Cap & ball reloading, cylinder switch version:

[Viking]

I've read a few times that it was somewhat common to simply switch cylinders to reload back when the cap & ball revolver was the latest & greatest in firearms technology. Anyone know how spare cylinders were carried? Pocket? Pouch on belt? Provided that the pocket is empty of other things, can you safely carry a primed cylinder without risking one or several chambers going off, using modern caps?

[vaskidmark]

Depending on the amount of grease used to seal the chambers, and the amount of lint or other "stuff" in the pockets, carrying there probably would not cause a problem.

As for pouches, the answer is a definate, positive, unconditional "Maybe.  We aren't sure."  http://homeplace-artsstuff.blogspot.com/2011/01/swapping-cylinders-in-cap-and-ball.html  Seems the "first" well-recognized use of pouches was in the movie "Pale Rider".

Modern rigs seem to be equally represented between covered pouches and speedloader-like loops.  http://harrisonleather.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=68&Itemid=77

My preference would be for the covered pouch style as it seems to offer more protection from impact on the caps.

Might want to contact Jerry Miculek http://www.miculek.com/ and see just how fast he can do reloads from each style.

stay safe.

[Triphammer]

I remeber a belt pouch Civil War accoutrement from my NSSA days. May not have been completely authentic but they were common in 1975

[TommyGunn]

On another forum which has a dedicated black powder section there was a debate about how authentic cylinder switching was back in the Civil War/western movement.  Some people felt it didn't happen.  I think perhaps it did happen but wasn't very common.
A number of Confederate raiders and irregulars  believed "the fastest reload is another gun" philosophy and simply carried a number of revolvers.  This was probably the most common thing and was limited only by how many revolvers could be procured -- the Confederacy had limited production and never really had enough.
So it happened but, again IMHO, not very often.

[just Warren]

An extra gun would weigh more but grabbing that and putting it in to action seems a lot easier than trying to swap out cylinders.

[Perd Hapley]

An extra gun would weigh more but grabbing that and putting it in to action seems a lot easier than trying to swap out cylinders.

It was also established practice from the days of single-shot pistols.

[BlueStarLizzard]

On another forum which has a dedicated black powder section there was a debate about how authentic cylinder switching was back in the Civil War/western movement.  Some people felt it didn't happen.  I think perhaps it did happen but wasn't very common.
A number of Confederate raiders and irregulars  believed "the fastest reload is another gun" philosophy and simply carried a number of revolvers.  This was probably the most common thing and was limited only by how many revolvers could be procured -- the Confederacy had limited production and never really had enough.
So it happened but, again IMHO, not very often.

Well, wouldn't cost also be a factor. How much does the whole shebang cost as oppossed to just the cylinder? If the cylinders are super cheap compared to the whole thing, sure, I could see them doing it, but if they were more expensive, them I could see someone say "well, I'll just save up a bit more".
And how much, if any, fine tuning is needed on the induviduel cylinders to fit the gun?

[BlueStarLizzard]

An extra gun would weigh more but grabbing that and putting it in to action seems a lot easier than trying to swap out cylinders.

True, but reloading does takes a bit, so I could see occasions were being able to swap would be more effective then reloading, for example, when the fighting has slowed or stopped, but you're still in the feild.

[just Warren]

I read a first-person account of a reb officer who got stuck up against some barricades during an assault, emptied his revolver and then because the log-works kept the other side from seeing him he was able to curl up at the bottom, below the level of the firing slits and reload right there in the middle of the fight.  He might have appreciated an extra cylinder.

[MechAg94]

In the days of hand fitted guns, what would it take to fit multiple cylinders to the same gun?  I am sure it happened.  Pale Rider can't be wrong.  I just don't know how common it is. 

As for civil war raider cavalry, I would think if they did have multiple revolvers, they weren't issued but were captures taken off dead enemies or raided supplies and might be multiple calibers. 

[TommyGunn]

Well, wouldn't cost also be a factor. How much does the whole shebang cost as oppossed to just the cylinder? If the cylinders are super cheap compared to the whole thing, sure, I could see them doing it, but if they were more expensive, them I could see someone say "well, I'll just save up a bit more".
And how much, if any, fine tuning is needed on the induviduel cylinders to fit the gun?

