How accurate are you with a revolver? Hickok was deadly

I'm still amazed when I read accounts of the famous quick-draw duel between Wild Bill Hickok and Davis Tutt in 1865 in Springfield, Mo.

From 75 yards, which is a long way for a revolver, Hickok's one and only deadly shot struck Tutt in the left side between the fifth and seventh ribs. Tutt, who was said to be the better marksman, missed as both fired at about the same time. Tutt collapsed and died almost instantly after shouting, "Boys, I'm killed!"

Hickok was carrying his favorite gun, a Colt 1851 Navy (see photo), which is a cap-and-ball revolver favored by other famed gunfighters including Doc Holliday and the fictional Rooster Cogburn. Hickok also holstered his guns backwards, enabling the so-called Cavalry Draw. Hickok killed 36 men before he was shot in the back of the head during a card game, holding the famous "dead man's hand" -- aces and 8's.

That was well over 100 years ago and considering the improvements in revolvers since Sam Colt first made them popular, I remain fascinated at Hickok's precision shot in the Tutt duel from such a long distance.

I'm lucky from 25 yards to get a 5-inch grouping with a full load from my 9-shot H&R .22 much less a bullseye. Of course, at 70, I'm not nearly the shooter I once was. But from 75 yards I'd be startled to be on the paper anywhere.

So, I ask, can you fire a revolver accurately from 75 yards with or without a scope?

Yikes, embarrass me, why don't you!

Well, with a Tussey 1911, I can put 13 shots into a poker chip at most distances.

With a Bren Ten I could hit a golf ball at 80 yards, first time, no bracketing, using my handload and a cast bullet.

I had an early Ruger 22/45, and none of my friends would bet me for money if I pulled out that pistol. For some reason, that was 'my gun.' It liked me, and I liked it.

However, with any "cowboy gun," and especially blackpowder, I'm the guy who can't hit his own butt with both hands and a canoe paddle. I'm just not a guy who can grip that style of handle.

So to answwer your overall question, Wild Bill would have laughed at me, dumped out a round ball from his possibles bag, and thrown it at me bare-handed. I would be no threat to him, or his kid sister.

Might have been an interesting shootout if Hickock could have caught up to John Wesley Hardin after Hardin shot the man in an Abilene hotel for snoring too loud. From what I understand, Hardin admired Hickock's ability with a sixgun and left Kansas before Hickock could find him.

CW

Speaking of Hickock...

Go to youtube and watch hickok45 ring that gong with revolvers from 80 yards (I think). Even a J frame.

I used to shoot with the firearms instructor for the Lowndes COSO (GA) twenty five years ago. He could consistanly shoot three inch, 25 yard groups with a J frame Chief's Special. Deadly accurate with any revolver.

I am sure Wild Bill was more than proficient with his Colts I am also sure that a wee bit of luck had something to do with it as well. Now if I had been ole Tutt I would have shot him in the back;-)

WardenRoss said:

Speaking of Hickock...

Go to youtube and watch hickok45 ring that gong with revolvers from 80 yards (I think). Even a J frame.

I used to shoot with the firearms instructor for the Lowndes COSO (GA) twenty five years ago. He could consistanly shoot three inch, 25 yard groups with a J frame Chief's Special. Deadly accurate with any revolver.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I've seen Hickok45 on YT, but I sometimes wonder how many takes before he posts. He's pretty accurate, though.

I regularly face off against targets at that distance with a handgun, but it is for fun. With adrenaline, knowing your butt is on the line, etc I think accuracy with a handgun might suffer anything over 10 ft. Then again maybe I am just a bit of a coward.

4" clays at 100 with a 29-2, 4". (from sandbags)
10" steel, same distance, with ruger flattop .44 special, standing two-hand hold.

A lot of shootings in the Old West were IN THE BACK, and were judged to be GOOD SHOOTS.

