One of the downsides is that if you extend your arm to hold the barrel like a rifle you expose the tender skin on the inside of your forearm to the hot gasses and lead coming from the cylinder gap, it's awkward holding it like a pistol with that much weight forward. Some new designs have shields around the cylinder to deal with that but a lot don't as a friend learned after the first shot with his...ouch.
Just got my hands on a Remington 1875 (Outlaw) Carbine reproduction, very exquisite looking firearm. Despite being chambered in 357 mag it has the 1858 style of webbing along the extractor arm which really gives it extra styling points.
@@JRB781 I think it was either Uberti or Navy Arms, it has all the brass features just like the 1858 shown here, with a case hardened receiver. Beautiful finish since it was kept new in storage in 30 years. 👌
I have a 12 inch barreled 1858 pistol, the "Buffalo Hunter" version. Someone had added a Henry rifle stock to it. I find that in this configuration, it is a good short range carbine and a short over-the-shoulder scabbard keeps it very handy. Best of luck with your newer model.
I love revolving rifles. Also, I think the drawbacks during use are over stated. If you read about the 21st Ohio Volunteer Infantry in the US Civil War, there isn't a single complaint that came out of that unit. They were a sharpshooter unit that used revolver rifles throughout the war. Their actions at the Battle of Chickamauga make great reading. They fired an average of 58 rounds per man per day. That's significantly more than their muzzle loading counterparts. Despite the overstated issues people bring up about revolver rifles. I think cartridges were simply invented so very quickly after capped revolver rifles that they didn't catch on. If you have the machining and chemistry available to make these...cartridges just make more sense.
I suspect that men wearing long sleeve wool shirts are going to have less issues with a revolving rifle than your modern man in a short sleeve T-Shirt at the range.
@@Zundfolge There's also an expectation difference. The 21st OVI were a bunch of frontiersman. If they had to hold the rifle with both hands at the semi pistol grip...so what? It's not ergonomic, but, it slings a lot of lead. Now, we get mad at GRIPZONE and make memes if a firearm is the slightest bit inconvenient.
A union soldier wore a heavy wool jacket over a long sleeved shirt and underclothing. They didn't take that off even on a hot day unless they were digging latrines or the like. In battle they always wore that along with leather gear w/ cartridges, caps, canteen, etc. At any rate, a 19th century guy was heavier dressed than today, soldier or civilian. The problem, as Ian points out, wasn't so much the cylinder gap, it was that the lever guns were just superior in every way.
I think that's the biggest part of it. It was a solution to a problem that had more or less stopped existing. Once people could put cartridges in magazines, it was pretty much over for revolving rifles.
seems like the problem was more there were specifically bad revolving rifles (some ian has featured!) that gave the whole class a bad name. there is legitimate concern about how to hold it though, but that's more drill and training
Why do I feel like the same people were buying this as are buying revolver rifles today (me included)? The "gee-wiz" factor is high with this beautiful old firearm..
Today is going to mark a pivotal moment in my personal life. Thank you for taking my mind off of it for a moment with one of my favorite types of forgotten weapons.
These were available with interchangeable percussion cylinders even for the factory converted rimfires. Handy if you were out in the middle of nowhere and couldn't get cartridges, but caps, powder, and lead for casting into bullets were readily available at even the most remote trading posts.
Remington back in the day, 'Look guys I don't think this is going to be a great success, but I bet in the future it'll have people talking.' Ian today, looks at Remington Revolver Rifle, 'Ah, just my thing.'
I’ve been curious about these revolving rifles since I was a kid. It long seemed to me that this should have been the ideal weapon available at the time to carry in the Civil War. But thanks to Ian I now realize no it really wasn’t. So many factors about this concept that aren’t superficially apparent. So thanks Ian for the video.
I think the drawbacks during use are over stated. If you read about the 21st Ohio Volunteer Infantry in the US Civil War, there isn't a single complaint that came out of that unit. They were a sharpshooter unit that used revolver rifles throughout the war. Their actions at the Battle of Chickamauga make great reading. I think cartridges were simply invented so very quickly after capped revolver rifles that they didn't catch on. If you have the machining and chemistry available to make these...cartridges just make more sense.
You also had units like the 7th Illinois that equipped themselves with Henrys. The Ordnance Department during the Civil War was staffed by a collection of semi-fossilized relics who flat out refused to consider anything other than single-shot muzzle-loading rifles. Some units got around this by purchasing their own weapons instead of drawing them from Army stocks. The 7th Illinois lucked out or had deeper pockets. The manufacturers were equally frustrated by this. Some relied on regiments making private purchases. Some went bankrupt waiting for Ordnance to pull their head out of their fourth point of contact. And others (I'm looking at you, Mr. Spencer 😄) made house calls.
