Cap and ball revolver over penetration concerns for home defense

[Kulot]

Well, I'd like to know if anyone had info or could link to info regarding the safety of using a cap and ball revolver inside a home for self defense and the possibilities of over penetration into other homes, etc. I know cartridge smokeless round balls are known for over penetration and can travel far beyond your intended target.

This is not a question of the round ball's effectiveness as a tool against bad guys, just keeping the innocent safe.

If round balls are bad, and hollow points are better for this application, are there methods of DIY hollow points for cap and ball revolvers?

I'm using a Ruger Old Army. .457

Thank you.

[Fly]

This is a great video on just what you ask for.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIPazOT5M3A
I might add in the video below he used 30 grains of powder. A 58 remmey can hold 40 gr,s.
Another https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpIVLUQ9rk8
Fly

[mooman76]

Just use less powder. You don't have to go near max on the powder load, even 5 gr. would work.

[bubba.50]

Just use less powder. You don't have to go near max on the powder load, even 5 gr. would work.


that's my opinion too. the beauty of the cap-n-ball is you can load it down to any level you want. get a piece of sheet-rock & try different loads til ya get one that will not-quite or just-barely penetrate it.

[Kulot]

Thanks for the link, Fly.
Mooman76 and bubba.50- I wish I had a decent outdoor place to test this. You think 5gr would incapacitate a person but not over penetrate? I'd be interested to see this theory in action under a controlled environment.

[Baron von Trollwhack]

You need to review lots of information on the use of deadly force by real experts before you latch on to an opinion here about low power C & B use for self preservation.

BvT

[Kulot]

The question is not about the use of deadly force, it's about the ability of the tool to be able to perform how I want it to. If not, then another tool can be used. This is a question about safety.

I do believe this is an open forum, so I think as long as I am respectful, I can ask what I like.

[Good Cheer]

My tests with percussion revolvers show that a dead soft lead wadcutter in a black powder revolver will expand, will limit penetration and will make a real mess as dumdums so often do. Yeah, I know, so I found out the same stuff Webley did. But I had fun.
Please take my exhortation to heart; test them for yourself before staking anyone's life on it.
And please report your results. With lots of pictures!

[mooman76]

Thanks for the link, Fly.
Mooman76 and bubba.50- I wish I had a decent outdoor place to test this. You think 5gr would incapacitate a person but not over penetrate? I'd be interested to see this theory in action under a controlled environment.

I was using 5gr as an example not meaning it to be used. 5gr probably would put someone down good and even maybe for good if you hit them right but I would strongly suggest testing some loads. With that small amount of powder you probably will also have to use a filler because the ram on your pistol probably won't go down all the way to compress the powder or remove the air space needed. You don't want air gap.

[Hellgate]

Several times (4 or 5) I have kept a loaded C&B for either personal defense (under the pillow or in the headboard or bedside table) or for finishing deer (carried while hunting). The guns were meticulously loaded so as to have NO OIL or lube in the chambers with either the ball or conical. Caps (Remington #10 or RWS 1075) were carefully pushed onto the nipples. Then after 2 or 3 months I fired the guns dry to clear and clean them. I would not rely on a C&B as a life saver for me or my family. I do not recall where all 5 chambers went off with full power like they do when freshly loaded. If you have any other modern centerfire gun from .22 on up I would use that first. Only if there were no other choice would I go to a C&B. I've put over 25,000 rounds through my multiple C&Bs but after a couple of months of being loaded/holstered, or stashed I would not count on them to go off exactly as planned. Trust me, it's romantic to fantasize of stopping a perp with a C&B but if you have any other weapon use that one first.

Actually an AR-15 using .223 ammo will penetrate less than most pistol loads. The bullet fragments quickly. A lot of SWAT teams use .223.

[Kulot]

Thanks for the insight and suggestions. This came up after I watched a video about the .45acp 230gr ball ammo, and they mentioned the round being used for home defense, and how high the risk of over penetration was. I figured it would be interesting to find out the results for this older technology vs. the newer, smokeless stuff. I guess the interest just isn't out there...probably due to the reason some of you have stated: you probably wouldn't use it in this situation to begin with. Oh well. One day, when I'm able to find a place to test things out, I might just give it a try.

[Walkingwolf]

Doing your own testing is probably best, if all you have is a cap, and ball then it is better than a sharp stick. Personally I would not use one in the house for home protection. There is considerable smoke, and the flame could catch something on fire.

I have left cap, and ball pistols loaded for years. This year I shot them off over chrono, the 58 remy consistently got fps over 900. I have never had a cap failure. Yesterday I had my first primer failure 380 acp, from a new box of primers.

I suggest you do some research into over penetration stats in self defense shootings. It is your ****, and your responsibility, the ultimate decision is yours.

[RogerDat]

Shotgun in 410, 16, or 20 gauge. Shot don't need to shatter it comes out that way. Small shot loses momentum going through a couple of layers of drywall. Also since it seldom penetrates a human target it will transfer all of the force to the intended target and won't continue through to an unintended one.

Pretty sure the business end of a 20 gauge with #7 shot will deal with most unwelcome house guest, criminals tend to be stupid sometimes but suicidal not so much. Snick-Snick of a slide generally ends the encounter. Even the 410 is essentially pretty close to a 45 colt at least at living room ranges. But as shot won't travel through the next house.

[Kulot]

Thanks, I do have other options. This was merely a quest for information from others who may have the experience to answer the question.

[azrednek]

Story I heard from a former co-worker so I can not attest to its veracity. He claimed a mobile home fire that spread to others in the park. Was caused by a woman using cap and ball revolver in a self defense situation.

[Good Cheer]

With percussion revolvers the shape of the bullet nose (round vs. round flat vs. SWC vs. wadcutter) and the powder space remaining in the chamber with any given design are what make the difference.
Nobody believes the differences unless they see it for themselves.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

About all those videos prove is penetration in ballistic gelatin, and I wouldn't even be inclined to put much reliance on someone else's ballistic gelatin. Heating it just a little above the manufacturer's instructions in mixing can make a great difference to penetration, and the best of it gives only a comparison between bullet and bullet, which may be quite different in other materials. Human tissues are fibrous, and most building materials are compressible.

