootist and I beleive Hickok would be at the top. I think the most proficient shootist was the one who did not hurry a shot but carefully took aim. Which is fine as long as the inteneded target is nto a quicker aim and better trigger man than you are ;)

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

JW Hardin, that was a very good post you just put up here. I enjoyed reading it....

[Matt-J2]

I reckon the good ones didn't get so good by sittin round talking about it. They likely did it the same way that the good ones did it before them, and the ones that come after.
Practice.
Good practice, that is.

[rcmodel]

Hickock was said to go out early every morning and shoot the loads in his guns that might have drawn dampness overnight.

I doubt he wasted 12 shots by shooting them in the dirt.
Even 12 rounds a day focused practice, for most of your adult life would make you a pretty good shot, I betcha.

Others, as noted, grew up with flint-lock rifles & sustenance hunting. You either learned good trigger control and follow-through with them, or you simply missed badly and went hungry.

Later, transitioning to a cap & ball, or cartridge arm would be like us going from a motor scooter to a Corvette.

And life was different then, or even 60 years ago for some of us back on the farm.

I started shooting a .22 when I was barely old enough to hold one up.

By the time I was 10 - 12, I was potting jack rabbits at 150+ yards in our spring wheat fields with an iron sighted .22 LR, and feeding the carcases to the hogs every evening.

By the time I entered the Army, I shot expert with every weapon they let me touch on a range. A few years later, I was shooting for 5th. Inf AMU.

rc

[steveracer]

rcmodel,
That sounds a lot like my upbringing, 'cept I joined the Navy.

[Mike OTDP]

Yup. I was raised shooting black powder, and never understood the attraction of blasting bullets into the backstop. You can get pretty good if you focus on what you are doing.

[fineredmist]

If you think about what is required to get a C&B revolver into ready to fire you will soon realize that it can't be done the way it is portrayed in the movies. Drawing and cocking while the pistol is in motion is asking for trouble with caps falling off which will surely put you at a disadvantage when the pistol doesn't fire. The playing field was level as everyone had the same type of equipment. The name of the game was draw the weapon, take aim and make the shot count. Draw fast, shoot fast, miss fast will get you killed fast. I was always impressed with the super fast IDPA shooters until I saw their targets, more poor hits than good hits. The "shootists" had to do a whole lot more with a whole lot less so they had to get the most out their practice.

[Gaucho Gringo]

Lets not forget that most women on the frontier knew there way around a gun. Annie Oakley has already been mentioned but I am sure there were others. During the 1880's-1910's target shooting was a very well attended sport as both spectators and participants by the fairer sex.

[AdmiralB]

The one famous shot Hickock made was at 75 yards, one shot, right in the guy's heart. I'd call that "good enough".

Yes, but he had (and took advantage of) the luxury of time to rest his pistol on his weak-side arm, and take careful aim....since his opponent fired first, and missed.

Rules of dueling, and all.

[blkbrd666]

It was probably akin to what I experienced as a kid. I was given an Ithaca lever action single shot .22 to squirrel hunt with. To me, back then, having 2 or 3 50rd boxes of Super-X .22 short was a MAJOR MAJOR "stash". I made every shot count whether it was a running squirrel or rabbit, or a flying quail. I can't EVER remember missing a squirrel until I was in my teens and got my first 10shot autoloader, then later a semiauto shotgun...and my shooting skills went to sh__. Took me a while to realize I had quit concentrating on my shots and I no longer followed my target in a calm, cool and confident manner. It was years later before I realized what had happened...now I never forget. I take every shot, even with a hicap 9mm, as if there is only the one bullet.

[Dithsoer]

You know, it's interesting to read the posts about life on the farm as a kid. Such a childhood probably does more for shooting skill than anything else. I recall reading the words of a W.W.I era US general who stated that while our technology of the time may not have been equivalent with what most Europeans were fielding, our soldiers possessed the finest accuracy of any army. Even in W.W.II the fact that so many young men learned to shoot-and shoot well-on the farm gave our boys an edge on the battlefield. In other words, most of our young men back then joined the service already possessing much more than the rudiments of marksmanship. Compare that to today, were the ignorance inherent in so many of our youth is astounding.

