Colt .36 Navy. Stopping power and use

[PJ Hardtack]

It has always puzzled me why we would consider ourselves to be well armed for self defence with a firearm in a calibre which we would be reluctant or forbidden by law to use on a deer-sized animal.

It wouldn't occur to me to use a .36 calibre pistol on a deer, even if I was allowed by law to do so. A .44 perhaps, but well within 25 yards, fifty if I was using a Dragoon or Walker. It would also have to be an ideal broadside shot on a stationary deer and I'd use a rest or sit.

Custer and others reported shoting buffalo from horseback with the '60 Army. That's more of a stunt than a sporting proposition.

[TwoWalks Baldridge]

If memory serves me, I listened to this same discussion as a small boy.  The old men use to sit around and argue the merits of one caliber over another and it would always escalate into a loud argument if not a fist fight.  I have no first hand knowledge, but no doubt that the same discussion was being held in 1870 as well.

The reality is, there are too many different variables and situations for a answer that everyone will agree on.  Perhaps that is the reason when asked, what is the best gun for self defense? the reply was, the one you have with you.

Would a .36 caliber cap and ball have adequate stopping power?  The answer has many variables so I will just use the ones on each end of possibility.
1. The person you need protection from is angry, not on drugs and does not want to be shot or killed. Yes
2. The person is 200#'s of muscle, high on dope and does not care if he lives or dies. No

The best self defense weapon for all circumstances, is the brain and even that can be in different calibers measured by the IQ 

[Slowhand Bob]

I live in a rural area that is close to a small crime ridden communiy that frequently makes the evening news.  While moving around my place and my area I am almost always carrying a .45 Officers model but there are occasional functions that I go into the big city to attend and sometimes feel the need to reduce any chance of weapon detection so will go all the way down to a small Beretta .25acp.  We all weigh our choices based on the current perceived need/threat and I am sure the same would have applied to those choosing between the various fighting Colts of their day.

A Navy pistol would have been a very comfortable carry around pistol in its day and I am sure no one then, or now, would have wanted to be shot by one BUT!  Were I Wild Bill Hickock, on that fateful morning and going out to kill a man, I would have had all my apples and oranges lined up as well as humanly possible.  I would try and arrange for the distance and surprise factor to be in my favor and I would make damn well sure that I was carrying the biggest most effactive pistol available to me and I would know exactly where it was going to hit meat at the preplanned distance that I would be shooting at.

Guys, there is one thing that the trial seemed to not want to look at.  If WBH had truly not wanted to make that kill, why would he have gone to that exact spot that would insure an encounter, why would he holler out to the still distant target and why was he ready for such a quick response to something he was not expecting?  Had he actually told the target, the night before, not to be wearing the watch when they next met and fid he not seek out Tutt?  If the story popular story pans out true, it would seem that this was little more than a staged duel, one in which WB had actually planned meticulously for and Tutt stumbled into unexpectedly.  For this reason, until proved otherwise, I think he was carrying the big .44 Dragoon while leaving the pretty little .36 at home for calmer times.

[Niederlander]

You may be right, but it begs the question:  Why didn't he use a rifle?  Much more effective than ANY pistol.

[Slowhand Bob]

One version I read on the McCanles(s) killing actually did claim he hid behind curtains and dropped the first kill, McCanles(s) with a Hawkin rifle but I think most versions claim it was a shotgun.  Most of the men killed by WB were not only not the great gunfights as depicted by legend but they frequently left many in those communities feeling that he had sidestepped justice.

[griswold]

When Hardin was arrested in FL he was carrying a '60 Army.  Also, he killed Charlie Webb with a S&W .44 Russian. 

Hardin yelled out--"Texas by God!!"....and tried to pull his 1860 but it caught on his suspenders and Texas Ranger Armstrong buffaloed him to the train car floor.

His first official kills were four or five poor Mexican cattle pushers who made the mistake of getting their cows too close to his herd on the trail south east of Dallas. He used a borrowed .36 Navy then.