Colt charged the U.S. government $25.00 apiece for the Colt 1860 Army, a .44 caliber 6 shot percussion revolver with an 8" barrel.  Remington made a similar size .44 caliber revolver that took the same ammo that cost $18.00 apiece.   At a guess, cylinders might go for $7-10 dollars.

In the days of hand fitted guns, what would it take to fit multiple cylinders to the same gun?  I am sure it happened.  Pale Rider can't be wrong.  I just don't know how common it is.  

As for civil war raider cavalry, I would think if they did have multiple revolvers, they weren't issued but were captures taken off dead enemies or raided supplies and might be multiple calibers.  

There was a LOT of handfitting involved in the interior lockwork and it is interesting how Colt and others devised an efficient process to make everything work right.  The cylinder and it's fitting OTOH while certain things were critical the mechanics of fabrication were advanced enough that, in general, the .44 Colt 1860 cylinder that fit one revolver would fit others, as well.   Some other makers that essentially made duplicates of Colt revolvers weren't so advanced and cylinders might or might not exchange.
So far as  how raiders procured multiple revolvers, it was done any way possible.  The Confederacy, as said, never really produced all the handguns they needed.  Sometimes officials didn't feel requests for multiple revolvers were justified and sometimes others did.  As for caliber, .44 and .36 were the two most common revolver calibers.  
There were some unusual ones though; the Confederacy used a peculiar 9 shot revolver called a Le Mat which was .41 caliber, and had a 20 gauge short barrel shotgun as the central arbor the cylinder rotated on.   The gun was a humongous piece of metal with an odd upward hinged loading arm.   It was manufactured in cottage industries across France and smuggled into the C.S.A.

The North had the stranglehold on major industries and didn't have the problems procuring guns the South had.  Colt 1851 in .36 calibers were bought in some abundance and .44 caliber Colt 1860s in greater abundance.  About halfway through the war some nimrod in charge of army purchases discovered that while Colt charged $25 for their .44 Model 1860 Army, Remington charged only $18 for their .44 so they started buying  more of the Remington.  These were also well made guns and soldiers liked them as they had a top-strap over the cylinder, and a one-piece frame and the design allowed a quick easy cylinder change (assuming, as said, that extra cylinders were to be had).  The Colt gun was a two piece unit and the barrel had to be pulled forward & off before the cylinder could be replaced, a sort of difficult process to do on horseback under enemy fire .... though the Remington was only marginally better under these circumstances.

[230RN]

Parenthetically, it should be pointed out that the 1861 Remington was (and still is) commonly called the "1858" Remington because of the patent date on the barrel.  It was, however, adopted as the 1861 Remington New Model, per the above post by TommyGunn.

Just to avoid possible confusion on these "model" dates.

I had a replica of one of these, and it is one beautiful work of art, in my opinion, with the bright blue steel contrasting with the brass frame.

With respect to how extra cylinders might have been carried, it was common in the "long rifle" muzzle loading days to have what was called a "possibles bag."  This was a slung pouch which carried extra balls, patches, flints, etc.  In other words, everything the frontiersman might "possibly" need as far as shooting was concerned, although the powder flask (or horn) was usually carried separately.  

I doubt that there was any formalization of the layout or construction of the possibles bag, and I don't know if the term was still used in the mid-19th century.

Terry, 230RN

REF:
American Rifleman, "I have this old gun," December 2013 p. 112

[Tallpine]

There were also paper cartridges for revolvers in those days.  The paper was treated to burn up with the powder.  I don't remember where, but I read about this a while back.  The site even had pictures of the original boxes.

So reloading in-frame wouldn't have to take that long: insert a cartridge into the front of the cylinder, press it down with the integral lever action ramrod, rotate the cylinder and repeat.

It might even be about as quick as swapping to a loaded cylinder, especially if you didn't carry the spare cylinder pre-primed.

Remember that was still the days of single shot muzzloading rifles, so just having a revolver with six shots was the equivalent of a 30 round magazine today 

[Boomhauer]

Has there been any mention of swapping cylinders in historical accounts?

[Tallpine]

Has there been any mention of swapping cylinders in historical accounts?

