Author Topic: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question  (Read 7860 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GeneRector

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 417
Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« on: September 09, 2012, 03:37:20 PM »
 :)  Howdy! What was the standard issue pistols for Custer and his men at the Little Big Horn Battle? I thought they were cap and ball; however, on a recent tv program on its history, they said that the pistols used cartridges. Does anyone know for sure? Always, Gene
 
 
Happy Trails!
Always,
Gene Rector
Endowed NRA Life Member

Offline AtlLaw

  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6405
  • Gender: Male
  • A good woman, nice bike and fine guns!
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #1 on: September 09, 2012, 04:30:40 PM »
Yup.  Sure do...  ;D
 
Richard
Former Captain of Horse, keeper of the peace and interpreter of statute.  Currently a Gentleman of leisure.
Nemo me impune lacessit

                      
Support your local US Military Vets Motorcycle Club

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2012, 04:34:26 PM »
Locations of battle, movements, and retreats, were tracked, and located, by empty and loaded shell casings.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline GeneRector

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 417
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #3 on: September 09, 2012, 05:04:13 PM »
 :)  Howdy! Thanks for the info! What caliber were the pistols? Always, Gene
 
 
Happy Trails!
Always,
Gene Rector
Endowed NRA Life Member

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #4 on: September 10, 2012, 01:47:58 AM »
Don't remember that I ever knew, as only officers were basically issued pistols, but the troops mainly carried single shot trap doors, while Crazy Horse and company carried an assortment of rifles including Henry, and Winchester lever actions.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline guzzijohn

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #5 on: September 10, 2012, 03:05:35 AM »
I think all of Custer's troops were issued Colt SA .45s.
GuzziJohn

Offline Hellgate

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 135
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #6 on: September 10, 2012, 01:06:11 PM »
I agree with previous posts. Colt 1873 SAA in 45LC. There were not many that were fired during the battle. I read (and everything I read is true!) that the Indians had all the troopers sidearms as trophies of war but realized that posession of the guns would incriminate them as participants in the slaughter so they dumped them all in a river so as to not be caught with them. That could be complete B.S. but I sure don't hear of people selling "Custer/Little Big Horn" Colts but the TD carbines show up occasionally.
Gun control=OSHA for criminals

Hellgate
SASS#3302
DGB#29
NRA Life

Offline GeneRector

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 417
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #7 on: September 10, 2012, 04:06:50 PM »
 :)  Howdy! I guess you are never to old to learn something! I had thought for a long time that the pistols at Little Big Horn were cap and ball. And, they took a long time to reload, thus a factor in losing the battle. However, I have recently learned after watching a historical TV show and your verification that the pistols were Single Action Colt Revolvers. For reloading, you still had to eject each spent shell with the rod and then fill the cylinder one bullet at a time. This would take a bit of time while being shot at with rifles and arrows. I heard one source say that approximately 1100 shots were made, rifle and pistol combined, by Custer and his men. I have visited the battlefield, a few years ago and listened to the Ranger talk, etc. It will be forever an awesome event in history. Always, Gene
 
 
Happy Trails!
Always,
Gene Rector
Endowed NRA Life Member

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2012, 12:54:14 PM »
It was awesome for the Sioux, but for Custer, not so much. Like the song says: Ole Custer split his men, bet he don't do that again. ;)
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline chefjeff

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 472
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2012, 02:54:02 PM »
Only Dustin Hoffman got away! ;D

Offline ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31268
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2012, 03:31:49 PM »
  From what I understand, the biggest problem..other than the Indians having repeaters, was the nature of the trap door carbines.
  After 5-6 shots the bores were so dirty that empties were often seized in the chamber, and when the trapdoor was flipped up..the extractor pulled through the cartridge rim..leaving troops to try to pick shells out with knives.
 
     Somebody correct me if I am wrong..
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #11 on: September 15, 2012, 04:01:03 PM »
Actually the biggest problem were the Indians. There was a bunch of'em. Custer, in typical Custer style, thought that he was riding into a route, where he could club a few women and children, maybe even shoot a few men, and call it a day. Custer was politically motivated for promotion. He was hated by other officers and was blamed for one massacre of soldiers. Custer made his now famous tactical blunders that he was so noted for, and split his men with Captain Reno taking one group, and Captain Benteen another. Divide and conquer so to speak, with the idiot Custer dividing himself.
He was now, out numbered, outgunned, and out fought. In short, Custer was a military fool of much renown, and had the past credentials to prove it. His movie created legend, was unearned, but his flamboyant ways were good in Hollyweird where truth has never mattered.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline mcwoodduck

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7983
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #12 on: September 15, 2012, 04:05:06 PM »
:)  Howdy! Thanks for the info! What caliber were the pistols? Always, Gene
The Revolvers were Colt SAA 7.5" chambered in 45 Colt but the ammo could have been S&W Schofield ammo as the Army bought both the Colt and the S&W Schofield the Schofield shot a shorter round and the army made that ammo standard
Custer was carrying an English revolver, I froget the make but it was called a Bulldog, Double action 3" in 44 caliber about equal in power to a 44 Russian.
Had the troopers been issued the S&W they may have been better off as the S&W loads and unloads about 5 times faster than the Colt SAA.