@@quentintin1 True, but sticking with an outdated system no matter what isn't a great approach either. The Ordnance chiefs' arguments against everything other than the issued rifled musket were that a) faster loading just encouraged troops to waste ammunition, and b) the additional ammunition use would overstretch the logistics capabilities of the Army. Both arguments have *some* validity. However, having individual regiments self-equip themselves with non-issue firearms put just as much strain on logistics (more, since most of those rifles didn't share ammunition), and the Union supply chain didn't collapse (any more than being in a constant state of such). Since most fire was essentially unaimed anyway, the "waste of ammunition" argument doesn't carry much water (in any case, that same argument has been pushed every time newer, faster firing weapons were introduced, and not just in the US, so it's merit is pretty dubious). The Union had the potential industrial capacity to manufacture metal-cased ammo on a large scale. It had the manpower to rotate units out of combat for retraining, and God knows the designs were out there, even within the US. Yet the Army stuck with close-order line formation tactics designed for muskets with an effective range of 100 yards and an approach of tit-for-tat casualties, despite the issued rifle being effective to 200 yards. This stagnation of tactics is one reason for the staggering casualty numbers in Civil War battles. Caveat: I'm saying this in hindsight and as a gun nerd. That said, a Union regiment trained in "light" infantry tactics (Sir John Moore et al.) and equipped with license-built Vetterli rifles is is theoretical (and IMO rather daunting) possibility.
@@quentintin1 I think you may be overstating it as a change. Most units were freshly raised. I would also observe that there is an 'opportunity' training burden with going into line with equal or less firepower than the enemy. You have to train more replacements than otherwise. To climb onto my soapbox I would again observe that you pay for training and logistics in sweat and gold , and you pay a debt of firepower in blood.
@@benm5913 Having shot a repro, they're not overstated. It's like a flashbang mixed with getting punched in the face every shot, definitely not a good rifle for a sharpshooter compared to a standard percussion rifle
I gotta say I love mines, although slightly impractical for anything other than having fun, the elegant stirrup on the handgaurd and canteen stock just make it look cool to me.
Thank you for your videos Ian. Without them, millions of people would never get to know the rich history of manufacturing and engineering of the most used tool in the world.
In my gunsmith fantasy which will never be realized, I run a shop where you can custom order everything about your gun. It's interesting that there is some basis in reality for that sort of model.
You can. You just have to pay for it, and most people don't want to. Some years ago, Hickock45 custom ordered three Colt Single Action revolvers. At a guess, I'd say he probably paid over $1,000 for each one, and possibly more than $2,000. That's the kind of money you're looking at to get custom work.
Revolving rifles are just cool. I think that may be the defining factor in anything "cool": They have problems and aren't ideal for their purpose, but they work well enough and somehow look "right."
Well, folks, finally a Forgotten Weapons subject that is not only an interesting failure that evokes steampunk vibes, but one that is readily available for affordable prices in the form of Eye-talian reproductions! And as a bonus, you can get it not only as its base cap-&-ball form, but also cartridge conversion cylinders that work identically to the historical method! So you can own almost the exact rifle Ian presents. And best of all, due to its status as a blackpowder muzzleloader, it is more easily available is many places that other arms may not be.
I've had a fondness for the Remington New Model (or 1858) ever since I was a kid. I had a cap pistol that took 8-shot ring caps and was clearly styled to look like a Remington revolver, with a rib under the barrel that mimicked the Remington's loading lever.
I have an Uberti repro Colt revolving rifle in 44-40 mainly as a collectors piece to go along with my Uberti lever guns. It was comfortable to shoot. I bought a Repro Remington revolving rifle in percussion so I could use a conversion cylinder in 45 LC. However, I returned it because the ergonomics were uncomfortable for me. I have always been attracted to stocked revolvers and pistols, so the revolving rifles fit right into that category for me. It was interesting to see an original in rimfire. Thanks Ian.
Some sort of arm protection is a must if you're holding the front end of the rifle. The Rossi version using the Judge as a base uses a plate to deflect the cylinder blast.
One of the moments that sparked my firearms enthusiasm was as a kid when we went to a school trip to the castle of Chapultepec in Mexico city. In there they have a museum with a bunch of interesting weapons from the 1800's that were actually used historically: crude revolving and harmonica rifles, a gatling gun and many other interesting designs and unique hand made mechanisms. Also the building is beautiful! if you ever come to Mexico that's one you should visit!
Interesting choice to leave the loading lever on, and looking at that hammer, would that still work with a percussion cylinder? It still has a flat face below the "firing pin" for the rimfire cartridge. That was kind of a thing back then from what I have seen, accommodating people at the far end of a supply chain with the ability to make do with what is available.
I can't wait to see what Ian and Jonathan from Royal Armories will do when they finally have a collab video. Even if it is Zoom, I think Ian and Jonathan could really elevate each other's content and would benefit the world. Perhaps a Q&A video guest?
I had a Uberti repro of this in .36 until a few years ago. It took many squirrels in the 8 or so years i had it. I don't know why but i love the whole revolving rifle concept
I'm surprised there aren't more revolving rifle options in the UK considering it'd give us the closest thing to a semi-auto centrefire rifle that we'd be allowed... i'm sure with a more modern design they could include safety features to mitigate gas venting from the cylinder .etc.
Ironically they're more practical as a percussion gun in the UK as you can actually legally own it! One positive about percussion is that you can always get ammo! If you have seen how the reloaders make ammo for those gorgeous Belgian pinfire revolvers, you realise the ingenuity of black powder enthusiasts!
Here's how that would go down. They would get mildly popular, the daily mail would write a story about revolver assault rifles, priti patel would have an orgasm banning them.
The inventor of the bored through cylinder revolver was Rollin White. US Patent 12,648 patented on April 3, 1855. He licensed the patent to S&W. Interesting story.
