.50 Revolver?

[whitfang]

Does anybody know of a manufacturer who makes a high quality .50 caliber cap&ball revolver?

Close range deer hunting, in case you're wondering why.

[filmokentucky]

Check page three of this forum for a previous thread on this topic. At this
time, unfortunately, no one is making a .50 caliber C&B revolver. I e-mailed some of the makers of the large cartridge revolvers about the possibility of making a C&B variant, but none was in the least bit interested. Perhaps Hamilton Bowen would make one up for you--his work is as good as it gets--and if it's do-able, he'd be my choice.

[whitfang]

After reading that thread, it looks like it's questionable whether you can get enough downrange oomph to hunt deer with a cap&ball revolver.  One hunter had to get 3 hits on a deer to keep it down.

Finally got an Indiana Hunting&Trapping guide and you need a single shot pistol anyway, 12" min barrel length.

Just wondering because I was interested in cap&ball and thought if I was going to buy one, might as well buy one you could hunt with.  Guess I'll have to be satisfied with a Ruger Old Army and hunting rabbits.

Thanks.

[Blackhawk44]

If you truly MUST have one, be sure you have about 9 monthe, $1400 and a lot of conviction and call Dave Clements at Clements Custom Guns.  They're neat, beautiful and high, but...

[whitfang]

Thanks, but I don't need one THAT much.

[filmokentucky]

The Walker Colt has enough pop to take a deer cleanly and has done so. There's no way to load a ROA up to a Walker's level. My Walkers (2 by
Colt, 1 by Uberti) all take 60 grains of fffg with no problem and have good enough accuracy to get the job done. 'Course, some states won't let you hunt deer sized game with a C&B revolver,so you might want to check that out.

[Blackhawk44]

Haven't tried it but reports come back that 777 has a good bit more kick than almost anything else.   Judicious load work up in a ROA, a good and patient shot and no attempts past 35-40yds should put venison in the freezer.

[AndyHass]

I have "finished" a few deer with my 1858, loaded to max with FFFg 777.  Within 15 yards, the usual result was a chest pass-thru, so it was enough at that range.  However, there is a noticeable lack of trauma around the wound, and usually I used a second chamber immediately as I couldn't even tell from the reaction that the first had connected soundly.  I would hesitate to use it as a primary weapon unless I limited myself to VERY close shots.
   Actually, I bought the pistol to use as a primary weapon thoug (sort of).  After the second time I was nearly run down in a corn row by spooking deer after I'd emptied my ML rifle, I decided I needed a backup to prevent it form happening again.  However, this scenario would fit in with the afore-mentioned "very close shots"!  :wink:

[Gatofeo]

I hope a .50-caliber cap and ball revolver is never available.
We don't need it.
I can see it now ... .50-caliber, loaded with nylon sabots filled with .44 jacketed bullets, Pyrodex pellets or (ack!) smokeless powder (curses on Savage!) and shotgun primers for igntion! And probably a hydraulic rammer too!
Makes me wanna thrup!
I had thought that cap and ball sixguns were the last bastion of REAL blackpowder shooting. Sure enough, some jackleg will come along and poison that standing.
The Ruger Old Army was enough. I don't have a problem with it. A quality, modern target gun was needed at the time. Also, a lot of nice, old, original  Remingtons were being butchered with the addition of adjustable sights and other doodads. The Ruger probably saved tons of Remingtons from such butchery.
But a .50-caliber cap and ball? For what use?
If you must hunt big game with a black powder sixgun, then load .45 Colt cartridges with the ancient propellant. The late gun writer Elmer Keith killed a lot of deer and elk with the .45 Colt and blackpowder loads until he started experimenting with the .44 Special and heavy smokeless powder loads.
The only reason I see someone buying a .50-caliber cap and ball sixgun is for bragging rights.
They'll make wild claims about its power and strut around like peacocks, denigrating the rest of us with "puny" .44s and .36s. Of course, most of them won't be able to hit a paper plate at 25 yards with the thing; it's the nature of such immature braggarts.
I saw plenty of these types when the .44 Magnum became generally available in the 1960s and 1970s. Then they resurfaced when the .454 Casull came out. Then they craweled out of the woodwork again when hot, dangerous loads for the .45-70 became the rage.
Their testosterone and ignorance will be exceeded only by their B.S. as they spout all kinds of wild ballistic claims from the maker (gee, now THERE is an objective source!).
I hope they don't profane the sport of shooting cap and ball sixguns with such an abomination.
ACK!

[filmokentucky]

I still stand by my beloved and trusty Walkers. Take the time to learn where they shoot to and they'll compete favorably with most modern revolvers, never mind C&B pistols. And they look good doing it. It is almost impossible to beat the Victorian elegance of a traditional C&B revolver---the only modern guns that come close are simply clones anyway---in my not so humble opinion.

[whitfang]

Take it easy, Gatofeo, take it easy.  Must be mighty hot in the sun out there.   :-D   :-D     :-D   :-D

The ONLY reason I was asking about a .50 caliber revolver was to use it to hunt deer.  And in Indiana it turns out you need a .50 cal SINGLE shot muzzleloading pistol anyway.  I just thought as long as I was buying my first cap-and-ball revolver, I'd get one I could hunt with.  Besides, I don't even own a chronograph or a choreograph or whatever.                    

