RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one?

RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

PeonForHer -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/27/2014 12:31:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PyrotheClown quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR As a matter of interest - and I'm somewhat unlikely to be in the same situation myself - but if faced with an angry, charging bear - which would be best, a gun or a crossbow? Assuming that the gun's bullet and the crossbow's bolt were to hit exactly the right target, that is . . . . Depends,are you using exploding bolts or a ballista,and is the gun firing something as small as a 2.34 mm rimfire or something as large a 12.5x108 mm anti tank round? You might as well have written that in hieroglyphics, Pyro, I'd have understood about as much of it . . . .

PyrotheClown -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/27/2014 1:41:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: PyrotheClown quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR As a matter of interest - and I'm somewhat unlikely to be in the same situation myself - but if faced with an angry, charging bear - which would be best, a gun or a crossbow? Assuming that the gun's bullet and the crossbow's bolt were to hit exactly the right target, that is . . . . Depends,are you using exploding bolts or a ballista,and is the gun firing something as small as a 2.34 mm rimfire or something as large a 12.5x108 mm anti tank round? You might as well have written that in hieroglyphics, Pyro, I'd have understood about as much of it . . . .

MasterCaneman -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/27/2014 3:41:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: PyrotheClown quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR As a matter of interest - and I'm somewhat unlikely to be in the same situation myself - but if faced with an angry, charging bear - which would be best, a gun or a crossbow? Assuming that the gun's bullet and the crossbow's bolt were to hit exactly the right target, that is . . . . Depends,are you using exploding bolts or a ballista,and is the gun firing something as small as a 2.34 mm rimfire or something as large a 12.5x108 mm anti tank round? You might as well have written that in hieroglyphics, Pyro, I'd have understood about as much of it . . . . The 2.34mm RF are the little-bitty cartridges in the upper left image. 12.7X108 is used by the Warsaw Pact 12.7 'Dashika' heavy machine gun. (no pic of that handy) [image]local://upfiles/1614272/055FD685CC564308B1EF1CF45184489C.jpg[/image] ETA "are" for "is".

PeonForHer -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/27/2014 4:52:17 PM)
FR Pyro abd MC, Thanks for the info. Fascinating! My secret I shall reveal : when I was a kid I wanted to grow up to be William Tell. ;-)

MalcolmNathaniel -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/27/2014 9:00:49 PM)
This video I just stumbled across is pertinent to this conversation Gun Gripes Episode 82

MasterCaneman -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/27/2014 9:24:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR Pyro abd MC, Thanks for the info. Fascinating! My secret I shall reveal : when I was a kid I wanted to grow up to be William Tell. ;-) Archery is an English specialty, you know. Takes some doing to get good with a longbow, I understand.

FrostedFlake -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/27/2014 11:11:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MalcolmNathaniel This video I just stumbled across is pertinent to this conversation Gun Gripes Episode 82 Well done, Malcolm. Another thought that might not be too obvious, a single action recoils in a very different way than a double action. When fired, the single action rotates in the hand. This absorbs a lot of recoil. A double action has a bump that fits in the web of your thumb, and this transfers the recoil to your hand. To bring the single action weapon back into battery, the pinky and thumb are extended, then snapped back onto the grip. The pinky pushes at the extreme corner of the bottom of the grip while the thumb strokes the hammer. Done right, it takes no time at all, becomes unconscious and automatic. A .45 long colt can be loaded to 1250 foot pounds. Suitable for Grizzly or Boar. If you fire one out of a double action, you should grip the weapon as if you thought it might just knock you out. And try not to miss. It's embarrassing when you miss when you knock yourself out in front of a charging bear. A single action can digest the same cartridge without making you think about whether you can hold onto it, much less whether you better. And you can shoot it again in half a second, if you have to. Disclosure : The last bear I met got sent on his way with a flashlight and a little noise. This stuff works, most of the time. There is another thing some folks don't know about revolvers. They are not just dangerous to the front. [image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f8/Magnum44_900pix.jpg/800px-Magnum44_900pix.jpg[/image] It's not good to shoot out of the passenger window from the drivers seat. The passenger might do something reasonable. If he can still see. Unsolicited endorsement : The Ruger Blackhawk introduced the transfer bar safety in 1973. If your gun doesn't have one of these, trade it for one that does. The New Model Blackhawk will not fire when dropped on it's hammer, because the transfer bar doesn't slide between the hammer and firing pin until the trigger is pressed.

