Was there a revolver whose use was preferred by the U.S. Cavalry during the Civil War?

[hawg]

Truth to that, I know that a couple of the LeMats were gifts to Southern Generals. I don't know whether the LeMat performed well in the field, but one would certainly serve as a distinctive general's sidearm, as generals don't "generally" engage in hand to hand combat often, or at all. How they (the LeMat) actually performed in combat I have no idea. I know the replicas sometimes have issues, but again, no idea of how the originals performed.

Anyhow, when I said I would not be excited over one of the foreign pistols, I was not thinking of any quality arm, the British and French made some nice ones for sure, was thinking more of something coming out of a village mom and pop shop in Spain in mind.

I can't think of anything from Spain altho there may have been some. The majority of imported revolvers came from England. France and Belgium. Belgium even made 1851 navies under license from Colt.

 

[StrawHat]

This is a French revolver, built by L Perrin in 1860. The Union had a purchase order for thousands of these. Not sure how many were delivered but it tied up production and kept them away from CSA contracts.







A double action only, central fire revolver that fired a 12 mm bullet. I have fired this one and the trigger pull is … “substantial”.

Kevin

 

[drobs]

I've read accounts where of Kadets that were in the service academies (West Point, etc) at the time, took their issued 1851 Colt Navy Revolvers back to their home states to serve in the CW on either side. Many of them cut their time short at the academy to serve in the war.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

Thanks for showing that French pistol! First time I've seen one. Man, is that thing ugly!

 

[woodnbow]

Thanks for showing that French pistol! First time I've seen one. Man, is that thing ugly!

Europeans… They build the worlds most elegant rifles and shotguns but they don’t know how to build a purty revolver.

 

[Zygodactyl]

One of my wife's ancestors rode with John Hunt Morgan on the confederate side. One of the troopers wrote a book and relates how they carried up to six revolvers, in belt and saddle holsters to keep from having to reload. They practiced shooting from a gallop at tree stumps.

 

[Eyrie G. Dogg]

Is anyone here aware of references as to the Colt 1860 Army having been designed for cavalry use. Of course they were issued to all branches and all arms but was the Ordinance Dept. thinking of cavalry use by incorporating the 8” .44 and the larger “plow handle”? I have read that after experience with the Dragoon models
the Army was interested in better .44 recoil control for mounted troops.

Any information on that?

Thanks.

 

[entropy]

Not to mention the stock mount modifications built into them.

 

[woodnbow]

Is anyone here aware of references as to the Colt 1860 Army having been designed for cavalry use. Of course they were issued to all branches and all arms but was the Ordinance Dept. thinking of cavalry use by incorporating the 8” .44 and the larger “plow handle”? I have read that after experience with the Dragoon models
the Army was interested in better .44 recoil control for mounted troops.

Any information on that?

Thanks.

Pate doesn’t really address this in his book but it’s pretty common knowledge that the larger grip is, all else being equal, better at controlling recoil.

 

[hawg]

I don't try to control recoil. I let the recoil roll it up in my hand.

 

[Eyrie G. Dogg]

But Hawg, that IS controlling recoil.

 

[Gator Weiss]

Is anyone here aware of references as to the Colt 1860 Army having been designed for cavalry use. Of course they were issued to all branches and all arms but was the Ordinance Dept. thinking of cavalry use by incorporating the 8” .44 and the larger “plow handle”? I have read that after experience with the Dragoon models
the Army was interested in better .44 recoil control for mounted troops.

Any information on that?

Thanks.

Recoil was not a problem in the BP handguns. We did not really see many written references to small arms recoil control until after the Civil War. We saw some references to it on the trapdoor cavalry carbine ammo matter.

 

[Gator Weiss]

Forty-Four / Forty-Five had been designated Army handgun calibers and Thirty-Six a Naval caliber. None of these calibers had recoil issues. The 1860 and some others had been designed to shoot higher than point of aim.

 

[hawg]

Forty-Four / Forty-Five had been designated Army handgun calibers and Thirty-Six a Naval caliber. None of these calibers had recoil issues. The 1860 and some others had been designed to shoot higher than point of aim.

The army revolvers were sighted in to hit a man on a horse or at least the horse at 75 yards.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

This is a French revolver, built by L Perrin in 1860. The Union had a purchase order for thousands of these. Not sure how many were delivered but it tied up production and kept them away from CSA contracts.

View attachment 1162275

View attachment 1162276

View attachment 1162277

A double action only, central fire revolver that fired a 12 mm bullet. I have fired this one and the trigger pull is … “substantial”.

