Civil War Question

[mandingo]

Why weren't troops issued more revolvers?  I would have taken a revolver over some rifle that took 20 seconds to load.

[SAS_KID]

because I belive the revolver wasn't as powerful as the rifle and i hope you know the rifle wasn't the main weapon for the armies. It was the bayonet and the rifle butt which were the main weapons in the revoulutionary and civil wars. FYI you wouldn't want to charge into an army with bayonets and rifle butts with a stinking revolver and bowie knife. The only regiments that i belive specialized with the rifle were teh 1337 Sharp Shooter regiments. Only numbering in the hundreds i belive.

EDIT: Also, musket balls cost less than bullets.

[lasersailor184]

because I belive the revolver wasn't as powerful as the rifle and i hope you know the rifle wasn't the main weapon for the armies. It was the bayonet and the rifle butt which were the main weapons in the revoulutionary and civil wars. FYI you wouldn't want to charge into an army with bayonets and rifle butts with a stinking revolver and bowie knife. The only regiments that i belive specialized with the rifle were teh 1337 Sharp Shooter regiments. Only numbering in the hundreds i belive.

EDIT: Also, musket balls cost less than bullets.

4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.

[Flit]

Originally posted by mandingo
Why weren't troops issued more revolvers?  I would have taken a revolver over some rifle that took 20 seconds to load.

 yeah, but could you hit anything past 20 yards (if you were lucky)
  The calvery (sp) used the revolver to great effect in the N VA area( was a fav of Mosbeys Rangers)

[rpm]

I may be wrong, but I believe only officers were issued pistols. Any enlisted man with a pistol brought it from home.

Also, tactics were a lot different from what is used today. It was basicly "OK, you guys line up over there, we'll line up over here then we run towards each other!"

[lasersailor184]

HT, that wasn't flaming.  I purposefully worded my post to avoid flaming him.



First, most civil war pistols did not use bullets and cartridges.  They used musket balls.  They were loaded much the same way a rifle was loaded.  Put the powder in the chamber, put in the wadding, put in the bullet, and then put a percussion cap over the nipple (n i p p l e in case the word censor goes crazy).  Then you do this for the other 5 chambers.  

And back then, you couldn't flip the chambers out and easily load them.  The cylinder was fixed.  You could only load it one by one and by rotating the cylinder around.

Next, nearly all (almost sure of this) revolvers were single action.  This meant you had to **** the hammer before you shot it.  You could not do it any other way.

It's also a symbol of elegance.  Even then, the officers were seen to be better then the enlisted men.  And what better way to do this then give all the officers a more powerful weapon?

Lastly, these things weren't cheap.  They were very expensive.  Because of all the reasons above, why would you give them to everyone?

Also, tactics were a lot different from what is used today. It was basicly "OK, you guys line up over there, we'll line up over here then we run towards each other!"

That sort of behavior ended with the war of 1812.  While they still formed lines in the Civil War, they more did what was necessary to win, rather then the formal way to fight the war.  

I.E. They didn't form lines and march at each other.  At 40 yards apart, they stopped.  They shot, We Shot, They Shot, We shot.  And then you charge at each other.

With the advances in artillery, you were dead insane for stopping in the middle of the battlefield without any cover.

yeah, but could you hit anything past 20 yards (if you were lucky)
The calvery (sp) used the revolver to great effect in the N VA area( was a fav of Mosbeys Rangers)

The cavalry used everything.  But only swords and pistols were given to the men by the armies.

The men who were the officers of Cavalry were often of greater prestige and wealth classes then those who were officers of foot infantry.  And as such, they had more money to spend.  Everyone had their cavalry named after themselves (especially in the south), so wins and losses reflected on the Officer.  So the officers tried to stack the deck.

Some bought nice swords for their troops.  Some purchased lever action rifles for their troops, even though they were extremely expensive.  *See Side Note Below.  Some gave their troops an extra pistol.  One guy even outfitted all of his men with cartridge shotgun and extra pistols.