I've heard of people dropping the loading lever to function as a forward grip, but with hot gases escaping through the cylinder gap and nothing but bare metal to hold on to out front, this is not so good in practice.
I know nothing about guns. Never fired one not particularly interested in doing so but... .... your videos are brilliant, well presented and with accurate history. It's like watching a hairy Yoda dispensing wisdom.
I'm Ian Mcallem and I'm here to say We're about to look at guns in a major way This piece is forgotten, lost to time Let me review it, in a sick ass rhyme
About 40 years ago I read a series of books called Adam Steele written by George g Gilman. He used a Colt Hartford revolving rifle in I think 44-40. Not sure what year it was set in but a parallel series called Edge used a Winchester lever action. Supposedly the Colt Hartford was extremely accurate particularly over extremely long ranges. It was also much faster for repeat shots. It had cased ammo and smokeless powder in the book. It was set just post civil war and went for about 20 years
That style of stock is "dandy," in the parlance of the times. 19th-century guns had an aesthetic elegance to them of the sort you just don't see anymore (not including repros). * *insert Jakobs reference* *
Using contemporary technology to create a repeating firearm. Brilliant! When Heritage Manufacturing offered their revolver with a 16" barrel,my first thought was"How long until they offer a carbine version?" And it looks an awful lot a like this classic rifle.
I've always wondered why revolving rifles never caught on, but it makes sense when you consider that the lever action rifle, which is better in every way I can think of, was invented rather close to the popular use of revolvers
I absolutely love revolving rifles. When I was an 07/02 I kept on trying on making both lever actions and revolving rifles. Failed in making commercially successful weapons, just not enough demand. Turns out I was 25 years too early. Many years later I had a LGS call me up and try to buy a dozen from me but I had already been long gone from the industry.
Great video as always. I just purchased a Uberti replica, beautiful gun, however the hand (prawl) barely sticks out of the frame (thousandths). Timing and lock up are tight but the hand will not last long it has to be barely grasping the cylinder by the tip. I was able to see the hand protrude from the frame of your 155-year-old rifle easily. Sadly I have to send it back. It is a Stoger import.
I use reproduction model of Uberti. You have to wear glasses and gloves in order to avoid percussion cup rests and fire from the cylinder, and you inhale a lot of smoke while shooting. But this thing is astonishingly accurate at 25 and 50 meters :)
Toward the end of the run they advertised them as coming with both a percussion cylinder and a cartridge cylinder, hence the retention of the loading plunger (which would otherwise just be an annoyance). Therefore, I don't believe there much if any "conversion" being done there beyond simply swapping out cylinders. I have one of the modern repros from Uberti. They used the pistol loading lever, and it has an 18" bbl, but it's a hoot all the same.
With the longer loading lever would that allow for even higher velocity because of a tighter pack on the powder? You’d already get a bump from the barrel length, just curious if being able to put more pressure on packing the cylinder would add to the power with these.
they should have put the cylinder in front of the support hand. like an old smg, like the berretta 38 and how the support hand can go behind the magazine
Chassepot to famas is an amazing book the illistrations are 👌 the information is 👌 not to mention the thing is put together like a brick I don't know if there's anymore even in stock but if you guys like this channel you'll love the book it's awesome
You held onto the tang behind the trigger with your left hand if you were right handed instead of gripping ahead of the cylinder. This way you would not get powder burns from the barrel cylinder gap.
This has me wondering something. If you carried extra cylinders that were loaded how many could you practically carry and how quickly could you remove an empty cylinder for a loaded one? I also wonder what a modern version would be like in 9 and 45.
I would love a revolving rifle- but for me to personally enjoy it, it would need to accept centerfire cartridges and probably have a crane or otherwise be easy to load. No slower than levergun repeaters to fire or replinish- and there is always that "single action" (Sorry, St. Othias. I have sinned) if you need a precise shot.
I remember reading somewhere that the Colt revolving rifles had problems with mass discharge - i.e. all the rounds firing off at once. This was a problem too with their revolver pistols, but in a pistol it don't hurt anybody but the thing you're shooting at. In a rifle, it could go into your arm - hence why the US military wasn't particularly thrilled about buying them at the time.
Your absolutely right about these rifles not selling very well. The general store in the old town I live has several of these rifles. They have been on the stores shelves since 1867. Personally, I don't think they will ever sell, they have a price of $75. As far as I'm concerned they can stay on these shelves another 154 years. $75. That's ridiculous. If they ever go on clearance I may buy one.
so strange that more repeating guns weren't used during the Civil War. I know some were but the numbers just aren't what I think they'd be with what was out there at the time
one reason is government and the military were afraid the mass issuing of repeating arms would cause an over usage of ammunition particularly when and if formations panicked. More real reason is It was an economic and a timing issue for the US . . . the economy had just been split in half and both sides needed guns now.
Significantly more expensive. The Spencer was *three months pay* for a soldier. And it used non-standard ammo, which complicated supply. When you're going from "a few thousand" soldiers to several million, cost is a very significant issue. Basically, only the Cavalry got repeaters, and even then not all units did.
I have a repro percussion one (Uberti).... a fun little rifle (carbine).... pretty accurate too... I shoot it a lot..... The required grip is one to which on soon becomes accustomed.... entertaining...