Offline ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31268
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #13 on: September 15, 2012, 04:10:39 PM »
  I agree with basically all Dee said..but still seeking answer to the ejectors ripping clear through the cartridge rims..anybody know if that were a huge problem?
 
   Oh, BTW:  Didn't Custer turn down either cannons or gatling guns before the battle?
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Offline mcwoodduck

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7983
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #14 on: September 15, 2012, 04:23:13 PM »
  I agree with basically all Dee said..but still seeking answer to the ejectors ripping clear through the cartridge rims..anybody know if that were a huge problem?
 
   Oh, BTW:  Didn't Custer turn down either cannons or gatling guns before the battle?
I know he left Gattlings as he wanted to move fast.
What I find facinating about the Custer Battle field is the Indian Ammo.
The Indians were sold rimfire surplus Henry rifles and about 50 to 100 rounds of ammo.
The Idea was that the Indians did not have enough ammo to fight with.
Thye reloaded the rimfire 44's and surprised the trooper in the volume of fire.
The extractor problems were with the trap door.  The cases of the original 45-70 were copper not brass and the steel would rip the rim, troopers carried a special knife just to pry cases out of the trap doors slowing thier reloads.
Had the troopers been given Updated Henry rifles like the 66 or the 1873 and top Break S&W rifles, it may have been the other way around.  But as Dee said Custer was full of himself and underestamated the indians and their tactics of drawing fire and charging while the troopers were reloading.

Offline Hellgate

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 135
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #15 on: September 15, 2012, 05:03:43 PM »
One of the main fgaols of the battle was to capture women & children in order to bring the braves back to the reservation. That is one reason Custer continued farther west (I think) in order to surround and capture the fleeing women & kids. This seperated him even further from Benteen(?) who was trapped atop the bluff on the opposite side of the Greasygrass Cr. The problem is every time he tried to head them off he ran into a bunch of braves flooding toward him. He was just plain out gunned & arrowed. The Indians could lob high arcing arrows from concealment as well as pump Henry 44s into his troops & horses.
Gun control=OSHA for criminals

Hellgate
SASS#3302
DGB#29
NRA Life

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #16 on: September 15, 2012, 05:15:01 PM »
Hellgate brings into the mix another interesting issue. The horse. White men valued the horse as a major source of transportation. The American Indian also valued the horse as a major source of transportation. And food.
Indian fighters always feared the Indian when they ate their own horses, because they had already figured out how to steal the soldiers horses. In this particular fight the horses were targeted. Crazy Horse had no intention of letting Custer get away. He was a hated man, and well deserving of the hatred.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline BobJ

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 64
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #17 on: September 16, 2012, 07:50:15 AM »
A little OT, but some comments from a trapdoor user. My grandfather was in the Spanish American War in the Philippines 1898-1904. He had a 45-70 trapdoor, hated-HATED-it. Spanish had 7mm Mausers. said his shoulder was black and blue and the first shots of the day were painful, but became numb. Couldn't tell where the Spanish were shooting from, unlike our black powder 45-70s.
 
Their wool uniforms rotted in the tropics, their mules died, and they ended up wearing captured Spanish khaki uniforms, all 2 or 3 sizes too small. And their USDA Prime beef was horsemeat. He never mentioned extraction problems. Anyway, his stories on the state of the US Military of the time were interesting. Horsemeat is actually quite yummy, tho.

Offline mcwoodduck

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7983
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #18 on: September 16, 2012, 07:54:48 AM »
A little OT, but some comments from a trapdoor user. My grandfather was in the Spanish American War in the Philippines 1898-1904. He had a 45-70 trapdoor, hated-HATED-it. Spanish had 7mm Mausers. said his shoulder was black and blue and the first shots of the day were painful, but became numb. Couldn't tell where the Spanish were shooting from, unlike our black powder 45-70s.
 