*Side Note:  On the first day of Gettysburgh, the union troops could have easily lost.  The two forces met on the first day and the only thing that saved the Union Positions was a unit of Dismounted Cavalry.  Each man carried with him many cartridges and a Lever Action Rifle.  Through shear volume of fire and Accuracy, they held off all of the Confederates that day.  Because of this, the battle was extended to 3 days.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by SAS_KID
because I belive the revolver wasn't as powerful as the rifle and i hope you know the rifle wasn't the main weapon for the armies. It was the bayonet and the rifle butt which were the main weapons in the revoulutionary and civil wars. FYI you wouldn't want to charge into an army with bayonets and rifle butts with a stinking revolver and bowie knife. The only regiments that i belive specialized with the rifle were teh 1337 Sharp Shooter regiments. Only numbering in the hundreds i belive.

EDIT: Also, musket balls cost less than bullets.

Ok, a few facts need to be applied here.

1) The majority of battlefield deaths in the American Civil War were due to Rifle and Rifled Musket fire. A close second was field artillery. Deaths due to bayonets were rare.

By the 1860s, battle rifles had evolved into very deadly weapons, accurate out to 400 yards, and lethal at three times that range.

There were three general types of long arms used in the ACW. I list them in order of commonality.

1) Rifle Musket
2) Rifled Musket (a smoothbore musket reworked to have the bore rifled)
3) Smoothbore Musket

Musket balls were bullets... Minie balls were not balls, but conical bullets that expanded into the rifling when exposed to gas pressure in the chamber. Few metallic cartridge weapons were used, with those primarily being the Spencer rifles and carbines (cavalry use), and the Henry rifle. Other self-contained cartridge carbines were used by cavalry units such as the Burnside and Smith Carbines to name but two. Sharps rifles and carbines used paper or silk cartridges and Musket caps. Smoothbores were usually loaded with "buck 'n ball". This consisted of three smaller caliber balls (about .310 dia) over a large ball (typically .69 caliber). This combination was especially lethal at short range. Nonetheless, smoothbores were increasingly rare by mid-war.

Revolvers issued were generally limited to officers and cavalry. Although anyone who wished to purchase a revolver could do so and it was common to see enlisted troops with sidearms. However, with few exceptions, revolvers were cap and ball weapons, just like the Muskets. That means that to reload them, one did so from the front of the cylinders, using paper or nitrate treated silk cartridges. After a round was rammed into each chamber of the revolver, all chambers then had to have a cap placed on the nipple. Of these revolvers, the better ones had top straps (Colts did not) and of those, Remingtons were the most popular and the fastest to reload as the entire cylinder could be replaced with a loaded one in about a minute. This assumes that you have a spare loaded cylinder on hand. If not, it took about 3 minutes to reload a revolver and often longer if under the stress of combat.

So no, the bayonet and clubbed musket were not the primary weapons of the ACW. Not by a long shot.

My regards,

Widewing

[lasersailor184]

Widewing, I have one thing to say to you...



  Nanner Nanner Nanner, I beat you!

[Widewing]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Widewing, I have one thing to say to you...



  Nanner Nanner Nanner, I beat you!

Yes you did...  

My regards,

Widewing

[lasersailor184]

I would also like to point out that bayonet wounds were atrocious.  They were very difficult to heal and caused great injury...

But the soldiers did not like using their bayonets because of this.  Kinda like a 'You don't kick me in the nuts, I won't kick you in the nuts' unwritten clause.  More often then not they would flip the gun around and use it like a heavy mallet.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
*Side Note:  On the first day of Gettysburgh, the union troops could have easily lost.  The two forces met on the first day and the only thing that saved the Union Positions was a unit of Dismounted Cavalry.  Each man carried with him many cartridges and a Lever Action Rifle.  Through shear volume of fire and Accuracy, they held off all of the Confederates that day.  Because of this, the battle was extended to 3 days.

This would be Buford's Brigade. His troops were armed with Spencer repeaters and Sharps carbines. This allowed for a formidable volume of fire.
General Heth threw his entire Division at Buford and was repulsed repeatedly. Buford's cavalry troops were able lay down more than twice the volume of fire of Heth's infantry, who were armed with single shot rifle muskets. Eventually, 2/3rds of A.P Hill's Corps was committed to the engagement. When it looked like they would overlap Buford's flanks, Union General Reynolds arrived with his Corps and threw in the Iron Brigade, which repulsed the Confederate assault, buying enough time to bring up all of Reynolds units. From that point on it was a race to see who could field the most troops. Inasmuch as the Confederates had more units in the immediate vicinity of Gettysburg, they eventually forced the Union forces back through the town and onto the high ground south (Cemetery Hill and Cemetery Ridge, along with Culps hill to the east). The rest, as they say, is history.

