If you see an officer with a pistol that large, you may wonder: "Is he compensating for something?" The answer is most likely "Yes, for the shorter reach of his sword."
For my fellow Americans, we use the word "gauge" instead of "bore", as in shotguns. For everyone, what it means is the size of a round lead ball quantified in division of one pound of lead. So for an easy one, a 16GA or 16 "bore" is sized for a one ounce lead ball. I don't know where you come up with 54 bore for .44 inch caliber, 44 cal is 50 bore, but you are right that .50 cal is 38 bore. But what mattered is that lead was sold by the pound, and divided into easy numbers to count. Navy pistols were 100 bore, or .36 cal. Then there were screw ups like the LeMatt pistol. After designing the thing, the cylinder walls were too thin at .44, so they made it smaller, some .40 or .41, and included a bullet mold with it as a solution, since balls that size were otherwise unavailable. That was almost the perfect pistol for it's day..... I'm of the thought that this is one of those examples, where .50 was as big as they thought they could get away with boring the things out, and that's where they came up with 38 bore, since that is the correct way of expressing it, although it is not an even number. It was therefore, a proprietary size, and probably also included a bullet mold as a solution. You won't find lead balls for it just anywhere, nor could you back in the day.
Hi, I can assure you that 54 bore was the standard size for British military revolvers (never seen a 50 bore, though I do own a 56!) and that these 54 bores (which are marked as 54 bore on the frame) correspond roughly to .44 although perhaps a little bit larger - between .44 and .45
@@scholagladiatoria Thompson and Lagarde conducted testing with early auto-loading pistols and the revolvers of the day in the early 20th century. They concluded a bare minimum caliber to have a fair chance or rapid incapacitation was .45. They hung up cows and shot them and saw what bullets did how much damage to what bits and Lagarde gave his expert opinion of what it would take to reliably stop someone against their will. Lagarde had been a doctor in the military for a long time and treated mass amounts of casualties in several wars and conflicts and battles. He also proved the septic nature of bullets and that shooting them did not sterilize them. During World War 1 Lagarde wrote an excellent book called "Gunshot Injuries" on the effects every type of bullet in his day (and days previously, all the way back to the 16th century) had on every part of the human body (with medical picture examples) and gives the best known medical practice of the day to treat it. From children's toy pistols to round musket balls of the Napoleonic era to conical bullets of the US Civil War to the flat nose lead of the Wild West lever/wheelguns to the full metal jacket bullets of the .30-06 and .303 Enfield etc. I highly recommend it!
Keep in mind unless the revolver had a safety notch to rest the hammer on you’d have to rest the hammer on an empty chamber. Adams revolvers got around it by using a spring safety that disengaged automatically when you pulled the trigger.
You are correct. It was used by gunsmiths and ammo makers, so they knew "how many bullets this pound of lead will make for this or that gun." Caliber is much more relevant to the shooter, for stopping power understanding etc, than bore is to the gunsmith or manufacturers.
As an American who's lived around guns my entire life, I can say most people most of the time are purely drawn to how the gun looks, often picking a worse weapon because of it. I do agree tho, many old US wheelguns are beautiful. One of the reasons to not be so "industrial" looking is slight shifting of where the mass of metal and wood is on the weapon to give it better balance and feel, to help with drawing, indexing, holding the gun on targets for long periods of time, etc. It's more difficult to make tho. But it often has the effect of making the gun (or weapon in general) more aesthetically pleasing. I'm often amazed at how well and balanced Wild West guns handle in the moment, especially compared to their weight on a scale. Or the scale weight and handling characteristics of Modern firearms, which look VERY industrial. Winchester Model 1897 shotgun etc type guns compared to Remington 870 or Spas 12 are good examples.
Funny I feel ..Just the Opposite!! English----Delicate "clockwork" + engraved artwork. Colt ---clean machined mechanical business like INDUSTRIAL!! No accounting folks!
That's very interesting. The first American double action revolvers apparently had very delicate mechanisms that made them much less durable so they would end up using them single action anyway. That's amazing that British guns designers were first to make a functional and durable double action revolver.
TIL that in England/Europe (probably most English speaking places that aren't North America) the term used for the size of a shotgun is 'bore'. In the USA at least the only term I've ever heard is 'gauge' instead of 'bore', and the most common shotgun sizes are .410cal (likely the only common shotgun size I've ever come across that uses caliber instead of gauge), then 20 gauge, 16 gauge, 12 gauge, and 10 gauge. Don't think I've ever run across any other shotgun sizes
Mika Luostarinen I believe it was more prectical in the early days of musketry when soliders used to make their own lead balls, therefore the bore size was very useful. In any case, it its not very difficult to learn different measuring systems. Its fun to learn.
It's basically an old form of measurement that's still in use today that was more common elsewhere but has fallen out of fashion in other industries.; like the continued use of grains for measuring the weight of a bullet and the propellant.
4 bore shotguns were mostly used by market hunters to mow down masses of waterfowler via spread of shot. Some sport hunter used them, but its really overkill for anything as the 8 and 10 bores of that time would kill high flying geese at 80-100 yards if a man knew what he was doing. The other (very specialized, very minor) use for the 4-bore was for elephant hunting (!). The Boers commonly used converted 4-bore British waterfowling guns (the barrel shortened to make them managable on horseback) for going after elephants, cape buffaloes, rhinoes, etc which they called 'roers'. Frederick Courteney Selous used two such cannons during his ivory hunting days, made by Isaac Hollis if I remembered correctly. One time his gunbearer made the mistake of double loading one of them, and he DID actually pull the trigger! Needless to say he was flattened by the recoil.
I got a .50 caliber Deane Adams revolving pistol about a year ago from IMA and I made sure it was functional- and all parts intact, it was in amazing condition and I’ve fired 30 rounds through it, I love it even if it’s not the most accurate. It’s just too much fun! I have a few videos on mine and a disassembly.
Standard doctrine was to shoot all revolvers/pistols one handed anyway, so I really don’t see that being anything unordinary at the time that one could shoot one handed. Fanning the hammer was rarely ever done, It mainly become popular in the 20th century with the movie industry. Same as cocking the hammer with the other hands thumb while being gripped with both. That has really only become popular quite lately with Cowboy Action Shooting competitions. But I agree that DA would have been a great advantage at the time.
The preferred way to cock the revolver was known as the Calvary cock. You would basically point the barrel facing upwards, cock the hammer with the thumb of the shooting hand allowing the used cap to fall out of the back helping to prevent it from getting caught in between the cylinder and frame causing a jam.
Matt, most of your American viewers are unfamiliar with "bore" for a bullet/barrel size. More familiar with the term "gauge" for the measurement. ("12 Gauge") I agree that 4 bore is good for large birds. It is about 26mm, larger than many Soviet/Eastern Block Anti-Aircraft systems.
4 bore and larger were usually punt guns (mounted to a swivel on a boat) for commercial hunting, they put out an enormous pattern of shot that could bring a lot of birds down in one shot. There were 4 bore rifles for very large game, though.
The 'bore' denotes the number of spherical lead balls of the bore diameter that total one pound in weight. Hence a 4-bore would chamber a lead ball weighing four ounces (4 x 4 ounces = 16 ounces = one pound).
usaid alfatih And the other Ian (LaSpina (sp?)) is Armor Jesus. Shad is Castle Jesus. (Machicolations!!!) Metatron is Roman/Japanese Jesus. Thrand is testing Jesus. Joerge Sparve is God.
An excellent video ! One thing you've missed is how much powder was used. I've owned and fired a number of black powder guns and all the Colts you mentioned. The Navy model (Colts biggest seller) normally used 25 to 35 grains of 3f black powder while my 1860 Used from 35 to 50 with a. 44 caliber led ball or bullet. I also owned a Sharps carbine in 54 can. with 100 grains of 3f! I also had a copy of a Sharps advertising booklet. It had many testimonials of dropping a buffalo with one shot, etc. It was also claimed that you could kill 3 Indians with one shot as long as they were in line ! LOL! It's really the stopping power is determined by the number of grains of black powder behind the ball that's important. As for single v. double action it's a matter of hand size. People back then we're smaller than today. Our local city museum has some Civil War uniforms and clothing too. While I can easily fire either the Navy or the .44 hogleg using my thumb to cock the hammer, I can easily see that they couldn't. I would have thought it was the solid frame that would be it's big selling point. I know that was a major reason Remington guns were thought better ? Either way you've done a great job and I can't wait for more.
I wanted to point out that in the US we use the term gauge instead of bore. What bore or gauge means is a 38 bore or gauge is that it would take 38 bullets of its size to equal a pound. Hence a 12 gauge shotgun would take 12 round slugs would equal 1 pound of lead. His .50 cal would need 38 round balls of lead would equal a pound.
one thing you may know, those barrels also often suck. lol. my buddy has a gun with one thats had the barrel go bang at some point(theres a huge blow out on one side of the barrel where the charge caused the barrel to breach)
My buddy owns one of these made by John Blanch and son. He has the original box with oiler, bullet mold, patches, bullets and powder container. It is super slick and very minty and It looks really nice next to my Enfield Revolver No.2 MK1**. Thats a very nice acquisition.
easier way of explaining the bore thing, is that it denotes the number of round lead balls in a pound of lead. So a 4 bore is a quarter pound of lead in a round ball that fits in the barrel. 12 bore takes 12 balls to get a pound etc.
