by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier
The new Colt Peacemaker is also available with ivory grips.
This report covers:
- 300-yard shots with an SAA?
- The revolver
- Hidden from view
- What’s different about this one?
- Hammer doesn’t go all the way down
- A licensed Colt
- The gun
- Evaluation so far
When Umarex started making the Colt Single Action Army BB pistols a couple years ago, we all knew they had a large number of variations to go through. The most popular of these was the very first Colt SAA — the revolver with the 7.5-inch barrel that was also called the Peacemaker, The Frontier Six-Shooter and the Colt Army .45. This is the revolver so many western stars like Paladin and Marshal Dillon carried. It’s not the fastest in a gunfight, but for 300-yard shots, it’s the one to have.
300-yard shots with a handgun?
Yes. When I was a gunfighter at Frontier Village in San Jose, California, I used to shoot live ammo on my days off. I was reading Elmer Keith at the time and didn’t know that a handgun could not shoot accurately to 300 yards, so of course I tried it and found that it worked just as Keith described. Too bad Keith was a liar, because so much of what he wrote is still true today!
I was a gunfighter at Frontier Village when I was in college.
Here we have a Colt SAA revolver BB pistol that’s nickel-plated. The standard gun comes with dark simulated wood grips, but for $20 more you can get the one I am reviewing today. I think the look is worth the price.
Hidden from view
Pyramyd Air sent me this airgun a couple months ago. It’s one they make up themselves and you may have some difficulty finding it online. Open the web page for the gun with the dark grips, and this one is an option that opens inside that page. Click on the “Pick your option” box.
What’s different about this one?
We have looked at the first SAA BB pistol that came out. We also saw a Duke weathered pellet pistol. But today’s revolver is the first we have seen with a 7.5-inch barrel. In many ways it is the same as the other BB revolvers — 12-gram CO2 cartridge in the grip, smoothbore barrel, shoots using cartridges with one BB apiece, is single action only. But the longer barrel will mean faster shots for sure.
Hammer doesn’t go all the way down
Before you ask, the hammer does not stay all the way down on this pistol. It does go down when the gun is fired, but it then rebounds to sit 1/4-inch fro the frame.
The hammer sits like this at rest.
A licensed Colt
One nice feature about this airgun is it is fully licensed by Colt. That makes it an authorized Colt and for a Colt collector, that makes it one for the collection.
Aside from the finish this is a six-shooter that loads cartridges through a gate on the right side of the frame. The hammer is drawn back to half-cock (one click back) and the cylinder can be rotated clockwise, when seen from the rear. Hold the muzzle down as you do this or the cartridges will slip back and tie up the cylinder.
The gun weighs 2 lbs. 4 oz with the cartridges loaded but no CO2 cartridges installed. That’s not too far off the weight of the firearm.
With a firearm you have to use the extractor rod to push each cartridge from the cylinder after they are fired. That’s because the cartridges swell under the pressure of firing and hug the walls of each chamber tightly. Of course that doesn’t happen on the BB pistol because the cartridges are under no real pressure — maybe a couple hundred pounds at most, rather than the 15,000 psi of a .45 Colt cartridge. So they tend to fall out easily.
To fire the gun, the hammer is pulled all the way back. Then the trigger fires the gun. This is called single action. If the gun fired with just a pull on the trigger, that would be double action. Double action is faster but single action offers the chance for a much lighter and crisper trigger pull.
The sights are fixed. The front is a low blade and the rear is a notch cut into the rear of the frame.
Rear sight is just a notch in the frame.
Safety? On a revolver? Yes, to appease Agatha Christie and all the other mystery writers, to whom guns are the biggest mystery of all, this revolver has a safety. It might also be there for operational safety reasons. When it’s on the hammer can’t be cocked. If the hammer is already cocked and the safety is put on, pulling the trigger does nothing.
Safety is on the lower grip strap. It’s on right now.
