Sam'l Colt and Left-Handed Rifling Twists

[230RN]

I have long suspected, but do not know for sure, that Sam'l Colt was left-handed.

The Single Action Army (SAA), of his design, seems to have been designed for left-handed shooters, with the loading gate on the right, making reloading slightly more difficult for right handers.

It was possible to reload the SAA while shooting it, by leaving the loading gate open and as the empty came around to the ejection port, kick out the empty, put in a fresh cartridge, and continue firing, repeating this process as long as desired, without stopping to eject six empties and reload six loaded cartridges all at once. This method is a lot easier for left-handed shooters than for right-handed ones.

I note and was somewhat surprised that my inexpensive knockoff of the Colt 1911 by Rock Island Armory, has a right-handed twist, more in line with "normal" practice, whereas original Colts have left-handed twists.

I have a high suspicion that if Mr. Colt was indeed left-handed, this may also explain why all (as far as I know) Colt handguns have a left-hand twist, as opposed to most other firearms. It seems like it might just have been a whimsical preference of Mr. Colt to use left-handed rifling in his firearms.

What is interesting from a practical standpoint is that the known drift of the 1911 due to the left-handed rifling twist is 2.0" to the left at 100 yards, while right-handed twist firearms' bullets drift to the right. Therefore my RIA knockoff should drift 2.0" to the right.

I wonder if anyone knows for sure if Mr. Colt was left-handed.

------------
I also posed this question at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rifling

 

[Cosmoline]

After taking apart and putting back together a number of the early 20th century Colt DA revolvers, I came to the conclusion that the folks who took over the company from him were also left handed. And insane. But it's a great madness. A bizarre Rube Goldberg set of backwards springs and levers that somehow make the gun go bang.

 

[unspellable]

twist

Would the direction of twist be related to any tendency to unscrew the barrel? Until recently S&Ws had pinned barrels so this would not have been a factor.

I've seen cliams that direction of twist inb rfile barrels has on occasion been influenced by considerations of the corialis effect, but if true, it struck me as rather pointless.

 

[SMLE]

Remember that when the first Colt handguns were being made,swords were still common on the battlefield. The sword would be in the right hand, so that meant that the pistol/revolver was in the left. That *might* account for the seeming "lefty friendly" set up of the Colt revolvers.

 

[daniel (australia)]

Sam'l Colt was left handed, according to a number of sources including the official history of Colt Firearms I have around here somewhere.

However, he died in 1862, 11 years before that SAA design hit the market.

One alternative explanation for the loading gate being on the right is that for cavalry the left hand always holds the reins, with the right free to use weapons etc. When the revolver needs reloading though you transfer it to your rein (left) hand, holding both reins and revolver together and freeing up the right to do all the work of clearing the empty brass, fumbling for cartridges and stuffing them into the cylinder - you couldn't do this fiddly stuff with your left because it is needed for holding the reins

 

[Jim Watson]

Under stress of combat, it is better to hold the big piece (the gun) with the less dextrous hand and the little piece (the cartridges) with the strong hand.
I consider the SAA to be a right handed gun. I would not want to have to reload with my left hand with the hostiles chasing me.

 

[the naked prophet]

There is no aerodynamic reason that the spinning bullet would "drift" one direction or the other. Wind may easily affect the trajectory, but the spin would not. Bullets spin on an axis parallel to the path of the bullet.

A spherical or cylindrical object which spins on an axis perpendicular to the airstream may experience force in a direction perpendicular to both the spin axis and the airstream direction. This is called the Magnus Effect.

Although there would be no sideways drift, a strong sidewind could cause vertical forces (either lift or drop) on the bullet (this is mentioned in the linked article). Depending on the left/right rifling, a long-range shot in heavy winds may need to take this into account, although at that point the wind would likely blow the bullet so far off course that the elevation change would be irrelevant...

 

[JesseL]

There is no aerodynamic reason that the spinning bullet would "drift" one direction or the other. Wind may easily affect the trajectory, but the spin would not. Bullets spin on an axis parallel to the path of the bullet.

If a bullet is overstabilized it may not spin on an axis parallel to the path of the bullet. It could continue to spin on an axis parallel to the bore of the firearm (pointed up slightly). At extended ranges, when the bullet's trajectory begins to drop dramatically, the spin of the bullet and the direction of it's flight can differ enough that the magnus effect starts to cause a sideways drift.

 

[230RN]

In Hatcher's Notebook we find....

p. 404: The drift of the cal .30 ball round is 0.1 mils (~0.3375 MOA) to the right at 1200 yards. At 2000 yards the right drift is 0.3 mils (~1.0125 MOA).

p.31: The "Table of Fire for the Cartridge, Ball, Cal .45 M1911" shows that the drift is 2.0 inches to the left at 100 yards. (Sorry, I misremembered it as 2.5 inches.)