Since you're doing Adams, a vote to review the fight and battle scenes in "The Wind and The Lion." Sabers, bayonets, Colts, Adams, and a host of military long guns. Saber and Colt used versus bayonets even!
The Perdicaris Affair as adapted by Jon Milius, who tries for historical accuracy. Brian Keith as Teddy Roosevelt, Candice Bergen as Mrs Perdicaris, US Marines assaulting the Pasha's palace at bayonet point (they showed that scene as a moto-movie during my Marine Boot Camp Indoc in '91). Sean Connery as Raisuli, the Berber Pirate King with a Scottish accent. The various Legations angling for advantage, the possibility of World War in 1904. And oh so many period weapons!
Adams didn't really keep up with innovations after cartridge revolvers came in. Pinfire never caught on in Britain like it did in France and elsewhere, but when rimfire and centrefire started getting popular in Britain other companies seem to have taken up the market quickly. Webley had lost out to Adams in the cap'n'ball period, but they really stepped up with cartridge revolvers.
Our great-grandpa Piet carried a pair of .44 cal Adams revolvers as a Union Cavalry officer in the American Civil War. He believed in the firepower of a double-action.
Had no idea double action revolvers existed back then! Thanks for making history interesting for me. If they talked about swords and guns from history in school, I might have gotten better grades lol
David Daniels You would be super surprised at what existed in the 19th century with regards to firearms technology. Forgotten Weapons covers a plethora of them. It is an awesome channel.
Bore or Gauge The number of round balls that could be cast from a pound of lead, A four bore would equal 4 ounces of lead, a 16 bore would be one ounce. So 54 balls of the diameter of the barrel. As an American I have to say given the choice at the time I would take an Adams. As far as the 6 vs 5 shot, the Adams could be carried with all 5 chambers loaded. The Colt was not safe to carry with all 6 loaded so in practical terms they were equal. Also the solid frame is a derinaltelly an advantage.
I think in the USA that is/was the case, but in Britain we used to use 'bore' for everything. A lot of our modern terminology comes from the USA - even the word 'shotgun' is from the USA; we used to call it a 'fowling piece'.
Percussion Colts were perfectly safe loaded with 6 shots, there is a slot between each chamber that the hammer nose can fit into to allow the Colt and Remington to be safely carried fully loaded.
www.google.com/search?q=colt+cylinder&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=VIWscqlxcuAiZM%253A%252CFw8xl0DPGQF-VM%252C_&usg=__ygyfmnoaN_cnFd7pbmfANF0hQuE%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj38ar675rYAhVHeSYKHST6BOMQ9QEILzAC#imgrc=yeu7XGj-pkm9AM: picture of both for comparison, personally I would not trust the Colt system.
The number for bore (or gauge in the US) is how many lead balls of that size it takes to make a pound of lead. So it takes 12 lead balls of 12 bore size to make one lb, 4 lead balls of 4 bore size to make one lb, 38 lead balls of 38 bore size to make one lb, and so on.
Larger calibre shotguns were used for longer range, not larger game. You selected the shot (pellet) size according to the size of your intended target. Shot disperses as it leaves the barrel. Too close and many pellet hits would mangle the game. Too far and the shot would spread further and too few pellets would hit the target and wound or even miss completely. It's difficult to get close to wildfowl, so larger shotgun loads were and are often used.
12 gauge shotgun, I've never heard of a "12 bore" but I understand the sizing system you describe. The type of shot and shell used has more impact on projectile performance than the gauge of the shotgun used (within reason). A 12 gauge loaded with a 3.5 inch magnum shell of 00 buck-shot will never hunt birds as well as a .410 using any kind of shell and load of bird-shot. The longer barrels were more necessary to achieve enough velocity to be effective back in the days before cordite (smokeless powder), and especially full metal jacket bullets. Those two innovations combined caused the single greatest leap in projectile velocity in history! A 5 inch barrel used to be a compact or "belly gun" in the days of black powder revolvers. The 1911 pistol and 230 grain hardball rounds forever made that the new size of service pistols. Barrels longer than 5 inches are for competition, sport, hunting, etc.
A old friend of mine, held one of the most splendid title's ever, that of 'Victorian pocket pistol Champion' ! beats Bishop or Lord Chancellor hands down.
A very nice pistol you have there! You could have mentioned the reason behind the "bore" designation in your description, it is of course that the bore number equates to the number of pure lead ball to the pound equal the bore of the gun, that is, a 12 bore equals 12 balls of bore diameter equal 1 pound, easy!
Origins of bore/gauge. The number of pure lead balls, the diameter of the barrel of the weapon, it takes to make a pound. 12 gauge/bore is .72in, 12 pure lead balls of .72inch diameter weighs 1 pound. Hence the ball of a 4 bore weighs a whopping 8 ounces. Bob's your uncle and all that.
The double action had a big advantage over the single action. I think that with the 38 bore, one could adjust the load to one's comfort. Do you know how many grains of powder constituted a standard load for that beast?? The Walker's cylinders were prone to bursting when loaded with the maximum powder charge. I believe the Walker was intended to take 60 grains of powder. The Colt had a six shot cylinder but it was rarely carried with all six chambers loaded for safety reasons. Striking the hammer, as when dropped, would fire the cap it was resting on. That was altered later. Also, the Colt would get jammed when percussion cap pieces would fall off and into the back of the of the cylinder. As graceful and well balanced as it was, the Colt had some problems. I am not surprised the Adams was preferred. I would hate to carry that thirty eight bore monster. The Walker was not carried on the hip but in holsters mounted on the saddle. The Texas Ranger often carried the .36 Paterson as a side arm.
The problem with the Walker bursting was mostly unfamiliar users putting the pointed bullets it used in the wrong way around - putting the pointy end to the powder charge meant you were packing far more powder around it than if you put the proper, flat side to the charge.
ironanvil1 No. The problem was that the cylinders were made by a subcontractor who did not harden the steel properly. The cylinder was even a different colour than the rest of the gun because it was not properly hardened. Most of the Rangers started reducing the powder charge, using less powder than was originally intended.
10:11, not bang bang bang bang bang bang, but bang bang bang bang bang click. The thing with a single-action, it partially pulls the trigger back, so you have a shorter trigger pull, therefore less time for a hasty pull to spoil your aim. Ideally, you have one that can do both, like the Beaumont-Adams. Don't know how the British word it particularly, here in America nobody uses the term "bore" with a shotgun, they are all "gauge" (20-gauge, 12-gauge, etc., except for the .410), though they mean the same thing. I should have read the comments before posting, apparently everybody has been saying that.
