I have read more than once that the newer Dragoons produced in 1848 and thereafter were to correct some defects of the Walker. If someone buys a Walker Repro. today. will those defects still exist? Has anyone had good service and reliability out of a new Walker? How about with the Conv. cartridge cylinder? Thanks for any feedback as I am considering buying a new Walker.
Walker 1847 question
- Thread starter Rogmatt
- Start date
- Status
Peter M. Eick
Member
I just bought one but it has not shown up yet.
I did a lot of research on the Walker, and the main defects are the rammer falls down tieing up the gun and the gun is basically huge, so they lopped off some of the cylinder and some of the barrel. Thus a more manageable gun. They also put a lock on the rammer to keep it up.
Did I miss anything else anyone?
I did a lot of research on the Walker, and the main defects are the rammer falls down tieing up the gun and the gun is basically huge, so they lopped off some of the cylinder and some of the barrel. Thus a more manageable gun. They also put a lock on the rammer to keep it up.
Did I miss anything else anyone?
Yes Peter.... 
They had a problem with cylinders bursting because of the powder charge vs. the steel they were using sometimes had seams in it. That, and it's a heck of a piece of iron to hold up. They shortened both the cylinder (which had the effect of lowering the powder charge) and the barrel.
Material that is used in the better reproductions is far superior to anything Colt had, but because of the "drooping rammer" I much prefer the 2nd or 3rd Dragoon replicas for shooting.
Having shot an original 2nd. Model I can assure everyone that it’s enough…
They had a problem with cylinders bursting because of the powder charge vs. the steel they were using sometimes had seams in it. That, and it's a heck of a piece of iron to hold up. They shortened both the cylinder (which had the effect of lowering the powder charge) and the barrel.
Material that is used in the better reproductions is far superior to anything Colt had, but because of the "drooping rammer" I much prefer the 2nd or 3rd Dragoon replicas for shooting.
Having shot an original 2nd. Model I can assure everyone that it’s enough…
The walker contract called for 1,000 revolvers and Colt made an additional 100 that are usually called the "Civilian Model." The contract was signed in February, 1847 with 500 less six stolen delivered to the United States forces in Vera Cruz Mexico September/October 1847. 500 others waited in the arsenal in baton rouge until flasks and tools were available. Most of these were sent to Texas to arm the US Dragoons and Texas Rangers. This took place in March, 1848 as the US/Mexican war ended. By that time the second contract was underway - the dragoon series mentioned in the above posts.
The Walkers reached the troops with moulds for a conical bullet that has almost none of the qualities we now associate with an accurate revolver bullet. I was surprised to find that they are actually pretty accurate if you cone the loading lever to prevent distortion. The troops were unfamiliar with conical bullets having mainly used round balls and decided the sharp point of the bullet should enter the chamber first. According to John S. {RIP} Ford, Adjutant of the Texas volunteers, this almost invariably resulted in a burst cylinder. Loaded right, the bullets provided quite a lot of space for powder spill over from sloppy loading and may have contributed to chain fires and explosions. One experienced bp shooter here says that he had never seen a modern reproduction walker blow up unless the shooter decided that he needed to use smokeless powder - either as the main charge or as a portion of the charge because he believed it would shoot cleaner.
The loading lever does drop down on the originals and still does. Taping or tying it up adds a good bit to convenient shooting.
By the way, I would not and did not choose the Walker as a first or primary percussion revolver but I do like it very much.
The Walkers reached the troops with moulds for a conical bullet that has almost none of the qualities we now associate with an accurate revolver bullet. I was surprised to find that they are actually pretty accurate if you cone the loading lever to prevent distortion. The troops were unfamiliar with conical bullets having mainly used round balls and decided the sharp point of the bullet should enter the chamber first. According to John S. {RIP} Ford, Adjutant of the Texas volunteers, this almost invariably resulted in a burst cylinder. Loaded right, the bullets provided quite a lot of space for powder spill over from sloppy loading and may have contributed to chain fires and explosions. One experienced bp shooter here says that he had never seen a modern reproduction walker blow up unless the shooter decided that he needed to use smokeless powder - either as the main charge or as a portion of the charge because he believed it would shoot cleaner.
The loading lever does drop down on the originals and still does. Taping or tying it up adds a good bit to convenient shooting.
By the way, I would not and did not choose the Walker as a first or primary percussion revolver but I do like it very much.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
mec said:
I did. I did because I didn't know any better and the Walker design is what made me want a C&B revolver in the first place.
I don't necessarily regret buying it first, but I bought an 1860 very shortly after.
Since then I just don't shoot the Walker much. The only "defect" left today is the loading lever dropping down. As mentioned the metallurgy problems are long gone.
Peter M. Eick
Member
I know they are problably not the best choice for a novice like me, but as a history buff, they are so "right" living in Texas.
Hopefully I can figure it out over the next few months before summer comes to Houston and ruins all of the fine shooting weather!
Hopefully I can figure it out over the next few months before summer comes to Houston and ruins all of the fine shooting weather!
M.E.Eldridge
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2005
- Messages
- 367
After considering various designs for my first black powder revolver, I've choset the Patterson. The first of Colt's revolvers to be sold,it has a certain historical appeal to it. Plus, I like its looks and hidden trigger. I believe it was used by a group of 15 Texas Rangers to beat back 80 Comanche/Apache? warriors. Also since only the higher quality companies seem to make them, there is leass of a chance of buying cheap junk. Are there any major pitfalls to this choice?
Steve499
Member
The only thing I could think of would be the bazillion parts they have compared to the later Colt's.
Steve
Steve
here's an earlier post on it:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=108519
they do have between three and four times as many parts as a 51 navy
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=108519
they do have between three and four times as many parts as a 51 navy
Peter M. Eick
Member
Well I have mine now and I just got done cleaning it up. Yikes is that sucker big! It comes apart easily, great fit and finish overall and seems to time up perfectly. The bolt seems to drop about 1/16" early so there is a slight bolt mark prior to the locking notches. It is drenched in oil. It makes Les Baer look frugal when it comes to oiling the gun. Over all it seems very nice and well made. I cannot wait to try it out tomorrow.
- Status
Similar threads
