History Primer 160: Dutch 1873 Revolvers Documentary 

Yes, up to 1945.

email us and we will borrow yours

"Got to move at government speed" Othias (I forget the episode)

Ever heard of the ache conflict , no read up on it and you know why. learn the history and facts before making comments . a conflict that made the vietnam war a picknick on a sunday. Reliabilty and robustnes over mechanical isseus.

@@marcusfranconium3392 I know the history and the facts; I don't have a horse in this race though. To me it's mostly about how much Dutch politics still functions on trying to bean-count to the detriment of all else. It's a "the more things change, the more they stay the same" kind of observation.

@@DiggingForFacts I suggest to get some books on history and you will find out how wrong you are . .

@@marcusfranconium3392 If you have any particular titles to share I'd be happy to give them a look.

“You going to change those hand fitted cylinders or whistle dixie?”

Well, there is some evidence for it actually happening ( pony express, rangers and some other papers) but think it was a rare thing.. but pale rider made some really obsessed with it.

I believe two reasons people didn’t carry spare cylinders generally was was the cost associated with buying multiple cylinders. Combined with most people not needing to reload under pressure.

M73 would be a true upgrade to S&W's lock work. BOTR's Chap has an excellent video discussing the differences.

It should not be surprising that there isn't much innovation in a completely obsolete category of firearms.

@@anotherkenlon Modern inline muzzleloaders would the exception to the rule.

@@SlavicCelery in-line muzzleloaders are just percussion guns.

@@baneofbanes Yes, but that's the most significant lock action development for an obsolete category of firearms.

it was so complicated that in order to throw the gun, they needed to devise some kind of separate multi-tool. So you had to stop get out the multi-tool from your holster and fit the tool to the revolver then and only then could you throw it....This lead to them not being thrown most of the time and the officer just chose to die to a bayonet or spear. All the writings from the period just said it was easier to choose death

Your Avatar could not be more fitting for your Comment :D

There's a lot of people who know some stuff about guns. But most of it is probably geared towards modern stuff..

Bruh, you're commenting on a C&Rsenal video which means you're already in the top 10%. Revolver genealogy is about as complicated as tax law (and to some people just as boring), give yourself a break!

Yes, and it may be noteworthy to mention that this revolver proved very effective, so much for all those who ridicule its cartridge. An M1873 (or a rifle/carbine) combined with a klewang was more than adequate to handle our (not so) little Jihadi problem back then.

Not sure if you are on the level here but either way your comment is hilarious.

Germany has an army? When was the last time they left the barracks? I have never seen a German soldier in person or on tv, I don't believe they actually exist.

Sure. But you have a century of hindsight, the decision makers at the time didn't. There were both good and bad reasons to be hesitant about automatic pistols in that time. In terms of good reasons, they were of somewhat questionable reliability (especially as militaries often had pretty poor quality ammo which was less of an issue in revolvers as an under or overpowered or split cartridge can just be ignored in a revolver.but may completely stop a semi-automatic) with very few pistols having really been put through the rigours of military use by this time. In terms of less good reasons, these decisions were often made by geezers who rode into battle with single shot pistols and didn't even really trust revolvers yet. And the somewhere in between of how much of a practical benefit is an automatic pistol over a revolver? If you need more than six rounds you are probably screwed anyway so the reloading advantage may not be much use in practice. After WWI, you have seen tons of automatic pistols that faced atrocious conditions for years and performed admirably. And the Western Front was also possibly the pinnacle of the importance of the pistol in military service in the trenches with long, bolt action rifles and before widespread use of SMGs

​@@88porpoiseSoldiers fire hundreds of rounds to get a single hit. Small arms are mostly about suppression and area denial, keeping the enemy away from yourself. When shit hits the fan you want a sidearm with at least a single-nine uptime, that is, you want to be able to spend less than 10% of your time reloading, and 90% spewing lead. A double-stack pistol in some 9mm-ish cartridge is perfect for that.

@@WhenDoesTheVideoActuallyStart Not exactly a lot of options for that before WWI.

@@88porpoise What? There were dozens of different pistol designs competing for attention, and double-stack pistols were well known. It was not an issue of options, it was an issue of doctrine.

@@WhenDoesTheVideoActuallyStart The concept was known and widely used in rifles. But it wouldn't become common in pistols until post-WWII with the Hi-Power being notable for (and named after) its unusually large capacity of its double stack magazine.

Happy birthday

Happy birthday brother!

You really dont want to hear Dutch Music... ;-)

OAFC Obligatory Algorithm Feeding Comment I always post that just to up the ALGO whenever I have nothing to say.

We have a whole series dedicated to walking up on the Colt history... I just wanted to make sure we cover some good guns too

I am mostly interested in finding a source of .380 diameter bullets for reloading this caliber. Any references would be appreciated.

@@tmcgill2219 Pretty sure you're going to have to cast your own.

The next month "look, you only used 5 of the 8 you asked for, clearly you only need 2".

@@jameshealy4594 you trade the extra 3 for other things and make shure the books reflect you used all 8.

You could actually probably do that with the new model because it's machined instead of hand fit.

It's almost like, on an army scale, pistols aren't very important. They are necessary but the overall benefits of the best pistol over any other half decent pistol since 1900 are pretty much negligible. For some special forces it may matter and for individuals they may care about the minor increase in the odds of not dying. But at the big picture there are way more things that are far more important.

De voc was in 1799 failliet gegaan, tegen de tijd van deze revolver bestond het al lang niet meer

@@kylianvanhoorn2859 zucht, het gaat om het feit hoe onze regeringen denken over defensie en de daarbij behorende verplichtingen. Ze willen altijd voorop staan, maar betalen ho maar.

@@joostprins3381 oh zo, ja daar heb je absoluut gelijk in

@@kylianvanhoorn2859 😂🤣 dank je, ben blij dat je het eens bent met de essentie.

Revolvers point like shit to me since they are stupidly tall over the hand and front heavy. Blaming the user does not negate the objective benefits of autos. Anything shoots great if aimed properly. Having watched every revolver Primer ever, I have a greater appreciation for the basic concept of an auto loading hand arm.