This is a revolver people say they have been waiting for. Let’s see the reaction.
62 thoughts on “Colt Peacemaker BB pistol: Part 1”
Nice to see you testing hand guns again. There seems to be many variations of this colt. Will it be like some of the earlier ones, and you can get pellet firing cartridges for it.
All these guns share a common heritage.
I HAVE THE COLT LIMITED EDITION, PEACH MAKER IN .177 CAL, PELLET, 45 LONG COLT. HAS 24 CARAT GOLD PLATING ON THE CYLINDER , HAMMER AND TRIGGER. IN 7 1/2″. HAS THE IVORY GRIPS WITH COLT LOGO. I WAS VERY SURPRISED AT HOW ACCURATE IT IS OUT TO 50 YARDS.
I HAVE MY GRANDFATHERS 1898 COLT SINGLE ACTION ARMY IN 45 LONG COLT. ORIGINAL. MINT CONDITION. I GOT COLT TO SEND ME A CERTIFICATE OF PROOF OF DATE AND CONDITION. WORTH ABOUT $10,000.00 THE PEACE MAKER BY UMAREX IS HEAVYER, THAN MY ORIGINAL ARMY MODEL. GO AHEAD AN DROOL!! LOL 🙂
Welcome to the blog.
Please turn off your caps key. It’s the internet equivalent of shouting. Makes your comments very hard to read.
SORRY FOR THE CAPS. MY CAP KEY IS HISTORY, WAITING ON NEW KEY BOARD.
IN MY OPINION, USING CAPS IS NOT SHOUTING, IT HIGH LIGHTS YOUR COMMENT.
The Umarex Colts are great guns, and loads of fun to shoot.
I had one when they first came out, but made it a present to a friend who is a Colt collector.
My only gripe is (and it can be a minor one or a big one depending on the person) is the frames are not the full size of the real 1873.
They are about 7/8 size of the centerfire pistols.
And more inline with the size of the rimfire “scout” Colts.
So if you have a favorite holster rig, these guns are just swallowed by the regular holster.
Would you do a photo comparison showing the size difference?
Really? I grew up with the rimfire “scout” Colt. I have the Umarex version; it seems to me to be larger and heavier than my old rimfire version.
I’ll take a look at it. I wasn’t aware that was the case.
You do know that the grip frames on these guns are from an 1860 Colt cap and ball revolver? That’s to fit the CO2 cartridge. That larger grip may be why you think the frame is smaller.
I will wait on you findings.
I am a long time cap and ball shooter here, love the looks of the 1860, but the feel of the 1851 grips.
The 1860 grips were the “plow handle” grips and yes longer.
I found my favorite percussion pistol in the 1862 in .36 caliber, it had the looks, and the FEEL.
I have a great western in .45 with a 5.5 inch barrel and a uberti in .38/.357 with a 4.75 inch barrel..
When I bought the Umarex, I dropped it in my holster rig and it just swallowed it.
I ordered the Umarex leather holster, and it’s a perfect fit for the Umarex.
Oh for you that are looking for a holster rig, the Umarex offering is great quality, and a beautiful setup, get one.
My powder burners would not fit the Umarex holster.
On a side note, my Daisy 179 is the same size as my uberti.
The answer to the difference in size may be as simple as your Great Western “Peacemaker” itself. As As I recall the story, James Arness was a VERY large man, so much so that over the years several of his props were custom made in larger than life sizes because he had a tendency to make them look laughabley too small. This included his co-actors (soap-box required for two-shots,) his unusually large horse (lest his feet drag on the ground,) and even outsized set doors when he was required to walk through one. And the famous opening fast-draw sequence was thought to look too silly because his “Peacemaker” looked as undersized as a toy. Aside from Colt not having a real 1873 Peacemaker in production at the time, the Great Western not-really-a-Peacemaker was actually physically larger than the the real-deal itself.