BamaD -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/27/2014 11:30:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: ORIGINAL: MalcolmNathaniel This video I just stumbled across is pertinent to this conversation Gun Gripes Episode 82 Well done, Malcolm. Another thought that might not be too obvious, a single action recoils in a very different way than a double action. When fired, the single action rotates in the hand. This absorbs a lot of recoil. A double action has a bump that fits in the web of your thumb, and this transfers the recoil to your hand. To bring the single action weapon back into battery, the pinky and thumb are extended, then snapped back onto the grip. The pinky pushes at the extreme corner of the bottom of the grip while the thumb strokes the hammer. Done right, it takes no time at all, becomes unconscious and automatic. A .45 long colt can be loaded to 1250 foot pounds. Suitable for Grizzly or Boar. If you fire one out of a double action, you should grip the weapon as if you thought it might just knock you out. And try not to miss. It's embarrassing when you miss when you knock yourself out in front of a charging bear. A single action can digest the same cartridge without making you think about whether you can hold onto it, much less whether you better. And you can shoot it again in half a second, if you have to. Disclosure : The last bear I met got sent on his way with a flashlight and a little noise. This stuff works, most of the time. There is another thing some folks don't know about revolvers. They are not just dangerous to the front. [image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f8/Magnum44_900pix.jpg/800px-Magnum44_900pix.jpg[/image] It's not good to shoot out of the passenger window from the drivers seat. The passenger might do something reasonable. If he can still see. Unsolicited endorsement : The Ruger Blackhawk introduced the transfer bar safety in 1973. If your gun doesn't have one of these, trade it for one that does. The New Model Blackhawk will not fire when dropped on it's hammer, because the transfer bar doesn't slide between the hammer and firing pin until the trigger is pressed. All the Ruger single actions have this, and it seems that Uberti does too. Lacking a transfer bar you can always just carry 5 rounds like they did in the west.

PeonForHer -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/28/2014 5:40:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR Pyro abd MC, Thanks for the info. Fascinating! My secret I shall reveal : when I was a kid I wanted to grow up to be William Tell. ;-) Archery is an English specialty, you know. Takes some doing to get good with a longbow, I understand. It used to take a lifetime, apparently. Hence the law here - famously, never rescinded - that boys and men between certain ages must do a specified number of hours of archery practice per week. (A vicar recently invoked this law - see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10300924 . The decree went out to attend the archery practice; intrigued townsfolk turned up to find a barbecue and live music.) Some while ago some archeologists unearthed the skeleton of an archer who'd been killed during the English Civil War. The bones of his right arm and shoulder, and his left wrist, were massively enlarged: he'd had decades of archery practice behind him to get that. William Tell, though, was a crossbowman. Crossbows didn't need anything like the same training to use properly. Soldiers didn't even need to shoot so that the arrow had to travel in an arch (hence the word 'archery'). If you had a mob of even entirely untrained men and lots of money, you could put together an effective mercenary army very quickly.

