True Grit - 1874 Sharps, 1894 rifle & Colt Dragoon

[coopieclan]

I saw the new movie of "True Grit" this weekend. Wow do they love the study of antique guns in this film.

Also I had the D.V.D. of the 1969 True Grit with John Wayne so I watched it too.
I hadn't seen it since 1969.

John Wayne is a true American hero... He made that film with only 1/2 a lung

Both films mention the Colt Dragoon the young girl inherits from her father.
In a crucial moment the gun gets wet then mis-fires. Is it the original cap and ball?

She says how it is an "Old Fashioned Gun" and the other characters (Both films) Say how it is an old horse pistol.

In another scene The girl asks Rooster Cockburn "Why do you only load 5 chambers on your gun?"

The bad guy has a powder burn on his face and carries a Henry rifle. They say this over and over in both the old and new films.

Most of the guns are cartridge guns.

But LeBeouff the Texas Ranger (Glenn Campbell/Matt Damon) has a Sharps Carbine.

From what I saw they depict it as a percussion gun. but he never pulls out a ramrod.

Depending what Sharps carbine could this be a muzzle loader?

The Ranger seems to have tons of big rifle ammo in a belt around his waist.

The Duke does it better than Jeff Bridges when he says how he chased away a posse with his two Navy 6 shooters. I NOW know that is two .36 caliber Colt Wheel-guns... muzzle loaded or converted...Like mine is.

Every time John Wayne mentions a Boolit (Bullit) he calls it a "Ball"

Also the iconic '92 rifle that killed a million buffalo is well represented too.
I will have the chance to shoot a few rounds from a replica this spring... The bullets cost me $2.oo each! You can bet I'll be saving that brass.

I bet a few of you guys saw True Grit and noticed a few interesting gun facts too.

[Finster101]

If I remember correctly the Colt "Dragoons" were so named because they were carried in saddle holsters by mounted cavalry.

[northmn]

The Walker and the Dragoon were carried by cavalry and were true horse pistols. They had saddle holsters to carry them with. The Dragoons were improved Walkers in which they had a notch to hole the rammer bar and actually had reduced powder capacity as some Walkers blew. Sam Walker wanted them for the Rangers to fight the Mexicans in the Mexican War and got skewered by a Mexican Lancer himself. Their purpose was to give adequate power against that sort of enemy. The 1851 Colt was a true holster pistol carried on the person. I cannot imagine someone carrying a Walker or Dragoon as they weighed over 4 pounds each. Gus of Lonesome Dove and Jose Wales be Da----d. They were not a "fast draw pistol. The early sharps was a paper cartridge percussion rifle with a roll cap system similar to the old kids cap gun. The 92 Winchester was not a buffalo rifle as they were pretty well gone by then and a 44-40 would not be all that desirable for that purpose. buffalo were killed by a variety of guns most single shots. Although Wyatt Earp was said to ahve picked up a few dollars shooting buffalo with round ball out of a double shotgun.

DP

[excess650]

The Sharps was NEVER a MLer. They were always breechloaders, but used percussion ignition until the 50-70 was introduced in the late 1860s. Many Civil War era carbines and and some rifles were later converted to use the 50-70.

As for the Walkers and Dragoons, they were BIG and HEAVY and carried in holsters on the saddle. The Walker was reputedly the most powerful handgun (revolver) until the advent of the 357 Magnum in 1935!

The Colt SAA was introduced circa 1873.

The Henry was introduced in the late 1850s and used the 44 Henry Flat (rimfire). The 1866 Winchester was sort of an "improved" Henry in that it loaded from the side ala "Kings Patent". The 1873 Winchester would have been the improved 1866.

As for the Winchester, I didn't take notice as to whether it was a '92 or '94, but BOTH seem too late for time period of the movie, IMO. They mention the "Indian Territories" and to me that means Oklahoma. It is true that OK didn't become a state until 1907, but it seemd like the movie was 1870s or 1880s.