Part 2 Shot placement is also key. Without good sights, most people used point shooting back then. They drew and fired from the "hip" or retention position, or simply extended out their arm and tried to point the gun like it's an extra finger. Neither is a very accurate way, especially at distance, tho it is useful for close distance with little time when your and or the opponent are moving. A single action only aimed shot it more likely to strike a foe in the "A box" which is the chest center mass area aligned with the spine. Only hits to the central nervous system instantly disable, and hits to the heart and lungs are what most reliably disable quickly with the fewest hits. Gut shots are painful and very mortal, but not so good at instant incapacitating people. The belly is where you're quite likely to hit when shooting out of the holster close up from the retention position going "bam bam bam" or with your sword in front of you blocking and the revolver fired from close up to your body. Incidentally, that's a BIG advantage of the "bobbed hammer" design the Adams has. The spur used to cock the hammer can get caught on things or gets in the way, especially when held tight to the body, clothing or gear can stop the hammer or mess with your trigger press and most often a snagged spur of the hammer is what messes with a cowboy's draw. I've made that mistake myself several times, you just gotta keep going and make lemonade - never stop or restart the drill.a On early revolvers (like the Colt single action army) a protruding hammer can also cause the firearm to shoot when smacked hard. So, the 6 shot Colts were often carried with only 5 loaded chambers in the cylinder anyway. This defect is why many people think guns "just go off" even tho its a 19th century problem with a very few guns. Skallagrim does a FANTASTIC demonstration of this with his, using a mallet to smack his Ruger Super RedHawk .357 magnum revolver (best fighting wheelgun on the planet IMO without something highly customized). I have the .44 magnum of the same pistol, and love it to death. I should have got the Alaskan model tho, the 2 inch barrel really helps with draw speed and when being mauled by a bear, a 6 inch barrel is for hunting or distance shooting. With modern powders and barrel consistency etc you don't loose much velocity with snubby guns, especially when you're very close like in most self-defense situations. Colt vs. Adams... Schofield wins! Reliability is the issue. No matter what gun it is, if it doesn't work it is crap. Soft nipples, the inability to dry fire therefore, is a deal breaker to me. Primers getting stuck in the cylinder is bad, but proper care and loading and maintenance have a great deal to do with that. Also, that's why you carry two! The great thing about sidearms is you can have so many! That's why one handed sword and pistol go so well together. You can wear both, and a knife, and carry a longgun (shotgun or rifle). Very formidable, adaptable, and redundant. That's why that's how I roll. Answer: The group that did dry fire only. I think that may be a reason British officers preferred double action, lack of skill because they didn't grow up shooting like Americans often do and they did not have adequate training and practice to become anything more than target range shooters. Target range shooting is like foil fencing. Good basics, but far removed from combat. I would also say, that I think a European officer would probably have an advantage over an American officer in a swordfight, because here most people think swords are decorations or sharp caveman clubs and that they are shaped different way to look different kinds of cool or scary. I know we had our fencing system to, but it's also about the collective cultural level of skill and knowledge and especially experience in the population you have to draw from. I'd never think of giving Americans a thrust only or thrust dominant sword like a rapier, they wouldn't know what to do with it. Same reason I wouldn't give most people a 1911 or single action only revolver, it's an expert's gun and you need a lot of skills "on farm" to take advantage of it. To most shooters, they won't have any difference shooting a 1911 or a Glock. For experts, the difference is clear. It's why Travis Haley and his unit put on 1911s when they KNEW they were going into violence, and wore their Glocks all the time. Deliberately sacrifcing capacity and even some ruggedness, for a better trigger pull and finer grip, because they are experts and can make it pay off, and they NEED that 2nd shot that .1 second sooner. British officers aren't like Travis Haley. I'd give them Glocks today for that reason, not $5000 1911s. I'm no expert either, I carried a 1911 for 3 years (and through the scariest shit of my life, VERY glad I had it) but I switched to a Glock 5 years ago and never looked back. It hasn't left my side since. So don't think I'm posturing like some great warrior or skilled firearms instructor or ace gunman, or that I'm just a single-action only or Colt or American gun fanboy. If anything, I'm a Russian and Austrian gun fanboy =) Glock and Kalashnikov for life, never looked back. Again, I truly hope that all that helps you reconsider your statements about "double action is better than single action." You really sound like a katana fanboy there Matt, sorry. Curved is not better than straight, cut is not better than thrust, they are different. I mean, what happened to "context?" Or I wrote all that and you don't even both to read what I say anymore... Sorry about going crazy and rude and vulgar at the start. I had a rough entry to RUclips years ago, and I figured the comments section was just a nest of zombies from then on. So I just blah blah blah whatever stream of consciousness I felt like to give you a few cents (or quid?) or whatever a comment with X characters is worth. I was amazed when you actually answered, or other people engaged me in rational conversation, so I tried to tone it down and actually be academic like I normally am. I hope I didn't give you a bad impression of me, America, Alaska, and "gun fans" in particular. Peace.
Amazing! Whats the powder charge and weight of ball you were meant to used with that thing? I read on an account by a British officer in India, Major Henry Shakespear, that he used a conical bullet of three quarter of an ounce (330 grains!) with about one drachm (27.5 grains) of fine powder on his 38-bore Adams, now that would have been a real handful!
That thing is the same size as my Ruger Super-Redhawk in .44 magnum (will also shoot .44 Special, .44 Russian, etc). That's a sweet antique. I wish I had money to collect such things, they'd be fuel for future lectures. I only own weapons for 100% function or 100% historical value.
I was under the impression that four bore was primarily used in punt guns( massive shotguns fired from the shoulder or mounted on a boat ( punt) and used for commercial fowling( killing large groups with a single "blast") before farm raised water fowl displaced wild caught birds in market prominence.
Get a second camera and focus it at a table in front of you. Then you just put the gun or sword on the table. Super easy to edit the cuts between the main and macro if the two cameras are just running.
Nice hand-cannon, Matt! Bore/gauge (basically): "gauge of a firearm is a unit of measurement used to express the inner diameter (bore diameter) of the barrel. Gauge is determined from the weight of a solid sphere of lead that will fit the bore of the firearm, and is expressed as the multiplicative inverse of the sphere's weight as a fraction of a pound, e.g., a one-twelfth pound ball fits a 12-gauge bore. Thus there are twelve 12-gauge balls per pound, etc. The term is related to the measurement of cannon, which were also measured by the weight of their iron round shot; an 8 pounder would fire an 8 lb (3.6 kg) ball." --Wikipedia: Gauge.
If he had just said "its the same as gauge," most Americans would have understood immediately. Gauge is not an uncommon term in the U.S. when describing shotguns. Bore on the other hand is quite uncommon.
Can you make a video about using revolvers in Crimean war. Or can you recommend any books about it. There are not so much information in russian sources.
Part 3 Forgot this bit, it should have been in with the rest. You can use a single-action only revolver with 2 hands, all pistols are more effective this way. It especially pays off with a SAO revolver. Use the support hand thumb to cock the hammer after every shot, your support side thumb should be wrapped back across your trigger hand anyways, so it's right there ready to go. With my DA/SA revolver I find that using this method to fire only single-action shots with 2 hands is actually faster than firing double-action, either one or two handed. It's also MUCH more accurate. Fallout 4 has an excellent animation of this technique, it's how a revolver is meant to be run with 2 hands, and it would work EXACTLY as well on a single-action only revolver, except you would not have double action as a back up. SAO is also safer in one regard. You can pull the trigger ALL day, but until you cock the hammer (a deliberate action which EVERYONE knows what it means) the trigger will not fire the gun. With a double-action only revolver, all it takes is a trigger pull. There IS no safety! Double-action only revolvers are the most unsafe pistols in the world. Even Glock has a trigger safety on the trigger, and you can leave the chamber empty. On DAO revolvers, if you pull the trigger, it goes bang. There is a high price to be paid for negligence or low skill with that gun. Also, if left loaded and lying around with small children etc, its a VERY unsafe thing to have. It's also not the greatest pocket pistol or purse gun, because you're relying on nothing but a long heavy trigger press for safety. It can be done, and some pistols are better at it than others, but it can also be done very wrong.
If you want a great historical source on the use of revolvers, read "Jim Cirillo's Tales of the Stakeout Squad" by Paul Kirchner. That man was like Wyatt Earp, Wild Bill, and Doc Holiday rolled into one.
Good review video! Nice Revolver! Too bad the 1851 Adams revolver had no loading lever or a Recoil shield. The Beaumont Adams also made a M1854 Dragoon 50 caliber percussion revolver. Many experts say that the William Tranter revolvers seem superior to the Adams and Tranters also came in the Behemoth 50 and 577 calibers. The Austrian offshoot of Adams, the Josef Scheinigg M1860 revolver in 55 caliber was an improved version of the Adams revolver one the most powerful manufactured percussion revolvers. It would be good if the historic replica firearms manufacturers would produce firing replicas of the various British percussion revolvers.
How much power do you need? Depends is you are planning to walk away from the combat, or be left in a pit somewhere. .50 might be loaded mildly, though.
Man, I love this channel. You're really informative and you talk about interesting things, but also your fucking goofy. Goofy in the best way. Not to be off-putting, but one might deem you a swordboi.
Keep in mind that the reason Aldo Uberti got into the business in the first place was because he saw a market for American Civil War reenactment, given that it was the 1960's and the U.S. was commemorating the 100-year anniversary. Getting manufacturers interested would depend on how keen you folks are about reenacting the classic exploits of the Empire.
The colt walker claimed to be the most powerful handgun ..some people say until the advent of the .357 magnum. That o lyrics holds true in revolvers because the adve t of the 7.62 x 25 tokarev held the title of most powerful handgun until the .357 .....but it was not a revolver round.
The difference is "owning" and "shooting". If you just want to collect and own antique pistols (such as this Adams), then you can do that without any licences. If you want to *shoot* it, that's a different story. Then you need an FAC for the pistol and an explosives licence if you want to use black powder.
I have never seen a real representation of the operation of the old pre-cartridge revolvers. would you do a video where you demonstrate the loading in detail?