 

[unspellable]

Left handed

It just dawns on me that in the calvery the pistol WAS a left handed weapon. One carried a sword i nthe strong hand and the pistol in the weak hand. That's the reason al lthose old calvery holsetrs were left handed.

Now all you have to do is figure out how you are going to reload with a sword in your right hand.

 

[230RN]

Daniel (australia) said:

Sam'l Colt was left handed, according to a number of sources including the official history of Colt Firearms I have around here somewhere.

Thank you! That's good enough for me!

 

[DixieTexian]

Yes, calvary pistols were intended to be left handed, with the holster set up cross draw on the right hip. The sword was wor on the left hip where it could be easily drawn with the right hand. It is also easier to draw from a crossdraw holster when on a horse (or a four wheeler for that matter). The sword being on the left hip is why we mount horses from the left side still today. It would get in the way if you tried to mount from the right side.

 

[daniel (australia)]

It just dawns on me that in the calvery the pistol WAS a left handed weapon. One carried a sword i nthe strong hand and the pistol in the weak hand. That's the reason al lthose old calvery holsetrs were left handed.

A mounted trooper couldn't do that, what would he hold the reins with?

 

[c_yeager]

The gate is on the right side because that is where the cut-out on cap and ball revolvers is for capping, this is placed as such for RIGHT handed shooters because it is almost impossible to put a cap on a nipple with your weak hand. Since these guns were sold to a generation of people who spent their lives putting caps on with their right hand while holding the weapon in the left it makes perfect sense to load the cartridges in the same way. I doubt very much that there was a whole lot of thought on how "tactical" it was.

 

[unspellable]

swords and which side of the horse

The sword is worn on the left as with a sword a cross draw works better even when standing. While a sword on the right would get in the way while monting a horse, I believe wearing the sword on the left is actully unrelated to mounting a horse on the near side. It's just a happy coincidence. (A horse does not have a left and right side, it has a near and far side.)

 

[TallPine]

A horse does not have a left and right side, it has a near and far side

Actually, it's more normally called the the "near/on" side and the "off" side.

The "Far side" is a cartoon

 

[unspellable]

Which side of the horse?

Might be a regional difference here. Back in my days with horses the terms "far side" and "off side" were pretty much interchangable in my neck of the woods. I cannot recall ever hearing the "near side" referred to as the "on side" though.

But the great question we all ponderd was, "How many neats did it take to get a quart of neat's foot oil?"

 

[TallPine]

Save the vanishing neats!

 

[alucard0822]

In Hatcher's Notebook we find....

p. 404: The drift of the cal .30 ball round is 0.1 mils (~0.3375 MOA) to the right at 1200 yards. At 2000 yards the right drift is 0.3 mils (~1.0125 MOA).

p.31: The "Table of Fire for the Cartridge, Ball, Cal .45 M1911" shows that the drift is 2.0 inches to the left at 100 yards. (Sorry, I misremembered it as 2.5 inches.)

I am intrigued by this, 1st, I don't know anyone that can even bench a 1911 and tell a 2" drift at 100yds from left hand rifling, and would the spinning cause it to drift to the right in the southern hemisphere?

Would the direction of twist be related to any tendency to unscrew the barrel? Until recently S&Ws had pinned barrels so this would not have been a factor.

this would be entirely possible, if the barrell had left handed threads also

I think it is just a logical evolution, cap and balls load the caps on the right, conversion cylinders utilize the cap cutout to load the cartridges, SAA would logically load on the same side, if the whole pistol in the left hand thing were true, wht would the 1911 (also a cavalry pistol) have a left sided thumb saftey and mag release, and spit emptys across you as you ride?

 

[atk]

The sword is worn on the left as with a sword a cross draw works better even when standing.

It depends, partially, on the length of the sword. The roman legions carried their swords on their right hips, and drew with their hand inverted (like "cowboy" carry).

 

[alucard0822]

It depends, partially, on the length of the sword. The roman legions carried their swords on their right hips, and drew with their hand inverted (like "cowboy" carry)

the roman gladius only has a 20" blade, the standard cavalry sabre has a 32" blade making it awkward if not impossible to not crossdraw.

 

[atk]

the roman gladius only has a 20" blade, the standard cavalry sabre has a 32" blade making it awkward if not impossible to not crossdraw.

Wouldn't the degree of awkwardness depend upon the size of the individual drawing the blade? For example, I'm 6 feet tall, and my arms are just about 2 feet long from armpit to wrist. I've got another foot between armpit and hip, so, assuming that the sword is slung exactly at my right hip, theoretically I should be able to draw up to a 36" blade using my right hand. A sword slung lower would be easier to draw.

It would be interesting to know what the average hight of a roman soldier was, to get an idea of the difference between the length of their arm and the length of their sword.


I seem to recall that there were minimum height requirements to be in the cavalry, but I have no idea where I remember that from.