[blkbrd666]

Last summer I did something I had never done before. I went to the indoor range and just watched from behind the glass for over half an hour. There were a LOT of people who weren't shooting 1" or 2" or even 3" groups...some of them were having trouble with 8.5x11" groups...seriously!!! It makes you just want to go help them.

[J.T. Gerrity]

he had (and took advantage of) the luxury of time

Contemporary reports are that the two fired almost simultaneously. None of the witnesses at Hickok's subsequent trial mention anything about Hickok "rest[ing] his pistol on his weak-side arm, and tak[ing] careful aim", but say that the shots came so quickly no one was sure who fired first, and some thoought that only Hickok had fired until it was noticed that the cap on Tutt's revolver had been burst, and the chamber had been fired. The real trouble is seperating fact from legend. Had Hickok really taken his time to fire after Tutt's first shot, he would have been dead from the second, as it was commonly agreed that Tutt was actually a better shot than Hickok.

[AdmiralB]

I'm wrong about the elapsed time between shots, but not about the resting on the arm part:

Both men faced each other sideways in the dueling position, hesitated briefly then Tutt reached for his pistol. Hickok drew his gun and steadied it on his opposite fore arm. The two men fired a single shot each, both shooting at essentially the same time, the reports combining as one.

From the wiki entry, FWIW.

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

JT Gerrity, you are right..Tutt was given up to be a better shot then Hickok and was supposed to be a little faster to.
John Wesley Hardin was faster than Mr. Tutt and was certainly way faster than Hickok. People that jump on this thread and talk out their ass about how good Hickok was and how he was the very top and all, just demonstrate that they haven't the foggiest idea what they're talking about. He was mean, and a cold blooded killer, and he would shoot somebody's ass off for them, but he wasn't real fast with a gun. Besides all that, Hickok seldom went anywhere without a couple of shotgun toting deputies trailing along with him....

[J.T. Gerrity]

Well, I wouldn't rely on Wikipedia as a resource for anything. If you want to learn the true story, I suggest you check out a copy of "Wild Bill Hickok, Gunfighter" by Joseph G. Rosa, which examines the fight in detail and gives eyewitness testimony from Hickok's trial. Most agree that it was Tutt that reached for his gun first, but that the subsequent shots "sounded as one". Hickok was found not guilty, having shot in self defense. This shoot-out is considered the classic face to face gunfight, and Hickok's trial and acquittal has become legendary in legal circles, being studied even today.

As for Hickok being fast and accurate with his gun, there is no doubt about it, and he used a reverse draw to boot. His main claim to fame was that he was cool-headed in the face of certain death.

[NobleSniper]

Now I have read more on Hickok than Tutt. COuld you point me in the direction of where I might do some "true reading " on him. Not doubting you so much as wanting to be better informed myself.

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Mr. Gerrity, I don't depend on Wilkipedia for anything, sir.When I wanted to find out about Hickok I pulled the records from Missouri and Kansas. When I wanted to find out about Hardin (who was a damn decent man in his own way. he just wouldn't back up) I got the records by going through the Rangers and some more folks down in Texas. I pulled records on Atrim (Billy the Kid) Frank and Jesse, Cole Younger, (didn't care about his brothers) Buckskin Frank Leslie and several more Mr. Gerrity. I pulled copies of records from Texas, Missouri, Kansas, New Mexico, New York City and lot's of places.
Believe me sir. I don't use Wilkipedia. Very few internet sources do I use and actually put any faith in....

[AdmiralB]

I don't really care who uses wikipedia and who doesn't. Anyone who believes everything they read on the internet is naive, but then again automatically casting it as fiction because it's on the internet is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

If there are sources out there that say Hickock drew from his holster and made the shot freehand, I'll happily read them.

But even if he did...the conventional wisdom, which is documented, stipulates that Tutt was regarded as better and faster. So if he didn't have the 'drop' on Tutt, so to speak...it seems that he was just lucky that day anyway.