My regards,

Widewing

[StarOfAfrica2]

Mostly right on the money.  But then one expects that from Widewing.  However, a couple of clarifications ..........

Cap and ball pistols dont use "wadding" when loaded.

Although I dont think it was intended, I got the impression from that post that cartridge rifles were primarily cavalry weapons.  I dont know enough to comment either way on most of them, but I would suspect that would not be true of the Henry.  Firstly because its a long rifle, secondly because it has no forestock.  It was designed to be shot from a rest.  The "follower" in the ammo tube is exposed and will catch on your hand if you try to hold it like a normal rifle, not to mention that you'll get burned from the hot metal unless you wear gloves.  While the 1860 Henry rifle was an incredible piece of work, it would be very difficult to shoot from the saddle.

Also (and again, I think this is merely a clarification of what he meant to say vs what seems to be implied), you wouldnt be swapping cylinders on the Colt designed pistol (open tops).  Not on the battlefield.  That was a distinct advantage of the Remington design, that you could remove and replace the cylinder in a matter of seconds, cap it, and be reloaded.  Sort of a civil war version of the speed loader.  With the Colt (open top) design, you have to drive out the barrel wedge, take the barrel off the gun, THEN remove the cylinder, put the new one on, put the barrel back on, hammer the wedge back in, and then cap it.  Other notable versions that used the same top strap design were the Spiller (Confederate, Remington frame, Colt loading lever), the Starr (in both single and double action, although much larger than either the Remington or the Colt), and another that actually predates the Civil War designs with a fold up trigger whose name escapes me at the moment.  Then of course you had LeMats, which are another animal entirely (but still alot of fun to play with).

I would also take exception to the statement that it takes 3 minutes to load a cap and ball revolver.  With nitrate treated paper cartridges I can load and cap 5 rounds in right around 1 minute.  Loose powder takes me a tad longer, but having the powder flask with the measure built in to the top makes it quick.


*Edit*

That gun I couldnt remember the name of is the Patterson (designed by Samuel Colt strangely enough).

[Leslie]

This is an interesting subject.  Here's something to think about.  Black powder revolvers would corrode after firing if not cleaned soon afterwards.  Pistol components are smaller than rifle components and would have frozen up if a sufficient amount of corrrosion occured.  Probably didn't affect a muzzle loading rifle as much due to the fact it's simpler mechanically and would work longer even if corroded.  They used scraper bullets to clear the fouling every time loading started hanging up in the barrel.

I can't imagine having to load in the prone position using the ramrod that came with the rifle.   It is barely longer than the barrel and doesn't afford any hand grip, though there was a tool made that fit the handle for that purpose.  They loaded using paper cartriges and just tore 'em open and put a Minie on top of that and rammer home.

One exception where revolvers would have been very effective in battle such as an ambush for example, would have been the Walker, which used near rifle sized powder loads; the magnum of it's day and supposedly holding the title until the 1980s.  Large pistol more powerful than Dirty Harry's S&W Model 29.*

* At least that's what the History Channel said.

So yes, everyone having a pistol along with the rifle would have been a good thing from the firepower standpoint.  Along with that would have gone the requisite maintenance and extra weight (pistol balls, pistol cleaning items, pistol caps)  to lug around.  Also, manufacturing was strained to produce weapons and accroutrements.  Revolvers were expensive, as were holsters.

The Enfield and Springfield rifles were accurate a good long ways.  200 yards is a close in shot for one of those rifles (even a reproduction), and I'd be willing to bet 400 yards (with good eyesight and practice) would not be an unreasonable shot to make using an authentic rifle.  A reproductions' rifling is different from the real thing in that an original's rifling is deeper at the muzzle and gives the bullet more twist at the end of the barrel.

People did not think the war was going to last as long as it did.  If they knew then how long it would last and how bad it was going to be, I believe issuing pistols to foot soldiers may have been given more serious thought.  On one hand it would provide more firepower.  On the other, there's no way of telling how many of those pistols, had they been in abundant production... affordable weapons issued to every foot soldier... Would those pistols have been traded for other needs, or simply discarded as extra baggage?  Transportation was mostly forced marches by foot  In a war of attrition, such as the American Civil war was, food was a luxury.  The soldiers would have rather had decent food if money was available to where  revolvers could  be issued to everyone.