MasterCaneman -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/28/2014 7:40:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR Pyro abd MC, Thanks for the info. Fascinating! My secret I shall reveal : when I was a kid I wanted to grow up to be William Tell. ;-) Archery is an English specialty, you know. Takes some doing to get good with a longbow, I understand. It used to take a lifetime, apparently. Hence the law here - famously, never rescinded - that boys and men between certain ages must do a specified number of hours of archery practice per week. (A vicar recently invoked this law - see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10300924 . The decree went out to attend the archery practice; intrigued townsfolk turned up to find a barbecue and live music.) Some while ago some archeologists unearthed the skeleton of an archer who'd been killed during the English Civil War. The bones of his right arm and shoulder, and his left wrist, were massively enlarged: he'd had decades of archery practice behind him to get that. William Tell, though, was a crossbowman. Crossbows didn't need anything like the same training to use properly. Soldiers didn't even need to shoot so that the arrow had to travel in an arch (hence the word 'archery'). If you had a mob of even entirely untrained men and lots of money, you could put together an effective mercenary army very quickly. My bad, I forgot about that. And he was Swiss, too, now that I remember. Still, the longbow is a classic and classy weapon that requires dedication and practice to master. And archery is just plain old fun, too. Regarding the revolver pic, what's you're seeing is a severely gapped and mistimed revolver, probably caused by some idiot 'snapping' the cylinder closed like in the old gangster movies. Over time, that bends the crane, which holds the cylinder in place, allowing it to lock up slightly off-center. Erosion of the barrel throat occurs over time as the weapon is fired, and is corrected by shimming the cylinder to close up to the forcing cone (where the bullet enters the barrel from the cylinder). Anything more than .003" will do what that picture demonstrates.

FrostedFlake -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/28/2014 8:39:44 AM)
quote: Regarding the revolver pic, what's you're seeing is a severely gapped and mistimed revolver, probably caused by some idiot 'snapping' the cylinder closed like in the old gangster movies. Over time, that bends the crane, which holds the cylinder in place, allowing it to lock up slightly off-center. Erosion of the barrel throat occurs over time as the weapon is fired, and is corrected by shimming the cylinder to close up to the forcing cone (where the bullet enters the barrel from the cylinder). Anything more than .003" will do what that picture demonstrates. True. It is an extreme case as well as an extreme cartridge. But, it would be hard to show the effect using a smaller weapon in better condition. To an extent, every revolver displays the same fault, because the gap between cylinder and barrel is part of the design. The first time the weapon is fired, it will jet gas to the side. Over time, wear, insult and damage will cause the gap to increase, throwing more gas, and the cylinder will drift out of alignment, shaving lead off the bullet and sending fragments sideways along with the gas. This also makes hitting anything more a matter of luck than skill, because the bullet is not launched cleanly. A hammer is a pretty simple tool. And it isn't hard to break. A gun can do many of the same things, but it is more complicated. There is more to go wrong. A semi-automatic doesn't have the cylinder alignment problem, but it has its' own set of things to know and do, and not do.

PyrotheClown -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/28/2014 8:48:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: Regarding the revolver pic, what's you're seeing is a severely gapped and mistimed revolver, probably caused by some idiot 'snapping' the cylinder closed like in the old gangster movies. Over time, that bends the crane, which holds the cylinder in place, allowing it to lock up slightly off-center. Erosion of the barrel throat occurs over time as the weapon is fired, and is corrected by shimming the cylinder to close up to the forcing cone (where the bullet enters the barrel from the cylinder). Anything more than .003" will do what that picture demonstrates. True. It is an extreme case as well as an extreme cartridge. But, it would be hard to show the effect using a smaller weapon in better condition. To an extent, every revolver displays the same fault, because the gap between cylinder and barrel is part of the design. The first time the weapon is fired, it will jet gas to the side. Over time, wear, insult and damage will cause the gap to increase, throwing more gas, and the cylinder will drift out of alignment, shaving lead off the bullet and sending fragments sideways along with the gas. This also makes hitting anything more a matter of luck than skill, because the bullet is not launched cleanly. A hammer is a pretty simple tool. And it isn't hard to break. A gun can do many of the same things, but it is more complicated. There is more to go wrong. A semi-automatic doesn't have the cylinder alignment problem, but it has its' own set of things to know and do, and not do. Not all...russia got a few revolvers that bridge the gap. cheapest and oldest of them being the nagant(pistol,not rifle) you can also silence a nagant you can see why the kgb liked them a gun that makes no sound and leaves no pesky cartridges around