@@ScottKenny1978 Two months pay back than maybe. If your only making 310 bucks a month today...shit you're employer is breaking all sorts of laws. Or you only work like 30 hours a month at a wage slave job.
@@clothar23 yes, two months pay back then. It's a much more useful measure of how much it cost, because cost of living has gone weird compared to inflation.
Military rifles: how idiot proof can we make this mechanism? Hunting rifles: can you still work it through two pairs of gloves with a facemask and hood on and your glasses steamed up while trying to keep your ass from falling asleep?
Here's how I got here: played Battlefield 1, saw "Pieper 1893" in the weapon list, and, not knowing what it is and not expecting much, decided: why not try it? Was surprised by how good it is (3 shot kill, very fast rate of fire, 9 bullets), decided to learn more about it.
I own a operating replica. It’s definitely got more power than the pistol. It feels like something a rich baroness would carry while on horseback tour of her plantation.
I had the Uberti reproduction of this rifle and I loved it. Shooting/safety glasses were definitely a must when shooting it! Sadly it was a victim of my divorce. Thanks for the great video!
Damn, I'm seven months late to view one of my favorite western firearms for the first time on this channel. Really wish there was a way to be notified only about the western era
i really like that new .410 revolving shotgun that was on who-tee-who recently. think it might have been on edward sarkissian too? never seen a revolverifle before though!
Ian, why dont you make a video particularly about Remington new model army / navy ? It has some unique patented features and some thinks that they were more advanced than 1960 colt army /navy
Gun designers today: "It may not be a success... but at least it will be on FW someday."
Cries in Hudson
Oh, hey look! Kel-Tecs mission statement!
@@OneHunnitNoCapStannitOnBidnisz isn’t gun jesus’ name Ian?
That alone should be a mark of success in its own mannner
@@frankcommatobe8009 Voice to Text, notice lack of punctuations.
I always find revolving rifles fascinating, even if there's really not much there beyond "we put a stock and a long barrel on a revolver"
They look cool as heck.
Ever seen a revolving shotgun?
@@eldorados_lost_searcher I have now. Holy shit :O
Me too. It's one of the guns on my wish list
One of the downsides is that if you extend your arm to hold the barrel like a rifle you expose the tender skin on the inside of your forearm to the hot gasses and lead coming from the cylinder gap, it's awkward holding it like a pistol with that much weight forward. Some new designs have shields around the cylinder to deal with that but a lot don't as a friend learned after the first shot with his...ouch.
Just got my hands on a Remington 1875 (Outlaw) Carbine reproduction, very exquisite looking firearm. Despite being chambered in 357 mag it has the 1858 style of webbing along the extractor arm which really gives it extra styling points.
Back in the 90's I had an Uberti copy .44 percussion carbine....
@@JRB781 I think it was either Uberti or Navy Arms, it has all the brass features just like the 1858 shown here, with a case hardened receiver. Beautiful finish since it was kept new in storage in 30 years. 👌
@@JRB781 no problem, hope you have luck finding one too if you are looking
I have a 12 inch barreled 1858 pistol, the "Buffalo Hunter" version. Someone had added a Henry rifle stock to it. I find that in this configuration, it is a good short range carbine and a short over-the-shoulder scabbard keeps it very handy. Best of luck with your newer model.
lucky. I have been trying to track one of those down for a while now. but I am weird and like revolving carbines
I love revolving rifles. Also, I think the drawbacks during use are over stated. If you read about the 21st Ohio Volunteer Infantry in the US Civil War, there isn't a single complaint that came out of that unit. They were a sharpshooter unit that used revolver rifles throughout the war. Their actions at the Battle of Chickamauga make great reading. They fired an average of 58 rounds per man per day. That's significantly more than their muzzle loading counterparts. Despite the overstated issues people bring up about revolver rifles.
I think cartridges were simply invented so very quickly after capped revolver rifles that they didn't catch on. If you have the machining and chemistry available to make these...cartridges just make more sense.
I suspect that men wearing long sleeve wool shirts are going to have less issues with a revolving rifle than your modern man in a short sleeve T-Shirt at the range.
@@Zundfolge There's also an expectation difference. The 21st OVI were a bunch of frontiersman. If they had to hold the rifle with both hands at the semi pistol grip...so what? It's not ergonomic, but, it slings a lot of lead.
Now, we get mad at GRIPZONE and make memes if a firearm is the slightest bit inconvenient.
A union soldier wore a heavy wool jacket over a long sleeved shirt and underclothing. They didn't take that off even on a hot day unless they were digging latrines or the like. In battle they always wore that along with leather gear w/ cartridges, caps, canteen, etc. At any rate, a 19th century guy was heavier dressed than today, soldier or civilian. The problem, as Ian points out, wasn't so much the cylinder gap, it was that the lever guns were just superior in every way.
I think that's the biggest part of it. It was a solution to a problem that had more or less stopped existing. Once people could put cartridges in magazines, it was pretty much over for revolving rifles.
seems like the problem was more there were specifically bad revolving rifles (some ian has featured!) that gave the whole class a bad name. there is legitimate concern about how to hold it though, but that's more drill and training
Even if it's not a success, there's something rather classy about a revolver rifle.