Never having had one myself, I can’t say how much size difference there really was between the guns but supposedly Amanda Blake (Miss Kitty) had a few bon mots concerning their own variations in altitude. ;):);)
For the collectors, If they wanted a correct sized grip, they could get the 8gram co2 cartridges to fit in a standard grip.
And then Pyramid air could sell more 8 gram cartridges.
Love my Benjamin 252, it uses 8 gram cartridges.
The guns are so much smaller than say a crosman 2240.
If you want to review one, I have a 1953 model in .22 caliber you may use.,
I think you are correct about the frame appearing smaller, by visual comparison, to the large grip, which Umarex was forced to size as a sort of straightened Bisley grip to accommodate 12 ounce Powerlets. I noticed no difference between my CO2 Colt SAA and Daisy 179, although I am not holding them at the moment.
Something has to be adjusted for the CO2. The correct frame but slightly larger grip is the opposite of the frame-elongating done to accommodate the CO2 valve with replicas of 20th century revolvers.
This makes the small dimensions of the Gletcher Nagant so impressive! How’d they squeeze all of that in?
Not so . The Umarex Peacemaker, of which I have several , is the same size as a standard Peacemaker, is three ounces less, and differs in the grip frame . As stated to house the the12 gm co2 cartridge , the grip frame is longer, the size of. an 1860 Army. The Umarex Peacemakers fit standard ColtSingle Action , not the smaller Scout holsters.
Do you happen to know where I could buy seperate parts for the Umarex Peacemaker?
The hammer on mine got damaged and now the cilinder doesn’t rotate anymore when I cock the gun.
Welcome to the blog.
Umarex U.S.A. would be the only place I would know of.
I needed a valve replaced. Umarex USA will sell parts or , take the revolver in for repair.
I am STILL (im-)patiently waiting for the Colt SAA with the 4 and 3/4″ barrel…the so-called gunfighter version.
What are the chances?
Well, if they are making a second barrel length, the 4-3/4 length has to be next.
I mentioned in a comment last week seeing a video of Umarex pistols on display at the IWA Show 2017. The most noteworthy pistol on display appeared to be a 2-1/2 inch Peacemaker. That’s the one I want!
I saw that video. The revolver had a weathered finish, Colt logo and appears to be at least a 3 1/2 inch barrel with ejector rod. The internal barrel is shorter and may be where the 2 1/2 spec comes from. I did not see a front sight on the revolver . The reason they would probably go with the Shopkeeper model with the ejector rod, is the ejector rod is permanently attached as an integral part to the barrel. An ejector less version would need a new barrel rather than just a cut down barrel. The 4 3/4 inch gunfighter version is long overdue ,as are aftermarket grips. A winner would be a nickel plated 3 1/2 barrel Bat Masterson with staglite grips. I don’t know if BB received them ,but I emailed some pictures a Colt SAA and the Umarex for size comparison
Well she is a “looker” for sure. The pistol featured (pulls up) as pellet gun and rifled on your link, yet your article has it as bb shooter and smooth bore. 4188-7991. ???
Good Day all,…. Chris
That is a Pyramyd Air problem I will try to resolve.
BB, I also can not find the link for 7.5″ BB Peacemaker. Find the pellet ok.
That would have been a pretty cool job when you were a kid.
I have 2 of the Peacemakers. A warn blue 7.5″ and a nickel 5 .5″ . The 5.5 is a BB version. I have more fun with these than any of my other pellet guns.
I use pellets in both and have no problems. Accuracy is plenty good for the plinking I do..
Not sure what’s going on with these pricewise. I have a pair of these long barreled Peacemakers. They are the same pellet version except the cylinder, hammer and trigger are gold plated and the “Ivory” grips have a “Colt Peacemaker” medallion included instead of the screw and they are ten dollars cheaper than this one !