[griswold]

Kid,
I think the mouse is right and I think you sort of alluded to it.  The .38 "Short Colt" was a heeled bullet and it was Ø.376 thereabouts as you said.  The .38 Long Colt was the first .357 (or there abouts) and introduced in 1875.  The heeled bullets were intended for the conversions.  So what's a few thousandths of an inch among friends?  A .36 cap gun spits out bullets around .36 caliber, so does the .38 S&W, .38 Long Colt, .38 Spl and the .357 mag. (maximum, cro-magnum, maxillian, etc.)  He's very right about that.  And I like you have read Elmer Keith's accounts and I think he has "romanticized" them a bit.  Remember now what he cut his teeth on, he has a soft spot for the Navy models. 

I will tell you this I have heard veterans go on about the stopping power of M-1 carbines and I have almost bit my tongue in half in order not to contradict an older man and their memories.  Plus I would probably be banned from the hall  .  When I hear people go on about the "stopping power" of anything I have to many times take it with a grain of salt.  Now we have youngsters at the hall telling us that the 9mm replaced the .45 ACP because it is a higher velocity  and more "modern"cartridge than the .45 ACP.  I once made the mistake of pointing out the 9 X19 was introduced in 1902 and preceded the .45 ACP by 2 years.  It's amazing the kind of looks you get.   My whole point is that the recollections of very old Civil War veterans to a young man may not be the best source of field data.

I'm with the Mouse on this one.  I don't buy it that an 80 grain ball is a better killer, stopper, whatever you want to call it than a bullet weighing 150% or more than the ball in the 125 grain loading.  Neither is a modern deforming bullet, they both make .36 caliber holes like the mouse said.  The heavier bullet in the same velocity ranges will penetrate better, break more bones and if you are a believer in energy transfer it has more kinetic energy.

~Mako

Your largely correct on round ball, however, I'd like to make two comments. The round balls are pure soft lead. I am told that they tend to flatten on one side and tend to tumble after striking their target, especially the .36. This in its self causes a lot of damage. Remember, a human chest is a bit denser than a woodchuck or ground squirrel.
Also, second point........I have an old Lyman reloading manual that states the .36 with a full cylinder charge, travels a little over 1000 ft per second. The 38 Colt rounds were 700 ft/sec. Something in the range of 650 or so.
Not to mention that the Navy 51 was considered an extremely accurate weapon. Thought to place shots where you aimed.......heart or head.........Wild Bill was said to prefer heart shots.

[Slowhand Bob]

It seems I have often heard the .36 Navy pistols power most often likened to the modern .380.  Most modern opinions place this at the bottom end of acceptable as a self defence round.  I recently aquired one of the new breed micro 380s as a replacement for the little .25 Beretta that  I mentioned above and after a couple of hundred rounds through it without any failures, it now rides in my pocket for perhaps ten percent of my personal carry time. The cut down 45acp still gets the nod about eighty percent of the time.  There is no secret to it, carry what will fit within your comfort zone and hope you never have find out what will and will not work.  There was surely not much difference  in the cap and ball days, a person often would have easy access to revolvers firing anything from the little 32s up to the big 44 Dragoons or Walker models.  I think that the 36 Navy size pistol and the 44 Army size would have been pretty much a total wash on size and weight, making the selection pretty much based on caliber and cost of loading.  To say there was a measurable difference between the accuracy of the two Colt calibers would be pretty hard to prove in real world target shooting comparisons???     

[griswold]

Gee, this is fun reading all y'alls comments.

Regarding the Dragoon, I remember years ago, the NRA magazine had an article about the old Colts. It seemed the frontier soldiers preferred the Dragoon to even carrying their short musket carbines. One Calvary officer even wrote to the Supply department back east not to send anymore .58 caliber ammo, but to send more of the paper cartridges for the Dragoons. The letter said the soldiers could pick off an savage, with a Dragoon, at one hundred yards as easily as using the Carbines they carried and have 5 additional shots plus the spare cylinders (apparently they carried one or two loaded replacement cylinders) and were easier to carry on the saddles.