Sharps made the west safe for Winchester! LOL! The bison were decimated by the time Winchester marketed the 1885 "highwall", and prior to the 1886 lever action. True, they had the large frame 1876, but more bison were killed with Sharps and Rollingblocks than anything else. Sharps was out of business by 1882.

[northmn]

The Sharps used paper cartridges loaded from the breech. The falling block of the Sharps cut the paper, in theory at least. The early Sharps loose powder breech loaders were not really all that powerful and were known to spit in the face. The 5 chambers loaded in a Colt was to protect the shooter if it was dropped from accidental discharge. The famous load one skip one load four and cock and release was common.

DP

[405]

Most assuredly Rooster's large loop trapper's carbine in the 1st True Grit is a Win 92 in 44-40. Haven't seen the current version. They also, were most assuredly not a buffalo gun..... but given the nature of the character of Rooster, if he mentioned it, it would fit perfectly. :)

pic is of earlier John Wayne movie Win 92 large loop. The Duke's True Grit carbine is almost identical to this one but with a shorter "trapper's" length barrel.

[DIRT Farmer]

My 1859 Sharps holds about 100 grains of ffg loaded loose and a 500 grn .54 bullet. paper cartridge holds appx 85 grns of ffg. I would guess it would shoot through a buffer. I know you don't have to open the action to see if it went off with the loose powder load.It does have some gas leakage, but it goes stright up as far as I can tell. I have never felt any spatter.

[cwskirmisher]

Most assuredly Rooster's large loop trapper's carbine in the 1st True Grit is a Win 92 in 44-40. Haven't seen the current version. They also, were most assuredly not a buffalo gun..... but given the nature of the character of Rooster, if he mentioned it, it would fit perfectly. :)

pic is of earlier John Wayne movie Win 92 large loop. The Duke's True Grit carbine is almost identical to this one but with a shorter "trapper's" length barrel.

In the current movie, Roosters SRC is viewed from the bottom as he holds it up in one scene, and one can clearly see the brass carrier - it is a '73 Winchester (at least it is in that scene).

[Multigunner]

The .36 Colt Navy revolver was often converted to fire cartridges.

A Magazine spread I ran across back in the late 80's or early 90's pitted the late 10th and early 20th century military handguns against each other in a shooting match.

A cartridge collector donated some original US Navy ammo made for the converted .36.
The Converted Colt Navy beat out all the other handguns tested for accuracy. The century old ammo performed perfectly with no misfires.

A few Sharps rifles were converted to muzzle loaders by the Confederacy. These Sharps rifles had been smuggled to abolitionist and seized when found. The Breech blocks of those rifles had been removed and were to be shipped separately, so the Confederates were not able to use them as breech loaders.
The Converted Sharps actually doesn't look much like had looked before conversion.

Burst cylinders were a problem for the Colt Walker revolvers, and this resulted in Colt making efforts to find the best available steel for his large caliber pistols.
The Colt 1860 was made of "Colts Silver Spring Steel" which he had first obtained for the manufacture of springs for his earlier designs.
A Controlled Carbon Process Steel, Silver spring steel was more elastic and parts made from it were unlikely to have hidden defects that could show up later on.
The added strength of this steel allowed Colt to pare down the weight of the 1860 Calvary revolver.

Most percussion Colts had small pins between each chamber, and a slot in the hammer nose in which the pin fitted when the hammer was lowered halfway between the nipples of the cylinder. Five beans in the wheel was un necessary for un modified Colt Navy revolvers. The cartridge conversions, and later cartridge model Colts, would be safer with hammer down on an empty chamber.

PS
Carbines of various types were used for shooting bison on the run from horseback. A skilled rider could plant one in the spine to anchor the beast, or more often deliver a wound that killed the animal slowly. Hunters could then follow the herd and wait till the wounded animals just keeled over.
Indians prefered a cut down smoothbore musket for this sort of work. They carried extra musket balls in their mouth and simply spit them down the bore after pouring in an unmeasured charge of powder. Those that still used flintlocks wallowed out the touch hole so shaking the musket caused powder from the main charge to fill the pan.

