• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

Dragoon vs 1860 Army?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I can easily see Bill having used his .36 instead of the Dragoon merely from the standpoint that they are quicker and easier to get on target fast, and a man who wasn’t a stranger to dealing with issues would more likely carry something more fit for the job and very familiar with, and we know he loved those Navies.

A bit curious if there’s any details concerning the wound Tutt was given. Complete passthrough? I doubt the lead expanded since it was clearly going slow by the time it got there, which would say the wound was caliber sized plus maybe some bone fragmentation.
 
75 yds is one heckofa shot. How many could hit a man-sized vitals area at that distance, off-hand, and knowing the opponent will also be firing?

Do we know whether or not he used conicals along with ball? A .37 cal ball wouldn’t have much oomph at 75 yds. There’s people who think that’s the edge of humane for hunting deer from a rifle firing a heavier ball, and at that distance the rifle’s ball has much more velocity/energy than a pistol ball at 7 yds.
It is said Hickok raised his left arm, bent it so his hand was close to his face, and rested his gun over his extended elbow.
Contrary to popular assumptions, this was not a quick-draw situation.
Also, Tutt did not go down immediately. He frantically ran back inside a shop or office behind him, spoke to somebody, came back outside, and collapsed, IIRC.
All I remember about the examination of Tutt’s body later is that the bullet did not follow a straight path, but angled off in another direction at least once.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good luck!

Thanks, sourdough! You were instrumental in helping me. I can’t wait to read the book you mentioned once it arrives in the mail.

Not only do I love the beautiful lines of the fluted models, but I have learned that the chambers on the repros match up with the originals. Very cool!
 
Last edited:
some time ago I set an IDPA silhouette target at 75 measured yards and invited any one at an SASS match to make the Tutt shot with anything. Five or six people tried and only one made a one hit.
I moved it o my range and shot my 1851 Navy at it a lot and have yet to make a hit.
It was not shooting back at me either.
 
BTW that fluted Army is a great looking and great shooting gun. It is one of a pair and makes the newer round cylinder gun look plain.
Good choice
 
CBAC offered their version of the rare fluted cylinder 1st model Dragoon but with with rectangular bolt notches and oval triggerguard in their "Signature Series '96" (third generation). Just trying to help with your decision...😐
 
I have an Uberti Whitneyville Hartford Dragoon also. Awesome revolver and have only shot it a few times. It is a huge gun. It has the bolt and trigger screws showing through the right side of the frame, not original.



Early on, Uberti did it correctly (early stock photo):



Regards,

Jim
 
Last edited:
I may be a little bit biased...no I am completely biased. Today, until it got up to 95+ in the shade, I was shooting my 1860 Pietta Army. heat not withstanding I got off 6 cylinders full on my CAS target range. Mostly testing CCI#11 caps and RWS 1075 caps with round ball and FFFg GOEX powder.
I would go for the1860 Army every time it is the most practical of the two.
Failing that look at the Pietta Marshal from EMF. It is a great looking gun, is a very handy size and is .44 caliber.
At least that is my opinion
Bunk
 
I actually bought a round cylinder Uberti 1860 from a fellow forum member here just this morning. :)

I’ve since learned through my own research that there WERE round cylinder 1860s with straight chambers (they just had a tendency to explode) 😧

Luckily the repros don’t lol! So excited and happy! My 51 London Navy is getting some TLC from a gunsmith (chamber reaming etc.) and I’ll be smoothing over this 1860 and getting it to the range soon.

Stay tuned gang!
 
The grips are different, too. The 1860 Army is considered more ergonomic, even more so than the Model P cartridge revolvers. In fact, people would sometimes take the grip frames from the old 1860 Army percussion revolvers and put them on their Colt Peacemakers. The Dragoons have a lot of cachet, but there are reasons for the evolution of those old forty-fours toward the 1860 Army model. Even the loading lever is improved.

My dad had an original 1860 that we used to shoot when I was a kid. It was great fun. My brother still has it.

With all of that said, though, I'll have to admit I bought a 1st Model Dragoon from Mike Brackett last year, after having him do his "Outlaw Mule" action job on it. It is a nice revolver. Check out Goon's Gun Works - Services

Really, I don't think you'll go wrong either way. Both of your choices would be fun to shoot. I chose the Dragoon because it was from the historical timeframe that interested me more.

Notchy Bob
Ik this is an older post, but is it worth having the job done? I just purchased a second generation Colt Dragoon
 
Back
Top