I beg to differ on the tales about Wild Bill. He was a excellent shot, preferred the 51, even carried two at one time, probably more for show than anything else, as he only needed one or two shots at most to quell any issues. But the 51 was deadly accurate in the right hands. He took Tuff out with one to the heart.

John W Hardin, bless his cold heart, was a killer, and had many dead men on his title, however, as murderous as he was, he was afraid of Wild Bill.

[rifle]

Lead round balls have a wicked "wound channel". Balls from a Walker will penetrate further than an expanding bullet from a 44 magnum. Way further since the expanding bullet slows when expanded.
All said, the 44 1860 was the result of people asking fer a carry gun with more weight to the bullet to hit harder. Back in the day of blackpowder the way to get a gun to hit harder was to use a bigger lead ball.
Even though the "Navy" was extremely popular and remained that way till 1873 I think it was the weight and the eronomics and the recognized profile as the "in" gun.
The Army liked the 44's better and the Navy liked the 36's better. Course it went both ways actually with either dept. ordering the one the other liked the best.
Accounts of 36 balls failing to penetrate well when someone shot with one was wearing something like a thick hairy Buffalo robe coat are known.
Wild Bill Hickock accidently shot his deputy twice with the 36's he carried and killed plenty with them. The deputy took two days to die.
It been said that Wild Bill got his engraved 36's from a satisfied hunter from the east that Bill guided on a buffalo hunt. they were a gift it's been said. I guess back then if someone gave you a coupla engraved Navy Colts an Hombre was inclined to use them. I've read that when Bill shot Tutte at 75 paces in the beginning of his "gun fightin career" it was with a Colts Dragoon as he didn't have the 36's yet anywhoooo.
Anywhooooo.....I thunk that if a person used short wadcutter type bullets with sharp edges in front not any longer than a ball the wadcutters would do more damage than the ball. Bullets that are flat in the front are real killers when made of pure lead. What say ye?
A wadcutter as short as a ball would travel around 900FPS like the ball from a Navy Colt and pack a "punch".
From an article documenting "one shot stops" from real life scenarios.....the 44 ball from a cap&baller wasn't too bad...I thunk it was 47%....and more than the 36 ball that was in the 35% range(if I remember right). "One shot stop" was meant to be "the threat was over" and the antaganist didn't shoot back after being shot.

[Mike]

"but it should be pointed out that the Colt's Navy revolvers used by Hickok and others were accurate at up to 200 yards, but were rarely fired in anger at that distance!"

I have not read all the thread but went to link and as soon as I saw this I stoped. This is utter crap.
So the artical has no credibility in my mind at all.

[RRio]

As a person that has been accidentally shot in the leg with a .32 caliber, I can tell you for a fact that it stopped me right that second, and the only thing I was interested in, was find out why my leg quit working and why was it hurting and bleeding.
 
From that experience, I believe a full load .36 would perform the job quire well.

[Mean Bob Mean]

The FBI's writeup on the subject is worth reviewing.  

http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

The point they make is that no law enforcement agent lost their lives due to failure of a hollowpint they fired to expand whereas many have lost their lives to poor penetration.  