..until you get a flashover... but once you have metallic cases, there is no advantage to a revolving rifle whatsoever - quite the contrary.
@@geodkyt I think i looks cool in the same vein as bullpup rifles do. I like how it looks, even though I'm aware of the drawbacks of the design.
Amen!
@@geodkyt _There IS one advantage..._
*_Engravings!_*
@@geodkyt thanks for your expert opinion....you should write a book
Why do I feel like the same people were buying this as are buying revolver rifles today (me included)? The "gee-wiz" factor is high with this beautiful old firearm..
i know its a really old gun but this seemed to be worn out pretty much so somebody in the past used it alot, dosnt seem like a display gun
Uberti makes a reproduction of this. I have one. Its a lot of fun to shoot, but I couldn't tell you why.
Today is going to mark a pivotal moment in my personal life. Thank you for taking my mind off of it for a moment with one of my favorite types of forgotten weapons.
Good luck!
Best of luck to you, friend
I hope it goes well.
Prayers that it goes well!
@Beaverish Buck Teeth that’s what I was waiting for...the internet lol
These were available with interchangeable percussion cylinders even for the factory converted rimfires. Handy if you were out in the middle of nowhere and couldn't get cartridges, but caps, powder, and lead for casting into bullets were readily available at even the most remote trading posts.
Remington back in the day, 'Look guys I don't think this is going to be a great success, but I bet in the future it'll have people talking.'
Ian today, looks at Remington Revolver Rifle, 'Ah, just my thing.'
I’ve been curious about these revolving rifles since I was a kid. It long seemed to me that this should have been the ideal weapon available at the time to carry in the Civil War. But thanks to Ian I now realize no it really wasn’t. So many factors about this concept that aren’t superficially apparent. So thanks Ian for the video.
I think the drawbacks during use are over stated. If you read about the 21st Ohio Volunteer Infantry in the US Civil War, there isn't a single complaint that came out of that unit. They were a sharpshooter unit that used revolver rifles throughout the war. Their actions at the Battle of Chickamauga make great reading.
I think cartridges were simply invented so very quickly after capped revolver rifles that they didn't catch on. If you have the machining and chemistry available to make these...cartridges just make more sense.
You also had units like the 7th Illinois that equipped themselves with Henrys.
The Ordnance Department during the Civil War was staffed by a collection of semi-fossilized relics who flat out refused to consider anything other than single-shot muzzle-loading rifles. Some units got around this by purchasing their own weapons instead of drawing them from Army stocks. The 7th Illinois lucked out or had deeper pockets.
The manufacturers were equally frustrated by this. Some relied on regiments making private purchases. Some went bankrupt waiting for Ordnance to pull their head out of their fourth point of contact. And others (I'm looking at you, Mr. Spencer 😄) made house calls.
@@quentintin1 True, but sticking with an outdated system no matter what isn't a great approach either. The Ordnance chiefs' arguments against everything other than the issued rifled musket were that a) faster loading just encouraged troops to waste ammunition, and b) the additional ammunition use would overstretch the logistics capabilities of the Army. Both arguments have *some* validity. However, having individual regiments self-equip themselves with non-issue firearms put just as much strain on logistics (more, since most of those rifles didn't share ammunition), and the Union supply chain didn't collapse (any more than being in a constant state of such). Since most fire was essentially unaimed anyway, the "waste of ammunition" argument doesn't carry much water (in any case, that same argument has been pushed every time newer, faster firing weapons were introduced, and not just in the US, so it's merit is pretty dubious).
The Union had the potential industrial capacity to manufacture metal-cased ammo on a large scale. It had the manpower to rotate units out of combat for retraining, and God knows the designs were out there, even within the US. Yet the Army stuck with close-order line formation tactics designed for muskets with an effective range of 100 yards and an approach of tit-for-tat casualties, despite the issued rifle being effective to 200 yards. This stagnation of tactics is one reason for the staggering casualty numbers in Civil War battles.
Caveat: I'm saying this in hindsight and as a gun nerd. That said, a Union regiment trained in "light" infantry tactics (Sir John Moore et al.) and equipped with license-built Vetterli rifles is is theoretical (and IMO rather daunting) possibility.
@@quentintin1 I think you may be overstating it as a change. Most units were freshly raised.
I would also observe that there is an 'opportunity' training burden with going into line with equal or less firepower than the enemy. You have to train more replacements than otherwise.
To climb onto my soapbox I would again observe that you pay for training and logistics in sweat and gold , and you pay a debt of firepower in blood.
@@benm5913 Having shot a repro, they're not overstated. It's like a flashbang mixed with getting punched in the face every shot, definitely not a good rifle for a sharpshooter compared to a standard percussion rifle
Remington's Revolving Rifle really revolutionized repeaters remarkably.
Settle down Scooby Doo
say that 3 times in under 30 seconds. ain't no way
Good job on the alliteration. 😎👍
@@KimJongIl57 just did it. Now pay me 🤑
No it did not.. these were heaps of garbage
Given the low development and production tooling costs it was probably a financial success if only a minor one.
Pretty sure I remember having a toy revolving rifle as part of a cowboys and Indians play set.
I had one as well.
I also had a toy like this, i really loved it. Tom/Germany
They still sell them at outdoors places in the American Midwest. I bought one for my son a couple years ago.