While a hollow point bullet may penetrate less in drywall board, wood, aluminium siding etc., I don't believe you can come anywhere near counting on that. As a defensive round they are notoriously prone to performing well in gelatin tests, but plugging with fibre from heavy clothing and remaining unexpanded in a genuine confrontation. Why wouldn't plasterboard do the same? I think about all you can say with near-certainty is that all pistol loads of considerable but not hard to handle power, including the .44 cap and ball, are pretty much alike in the matter of overpenetration danger.

I agree that deterioration of the load is liable to be a factor with the cap and ball revolver. Even with a cap in place, atmospheric humidity is liable to enter via the nipple. An old dodge in waterfowl shooting used to be slipping a piece of thin, soft rubber tubing over the cap (bicycle valve rubber in the days when bicycle valves still had replaceable rubber), but I doubt if it would work perfectly on a fluted cap unless grease or wax was used. Grease is liable to leak past the bullet from the front in a hot climate too, and contaminate the powder. The best results might be obtained with the Lee cap and ball bullet which has the rear band sized to fit the chamber easily, and the rest oversized for the rammer to size it down. This should work with a harder lube.

An extremely flat-nosed bullet would undoubtedly be more effective on an assailant and less likely (a little) to overpenetrate in buildings. The problem, if it is made for cartridge revolvers, to seat it straight in the chamber and yet have it tight enough for a good seal. Some sort of die and "shellholder" could no doubt be made to enlarge the first band behind a Keith-type nose or even FWC.

All this begs the question, why the cap and ball? If the reason is the ease of acquisition, there are antique cartridge revolvers and replicas which would be just as good, with rounds which wouldn't deteriorate.

[dondiego]

Make your first shot count because the smoke will most likely prevent a clear second shot, especially inside a small room.

[Petrol & Powder]

1. relying on some sheetrock to stop a round is pure folly. I just don't think you can, or should even try to, plan for that.
2. If I'm using a firearm inside of my house things have gone terribly wrong. On my list of important things I need to worry about at that moment, over penetration is somewhere on the back of page 47.
That's like wondering if your seatbelt will crease you new dress shirt after you accidentally drive your car into an oak tree at 45 mph. You've got bigger problems at that point in time.

In a perfect world the projectile would always stop your attacker.
In a perfect world the projectile would always penetrate deep enough to stop your attacker but never penetrate too much and exit the adversary, regardless of the size of the adversary or path of the bullet through your adversary.
In a perfect world the wall would always stop the stray projectile that completely missed your adversary or stop a projectile that went through your adversary.
In a perfect world you wouldn't have to use deadly force. We don't live in a perfect world. We have to do the best we can with what we have.

I think the concept of over penetration has been thoroughly over hyped.

[Walkingwolf]

Story I heard from a former co-worker so I can not attest to its veracity. He claimed a mobile home fire that spread to others in the park. Was caused by a woman using cap and ball revolver in a self defense situation.

The flame from a cap and ball is indeed intense.

[Walkingwolf]

1. relying on some sheetrock to stop a round is pure folly. I just don't think you can, or should even try to, plan for that.
2. If I'm using a firearm inside of my house things have gone terribly wrong. On my list of important things I need to worry about at that moment, over penetration is somewhere on the back of page 47.
That's like wondering if your seatbelt will crease you new dress shirt after you accidentally drive your car into an oak tree at 45 mph. You've got bigger problems at that point in time.

In a perfect world the projectile would always stop your attacker.
In a perfect world the projectile would always penetrate deep enough to stop your attacker but never penetrate too much and exit the adversary, regardless of the size of the adversary or path of the bullet through your adversary.
In a perfect world the wall would always stop the stray projectile that completely missed your adversary or stop a projectile that went through your adversary.
In a perfect world you wouldn't have to use deadly force. We don't live in a perfect world. We have to do the best we can with what we have.

I think the concept of over penetration has been thoroughly over hyped.

+1 but it does allow ammo makers to charge much more for non over penetration ammo.

[rodwha]

I've often read that projectiles that are destined for minimal penetration generally make poor defensive rounds. Glaser Safety Slugs and birdshot come to mind.

From hunters using soft round balls it seems that it is the faster (closer) projectiles that have mushroomed are he ones found on the off side. When the velocity has decreased and/or there is no deformation it gives complete passthroughs in general.

Hog hunters using pistols tend to use heavy hard cast bullets to ensure deep penetration and with a very wide meplat gives a fair wound track.

Seein that expansion of soft lead cannot be relied upon I had Tom at Accurate Molds make me custom designs for cap n ball bullets that have a very wide meplat. If I get no expansion I'll still get a descent wound track, and with more frontal area it ought to reduce the penetration that a pointy bullet would have. These are a few designs he made for me:

http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-170C-D.png

http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-195C-D.png

http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-245C-D.png

[Omnivore]

Well it took 22 posts to get the point out. Thanks Rodwha. Those who hunt know the answers to these sorts of questions from years and years of experience. So get out and hunt. Then you'll find out fairly quickly that trying to measure penetration of this or that round to nearest inch, or the nearest foot even, is silly. It's only good for looking at relative differences between rounds, but whether you'll ever see those relative differences in real life is doubtful.

That's because animals and people aren't made of gelatin. We're made of stuff that ranges from hard bone, to heavy liquid, to tough stretchy hide, to sponge-cake lung tissue. In the field you'll see penetration vary from a few inches to a few feet, with the same exact load, depending on where it hits to how it went before it hit, to what the temperature of the guns was at launch.

Also there have been a lot of tests done on sheet rock walls and other building wall types. You will find them if you look around on line just a little bit, and then you'll see that the average home or apartment is VERY transparent to small arms fire of all kinds. Go out and shoot some stuff, and you'll know. Knowing makes the typical TV cop show into a slapstick comedy. For example; cops using car doors as cover. A 22 LR will often pass clean through a car body, as will any typical service pistol round.

building walls though are going to be a lot like people and animals-- it depends on whether you only hit two layers of Sheetrock or whether you happen to hit a double, two-inch, hard red fir header and a steel water pipe. There will be several hundred percent differences there, same as in a deer or a jihadist.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

The setting of clothes on fire did happen in close-up encounters in the Old West, and is close to unknown nowadays. It isn't like you were firing a flame-thrower, but it would pay to check for anything smouldering afterwards, in a situation where that is easily forgotten. The flash should be too momentary to cause the pupils to contract, so you wouldn't lose your night vision. It could be somewhat disconcerting, but presumably more so for the intruder.