The basic terminology is: single-action only SAO (must cock to fire), double-action only DAO (hammer cocks as trigger pressed), and single/double-action S/DA (shooter's choice). Unless you are target shooting, hunting, can count on reliable protection/cover, or very much an expert SAO makes little sense. It is helpful to safety that the trigger is an inert object until the hammer is cocked, a deliberate action that ANYONE who has seen guns before understand! Both trigger types are NOT drop or cock safe, as they don't have transfer bars etc like modern wheelguns. In an auto-loader a SAO trigger really helps with very high rates of fire. A 1911's semi-automatic action can still fire 50% faster than an AK47 on full-auto! See Gerry Miculek if you don't believe me. DAO gives you a better DA trigger, and some shooters (like Jim Cirillo) never found much use for cocking the hammer, so preferred DAO even in the mid-late 20th century. You're probably just going to grab the gun and squeeze the trigger as fast as you can aim the gun to your scared satisfaction, to optimize the trigger for it! The S/DA gives you both options, which is the most practical and tactical, but both the SA and DA trigger presses will be a bit worse than SAO and DAO triggers, all other things being equal of course! If I have ANY spare time, I cock the hammer on my Ruger SuperRedhawk, and try to immediately after recoil with my support hand thumb while the sights are brought back into alignment. The same is true for auto pistols, a 1911 is a SAO auto loader and has a better trigger Beretta M9 (S/DA) or than Glocks (ALMOST DAO, but their trigger reset makes them like a S/DA if your skill is there). The advantage of an SAO trigger is it makes more precise shots easier to do; smaller targets at longer range is more typical when people shoot back at you and use cover/concealment, which is what is to be expected in the US more often than in colonial wars against people without access to guns. SAO trigger press is also a common skill and feel with lever/bolt-action rifles and pump-action shotgun triggers, which helps training. While DAO would be advantageous for shooting multiple enemies rapidly at close to melee distance, the skill of the shooter makes a bigger difference than trigger type at rate of fire. The single greatest impact on a firearm is the shooter, and the greatest impact the shooter has is usually their trigger press. SAO revolvers have the finest triggers I've ever pressed, some of the well-maintained antiques were better than my $5000 Anschutz target rifle! Techniques like cocking the hammer as you draw as well as index the weapon for firing, doing "the fan," or just 2 hand pistol shooting (so a SAO is only slower than a DAO when used 1 handed...) and other "shootist" tricks allow SAO to have a high rate of fire, especially in pairs. Cock both pistols held in the up/workspace position, index one pistol on target and fire, as the fired pistol returns to up/workspace position it is cocked, as the fired pistol comes up the other (cocked) pistol indexes the target and fires. Repeat the last few steps until dry. Its a bit like "dual wielding" in melee, the attack and defend at the same time thing, you shoot and cock at the same time. Indexing is the "COD auto aim" technique for real life. You can point your finger very accurately at things, you keep your finger off the trigger in a pointing position anyway until ready to shoot, so just point at what you want to shoot with your finger from the compressed ready/retention position or as you bring the sights to eye level and lo! your sights are on target like a cowboy. It's often easier, more accurate, and more effective to rapidly index targets that aim in, shift the sights, keep holding breath and shifting against excess tension as you drift further away from natural point of aim, etc.
I'd just simplify the labeling with Single Action, Double Action, and Full Action. Single Action triggers have, as you guessed it, a single function: to release a loaded hammer. The Full Action trigger is your DAO: the trigger does all the work, whether you like it or not. Cycling the action is done fully by the trigger alone. Double Action triggers can perform two tasks: load up the hammer with potential energy, then release that hammer. But, furthering that, a spurred hammer lets you manually cock the hammer to have it perform like a Single Action. You have options. _Two_ options. The 'Double' in DA doesn't actually denote the dual functions of the action, but it sure makes it stick that way in peoples' minds.
@@BogeyTheBear I like describing it accurately better. I've never heard anyone use the term "full action," and everyone who really knows their stuff about firearms uses the terms SAO, DAO, and DA/SA. "Full" action implies it has something the others don't, when in reality DA/SA has the worst DA and SA trigger press
In North America, at least, we use "gauge" instead of "bore". So you'd have a 12-gauge or 20-gauge shotgun, for example. Also, what kind of bird are you using 4-gauge on? Pterodactyls? Seems like that would turn an ostrich into feathers and a bad smell.
They were used for shooting regular sized water birds, at whole flocks of them to be exact. The idea was to bring down a dozen or two at the same time, as they were mostly used by market hunters who supplied restaurants and grocery stores back then.
Not to be pedantic, but it's either "fifty cal" or it's .50 INCHES, not ".50 cal" (which would be a projectile of 0.005 inches or "five one thousandths of an inch" in diameter). In most cases (the way you use it) just drop the "cal" entirely and you'd be correct. A fifty cal projectile is a half inch in diameter, and a 22 cal is 0.22 inches in diameter. See the mathematical relationship there?
To be fair, using a projectile of 0,005 inches accelerated with a powerful magnetic coil to hypersonic (multiple Machs) or even very low relativistic speeds would presumably offer extremely good penetration, virtually no drop-off at any sane shooting distances and practically limitless carried ammo, energy source not included. You could presumably make a revolver-like weapon with the cartridges consisting of one-time-use extremely high yield precharged condensators to provide the acceleration current. Not a possibility with 19th century technology though. Maybe when we are able to produce monolayer graphene in any real quantities.
If we really get it moving at such high speeds, not quite. In order for a projectile to successfully penetrate a target, it must not disintegrate on contact, and no known material could stand that kind of impact. A relativistic projectile will, upon contact, essentially disintegrate in an explosive manner due to the extreme impact it has when decelerating in a solid substance. This will also naturally greatly rise the projectile and impact area temperature, and gaseous or plasma state iron for example is not the friendliest thing to human tissue. There's a reason why large relativistic speed bodies are compared to nuclear weapons in their destructive capability. Now, of course, the natural following observation is that atmosphere is not a vacuum, and thus it should have an effect on the projectile as well. This is correct, and a miniature relativistic projectile in atmosphere will explode after a certain distance depending on the air pressure, projectile material and projectile speed if it is not vaporized due to friction beforehand. Larger projectiles stand the travel better. The difference could be visualized by imagining a micrometeor and a meteor travelling through the atmosphere. A micrometeor will burn completely resulting in a shooting star, while a large meteor might become a meteorite by surviving the fall through the atmosphere.
"Colt was famous for his hardened nipples, which could withstand numerous blows from a hammer without bursting."
- Matt Easton 2017
Naaaah too easy.
Adams nipples sometimes squished or even bursted with repeated use.
He delegated the breastfeeding to Eve.
colt made all men equal, with hardened nipples.
If you see an officer with a pistol that large, you may wonder: "Is he compensating for something?"
The answer is most likely "Yes, for the shorter reach of his sword."
"One of the advantages of Colts is that they have hardened nipples"
-Matt Easton
Naturally, as it was made from cold, hard steel
Some woman somewhere: maybe i am a colt...
For my fellow Americans, we use the word "gauge" instead of "bore", as in shotguns. For everyone, what it means is the size of a round lead ball quantified in division of one pound of lead. So for an easy one, a 16GA or 16 "bore" is sized for a one ounce lead ball. I don't know where you come up with 54 bore for .44 inch caliber, 44 cal is 50 bore, but you are right that .50 cal is 38 bore. But what mattered is that lead was sold by the pound, and divided into easy numbers to count. Navy pistols were 100 bore, or .36 cal. Then there were screw ups like the LeMatt pistol. After designing the thing, the cylinder walls were too thin at .44, so they made it smaller, some .40 or .41, and included a bullet mold with it as a solution, since balls that size were otherwise unavailable. That was almost the perfect pistol for it's day.....
I'm of the thought that this is one of those examples, where .50 was as big as they thought they could get away with boring the things out, and that's where they came up with 38 bore, since that is the correct way of expressing it, although it is not an even number. It was therefore, a proprietary size, and probably also included a bullet mold as a solution. You won't find lead balls for it just anywhere, nor could you back in the day.
Hi, I can assure you that 54 bore was the standard size for British military revolvers (never seen a 50 bore, though I do own a 56!) and that these 54 bores (which are marked as 54 bore on the frame) correspond roughly to .44 although perhaps a little bit larger - between .44 and .45
@@scholagladiatoria Thompson and Lagarde conducted testing with early auto-loading pistols and the revolvers of the day in the early 20th century. They concluded a bare minimum caliber to have a fair chance or rapid incapacitation was .45. They hung up cows and shot them and saw what bullets did how much damage to what bits and Lagarde gave his expert opinion of what it would take to reliably stop someone against their will. Lagarde had been a doctor in the military for a long time and treated mass amounts of casualties in several wars and conflicts and battles. He also proved the septic nature of bullets and that shooting them did not sterilize them.
During World War 1 Lagarde wrote an excellent book called "Gunshot Injuries" on the effects every type of bullet in his day (and days previously, all the way back to the 16th century) had on every part of the human body (with medical picture examples) and gives the best known medical practice of the day to treat it. From children's toy pistols to round musket balls of the Napoleonic era to conical bullets of the US Civil War to the flat nose lead of the Wild West lever/wheelguns to the full metal jacket bullets of the .30-06 and .303 Enfield etc. I highly recommend it!
Wait a minute, so today I got gun videos from Ian, Karl, AND Matt? Christmas has come early!
Scholagladiatoria goes Forgotten Weapons?
4 bore is necessary to stop Emu cavalry.
Were not they outdated during the Great Emu War?
AB8511 Yes, that's why the humans lost.
EMO cavalry?
Yeknodathon Smaller calibre is more than adequate for that.
Emus ate my baby!
Very interesting. British novels are full of references about Adams revolvers. It’s great to learn more about them. They look very well made.
Keep in mind unless the revolver had a safety notch to rest the hammer on you’d have to rest the hammer on an empty chamber. Adams revolvers got around it by using a spring safety that disengaged automatically when you pulled the trigger.