Kevin

Now that would be quite the conversation piece, to have on one's side while hunting, if one encountered another hunter. (I very seldom do)

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Man, is that thing ugly!

C'mon Jack! It's beautiful in a strange and steam-punk sort of way. !!! I like it!

 

[StrawHat]

Now that would be quite the conversation piece, to have on one's side while hunting, if one encountered another hunter. (I very seldom do)

Got to disagree with you one that. While I have shot it, it was with cobbled together ammunition. I fired it 50 years ago and if I remember correctly, used a cut down 06 shell with a copper wire ring in the extractor groove to simulate a rim. Black powder and some sort of projectile. Now, when I walk in the woods, the revolver on my hip is probably the one I always carry and also is used for hunting. Not some antique.

Kevin

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Got to disagree with you one that. While I have shot it, it was with cobbled together ammunition. I fired it 50 years ago and if I remember correctly, used a cut down 06 shell with a copper wire ring in the extractor groove to simulate a rim. Black powder and some sort of projectile. Now, when I walk in the woods, the revolver on my hip is probably the one I always carry and also is used for hunting. Not some antique.

Yes, I did notice that cases were not anything easily duplicated/fabricated, and looked to hold very little powder. I agree, from a performance standpoint it would leave much to be desired. Double action only, it might not be super accurate for small game. !! However, I love to carry antiques, as long as they can perform, and a cap-n-ball revolver, Remington or Colt, of often on my hip. !!

 

[45 Dragoon]

After the war, the Army sold the Colts...and kept the Remingtons. Which I consider to have been the right decision, the Remington is stronger and more accurate.

What's your reasoning?

Mike

 

[Eyrie G. Dogg]

What are your sources? Cite something, anything.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

What's your reasoning?

Mike

Would like to know as well! I used to think the same thing as well, not anymore.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Well, it doesn't really make sense, considering due to the fire Colt wasn't delivering pistols, but Remington was. So it makes more sense that with a bigger surplus of Remingtons, many of them brand new, that they would retain them for that reason. Then consider that the cap-n-ball revolver was obsolete, they were not going to, or didn't want to, keep or retain any cap-n-ball revolvers, the switch was going to be made to cartridges. That is why the brand new Rogers-n-Spencers went into storage. Not because they were superior to either the Colt or Remington. Well that's my reasoning, my story, and I'm sticking to it!!!!

I believe most of us can say, from experience, that in general neither the Colt or Remington is more accurate than the other.

 

[hawg]

Well, it doesn't really make sense, considering due to the fire Colt wasn't delivering pistols, but Remington was. So it makes more sense that with a bigger surplus of Remingtons, many of them brand new, that they would retain them for that reason. Then consider that the cap-n-ball revolver was obsolete, they were not going to, or didn't want to, keep or retain any cap-n-ball revolvers, the switch was going to be made to cartridges. That is why the brand new Rogers-n-Spencers went into storage. Not because they were superior to either the Colt or Remington. Well that's my reasoning, my story, and I'm sticking to it!!!!

I believe most of us can say, from experience, that in general neither the Colt or Remington is more accurate than the other.

Remingtons last contract was filled in 1865 so the army had a glut of newer Remington revolvers after the war. It's just simple economics to keep the newer stuff and get rid of the older stuff. I can't say why the R&S wasn't issued to troops out west or occupation troops. It arrived to late to be used in the war but instead of being issued they went into storage. I guess it was just a case of being the new kid on the block.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I believe the R&S had two "issues" that kept any from being issued, which the Remington did before it was accepted. The Remington had no safety notches to carry the gun with all six chambers loaded, and the Army wanted a lower hammer spur. Those mods were made, and the pistol accepted as the model 1863, not a "1858". The R&S has the same features, or "issues", no additional bolt cuts, safety notches or pins to carry the pistol fully loaded. And, the hammer spur is very high. So yeah, besides being the new kid on the block, and not wanting anymore percussion pistols, plus the two "issues", of course they went straight into storage and probably just forgotten about. If the percussion era lasted a few more years, and the war went on, I think the Army would have insisted on those modifications, same as the Remington, before they ordered more and were issued to the troops. And today people would be calling it "The Rogers and Spencer 1858". (or some other patent date that applied to how the widget screw went through the johnson link on some other totally different pistol)

 

[Mike OTDP]

What's your reasoning?

Mike

The fixed barrel on the Remington is more accurate. Go down the line at a World Championships, and you'll find Remingtons and Rogers & Spencer revolvers. And the Remingtons will certainly shoot outstanding scores. I've seen one Colt in the original match.