Les

[StarOfAfrica2]

This is an interesting subject. Here's something to think about. Black powder revolvers would corrode after firing if not cleaned soon afterwards. Pistol components are smaller than rifle components and would have frozen up if a sufficient amount of corrrosion occured. Probably didn't affect a muzzle loading rifle as much due to the fact it's simpler mechanically and would work longer even if corroded. They used scraper bullets to clear the fouling every time loading started hanging up in the barrel.

Yes the pistols do foul up rather quickly.  In this area the Colt actually outperforms the Remington design, so its a tradeoff.  Colt's design keeps the fouling from getting onto the pin so much and binding the cylinder.  But all of them are subject to it to some degree.  One way this was countered was by using lard to coat the balls.  Not only did it help seal the cylinder to prevent a chain fire incident, the lard kept the fouling soft and easier to clean.  We have modern substitutes today, but interestingly enough you still have to use natural lube.  Any petroleum based products causes some really nasty things to happen with black powder residue.  

They used the same thing in rifles.  The Minie ball (described by Widewing above) used in the Springfield or British Enfield rifles has grooves on the outside of its "skirt".  You coat those grooves with some lard (I've seen people use Crisco at re-enactments, it works great except on really hot days) and drop it in and seat it.  When it's fired and the skirt expands to catch the rifling, the lube keeps the fouling soft and scrapes most of the previous fouling out as it goes.  Keeps the rifle firing longer without the need for cleaning.  These rifles accounted for most of the casualties in the Civil War.

Interesting side note.  Minie was not the first to design the expanding conical bullet.  Two British officers developed similar versions that were rejected by the British army for various reasons.  One of these, the Greener bullet, was almost identical to the Minie, except that Greener used a wooden plug in the bottom and Minie used an iron one.  The wooden one was considered "too difficult" to mass produce.

One other interesting note for trivia, the first breech loading cartridge revolver was made in 1856, four years before the Civil War started.  A former Colt employee named Rollin White developed a revolver design with cylinders bored end to end.  Remember that at this time smokeless powder had not yet been developed, and Colt felt the cap and ball revolver was the pinnacle of the breed for durability and reliability, as well as cost per unit to produce.  They saw metallic cartridge revolvers as an oddity, and decided not to pursue making them.  A man named Daniel Wesson saw the potential, and bought the exclusive rights to the design in 1856.  The Smith&Wesson break top .32 caliber revolver was in such great demand that they eventually had to stop taking orders.  They could never produce enough to satisfy customer demands, let alone produce for the military.  Colt and Remington were left out of the cartridge business until 1870, when the Rollin White patent on the design ran out.  After that you could have your Colt or Remington revolver refitted by the factory to fire metallic cartridges for about $5.00.  Considering that a new revolver cost around $12.00, it was significantly cheaper to have your old cap and ball gun converted.  I just picked up a Richards and Mason converted 1851 Colt Navy for my collection.  Its a bit pitted, but the action still works and the gun will fire, and the rifling is still good enough to hit a target at about 15 yards.

[hyena426]

Black powder revolvers would corrode after firing if not cleaned soon afterwards.

 umm..takes atleast a few weeks to do any serious damage from not cleaning...i own a rem uberti and a colt dragoon reissue from colt....shot the hell out of them..shot the rem a few days in a row with out cleaning it..it still works fine as when i got it...no pitting..action just as smooth...but i defenatly beleve in cleaning them atleast a few days after shooting..but on a battle field you could shoot it a few days before you had to clean it...they were just to expensive for the average guy to own..kinda like sports cars:)..lol


i use a wad or bore butter in my pistol..,,.or good chance you will get a chain fire...the flame will jump and light all the rounds off at once..ugly,,lol

In this area the Colt actually outperforms the Remington design, so its a tradeoff. Colt's design keeps the fouling from getting onto the pin so much and binding the cylinder

never had my rem or colt fail..but i did have a cap jam both guns before...till i figured out why they lift the gun in the air every time they shoot...so the cap falls free and clear of the action after each shot

i do alot of black powder shootin....i use real goex powder..i stay away from the pyrex..that stuff will corrode even faster than regular powder..and stinks even more..like rotten eggs,,lol,,and makes more smoke too...but i used it before,,and if you cant get regular it works just fine:).lol.got a 58 cal springfield..colt dragoon...rem...if i was back then and could afford it..i would have a pistol along with a rifle...im pretty sure the only reason not everyone had one..was cause of the price.