[Kulot]

Very interesting information. Thanks for taking the time to comment. I do believe the "over penetration" risk has been marketed too much. I'll just assume anything one would shoot in their home has the potential to pass through.

[rodwha]

I forgot to mention that I talked with Eric at Hollowpoint Molds. He installs hollow point pins in molds, and for a cap n ball application he could create an additional pin that threads into the ram so as not to deform the bullet at loading. If thought this would be cool, but I'm not sold that it's necessary. I've been wanting to have my bullets tested for penetration and expansion. One of these days...

[Good Cheer]

In testing one of the most difficult parts of DIY is for the results to be reproducible.
That requires a reproducible test media.
Stacks of office waste paper that have been soaked a day or two in dish washing detergent solution until the material gels and becomes (hmm, what's a good scientific sounding word) icky is great to have on hand.
Behaves as a liquid more so than a solid, makes recovering the boolits easy, the material is essentially free, easy to dispose of, can be revealed layer by layer showing the process of expansion and does of course also show the depth of penetration relative to other loads.
Going on forty years since I shot Grand Ma's stack of Readers Digests and I haven't found anything that is actually better.

Here's a little added info that will amuse some...
http://i791.photobucket.com/albums/yy192/SNARGLEFLERK/1858452066vsRB_zpsa7734763.jpg (http://s791.photobucket.com/user/SNARGLEFLERK/media/1858452066vsRB_zpsa7734763.jpg.html)
Yup, all same gun. All soft lead.

Here's what happens when changing the nose profile on boolits cast from soft lead.
Check out that wadcutter.
Ker-splatto!

http://i791.photobucket.com/albums/yy192/SNARGLEFLERK/stacktop3_zps11ae4d05.jpg (http://s791.photobucket.com/user/SNARGLEFLERK/media/stacktop3_zps11ae4d05.jpg.html)

Those loads were fired in the rather awesomely modified percussion 1858 Remington (Thank you, Mr. Taylor). Have taken to calling it the caseless round .41 Special.

[NavyVet1959]

Another data point:

A 230 gr cast lead (50:50 WW:Pb) .300 AAC round fired at around 1000 fps results in less than 1/2" penetration into a concrete slab from point blank range.

If you are really worried about wall penetration, then think about making your walls more bullet resistant.

[Omnivore]

I've been wanting to have my bullets tested for penetration and expansion. One of these days...

Since it is relative penetration you are most interested in, you can easily do that yourself. Some methods have been described above. Water mugs work too.

To get a little closer to a hunting reality test, you can purchase some large roasts, a whole turkey, etc. and blast away. You will then discover that it is near impossible to assign a number of inches of penetration to a given round, because it's wildly different depending on where and how the bullet hits.


300 AAC round fired at around 1000 fps results in less than 1/2" penetration into a concrete slab from point blank range.

So; what's point blank range for your 300? Around 250 yards? I.e. I don't think that term means what you think it means. Because I would like to use "Point Blank Range" and have it understood to mean what it means rather than what it does not, here it is. Please forgive me;

Point Blank Range is that distance where the bullet falls below the line of sight by the same amount that it rose above line of sight in its flight. It thus depends on the zero you have put in on the sights, the height of the sights over the bore, the bullet's velocity and ballistic coefficient, and the atmospheric conditions.

"Point Blank Range" therefore comes with another number; the "point blank target size". For example a certain rifle setup may have a PBR of 375 yards with a 15" target size. These terms together are useful in that they determine the distance and size of target you can engage while holding your sights on center target and without making any sight adjustments. "Point Blank" means you can aim dead on and have a reasonably good chance of connecting with the target effectively.

You could use a very long distance zero and in theory end up with a PBR of a thousand yards, but it won't be very useful because the BP Target size with that zero may be something like thirty or forty feet. On the other hand if you're using a machinegun to distract a brontosaurus that may work out OK. See?

So you have a sequence of events there. First, the bullet leaves the muzzle, but it's usually below the line of sight at that point ("sight over bore" offset) because the sights are usually above the barrel. Since the bullet begins to fall immediately, we must launch it at some upward angle ("Sight Angle") to get it out to a distant target, therefore it rises up into the line of sight (that's your "Near Zero" at that point, and for high powered rifles that's why we often do our initial sight-in at around 20 to 25 yards) and if the distance is great enough the bullet continues to rise above the line of sight, and the point where it reaches it's highest distance above line of sight is the "Midrange Height". Let's say that's 5 inches. After passing midrange height it then begins to drop, and when it drops back into line of sight, that's your Zero range, where point of aim equals point of impact. If the bullet continues on past the zero range, it falls below line of sight, and when it reaches a point where it's as far below line of sight as it was above it (it's now 5 inches below line of sight in our example) THAT is the Point Blank Range. BPR is always some distance beyond the zero range, and in this case the Point Blank Target Size is ten inches (five above and five below). So that would be a pretty good military or self defense rifle PBR, right there. Anything farther out may require some hold-over or sight adjustment. See?

Are we all clear now? I understand that those in media misuse the term "Point Blank Range" virtually 100% of the time, but now we all know what it means. It's a very useful term too, for the rifleman, which is why I believe I must defend it. Copy it, and as anyone misuses the term (as happens daily) you can paste in the correction. Feel free to correct anything I may have have gotten wrong.

Since all the deer I've shot with my muzzleloader were inside of 100 yards, and I use a 100 yard zero, all the deer I've shot were inside my point black range.

if you want say, "Really, really close! I mean, it was so close...well, you have no idea how freaking close it was! Listen...!" then say that. Or say it was about five feet, etc., but don't say it was point blank range, please, or I'll have to paste this whole thing in again.

Thanks for reading. You may now return to your regularly scheduled thread.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I forgot to mention that I talked with Eric at Hollowpoint Molds. He installs hollow point pins in molds, and for a cap n ball application he could create an additional pin that threads into the ram so as not to deform the bullet at loading. If thought this would be cool, but I'm not sold that it's necessary. I've been wanting to have my bullets tested for penetration and expansion. One of these days...


I would be dubious about punching a hole into the bullet in the act of loading, if that is what you mean. The rammer isn't a closed fit in the frame tunnel in any cap and ball revolver I know, and would become jammed by fouling if it were. So there is a risk of the hollow being off-center. Not that that matters in an indoor defensive situation, but for other purposes it would.