Doesn't the number before "bore" refer to how many balls of lead that size would make up 1lb. So 12 x 12 bore shots weighs 1lb.
Yes, it means the fraction of a pound of lead makes up round.
I never knew that. Interesting
You are correct. It was used by gunsmiths and ammo makers, so they knew "how many bullets this pound of lead will make for this or that gun." Caliber is much more relevant to the shooter, for stopping power understanding etc, than bore is to the gunsmith or manufacturers.
I love the asthetics of the old U.S. revolvers, The british ones have a more industrial look though.
Some might even say they look ugly.....lol
As an American who's lived around guns my entire life, I can say most people most of the time are purely drawn to how the gun looks, often picking a worse weapon because of it.
I do agree tho, many old US wheelguns are beautiful. One of the reasons to not be so "industrial" looking is slight shifting of where the mass of metal and wood is on the weapon to give it better balance and feel, to help with drawing, indexing, holding the gun on targets for long periods of time, etc. It's more difficult to make tho. But it often has the effect of making the gun (or weapon in general) more aesthetically pleasing.
I'm often amazed at how well and balanced Wild West guns handle in the moment, especially compared to their weight on a scale. Or the scale weight and handling characteristics of Modern firearms, which look VERY industrial.
Winchester Model 1897 shotgun etc type guns compared to Remington 870 or Spas 12 are good examples.
Funny I feel ..Just the Opposite!! English----Delicate "clockwork" + engraved artwork. Colt ---clean machined mechanical business like INDUSTRIAL!! No accounting folks!
That's very interesting. The first American double action revolvers apparently had very delicate mechanisms that made them much less durable so they would end up using them single action anyway. That's amazing that British guns designers were first to make a functional and durable double action revolver.
There's just something appealing about old revolvers that I don't really get from modern guns.
TIL that in England/Europe (probably most English speaking places that aren't North America) the term used for the size of a shotgun is 'bore'. In the USA at least the only term I've ever heard is 'gauge' instead of 'bore', and the most common shotgun sizes are .410cal (likely the only common shotgun size I've ever come across that uses caliber instead of gauge), then 20 gauge, 16 gauge, 12 gauge, and 10 gauge. Don't think I've ever run across any other shotgun sizes
Sounds very british, "Let's not announce the dimension of something, but refer to it through some conversion."
Mika Luostarinen I believe it was more prectical in the early days of musketry when soliders used to make their own lead balls, therefore the bore size was very useful. In any case, it its not very difficult to learn different measuring systems. Its fun to learn.
It's basically an old form of measurement that's still in use today that was more common elsewhere but has fallen out of fashion in other industries.; like the continued use of grains for measuring the weight of a bullet and the propellant.
"Is there a linear relationship?" "Oh heavens no, it's diameter is related to bore by the power of 3"
We used to have 144 pence to the £. So, yes, we like to do it the hard way.
4 bore shotguns were mostly used by market hunters to mow down masses of waterfowler via spread of shot. Some sport hunter used them, but its really overkill for anything as the 8 and 10 bores of that time would kill high flying geese at 80-100 yards if a man knew what he was doing.
The other (very specialized, very minor) use for the 4-bore was for elephant hunting (!). The Boers commonly used converted 4-bore British waterfowling guns (the barrel shortened to make them managable on horseback) for going after elephants, cape buffaloes, rhinoes, etc which they called 'roers'. Frederick Courteney Selous used two such cannons during his ivory hunting days, made by Isaac Hollis if I remembered correctly. One time his gunbearer made the mistake of double loading one of them, and he DID actually pull the trigger! Needless to say he was flattened by the recoil.
Very nice condition! Always wished one of the Italian makers would produce a decent Adams replica.
I got a .50 caliber Deane Adams revolving pistol about a year ago from IMA and I made sure it was functional- and all parts intact, it was in amazing condition and I’ve fired 30 rounds through it, I love it even if it’s not the most accurate. It’s just too much fun! I have a few videos on mine and a disassembly.
Standard doctrine was to shoot all revolvers/pistols one handed anyway, so I really don’t see that being anything unordinary at the time that one could shoot one handed. Fanning the hammer was rarely ever done, It mainly become popular in the 20th century with the movie industry. Same as cocking the hammer with the other hands thumb while being gripped with both. That has really only become popular quite lately with Cowboy Action Shooting competitions. But I agree that DA would have been a great advantage at the time.
Agreed!
The preferred way to cock the revolver was known as the Calvary cock. You would basically point the barrel facing upwards, cock the hammer with the thumb of the shooting hand allowing the used cap to fall out of the back helping to prevent it from getting caught in between the cylinder and frame causing a jam.
Later on in the century you also had the Tranter .577 revolvers, and the rather insane .600 Gilon.
Adding my vote for Ian of Forgotten Weapons to collaborate with you.
But are you going to drop some acid on it to see if it's wootz?
First time I read this moment I thought you were suggesting he should get high.
Matt, most of your American viewers are unfamiliar with "bore" for a bullet/barrel size. More familiar with the term "gauge" for the measurement. ("12 Gauge")
I agree that 4 bore is good for large birds. It is about 26mm, larger than many Soviet/Eastern Block Anti-Aircraft systems.
4 bore and larger were usually punt guns (mounted to a swivel on a boat) for commercial hunting, they put out an enormous pattern of shot that could bring a lot of birds down in one shot. There were 4 bore rifles for very large game, though.
The 'bore' denotes the number of spherical lead balls of the bore diameter that total one pound in weight. Hence a 4-bore would chamber a lead ball weighing four ounces (4 x 4 ounces = 16 ounces = one pound).
Wait, you’re not Gun Jesus
Ian is Gun Jesus
Skall is pommel Jesus
Lindy is beige Jesus
MATT IS SWORD JESUS!
what about Hickok45?
Hickock45 is a gibbering idiot and a his knowledge pales in comparison to Gun Jesus, hallowed be thy name.
usaid alfatih
Metatron is pasta Jesus
usaid alfatih And the other Ian (LaSpina (sp?)) is Armor Jesus.
Shad is Castle Jesus. (Machicolations!!!)
Metatron is Roman/Japanese Jesus.
Thrand is testing Jesus.
Joerge Sparve is God.
An excellent video ! One thing you've missed is how much powder was used. I've owned and fired a number of black powder guns and all the Colts you mentioned. The Navy model (Colts biggest seller) normally used 25 to 35 grains of 3f black powder while my 1860 Used from 35 to 50 with a. 44 caliber led ball or bullet. I also owned a Sharps carbine in 54 can. with 100 grains of 3f! I also had a copy of a Sharps advertising booklet. It had many testimonials of dropping a buffalo with one shot, etc. It was also claimed that you could kill 3 Indians with one shot as long as they were in line ! LOL! It's really the stopping power is determined by the number of grains of black powder behind the ball that's important. As for single v. double action it's a matter of hand size. People back then we're smaller than today. Our local city museum has some Civil War uniforms and clothing too. While I can easily fire either the Navy or the .44 hogleg using my thumb to cock the hammer, I can easily see that they couldn't. I would have thought it was the solid frame that would be it's big selling point. I know that was a major reason Remington guns were thought better ? Either way you've done a great job and I can't wait for more.
I wanted to point out that in the US we use the term gauge instead of bore. What bore or gauge means is a 38 bore or gauge is that it would take 38 bullets of its size to equal a pound. Hence a 12 gauge shotgun would take 12 round slugs would equal 1 pound of lead. His .50 cal would need 38 round balls of lead would equal a pound.
A thing you might already know. Sometimes they've made barrels for guns out of pattern-welded steel.
Yes I have a couple :-)
one thing you may know, those barrels also often suck. lol. my buddy has a gun with one thats had the barrel go bang at some point(theres a huge blow out on one side of the barrel where the charge caused the barrel to breach)
bmxriderforlife1234
I think that's the big problem with combined materials.
Check it for Wootz!
scholagladiatoria well show them to us! Lol
My buddy owns one of these made by John Blanch and son. He has the original box with oiler, bullet mold, patches, bullets and powder container. It is super slick and very minty and It looks really nice next to my Enfield Revolver No.2 MK1**. Thats a very nice acquisition.
easier way of explaining the bore thing, is that it denotes the number of round lead balls in a pound of lead. So a 4 bore is a quarter pound of lead in a round ball that fits in the barrel. 12 bore takes 12 balls to get a pound etc.
Since you're doing Adams, a vote to review the fight and battle scenes in "The Wind and The Lion." Sabers, bayonets, Colts, Adams, and a host of military long guns. Saber and Colt used versus bayonets even!
Really? I've not seen it, but I see that it's set in 1904!
The Perdicaris Affair as adapted by Jon Milius, who tries for historical accuracy. Brian Keith as Teddy Roosevelt, Candice Bergen as Mrs Perdicaris, US Marines assaulting the Pasha's palace at bayonet point (they showed that scene as a moto-movie during my Marine Boot Camp Indoc in '91). Sean Connery as Raisuli, the Berber Pirate King with a Scottish accent. The various Legations angling for advantage, the possibility of World War in 1904. And oh so many period weapons!