While I admit I am a good pistol shot, there is no one shooting back at me. Most of defensive shooting is instinct and the rest is luck. If you look at the gunfighters of note they were all tough men, period. Bill Hickok, John Wesley Hardin, Frank Hamer, Jelly Bryce, these guys were all tough as nails in any situation. In my career I have met a few guys that I have seen with the "deliberation" as Bat Masterson called it that would take on long odds. I know the one time when I was 19 and I got shot at by some guy who thought I was trespassing on his property didn't do well for my nerves and I am not too proud to admit I found cover pretty fast until the shooting stopped. I can't say what I would have done if he had come into the woods looking for me. I think the choice of weaponry that Hickok could make the shot at was impressive, but he practiced A LOT. I know I am pretty good at 25 yards with a handgun, the shots will be in the ten ring, at 50 maybe and 75 if I have a good rest then the target is in trouble, but at 50 and 75 yards those are well timed and aimed shots, Hickok was under fire and while he aimed he didn't have all day. I have met a few shooters like him, calm under any situation and I think that's how he was from accurate writing about him. I think Hickok practiced what Bill Jordan later wrote about, that speed is fine, but accuracy is final.

I folded a coyote in half at about 30 yards with my snub-nose SP101 .357 mag.
I'd have to say that's my best shot to date with a handgun.

In the days before TV and video games what else did you have to do but be a good shot.
and luck was likely a factor.

75 yards? I"m sure there's never been any stretching of the truth on that...LOL. I doubt any 'quick draw' gun fight would have been at such a distance.
I can get all my shots on the human outline size target at 50 yards and I know a few that get them all in the 8/9 or better area.
I've met a number of silhouette shooters that hit the ram at 100 yards - smaller than the vital area of a man if I recall. The turkey at 75 yards is toughie.

But overall, yeah, there were some extraordinary shootists back in the day. Annie Oakley still amazes me and she did many of her 'tricks' over and over again and lots of documentation exists.

At 90 feet Annie could shoot a dime tossed in midair.

In one day with a .22 rifle she shot 4,472 of 5,000 glass balls tossed in midair.

With the thin edge of a playing card facing her at 90 feet, Annie could hit the card and puncture it with with five or six more shots as it settled to the ground.

I'll generally hit what I'm pointed at.... but then again it isn't shooting back.

I used to be able to get all six shots from revolvers or a Colt Gold Cup .45 auto in a ragged hole at 25 yards from "offhand" as target shooters called that stance. This included a Model 29 with full .44 Magnum loads. Couldn't always do it, but the guns did when I was at my best. That happened quite a bit, with several guns.

I once tried my luck on a plastic jug at about 100 yards with a .45 Auto, not the Gold Cup. Once I saw where the first shot hit, it was pretty easy to walk the bullets on target.

The Colt style single action points very well. I once tried to see how well and how quickly I could point and shoot with a Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 Magnum. I set a silhouette target at 15 yards and pretended that I was a British officer at Rorke's Drift, trying to keep a Zulu from getting the blade of his iklwa (stabbing spear) into me, or that I was near the Khyber Pass, trying to keep Pathan or Afghan warriors from getting to me with swords or Khyber knives.

Even with the very heavy recoil of the Magnum, it was ridiculously easy to swing up the gun quickly and fire as the sights more or less aligned on the midsection of the target. Almost all hits would have been kills. I think the 7.5-inch barrel helped pointability. But I have also found the Colt .45 SAA with 4.75-inch bbl. to point and shoot very well at normal combat ranges. So does the Colt Govt. Model 45 auto, if one knows how to use it.

My experience with cap and ball sixguns is limited, although I own both Colt and Remington New Model Army .44's like served in our Civil War. They do point well. I'm sure that Wild Bill knew how to use his .36 to best advantage. BTW, he had a matched pair, with ivory grips, engraving and silver (?) plating.

When Rex Applegate was chosen to teach close quarters combat to OSS agents in WW II, he searched for accounts of how wild west gunmen described their techniques. He found letters from Hickock telling that he just extended his arm full length and fired. That is basically what I was doing with the Ruger .44. With skill and practice, I don't doubt that he could have killed Tutt as described, although luck was on his side that day. Applegate taught the Fairbairn technique for closer DA fire or with .45 autos. Troops that he or the Commando instructors trained were deadly at average gunfight ranges, far more effective than the average soldier so armed.

