1858 Remington

I just finished watching Pale Rider. During the big showdown at the end he would shoot the 1858 empty then reach in his pocket for another pre-loaded cylinder. The 19th century equivalent of speed loaders.
I don't know how available extra cylinders were then. Was this just Hollywood fantasy or did gunfighters actually employ such tactics?

RonJ said:

I just finished watching Pale Rider. During the big showdown at the end he would shoot the 1858 empty then reach in his pocket for another pre-loaded cylinder. The 19th century equivalent of speed loaders.
I don't know how available extra cylinders were then. Was this just Hollywood fantasy or did gunfighters actually employ such tactics?

Click to expand...

I think it's almost all Hollywood, although the practice was theoretically possible.

I've read a number of books written by men who lived then and Civil War books, inc. Mosby's Memoirs, and no one has
mentioned doing that. Nor have I ever seen even one photo that looked like anyone had a pouch for a spare cylinder on his belt, and it would have been heavy and awkward to wear.

The usual way to deliver more firepower was to wear a second gun. Even after ctg. guns were the norm, Earp mentioned that those concerned about the matter wore two guns.

Yeh...I don't really believe the revolver makers of the day made very many extra cylinders. Pistoleros just accumulated extra revolvers..sort of like Clint E in 'Outlaw Josey Wales'

An extra loaded and capped cylinder might be a real problem if it were dropped or the owner bumped into a hard object with it on his belt.
KA-BOOM

Steve

I've wondered about the same thing. I think carrying a spare cylinder was done, but rarely. Recently, I did see a photo of a Colt Paterson cased with a spare cylinder.

I have two original Remington New Army revolvers. One made in 1863 has been with me for about 20 years. The other made in 1864 came to me recently. Both are entirely functional, a testament to the designer (Beal) and manufacturer (Remington).

The cylinders of my two revolvers are indeed interchangable, as are the base pins (which retain the cylinders and on which the cylinders turn), indicating a high degree of maintaining manufacturing tolerances 150 years ago.

The process of actually changing out cylinders requires several steps:

1. hammer to half-cock
2. unlatch loading lever, but the ball ram cannot be permitted to pass through the frame into a chamber
3. remove T-shaped base pin
4. remove cylinder
5. insert cylinder
6. replace T-shaped base pin (making sure it is correctly oriented; if inserted upside down it will not be possible to seat it and removal to correct can be difficult)
7. return loading lever to latched position

Assuming the replacement cylinder has been loaded and capped the revolver is then ready to cock and fire. As Magneto pointed out, carrying a loaded and capped cylinder could be rather dangerous; dropping it could result in one or more rounds firing, as could a moderate impact on the percussion caps, and no possible control over where the bullet(s) might go.

Using a cylinder with powder charges and balls, but uncapped, would require placing percussion caps on the 6 nipples after making the change. With a capper device this would add perhaps another 30 seconds or so to the reloading cycle.

I think it would take me at least 2 or 3 minutes to perform such a cylinder exchange. That time might be improved with regular practice, which would also have to include training myself to correctly orient the base pin during reinsertion. But I doubt if it could be done in less than a minute or so anyway, and doing this during an actual gun fight would be very difficult.

Personally I would much prefer to simply have another revolver, or even two or three more, just like many of the old timers did back in the day.

Worked with a cop years ago who had spent several years on the NYPD in the 1960's. He refered to this as the "New York reload", simply drawing your other gun.

You guys seem to have it covered. I don't think the availability of extra cylinders was an issue. Therefor it was possible, impractical in most circumstances, but not unheard of.

The thing to remember is that at least into the 1870's the revolver was mostly deployed by the Cavalry and treated as a back up (all be it an inferior one) to the sabre. It was a secondary weapon for close contact. It was not thought of as being reloadable on horseback during battle. Six shots were considered its maximum practical capacity in combat. This gradually changed during the Indian Wars but even during much of that time the regulation Cartridge pouch held only 6 rounds. Only through cartridge belt field modifications ("prairie" or "thimble" belts) were troopers able to carry additional rounds within practical reach.

The first regulation military speed loader of which I am aware is the one accommodated by the US Navy pattern 1889 Revolver Cartridge Box which held two-6 cartridge speed loaders and 6 cartridges (I would love to find the speed loaders to go with my Box).

So aside from gunfighters and fighting lawmen, of whom there were fewer than popular fiction and Hollywood would have us believe, I don't think there was a great consumer demand for speed loaders.