Beautiful weapons!
Despite being a huge blades fan I always get super excited when you do a firearms video.
For the Americans, bore means gauge.
Why did the webley-Scott become the standard over the Adams in later years?
Adams didn't really keep up with innovations after cartridge revolvers came in. Pinfire never caught on in Britain like it did in France and elsewhere, but when rimfire and centrefire started getting popular in Britain other companies seem to have taken up the market quickly. Webley had lost out to Adams in the cap'n'ball period, but they really stepped up with cartridge revolvers.
Love that you also do revolvers now and again!
Our great-grandpa Piet carried a pair of .44 cal Adams revolvers as a Union Cavalry officer in the American Civil War. He believed in the firepower of a double-action.
Had no idea double action revolvers existed back then! Thanks for making history interesting for me. If they talked about swords and guns from history in school, I might have gotten better grades lol
David Daniels You would be super surprised at what existed in the 19th century with regards to firearms technology. Forgotten Weapons covers a plethora of them. It is an awesome channel.
Bore or Gauge The number of round balls that could be cast from a pound of lead, A four bore would equal 4 ounces of lead, a 16 bore would be one ounce. So 54 balls of the diameter of the barrel. As an American I have to say given the choice at the time I would take an Adams. As far as the 6 vs 5 shot, the Adams could be carried with all 5 chambers loaded. The Colt was not safe to carry with all 6 loaded so in practical terms they were equal. Also the solid frame is a derinaltelly an advantage.
JacksonCZ gauge is ever so slightly different to bore because includes rifling
A good point. Bore is usually a rifled barrel, gauge is usually shotguns.
I think in the USA that is/was the case, but in Britain we used to use 'bore' for everything. A lot of our modern terminology comes from the USA - even the word 'shotgun' is from the USA; we used to call it a 'fowling piece'.
Percussion Colts were perfectly safe loaded with 6 shots, there is a slot between each chamber that the hammer nose can fit into to allow the Colt and Remington to be safely carried fully loaded.
www.google.com/search?q=colt+cylinder&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=VIWscqlxcuAiZM%253A%252CFw8xl0DPGQF-VM%252C_&usg=__ygyfmnoaN_cnFd7pbmfANF0hQuE%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj38ar675rYAhVHeSYKHST6BOMQ9QEILzAC#imgrc=yeu7XGj-pkm9AM: picture of both for comparison, personally I would not trust the Colt system.
The gauge or bore numbers refer to how many bullets you can get in ball form, from a pound of lead.
If you ever shoot it, please chronograph it, I'd like to see the results!
The number for bore (or gauge in the US) is how many lead balls of that size it takes to make a pound of lead. So it takes 12 lead balls of 12 bore size to make one lb, 4 lead balls of 4 bore size to make one lb, 38 lead balls of 38 bore size to make one lb, and so on.
I know what you're thinking... did he fire five shots or four? To tell the truth I've forgot myself amidst all this context...
No Matt Easton Video without sexual innuendo.
That's how we love it!
Larger calibre shotguns were used for longer range, not larger game. You selected the shot (pellet) size according to the size of your intended target. Shot disperses as it leaves the barrel. Too close and many pellet hits would mangle the game. Too far and the shot would spread further and too few pellets would hit the target and wound or even miss completely. It's difficult to get close to wildfowl, so larger shotgun loads were and are often used.
Wow.....I always thought colt had basically cornered the world market in revolvers....always good to learn 😊💯
NellyBoy 86.0 Oh man hardly. By the US civil war everyone and their dog was making revolvers.
Hunter Smith if you say so chief 🖒
12 gauge shotgun, I've never heard of a "12 bore" but I understand the sizing system you describe. The type of shot and shell used has more impact on projectile performance than the gauge of the shotgun used (within reason). A 12 gauge loaded with a 3.5 inch magnum shell of 00 buck-shot will never hunt birds as well as a .410 using any kind of shell and load of bird-shot.
The longer barrels were more necessary to achieve enough velocity to be effective back in the days before cordite (smokeless powder), and especially full metal jacket bullets. Those two innovations combined caused the single greatest leap in projectile velocity in history! A 5 inch barrel used to be a compact or "belly gun" in the days of black powder revolvers. The 1911 pistol and 230 grain hardball rounds forever made that the new size of service pistols. Barrels longer than 5 inches are for competition, sport, hunting, etc.
Fun fact, in North America, we use gauge instead of bore. So a standard shotgun is 12 gauge.
we use gauge for unrifled, and bore for rifled.
A old friend of mine, held one of the most splendid title's ever, that of 'Victorian pocket pistol Champion' ! beats Bishop or Lord Chancellor hands down.
A very nice pistol you have there! You could have mentioned the reason behind the "bore" designation in your description, it is of course that the bore number equates to the number of pure lead ball to the pound equal the bore of the gun, that is, a 12 bore equals 12 balls of bore diameter equal 1 pound, easy!
Origins of bore/gauge. The number of pure lead balls, the diameter of the barrel of the weapon, it takes to make a pound. 12 gauge/bore is .72in, 12 pure lead balls of .72inch diameter weighs 1 pound. Hence the ball of a 4 bore weighs a whopping 8 ounces. Bob's your uncle and all that.
I'm so jealous! Please show these revolvers in action.
Congratulations on your new acquisition. My own favorites from that era (more or less) were the big Trantors.
The double action had a big advantage over the single action. I think that with the 38 bore, one could adjust the load to one's comfort. Do you know how many grains of powder constituted a standard load for that beast??
The Walker's cylinders were prone to bursting when loaded with the maximum powder charge. I believe the Walker was intended to take 60 grains of powder.
The Colt had a six shot cylinder but it was rarely carried with all six chambers loaded for safety reasons. Striking the hammer, as when dropped, would fire the cap it was resting on. That was altered later. Also, the Colt would get jammed when percussion cap pieces would fall off and into the back of the of the cylinder.
As graceful and well balanced as it was, the Colt had some problems. I am not surprised the Adams was preferred.
I would hate to carry that thirty eight bore monster. The Walker was not carried on the hip but in holsters mounted on the saddle. The Texas Ranger often carried the .36 Paterson as a side arm.
The problem with the Walker bursting was mostly unfamiliar users putting the pointed bullets it used in the wrong way around - putting the pointy end to the powder charge meant you were packing far more powder around it than if you put the proper, flat side to the charge.
Depends on the weight of the DA trigger. I shot someone's Webly once, and the DA trigger pull was very reminiscent of climbing a mountain.
ironanvil1 No. The problem was that the cylinders were made by a subcontractor who did not harden the steel properly. The cylinder was even a different colour than the rest of the gun because it was not properly hardened.
Most of the Rangers started reducing the powder charge, using less powder than was originally intended.
Considering the subcontractor for the Walker was Whitneyville, I'm somewhat doubtful they were incompetent in firearms manufacture.
Macnutz420 people did also reload wrong.
Handled one of these once in original condition .It had a fantastic peacock blue finish.
10:11, not bang bang bang bang bang bang, but bang bang bang bang bang click. The thing with a single-action, it partially pulls the trigger back, so you have a shorter trigger pull, therefore less time for a hasty pull to spoil your aim. Ideally, you have one that can do both, like the Beaumont-Adams. Don't know how the British word it particularly, here in America nobody uses the term "bore" with a shotgun, they are all "gauge" (20-gauge, 12-gauge, etc., except for the .410), though they mean the same thing. I should have read the comments before posting, apparently everybody has been saying that.
That is some cannon.
Did you pour acid on the revolver to see if it is wootz steel?
I believe most firearms that old are iron, not steel, with the surface case hardened where necessary.
Part 2
Shot placement is also key. Without good sights, most people used point shooting back then. They drew and fired from the "hip" or retention position, or simply extended out their arm and tried to point the gun like it's an extra finger. Neither is a very accurate way, especially at distance, tho it is useful for close distance with little time when your and or the opponent are moving. A single action only aimed shot it more likely to strike a foe in the "A box" which is the chest center mass area aligned with the spine. Only hits to the central nervous system instantly disable, and hits to the heart and lungs are what most reliably disable quickly with the fewest hits. Gut shots are painful and very mortal, but not so good at instant incapacitating people. The belly is where you're quite likely to hit when shooting out of the holster close up from the retention position going "bam bam bam" or with your sword in front of you blocking and the revolver fired from close up to your body.