I am constantly amazed that some post groups on forums like this that show really inept shooting. Some actually brag about being able to fire groups at seven yards that they can cover with a hand. I see people at public ranges, especially indoor ranges, who run the target up to ten feet or less and brag when they hit anything in the black! Quality handguns are capable of far better than most of the public think. Even under stress, the trained gunfighter can shoot quite well. I asked my son about this, as he has killed more men with a handgun in close combat than anyone I know. And he did this with just 9mm NATO ball ammo, with Beretta M-9 and Browning Hi-Power guns. He admitted to stress, but said that it seemed to make him focus more closely on what he was doing and then follow through as trained. That worked, although he had to shoot a few men more than once.

I think a man like Hickock, with nerves of steel, ample practice, and the knowledge of where to hold on a man at 75 yards could indeed kill Tutt with relative ease. What I do not understand is why some men cannot hit a barn if firing from inside it! We have a new member who posted in one of the forums here that someone had given him a M-65 with three-inch bbl and he can't hit anything with it. From his description, I think he doesn't know how much front sight to hold up and hasn't ever received basic handgun shooting instruction. That gun will probably drive tacks at close ranges once he learns to shoot it. And I think it'd stand a good chance of laying out dead a foe at 75 yards, in the hands of a capable shooter.

When I was younger and could see without help I would take new hires to the range for familiarization shoots with the Dept. weapon a Model 59. Enroute to the range I would ask the new hire what he thought the effective range of a hand gun was. Usual answer was short range 25 yrds or so. Before hand I would place a B27 shillioutte target on the range so that when we approached the range I would stop on the road at approx. 165 yards from the target. I would set up a spotting scope for the trainee and have him sight in on the target and to verify it was clean and not pre shot. I would pull out a Model 28 6 inch with .357 158gr SPs. I would shoot six rounds at the target. When we checked the target up close I'd have a 5-10 inch spread in the kill zone. The lesson was never underestimate your opponents ability with a handgun.
Could I do it today: most likely not.
I was once told 'When he is in range, so are you!'

By the way that guy Tutt brought the wrong weapon to the fight. He should have brought a rifle. Ie. Tom Sellack's Covington character in Crossfire Trail shoot out at the general store.

Well with my 29-2 8-3/8s Barrel I am no slouch, But then again paper targets and steel plates are not shooting back.

150 years ago ya needed to be better then good with a handgun to get along if that was your undertaking. Then again most of the population new which end of the gun the bullets went in and came out of.
And a firearm sitting on a table or rack was nothing more then an inordinate item/object that had its place and could bring no harm then to what the individual with it wanted to do, Then ya needed be prepared for the consequences.

There were some in the old days who were very good, I'm sure the amount of practice they got helped. Hickock reportedly practiced almost daily, wanted fresh loads in his guns in case of trouble (cap and ball handguns can be finicky). Many of the wild west show shooters and later gun company exhibition shooters burned up a lot of ammo and they were very good.
One of the keys for gunfighters was no doubt the ability to stay cool when someone was firing back though. When i had more time to shoot i got good at hitting the 100 yd gong at a local range consistently with a SA 45 Colt and a couple of my other favorite guns. However no one was returning fire either!

Back in the early 1990's, several of us went to an outdoor range. Someone had left 4 one gallon milk jugs filled with water on top of posts at 100 yards. My first 2 shots from a Colt series 70 Gold Cup with iron sights hit the jugs I was aiming at. Forty-eight rounds later, I had not hit either remaining jug. All my shots were close, but no hits. Lucky? Yes!

I don't shoot my single action guns more than three or four times a year but if I practiced with them more, I might be able to hit closer to the center than I did on this 25 yard target.

Mark

So, I ask, can you fire a revolver accurately from 75 yards with or without a scope?

Click to expand...

Not only no, but hell NO...