In the old days, carrying a load too long could compromise it due to moisture, etc., and contingenices being what they are, it is more than possible that some folks were shot with loads that suffered due to moisture, poor sealing, etc.  Note too that unscrupulous persons sold gunpowder of high quality mixed with earth or other materials to maximize profit during the war, likely rendering some hits less effective.  With modern cartridges, the consistency of loads is likely to be better.  For an example of what the round is capable of, Hickock shot Tutt at quite a distance and his ball penetrated to the vital organs (heart or lungs I believe and he was profile to Hickock at 75 yards, the ball entering under his left arm and entering the chest).  The FBI notes this is the crucial factor;  penetration to the blood forming tissues and major organs/arteries.  The author(s?) of that piece indicate that "kinetic energy" and "stopping power" are myths since each situation might have factors that mitigate the formulas used to convey these notions.  For example, shooting an enraged man hopped up on cocaine or other drugs is likely less effective than shooting a person who is apt to feel the pain immediately and consequently enter into shock or retire from the fight.  One must place the bullet into major organs/arterial regions or nerve centers and the bullet must have sufficient mass to reach those areas.  All else being equal, a larger round that plows ahead is superior to a smaller, frangible round.  The minimum penetration a load must have is 12 inches.  This is why 1 Buck is often touted as the best shotgun defensive round as it is the smallest buckshot that routinely penetrates 12 inches and offers a dense loading.  Penetration and shot placement are the features which dictate performance of a handgun round.  One factor they note that was most interesting is the idea of over penetration in urban environments.  They point out that no one considers that the vast majority of rounds fired in confrontations miss their target and consequently pose a far greater threat than the small percentage which do strike a target.  Thus, the whole "frangible" and "safe for homes" load issue is bunk.  If you load a hollowpoint, make sure it will penetrate 12 inches or more.  They also point out that it is a myth that people hit properly go down unless they feel pain immediately or they are hit in the spine/brain.  That is, it is more likely than not that a person you would have to shoot would stand there and return fire after you hit them so prepare to keep shooting.  

[Slowhand Bob]

I will always go with Jeff Coopers analysis,   there are reasons that we do not hunt elephants with .22s.  As to being shot in the leg by a .32, there is a recent Youtube video that show the actual incident of an individual shooting himself in the leg with a 45acp.  He lays his gun down informs the camera whet has happened, curses a bit, picks up and holsters his pistol and then hobbles off camera to seek help.  I guess the lesson is that every shooting is unique unto its self BUT that does not over rule the fact that there are certain laws of physics that will rear their ugly heads at the most inopportune moment.  The great thing about being an armchair warrior is that my little 22 Earl is likely to be more than I will ever need, statistically speaking!  But not to worry, if things do turn to $#!+, I can always take the time to coolly shoot them in the eye with the small caliber!  By the way, there is only one example of the left on display of WBH pair of Navy Models and this gun looks in almost pristine condition and stories indicate the other was jusat as nice before it was stolen.  Old WB must have really taken care of those show pieces for them to have served him so well practising, shooting and wearing daily over all those years and still look new.

[Mean Bob Mean]

IAs to being shot in the leg by a .32, there is a recent Youtube video that show the actual incident of an individual shooting himself in the leg with a 45acp.  He lays his gun down informs the camera whet has happened, curses a bit, picks up and holsters his pistol and then hobbles off camera to seek help.  I guess the lesson is that every shooting is unique unto its self

That was the point the FBI made in that piece. 

Men are dangerous game and we do not use deer rifles to hunt cape Buffalo for a reason.  When game that can and will kill you is involved, you use enough gun to reach deep into the animal from any angle and you place it where it will destroy the most tissue and/or break the animal down so it cannot charge.  As you note, any round into the orbital socket will end a fight, but wounds in other areas have less predictive responses.  Unless it breaks down bones or destroys major organs, it isn't doing the job.  Heavier bullets of good diameter that penetrate reliably assure you only a statistically greater opportunity to survive a confrontation, nothing more. 

[Slowhand Bob]

In my mind the real folly comes from those who select the small caliber based on the premise that when the time comes to defend their life, they will be able to take the the target shooters shot and shoot him in the eye!  My brother is a prime example of this, he thinks he will be able to make a shot in the heat of combat that is actually a stretch for him while relaxing at the target range.  I shoot cowboy for fun and will attest to the fact that when the beep goes off it is very easy to miss up close and big targets and friends, this doesnt even account for those situations where actual poopy pants is involved!  Wild Bill Hickock and John Wesley Hardins names are rememberd 150 years later because they were different under stress than 99.9% of us and they were lucky on a few more occasions than most of us could count on! 

[Graveyard Jack]

Wild Bill Hickock and John Wesley Hardins names are rememberd 150 years later because they were different under stress than 99.9% of us...

