Don357
Member
What would be a period correct long gun (short of a Sharps), to go with an Old Army style .44 revolver and a pre "War Of Union Agression" Cavalry rig? I'm trying to stay inexpensive.
Period correct
- Thread starter Don357
- Start date
- Status
bonza
Member
Maybe a Maynard or a Gallagher? There were many kinds of capping breechloaders. How about a percussion Halls carbine? That'd be kind of neat! In cartridge guns, a Henry!
Voodoochile
Member
I don't think the Henry or the Spencer would have been even remotely issued till after the War started.
Maynard, Gallager, & Sharps definitly.
Colt's Revolving rifle & Carbine would have been available at that time.
Maynard, Gallager, & Sharps definitly.
Colt's Revolving rifle & Carbine would have been available at that time.
Phantom Captain
Member
For what kind of impression? Dragoon impression pre "War of the Rebellion of the Slaveholders"? 
Have to remember Cav would sometimes carry short muzzleloading carbines at that time as well. Problem there is the bullets would jounce out or up the barrel by the horses motion.
Have to remember Cav would sometimes carry short muzzleloading carbines at that time as well. Problem there is the bullets would jounce out or up the barrel by the horses motion.
Not sure I understand the question. Period correct for what period?
The only Old Army I am aware of is the Ruger.
Pre CW horse soldier would have a single shot muzzle loader. They fought more as foot soldiers and used the horses to get from battle to battle.
The Mississippi rifle is a good one for the period. So is the Harpers Ferry.
The only Old Army I am aware of is the Ruger.
Pre CW horse soldier would have a single shot muzzle loader. They fought more as foot soldiers and used the horses to get from battle to battle.
The Mississippi rifle is a good one for the period. So is the Harpers Ferry.
Hmmm. I thought they carried sabres and fought from horseback. The cavalry has always been a mounted fighting force as their primary mission. Dismounting and fighting as infantry was secondary and rarely used as a strategy, I believe.
I assumed the OP was referring to the 1858 Remington New Army; the 'Old' reference was a mistake, I think.
Kentucky-roughrider
Member
They did carry sabres, mykeal you are correct.
In the 1840's the army was using the Dragoons as test units for new weopon systems, like lances instead of sabres.
We started to call our mounted forces Dragoons becuase they (believed to be) cheaper than true European-style cavalry and that's what the British did. Plus, the other side of the coin was two for one, a trooper who could fight as a cavalry man and as needed fight as a foot the next.
In the 1840's the army was using the Dragoons as test units for new weopon systems, like lances instead of sabres.
We started to call our mounted forces Dragoons becuase they (believed to be) cheaper than true European-style cavalry and that's what the British did. Plus, the other side of the coin was two for one, a trooper who could fight as a cavalry man and as needed fight as a foot the next.
Loyalist Dave
Member
Of course different nations, armies, and even regiments or companies/troops could vary while the names were used but...,
A dragoon is supposed to be mounted infantry that moves quickly by horseback, and fights dismounted. They were organized into companies, not troops, and took less training in theory as one could take the trained infantry soldier, and train him to ride, perhaps to shoot from horseback.
Cavalry fight mounted, specializing in the mounted charge, usually with sabers, BUT sometimes with lances, and usually then known as "lancers". They are organized into "troops" not companies. Much more training to ride and to stay in line, and use the saber from horseback, and when up against dragoons, generally dragoons were not well suited to face cavalry when both were mounted. Carbines or pistols were secondary weapons for the cavalry.
Since you refer to it as "The War of Union Agression", then you might consider a sawed off SxS caplock shotgun, and a saber.
LD
A dragoon is supposed to be mounted infantry that moves quickly by horseback, and fights dismounted. They were organized into companies, not troops, and took less training in theory as one could take the trained infantry soldier, and train him to ride, perhaps to shoot from horseback.
Cavalry fight mounted, specializing in the mounted charge, usually with sabers, BUT sometimes with lances, and usually then known as "lancers". They are organized into "troops" not companies. Much more training to ride and to stay in line, and use the saber from horseback, and when up against dragoons, generally dragoons were not well suited to face cavalry when both were mounted. Carbines or pistols were secondary weapons for the cavalry.
Since you refer to it as "The War of Union Agression", then you might consider a sawed off SxS caplock shotgun, and a saber.
LD
Voodoochile
Member
Yes, Dixie Gun Works has one in .44 caliber which is a correct caliber that was available for the period but the military used the .56 caliber model.
http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?cPath=22_92_186_191&products_id=13618
http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?cPath=22_92_186_191&products_id=13618
GNLaFrance
Member.
mykeal said:
A Brief History of Union Cavalry in the Eastern Theatre of the Civil War up to The Battle of Gettysburg
The cavalry usually scouted for the enemy and screened its own army, which is its primary mission, and as the War wore on they were more and more often used as dismounted skirmishers. Because North America is more broken, hilly and wooded than Central Europe and infantry was less likely to be caught in the open in massed formations, the glorious cavalry charges of the days of Napoleon were more difficult to pull off. Large examples of the Dance of the Saber Fairies happened only a few times, most notably at Brandy Station. Once the Union infantry got over its awe of cavalry it began to take a terrible toll. Forward-thinking commanders like Buford had their troopers turn in their pie-cutters, dismount, and learn to fire their carbines rapidly and accurately, q.v. Gettysburg, July 1, 1863.
"Must be a fight up ahead, boys, the cavalry's goin' to the rear!"
DixieTexian
Member
I know I read in a book about the Texas Rangers that they would practice shooting from horseback in the early days for fighting against indians. I believe they often carried Hawkins type rifles. Of course, they were mainly fighting indians and Mexican bandits and such, so they were not your usual cavalry.
OP
OP
Don357
Member
What I was refering to was the pre-Civil War Cavalry, predominately around the Indian wars. I know that Sharps, Spencers, and Henrys really came about toward the end of the 1860's. I would love to have a Sharps, either paper or brass cartridge, but can't afford either right now. The cheapest I've found is $689 for a paper cartridge gun and $900 to $1500 for a cartridge gun, and Spencers were almost as bad. Mostly I guess I'm looking for something affordable. I'm not looking for a political statement. I'm looking for something to go with a brass frame .44 c&b CVA 1851-1860? By the way Strawhat, the Ruger is a loose copy of the 1858 Remington New Army. By all means a good gun, but not an accurate replica. And mykeal, the "old" may not be actual nomenclature, but was put in there to contrast the " New" of the 1858 Remington. Anyway, thanks for the suggestions and keep them coming, a decision has not been made yet!
The first Seminole War was about 1818 so one of the Harpers Ferry flintlocks or Springfield flintlocks would be appropriate.
The second Seminole War was later, about 1840 or so. For that one a percussion musket would work.
The Colt revolver would not be correct for either war.
The second Seminole War was later, about 1840 or so. For that one a percussion musket would work.
The Colt revolver would not be correct for either war.
- Status