[rodwha]

@Omnivore: Back in San Antonio I got to know the guy who ran the shooting range, though I didn't realize he ran it. I asked about being able to do penetration testing, as well as reduced loads in my .50 cal muzzleloader at 25 yds. Though this was against their rules so to speak, he made an exception were I to rent a private stall. However we moved, and the closest range to me doesn't allow for such things.

Point blank for me is keeping the projectile within 4". I've often read the experts felt that 6" was great for hunting but I feel a little smaller allows for any miscalculations or whatnot.

[rodwha]

@BallisticsinScotland: No. Eric would install hollow point pins in my mold(s) and then make another pin of the same dimensions that would thread into the ram so that the cavity doesn't get deformed at loading.

It all sounds really cool, but I'm not sure I'll do it. Maybe one day.

[NavyVet1959]

if you want say, "Really, really close! I mean, it was so close...well, you have no idea how freaking close it was! Listen...!" then say that. Or say it was about five feet, etc., but don't say it was point blank range, please, or I'll have to paste this whole thing in again.

Thanks for reading. You may now return to your regularly scheduled thread.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point-blank_range


In forensics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensics) and popular usage, point-blank range has come to mean extremely close "can't miss" range with a firearm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm), within four feet of its muzzle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_%28firearm%29) at moment of discharge yet not close enough to be a contact shot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_shot).

I thought it would be pretty obvious what definition I was using in that post, but I didn't give a full description of the incident due to having already posted about.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?286355-My-first-AD-just-happened

Now, if you look at the wiki page for "contact shot", you see:



In the field of forensic ballistics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistics), the characteristics of a contact shot are often an important part of recreating a shooting. A contact shot produces a distinctive wound, with extensive tissue damage from the burning propellant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propellant). Unlike a shot from point-blank range (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point-blank_range), the powder burns will cover a very small area right around the entry wound; often there will be a distinct pattern, called tattooing. Star-shaped tattooing is often caused by the rifling (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifling) in the gun barrel, and distinct patterns may also be made by flash suppressors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_suppressor) or muzzle brakes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_brake). The shape of the tattooing may help identify the firearm used.


Apparently, the forensics folks differentiate between "point-blank range" and "contact shot" and neither is the definition that you are using.

So, yeah, I was using the more colloquial (or forensics) usage of the term -- a range of REALLY REALLY close where the muzzle velocity is at its maximum.

[johnson1942]

when my cap and ball conversion to long colt goes through a 100 gallon barrel with ease, that is good enough for me with defense gun. a single action feels good in my hand and i feel confident with it in the minute of need if ever it should happen. even my 1871 1872 uberti colt open top .38 special goes through a 100 gallon barrel with ease. that also is good enough for me. one in the midsection is all you need, a mule just kicked them and thats all thats needed.

[GREENCOUNTYPETE]

anything that penetrates bad guys well enough to work will also penetrate walls well enough to be of concern

my bigger concern with a C&B revolver would be that mine wasn't exactly 100 % and I conceded that was quite possibly me , but for the number of times My C&B has gone click then fired the second hit , it leaves me not wanting to use it for defense unless it's my about my only option left

if my only two options were a hatchet and a cap and ball I would be sure to grab the hatchet for when the C&B ran dry

[NavyVet1959]

when my cap and ball conversion to long colt goes through a 100 gallon barrel with ease, that is good enough for me with defense gun. a single action feels good in my hand and i feel confident with it in the minute of need if ever it should happen. even my 1871 1872 uberti colt open top .38 special goes through a 100 gallon barrel with ease. that also is good enough for me. one in the midsection is all you need, a mule just kicked them and thats all thats needed.

When the adrenaline is up, if you do not hit a vital area, the person might not even know they have been shot. At least that was my experience when an "urban youth" tried to rob me and I had a difference of opinion with him. I didn't realize that I had been shot until the police were taking him off afterwards.

[rodwha]

When I began using Rem #10's I quit having misfire issues.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

@BallisticsinScotland: No. Eric would install hollow point pins in my mold(s) and then make another pin of the same dimensions that would thread into the ram so that the cavity doesn't get deformed at loading.

It all sounds really cool, but I'm not sure I'll do it. Maybe one day.

That sounds fine, then. I don't believe you would need the pin in the rammer with an elongated bullet which locates in the chamber before ramming. But you could even do it for a round ball, and with that you would.

I believe most of us understood both ways in which the term "point blank" is used, and could have proceeded with uninterrupted reading of the thread in perfect understanding of which was intended here. The ability to penetrate into something, though, is different from the ability to pierce it. My .300H&H with softpoint bullets would make a crater of about 5/16in. in heavy mild steel, and yet would punch funnel-shaped holes in half-inch plate, with too much swelling and cracking in the back of 5/8in. for me to stand there. Concrete is far more liable to fracture than steel, and cinderblock or aerated cinderblock more so than the concerete with natural gravel used for precast beams etc.

All the good jokes about not being attacked by milk jugs or barrels must be about used up by now. But this kind of testing has less to do with the ability to incapacitate an assailant than many people think, and so does expansion. About the best modern medical textbook on wound ballistics I know is Vincent di Maio's "Gunshot Wounds", in which he says the only way to tell if a bullet at conventional pistol velocities was of expanding design, is to recover the bullet. They do not expand reliably in soft tissues, unless the bullet is of an extreme design which impairs its performance in other ways, and the temporary wound capacity closes up to almost the diameter of the bullet. Tumbling makes nothing like the difference it does with a high velocity rifle.

Unlike animals, which don't watch movies, the most trivial of bullets in a non-vital spot will occasionally prostrate the victim - although it might be least likely with an armed burglar. Crime records and personal anecdote show that it is entirely normal for a person not to be anywhere near incapacitated by a pistol bullet. All that is approximately dependable is a hit on the central nervous system, or which breaks major bones, and it doesn't seem reasonable to sacrifice the chances of that for effect on soft tissues which most likely won't happen. Similar effects were produced when military rifle bullets had round noses and less velocity than they do today. There are endless cases of people being very little incapacitated, and some, like the Boers who had minimal medical facilities, recovering without the removal of devitalized tissue which would be almost indispensable for survival today.

