elhombreconnonombre
Member
In discussion with some 20 something youngsters and friends of my son in law, I took the stand that the Walker was and remains the most powerful "sidearm" issued to federal troops. Was I full of Bravo Sierra?
Settle this argument on the Whitneyville Walker
- Thread starter elhombreconnonombre
- Start date
- Status
WestKentucky
Member
140 gr ball at 1200 fps is surely nothing to scoff at, but I would doubt that it's the most powerful since you are including modern guns. I will wait for more informed folks to pass through.
A quick glance at Wikipedia shows milspec .45acp ball 240 gr at 830 fps which edges out the walker.......edited because I'm wr...wro...I can't type it. I'm that thing my wife says about me a lot when she thinks she is right.
The Walker may have it, if your talking about issued to general servicemen. If your looking at more specific roles, 357 mag and 38 super would be pushing it. 10mm may push up there but I'm not sure if it has seen much use, and I don't know the numbers on it.
Can the horse pistol really be considered a sidearm though?
A quick glance at Wikipedia shows milspec .45acp ball 240 gr at 830 fps which edges out the walker.......edited because I'm wr...wro...I can't type it. I'm that thing my wife says about me a lot when she thinks she is right.
The Walker may have it, if your talking about issued to general servicemen. If your looking at more specific roles, 357 mag and 38 super would be pushing it. 10mm may push up there but I'm not sure if it has seen much use, and I don't know the numbers on it.
Can the horse pistol really be considered a sidearm though?
Last edited:
ExMachina
Member
Really hard to define "most powerful" but in terms of muzzle energy I think you're probably right. Looks like the Walker is right at 450 ft-pounds while the 45 ACP is around 365 ft-pounds (which of course was intended to duplicate the performance of the 45 Colt)
However, I would probably also define "power" by the gun's reliability, capacity and reload speed. So in that case I think the 1911 might win out.
However, I would probably also define "power" by the gun's reliability, capacity and reload speed. So in that case I think the 1911 might win out.
WestKentucky
Member
By that I would pick the m9. More rounds on tap out of a reliable gun which is easy to slam reloads into after the empty mag self extracts under spring tension when you hit the release....1911s are hard to reload by comparison. Long thin mag going into long thin slot as compared to big squared off mag with tapered top going into big squared off slot where that tapered top really helps.
45 Dragoon
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,785
Hmmm, must be the new math.
It looks to me (correct me if I'm wrong ) like 450 ft/lbs.is more than 365 ft/lbs. (by close to 100 if I'm not mistaken). So that would mean the the Walker produced MORE energy the the 1911. So THAT would mean that the Walker was the most Powerful military sidearm issued to date. I can't believe that is so hard to accept. We have to add in "reliability " and "ease of reloading "to the mix?
If that's the case, I guess a 10mm S.Auto would be more powerful than a 44 Mag S.A. revolver because it is easier to reload?
Holy Cow!! I guess 2+2 is 5 . . .
Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
How 'bout a 22 lr with a drum mag.?
It looks to me (correct me if I'm wrong ) like 450 ft/lbs.is more than 365 ft/lbs. (by close to 100 if I'm not mistaken). So that would mean the the Walker produced MORE energy the the 1911. So THAT would mean that the Walker was the most Powerful military sidearm issued to date. I can't believe that is so hard to accept. We have to add in "reliability " and "ease of reloading "to the mix?
If that's the case, I guess a 10mm S.Auto would be more powerful than a 44 Mag S.A. revolver because it is easier to reload?
Holy Cow!! I guess 2+2 is 5 . . .
Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
How 'bout a 22 lr with a drum mag.?
Tommygunn
Member
The ..."myth" I wish to contribute to this thread is that I've heard the Walker was the most powerful revolver made until the .357 magnum was developed.
Take that for what it's worth; I won't be getting into muzzle energy comparisons. Not that I'd wish to dispute those who bring that up. I just don't have a dog in the fight.
Take that for what it's worth; I won't be getting into muzzle energy comparisons. Not that I'd wish to dispute those who bring that up. I just don't have a dog in the fight.
45 Dragoon
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,785
Oh yeah!!
The Walker has a better looking grip than the 1911!! Walker wins!!!
Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
The Walker has a better looking grip than the 1911!! Walker wins!!!
Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
45 Dragoon
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,785
WestKentucky
Member
One thing is absolutely for sure, the walker was the most powerful sidearm issued when the sidearm ran out of ammo. That hunk of steel and wood made for one hell of a club.
dickydalton
Member
Huh?
DD4lifeusmc
Member
Technically the Walker is, but yet is not a sidearm.
Side arm is designed to be worn in a holster on the body.
The walker was designed to be carried in a holster on the saddle.
But it pretty much meets the other criteria.
They are pretty much defined as a handgun, versus shoulder fired weapon now days
So lets go with ft # of energy at the muzzle.
here's the formula
vel squared / 7000 /64.32 x bullet weight in grains
so unless somebody has a chronographed load of the Walker we will presume muzzle of 1200 fps with 140 gr RB
447.76 #ft
1911-present M1911A1 45 cal (825fps 234gr) 353.73 #ft
Now not all branches of the US armed forces used the same weapons.
1985 beretta M9(9mm) (1250 fps 112gr) 388.68 #ft
you all can look up other military sidearms / handguns here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individual_weapons_of_the_U.S._Armed_Forces
then find the specs and use the formula above.
If you know the velocity further out from the muzzle use that.
But as it stands the Walker probably does have the highest #ft of energy at the muzzle.
However, it was not issued to all US troops. Only to the Texas Rangers.
So it does fail that test.
Side arm is designed to be worn in a holster on the body.
The walker was designed to be carried in a holster on the saddle.
But it pretty much meets the other criteria.
They are pretty much defined as a handgun, versus shoulder fired weapon now days
So lets go with ft # of energy at the muzzle.
here's the formula
vel squared / 7000 /64.32 x bullet weight in grains
so unless somebody has a chronographed load of the Walker we will presume muzzle of 1200 fps with 140 gr RB
447.76 #ft
1911-present M1911A1 45 cal (825fps 234gr) 353.73 #ft
Now not all branches of the US armed forces used the same weapons.
1985 beretta M9(9mm) (1250 fps 112gr) 388.68 #ft
you all can look up other military sidearms / handguns here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individual_weapons_of_the_U.S._Armed_Forces
then find the specs and use the formula above.
If you know the velocity further out from the muzzle use that.
But as it stands the Walker probably does have the highest #ft of energy at the muzzle.
However, it was not issued to all US troops. Only to the Texas Rangers.
So it does fail that test.
RetiredUSNChief
Member
Huh? Maybe I'm missing something here.
Using an internet calculator:
Walker with 140 gr at 1200 fps gives 448 ft-lbs
.45 ACP with 230 gr at 850 fps gives 369 ft-lbs
.45 Colt with 250 gr at 910fps gives 460 fps
Seems to me that the .45 Colt in its original loading edged out the Walker.
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/taylor/45colt.htm
http://gunsmagazine.com/black-powder-cartridge-ballistics/
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_Colt
Using an internet calculator:
Walker with 140 gr at 1200 fps gives 448 ft-lbs
.45 ACP with 230 gr at 850 fps gives 369 ft-lbs
.45 Colt with 250 gr at 910fps gives 460 fps
Seems to me that the .45 Colt in its original loading edged out the Walker.
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/taylor/45colt.htm
http://gunsmagazine.com/black-powder-cartridge-ballistics/
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_Colt
bannockburn
Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 26,312
How about an Honorable Mention to the U.S. Springfield Model 1855 Pistol-Carbine. Firing a 450 grain .58 caliber bullet it must have packed quite a powerful punch to it. Granted it was used as a pistol out of a holster on horseback and as a carbine with the shoulder stock attached when dismounted; there is the possibility it could have been used as a sidearm at some time during the Civil War.
elhombreconnonombre
Member
For you number crunchers the std Walker round during the Mexican War was a 220 grain conical bullet...no round ball molds existed. Also while technically designed by Walker and Colt to be a horse pistol carried in a pommel holster, no self respecting Ranger during the war would risk losing his revolver or life by leaving it on his horse while conducting street patrol or attending a fandango. Rangers carried them in their belts or in a belt holster. We have already had this discussion in this forum. Rangers indeed carried them as sidearms both during the war and afterwards. Gen. Ben McCollough carried one during the ACW before he was killed in battle.