The Buffalo Rifles were a great improvement over those primitive methods.

[StrawHat]

...Sharps made the west safe for Winchester! LOL! ...

And the Springfield Trapdoor made it safe for the Sharps!!

[bob208]

the sharps was way before the trapdoor. the cal. used them in the paper cartage form in the was in the early 60's then in the .50-70 cartage conversion of 66. the trapdoor did not come out till the late 60's. then the sharps were sold off a surplus. which gets us to the fact that texas bought them and issused them to the rangers.

[Finster101]

It sure looks like that ranger is wearing Glen Campbell's hat and coat.

[DeanWinchester]

I hate to be the stick in mud, but I won't be watching it. I hate remakes, and I really hate remakes of movies that got it right the first time.
I like the actors cast in the remake, but they wasted their time. They don't have it.
It would be about like making a remake of Silence of the Lambs. NO ONE has what Anthony Hopkins has. So too is it with the Duke.
Another example is the A-Team. The remake is a disgusting turd of a movie. Hats off to MR. T for boycotting it. The original show had NO profanity, in the course of thousands of rounds, people rarely got hurt, never killed, and there was usually a moral for the younger viewers.
Like I said I WON'T watch the new False Grit movie but I am curious, how many curse words beyond "Fill your hands you son of a bitch" is there? Wouldn't surprise me if there was a bare boob or two.

Okay I am done griping.:D






Isaiah 5:20 - Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter and make horrible remakes of movies.

[Jim]

Well, if Dean's gonna be the stick, I guess I'm the mud. The movie was suggested to me by several people that know I'm an 1800s buff. I politely thanked my friends for their suggestion to see it and let it go at that.
As far as I'm concerned, "Mr. Bridges" wouldn't make a pimple on the Duke's backside. That's about like asking Bruce Willis to do a remake of Terminator.
Horse feathers.

[bob208]

i will see it when netflex has it .

[Geraldo]

The book begins in 1928, when Mattie is old and recalls the story. I don't think there is a timeline given other than that the story occurred when she was 14. I'd guess circa 1880.

One of my favorite westerns is "Monte Walsh", which originally starred Lee Marvin and was remade with Tom Selleck. Both versions are excellent, and I really can't say which I like more.

While I'm a big Duke fan, and have grown to like his version of "True Grit", I'm fairly certain I'll like the Bridges version as well.

It's OK to like them both.

[northmn]

They have improved their inclusion of a larger variety of firearms in movies now that the replicas can be had. Originally everyone in Westerns carried 94 or 92 Winchesters and 73 Colts. One movie called the "Man from the Alamo" showed him carrying that combination. had they had Winchester repeaters and Colts at the Alamo things may have been a little different. I think they really are just throwing in that variety just for effect.

DP

[excess650]

I watched the original a couple of weeks ago and saw the new movie this afternoon. Mattie had the Dragoon, Rooster had a Colt SAA and a '73 rifle (I thgink). LeBoef(?) was carrying a Sharps carbine with ring and bar, but appeared to be 45-2.1" or 2.4" and NOT a 50-70. Ned Pepper had a '66 Winchester and an 1875 Remington revolver. Chaney had the brass framed Henry.

I generally don't like remakes either, and may well have seen this one when it was first out, BUT, Jeff Bridges did a better job than John Wayne, IMO. Robert Duvall played Ned Pepper in the first movie, and he's a pretty tough act to follow. While I'm not a Matt Damon fan, he did at least as well as Glenn Cambell playing LeBoef. This is a great remake and definitely worth seeing.

<flame suit one>:twisted:

[Jim]

Anybody can do a better job than Glen Campbell. but to say Bridges did a better job than the Duke.........................................
THAT'S HERESY!