Now I realize PA almost always has a 10% discount and free shipping pops up a lot and I did not receive these discounts at another web site so the cost at PA can be reduced from the advertised price if you are vigilant. But if you are going to go for the grip upgrade you might want to consider the gold enhanced versions with the medallion grips, probably for just a little bit more when you figure it all out. Especially if you plan to collect them.
If that is a pic of you as a gunfighter you must have been one of the good guys. The white hat is a dead giveaway.
Did you switch with the bad guys?
I think I recently found the reason I collect these, a photo of me holding a six shooter … about two or three years old !
‘Kalifornians’ are amazed I haven’t turned into a villainous murderer, you know, actually having touched a gun at such an early age. “Oh the Howah ! ”
Glad they phased out the shinny plastic wood like grips, they just never looked right with a weathered version. Looking forward to custom grips. Also they moved the obnoxious warning print to the underside of the extended barrel. Looks a lot better and talking about looks, the gold enhanced version does not have a bright mirror finish on the gold plating. A nice contrast to the rest of the gun. They also improved the natural weathered look on the new NRA Commemorative I have, compared to the first Marshal edition. Sand paper marks everywhere are gone.
Good eye! Yes, in this fight I was the Deputy Marshal. I gave the Marshal his day off each week.
The rest of the time I was Sundown, a bad guy. I was known as the man whose fast draw was timed with a calendar. They used time-lapse photography to film it.
I was also known as Fanner 50 because I could not thumb the hammer with one hand. So I had a custom fanner gun made. I sounded like a one-man war when it worked — which was about 10 percent of the time.
Probably the reason you don’t get confused with Clint Eastwood … being the movie star you are and all. 🙂
Perhaps the inability to thumb the hammer with one hand is why horseback shooters in old westerns raised the pistol up to the sky to catch the hammer with their thumb after each shot and it looked like they were throwing bullets out of the gun. I thought it was done that way to shoot faster with one hand. Could be both ?
Movie star that I am, the reason I’m not confused with Clint Eastwood more often is he is much older. 😉
You got me there…. Almost lost a mouth full of coffee.
All and all, I’d be careful where I go with a poncho on if I were you.
You got me there…. Almost lost a mouth full of coffee.
All and all, I’d be careful where I go with a poncho on if I were you.
Second time I got a 409 trouble code when I hit send, resulting in a double post ?
Bob M, I remember reading somewhere that the ‘horseback shooters in old westerns raised the pistol up to the sky’ between each shot in order to drop the powder charge against the priming, so the gun would fire more reliably.
If memory at age 70 serves me correctly, you can see Clint Eastwood use this technique in The Outlaw Josie Wales.
Sounds reasonable or it may have just been a carry over from the days of ball and cap revolvers. They raised the pistol to clear percussion cap debris to keep it from fowling up the mechanism.
Thanks, the cap & ball revolver percussion cap clearing is what I originally remember reading about.
We used to take our kids to Frontier Village, so maybe we saw you then! Moved to Campbell in 1971, and left in 2005. We would have been in Frontier Villa between 1971 and 1980 or so.
I was gone by then. I was there 1968-1970. Then I went into the Army. You would have seen my buddy, Dakota, the outlaw, though.
Just wanted to let you know that I shot the 180 empty of CO2 and installed a fresh cartridge with required 3 drops of pellgun oil on it’s tip. There were no audible signs of leaking. I will be sure and let you know if that ever happens.
Well that is good news. But from what I have had happen different times. I think I’m not going to store my Co2 guns with a cartridge in it. Guess it’s one of them personal preference things. But thanks for letting me know.
I read Sixguns by Elmer Keith myself. I should re-read it. I am interested in your long distance revolver shooting. I would enjoy a blog on that.
Bless your heart! I need things to write about while I’m on the road to the Ohio show next week!
B.B., is that you in the pic? How did you decide who lived and died in the confrontations in the frontier village? I’ve heard that this is a problem in Civil War re-enactments. After a lot of expense on outfits and travel, none of the re-enactors want to die in the exchanges of volleys. And when they do, they try to film the battle on their cell phones from the ground.