Their wool uniforms rotted in the tropics, their mules died, and they ended up wearing captured Spanish khaki uniforms, all 2 or 3 sizes too small. And their USDA Prime beef was horsemeat. He never mentioned extraction problems. Anyway, his stories on the state of the US Military of the time were interesting. Horsemeat is actually quite yummy, tho.
By the time of the Spanish American War the Army ordenance department had moved from copper ballon cases to Brass drawn cases.

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #19 on: September 16, 2012, 07:55:25 AM »
My Cherokee grandpa said: Son, never fall in love with somethin ya might have ta eat. I think he also included the yard dogs, and barn cats. ;)
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline texagun

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 98
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #20 on: September 16, 2012, 08:04:43 AM »
The Revolvers were mostly Colt SAA 7.5" chambered in 45 Colt as mentioned.  One of the 2 books I've read about Custer (Son of the Morning Star, and the other I can't recall) mentioned that Custer's body was the only body found on the battlefield that was not mutilated or molested.  He had one .45 caliber wound in his chest and one .45 caliber wound in the left side of his head, leading to speculation they he may have ended his own life.

Offline BBF

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10042
  • Gender: Male
  • I feel much better now knowing it will get worse.
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #21 on: September 16, 2012, 08:19:52 AM »
I read/heard that the Indian women stuck sticks into his ears so he could "hear."
What is the point of Life if you can't have fun.

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #22 on: September 16, 2012, 08:30:44 AM »
Actually it was bone sewing awls stuck into his ears hoping his hearing would improve in death, as he had not been a good listener in life.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline BBF

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10042
  • Gender: Male
  • I feel much better now knowing it will get worse.
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #23 on: September 16, 2012, 08:45:42 AM »
Dang !! I was close for a non-American at that. ;D ;D
 
Good for him he was dead, that would'a have hurt.
What is the point of Life if you can't have fun.

Offline texagun

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 98
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #24 on: September 16, 2012, 09:27:17 AM »
Here's a pretty good read on the massacre.  It is pretty accurate according to most accounts of the battle:

http://www.littlebighorn.info/Booklets/ForTheRecord.pdf

Offline Hellgate

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 135
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #25 on: September 16, 2012, 05:58:31 PM »
Texagun,

That was a nice read. Succinct but detailed.
Gun control=OSHA for criminals

Hellgate
SASS#3302
DGB#29
NRA Life

Offline ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31268
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #26 on: September 17, 2012, 06:40:19 AM »
My Cherokee grandpa said: Son, never fall in love with somethin ya might have ta eat. I think he also included the yard dogs, and barn cats. ;)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 ;D   ;D   ;D   ;D   ;D   I like that...and being farm-raised myself, i find it totally true..
 
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Offline 90north

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 79
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #27 on: September 18, 2012, 06:27:25 AM »
I have read that the 7th had Spencer carbines until a few months befor the battle, when they had to turn them in for the Springfields.

Offline srussell

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (14)
  • A Real Regular
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #28 on: September 21, 2012, 03:27:51 PM »
  I agree with basically all Dee said..but still seeking answer to the ejectors ripping clear through the cartridge rims..anybody know if that were a huge problem?
 
   Oh, BTW:  Didn't Custer turn down either cannons or gatling guns before the battle?
the cartridge case was made of copper at the time. between the rifle getting hot and fouled it would no eject. the troopers had to pyre the case out with a knife. not a good thing when you in battle. the officers would buy their own ammunition that was made of brass. and even differant weapons than what the troopers had

Offline Gatofeo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 448
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #29 on: September 29, 2012, 12:24:32 PM »
 1. The troopers, by and large, carried the Colt Single Action Army in .45 caliber.
 
2. The issued pistol ammunition at that time was what we'd call the .45 Schoefield today: a case slightly shorter than the regular .45 Long Colt case. The Smith & Wesson Schofield revolver had a cylinder shorter than the Colt SAA.
To ensure that ammunition would work in either revolver, the U.S. military adopted the slightly shorter case. This was loaded with a 230 gr. lead bullet over 28 grs. of black powder: the standard military load of the day.
The civilian factory load of the day for the longer-cased .45 Long Colt had a 250 to 260 gr. bullet over 40 grs. of black powder. This civilian load would work in the Colt revolvers, but was too long to fully enter the S&W Schofield revolvers.
Undoubtedly, troopers bought the more powerful civilian load (250/40) from the fort’s sutler, or in town, for their Colts -- but this more powerful load was never issued.
 