[10 ga]

Some people just don't get it. The current "True Grit" is not a remake of the earlier movie of the same name. The current edition is closer to the actual novel and was an altogether new screenplay. Had a birthday just after the new movie was released and seeing it with the family was my "birthday present" by my request. We had rented the old movie first and watched it. Well my daughters and wife arn't western fans or JW fans for sure and after seeing both movies we ALL agreed the new movie was better. Better acting, better dialog, more accurate in location and scenery, more accurate in clothing and garments, better narration on and on. Yeah, I'm 61 now and I like my westerns! It's sorta like me and my Browning A-5, good gun and I like it even love it, but, my new Benelli is better and prettier too. Oh yeah, Hattie as Mattie is just way better than Kim was. 10 ga

[Char-Gar]

The State of Texas issued Sharps carbines in 50-70 to the Rangers. They were conversions from the linen cartridge. When the Winchester 73 came out, The Rangers ditched the Sharps in favor of the Winchester and had to buy them out of their own pocket. Some Rangers continued to use the state issued rifle for some years later. Most did not.

So, a 50-70 Sharps carbine was correct for the movie.

[excess650]

[QUOTE=Geraldo;1123945]The book begins in 1928, when Mattie is old and recalls the story. I don't think there is a timeline given other than that the story occurred when she was 14. I'd guess circa 1880."

If the book begins in 1928 when Mattie is 40( according to the end of the new movie), then the movie is set 25-26 years earlier when she is 14, so 1902-1903.

Jim and Dean, I'm sorry if this offends you, but John Wayne was just another actor. I hold him in no higher esteem than anyone else, and I'm certainly not in awe. Pursuing autographs never interested me, and I wouldn't walk across the street to meet one of these people. I've seen a lot of JW movies, and while they're generally great movies for the time they were scripted, directed, and filmed, they aren't necessarily better than movies that have been produced since then.

This scenario reminds me of the Harrisburg Pa's review of the movie "Tombstone". The critic was in such awe of Kevin Costner, that he/she thought "Wyatt Earp" would be much better, though it wasn't even finished filming. Preconceived notions are often erroneous.

[Charley]

Movie has Mattie looking up Cogburn with Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show in 1903, saying it had been 25 years since she had seen him last...1903 - 25 is1878, just about right for all the firearms mentioned.
Never got a good look at the Navies on the saddle, might have been cartridge conversions. It wasn't all THAT unusual for smaller holster pistols to be carried on the pommel, not just "horse pistols". Awfully new looking Dragoon to have been carried at Chickamauga and seen everyday use before and after that.
Morrison was a decent actor, but most of his movies were historical abortions.

[excess650]

Charley,
You're right! I forgot that at the END of the new version she was looking for Cogburn who had just recently deceased. 1878 WOULD be a better fit for the firearms used than would be 1903.

I didn't read the book.:violin:

[10 ga]

Charley has it pretty much right except that the banner ay the show camp gives another name for the wild west show and not "Buffalo Bill". 10

[Beerd]

I know that there is no accounting for taste, but I liked the new "True Grit".

DeanW,
I do not remember hearing an excessive amount of blue language, nor do I recall seeing
much exposed flesh. Perhaps I slept thruogh those parts.
..

[Jim]

Anybody can do a better job than Glen Campbell. but to say Bridges did a better job than the Duke.........................................
THAT'S HERESY!

I should have added the "Big grin" emoticon behind my post. I was just havin' a little fun. Now that I think about it, I see my mistake.
I apologize. I promise you, I meant no offense.

[excess650]

I should have added the "Big grin" emoticon behind my post. I was just havin' a little fun. Now that I think about it, I see my mistake.
I apologize. I promise you, I meant no offense.

[smilie=s:You didn't offend me. Quite to the contrary, I thought that I might have offended you.[smilie=p:[smilie=l::bigsmyl2:

The new movie starts out differently and ends differently, but for the most part the remainder is very similar in story line and dialogue. Some of the script is word for word. I had my doubts about a "remake", but my wife and I decided to see it anyway. We were both surprised....go see it and keep an open mind.

[Char-Gar]

Wayne had a carefully crafted on screen personality that proved to be a major box office draw. He didn't vary much from that proven money maker. There was some doubt that he could.

