-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Anyone doin it cowboy style?
- Thread starter Mordis
- Start date
Smokewagon
Regular Member
imported post
Check out San Pedro Saddlery in Tombstone Arizona. He makes one called The Pike. Styled after one of the characters rig in The Wild Bunch I think.
Check out San Pedro Saddlery in Tombstone Arizona. He makes one called The Pike. Styled after one of the characters rig in The Wild Bunch I think.
imported post
I have 2 Ruger Vaqueros and 2 New Vaqueros in .45 Colt.
Reasons to buy Ruger: Transfer bar. True 6 shot revolver. Modern coil springs andmodern alloys. This equals increased strength, which is always a good thing.
If you reload, 45. is a greatchoice. There are more molds and everything you needout there, than for any other. You can send the same bullet weight down range at the same speed with 4000lbs less pressure than the .44 magnum. Those would be Ruger only loads. To buy off the shelf, its expensive.
As for carry, try sticking the barrelbetween shirt and jeans, offside, grip up. I carry every day all day that way. Its called a Mexican carry. Most people didn't even HAVE a holster in the 19th century. Ace
I have 2 Ruger Vaqueros and 2 New Vaqueros in .45 Colt.
Reasons to buy Ruger: Transfer bar. True 6 shot revolver. Modern coil springs andmodern alloys. This equals increased strength, which is always a good thing.
If you reload, 45. is a greatchoice. There are more molds and everything you needout there, than for any other. You can send the same bullet weight down range at the same speed with 4000lbs less pressure than the .44 magnum. Those would be Ruger only loads. To buy off the shelf, its expensive.
As for carry, try sticking the barrelbetween shirt and jeans, offside, grip up. I carry every day all day that way. Its called a Mexican carry. Most people didn't even HAVE a holster in the 19th century. Ace
Tomahawk
Regular Member
imported post
Surfing youtube and I ran across this video. Very cool stuff if you're thinking of getting into cowboy action shooting. Watching it almost makes me want to get into it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAvBB2lv8iw&NR=1
(BTW, anyone know how to put a youtube video right in the post instead of just a link?)
Surfing youtube and I ran across this video. Very cool stuff if you're thinking of getting into cowboy action shooting. Watching it almost makes me want to get into it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAvBB2lv8iw&NR=1
(BTW, anyone know how to put a youtube video right in the post instead of just a link?)
imported post
I was looking at the old catridge conversions of the 1851 navy and what not. Back in the day, what the hell was colt thinking when they converted these guns. Unlike the SAA which atleast had a rudamentary safety, the safety notch. As weak as it was, it still worked in some fasion. But their Catridge conversions, dont have any safety measures at all. 6 cylnders and no safety notches, or safety pins?? While im sure people carried them with 5 bullets, and the hammer down on the unloaded chamber, I have a hard time believing that is what Richards and Mason had in mind for it.
I watched 310 to yuma, and the guns were very historicly accurate. The main good guy, was using either '51 or '61(I couldnt tell) conversion, and they were loading it with 6 rounds.(Modern westers, are doing there research into true firearms used in the days, and the way they were typicaly handled.)
So, thinking back on it, the percussion 1851 navy, and 61 army were safer to carry with 6, due to the safety pins in the frame between the cylnders. Unless im not seeing something, anyone know what the designers were intending, or was they truly guns with out any form of safety what so ever?
I was looking at the old catridge conversions of the 1851 navy and what not. Back in the day, what the hell was colt thinking when they converted these guns. Unlike the SAA which atleast had a rudamentary safety, the safety notch. As weak as it was, it still worked in some fasion. But their Catridge conversions, dont have any safety measures at all. 6 cylnders and no safety notches, or safety pins?? While im sure people carried them with 5 bullets, and the hammer down on the unloaded chamber, I have a hard time believing that is what Richards and Mason had in mind for it.
I watched 310 to yuma, and the guns were very historicly accurate. The main good guy, was using either '51 or '61(I couldnt tell) conversion, and they were loading it with 6 rounds.(Modern westers, are doing there research into true firearms used in the days, and the way they were typicaly handled.)
So, thinking back on it, the percussion 1851 navy, and 61 army were safer to carry with 6, due to the safety pins in the frame between the cylnders. Unless im not seeing something, anyone know what the designers were intending, or was they truly guns with out any form of safety what so ever?
imported post
Mordis,
You really have to look at the historical period in which these guns were developed. The early Colt percussion revolvers came at a time when almost all firearms were single shot. Most of these had no type of safety at all - just the half-cock to keep the hammer off the cap or the flint off the frizzen.
Colt had no example of a safety to refer to. I wouldn't be surprised if the market at that time would have regarded such a "development" as unnecessary and overly complicated. They just wanted something that could be put to use quickly and relied on to function and hit the target.
Even to this day there have been less than a handful of revolver designs with a safety latch of any sort. True, transfer bars and other passive safetydevelopments have been implemented but safeties are not common on revolvers.
Mordis,
You really have to look at the historical period in which these guns were developed. The early Colt percussion revolvers came at a time when almost all firearms were single shot. Most of these had no type of safety at all - just the half-cock to keep the hammer off the cap or the flint off the frizzen.
Colt had no example of a safety to refer to. I wouldn't be surprised if the market at that time would have regarded such a "development" as unnecessary and overly complicated. They just wanted something that could be put to use quickly and relied on to function and hit the target.
Even to this day there have been less than a handful of revolver designs with a safety latch of any sort. True, transfer bars and other passive safetydevelopments have been implemented but safeties are not common on revolvers.
Ford Truck
Regular Member
imported post
That squinty-eyed bad guy with the crooked pipe & the Remington .44 is Lee VanCleef. He did a good job playing a bad guy.
That squinty-eyed bad guy with the crooked pipe & the Remington .44 is Lee VanCleef. He did a good job playing a bad guy.