[NobleSniper]

While I consider you fella's better informed on the subject than I am I have to make this observation. Tutt didn't do to well as he didn't walk away from the fight ;)

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

AdmiralB, you're right. My printer is sitting right here. I don't much use it. If I was in the mood to load the updated software into my 'puter I could send you plenty of paperwork to back up what you just said. Hickok himself knew that Tutt was a shade faster. That's why the fight happened the way it did. Tutt had done let it be known that he wasn't about to take any s*** from Hickok and Hickok was trying to dodge Tutt until Tutt left town.
As to what JT Gerrity said..well, Hickok was a good shot, a real damn good shot. He was a real steady hand. And while it certainly didn't take him all day to get his gun out, well, he just wasn't very fast, relatively speaking. Mr. Tutt probably missed and got his ass killed because he was drunk as hell. (he'd been drinking all day) I'm not saying Hickok couldn't draw, but compared to men like Wes Hardin, Tutt, Buckskin Frank and a few more, Hickok just wasn't that fast. If that disappoint's some of these people who read some damn book that somebody wrote trying to make some money, well, sorry 'bout that....

[Loyalist Dave]

Also, at the time of the Revolution, flintlock guns cost exorbitant amounts, like the equivalent of a years' pay.

Actually no, a flintlock rifle was about 7 pounds, and a professional hunter was paid 4 pounds a month, so roughly 6 weeks pay, and it was often obtained on credit. A smooth bore ran less than a pound, and for even a farmer of the time it was less than a month's pay.

As for Hickok being fast and accurate with his gun, there is no doubt about it, and he used a reverse draw to boot. His main claim to fame was that he was cool-headed in the face of certain death

This seems to be the key, being able to take deliberate aim while under fire. IIRC Wyatt Earp is reported to have said, In a gunfight you need to take your time as fast as you can.

LD

[NobleSniper]

Fella's correct me if I am wrong but didn't Hardin draw down on Hickok one time literally scaring the crap ou of him. While some say it was in fun and others say Hardin admired Hickok I often wondered if it was merely a warning ??

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Hardin was in town off a cattle drive and was drunk. He fired his 1860 off into the air. Hickok approached him with his hand on his own gun, (Hardin's gun was already back in the holster) Hickok told him he wanted his gun until he left town. All of a sudden Hickok found himself staring into the muzzle of that 1860, just that fast. He decided he didn't want Hardin's gun after all, at least the end of it Hardin was fixing to give him. He raised his hands shoulder high to show he wasn't fighting (and dying) and turned and walked away. Hardin hurried up and got out of town before Hickok showed up again with a couple of his shotgun toting deputies. He's real lucky Hardin didn't kill him on the spot. Hardin worked cattle for a living when he could and all he ever asked for was to be left alone. Sometimes I think I know the feeling very well....

[NobleSniper]

Thats it. I could not exactly remmeber all the circumstances but I remembered Hardin for sure got the draw down on him before he knew what was happening. Thanks for the refresher ;)

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

No problem, Sniper. I have researched the hell out of a lot of those ol' boys just to give me something to do and for my own satisfaction. Sniper, listen to me. If I tell you that a chicken dip's snuff, you don't have to look under that left wing because that snuff can is gonna be there.

[NobleSniper]

I can believe that ;)