If you think he was an actor, you should see that movie again where he played Genghis Khan.

I enjoy Wayne and watch his movies over and over again, but a skilled actor, he was not.

[coopieclan]

Wow that was an interesting topic.
Sorry if it is somewhat off subject for muzzle loading.

[izzyjoe]

well let face it guy's they have run out of movies to make, so now there gona to start remaking the one's that did good before , just to make a buck. i have not seen the new true grit, and probally won't until it comes on regular tv. but the best western to come along in years, is open range. and you can bet your boots that someday they'll remake it. uhg. and no john wayne was not a great actor, but you'd be had pressed to find someone to fill his shoe's, just look at his career. nobody has come close to him. :grin:

[Geraldo]

Wayne had a carefully crafted on screen personality that proved to be a major box office draw. He didn't vary much from that proven money maker. There was some doubt that he could.

If you think he was an actor, you should see that movie again where he played Genghis Khan.

I enjoy Wayne and watch his movies over and over again, but a skilled actor, he was not.

He wasn't the best, but he wasn't as bad as some critics made him out to be. I'd say he was willing to be type-cast because as you say, he was a serious draw at the box office.

My wife is not a western fan, but she said she would go see True Grit if I wanted. I offered a compromise: we could go to see it in the theatre or she can buy me the book now and the DVD as soon as it's out. She said fine, and went one better. The theatre movie poster is already up in my cleaned out and repainted shop. :grin:

[Geraldo]

For those who are interested, I've been reading the book, and even the JW version followed a lot of it verbatim.

Guns in the book: During the trial when Mattie first sees Cogburn, he testifies that he used a .44-40 Colt revolver. Mattie's father wore a "long dragoon pistol" in a holster, and she described it as being old fashioned. Cogburn used it to kill the rat in his quarters. Cogburn also offered to swap her a pepperbox pistol for the Dragoon. Chaney has a Henry.

[bootsnthejeep]

There are a lot of people calling the new "True Grit" a remake of the JW picture, just because they are so close. But it shows how much both screenplays drew from the original text.

I went to see it in the theater, very excited and with high expectations. They weren't met, but that was NOT the movie's fault.

I, like a lot of you, am a HUGE JW fan, and True Grit is one of my favorite movies of his. So I've seen it a million times. So, much as I tried, I couldn't watch the NEW movie without constantly comparing it to the OLD movie. And it didn't make for enjoyable viewing.

I have to watch it again to give it a fair shake. I love Jeff Bridges. Hailee Steinfeld did an INCREDIBLE job in her roll, considering she is, in fact, 15 years old, and acting in the company of multiple academy award winners.

I'm arranging a viewing with some friends where we're going to watch the new on and then the old one back to back. I'm the only one in this group that has seen the JW version enough to remember it, if at all.

It is an excellent movie. I love the Coen brothers and their films, and this was no exception. But please don't decide to not give it a chance just because you like the original and feel it can't be done better. It may be a slow burn for you, but it is an excellent movie. Don't think of it as better or worse, rather two version of a very good book. :coffee:

[GOPHER SLAYER]