Incidentally, that's a BIG advantage of the "bobbed hammer" design the Adams has. The spur used to cock the hammer can get caught on things or gets in the way, especially when held tight to the body, clothing or gear can stop the hammer or mess with your trigger press and most often a snagged spur of the hammer is what messes with a cowboy's draw. I've made that mistake myself several times, you just gotta keep going and make lemonade - never stop or restart the drill.a On early revolvers (like the Colt single action army) a protruding hammer can also cause the firearm to shoot when smacked hard. So, the 6 shot Colts were often carried with only 5 loaded chambers in the cylinder anyway. This defect is why many people think guns "just go off" even tho its a 19th century problem with a very few guns. Skallagrim does a FANTASTIC demonstration of this with his, using a mallet to smack his Ruger Super RedHawk .357 magnum revolver (best fighting wheelgun on the planet IMO without something highly customized). I have the .44 magnum of the same pistol, and love it to death. I should have got the Alaskan model tho, the 2 inch barrel really helps with draw speed and when being mauled by a bear, a 6 inch barrel is for hunting or distance shooting. With modern powders and barrel consistency etc you don't loose much velocity with snubby guns, especially when you're very close like in most self-defense situations.
Colt vs. Adams... Schofield wins!
Reliability is the issue. No matter what gun it is, if it doesn't work it is crap. Soft nipples, the inability to dry fire therefore, is a deal breaker to me. Primers getting stuck in the cylinder is bad, but proper care and loading and maintenance have a great deal to do with that. Also, that's why you carry two! The great thing about sidearms is you can have so many! That's why one handed sword and pistol go so well together. You can wear both, and a knife, and carry a longgun (shotgun or rifle). Very formidable, adaptable, and redundant. That's why that's how I roll.
Answer:
The group that did dry fire only. I think that may be a reason British officers preferred double action, lack of skill because they didn't grow up shooting like Americans often do and they did not have adequate training and practice to become anything more than target range shooters. Target range shooting is like foil fencing. Good basics, but far removed from combat. I would also say, that I think a European officer would probably have an advantage over an American officer in a swordfight, because here most people think swords are decorations or sharp caveman clubs and that they are shaped different way to look different kinds of cool or scary. I know we had our fencing system to, but it's also about the collective cultural level of skill and knowledge and especially experience in the population you have to draw from. I'd never think of giving Americans a thrust only or thrust dominant sword like a rapier, they wouldn't know what to do with it. Same reason I wouldn't give most people a 1911 or single action only revolver, it's an expert's gun and you need a lot of skills "on farm" to take advantage of it. To most shooters, they won't have any difference shooting a 1911 or a Glock. For experts, the difference is clear. It's why Travis Haley and his unit put on 1911s when they KNEW they were going into violence, and wore their Glocks all the time. Deliberately sacrifcing capacity and even some ruggedness, for a better trigger pull and finer grip, because they are experts and can make it pay off, and they NEED that 2nd shot that .1 second sooner.
British officers aren't like Travis Haley. I'd give them Glocks today for that reason, not $5000 1911s. I'm no expert either, I carried a 1911 for 3 years (and through the scariest shit of my life, VERY glad I had it) but I switched to a Glock 5 years ago and never looked back. It hasn't left my side since. So don't think I'm posturing like some great warrior or skilled firearms instructor or ace gunman, or that I'm just a single-action only or Colt or American gun fanboy. If anything, I'm a Russian and Austrian gun fanboy =) Glock and Kalashnikov for life, never looked back.
Again, I truly hope that all that helps you reconsider your statements about "double action is better than single action." You really sound like a katana fanboy there Matt, sorry. Curved is not better than straight, cut is not better than thrust, they are different. I mean, what happened to "context?"
Or I wrote all that and you don't even both to read what I say anymore... Sorry about going crazy and rude and vulgar at the start. I had a rough entry to RUclips years ago, and I figured the comments section was just a nest of zombies from then on. So I just blah blah blah whatever stream of consciousness I felt like to give you a few cents (or quid?) or whatever a comment with X characters is worth. I was amazed when you actually answered, or other people engaged me in rational conversation, so I tried to tone it down and actually be academic like I normally am. I hope I didn't give you a bad impression of me, America, Alaska, and "gun fans" in particular.
Peace.
My favorite is the model 1858 Remington.44 caliber
Amazing! Whats the powder charge and weight of ball you were meant to used with that thing? I read on an account by a British officer in India, Major Henry Shakespear, that he used a conical bullet of three quarter of an ounce (330 grains!) with about one drachm (27.5 grains) of fine powder on his 38-bore Adams, now that would have been a real handful!
Christ i came in on "colt has hardened nipples"... every time matt every time. ya get me every single time
That thing is the same size as my Ruger Super-Redhawk in .44 magnum (will also shoot .44 Special, .44 Russian, etc). That's a sweet antique. I wish I had money to collect such things, they'd be fuel for future lectures. I only own weapons for 100% function or 100% historical value.
Waiting for annual Matt and Lucy comedy video.....😊
I was under the impression that four bore was primarily used in punt guns( massive shotguns fired from the shoulder or mounted on a boat ( punt) and used for commercial fowling( killing large groups with a single "blast") before farm raised water fowl displaced wild caught birds in market prominence.
Get a second camera and focus it at a table in front of you. Then you just put the gun or sword on the table. Super easy to edit the cuts between the main and macro if the two cameras are just running.
10:10 That's one too many bangs.
Bang Bang Bang, Bang Bang Bugger!
Pretty sure for Americans it's "gauge" vs "bore".
Nice hand-cannon, Matt!
Bore/gauge (basically): "gauge of a firearm is a unit of measurement used to express the inner diameter (bore diameter) of the barrel. Gauge is determined from the weight of a solid sphere of lead that will fit the bore of the firearm, and is expressed as the multiplicative inverse of the sphere's weight as a fraction of a pound, e.g., a one-twelfth pound ball fits a 12-gauge bore. Thus there are twelve 12-gauge balls per pound, etc. The term is related to the measurement of cannon, which were also measured by the weight of their iron round shot; an 8 pounder would fire an 8 lb (3.6 kg) ball." --Wikipedia: Gauge.
While that is technically true, 54 bore pistols are always .44 cal and 38 bore pistols are always .50 cal (or very slightly less, like .499)
If he had just said "its the same as gauge," most Americans would have understood immediately. Gauge is not an uncommon term in the U.S. when describing shotguns. Bore on the other hand is quite uncommon.
"Hardened nipples" - Matt Easton, December 2017.
I bet this would make a fine handgun hunting tool.
Wow i didnt know there was a .50 cal Adams, very cool i want one now lol!
used by cavalry.
naturally, if you've got a horse, you need a larger hole.
Can you make a video about using revolvers in Crimean war. Or can you recommend any books about it. There are not so much information in russian sources.
Matt just use the caliber to describe pistols and rifles, and gauge for shotguns, as rifles and pistols shoot bullets and shotgun uses shells or slugs
bore refferes to the number of equal diameter lead balls it takes to equal 1lb.
In origin that is true, but by this time is was essentially the same as gauge. A 12 bore or 54 bore always has the same gauge diameter.
12 bore is what we use here in Alaska for hunting wolverines.
Matthew Carberry i didn't know there are wolverines here lol
Part 3
Forgot this bit, it should have been in with the rest. You can use a single-action only revolver with 2 hands, all pistols are more effective this way. It especially pays off with a SAO revolver. Use the support hand thumb to cock the hammer after every shot, your support side thumb should be wrapped back across your trigger hand anyways, so it's right there ready to go. With my DA/SA revolver I find that using this method to fire only single-action shots with 2 hands is actually faster than firing double-action, either one or two handed. It's also MUCH more accurate.
Fallout 4 has an excellent animation of this technique, it's how a revolver is meant to be run with 2 hands, and it would work EXACTLY as well on a single-action only revolver, except you would not have double action as a back up.
SAO is also safer in one regard. You can pull the trigger ALL day, but until you cock the hammer (a deliberate action which EVERYONE knows what it means) the trigger will not fire the gun. With a double-action only revolver, all it takes is a trigger pull. There IS no safety!
Double-action only revolvers are the most unsafe pistols in the world. Even Glock has a trigger safety on the trigger, and you can leave the chamber empty. On DAO revolvers, if you pull the trigger, it goes bang. There is a high price to be paid for negligence or low skill with that gun.
Also, if left loaded and lying around with small children etc, its a VERY unsafe thing to have. It's also not the greatest pocket pistol or purse gun, because you're relying on nothing but a long heavy trigger press for safety. It can be done, and some pistols are better at it than others, but it can also be done very wrong.
"4 bore is for shooting very large birds" Dinosaurs perhaps?
If you want a great historical source on the use of revolvers, read "Jim Cirillo's Tales of the Stakeout Squad" by Paul Kirchner. That man was like Wyatt Earp, Wild Bill, and Doc Holiday rolled into one.
Good review video! Nice Revolver!
Too bad the 1851 Adams revolver had no loading lever or a Recoil shield. The Beaumont Adams also made a M1854 Dragoon 50 caliber percussion revolver. Many experts say that the William Tranter revolvers seem superior to the Adams and Tranters also came in the Behemoth 50 and 577 calibers.
The Austrian offshoot of Adams, the Josef Scheinigg M1860 revolver in 55 caliber was an improved version of the Adams revolver one the most powerful manufactured percussion revolvers.
It would be good if the historic replica firearms manufacturers would produce firing replicas of the various British percussion revolvers.