I had one,as well as, the Man from U.N.C.L.E. (United Network Command for Law Enforcement) P38 carbine.
@@benm5913 yup, you can still get the cap gun versions at Cabela's
I had a toy version of this gun along with a toy SLR and M16. They all fired caps and gave me hours of fun with friends 😊
I gotta say I love mines, although slightly impractical for anything other than having fun, the elegant stirrup on the handgaurd and canteen stock just make it look cool to me.
2:47
That glance around between "conversion" and "version" was adorable
Thank you for your videos Ian. Without them, millions of people would never get to know the rich history of manufacturing and engineering of the most used tool in the world.
I love how all these 19th century guns could be bought from the factory with whatever custom work you wanted.
Wish we had that today.
Actually most companies have a custom shop.
Uberti?
Still can, if you have enough money
In my gunsmith fantasy which will never be realized, I run a shop where you can custom order everything about your gun. It's interesting that there is some basis in reality for that sort of model.
You can. You just have to pay for it, and most people don't want to. Some years ago, Hickock45 custom ordered three Colt Single Action revolvers. At a guess, I'd say he probably paid over $1,000 for each one, and possibly more than $2,000. That's the kind of money you're looking at to get custom work.
Revolving rifles are just cool. I think that may be the defining factor in anything "cool": They have problems and aren't ideal for their purpose, but they work well enough and somehow look "right."
I love those old revolving rifles. Not the most practical but they're just too cool.
I recently picked up the heritage rancher. Although the quality isn’t that of a fine antique it does scratch the itch.
Kind of funny. I've always wished there was one available in Hunter: Call of the Wild.
Well, folks, finally a Forgotten Weapons subject that is not only an interesting failure that evokes steampunk vibes, but one that is readily available for affordable prices in the form of Eye-talian reproductions! And as a bonus, you can get it not only as its base cap-&-ball form, but also cartridge conversion cylinders that work identically to the historical method! So you can own almost the exact rifle Ian presents.
And best of all, due to its status as a blackpowder muzzleloader, it is more easily available is many places that other arms may not be.
are-ree-vaderdchee
I've had a fondness for the Remington New Model (or 1858) ever since I was a kid. I had a cap pistol that took 8-shot ring caps and was clearly styled to look like a Remington revolver, with a rib under the barrel that mimicked the Remington's loading lever.
I have an Uberti repro Colt revolving rifle in 44-40 mainly as a collectors piece to go along with my Uberti lever guns. It was comfortable to shoot. I bought a Repro Remington revolving rifle in percussion so I could use a conversion cylinder in 45 LC. However, I returned it because the ergonomics were uncomfortable for me. I have always been attracted to stocked revolvers and pistols, so the revolving rifles fit right into that category for me. It was interesting to see an original in rimfire. Thanks Ian.
Some sort of arm protection is a must if you're holding the front end of the rifle. The Rossi version using the Judge as a base uses a plate to deflect the cylinder blast.
Its black powder, your main concern is chain fire.
One of the moments that sparked my firearms enthusiasm was as a kid when we went to a school trip to the castle of Chapultepec in Mexico city. In there they have a museum with a bunch of interesting weapons from the 1800's that were actually used historically: crude revolving and harmonica rifles, a gatling gun and many other interesting designs and unique hand made mechanisms. Also the building is beautiful! if you ever come to Mexico that's one you should visit!
Interesting choice to leave the loading lever on, and looking at that hammer, would that still work with a percussion cylinder? It still has a flat face below the "firing pin" for the rimfire cartridge. That was kind of a thing back then from what I have seen, accommodating people at the far end of a supply chain with the ability to make do with what is available.
That's a great piece of information
The idea of revolving rifles has always fascinated me, always have kinda wondered why they never took off.
I remember one of the classic civil war tintypes of a cavalry man with a Colt revolving rifle and his left hand has a cloth wrapping or bandage on it.
A concept revived, very successfully, in the Rossi Circuit Judge. Great video.
I would by a new production version of this. Nifty rang/plinking/ conversation piece.
I have a beautiful Uberti replica with a Kenny Howell ,45 Colt conversion cylinder. Perfect!
I must say, Ian, it has been agony waiting for the new video each day hoping it will be the Christian Prouteau interview! :-D
I can't wait to see what Ian and Jonathan from Royal Armories will do when they finally have a collab video. Even if it is Zoom, I think Ian and Jonathan could really elevate each other's content and would benefit the world. Perhaps a Q&A video guest?
Already have done some on British bullpups.
They made a book. And Ian has spent a bunch of time at the Armouries
I've always been fascinated by revolver-rifles. They're just really cool.
I had a Uberti repro of this in .36 until a few years ago. It took many squirrels in the 8 or so years i had it.
I don't know why but i love the whole revolving rifle concept
I'm surprised there aren't more revolving rifle options in the UK considering it'd give us the closest thing to a semi-auto centrefire rifle that we'd be allowed... i'm sure with a more modern design they could include safety features to mitigate gas venting from the cylinder .etc.
Maybe a marriage of a gas seal and a Mateba-style recoil operated cycle system
Ironically they're more practical as a percussion gun in the UK as you can actually legally own it! One positive about percussion is that you can always get ammo! If you have seen how the reloaders make ammo for those gorgeous Belgian pinfire revolvers, you realise the ingenuity of black powder enthusiasts!