Last edited:
ExMachina
Member
Correct.
Power is not the same as energy. Power is energy divided by time. That's why the Walker might deliver the most muzzle energy but the M9 might offer more firepower.
Ephraim Kibbey
Member
What about the power at the other end of the trajectory, "Stopping Power?"
Isn't that the real test of a military firearm?
Now we can add bullet shape and material to our equation.
We should take them all out and see which one makes the biggest mess out of a watermelon.
More fun than math anyway!
Isn't that the real test of a military firearm?
Now we can add bullet shape and material to our equation.
We should take them all out and see which one makes the biggest mess out of a watermelon.
More fun than math anyway!
elhombreconnonombre
Member
dd4life
Actually 100 Walkers were issued in Mexico to the Dragoons and up to 500 Walkers were issued to US troops on the Texas frontier after the war. Also, the Rangers in 1847 were serving in Federal Service.
Actually 100 Walkers were issued in Mexico to the Dragoons and up to 500 Walkers were issued to US troops on the Texas frontier after the war. Also, the Rangers in 1847 were serving in Federal Service.
elhombreconnonombre
Member
With a 220 gr conical are we not talking over 700 ft# IF a muzzle vel of 1200 fps can be achieved. Sounds like I need to get back to my experimental 220 gr Walker combination conical/round ball project.
Sunray
Member
Don't argue with 20 something youngsters. They know everything. Just like we did when we were 20 something youngsters. snicker.
The most powerful sidearm issued to a cavalryman was the sabre.
The most powerful sidearm issued to a cavalryman was the sabre.
DD4lifeusmc
Member
Not trying to be argumentative or anything.
But the OP was kinda general on the issue, and I tried to respond based on that.
As to calculators. Online or hand held or computer software. Many will round up or down to a nearest whole number. Depending on the person that wrote the code. So 447.7 or 448 is kind of mute.
The first OP opined a 140 gr RB so that is what I went with, regardless of what the original bullet may have been.
Also apparently nobody has any chronographed results of some actual loads fired from the gun at 40, 50, 60 gr with a 140 gr rb or a 200 -220 gr conical
so we could use real math for a real calculation.
also nobody that I know of has any of the powder that existed back then.
One does not now positively how it performed compared to todays refinements in BP making.
So on that point it would be pure speculation how powerful it was back then. more or less than todays??
While the Walker was designed as a horsepistol to be carried in saddle mounted holsters, there is no doubt it was also worn on the hip.
But the main point is terminology.
Let's just say it was a HANDGUN, as compared to a shoulder fired weapon or a mortar or cannon regardless of how it was holstered.
Then we have the word MILITARY. Most would conceive that to be the uniformed armed forces of the United States (or another country) .
The Texas Rangers were not that.(But see explanatory notes below-- that explains this)
Also in dealing with the performance formula. Note, any change in the velocity or weight, the change becomes exponential not linear.
But without a chronograph of how fast that heavier bullet is traveling, it's all conjecture and supposition.
A 38 or 357 bullet that weighs less, but is traveling perhaps half again as fast
will produce a much higher # per ft .
So one would want to keep either the velocity or the projectile as a constant.
But even that would not be correct.
So using the Walker as the basis
220 gr conical at 1200fps would be your base line
Is there any other side arm / handgun that offers a 220 gr conical that will
also produce 1200fps ? if not then the walker would be king.
But we do have modern guns that have a heavier bullet and can be loaded to reach or exceed that velocity.
But those are not commonly ISSUED to the military
So the Walker would remain king, except for the fact he used military
and the Rangers were not technically military.
If he had opened that criteria up a bit and said sidearm /hand gun ever issued to a USA military or police force then all other things being equal.
Then yes quite possibly it would remain the king.
But we can only guess at what the original load was and it's performance.
did they really use 220 gr conicals and was the velocity 1200fps unfortunately we just don't know for sure.
Colt did recommend only loading 50 grains of powder though.
My apologies for my brevity here
-----------------------
A few other notes should be included I guess.
It wasn't really the Texas Rangers. There's a lot of back and forth and new companies formed and disbanded at that time.
He had moved on to the Texas mounted vlounteers. and during that time period, he had offered his services to the US Army.