Any hollowpoint pistol bullet is likely to be impaired by passing through heavy clothing. Perhaps the ultimate hollow-point is the Webley manstopper bullet, which is close to a double ended hollow-based wadcutter. In the Chicago stockyards trials which led to the .45ACP, Col. La Garde found it effective. His cadaver X-rays show that it did break major leg bones, though perhaps less dependably than solid bullets. You would have to use a lot more cadavers to achieve conclusive statistics. But I have fired these and found them opened up into floral beauty in a stream eight inches deep, without touching the rock beneath. The chances of reaching bone, especially with someone wearing heavy winter clothing, would have been drastically reduced.

The flamethrower, like your garden hose, has not only an extremely short point blank range in the sense of trajectory, but the unusual characteristic of a flexible trajectory. A conventional firearm trajectory can be regarded as rigid at all practical ranges. Raise your aim to place the mid-range trajectory a foot higher, and you place the full-range point of impact two feet higher. With the flamethrower you simply have to watch where the changing trajectory curvature is putting you. It is also about the only weapon with which mentioning burns at point blank range can cause the slightest risk of misunderstanding.

[NavyVet1959]

Other issues to consider is how your house and the houses of your neighbors are constructed, the distances to the other houses, and the housing / population density. My house is brick -- the same as all of my neighbors. Houses are not that far apart -- typical suburban community. Still, for a neighbor to be hit after I fired a gun in my house, it would need to most likely miss my walls, go through one of my windows, and then go through the window of my neighbor. AND one of my neighbors would have to be standing right in line of fire between the two windows. Possible? Yeah, but not particularly likely. If you are concerned about shooting your family in the house while trying to shoot an intruder, then create a panic alarm and instruct everyone in your house to lay on the floor if they hear the alarm -- anything that is still standing is now a valid target.

[fouronesix]

The "concern" about penetration out of a C&B seems almost irrelevant. The wisdom of relying on a C&B revolver for home self defense is questionable to begin with- IMO.

[ShooterAZ]

Same here. I will use the CCI caps for something else. The Remington #10's go bang every single time in my ROA. I do also question the use of a C&B revolver for self defense...but to each his own.

[NavyVet1959]

The "concern" about penetration out of a C&B seems almost irrelevant. The wisdom of relying on a C&B revolver for home self defense is questionable to begin with- IMO.

Well, maybe the location someone lives in has extremely restrictive anti-2nd Amendment laws and cap-and-ball would be a way around that?

[Baron von Trollwhack]

[QUOTE=fouronesix;3368758]The "concern" about penetration out of a C&B seems almost irrelevant. The wisdom of relying on a C&B revolver for home self defense is questionable to begin with- IMO.[/QUOTE

I wonder after reading some of the baloney here why SAM COLT sold so many Cap & Ball pistols for so long, why the Texas Rangers used them in Indian fighting, and just why both goobermints spent so much buying them for the Civil War party.

You recon they might have used them to kill Indians and bandits, and cavalry troops and plain old foot soldiers as neccessary?

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Few modern cars show the inventive flair of Henry Ford or WO Bentley, or modern ships that of the nineteenth century developers of the clipper ship. I suppose those users chose them as the best available. But it is very unlikely that they left them unfired for months at a time.

[Baron von Trollwhack]

Few modern cars show the inventive flair of Henry Ford or WO Bentley, or modern ships that of the nineteenth century developers of the clipper ship. I suppose those users chose them as the best available. But it is very unlikely that they left them unfired for months at a time.

Looks like PURE PERSONAL SPECULATION ON YOUR PART about the unfired part.

There are American records of the care with which folks maintained their weapons. Our history tells us that those who did not occasionally encountered difficulties using their firearms or staying alive, or both.

As a young fellow I had the actual personal experience of loading up my 1851 Colt with pure lead RB, 22 grains of Curtis & Harvey's best, and putting it in the bedside table drawer for wifey to use if needed at home in my absence ( and she knew how to use it too). When I got back from the sweatland tour a year later I took that pistol out and fired every ball first time at the trigger pull.

I always had the thought that if I had to use that pistol it was not going to be for a warning shot, or a miss in the dark in the house, it was for self preservation. People coming in your house especially without invitation, are not seeking driving directions, especially if they have to break glass to come to you.. They would be up to no good. One would be silly to have a weapon for self defense and use a half charge. I had no other pistol at the time mentioned above. I can also confirm that a Navy Arms pistol as above will completely penetrate a fat groundhog and make the RB simply disappear somewhere in the ground.

I can tell too that simply showing a 1911 Colt once helped two persistent American road thugs decide that when you told them you did not need their assistance, it was time for them to go on down the road and find a fool elsewhere. I doubt that such display would help Europeans avoid thugs since they would not likely have a Colt of any kind, likely not even a picture of a Colt. Some how I even have the thought that in many places there only thugs carry weapons and one could be arrested for having a potato peeling knife at hand absent the potato and being in ones kitchen. But this latter is my speculation. I am sure that in England the possibility of reaching into ones bedside table drawer and pulling out any kind of loaded pistol is hardly likely, isn't that so?

BvT

[Kulot]

I can appreciate everyone's viewpoints on this. I will say that my ROA, before a few cylinders of fouling from 777, and the 1-2/100 bad cap, runs flawlessly, and I consider it just as reliable as my 1911s I've owned. Anything can jam and you will lose valuable seconds at the worst moment. I don't understand the confusion about why someone would consider this an option. As long as it goes boom when it needs to, right?

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Looks like PURE PERSONAL SPECULATION ON YOUR PART about the unfired part.


It is quite possible that it worked just the way you describe, and that it would the next time, or for someone else. But that is just pure personal speculation on my part.

Wild Bill was certainly reported as having the actual experience of unloading and reloading his Navy Colts in the evening. It used to be common practice, in armies well supplied with ammunition, to fire off a musket volley on coming into camp, to make sure even the next day's charge was to be reliable.

[rodwha]

Granted my Pietta NMA has only had several hundred rounds through it, it has run flawlessly with no cap jams, misfires, or hang fires and its sat as long as 3 months with Triple 7 with no discernible loss of power. It's been sitting over a year now, and one day I will report back on how reliable those 6 shots are. Living in a high humidity state (Texas) is a real test to that.

My ROA has been no less reliable once I began using Rem #10 caps. CCI #11 magnums often needed 2 strikes to ignite the charge.