Here's how that would go down.
They would get mildly popular, the daily mail would write a story about revolver assault rifles, priti patel would have an orgasm banning them.
Someone at Remington kept the Colt model in mind and found the right opportunity with the New Model frame and Beals stock marriage.
The inventor of the bored through cylinder revolver was Rollin White. US Patent 12,648 patented on April 3, 1855. He licensed the patent to S&W. Interesting story.
I've heard of people dropping the loading lever to function as a forward grip, but with hot gases escaping through the cylinder gap and nothing but bare metal to hold on to out front, this is not so good in practice.
Thank you , Ian .
I know nothing about guns. Never fired one not particularly interested in doing so but...
.... your videos are brilliant, well presented and with accurate history.
It's like watching a hairy Yoda dispensing wisdom.
Have you watched Steve1989mre on military rations? He is just the same.
I'm Ian Mcallem and I'm here to say
We're about to look at guns in a major way
This piece is forgotten, lost to time
Let me review it, in a sick ass rhyme
I will always like revolving rifles despite their flaws. A single action Nagant gas-seal carbine would be my bae.
About 40 years ago I read a series of books called Adam Steele written by George g Gilman. He used a Colt Hartford revolving rifle in I think 44-40. Not sure what year it was set in but a parallel series called Edge used a Winchester lever action. Supposedly the Colt Hartford was extremely accurate particularly over extremely long ranges. It was also much faster for repeat shots. It had cased ammo and smokeless powder in the book. It was set just post civil war and went for about 20 years
I invented the revolving rifle in my head when I was 10 turns out i was 150 years late
That style of stock is "dandy," in the parlance of the times. 19th-century guns had an aesthetic elegance to them of the sort you just don't see anymore (not including repros).
* *insert Jakobs reference* *
There are still in small numbers custom made guns produced by traditional gunsmith shops, which use oldstyle design.
Using contemporary technology to create a repeating firearm.
Brilliant!
When Heritage Manufacturing offered their revolver with a 16" barrel,my first thought was"How long until they offer a carbine version?"
And it looks an awful lot a like this classic rifle.
I've always wondered why revolving rifles never caught on, but it makes sense when you consider that the lever action rifle, which is better in every way I can think of, was invented rather close to the popular use of revolvers
There’s something about revolving rifles that I absolutely adore. I wish these were more successful because I love the idea of these guns.
I absolutely love revolving rifles. When I was an 07/02 I kept on trying on making both lever actions and revolving rifles. Failed in making commercially successful weapons, just not enough demand. Turns out I was 25 years too early. Many years later I had a LGS call me up and try to buy a dozen from me but I had already been long gone from the industry.
what is an 07/02
I saw one of these, I’m sure a reproduction, in a Midway USA magazine catalog for like $500. I kinda want one. They look cool.
Now I wanna see a Reprocussion on a revolving rifle over at C&Rsenal.
Great video as always. I just purchased a Uberti replica, beautiful gun, however the hand (prawl) barely sticks out of the frame (thousandths). Timing and lock up are tight
but the hand will not last long it has to be barely grasping the cylinder by the tip. I was able to see the hand protrude from the frame of your 155-year-old rifle easily. Sadly I
have to send it back. It is a Stoger import.
Quick request could you try to cover the aps underwater rifle sometime in the future?
I use reproduction model of Uberti. You have to wear glasses and gloves in order to avoid percussion cup rests and fire from the cylinder, and you inhale a lot of smoke while shooting. But this thing is astonishingly accurate at 25 and 50 meters :)
These are so cool. I love the look. I'd like one for my collection just because.
Toward the end of the run they advertised them as coming with both a percussion cylinder and a cartridge cylinder, hence the retention of the loading plunger (which would otherwise just be an annoyance). Therefore, I don't believe there much if any "conversion" being done there beyond simply swapping out cylinders. I have one of the modern repros from Uberti. They used the pistol loading lever, and it has an 18" bbl, but it's a hoot all the same.
A local shop near me has a rare 10 gauge colt revolving shotgun
With the longer loading lever would that allow for even higher velocity because of a tighter pack on the powder? You’d already get a bump from the barrel length, just curious if being able to put more pressure on packing the cylinder would add to the power with these.
Rain, wind and cold outside.
Now I have pumpkin soup with Forgotten Weapons.
"Angel face's gun in Blueberry's adventure: " Le hors la loi"& "Angel face"
I really want to see this gun in action lol even if it is essentially just an Extended Remington revolver.
they should have put the cylinder in front of the support hand. like an old smg, like the berretta 38 and how the support hand can go behind the magazine
Great work Sir thank you
I just like looking at revolving rifles but boy I can't wait to own one myself.
Chassepot to famas is an amazing book the illistrations are 👌 the information is 👌 not to mention the thing is put together like a brick I don't know if there's anymore even in stock but if you guys like this channel you'll love the book it's awesome
A longer loading lever would be helpful on my 12" barreled "Buffalo Hunter" in shaving down .457 balls, as well as adding to the aesthetics, IMHO.