Which brings us to the man's most important weapon critical for winning a gunfight, the one between his ears. There was never a truer or more profound statement than "cooler heads prevail". The ability for the individual to stay calm and think during a crisis will always prove to be FAR more important than what he carries in his holster. There's only so much you can prepare for it. You'll only ever truly know how you'll react in such a situation when it happens. Until t hen, it's all just speculation and wishful thinking. The two men mentioned above had one very distinct advantage over everyone they ever had a confrontation with. They remained calm and were willing to take a man's life to save their own, without hesitation. Weapon proficiency being a close second, chosen equipment a distant third.

The size of the balls in their trousers was vastly more important than the balls in their sixguns. 

[rifle]

It seems like all that is said here by everyone is true to some extent depending. Even the 45acp isn't a fer sure "one shot stop".
If the central nervous system isn't shut down an antaganist can still shoot back usually.
All things said.......a Colt 1851 Navy shootin a lead ball at around 900fps and at a close range will hurt like a ($%^#@&*^!@*^%#.
If the same Colt shot someone twice or three times or more....they would be thunkin bout getting the heck out of wherever they were antaganizing someone. If the first ball ripped a major blood vessel then the pressure drops quick and the system goes to _ _ _ _ quick.
I think a lot of people would stop fighting after being shot with a 36cal. lead ball traveling 900fps. If shot multiple times with that ball each ball would lessen the chance of them fighting on. That's why I tell the lil lady(wife),"if need be and you shoot....then shoot till the guns empty". She has a 22 mag revolver using hollow points since that is something she can shoot.
Civil War combat vets related to Elmer Kieth that  the ball took the fight out of the enemy better than the conicals.
Naturally there are better guns fer defense than the Colt Navy. That doesn't mean the Colt Navy is a lil pip squeek. Nine smaller lead balls from a shotgun are known to work real well to stop fights. They go faster than the Navy's lead ball but.... the Navy has six of them goin fairly fast.
If I were in a tight spot and all I had was a Colt Navy.....I'd be glad I had it.  I'd wish I had a shotgun though.
Back in WW2 the British used the 38S&W fer it's standard military pistols. Used the 158gr. lead bullet not traveling super fast. The Germans liked the 9 MM cartridge. The Texas Rangers loved the five shot Patersons using 20gr. powder and five lead 36cal. balls. The Apache hated the Patersons. The 16 Texas Rangers that took on about 81 Apache and won the day were glad to have the puny lil 36cal. balls in the Patersons. Of course when the larger (more powder) Navy Colts came along they woulda liked then better and...when the 44 1860 Army came out it was out there because people wanted a lil more whomp per lead ball. The Army 44 did well I've read. The Dragoons did better and the Walkers even better.
Can't change the fact the Texas Rangers loved those Patersons and figured the guns made them able to take on superior numbers of enemy with them.
I'd read of a robber with a gun holding a couple hostage at gun point. The robber looked away a second and the gentleman pulled a brass framed 36cal. Colt from his coat pocket and fired one shot that hit the robber and the robber went down and the gentleman drops the Colt 36 cal. and he and his women ran like hell. Saved their bacon with a lil ole 36cal. cap&baller. I bet the smoke and noise scared the hell outta the robber when he felt the hot lead in front of it.

[Sir Charles deMouton-Black]

The .38 load that the Brits used was called the 38-200.  It had a 200 grain bullet and was loaded fairly hot.  It was inspired by the American .38 S&W "Police" load

[texcl]

I'm amazed at the penetration of the .36. I have a farm and on occasion we have livestock die. I have shot a conical over 17grs. of 3f right through 15"+ of carcass and didn't find the ball as it went through over 2' of snow. the same results with the RB but the wound was more pronounced with a cleaner edge where as the conical wound channel looks as if it was made by a .22 it must just sort of slip through the flesh. I did recover one conical in the snow about 18" in that hit 2 bones and went through about 15" of flesh. didn't even flatten.