Not that I recall 

Remember that life on the "frontier" was not nearly as violent as portrayed by movies.  You were far more likely to use your six shooter to put down a horse with a broken leg than be involved in a desperate gunfight.

[Boomhauer]

Not that I recall 

Remember that life on the "frontier" was not nearly as violent as portrayed by movies.  You were far more likely to use your six shooter to put down a horse with a broken leg than be involved in a desperate gunfight.

If it isn't mentioned in historical accounts but only in movies, then I'm going to call it as either "did not happen" or "so seldom as to be insignificant"

I've never been terribly interested in that era so I haven't read much history on it, but when I was doing American Revolution historical work we referenced everything we could extensively, for historical accuracy. Lots of myths and such out there that we did not want to repeat.

[Ben]

If all C&P revolvers swap cylinders the way my 1851s do, it's not all that quick. On one of mine I almost always need to use a helper tool to pop that shim thingy out to release the cylinder. Sure, it's faster than charging a cylinder, but not anywhere near as fast as Clint Eastwood does it.

[French G.]

If all C&P revolvers swap cylinders the way my 1851s do, it's not all that quick. On one of mine I almost always need to use a helper tool to pop that shim thingy out to release the cylinder. Sure, it's faster than charging a cylinder, but not anywhere near as fast as Clint Eastwood does it.

He's using a New Army. It's fast. CAS does not allow loose cylinders to be primed. Not that they need to reload but some competitors will have a tupperware full of loaded cylinders they load up before the match on a bench loader.

[Ben]

He's using a New Army. It's fast. CAS does not allow loose cylinders to be primed. Not that they need to reload but some competitors will have a tupperware full of loaded cylinders they load up before the match on a bench loader.

Ah, gotchya. I gotta get me one of them New Army revolvers one of these days.

[Tallpine]

Which is better, .36 caliber or forty-four?   

[MechAg94]

It never really occured to me that Civil War cavalry would be issued more than one revolver.  I sort of assumed any extras were taken off dead enemies or friends or stolen from captured supplies. 

[230RN]

Quote from: Ben on Today at 10:32:27 AM
"If all C&P revolvers swap cylinders the way my 1851s do, it's not all that quick. On one of mine I almost always need to use a helper tool to pop that shim thingy out to release the cylinder. Sure, it's faster than charging a cylinder, but not anywhere near as fast as Clint Eastwood does it."

French G. responded:
He's using a New Army. It's fast. CAS does not allow loose cylinders to be primed. Not that they need to reload but some competitors will have a tupperware full of loaded cylinders they load up before the match on a bench loader.

I'm working from long ago memory, but if Ben's referring to the 1861/1858 New Army revolver, I recall that it's easier to roll the cylinder out to one side, and re-insert another one from the other side.  Forget now which side was which, but I found that out in actual practice.    Oh, and you have to put it on half-cock to do this.

Someone correct my recollections and assumptions if necessary, please.


What's really awkward is putting one of those .45 Colt centerfire conversion cylinders in, since you also  have to hold the back plate, which contains the firing pins, while you're inserting the cylinder.  Also, since you should only be loading five rounds, it's difficult to keep things registered so that when you're done, the empty chamber is under the hammer when you let the hammer down from half-cock.  This does not pertain to battlefield conditions, though.

Terry, 230RN

REFs:
(1) Picture of the conversion cylinder showing ammo and the cylinder with its back plate:
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/61/b3/04/61b304d00d8975de4d820ae102eb2cc9.jpg
(2) Picture of the conversion cylinder with back plate attached, with firing pins:
http://media.midwayusa.com/productimages/440x330/Primary/669/669935.jpg

[French G.]

Ben's talking about the '51, I'm talking about the '58/'61, henceforth called a ,58 by me since no one except gun trivia people get the '61 part. And you are correct about the cylinder in and out, it's mainly the hand that gets in the way, I slightly lift the hammer off of half cock and that helps. I also load 6, those things have good intermediate notches. I'm low volume so I load my cylinder in the gun, but prefer to remove it to grease the balls once loaded.

[Ben]

but prefer to remove it to grease the balls once loaded.

[Archer] Phrasing [/Archer]

[230RN]

Bennnn-ja-MIN !  You cut a switch off the willow tree and get over here right now !