Sorry for the thread drift.

 

[unspellable]

1911

Was the sword still considered a practical weapon by the time the 1911 came along? Mechanized cavalry was in within sight by this time also. I don't know that the 1911 was devloped with only the cavalry in mind. Its adoption was influenced by the experience of the foot sloggers in the Philippine Insurrection. (Dirty little secret, the 45 caliber weapons in that little pocket war didn't prove to be any better a stopper than the 38 caliber weapons.)

 

[Sunray]

The gladius wasn't the primary weapon of the Roman troopie. The pilum and the spear was the primary weapon. The gladius was a close quarter stabbing weapon. Infantry swords became slashing and chopping weapons much later. Swords used by cavalry were always longer than infantry swords and were cutting and slashing weapons.
Until after W.W. I, the cavalryman's primary weapon was his sword/sabre. When the Canadian Militia was mobilized for W.W. I, officers were told to send their swords to the armourer for sharpening. It was assumed warfare would be pretty much as it had been in the 19th Century. Most W.W. I battles were fought by the PBI to break a hole in the enemy's line to allow the mounted cavalry through.
Mechanized cavalry didn't come along until the 1930's(much to the Cavalry's disgust). However, swords for use in battle were gone by then.

 

[230RN]

alucard0822

In Hatcher's Notebook we find....

p. 404: The drift of the cal .30 ball round is 0.1 mils (~0.3375 MOA) to the right at 1200 yards. At 2000 yards the right drift is 0.3 mils (~1.0125 MOA).

p.31: The "Table of Fire for the Cartridge, Ball, Cal .45 M1911" shows that the drift is 2.0 inches to the left at 100 yards. (Sorry, I misremembered it as 2.5 inches.)

I am intrigued by this, 1st, I don't know anyone that can even bench a 1911 and tell a 2" drift at 100yds from left hand rifling, and would the spinning cause it to drift to the right in the southern hemisphere?

The military had sophisticated machine rests and testing barrels and puh-lenty of ammunition to play/test with.

(There's one pic in the book showing a pile of empty .30 cases next to a machine gun which looked like it would overfill a wheelbarrow. This was after an endurance test of 20,000 rounds.)

So they could do enough testing to determine the drift as a statistically valid thing. You might well have asked how did they do it for 1200 and 2000 yards in determining the .30-06 drift. Same way. Many many many many rounds, with each shot carefully measured to confirm calculated predictions.

The drift is due to gyroscopic effects. and is basically independent of direction or hemisphere.

The Coriolis effect is due to geographical factors.

The Coreolis effect pertains, even with small arms, but it is so insignificant at short rifle and pistol ranges that it can be neglected.

However, to an observer in space, in both cases the movement is in the same direction as the earth's rotation if firing toward the poles, and in the direction opposite to the earth's rotation if firing toward the equator..

The Paris gun, firing Northwards toward Paris, 70 or 80 miles away, had to aim left (west) of the target to account for the Coriolis effect. A Paris gun firing southward in the southern hemisphere would again have to aim to the left of the target, but this would be toward the east in the southern hemisphere.

It helps to remember that if you face south, east is left. If you face north, east is to the right.

Note again that to an observer in space, in both cases the shots would land further in the direction of the earth's rotation. But this "further in the direction of the earth's rotation" is to the east in the northern hemisphere and to the west in the southern hemisphere.

Once again, remember that if you face south, east is left. If you face north, east is to the right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Gun
(with image)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect
(with graphics)

-------------------------

A simplified way of looking at the Coriolis effect is to imagine firing a gun northward at the equator. You are, on the equator, moving eastward (sidewise) at about 25,000 miles (earth's circumference) divided by 24 hours, or at about 1040 miles per hour toward the east --call it a thousand miles per hour..

You fire a very long range gun directly to the north.

The projectile slows down because of air resistance in the northward direction, but it does not slow down much in the eastward direction.

So let's say the projectile will fall to the ground at a point on the earth where the diameter of the earth is only 4000 miles. This correspond to a target at a latitude of 60 degrees north, or nearly at the Arctic Circle.

But the diameter of the earth through a circle at 60 degrees latitude is only 12,600 miles if you sliced through it parallel to the equator, and not the 24,000 miles that it is at the equator.

But it is still revolving at the same one revolution per 24 hours.

Therefore, the ground speed at this target area is 12.600 miles divided by 24 hours, or only 523 miles per hour.

So while the projectile is approachng the target at a latitude of 60 degrees, it is still moving eastward at the same velocity as when it started, or about a thousand miles per hour, or about 477 miles an hour in an eastward direction. relative to the ground.

What this means is that you would have needed to fire your gun to the west far enough to make up for the differences in ground speed. That is, as far as a ground observer is concerned, the projectile is not moving due north anymore, but toward the east.