RE: Walker revolvers.  Everybody complains about the weight of the Walkers, but a T/C Encore pistol weighs 5.2 pounds.  I see everybody quotes around 4.5 pounds for a Walker.    

[filmokentucky]

The Walker goes 4 lbs. 9ozs. empty. Add a couple of ounces for five loaded chambers and it is still lighter than an Encore. With the right leather
carrying a Walker is not a problem. Some early writers harped on the weight issue and how big the piece is and it became part of the collective conciousness that the Walker was a poor proposition to carry in the field. I believed it too until I tried it myself. The truth is that it is a grand old gun---versatile, well balanced, accurate  and handsome---and vastly under-rated as a personal and hunting firearm. Their large size has a real benefit,too. Their internal parts are beefier than the parts in smaller C&B
revolvers. I've never heard of parts failure in a properly cared for Walker.
   As a token of my esteem, I'm thinking about having ivory grips put on my two Colt made Walkers. Maybe the sea shell pattern that was used on a few Patersons--it'll be like gilding a lily.

[Fiveshooter]

I hope a .50-caliber cap and ball revolver is never available.
We don't need it.
I can see it now ... .50-caliber, loaded with nylon sabots filled with .44 jacketed bullets, Pyrodex pellets or (ack!) smokeless powder (curses on Savage!) and shotgun primers for igntion! And probably a hydraulic rammer too!
Makes me wanna thrup!
I had thought that cap and ball sixguns were the last bastion of REAL blackpowder shooting. Sure enough, some jackleg will come along and poison that standing.
The Ruger Old Army was enough. I don't have a problem with it. A quality, modern target gun was needed at the time. Also, a lot of nice, old, original  Remingtons were being butchered with the addition of adjustable sights and other doodads. The Ruger probably saved tons of Remingtons from such butchery.
But a .50-caliber cap and ball? For what use?
If you must hunt big game with a black powder sixgun, then load .45 Colt cartridges with the ancient propellant. The late gun writer Elmer Keith killed a lot of deer and elk with the .45 Colt and blackpowder loads until he started experimenting with the .44 Special and heavy smokeless powder loads.
The only reason I see someone buying a .50-caliber cap and ball sixgun is for bragging rights.
They'll make wild claims about its power and strut around like peacocks, denigrating the rest of us with "puny" .44s and .36s. Of course, most of them won't be able to hit a paper plate at 25 yards with the thing; it's the nature of such immature braggarts.
I saw plenty of these types when the .44 Magnum became generally available in the 1960s and 1970s. Then they resurfaced when the .454 Casull came out. Then they craweled out of the woodwork again when hot, dangerous loads for the .45-70 became the rage.
Their testosterone and ignorance will be exceeded only by their B.S. as they spout all kinds of wild ballistic claims from the maker (gee, now THERE is an objective source!).
I hope they don't profane the sport of shooting cap and ball sixguns with such an abomination.
ACK!

Rarely am I as disgusted with a post as I am with your attitude about big bore revolvers and people that like them. Whether they be cap and ball or cartridge. You sir remind me more of a politician than a shooter. To spout off with all your pomp as to what should and should not be available to other shooters. To read your post one would think that anyone that likes guns other than what you deem appropriate is stupid or a poor marksman. Many F.A. revolvers chambered in .454 Casull are capable of M.O.A accuracy and many big bore shooters can consistently plug that "paper plate" you mentioned at distances exceeding 200 yds. with a big bore revolver.  I have seen this enough with my own eyes to know its true. I enjoy shooting cap and ball revolvers from .36 caliber up. I enjoy the replicas but I also enjoy the Ruger Old Armies. They are hands down more accurate than any replica I have fired. I shoot a pair of 5.5" fixed sighted Old Army revolvers at clay birds(setting birds) at a measured distance of 65 yds. with more hits than misses. I have also personally scored 10 hits in a row at clay birds at the same distance with a heavy loaded F.A. 454 Casull. This was done standing without a rest. I don't do that well very often but I have done it. I don't personally own one of the Clements .50 (actually .485 caliber) Old Army conversions yet but I will be sending him one for conversion in the next couple of weeks.
You question the "need" for such a gun! Hell guy what do you "need" any of yours for? I just want one and that is all the "need" that matters.
 There are folks that hunt deer at long range with custom .50 BMG rifles. Thats not my cup of tea but as long as they can do it and do so in a safe manner I am PLEASED they have the RIGHT to do so.  I own several traditional BP guns and even (gasp) a few inlines. They all have their place and if you don't like modern muzzle loading guns you are FREE to NOT own one if you like.  It's when you start preaching about what other shooters should or should not shoot that you cross the line. I have shot with several shooters that shoot cartridge revolvers in .475 Linebaugh and up to .500 Linebaugh long that shoot them as well as many can shoot a target .38 revolver. Not everyone is as recoil sensitive as you may think. You will always find shooters that like different things than you. That does not make them ignorant or say anything about their shooting ability. Your tendency to generalize does make me wonder about you though.

[filmokentucky]

Actually, I believe there were some British percussion revolvers made in .50 caliber and they were successful, too. When I contacted modern makers about a .50 percussion variant of their revolver they weren't interested. Some of these guns chamber the .45-70 cartridge, so the cylinders are long enough to hold a serious powder charge. Maybe if enough people ask for it one of these outfits would make up a batch.