"The 1847 Colt Walker: The Most Powerful Handgun..." Topic

… Ever Used by The U.S. Military.

"Although the people within a military's ranks make up its power and potential, so too do the weapons the soldiers carry. With the right armaments, a nation can defeat its enemies, repel invaders, and keep the peace. Some weapons, of course, are more monumental than others.

With technological advances and military growth, weapons become even more impressive, even more fearsome and frightening. Despite all the incredible weapons that the world has today, one of the most powerful ever used by the military was in a century long past; the Colt Walker of 1847.

Although it is no longer seen within the ranks of the United States Military, the Colt Walker of the mid-19th century is the most powerful and most effective handgun ever used by soldiers. The Americans who wielded the Colt Walker were deadly, and here is what made this simple weapon such a powerhouse…."
More here
link

Amicalement
Armand

A fine weapon, no doubt about it. But most powerful? For that I would go with the M1911 .45.

Well, on a quick search it was throwing a 240 grain bullet at 1100 FPS, where as the .45 ACP throws a 230 grain bullet at 900 FPS. So yes, more powerful than the 1911.

not that I want to be hit be either one mind you

And when you run out of powder, the Walker has the advantage as a thrown or bludgeoning weapon.

You hit someone with one and you're liable to break their neck!

The Colt Walker is a very powerful gun, it's pretty much one of the most powerful guns you could buy until the introduction of the .357 magnum.

I hate to disappoint you John the Greater, but the .45 is only a medium powered cartridge. It's a common mistake for people to assume that the bigger the caliber, the more powerful, but there are smaller bullets that are much faster and have a lot more energy than the .45.

The Walker has two major disadvantages, Original ones were prone to blowing up as the power of the weapon exceeded the limits of metallurgy of the day. And the loading rod wasn't solidly secured so it had a tendency to come down and lodge itself into the cylinder and jam the weapon or at least be really frustrating and one of the reasons why many Walker replica buyers give them up after a while.

Think I'd rather have gone with a Dragoon. Don't think there was a massive difference in muzzle velocity and at least it wouldn't blow your face off.

Besides which it made a decent club like the Walker did too.

Keep in mind that neither the Walker or Dragoon models were belt holster weapons. They were usually carried in pommel holsters by mounted troops.

If you ever have the chance to handle one, you'll understand completely.

The Baretta (M9), used by US Military has a muzzle velocity of 1,250 fps.

The Tokarev TT-30 used by the USSR had a muzzle velocity of 1,575 fps. Which is faster than several of the .357 loads of the present.

"The Baretta (M9), used by US Military has a muzzle velocity of 1,250 fps."

The Tokarev TT-30 used by the USSR had a muzzle velocity of 1,575 fps. Which is faster than several of the .357 loads of the present."

Yes but they only throw a bullet of around 115gr which makes a big difference.

Size or velocity don't tell the whole story.

If you look at the energy of a bullet you'll find that modern loads in 9mm and a .45 ACP are fairly close (350 vs 400 ft-lbf) while the .357 Magnum hits around 750 ft-lbf. The .44 magnum goes an impressive 1000 ft-lbf and the .500 Magnum hits with a whopping 2600 ft-lbf. There is a joke that tells you to leave the eternal 9mm vs .45 ACP discussion behind and go for the .357 magnum instead.

The Walker had a muzzle energy a little over 500 ft-lbf equivalent of some early .357 Magnum loads.

Combine that with a soft lead ball and you quickly understand why being hit by a .44 Walker is the equivalent of a thousand years of bad luck catching up on you all at once. If you wanted real red-blooded "stopping power" the Walker was in the top three for the latter half of the 19th century and into the first quarter of the 20th. As TK said, the Walker was pretty much a "Horse" pistol designed to be able to bring down a horse with a well-aimed shot.

The 7.62 Tokarev is a very hot round, based on the 7.63mm Mauser (think "Broomhandle" C96) necked cartridge, high velocity makes it a very nice "carbine" round and one of the reasons why the Soviet PPSh was so effective in combat.

The title is technically accurate. As Patrick indicates it's a combination of size and velocity. This gives you a scientifically measured amount of energy.

This is then made partially irrelevant by the type of bullet being fired (a proper defensive round will induce far more tissue/cavity damage than a simple ball round).

On top of that this is then made more irrelevant by how easily the weapon is handled and how many rounds can be put on target accurately. Combine this with the trajectory or "flatness" of the shooting trajectory and the effective combat distance/accuracy and it all becomes a huge mass of data.

There has been a move since the 60's-70's toward lighter cartridges for two primary reasons: reduced recoil, and reduced weight (i.e. more ammunition carried). This is pretty much the reason that the modern intermediate rifle cartridge is in use. Handguns have ebbed and flowed far more than rifle cartridges.

Patrick R: I believe that horse pistol refers to the size and weight of the gun. They were meant to be carried in pommel holsters, not on a waist belt. There are two of us in my unit that carry Walkers, and at the end of the day with the additional weight of big knife, bayonet, and other gear the 5 1/2 pounds of the Walker gets pretty heavy.

Yes that's the case here's a picture.

The use of a linked pair of holsters that went over the pommel of the saddle goes right back to the days of the Wheel Lock pistol.

So not only predating the Walker but the USA as well ! :o)

Here's a pair of US flintlocks however.

The TT30 and the M9 both fire relatively light weight bullets at a high velocity, and with both you get a large number of through and through wounds even with hollow-points. the 1911 fire a fairly heavy bullet at medium velocity and will expand fairly well. I shoot my walker when I can and enjoy it. However my carry weapon is a 1911.

How does the .44" 1860 Army Colt compare?

While I love both the Walker (owned a replica and yes got very frustrated by the dropping loading lever) and simply love the .45 ACP round which is till my favourite carry pistol A SiG Sauer though and not a Colt) the prize for most powerful handgun round used by soldiers must surely go to the .577 Tranter? A very respectable 525-550 ft-lbf in 1860!

Heck, it did fine by Mattie Ross to blast a hole in Tom Chaney! And even Marshal Cogburn was impressed by the "howitzer".

Yeah, but you need a fence rail to rest it on!

Comparing the 1860 Army and the Walker is like night and day. The first and last time I took my Walker to the range, I figured out rather quickly this is not a target shooting weapon. Even for reenacting, the Walker draws rather clumsily due to the sheer weight. The 1860 has nice lines draws easily and shoots rather well at 25 yards. Still, for a target shooting weapon from that era, I like my .36 Remington the best.