Howdy
Did somebody say Merwin Hulbert?
The one in the video with James Arness is the same model as this one. An open top Pocket Army. Don't be confused by the name Pocket Army, these were big belt pistols. Notice the nasty Skull Crusher on the bottom of the grip. The one in the video has some typical Merwin Hulbert engraving on the cylinder between the flutes. Merwin Hulbert engraving was very simple, nothing fancy. Notice the unusual shape of the cylinder flutes, they are called Scoop Flutes. And yes, clearly the one in the video was unloaded when he opened it, or the cartridges would have been extracted. And when a Merwin is open, if you spin the cylinder, there is no ratchety clicking sound. The cylinder simply spins silently. Hollywood directors always seem to add stuff which is incorrect.
The 3d Video posted is pretty much correct. Very few realize that although you could dump all the empties out of a MH by pulling the barrel and cylinder forward, it has to be reloaded one chamber at a time through a loading gate, not much different than a Colt.
To open it up, you push the button in front of the trigger guard back.
Then you rotate the barrel/cylinder assembly 90 degrees and pull them forward.
There is an Extractor Ring mounted in the recoil shield. It captures the rims of the rounds in the cylinder, so when the cylinder is pulled forward, the rounds stay stationary.
If you watch the 3D video, you will see that fired brass will fall clear, because they are shorter, while unfired rounds will not fall out, because the bullets are still in the chamber. The MH was designed this way, the cylinder only rode forward enough for empty brass to fall out. I have found that in actual practice, it usually does not work that way. The rounds retained in the cylinder usually jiggle enough that the cylinder cannot be closed again unless they are manually jiggled back to line up with the chambers.
Collectors go on and on about how the Merwin Hulbert was the most technically advanced revolver in the Old West. But most are not aware that because of the location of the Extractor Ring it is physically impossible to reload with the cylinder open. The gun has to be closed up, and reloaded one chamber at a time through a loading gate, not much different than a Colt. Interestingly enough, because of the position of the loading gate, you reload a MH by loading two, skipping one, and loading three more. With a Colt you load one, skip one, and load four more.
With a Smith and Wesson Top Break, you break it open, automatically ejecting the empties, and then reload while it is still open. Much more efficient than the Merwin Hulbert system.
Why did Joseph Merwin come up with the bizarre design he did? Because at the time S&W controlled all the patents that made a Top Break revolver possible. So if he wanted to design a revolver that was not a copy of a Colt, he had to come up with a new idea.
Yes, there is a video on Forgotten Weapons about Merwin Hulberts. As much as I respect Ian (and I respect him a great deal) he also thinks they are 'the Best revolver of the Frontier Era'. Ian talks about how the unfired rounds will be retained by the cylinder, but I doubt he has ever actually fired one, and experienced how the unfired rounds jiggle around, making it difficult to close the cylinder again without physically jiggling them back in line with the chambers. And Ian makes a big deal about how precisely Merwin Hulberts were made. I am lucky enough to have four of them. I have been inside each of them, and I assure you there is nothing more precise about a Merwin Hulbert than anything Smith and Wesson was doing at the same time. If they had wanted to, S&W could have duplicated the unusual rotating mechanism of the MH, but they did not need to because they were happily making Top Breaks that could be unloaded AND reloaded faster than a Merwin Hulbert.
Don't get me wrong, shooting an old Merwin Hulbert is great fun. They are just not all that the myths about them claim.
.