MasterCaneman -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/28/2014 9:23:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: Regarding the revolver pic, what's you're seeing is a severely gapped and mistimed revolver, probably caused by some idiot 'snapping' the cylinder closed like in the old gangster movies. Over time, that bends the crane, which holds the cylinder in place, allowing it to lock up slightly off-center. Erosion of the barrel throat occurs over time as the weapon is fired, and is corrected by shimming the cylinder to close up to the forcing cone (where the bullet enters the barrel from the cylinder). Anything more than .003" will do what that picture demonstrates. True. It is an extreme case as well as an extreme cartridge. But, it would be hard to show the effect using a smaller weapon in better condition. To an extent, every revolver displays the same fault, because the gap between cylinder and barrel is part of the design. The first time the weapon is fired, it will jet gas to the side. Over time, wear, insult and damage will cause the gap to increase, throwing more gas, and the cylinder will drift out of alignment, shaving lead off the bullet and sending fragments sideways along with the gas. This also makes hitting anything more a matter of luck than skill, because the bullet is not launched cleanly. A hammer is a pretty simple tool. And it isn't hard to break. A gun can do many of the same things, but it is more complicated. There is more to go wrong. A semi-automatic doesn't have the cylinder alignment problem, but it has its' own set of things to know and do, and not do. Not necessarily. I've fired older revolvers with a considerable gap which displayed perfectly acceptable accuracy despite the shavings/unburnt powder jetting to the side. It's when the crane is bent from the 'wrist-snap' closing method that causes them to enter off-center. The weapon in the image appears to be a Ruger Redhawk/Super Redhawk, which is sized and chambered for .44 Magnum on up. Those big cartridges throw a lot of flame even in a tight gun, and one with even a minimal mistiming issue will show immense side-blast.

MasterCaneman -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/28/2014 9:24:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PyrotheClown quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: Regarding the revolver pic, what's you're seeing is a severely gapped and mistimed revolver, probably caused by some idiot 'snapping' the cylinder closed like in the old gangster movies. Over time, that bends the crane, which holds the cylinder in place, allowing it to lock up slightly off-center. Erosion of the barrel throat occurs over time as the weapon is fired, and is corrected by shimming the cylinder to close up to the forcing cone (where the bullet enters the barrel from the cylinder). Anything more than .003" will do what that picture demonstrates. True. It is an extreme case as well as an extreme cartridge. But, it would be hard to show the effect using a smaller weapon in better condition. To an extent, every revolver displays the same fault, because the gap between cylinder and barrel is part of the design. The first time the weapon is fired, it will jet gas to the side. Over time, wear, insult and damage will cause the gap to increase, throwing more gas, and the cylinder will drift out of alignment, shaving lead off the bullet and sending fragments sideways along with the gas. This also makes hitting anything more a matter of luck than skill, because the bullet is not launched cleanly. A hammer is a pretty simple tool. And it isn't hard to break. A gun can do many of the same things, but it is more complicated. There is more to go wrong. A semi-automatic doesn't have the cylinder alignment problem, but it has its' own set of things to know and do, and not do. Not all...russia got a few revolvers that bridge the gap. cheapest and oldest of them being the nagant(pistol,not rifle) you can also silence a nagant you can see why the kgb liked them a gun that makes no sound and leaves no pesky cartridges around And it's the 'steam-punkiest' looking revolver of all time, to boot.

PyrotheClown -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/28/2014 9:27:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman quote: ORIGINAL: PyrotheClown quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: Regarding the revolver pic, what's you're seeing is a severely gapped and mistimed revolver, probably caused by some idiot 'snapping' the cylinder closed like in the old gangster movies. Over time, that bends the crane, which holds the cylinder in place, allowing it to lock up slightly off-center. Erosion of the barrel throat occurs over time as the weapon is fired, and is corrected by shimming the cylinder to close up to the forcing cone (where the bullet enters the barrel from the cylinder). Anything more than .003" will do what that picture demonstrates. True. It is an extreme case as well as an extreme cartridge. But, it would be hard to show the effect using a smaller weapon in better condition. To an extent, every revolver displays the same fault, because the gap between cylinder and barrel is part of the design. The first time the weapon is fired, it will jet gas to the side. Over time, wear, insult and damage will cause the gap to increase, throwing more gas, and the cylinder will drift out of alignment, shaving lead off the bullet and sending fragments sideways along with the gas. This also makes hitting anything more a matter of luck than skill, because the bullet is not launched cleanly. A hammer is a pretty simple tool. And it isn't hard to break. A gun can do many of the same things, but it is more complicated. There is more to go wrong. A semi-automatic doesn't have the cylinder alignment problem, but it has its' own set of things to know and do, and not do. Not all...russia got a few revolvers that bridge the gap. cheapest and oldest of them being the nagant(pistol,not rifle) you can also silence a nagant you can see why the kgb liked them a gun that makes no sound and leaves no pesky cartridges around And it's the 'steam-punkiest' looking revolver of all time, to boot. I dunno,i think most percussion revolvers beat it