Matt, you might enjoy the Forgotten Weapons youtube channel.
Also, great trigger discipline, Matt. :)
I have watched many hours :-)
Need Forgotten Weapons collaboration on more in depth review!
I bought A remington pocket 31cal. Now I want that cannon !
You just cant get through a video without innuendo Matt
A lot cooler than what?
That's what I thought. It's killing me!!
How much power do you need? Depends is you are planning to walk away from the combat, or be left in a pit somewhere. .50 might be loaded mildly, though.
6:10 The middle of a battle seems like an odd time to go for a high-five. He's kinda early, too. His horse buddy hasn't even won yet.
Why are there no reproductions of this???
Man, I love this channel. You're really informative and you talk about interesting things, but also your fucking goofy. Goofy in the best way. Not to be off-putting, but one might deem you a swordboi.
Such a shame that you can't get good replicas of our British Revolvers as easily as you can the Colts or Remingtons
that's because your queen removed them from your hands and gave them to us =D
Keep in mind that the reason Aldo Uberti got into the business in the first place was because he saw a market for American Civil War reenactment, given that it was the 1960's and the U.S. was commemorating the 100-year anniversary.
Getting manufacturers interested would depend on how keen you folks are about reenacting the classic exploits of the Empire.
The colt walker claimed to be the most powerful handgun ..some people say until the advent of the .357 magnum. That o lyrics holds true in revolvers because the adve t of the 7.62 x 25 tokarev held the title of most powerful handgun until the .357 .....but it was not a revolver round.
Did the Beaumont-Adams come in a 38 bore version?
Yes indeed, the Beaumont Adams Dragoon was 38 Bore 50 caliber.
I wonder how many years, classes, and thousands of pounds and signatures it took to get a handgun in England.
None... You don't need a licence to own an antique firearm in the UK
You still need one to buy powder, though, don't you?
The difference is "owning" and "shooting". If you just want to collect and own antique pistols (such as this Adams), then you can do that without any licences. If you want to *shoot* it, that's a different story. Then you need an FAC for the pistol and an explosives licence if you want to use black powder.
How many built, compared to Colt London Factory numbers
I have never seen a real representation of the operation of the old pre-cartridge revolvers.
would you do a video where you demonstrate the loading in detail?
Edward Doernberg cap&ball on youtube. Not a frequent poster, but, very informative. Britishmuzzleloader is also a good chennel.
The basic terminology is: single-action only SAO (must cock to fire), double-action only DAO (hammer cocks as trigger pressed), and single/double-action S/DA (shooter's choice).
Unless you are target shooting, hunting, can count on reliable protection/cover, or very much an expert SAO makes little sense. It is helpful to safety that the trigger is an inert object until the hammer is cocked, a deliberate action that ANYONE who has seen guns before understand! Both trigger types are NOT drop or cock safe, as they don't have transfer bars etc like modern wheelguns. In an auto-loader a SAO trigger really helps with very high rates of fire. A 1911's semi-automatic action can still fire 50% faster than an AK47 on full-auto! See Gerry Miculek if you don't believe me.
DAO gives you a better DA trigger, and some shooters (like Jim Cirillo) never found much use for cocking the hammer, so preferred DAO even in the mid-late 20th century. You're probably just going to grab the gun and squeeze the trigger as fast as you can aim the gun to your scared satisfaction, to optimize the trigger for it!
The S/DA gives you both options, which is the most practical and tactical, but both the SA and DA trigger presses will be a bit worse than SAO and DAO triggers, all other things being equal of course! If I have ANY spare time, I cock the hammer on my Ruger SuperRedhawk, and try to immediately after recoil with my support hand thumb while the sights are brought back into alignment. The same is true for auto pistols, a 1911 is a SAO auto loader and has a better trigger Beretta M9 (S/DA) or than Glocks (ALMOST DAO, but their trigger reset makes them like a S/DA if your skill is there).
The advantage of an SAO trigger is it makes more precise shots easier to do; smaller targets at longer range is more typical when people shoot back at you and use cover/concealment, which is what is to be expected in the US more often than in colonial wars against people without access to guns. SAO trigger press is also a common skill and feel with lever/bolt-action rifles and pump-action shotgun triggers, which helps training. While DAO would be advantageous for shooting multiple enemies rapidly at close to melee distance, the skill of the shooter makes a bigger difference than trigger type at rate of fire. The single greatest impact on a firearm is the shooter, and the greatest impact the shooter has is usually their trigger press. SAO revolvers have the finest triggers I've ever pressed, some of the well-maintained antiques were better than my $5000 Anschutz target rifle!
Techniques like cocking the hammer as you draw as well as index the weapon for firing, doing "the fan," or just 2 hand pistol shooting (so a SAO is only slower than a DAO when used 1 handed...) and other "shootist" tricks allow SAO to have a high rate of fire, especially in pairs. Cock both pistols held in the up/workspace position, index one pistol on target and fire, as the fired pistol returns to up/workspace position it is cocked, as the fired pistol comes up the other (cocked) pistol indexes the target and fires. Repeat the last few steps until dry. Its a bit like "dual wielding" in melee, the attack and defend at the same time thing, you shoot and cock at the same time.
Indexing is the "COD auto aim" technique for real life. You can point your finger very accurately at things, you keep your finger off the trigger in a pointing position anyway until ready to shoot, so just point at what you want to shoot with your finger from the compressed ready/retention position or as you bring the sights to eye level and lo! your sights are on target like a cowboy. It's often easier, more accurate, and more effective to rapidly index targets that aim in, shift the sights, keep holding breath and shifting against excess tension as you drift further away from natural point of aim, etc.
I'd just simplify the labeling with Single Action, Double Action, and Full Action.
Single Action triggers have, as you guessed it, a single function: to release a loaded hammer.
The Full Action trigger is your DAO: the trigger does all the work, whether you like it or not. Cycling the action is done fully by the trigger alone.
Double Action triggers can perform two tasks: load up the hammer with potential energy, then release that hammer. But, furthering that, a spurred hammer lets you manually cock the hammer to have it perform like a Single Action. You have options. _Two_ options. The 'Double' in DA doesn't actually denote the dual functions of the action, but it sure makes it stick that way in peoples' minds.
@@BogeyTheBear I like describing it accurately better. I've never heard anyone use the term "full action," and everyone who really knows their stuff about firearms uses the terms SAO, DAO, and DA/SA. "Full" action implies it has something the others don't, when in reality DA/SA has the worst DA and SA trigger press
10:17 the dude with the blue uniform on that painting looks like cpt flint from black sails :D
In North America, at least, we use "gauge" instead of "bore". So you'd have a 12-gauge or 20-gauge shotgun, for example.
Also, what kind of bird are you using 4-gauge on? Pterodactyls? Seems like that would turn an ostrich into feathers and a bad smell.
They were used for shooting regular sized water birds, at whole flocks of them to be exact. The idea was to bring down a dozen or two at the same time, as they were mostly used by market hunters who supplied restaurants and grocery stores back then.
I was literally just talking about .50 cal revolvers... Is it fate?
It must be.
Not to be pedantic, but it's either "fifty cal" or it's .50 INCHES, not ".50 cal" (which would be a projectile of 0.005 inches or "five one thousandths of an inch" in diameter). In most cases (the way you use it) just drop the "cal" entirely and you'd be correct. A fifty cal projectile is a half inch in diameter, and a 22 cal is 0.22 inches in diameter. See the mathematical relationship there?
To be fair, using a projectile of 0,005 inches accelerated with a powerful magnetic coil to hypersonic (multiple Machs) or even very low relativistic speeds would presumably offer extremely good penetration, virtually no drop-off at any sane shooting distances and practically limitless carried ammo, energy source not included. You could presumably make a revolver-like weapon with the cartridges consisting of one-time-use extremely high yield precharged condensators to provide the acceleration current. Not a possibility with 19th century technology though. Maybe when we are able to produce monolayer graphene in any real quantities.
the problem is that it would zip right throw the target without much damage.
If we really get it moving at such high speeds, not quite. In order for a projectile to successfully penetrate a target, it must not disintegrate on contact, and no known material could stand that kind of impact. A relativistic projectile will, upon contact, essentially disintegrate in an explosive manner due to the extreme impact it has when decelerating in a solid substance. This will also naturally greatly rise the projectile and impact area temperature, and gaseous or plasma state iron for example is not the friendliest thing to human tissue. There's a reason why large relativistic speed bodies are compared to nuclear weapons in their destructive capability.
Now, of course, the natural following observation is that atmosphere is not a vacuum, and thus it should have an effect on the projectile as well. This is correct, and a miniature relativistic projectile in atmosphere will explode after a certain distance depending on the air pressure, projectile material and projectile speed if it is not vaporized due to friction beforehand. Larger projectiles stand the travel better. The difference could be visualized by imagining a micrometeor and a meteor travelling through the atmosphere. A micrometeor will burn completely resulting in a shooting star, while a large meteor might become a meteorite by surviving the fall through the atmosphere.