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Noble Sniper, I will tell you something very briefly. When I decided to move over into blackpowder revolvers and inlines, people tried to talk me out of it. Told me they wern't any good and if I ever needed a gun they were fit only to get me killed. On and on and on I listened to this s***, from my family, my friends from the Corps, my friends from the Mariners, virtually everybody. But it was always in my mind that they had always seemed to work well enough for people like Hickok and Hardin and the rest of them good ol' boys. So I started practicing (hard brutal driving practice) and in between when I had time I would research those ol' boys. Lot's of them were pretty decent as long as you didn't start any s*** with them..
That bring's me to one more thing. All I read about on here is how the nipples are wrong or the caps keep wanting to fall off and all of that. I can flat guarantee you that somebody is not doing something right, because I have several '58's, several Cattleman carbines, Walkers, and '49's and I have shot the living hell out of them (except for the ones I keep put away as spares) and it's a funny damn thing to me that myself, Hardin, Hickok, and uncountable numbers of more out there that are living or have lived never have (or had) these problems, and we shoot or have shot the hell right out of these guns. I'vd never had any kind of problem with a cap in my whole damn life and that's the truth, and neither have I ever had a cap fragment jam an action.
Sniper, don't blame the gun. If you're gonna blame anything you better take a damn close look at the one handling the gun. That's where the problem is gonna be.
Now, I'm an old man and if this post pisses off some people, well now, ain't that a shame....

[NobleSniper]

Funny that you post this as I have alot of folks blow me guff over my choice of revolvers for personal protection. A Colt Peacemaker............ I do not need a 30 round mag with night sights and lasers etc. That six gun will put a bullet wherever I aim it time after time. The brace of Walkers I feel the same way about. They will take out the trash if need be...... As far as problems. These are my first BP revolvers. My past BP experience was a TC Hawken and a 50cal Kentucky pistol I built myself. AS long as I did my part they never failed to go boom :) I have been told the same garbage about how dangerous black powder reovlers pistols and rifles are time and again. Good thing I don't listen to stupid people :) You just keep posting and I will keep learning ;)

[Old Fuff]

Gentlemen... and others of course. :D

I recommend that on the subject of Wild Bill, you pick up any books written by Joseph G. Rosa, who is generally considered to be "the" authority on the subject. For a wider view, and a lot of excellent photographs of period firearms, get a copy of The Taming Of the West - Age Of The Gunfighter, by the same author.

Also you can find a heap of contemporary newspaper articles in Great Gunfighters of The Kansas Cowtowns 1867 - 1886, By Nyle H. Miller and Joseph W. Snell.

As for the Old Fuff, he will keep out of this because there is no way he can put in his two-cents worth without getting somebody mad at him... :uhoh:

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Sniper, well, there's not much I could teach you. You already have your mind right. The rest of it is to just follow through and work out your own techniques and figure out and learn (learn-learn-learn Sniper) your gun. Learn what it will do and how it does it, and learn what it won't do and how come it won't do it. Learn what you can do. Know your limitations and always stay within them. Never attempt to go outside your gun's known working parameters if you can help it. You'll do good Sniper....

[sltm1]

Gentleman O.T.C. Old Fuff and NobleSniper. I too am of the older generation (60....perhaps a mere babe by your standards), and I have to agree that percussion firearms are just a deadly and reliable as cartridge if you take the time to learn your weaponry. The best defense against problems is knowledge and those that are still learning, make your mistakes, but analyze them and learn form them. My personal defense weapon is a Rogers & Spencer, w/ cap and ball or 45lc, either way, she fires everytime and hits what
I aim at, fancy and deadly don't often go hand in hand.

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Afternoon Old Fuff. Hope you're doing alright sir. I was looking around on here for you off and on all day. Missed you. I'm glad you're not down with the swine flu or something....

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Sitm1, well, another man with some good common sense! Welcome into this conversation sir. You told the exact truth....

[J.T. Gerrity]

Mr. Gerrity, I don't depend on Wikipedia for anything, sir
GOTC, I never said you did. Glad to hear you don't.

If there are sources out there that say Hickok drew from his holster and made the shot freehand, I'll happily read them.

"If you want to learn the true story, I suggest you check out a copy of "Wild Bill Hickok, Gunfighter" by Joseph G. Rosa, which examines the fight in detail and gives eyewitness testimony from Hickok's trial."


As to the rest, I'm going with Old Fuff, and am withholding my opinion. :rolleyes:

[Old Fuff]

Missed you. I'm glad you're not down with the swine flu or something....

Well it's just south of me, but we're told that if we stay away from crowds there isn't much risk, and anyone that develops a fever or sore throat should get to a doctor or hospital quick. So far where I am there have been no reported cases. An 8 year-old boy did die up in Phoenix though. This flu is nothing to fool around with.