[KCSO]

Well in real life an 1851 Navy revolver with 20 grains of FFFg will shoot front to back on an intruder and will stop inside 2 out of 3 shots. A 50 calibre loaded with 70 grains of FFG will blow a hole clear through and leave a 2" exit hole and we never did find the ball.

[Kulot]

Well in real life an 1851 Navy revolver with 20 grains of FFFg will shoot front to back on an intruder and will stop inside 2 out of 3 shots. A 50 calibre loaded with 70 grains of FFG will blow a hole clear through and leave a 2" exit hole and we never did find the ball. personal experience?

[KCSO]

More or less did the investigations saw the autopsy.

[Baron von Trollwhack]

It is quite possible that it worked just the way you describe, and that it would the next time, or for someone else. But that is just pure personal speculation on my part.

Wild Bill was certainly reported as having the actual practice of unloading and reloading his Navy Colts in the evening. It used to be common practice, in armies well supplied with ammunition, to fire off a musket volley on coming into camp, to make sure even the next day's charge was to be reliable.

FWIW my understanding is that WB unloaded his pistols(.36 Colts) in the morning by firing them at targets, then cleaned, inspected and reloaded them to his standards for use during his awake hours, especially when he went to work later. I doubt they were NOT reloaded to far in time from the practice time. Cleaning one firing of a cylinder in a an 1851 is not very difficult. I would think he worked at that saloon more in the evenings to late times more than in the morning. He likely had to be prepared to shoot misbehaving patrons in a crowded situation most any time.

More business then maybe? On the next issue, it is likely that rodwha's old army Ruger was really needing # 10s all along and was not being fed correctly. Or it could of been like DIXIE'S old # 10 in the red plastic case that had the cups that were so thick and hard that many that bought them so long ago, just threw them away as junk. He describes a valid bad nipple fit with Ruger's proprietary nipples. I note that from the early 1960's when the Italians got into the replica business, many pistols were poorly made, with parts including nipples made to euro measurements. That caused problems especially with surety of working and dimensional nipple failures. Finding the correct caps to fit the gun's nipples has always been problematic over the years, especially as many small time American suppliers jumped into the nipple business with little understanding of Italian pistols, nipples and real fitting needs. I still often have to check and frequently modify nipples to have them behave correctly. The Ruger OA is the best there is of any modern C&B pistol though, although not authentic enough for some.

I mention this latter bit of chat because all these various dimensional matters gravely effect RELIABILITY of function, jamming, and failure to fire. Other things cause problems too, like fired caps not cycling out as designed. Don't be loading into a greasy cylinder for any length of time before shooting. If you want to put it in your bedside table for any length of time, start clean, the caps must fit snugly, the cylinders must be dry and the ball must seal. Ball grease must not melt, and you need to carefully cock and cycle that cylinder(not dropping the hammer) before storing safely and that's hard if you have youngsters about

BvT

BvT

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Well in real life an 1851 Navy revolver with 20 grains of FFFg will shoot front to back on an intruder and will stop inside 2 out of 3 shots. A 50 calibre loaded with 70 grains of FFG will blow a hole clear through and leave a 2" exit hole and we never did find the ball.

There is no question about the effectiveness of a .50 caliber firearm loaded with 70gr. of black powder. But the British government stopped buying the Navy Colt, and Col. Colt closed the London factory in which he was making a much cheaper product than the British Adams or Tranter. One reason was double action, and another the fact that Colt hadn't yet trimmed down their .44 revolvers to the more manageable weight of the 1860 Army. But the main reason was that the Crimean War saw too many people killed after delivering the full six shots.

I don't doubt that it sometimes achieved instantaneous stopping power with a single shot. Just about anything does, and it would take a lot of autopsies to determine how often. But the .36 is very inferior in stopping power to a .44 revolver. I also don't doubt that an assailant was liable to die of something in the next few minutes. But that is a pretty inferior sort of self-defence. If you want a cap and ball revolver for anything but targets or small game, it is hard to see any reason not to prefer a .44.

[Good Cheer]

Heh, reminds me of the funny looks in the mid seventies when the cops saw that I had cleared the house with a 1861. The intruder was gone and I was just as happy not to use the homemade boolits (Lee 9mm mold altered with a 3/8" bit).

[GREENCOUNTYPETE]

[QUOTE=fouronesix;3368758]The "concern" about penetration out of a C&B seems almost irrelevant. The wisdom of relying on a C&B revolver for home self defense is questionable to begin with- IMO.[/QUOTE

I wonder after reading some of the baloney here why SAM COLT sold so many Cap & Ball pistols for so long, why the Texas Rangers used them in Indian fighting, and just why both goobermints spent so much buying them for the Civil War party.

You recon they might have used them to kill Indians and bandits, and cavalry troops and plain old foot soldiers as neccessary?

people of that time used a lot of tools that required much more care maintenance and planning because they were the best thing available at the time.

if I pick up a self defense gun I want deep magazines and proven reliability that has gone hundreds or thousands of rounds without any issue , failure or miss fire I want it to do it at 95 degrees and 95% humidity and I want it to do it at -30

if I could get it without a ton of maintenance that must be kept up on it sounds even better

a brown bess was a great military arm , but it isn't so great when your one side with a Brown bess and the guy on the other side has k98 Mauser , likewise , the bolt action rifle in modern combat is relegated to what it does best long accuracy one shot at a time it has been replaced for infantry troops by arms that spend more time shooting the enemy and less time reloading.

when your shooting against other 1858 technology the playing field is quite level with a cap and ball but when you put it against 20th century defensive arms it doesn't look as good

most all handgun rounds are not that far apart for penetration and the energy they carry to the target most fall between 300 and 500 foot pounds of energy and depending on how you loaded a C&B you would fall in that same range with very similar penetration

weight , capacity , time to deploy , time to reload, split time between shots on target have always been considerations

the English used large caliber smooth bore muskets in the American revolutionary war , it fit with how war worked in their terms , a volley fire of the fasted to reload and hardest hitting round they had at the time was intimidating , the American's used the much smaller bore 46 caliber rifled barrel the common hunting arm of the time that saved on lead and powder with aimed shots and became the first to take an English general off his horse at 330 yards while he was "Safely" behind his troops out of range also very intimidating a puff of smoke from an enemy you couldn't even see that then strikes you at a range thought impossible, moral killer indeed.


use the best tool you have at the time , if for some reason that is a C&B because of availability , politics or some other reason then be the best you can with it make it as repeatable and reliable as possible , but don't confuse what was the best tool available 150 years ago as the best tool today because it worked then.

there have always been 3 kinds of stops

the mental stop ,they just decided to stop fighting for whatever reason it is no longer worth it to continue
the physical stop you broke enough bones or they lost enough blood they couldn't fight any longer
the neurological stop , you hit the brain or spine in such a way that they have lost motor control

[Baron von Trollwhack]

Pete ol buddy. You missed a lot of the info before my first post on the topic. You should have started reading at the beginning of the topic and followed what was going on. I think your history rant was a bit off the factual. But you are allowed here to be an .......... if that is your thing.