He was commissioned a Capt in the army. president polk ordered the treasury dept to purchase the Walker Colt, from Sam Colt, for Col. Walkers unit ( a volunteer company of scouts). So even though Walker was commissioned in the US Army, his unit was all volunteers.
But the Federal government equipped them.
Walker named his unit The Texas Mounted Rangers. But he was back and forth with the Feds. So much it becomes confusing during this time period.so lets see if we can basically chronicalize some events
----------------------------------------------
4/21/1846 authorized to form a volunteer regiment of scouts for Taylors army (texas not feds) = Texas Mounted Rangers
a volunteer unit attached to the US Army
june24 1846 was appointed brevet lt col with the 1st regiment TEXAS mounted riflemen but he delayed that appointment until his
previous enlistment expired in July.
At same time he accepted a commission as a Capt. in the regular Army with the First United States Mounted Riflemen so he was serving in dual capacity for a short time. but his federal service with the Texas Mounted Riflemen ended in a couple months anyway.
So now oct 1846 he is a Capt with the First United States Mounted Riflemen -------are you following this conglomeration?
It is now January 1847, he is in Washington, meets Sam Colt, they design the Walker colt.
Walker sees President Polk who orders the treasury to buy 1,000 of the revolvers for Walker to issue to his troops. So technically it is a United States Military issue.
While the guns are being made, Walker raised his company: Company C, First U.S. Mounted Rifles at Newport Barracks. april-may 1847
Tecnically they were USA Army, but the men called themselves Texas Rangers..............so now we must alter all the very above.
Technically the Walker Colt was issued to a Military unit of volunteers.
From approx june 1847 til oct 1847 his unit was in several campaign in Texas, and down to Vera Cruz, fighting Mexican Army and others.
BUT he did not yet posses the Walker Colt.
The Walker Colt was finally delivered to him . In October 1847, he Received his as personal gifts. but the rest were not delivered yet.
The remainder were delivered sometime after his death on October 9, 1847.
The Walkers were only made one year 1847. Thereafter they were redesigned slightly smaller and became the 1st, 2nd and 3rd model Dragoon.
This design was to corrct some of the shortcomings of the Walker.
maximum charge was reduced to 50 gr, to avoid ruptured cylinders ( even though they may of ruptured because bullets were inserted wrong).
shortened the barrel for better balance and to lighten it somewhat
improved the loading lever catch to prevent it's inadvertent dropping while firing. Which could be very disconcerting to the shooter especially on horseback.
But the OP was kinda general on the issue, and I tried to respond based on that.
As to calculators. Online or hand held or computer software. Many will round up or down to a nearest whole number. Depending on the person that wrote the code. So 447.7 or 448 is kind of mute.
The first OP opined a 140 gr RB so that is what I went with, regardless of what the original bullet may have been.
Also apparently nobody has any chronographed results of some actual loads fired from the gun at 40, 50, 60 gr with a 140 gr rb or a 200 -220 gr conical
so we could use real math for a real calculation.
also nobody that I know of has any of the powder that existed back then.
One does not now positively how it performed compared to todays refinements in BP making.
So on that point it would be pure speculation how powerful it was back then. more or less than todays??
While the Walker was designed as a horsepistol to be carried in saddle mounted holsters, there is no doubt it was also worn on the hip.
But the main point is terminology.
Let's just say it was a HANDGUN, as compared to a shoulder fired weapon or a mortar or cannon regardless of how it was holstered.
Then we have the word MILITARY. Most would conceive that to be the uniformed armed forces of the United States (or another country) .
The Texas Rangers were not that.(But see explanatory notes below-- that explains this)
Also in dealing with the performance formula. Note, any change in the velocity or weight, the change becomes exponential not linear.
But without a chronograph of how fast that heavier bullet is traveling, it's all conjecture and supposition.
A 38 or 357 bullet that weighs less, but is traveling perhaps half again as fast
will produce a much higher # per ft .
So one would want to keep either the velocity or the projectile as a constant.
But even that would not be correct.
So using the Walker as the basis
220 gr conical at 1200fps would be your base line
Is there any other side arm / handgun that offers a 220 gr conical that will
also produce 1200fps ? if not then the walker would be king.
But we do have modern guns that have a heavier bullet and can be loaded to reach or exceed that velocity.