Gunfun1, as to why the WWII fighters didn’t site at different distances, I suspect that they didn’t have enough guns. The Spitfire had the most at eight different machine guns, but these were limited to .30 caliber. And with two per distance, you would only have had four sighting ranges from an almost infinite number of possibilities. I think the key concept here is “shot density.” You needed enough shots to hit a target for the brief time it was in the sights. The common solution was converging fire from six machine guns at a single point. Another option was mixing cannons and machine guns. But the heavier the gun, the fewer rounds which decreased shot density overall, just as lighter guns in the Spitfire gave you lower power which decreased the shot density in a different way.
The p-38 was the most successful in combining machine guns an an autocannon in the nose so that they could be concentrated at all distances. The word was that the p-38 could sink a ship all by itself although that may have been because it could carry a bomb load comparable to a B-17 as well as the heavy gun armament. This indeed was the wave of the future with the wing-root mounted miniguns on today’s fighter planes. They need to be speeded up to 6000 rounds/min to have sufficient shot density at the speed at which fighter jets fly. The old machine guns would not do sufficient damage even if they managed to hit.
On the subject of rc, I only developed moderate skill at flying the planes before I had to quit. But, I also had dreams of building them, and the p-38 was supposed to be the hardest to build, just like the original which was originally a hand-built custom plane. Modifying the plane for mass production and related problems caused the plane to miss much of the war, at least in Europe.
Here is an interesting question for you,.. or anyone that cares to speculate,…
Say an aircraft has a .50 cal. machine gun that fires with X amount of FPE, but (not) flying. Then,.. fire that machine gun while in flight. With the FPS of the aircraft, I would think that FPE of the machine gun rounds would go way up. Wrong?
It seems like simple logic, but perhaps not.
I’ve only heard this come up in relation to jet planes and missiles. Apparently jet planes can gain speeds that are a significant fraction of a missile’s velocity which can change the dynamics of a shot. In your scenario of a .50 BMG, the logic seems irrefutable that the velocity of the bullets would go up. I guess the question would be what effect it would have. I’m supposing that .50BMG bullets travel around 2000 mph. I’ve heard that 30-06 bullets travel about that fast, so this is an approximation. The best WWII fighters going flat out could do about 400 mph in level flight. It’s a matter of judgement whether that is a “significant” fraction of the bullet speed. However, I doubt that the additional speed would increase the kinetic energy of impact significantly since the .50 BMG did a lot of damage under any circumstances. At one quarter the bullet speed, I don’t think the plane speed would provide any significant advantage in overtaking a fleeing airplane. And the same reasoning suggests that the shot density would not be significantly changed. All this applies to a best-case scenario of a direct line pursuit which the fleeing pilot wants to avoid at all costs. With the changes in speed and direction of a dogfight, I doubt that the plane speed had any effect on the bullets. So generally I suspect that the speed regimes of WWII fighters prevented the delivery system from affecting the projectiles the way it does for jets.
After posting, I thought some of the same things. Most obvious upon pondering was that a nose to tail pursuit would negate any added FPE at impact. On the other hand, a direct side shot would allow the gained FPE to be maximized. Two extremes, but it makes sense.
Thanks for your thoughts,… Chris
You’re right. The nose to tail pursuit negates the plane velocity, so it is not the best case scenario, like I said, but the worst. A side shot would be better, but not as good as a head on confrontation. Also, while a side shot might be better than a pursuit in terms of projectile speed, you are also minimizing shot density as the plane flies through the stream of bullets so your aim had better be good. Both the top-scoring American ace, Richard I. Bong (who flew p-38s) and the high scoring German ace, Erich Hartmann both planted themselves right on the tail of their targets before opening fire.
Incidentally, Hartmann was quite a guy who,as a prisoner of the Soviets after the war, actually hit his interrogator over the head with a chair! How is that for guts? And he did survive to be released.