3. Custer is known to have carried a variety of non-issue revolvers and rifles. Officers, especially those who were higher ranking, typically carried what they wanted -- especially if they were in the field, away from regulation hawks.
This practice was common again nearly 100 years later in Vietnam, where soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen carried the Browning Hi-Power 9mm, .357 Magnums, .38 Specials, .44 Magnum, .41 Magnum, .380 ACP and even the .22 rimfire for defense or special purposes.
 
4. The 1873 Springfield "trap door" rifle was actually a good rifle in its day. It had the advantage of a powerful camming system to extract fired or loaded cartridges, important when using a propellant that leaves 56 percent of itself behind as solids.
Then, the Springfield flung the empty case clear of the breech, leaving it empty for the next cartridge.
The Sharps, Remington and other single-shot rifles of the day had weaker extraction systems, and did not fling the empty or loaded cartridge clear. Their systems left the case 1/4 inch or so out of the chamber, to be picked out with your fingers and flung clear -- no small feat in a Dakota winter while wearing heavy gloves.
 
5. The Springfield 1873 rifle was quite accurate at very long range, out to 1,200 yards, in the hands of a good shooter -- when fed good ammo.
Alas, frontier forts typically received very little spare ammo for practice. If lucky, soldiers practiced twice a year. A major problem was ammunition quality.
Most military issue ammo was made on the East coast in government arsenals, thousands of miles from some of the remote Army posts out West. Most people today forget that, while the first transcontinental railroad was completed in 1869, it took decades to complete the track spurs that supplied the remote towns and forts.
Many places never received tracks, and freight was still shipped by wagons into the 1920s, (the last stagecoach robbery was in Jarbidge, Nevada in 1916!). Trucks still supply these small towns and cities.
During the long trip, ammunition was exposed to typically extreme changes in temperature and humidity. Bullet lubricant dried out. Priming compounds degraded. Though black powder is resistant to temperature extremes, it is badly degraded by even mild humidity.
The combination of very little practice, and ammunition of questionable quality, led to the i ncorrect belief that the Springfield 1873 was an inaccurate rifle. Blame the ammo and the shooter, but not the rifle itself. Even today, old Springfield 1873s with good bores, fed black powder ammunition made to fit, have exhibited good accuracy out to hundreds of yards.
 
6. The 1873 Springfield had a reputation for jamming, but this was actually attributable to its cartridge case and propellant. Troopers received ammunition assembled with cases made of nearly pure copper, a very soft metal. Black powder leaves behind 56% of itself as solids, converting 44 percent to gases to propel the bullet. Solid fouling clogs bores and chambers, combining with gun oil to create a black sludge on moving parts, retarding their movement.
Anyone who’s fired black powder can attest to its propensity to gum up the works, but the use of a moist bullet lubricant helps keep the fouling soft, for easier expelling by the bullet’s passage. Hard, dry lubricants won’t soften the fouling, and it tends to cake up in the chamber and bore.
 
7. The soft copper case expanded upon firing to the limits of the rifle’s chamber dimensions, and stayed almost that dimension. Under pressure, the soft copper case swelled over and around the fouling in the chamber, creating greater friction to remove it. The narrow, pivoting, hardened steel case extractor of the 1873 Springfield, bearing against the narrow copper rim of the case, tended to cut through the case rim rather than force the case out.
It was all due to metallurgy.
Copper cases swell to chamber dimensions when fired, and don’t retract much from that dimension.
Brass, composed of copper and tin, is much harder than pure copper. It also has a different and very important property: it will swell to the chamber dimension upon firing, then spring back nearer to its pre-fired dimension. This makes it looser in the chamber than the copper case. The 1873 Springfield’s narrow extractor can push against the brass case’s rim and push it out much easier, despite black powder fouling.
Brass is also more resistant to heat, and flowing under pressure, than copper.
A common remedy for removing a copper case stuck in the chamber of the 1873 Springfield was to pry it out by the rim, with the point of a knife. Cases with this tell-tale pry mark have been found at the Little Bighorn battlefield where Custer and his troopers died, but only a few.
According to Wikipedia, only 3.4% of the copper .45-70 cases recovered in a 1983 archaeological dig at the battlefield indicated they had been pried from chambers. The battle’s aftermath, and other complaints from the field, resulted in the Army changing the cases from copper to brass. However, I can find no reference as to when this change occurred. Some sources say immediately after the 1876 battle, others are imprecise.
When it comes to ammo, the military is reluctant to throw it away unless it’s explode-in-your-face dangerous. I suspect that the obsolete stocks of copper-cased ammo continued to be issued for target practice.
"A hit with a .22 is better than a miss with a .44."