Well, I just have to put my two cents worth in. Like everyone else on this site I was born a gun nut. I began going to movies about 1940. My favorites were of course, the westerns. I was crushed when Buck Jones was killed in the Cocanut Grove night club fire in Boston. He could have easily saved himself but he kept going back in to rescue others. Durango kid was another favorite. In every film I saw I took notice of the guns. I dreamed of owing a Colt single action. I well remember the first one I held in my hand. It seemed so big. In all the movies I saw I never saw anyone use a '94 Winchester. All I were '92s. I didn't know it at the time but many of those guns were not Winchesters at but Spanish copies. When MGM studios auctioned off their prop deportment in the late 1960s,many of the guns were bought by Martin Redding who had a gunshop down the street in Culver City. I saw a large rack of '92 copies priced at 49 dollars each. Spain exported thousands of those guns to South America. I am sire many are still in use tiday. In 1950 a movie came out named Winchester '73. Everyone was quick to look and see if their '73 was a 1 of 1000. I played with one as a child. I remember it was a carbine and it had 38cal on the brass cartridge lifter. My father brought home some loose cartridges in a cigar box he had picked up in the shipyard were he worked during the war. I put one of them in the chamber of the ''73 and closed the lever. Lucky for me it didn't fire. Maby the round was a dud or the rifle had a broken firing pin. I could never get the cartridge out of the gun and I traded it away still loaded. I never saw or heard of the rifle after that. In the 1950s movies began to feature more appropriate weaponry. I have not seen the remake of True Grit nor do I plan to. I haven't been inside a movie theatre since 1973. The last one I saw was The Wind And The lion. Still a good flick. In the final scene of the orignal movie True Grit, Mattie Ross is laying flowers on her fathers grave. I am not sure but you may be able to see a date on the headstone. I just noticed , I have put in way more than two cents worth. As Maxwell Smart would say"sorry bout that"

[ironhead7544]

The new one is worth seeing. I was surprised at how close they were. The first one had Mattie with a Walker and the second is a transition model Dragoon, I think as I didnt get a good look at it. Looked like the Walker grip.

[GOPHER SLAYER]

I just found a few more cents to through in. I read the book True Grit before I saw the movie and while I enjoyed the film and thought they followed the book closely enough, the Texas Ranger did not die in the book.I didn't think they said the lines exactly the way the people of Arkansas would say them. My Mother was born there in 1894 and she spoke much like the language of the book. I must say I never get tired of seeing the movie however. Several years ago they were showing some very old reruns of Charles Kuralt's tv show On The Road. He was in Arkansas and people were telling him that he just had to visit this charactor that lived down by the river. While he was talking to the man who wore bib overalls I noticed a board over the door of his shack. On it was painted the name , Rooster Cogburn. So we know where Charles Portis got the name. Portis wrote another book titled Norwood which was very funny and it was also made into a movie Staring Glen Cambel but the movie bombed. Funny books rarely work on film. I think much is best left to the imagination. Max Schulman wrote hillarious books but they didn't seem all that funny on film. The tv show Dobie Gillas was moderately successful. By the way. The Russians thought Charles Portis was America's best author since Mark Twain. My wife and went to Hollywood soon after the movie Tru Grit came out . We saw it at Grahman's Chinese Theatre and while we were standing in line the first showing let out. The man who played Mattie Ross's father came out and no one noticed him. I recognized him from all the westerns I had seen. I pointed him out to my friend and he asked, do you think our two wives would recognize a movie star if he came by, at that moment Jack Lalane walked between my wife and I and she didn't notice. At the time she followed his exercise show on tv everyday. I told him,I guess not. Jack died this week at the age of 96 ,so I guess all that exercise helped. I promise this is my last word on the subject.

[macguru]

That Sharps carbine was a black power cartridge weapon, most likely a 50-70 BUT

1. The cartridges on Matt Damon's belt look like 50-90s (Big Fifties). I guess these looked more impressive for the movie. I dont think they are 45-70s, they look too big.
2. As far as i know the carbine was not made in 50-90 ?
3. A 50-70 probably (?) could not shoot 400 yards, but a 50-90 could, so could a 45-70, and all were available in 1878 when the story was set.

[35remington]

Nobody will replace John Wayne.

As for the remake of True Grit, nobody has to. The Cohen brothers put their own stamp on the movie, and it is more coldly realistic than the original.

In many of the 60's westerns, including the ones John Wayne was in, most of the characters looked as if they bathed twice a day and collected their clothing every morning from the dry cleaners.

Not exactly "period representation."

Those that claim they will "sit out" the movie because it is somehow dumping cold water on the original are completely missing the point. The movies cannot be compared as the directing style and actors present are completely different.

This movie will stand on its own, and as the western "style" has changed, in many respects it's superior to the original. Including the acting and directing.

Just the way it is.