BvT

[GREENCOUNTYPETE]

perhaps I did read that out of context , but when i read it , and I admit I didn't read it all the way from the beginning it looked like " a C&B are great because the rangers used them the army used them, they worked just fine to kill Indians and soldiers alike."

my rant was that they used them because they were the best thing going at the time , it doesn't mean their users never wished for more rounds or that they never malfunctioned or that the Indian or solder took hours or days to die
president Garfield took 11 weeks to die from being shot with a cap and ball revolver ,shot July 2nd 1881 he died September 19th, and from modern analysis he would have lived f the DR's of the time would have quit poking around trying to get the ball out bare fingered

so like any side arm they are not exactly a death ray , but a useful tool non the less

[ogre]

President Garfield was shot with a Belgian made 44 calibre British Bulldog revolver. This revolver was not a cap and ball design.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/21/GarfieldBD.jpg/200px-GarfieldBD.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GarfieldBD.jpg)
Smithsonian file photograph of the British Bulldog revolver used by Charles Guiteau (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Guiteau) to assassinate President James A. Garfield (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Garfield) in 1881





http://www.zoominto.com/zoomapi/ZoomButt.gif

[Geezer in NH]

Home defense when your home and families lives are cheap IMHO

I love the past with a passion but, I live in the real world now. I use the best modern arms for that purpose with no regret.

[M-Tecs]

http://www.historicalfirearms.info/post/45532878814/the-gun-that-killed-us-president-james-garfield

The Gun That Killed US President James Garfield: Webley British Bulldog
A British Bulldog pistol fired by Charles J. Guiteau was responsible for the death of the United States’ 20th President James Garfield on 2nd July 1881. Guiteau had stalked Garfield for a considerable time, believing that assassination of the President would lead to a restoration of more traditional Republican values, feeling that Garfield’s Vice President Chester A. Arthur would be a more suitable President. It is believed that Guiteau was insane and had been previously committed by his family in the 1870s, but had subsequently escaped.
Designed by Webley the ’British Bulldog’ series of pocket pistols were incredibly popular. Their size ranged from very small .32 to large .45 calibre pistols, all had a solid single piece frame with a right-hand-side loading port. They could be fired double or single action and had either 5 or 6 chambers depending on the size and calibre, they can be found with both folding triggers and trigger guards.
Many Bulldogs were crudely made, rough looking pistols, the top photograph shows a more refined .44 Bulldog. Manufactured between 1875 and 1930 hundreds of thousands were made. The pistol Garfield’s assassin used was a Belgian made .44 calibre which he purchased for $10 (see photo three). Guiteau is said to have been surprised by the pistols heavy recoil and knocked of balance when he first fired the pistol as he practised shooting into trees on the banks of the Potomac River. The short barrel and powerful cartridge made the Bulldog difficult to control by inexperienced shooters. The pistol was inaccurate at ranges beyond 60-feet as it only had a front sight. Guiteau managed to get within 20-feet of the President in the busy Baltimore and Potomac Railroad station in Washington D.C when he fired.
Garfield was shot twice with one bullet grazing his shoulder while a second entered his lower back, just missing his spine and becoming lodged just behind his Pancreas. The President survived the night and remained alert, doctors were unable to discover the location of the second bullet but hopped that the President may yet recover. Infections from the probing for the bullet and from clothes fibres dragged into the body by the tumbling .44 bullet racked Garfield but he continued to hold on for over 2 months. He finally succumbed to his wounds and infections, which put a massive strain on his heart causing an artery to rupture, after 80 days on the 19th September.
Almost a year after he had shot the President Guiteau was hanged on the 30th June 1882. The pistol itself was taken from Guiteau on his arrest and was later donated to the Smithsonian Institute, who photographed it. However, it was subsequently lost and the pistol's whereabouts are still unknown.

http://www.guns.com/2013/04/22/british-bulldog-pocket-revolvers/

Both Bark and Bite: British Bulldog pocket revolvers4/22/13 (http://www.guns.com/2013/04/22/british-bulldog-pocket-revolvers/) | by Kristin Alberts (http://www.guns.com/author/kristin-alberts/)
Stout and strong, these little revolvers are built like their namesake canine. With connections to a presidential assassination, an eccentric general and the Wild West, British Bulldogs may be the most collectible uncollected guns on the market.
British Bulldogs (http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/british-bull-dog-revolver/) are cute but mean, bark with bite. I recently came across a pair of unmatched, but nonetheless beautiful Belgian-made Bulldogs, which made me wonder why I knew relatively nothing about them. The well-kept secrets of these dogs are finally off the leash, as the previously un-collected British Bulldogs are beginning an upward trend on the firearms market.
http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/british-bulldog-1.jpg (http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/british-bulldog-1.jpg)The British Bulldog revolver. (Photo credit: iCollector (http://www.icollector.com/Antique-British-Bulldog-Revolver_i10903892#))

LineageThe pocket revolver known primarily as the “British Bull Dog (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Bull_Dog_revolver)” was first produced by P. Webley & Sons of Birmingham, England, in 1872. Its appeal was so great that the “British” Bulldog was adopted and copied by gun manufacturers in Belgium, Spain, France and the U.S. Though American-made Bulldogs came from the armorers Iver Johnson, Harrington & Richardson, Forehand & Wadsworth, and several other makers who quickly went in and out of business, the Webley versions are rightly considered the real McCoy.
Though the revolver remained in production until the WWI-era, the hay day of the Bulldog was in the 1870s to 1880s, a time when it was known its affordability and reliability, consequently making it one of the most popular pocket pistols in both Europe and America. Though Colt is the brand we all know and love, and their single actions are thought to have fit the hip of near every cowboy, ranch-hand and gunslinger, Colt’s single-actions sold for three to four times the cost of the British Bulldogs. The inexpensive, yet solidly made little dogs — many of which survive as shooters today — were available to everyman.
BuildThough this little gun has had as many variations and names as it had makers, the general features are quite simple: a 2.5-inch barrel, five-round capacity, double-action trigger, and an overall true small-frame pocket pistol.
http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/british-bulldog-3.jpg (http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/british-bulldog-3.jpg)The British Bulldog field stripped. (Photo credit: iCollector)