FrostedFlake -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/28/2014 3:34:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: Regarding the revolver pic, what's you're seeing is a severely gapped and mistimed revolver, probably caused by some idiot 'snapping' the cylinder closed like in the old gangster movies. Over time, that bends the crane, which holds the cylinder in place, allowing it to lock up slightly off-center. Erosion of the barrel throat occurs over time as the weapon is fired, and is corrected by shimming the cylinder to close up to the forcing cone (where the bullet enters the barrel from the cylinder). Anything more than .003" will do what that picture demonstrates. True. It is an extreme case as well as an extreme cartridge. But, it would be hard to show the effect using a smaller weapon in better condition. To an extent, every revolver displays the same fault, because the gap between cylinder and barrel is part of the design. The first time the weapon is fired, it will jet gas to the side. Over time, wear, insult and damage will cause the gap to increase, throwing more gas, and the cylinder will drift out of alignment, shaving lead off the bullet and sending fragments sideways along with the gas. This also makes hitting anything more a matter of luck than skill, because the bullet is not launched cleanly. A hammer is a pretty simple tool. And it isn't hard to break. A gun can do many of the same things, but it is more complicated. There is more to go wrong. A semi-automatic doesn't have the cylinder alignment problem, but it has its' own set of things to know and do, and not do. Not necessarily. I've fired older revolvers with a considerable gap which displayed perfectly acceptable accuracy despite the shavings/unburnt powder jetting to the side. It's when the crane is bent from the 'wrist-snap' closing method that causes them to enter off-center. The weapon in the image appears to be a Ruger Redhawk/Super Redhawk, which is sized and chambered for .44 Magnum on up. Those big cartridges throw a lot of flame even in a tight gun, and one with even a minimal mistiming issue will show immense side-blast. Hmmm... Well, of those guns I noticed shaving lead, and this is a very small sample, all of them sucked. I suppose I might have overlooked the problem in a weapon I liked. So, in terms of what can go wrong, there is the gap between barrel and cylinder, there is the alignment of the cylinder axis with the centerline of the barrel, and there is the small matter of actually lining the chamber up behind the barrel every time the action rotates. Three different things. On the other side of the coin, the automatic has its' share of issues. A weak round can fail to cycle, leaving you momentarily disarmed. A dud also requires two hands to deal with, and until you do, no gun. For some folks, the ability to just move along to the next round is worth a lot. MYTHBUSTERS takes on the Cylinder gap issue. How much damage are we talking about? (Advance to 7:10 for the punchline)