You held onto the tang behind the trigger with your left hand if you were right handed instead of gripping ahead of the cylinder. This way you would not get powder burns from the barrel cylinder gap.
This has me wondering something. If you carried extra cylinders that were loaded how many could you practically carry and how quickly could you remove an empty cylinder for a loaded one?
I also wonder what a modern version would be like in 9 and 45.
I would love a revolving rifle- but for me to personally enjoy it, it would need to accept centerfire cartridges and probably have a crane or otherwise be easy to load. No slower than levergun repeaters to fire or replinish- and there is always that "single action" (Sorry, St. Othias. I have sinned) if you need a precise shot.
The Rossi Circuit Judge is a revolving rifle and loads like a standard DA revolver
I can see how random green, blue and black wrist tattoos from brass and powder residue would be very popular today.
Does Magpul make a collapsible stock for it yet?
I remember reading somewhere that the Colt revolving rifles had problems with mass discharge - i.e. all the rounds firing off at once. This was a problem too with their revolver pistols, but in a pistol it don't hurt anybody but the thing you're shooting at. In a rifle, it could go into your arm - hence why the US military wasn't particularly thrilled about buying them at the time.
Chain fire was kind of an unavoidable issue with cap and ball revolvers
These are the type of rifle i would own just because i find them neat in their simplicity
Funny how the 'less good guns' have such an interesting back ground!
Even though this is unsuccessful production, Morgan gonna buy this long iron
Your absolutely right about these rifles not selling very well. The general store in the old town I live has several of these rifles. They have been on the stores shelves since 1867. Personally, I don't think they will ever sell, they have a price of $75. As far as I'm concerned they can stay on these shelves another 154 years. $75. That's ridiculous. If they ever go on clearance I may buy one.
It's always pretty crazy the machining they did on these things 100+ years ago. Couldn't even magine doing it without a computer controlled lathe now.
so strange that more repeating guns weren't used during the Civil War. I know some were but the numbers just aren't what I think they'd be with what was out there at the time
militaries tend to be two decades behind on small arms technology
Muskets are cheaper.
one reason is government and the military were afraid the mass issuing of repeating arms would cause an over usage of ammunition particularly when and if formations panicked. More real reason is It was an economic and a timing issue for the US . . . the economy had just been split in half and both sides needed guns now.
Significantly more expensive. The Spencer was *three months pay* for a soldier. And it used non-standard ammo, which complicated supply.
When you're going from "a few thousand" soldiers to several million, cost is a very significant issue.
Basically, only the Cavalry got repeaters, and even then not all units did.
@@mixedfootage8010 Given as the Brown Bess turns up in numbers converted to percussion you can see how the demand unearthed every thing.
It is very pleasent to look at. I wouldn't mind owning one.
I have a repro percussion one (Uberti).... a fun little rifle (carbine).... pretty accurate too... I shoot it a lot..... The required grip is one to which on soon becomes accustomed.... entertaining...
that would be 621 dollars in todays market if it costed 25 back then
Try "two months pay"
@@ScottKenny1978 Two months pay back than maybe.
If your only making 310 bucks a month today...shit you're employer is breaking all sorts of laws.
Or you only work like 30 hours a month at a wage slave job.
@@clothar23 yes, two months pay back then.
It's a much more useful measure of how much it cost, because cost of living has gone weird compared to inflation.
My dad has a replica made in the 1980s, I think. I loved that gun. I don't know how many deer that thing has killed.
Military rifles: how idiot proof can we make this mechanism?
Hunting rifles: can you still work it through two pairs of gloves with a facemask and hood on and your glasses steamed up while trying to keep your ass from falling asleep?
Here's how I got here: played Battlefield 1, saw "Pieper 1893" in the weapon list, and, not knowing what it is and not expecting much, decided: why not try it? Was surprised by how good it is (3 shot kill, very fast rate of fire, 9 bullets), decided to learn more about it.
I just really love revolving guns
Interesting. Just curious, do you happen to know if Colt would do the same conversion for their 1855 Revolver Carbines?
Hey Ian, there's a revolving rifle in in Far Cry 6 called La Varita, and I was wondering if you happened to know what it is based on
I think I saw a lever action revolver rifle in a show somewhere, was that ever a thing?
I remember this gun, I think it was used in The Hateful Eight
Great video
Спасибо за вашу работу, делайте подобные ролики ещё!
I've always wanted to get a repro of this, cut it down to about a 12" barrel and smoothbore it. Sort an a non-NFA "SBS" Ye Olde Circuit Judge.
I own a operating replica. It’s definitely got more power than the pistol. It feels like something a rich baroness would carry while on horseback tour of her plantation.
I had the Uberti reproduction of this rifle and I loved it. Shooting/safety glasses were definitely a must when shooting it! Sadly it was a victim of my divorce. Thanks for the great video!
I thought about buying one of the Uberti replicas.
Do you think some shooters carried a spare loaded chamber already loaded?
Damn, I'm seven months late to view one of my favorite western firearms for the first time on this channel. Really wish there was a way to be notified only about the western era
i really like that new .410 revolving shotgun that was on who-tee-who recently. think it might have been on edward sarkissian too? never seen a revolverifle before though!
Ian, why dont you make a video particularly about Remington new model army / navy ? It has some unique patented features and some thinks that they were more advanced than 1960 colt army /navy