a mystery to me

urbanspaceman · 22nd May 2021, 03:08 PM

Came across this and was intrigued: did this system ever have any uptake?
Percussion Savage Firearms Co. Navy Model Six-Shot Revolver, Circa 1860. With russet octagonal sighted barrel, top-strap, bevelled frame and spurred butt all in one piece, the top-strap stamped, ‘Savage R.F.A. Co. Middletown. Ct. H.S. North Patented June 17 1856 January 18 1859 May 15 1860’,

Jim McDougall · 22nd May 2021, 06:18 PM

While I am surely no gun authority, I have always thought these were pretty intriguing for their most unusual appearance.
From what I have found on them they were produced for the Navy in 1860 through 1862, but only 300 in '60 and 800 in '61.

Apparently these were an early attempt at double action firing mechanisms where the cocking and firing both are initiated by the trigger. This 'system' seems to have been regarded as too complex, possibly leading to malfunctions?
Thus this particular model gun ceased.

As far as double action goes, Colt introduced their version in 1877.

urbanspaceman · 22nd May 2021, 06:46 PM

Hey Jim, thank-you, I guess they must have been prone to malfunction with so few manufactured. Like my series 1 Remington rolling block, the Navy were happy to experiment but quick to abandon. Rim-fire then c/f solved everybody's problems I suspect and they all moved on.
Even so, double-action was still the holy-grail back then.
Still, it gives collectors of the unusual an opportunity to lust over rare examples.
I am tempted by this piece.

urbanspaceman · 22nd May 2021, 07:13 PM

The Army contract was for 20,000.
I guess by 1861 the Navy had given up on percussion caps; I understand they were nothing but trouble out on the high seas.
I've also been told that the caps were prone to dropping off at the best of times and jamming the cylinder.
Still, it is an attractive curiosity.

Jim McDougall · 22nd May 2021, 11:48 PM

It would seem percussion caps would present problems in any kind of a situation where dynamics would impair their intended function.

In the much misunderstood Battle of San Pascual in the Mexican-American war Dec 7, 1846, it has always been heralded that the forces of US Dragoons and Marines were soundly defeated by Californio riders armed only with lances.

The main claim was that the US rifle's would not fire due to wet powder and exposure to rain.
The truth was that the actual combat took place literally in the early morning hours or middle of the night; the US troops were exhausted after being on one of the longest marches in US history, the horses were spent and the men were on mules; it had indeed been raining and they were in rugged, unfamiliar terrain in pitch black darkness....and it was freezing cold in damp fog.

The ball and paper cartridges for the M1833 Hall & North breech loading carbines were held in coated leather pouches, so it was not damp powder.... it was that the men could not see to load the guns........in darkness, and freezing fingers.....the caps were fumbled and fell.

The Mexicans were upon them with lances, and with no defense other than using the guns as clubs, they were instantly victims.

Definitely, the cartridge was a most important innovation for guns.

urbanspaceman · 22nd May 2021, 11:57 PM

Did they not have bayonets Jim or was the no time to fix?
Still poor defence against Lancers of course.

22nd May 2021, 03:08 PM	#1
urbanspaceman Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: Tyneside. North-East England Posts: 532	a mystery to me Came across this and was intrigued: did this system ever have any uptake? Percussion Savage Firearms Co. Navy Model Six-Shot Revolver, Circa 1860. With russet octagonal sighted barrel, top-strap, bevelled frame and spurred butt all in one piece, the top-strap stamped, ‘Savage R.F.A. Co. Middletown. Ct. H.S. North Patented June 17 1856 January 18 1859 May 15 1860’, Attached Images

22nd May 2021, 06:46 PM	#3
urbanspaceman Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: Tyneside. North-East England Posts: 532	intrigue Hey Jim, thank-you, I guess they must have been prone to malfunction with so few manufactured. Like my series 1 Remington rolling block, the Navy were happy to experiment but quick to abandon. Rim-fire then c/f solved everybody's problems I suspect and they all moved on. Even so, double-action was still the holy-grail back then. Still, it gives collectors of the unusual an opportunity to lust over rare examples. I am tempted by this piece.

22nd May 2021, 07:13 PM	#4
urbanspaceman Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: Tyneside. North-East England Posts: 532	Numbers The Army contract was for 20,000. I guess by 1861 the Navy had given up on percussion caps; I understand they were nothing but trouble out on the high seas. I've also been told that the caps were prone to dropping off at the best of times and jamming the cylinder. Still, it is an attractive curiosity.

22nd May 2021, 11:57 PM	#6
urbanspaceman Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: Tyneside. North-East England Posts: 532	the sharp end Did they not have bayonets Jim or was the no time to fix? Still poor defence against Lancers of course.

22nd May 2021, 06:18 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,945	While I am surely no gun authority, I have always thought these were pretty intriguing for their most unusual appearance. From what I have found on them they were produced for the Navy in 1860 through 1862, but only 300 in '60 and 800 in '61. Apparently these were an early attempt at double action firing mechanisms where the cocking and firing both are initiated by the trigger. This 'system' seems to have been regarded as too complex, possibly leading to malfunctions? Thus this particular model gun ceased. As far as double action goes, Colt introduced their version in 1877.

22nd May 2021, 11:48 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,945	It would seem percussion caps would present problems in any kind of a situation where dynamics would impair their intended function. In the much misunderstood Battle of San Pascual in the Mexican-American war Dec 7, 1846, it has always been heralded that the forces of US Dragoons and Marines were soundly defeated by Californio riders armed only with lances. The main claim was that the US rifle's would not fire due to wet powder and exposure to rain. The truth was that the actual combat took place literally in the early morning hours or middle of the night; the US troops were exhausted after being on one of the longest marches in US history, the horses were spent and the men were on mules; it had indeed been raining and they were in rugged, unfamiliar terrain in pitch black darkness....and it was freezing cold in damp fog. The ball and paper cartridges for the M1833 Hall & North breech loading carbines were held in coated leather pouches, so it was not damp powder.... it was that the men could not see to load the guns........in darkness, and freezing fingers.....the caps were fumbled and fell. The Mexicans were upon them with lances, and with no defense other than using the guns as clubs, they were instantly victims. Definitely, the cartridge was a most important innovation for guns.