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Old Fuff and others. Well, they have 62 schools closed down in Alabama. I don't know what part(s) of the state, but Alabama is not that big of a state anyway. I haven't been able to get through to my sister on the phone to find out about my Grand neice and nephew. Maybe they're doing alright. (My sister and them won't use a computer. Afraid of child molesters and other assorted trash that haunt the internet)....

[Old Fuff]

As usual the mainstream media is reporting the news in the most alarmist way they can, and scaring people right and left. The truth of the matter is that swine flu is potentially dangerous, but so far not out of hand. Also every cold or viral flu attack isn’t necessary a case of swine flu.

What is needed is calm and paying close attention to detect any symptoms. If anyone in the family (especially children or elderly) has a fever, sore throat, hacking cough, or related – get them to a doctor or hospital as soon as possible, but in the meantime don’t panic.

Concerning the Gent’s young relatives – if they are home and not sick they are probably safe.

[NobleSniper]

Thanks GotC ;)

[Vonderek]

Many of the Old West shootists were veterans of the Civil War and subsequent Indian Wars and knew their way around firearms. Of course cavalrymen would be proficient with a handgun by the time they got out of the service, whether it be a Colt's Navy or Army, or the later model 1873.

Also, I think much of the shooting heroics of the era were romanticized in the newspapers and pulp novels of the time. In reality, most gunfights were sudden boozy affairs at arm's length and even more were outright bushwack murders.

[Tommygunn]

Old Fuff and others. Well, they have 62 schools closed down in Alabama. I don't know what part(s) of the state, but Alabama is not that big of a state anyway. I haven't been able to get through to my sister on the phone to find out about my Grand neice and nephew. Maybe they're doing alright. (My sister and them won't use a computer. Afraid of child molesters and other assorted trash that haunt the internet)....

Huntsville, Madison County, in N. Alabama north of the Tennessee River has a couple of cases ... IIRC Montgomery down south has one.
Schools in the effected northern areas are closed for a week.
Everyone is going crazy with a flu strain that has killed only a few people (a small % of those who get it) while regular flu kills 36,000 people a year.
This is insane.:confused::scrutiny:

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Tommygunn, Many thanks sir. Yes, Morgan Cty. is where they live. School's out. I bet those two kids are happy!! I had to correct this post....

[Loyalist Dave]

People scoff at cap-n-ball revolvers, but even the cheapest I have found to be highly accurate at 25 yards, equal or better than some brand name modern revolvers.

The story that Hickock squared off at 75 yards with an opponent, and he killed the man with a .36 Navy is quite plausible. They are very accurate handguns.

I have experienced caps jamming the cylinder, or slowing it up for a second with Colt repros in .44 and using a max load..., I suspect the rebounding gas pressure coming back through the nipple had something to do with damaging the spent cap. Reducing the load fixed that problem, and with a '58 Remington = no worries.


LD

[Jefferson Herb]

I've enjoyed the comments of the old west and those who research the historic facts. Gentlemen,I've been using a tc hawkin since 1978[now w gm 1:28 twist]and can attest that a bp arm is accurate.I've lost some of the edge[my old tc 1:48 was deadly w/maxi]but with the tang sight could hit pop cans at 150 yds on a regular basis.[move target 20 yds and I would miss till adjustment made]
The one problem i still encounter is keeping a loaded percussion arm loaded for long periods of time,any tricks ?

[BHP FAN]

Keep your powder dry.It sounds simple,but it's true.a slobbery patch or one soaked in lube will degrade your powder over time.Be very spareing with lube if you're goin to leave it loaded.depending on your situation,you could leave it capped.BP will hydrate,sucking moisture in through the nipple.I have a rubber peice off of a pegboard hook that fits over the nipple,instead of a cap,as my place is kinda high traffic,with kids in and out,and leaving it capped is [in my situation] an invatation to trouble.but if you follow those simple steps,and store it high and dry,you should be ok.