Hickok and His .36 Navy Revolvers

[Rat]

I personally, had BOTH 1851 navies (still do) and Remington .44. The Remington WAS a fussier revolver and had chain fire TWICE. If indeed, Mr. Hickok had experienced BOTH revolvers; I can certainly see him choose the Navies over Remington's. Well, do I own a 1858 Remington .44??? Nope!! I now have two 1851 navies. Merry Christmas!!

Wow...totally opposite of my experience! Well them guns is all individuals, as we know, so we would have to test like 300 examples of both, and they all would have to be original guns, not replicas. !!!

But yeah, that's funny, my 1860 chain fired once, the only time I used T7 in it, and my Remington Navy has never cap-jammed, malfunctioned, or failed to fire. For me, the Colt was the fussy one, but I think I have learned to keep the Colt running as well as the Remington. To be honest, I got the Remington after years of learning the Colt, so I was ahead of the game. Merry Christmas.

 

[Eutycus]

Who was it that said to "shoot slow and deliberate but as fast as you can"?

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Who was it that said to "shoot slow and deliberate but as fast as you can"?

"Fast is fine but accuracy is everything. In a gunfight, you need to take your time in a hurry." Attributed to Wyatt Earp.

I have had cap jams in Colt repro revolvers, but they were with very hot loads, with the back pressure destroying the cap, so when the next round was cocked the mangled cap fell loose and into the action. My 1858 Remington, no worries, but no worries when I reduced the Colt load some.

LD

 

[rodwha]

But I did see that quote from him/by him, saying how important it was not to hurry one's shot, and take one's time when shooting at a man....which for me, dispels the notion that he preferred the .36 over a .44 because he could get back on target quicker. He does not seem to believe that speed is important, in fact the very opposite. I think the handling and balance of the Navy Colt was his preference.

Must say that does make sense. And quite frankly it’s this pointability and handling I continually read about that makes me feel I should own one.

 

[drobs]

I prefer my Colts (3) over my Remingtons (2). Actions on the Colts are so much nicer.
Cap jams aren't an issue if you keep an eye out for them. Raising the gun or turning it to the side clears fired caps easily enough.

There are more permanent ways of dealing with cap jams and Colt.

 

[Eutycus]

I've never handled a Remington (yet) but the Colt Navy repros fits into my hand like a glove. I would imagine a better "feel" would make for a better shot. It certainly didnt hurt Hickocks handeling of his Colts.

 

[nightwolf1974]

I don't question your post, but my experience has been that the Colt is more prone to cap-jams than the Remington. ?? My Remington Navy has never had a cap jam. My Colt has, and one time a long time ago, I took the gun apart just for a good cleaning, and found chunks of caps inside the frame. !!! Then I learned how to operate/shoot the Colt so that caps don't fall into the action.

Having said that, if one flips the Colt up and back, when re-cocking the gun, that will throw the caps and it won't jam. However, that does not bring it back on target very fast. Or fast at all. But neither is it super slow...but a bit slower than bringing a .44 back down from recoil. ??? I wonder if the purpose of two guns wasn't more because of the possibility of cap-jams, than more firepower.

I never shot my Colts in pairs or fast. I'd fire, raise, pull hammer back, lower, and fire. Like I say, cap jam between the cylinder and top strap has happened to me before in the 58' and ROA. It could have been the way I was shooting (I was a newbie to C&B then) the revolvers too maybe. After all this now, I wanna get a Rem. 58' and try it again for myself. Guess I'd better order one of those too.......lol!

 

[rodwha]

Haven’t had a cap jam with my ROA either and it’s bad maybe another 300 rounds through it. It was finicky on caps though. Changed out the nipples and found it still finicky. ToTW states CCI #11’s (non magnum flavor), which are impossible to find locally and rare online it seems too, but found Rem #10’s work just fine, which are easy to come by.

 

[hanshi]

The late Bill Jordan, when asked which was more important speed or accuracy in a gunfight, answered, "take your time real fast"!

As far as Colt jams go you only have to flick it to the side to dispense with the fired cap.

 

[Eutycus]

To be that good with a gun back then (or now) requires alot of practice. Hearing protection was unheard of back then. Would a man be deaf or next to it?