But those are not commonly ISSUED to the military
So the Walker would remain king, except for the fact he used military
and the Rangers were not technically military.
If he had opened that criteria up a bit and said sidearm /hand gun ever issued to a USA military or police force then all other things being equal.
Then yes quite possibly it would remain the king.
But we can only guess at what the original load was and it's performance.
did they really use 220 gr conicals and was the velocity 1200fps unfortunately we just don't know for sure.
Colt did recommend only loading 50 grains of powder though.
My apologies for my brevity here
-----------------------
A few other notes should be included I guess.
It wasn't really the Texas Rangers. There's a lot of back and forth and new companies formed and disbanded at that time.
He had moved on to the Texas mounted vlounteers. and during that time period, he had offered his services to the US Army.
He was commissioned a Capt in the army. president polk ordered the treasury dept to purchase the Walker Colt, from Sam Colt, for Col. Walkers unit ( a volunteer company of scouts). So even though Walker was commissioned in the US Army, his unit was all volunteers.
But the Federal government equipped them.
Walker named his unit The Texas Mounted Rangers. But he was back and forth with the Feds. So much it becomes confusing during this time period.so lets see if we can basically chronicalize some events
----------------------------------------------
4/21/1846 authorized to form a volunteer regiment of scouts for Taylors army (texas not feds) = Texas Mounted Rangers
a volunteer unit attached to the US Army
june24 1846 was appointed brevet lt col with the 1st regiment TEXAS mounted riflemen but he delayed that appointment until his
previous enlistment expired in July.
At same time he accepted a commission as a Capt. in the regular Army with the First United States Mounted Riflemen so he was serving in dual capacity for a short time. but his federal service with the Texas Mounted Riflemen ended in a couple months anyway.
So now oct 1846 he is a Capt with the First United States Mounted Riflemen -------are you following this conglomeration?
It is now January 1847, he is in Washington, meets Sam Colt, they design the Walker colt.
Walker sees President Polk who orders the treasury to buy 1,000 of the revolvers for Walker to issue to his troops. So technically it is a United States Military issue.
While the guns are being made, Walker raised his company: Company C, First U.S. Mounted Rifles at Newport Barracks. april-may 1847
Tecnically they were USA Army, but the men called themselves Texas Rangers..............so now we must alter all the very above.
Technically the Walker Colt was issued to a Military unit of volunteers.
From approx june 1847 til oct 1847 his unit was in several campaign in Texas, and down to Vera Cruz, fighting Mexican Army and others.
BUT he did not yet posses the Walker Colt.
The Walker Colt was finally delivered to him . In October 1847, he Received his as personal gifts. but the rest were not delivered yet.
The remainder were delivered sometime after his death on October 9, 1847.
The Walkers were only made one year 1847. Thereafter they were redesigned slightly smaller and became the 1st, 2nd and 3rd model Dragoon.
This design was to corrct some of the shortcomings of the Walker.
maximum charge was reduced to 50 gr, to avoid ruptured cylinders ( even though they may of ruptured because bullets were inserted wrong).
shortened the barrel for better balance and to lighten it somewhat
improved the loading lever catch to prevent it's inadvertent dropping while firing. Which could be very disconcerting to the shooter especially on horseback.
Last edited:
While I've not seen any specific powder mentioned concerning the loading of Walkers, I have seen research done that showed Hazard's Pistol Powder used to make paper cartridges during the Civil War were of 4F granulation and gave results comparable to Swiss powder.
Wasn't the original conical a 170 grn Hershey Kiss?
Wasn't the original conical a 170 grn Hershey Kiss?
swathdiver
Member
The Colt Walker was considered the most powerful handgun until the .357 magnum.
Walker's were not issued with round balls, they used conicals and if one is to make a velocity/energy comparison, it should be based on that. If memory serves, they shot a 260 grain conical with our equivalent of 4Fg powder at 1200+ FPS.
It still remains the most powerful sidearm issued to the American military.
Walker's were not issued with round balls, they used conicals and if one is to make a velocity/energy comparison, it should be based on that. If memory serves, they shot a 260 grain conical with our equivalent of 4Fg powder at 1200+ FPS.
It still remains the most powerful sidearm issued to the American military.
- Status
Similar threads