As always,.. a wealth of insight and fact filled information. The head on shot completely eluded me. Yes, that would be the ultimate in maximizing flight gained FPE.
I am currently pondering on launching my M-rod from a catapult with a 50′ length of string attached to the trigger. Upon the abrupt halt, and inevitable firing,.. I am figuring at least another 10 FPE. Target size and location(s) is proving to be a bit of a calculating challenge however.
I am not sure if that qualifies as an “official tune” though. 😉 Thanks,.. Outa’ here,.. Chris
I just have to bring this up. One of the older guys that taught me some rc flying and air plane tuning tricks back in the day had this to say. He said watch these next 5 guys that are going to race there pylon planes. He said pay attention to what happens when they launch their planes. They take off running when the starter drops the flag. Then right when they get ready to release the plane they stop and throw it.
He said when you go out to race. Just stand there. Wait for the flagger to drop his arm and throw the plane. He said you will be around the first turn before they release their planes.
Yes I did win. And about the plane going so fast and the bullet getting fired. Well the bullet still exits the barrel in the same place.
That’s what I was meaning also about them not having much lock time on a target. They probably sighted them for mass fire power at a given distance. And like you mentioned when we was talking before. Once they start firing and the shot is spread out then concentrates the fire in one area then spreads out as the distance to the target changes. So basically they had the guns fire power placed in a broader range of area over a broader distance is what I’m thinking.
Maybe they did have a good idea with the multiple guns sighted at a given distance.
And yes I did like the P38 lightning. But another I liked was the twin engine Mosquito. What I liked about it was that it was a wood built plane. Since I was into building the balsa wood planes at that time and was into rc planes big time.
I hate to ask this. But why did you have to stop flying rc planes. I can say that was probably the most fun I had hobby wise out of the different hobby’s I have had. I still have a few planes and helicopters I fly from time to time. But not nothing like I use to fly. And what’s funny is it’s like they say. Riding a bicycle. Once you learn you never forget. You pick right back up where you left off.
Chris and Matt,
There’s a pretty good book out there explaining a lot about aerial gunnery in a exciting and even readable form. Try “God is my Co-Pilot,” by Col. Robert Scott, the real deal if there ever was one. Scott was with Chennault and the Flying Tigers against the Japanese and wrote a quite educational basic aerial gunnery treatise on engaging fighters and how different engaging bombers is. And ground attack against coverless infantry, patrol boats and such.
A couple of points to ponder:
—tuning 8 or 12 rifle caliber guns (Some models of Hurricanes had 12)is done to maximize convergence, or focusing the projectiles to the same place. Scott has an interesting observation while watching his converging fire began spaced across a patrol boat and as he closed the convergence focused to a single hot-spot, eating through the side of the boat like a magnifying glass burning through paper. And out the other side.
—The idea of many, many, many projectiles had to do with at least damaging (marking) say an HE-111) for a bit of psychological warfare for the surviving crews that made it back. Bearing in mind also, defensive gunners were often poorly protected (or not at all) and a rifle caliber hit is as good as a cannon shell (while your Hurricane otherwise nibbles away at things.)
—Col. Scott relates that in 1940, the Japanese Idea of air-defense for infantry was to form a square with a hundred guys or so, (yup, just like Wellington at Waterloo) and lead, aim and fire in unison at the offending strafing aircraft. They thought they formed a efficient concentrated fire-base. Scott thought they formed a golden target. His observation there was after the third pass, not too many left to shoot anymore.
—Small caliber is not so good to shoot down bombers. Get a canon.
—The canon in the P39 had a very small magazine (like thirty or so rounds,) and the aircraft itself was substandard. The Russians used them to shoot down bombers, we used them to sink Japanese resupply barges.