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Well we in the "nuclear age" are exposed to a lot of noise on a regular basis that simply didn't exist back then. So a career soldier, or an artilleryman, and a fellow who blew stone for railroad tunnels..., probably had hearing loss from gunfire noise...but civilians in the 19th and 18th centuries ??? I don't know if Hickock due to his regular handgun practice had any hearing loss. Plus one must remember that a lot of deafness was from maladies that are today preventable or curable, or at least treatable these days, like measles, mumps, whooping cough, nasal diphtheria, not to mention malnutrition. We have no way of knowing who grew up way back then, with injured hearing, only to begin shooting, and aggravate the problem, right?

Now I wear ear plugs when using a gas lawnmower, when at large social functions where there's a band, when I was younger and went to bars with a band, and rock concerts, plus anytime at the range, but not when hunting, and not when in the past I was on exercises in the Marines. I'm past 55 years and my hearing, since I protected it, is very good. My kids have very limited exposure to guns, but have lots of exposure to "ear buds" and their hearing is moderately bad. In fact I get quite aggravated by "sharp" noises, which my family doesn't understand ('cause I think they're half-deaf and don't hear the same as I do. )

Guys I know who drove police cars when the siren was mounted on the roof, or even just with the window open and air blowing in the ear, have bad hearing. So today, sometimes it's quite simply and unexpected as a source of hearing damage. So perhaps we think they had such losses too, when in fact we might experience more hearing loss today simply because in our case, shooting is the "straw that broke the camel's back" so to speak, in our modern experience.

LD

 

[Eutycus]

Actually I was referring to the gunslingers in the movies. The kind that light a match or do the impossible with a gun in the western movies. To be that good would require ALOT of practice. And that lots of practice would take a toil on the ears and pocketbook. Bullets were cheap but the average working man couldnt afford "such waste".

 

[nightwolf1974]

Haven’t had a cap jam with my ROA either and it’s bad maybe another 300 rounds through it. It was finicky on caps though. Changed out the nipples and found it still finicky. ToTW states CCI #11’s (non magnum flavor), which are impossible to find locally and rare online it seems too, but found Rem #10’s work just fine, which are easy to come by.

I found the CCI & Remington #10 caps were too loose for C&B shooting. I switched over RWS #11 caps and I had to press them on the nipples, which worked fine. After that, ALL my percussion caps are RWS caps. From musket to C&B, nothing but RWS now.

 

[Eutycus]

Thay is what a person wants isnt it? That tight fit that requires pressing on.

 

[Artificer]

Bigted: “bullet to kill ratio in Viet Nam, however the kills were all very expensive”.

Long ago I read that seven thousand shots were fired for every enemy combat kill in Vietnam Nam.

The colt factory received letters from British officers from the Crimean War ~1858, they complained about the lack of power in their 36 cal revolvers. Apparently the Russians wearing many layers of coats were near bullet proof to the 36 cal pistol. Maybe they should have aimed for head shots like Hickock.

The problem in Viet Nam was the jungle was so thick, you often could not see the enemy and often had to lay down suppressive fire to fight through an ambush or on patrol, in many areas.

Before I went to Cambodia in 1972, at a Rifle Range in Northern Okinawa where there is still a lot of jungle, we shot in the morning then had to bush axe jungle in the afternoon each day. Just as a test, we had one Marine stand from where there was short grass to the edge of jungle and he was only back in the jungle one foot. He disappeared from view.

I have heard Wild Bill was truly ambidextrous and just as good with either hand. Is that true?

It is also amazing to me he was so fast with the reverse draw he used.

Gus

 

[Cruzatte]

Actually I was referring to the gunslingers in the movies. The kind that light a match or do the impossible with a gun in the western movies. To be that good would require ALOT of practice. And that lots of practice would take a toil on the ears and pocketbook. Bullets were cheap but the average working man couldnt afford "such waste".

I don't know....gun reports sound quite differently out on the open prairie where there's no real surface but the ground to the sound to be reflected back to the shooter, than they do under a covered, protected firing range. I can imagine that a gunfight that erupts in a small barroom might set your ears to ringing. But out on the street in Abilene, maybe not so much.

 

[Joe B.]

The guns in the bust at the Adams Museum, Deadwood last June are large in stature just like the Legend.

 

[longcruise]

I think "Calamity Jane" was hicock's heart throb.

 

[Kansas Jake]

I read a piece within the last year or two that indicated Jane was much more interested in Bill than he was in her. Sorry I can't remember the source.

 

[Eutycus]

I read a piece within the last year or two that indicated Jane was much more interested in Bill than he was in her. Sorry I can't remember the source.

I've heard that somewhere too, that Jane was more interested in him than vice versa. Kind of like she wanted a lover, he wanted a friend with benefits. Who knows?