Cap and Ball Revolvers

Anyone shoot these?

There's an muzzleloader enthusiast at work (OK he's a world-class medal winning member of the US Muzzleloader Team ) and I've been looking. I remember way back in my Marine days handling a Ruger Old Army thinking it was a beauty. Watched a couple of youtube (including an older Hickock45 episode) and it looks like fun..

Those who shoot black often are serious enthusiasts. Me, I've never gotten bitten by the bug. Friend of mine once took me shooting his black guns. The pistols were sort of fun, but the rifle, a Civil War replica of probably a Springfield, was a bear. Or so it felt at the time. Kicked like a mule.

For me, the biggest drawback is all the cleaning. I rather HATE cleaning guns. I do it from time to time because, well, you have to. But I avoid it a lot. Most modern handguns don't need all that much cleaning. Not like you're shooting corrosive primers. I personally believe the modern autoloader actually does better with a bit of carbon on the slide to help it along. Not so much wheelies, though. Rifles (not AR's) I clean right away.

But the whole cleaning process for shooting black just seems more than I want to put up with right after I get back from the range.

My primary shooting range used to host nationwide blackpowder bullseye matches. It doesn't anymore, but needless to say, there are a lot of people there who still shoot blackpowder.

I find the blackpowder revolvers very interesting. If I had a little more free time, I could see myself getting some Colt Navy and Army replicas and going at it.

Dev, my friend, I think you're missing out on one of shooting's greatest joys, cleaning the guns. For me it's a ritual. I head out with the dirty guns to my workshop, turn on a classic rock station, pull up a glass of whiskey, and go at it. And I don't just do a minor once over, I take them apart and get all the gunk out of every nook and cranny. There's something very therapeutic about getting a cherished gun immaculately clean. Hell, just the smell of Hoppes No. 9 makes me feel warm and happy all over.

TJ - I have well in excess of 30 guns (WELL in excess). ?You have any idea how long cleaning all of them would take. Like DAYS! Just so you get the picture, I have something like 13 1911's, and 8 lever guns. Just for starters.

I'm not talking about cleaning the whole collection, just those I shot when I get back from the range.

Cleaning the entire collection would take a very serious amount of whiskey.

You gotta clean, you gotta clean. No sense just doing a couple. Let them get dirty then clean them all. They have to be cleaned from time to time anyway.

Godzilla solvent (but keep it off the ivory grips - heck, keep ALL solvent off ivory grips).

I rather hate cleaning guns too. I enjoy casting. I enjoy loading ammo. I enjoy shooting guns. But man! I hate cleaning them.

?Ever take a couple of your 1911's apart and then try to remember which parts when to which weapon.

Sorry, Jim. Hijacked your thread.

back to Jim's main question, I did buy muzzle loader for the heck of it earlier this year. It is fun to shoot, but crappy to clean.

Devereaux wrote:Sorry, Jim. Hijacked your thread.

No problem sir!

You know, IF I were to shoot black, I would seriously consider the Remington 1858 model. It is cap 'n ball, but the cylinder comes out really easily, and the pistol is a full frame weapon, unlike the Colt stuff of the times. That means you could buy a couple extra cylinders and preload them (a la Clint in that movie he plays the preacher/former gunfighter in a gold town). Depending on cost of cylinders, I would consider 6-10 of them. That would mean a decent amount of shooting without any messy "reloading" - complete with waxing the front of the cylinders to prevent chain firing. 

My very limited exposure to a cap 'n ball type pistol is shooting my converted Navies. They shoot cartridges, but I had a lot of trouble getting them to the point of being able to shoot 5-6 loads through them without fouling so the cylinder wouldn't rotate. Granted, it's a Richards-Mason conversion cylinder, so strictly speaking I haven't shot the real black thing. But considering you set the cylinder front end shake by driving the wedge in to different depths, I am not sure it would be much better.

Colt Army 1860. Perhaps the most beautiful handgun ever.

Charlie Foxtrot wrote:  
Colt Army 1860. Perhaps the most beautiful handgun ever.

 Perhaps. But it's SO much easier to deal with the Remi.

Devereaux wrote:

Charlie Foxtrot wrote:  
Colt Army 1860. Perhaps the most beautiful handgun ever.

 Perhaps. But it's SO much easier to deal with the Remi.

Is true. But, if you want easy - you don't shoot black powder. Dem boys LIKE the prep, noise, smoke, stink and debris.

My coworker actually shoots a Rogers & Spencer and agrees the Colt is a poor design..that the Remington is better...but he says the Rogers & Spencer is designed to shoot more rounds before fouling starts to bind up the cylinder.

Don't know anyone who actually owns one. ?What are the advantages over a Remi.

Devereaux wrote:Don't know anyone who actually owns one. ?What are the advantages over a Remi.

IIRC it has to do with the spacing on the cylinder...that it won't bind up as quickly as a Remington in long shooting sessions.

I would guess, since black dirties up the front of the cylinder. But if there's more room in the front, there is also more gas escape and more distance for the ball to jump to the barrel.

Help me out here, TJ, but IIRC there is a specified gap for the front end shake on a cylinder. I know the Colts had a system whereby when you cocked the gun the mecchanism moved the cylinder forward against the barrel. Don't know if the Remi's and your gun did the same.

Yeah, that is correct. Even modern revolvers need to have a certain amount of gap between the front of the cylinder and the forcing cone. It's usually somewhere around 0.006"-0.007". If the gap is too large, accuracy and velocity suffer. If the gap is too small, then the cylinder will begin to bind against the forcing cone as powder residue starts to build up.

I believe that the abomination Nagant revolvers had a goofy system where the cylinder pressed up against the forcing cone right before the shot was fired. The concept was to provide a complete seal. Why that was deemed important is anybody's guess. Maybe they were trying to squeeze as much velocity as possible out of their anemic 7.62 ammo. Silly Russians.

I know the Colt Lightening and its larger brother both also moved the cylinder up against the forcing cone just before firing. I am somewhat sure the Colt CnB's did also - at least the Navy and Army. Can't speak to the Dragoon or Walker, and have no clue about the Patterson. I know that name and darn little else about it.