—Certain models of the B25 had a multitude of .50 caliber guns stacked with a 75mm tank gun. Theoretically one could sink a destroyer with one of these. Don’t know in the AAF ever did but even though the pilots didn’t like them so much (too slow to reload after each shot,) eventually they developed what we now call “Swarm” tactics.
—Speaking of aircraft mounted large cannons, if you really do the math, even if you fired everything at once, despite that old chestnut of “the airplane slowed down by half when I fired…” you really can’t effectively counter the moving mass of a several hundred mile an hour airplane with the relatively low-recoil of a cannon. (You sure can rattle things up some by the shake and shimmy, though.)
—Study up a bit on dogfighting tactics and it becomes clear how using a gun at any time while supersonic is very unlikely. Not impossible but the record of jet to jet combat reveals the closing moments of an engagement may well be supersonic but things quickly devolve to lost altitude and a much slower airspeed.
This, of course has not ruled out gunplay by any means, still, low and slow can take the day.
Another author to explore is Martin Caiden, “The Last Dogfight” deals p39, P38 fighter tactics, preparation, the Japanese tactics, etc. It’s a page turner.
Scott wrote books half a century ago, Caiden in the early 70’s. Apologies if my memory is faulty.
Thank you for taking the time to write all of that. I learned many things that I have never even considered.
I( was told by a browning engineer that the 0 cal was so inheritly accurate that the ammo manufacture had to load unbalanced bullets to make the bullet pattern spread out like a shot gun or the bulet would more or less hit the same hole
Welcome to the blog.
That sounds like Browning hype to me. If it was that accurate why aren’t Browning guns the benchrest champions of the world?
And only on Wednesday’s right.
I read Sixguns a long time ago. I’d be curious to know what things Elmer Keith lied about.
Elmer reported killing either a mule deer or an elk with a .44 Magnum revolver at 400+ yards. I would have to look it up but I believe it was even farther than 600 yards. After that a lot of people started calling him a liar.
Of course he wasn’t. What he wrote about is true and I have done some of it myself. Once you learn how, it’s almost too easy!
But don’t reveal the “Secret!”
You know it, I know it, my Dad, the Rangemaster at the local National Guard range knew it, Billy Dixon knew it, Ed McGivern knew it and even my Grandfather knew it.
What? You say? You really think I or BB are about to divulge such a secret?
Dream on, grasshopper.
Well maybe later. You won’t believe it anyway.
It turned out to be a steady, $5 a-pop-income at the range to help his eldest son not depend on cooking hamburgers for dinner with so much bread mixed in that they were cooked in the toaster.
Okay, I’ll tell. They’re only two requirements. The first and nearly the most important is know and fervently believe is that it’s possible…no matter what anybody tells you. It’s possible. This is a person (me) describing how I once took a shot at a 100 yard gong…drastically uphill..And the sound-track went some thing like this: “Pow. . . . . .ding.” The weapon of choice? A Colt 1908 .25 ACP with a little over a less than 2″ barrel.
Luck? You better believe you betcha!
The second and by far most important thing to know/do is never attempt to replicate the feat particularly in front of th same crowd. Be mysterious, even formidable, but quietly and secretly understand and accept, it’s unlikely to ever happen again.
But it doesn’t mean you can’t keep trying.
Anybody got $5 they want to lose?:);)
I might suggest McGivern’s “Fast and Fancy Revolver Shooting,” ca 1938, (If you can find it.). It’s useful and educational to anyone fooling around with a projectile launching device.
It’s also an interesting learning tool concerning the appearance of possible…maybe…dangerous types.
Suffice to say, Ed would have been the last pokey, short, benign old guy on the planet you’d wish to tangle-ass with.
I was not aware that you were into taking “selfies”. That 3rd. picture down has a pretty good representation of you in the reflection. I looked for a cat or two, but failed to find any. 🙂
An interesting novel for fans of some of the old gun writers. “Pale horse coming” by Stephen Hunter. It features lightly disguised, Elmer Keith, Ed McGivern, Audie Mutphy and others.