MasterCaneman -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/28/2014 3:42:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: Regarding the revolver pic, what's you're seeing is a severely gapped and mistimed revolver, probably caused by some idiot 'snapping' the cylinder closed like in the old gangster movies. Over time, that bends the crane, which holds the cylinder in place, allowing it to lock up slightly off-center. Erosion of the barrel throat occurs over time as the weapon is fired, and is corrected by shimming the cylinder to close up to the forcing cone (where the bullet enters the barrel from the cylinder). Anything more than .003" will do what that picture demonstrates. True. It is an extreme case as well as an extreme cartridge. But, it would be hard to show the effect using a smaller weapon in better condition. To an extent, every revolver displays the same fault, because the gap between cylinder and barrel is part of the design. The first time the weapon is fired, it will jet gas to the side. Over time, wear, insult and damage will cause the gap to increase, throwing more gas, and the cylinder will drift out of alignment, shaving lead off the bullet and sending fragments sideways along with the gas. This also makes hitting anything more a matter of luck than skill, because the bullet is not launched cleanly. A hammer is a pretty simple tool. And it isn't hard to break. A gun can do many of the same things, but it is more complicated. There is more to go wrong. A semi-automatic doesn't have the cylinder alignment problem, but it has its' own set of things to know and do, and not do. Not necessarily. I've fired older revolvers with a considerable gap which displayed perfectly acceptable accuracy despite the shavings/unburnt powder jetting to the side. It's when the crane is bent from the 'wrist-snap' closing method that causes them to enter off-center. The weapon in the image appears to be a Ruger Redhawk/Super Redhawk, which is sized and chambered for .44 Magnum on up. Those big cartridges throw a lot of flame even in a tight gun, and one with even a minimal mistiming issue will show immense side-blast. Hmmm... Well, of those guns I noticed shaving lead, and this is a very small sample, all of them sucked. I suppose I might have overlooked the problem in a weapon I liked. So, in terms of what can go wrong, there is the gap between barrel and cylinder, there is the alignment of the cylinder axis with the centerline of the barrel, and there is the small matter of actually lining the chamber up behind the barrel every time the action rotates. Three different things. On the other side of the coin, the automatic has its' share of issues. A weak round can fail to cycle, leaving you momentarily disarmed. A dud also requires two hands to deal with, and until you do, no gun. For some folks, the ability to just move along to the next round is worth a lot. Not to mention some are fussy with different bullet shapes, which can limit their performance, there is a built-in instability for a dropping-breech design like the 1911 and others, and feeding is dependent on the weakest part of the weapon, the magazine. Revolvers can jam as well, from extreme dirt and grit to overpowered rounds locking against the recoil plate.

FrostedFlake -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (2/28/2014 10:56:48 PM)
Hot handloads can be a real problem. They are tempting to make. And a fella can get carried away. If the primer is pushed out of its' pocket, it can drag on the recoil plate. This wears out the clockwork fast. That causes timing problems. I've not had a revolver jam on me. Ever. But then I avoid dipping it in the dirt. Autos have jammed on me, and it's either bad ammo or damage. I can't recall a jam due to dirt. But, I keep it clean.

epiphiny43 -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (3/1/2014 1:20:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech The comment about the bear reminds me... bear spray. Have you ever seen tear gas in a projecting aerosol can just like the hornet spray? A 20 ft range would be useful. Might work well on angry mobs I would think. I fear 'bear spray' is like pepper spray at pit bulls. It only dissuades those already inclined to leave anyway. No Effect on one already angry and charging?

jlf1961 -> RE: None political gun thread with the question, why would you want one? (3/1/2014 7:46:06 AM)
When discussing old revolvers, I have two, a Walker Colt saddle gun, and a colt dragoon. Both original and both in firing condition. The Walker takes a load of 75 grains of black powder behind a .454 ball, and has considerable gap between cylinder and barrel, it looks quite spectacular to fire. you know, flash, smoke and one hell of a loud KABOOM. Both are on extended temporary loan to a local museum so I dont have to cover the frigging insurance cost of having them in my house, even with a top rated gun safe the premiums are fucking unreal. Uberti makes a replica of both pistols and they take the same load and ball as the original, the gap between cylinder and barrel is much smaller, at near modern revolver standards, but still a sweet weapon to shoot. If you are interested in getting into black powder cowboy shooting, I recommend the following. For cap and ball, any of the 1854 to 1861 series colts. The 1858 Remington new army is a nice pistol, and you can reload by changing cylinders, but after 12 rounds the pistol is so fouled with powder residue that it will not function. For cartridge pistols, any of the replicas are good, be aware that they still use black powder and not modern smokeless. And the breach loading high wall remington buffalo gun or sharps buffalo gun in 45/70 or 45/120 are wonderful to shoot, be prepared for a sore shoulder though.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625