Bulldogs are quickly recognizable by the bird’s head grips, generally made of either walnut or pearl. However, there are many fine examples with sweet ivory grips and delicate engraving. Most had a blued finish, but some nickeled models have survived as well. The revolver is generally dressed with simple fixed sights, a large looping trigger guard, curvaceous hammer spur and weigh in around 20 ounces.
Many European Bulldogs were chambered for .44 Short, .442 Webley, .455 Webley and .450 Adams, but there are several smaller variations of Webleys chambered in .320 and .380 calibers, though they were produced much later and were never labeled as Bulldogs.
Both the American and Belgian Bulldogs, which seem to be the most prevalent on the market these days, were readily available in smaller calibers. Perhaps the most common American clones housed .44 Webley and .38 caliber chamberings.
Famous tiesThe Bulldog revolver has connections both famous and infamous in American history, as detailed George Layman’s book “The British Bulldog Revolver: The Forgotten Gun that Really Won the West! (http://www.amazon.com/British-Bulldog-Revolver-Forgotten-Really/dp/193146426X)”
Probably the most infamous connection places it in the hands of Charles Guiteau, the man who shot President James Garfield in 1881. Though the wounded President lived for several months under the rudimentary medical care of the time, he succumbed to the pair of bullet wounds almost three-months later.
As the story goes, Guiteau was reportedly furious that Garfield overlooked him for appointment to a federal post and vowed to take vengeance on the President — and to do so with a good-looking gun, but one that could be had on a budget.
Guiteau is said to have used a Belgian-made British Bulldog in .44 caliber, but interestingly there is some debate over whether Guiteau got his wish of acquiring one with ivory grips. As rumor has it, he wanted his gun to look good when it eventually made its way to a museum, but the ivory upgrade cost several dollars more than the walnut model, which sold in the $8 to $12 range. The gun commonly shown as Guiteau’s model in period illustrations has walnut grips, but the actual gun is, in fact, long gone. Following Guiteau’s trial, the revolver was on loan to the Smithsonian, but, a short time later, the revolver disappeared and has not been found to this day. It is unclear whether the gun disappeared during its stay with the museum or sometime later.
http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/british-bulldog-6.jpg (http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/british-bulldog-6.jpg)Artist Frank Leslie’s rendering of President Garfield’s assassination. Garfield, center, applies pressure to his lower back as Charles Guiteau, left corner, is being restrained by the crowd and beaten with a cane. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In addition to the Garfield-Guiteau history, British Bulldogs found their way into the pockets and holsters of other famous characters. Gen. George Custer is rumored to have wielded a matched pair of ivory handled British Bulldog (http://petticoatsandpistols.com/2010/10/14/custer%E2%80%99s-british-bulldogs/) revolvers.
A British Bulldog may also have fallen into the hands of William Bonney (http://ww2weaponsforum.com/showthread.php?1073-The-British-Bulldog-Pistol), aka Billy the Kid (http://www.guns.com/2012/01/06/gunfights-on-gunscom-billy-the-kid-outwits-joe-grant/), by way of his first employer and mentor, John H. Tunstall. Whether this gun ever saw any dubious service remains for great speculation, but regardless, the little British Bulldogs were as well traveled as they were well loved.
Collectability todayThe large-caliber British Bulldogs, particularly the original Webleys, are considered both the most collectible and generally the most valuable. As the dogs were true pocket pistols, though often carried, the majority of them saw quite light use. While the patina on them shows the beauty of age, many survive in surprisingly nice condition today. Though British Bulldogs will never carry the fame or value of Colt single-actions, the dogs were cheaper yet dependable and thus available to the common workingman.
http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/british-bulldog-5.jpg (http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/british-bulldog-5.jpg)The British Bulldog fallen over, tired. (Photo credit: iCollector)

While exceptions certainly exist, the common revolvers can be had in the $75 to $200 range. Many Webleys or ivory and engraved models command prices in upwards of $1,000. Multiple British Bulldog models are housed in the NRA’s National Firearms Museum (http://www.nramuseum.org/the-museum/the-galleries/the-new-prosperity/case-48-the-booming-arms-industry.aspx) alongside Colts, Smith & Wessons and Velo Dog revolvers.

Filed Under: Collectibles & Novelties (http://www.guns.com/category/antiques-and-collectibles/)

[Texantothecore]

I would use a c&b for defense withoutany qualms. A fail to fire event would simply involve recocking and going to thenext cylinder.

My 1851 Navy is extremely reliable, more so than my semis. There is a sort of a break in period but it is me who is broken in not the pistol. I will pass 400 rounds this week and hope to rapidly reach the 3,000 mark pretty quickly.

This pistol, unlike most pistols, will see thousands of rounds. It is a joy to shoot.

[charlie b]

So, C&B for personal defense. Yep. Not a problem with me. Had an old 1860 Rem I built from a Navy Arms kit (long time ago) and carried it as a 'truck gun'. About every 3-6 months I'd get it out and shoot it. Never had a malfunction.

The 140gn or so RB from that gun was chrono'd at a bit over 1400 fps. Penetration was great and it would mushroom in meat (yes, a big fat roast). Exited after more than 10".

Penetration through a house wall. Yes. Plan on it. Know where your family is in the house and know that the bullet will exit with enough force to go through the sheetrock. If you miss it is going to go through several walls. Deal with it.

FWIW, if your bullet does not have enough force to go through a couple of layers of sheetrock, how is it going to penetrate a leather jacket with a thick fleece lining and still kill a person?

Yes, some bullets kill better than others. Some pistols/loads may be more reliable than others. Test yours and see. I tested every one I have used for self defense. Several layers of denim and/or leather in front of a beef roast. In the old days most HP bullets failed. They would plug up with the denim/leather and fail to expand. They would penetrate well :)