I'm not really into all that ballistics stuff as much as I should be. While I am sure the longer barrel helps in the velocity a little, just how much I have no idea. My revolver has a 7-1/2 inch barrel with target sights, and that thing will really shoot. We do a lot of plinking with them. Very accurate.

I do not think that would be legal in Muzzleloader season because of the cylinder. I could be wrong.

Most states would not consider it a muzzleloader so it is likely not legal in most for hunting. I have an original Remington 1858 revolver which was purchased Civil War Surplus by my Grandfather. It was not taken good care of and to make it shootable I ordered Navy Arms parts to refurbish it. The dimensions of the original and the new Italian copies are different. The original used a .454 ball and the newer ones use a .452 ball. The replica cylinder sends balls too small for my barrel so it needs to be reamed out to shoot the larger ball. If you can get a measurement of the face of the cylinder chamber holes I can match it with my replica cylinder and likely verify that it is a replica. The original that I have although basically a ball of rust when I found it in a box with a pile of old chains; once cleanedup with a power wire brush,still has the markings on the barrel "Patented Sept 1858" second line on the barrel reads "Remington & Sons IlionNew York USA" third line "New Model". If yours is an original I would expect to see similar markings stamped on the barrel just forward of the cylinder. I was about 12 when I started cleaning this up. Later I did a fair job of making it shoot although timing the cylinder and replica hammer with the original trigger and cylinder stop was a real job. Mine does not look quite as good as the one you have but I strongly suspect that it is a replica due to the condition of the stock alone.

Been trying all kinds of google searches for it under a number of different syntaxes. But the results are full of magnetic force line / explosiontopics. If you can direct me to a particular reference, i think I would find it very interesting.

It occurs to me that the cylinder shapes the explosion in line with the barrel. Still the gap between cylinder and barrel must have some effect, acting like a muzzle brake. A muzzle brakeworks to reduce recoil because it is capable of lessoning the motion of gas in line with barrel, thereby reducing momentum in that direction. The ideal braking would occur where the maximum velocity (congruent with barrel) the gas ever achieved was only that of the projectile. Without a muzzle brake gases remained contained and moving in the direction of the muzzle until the projectile exits allowing rapid expansion and acceleration of the gases to velocities well beyond that ofthe exiting bullet.

Pressure is the reason why a muzzle brake works. If all of motion of the gas particles were in the direction of the muzzle, then none could exit the muzzle brake. But because the gases are contained, and pressures elevated,the random character of their motion (mean speed) far exceeds their mean motion(avg velocity)which is determined by the motion of the projectile itself. I think you would agree, that for the entire breech volume, at any given point in time, the average velocityfor all the gas particles must be less than the velocity of the projectile. Near the ignition point the average approaching zero while nearer the projectile approaching the velocity of the projectile.

Regarding the revolver,certainly some portion of thegases will be accelerated past the cylinder into the barrel making impact with the projectile causing further acceleration of the projectile.The question I have is, is it significant? I can thinkthe most useful way to measure it would be to measure the efficiency of the revolver barrel.

To calculate that one needs to know what the energy is at exit from the cylinder.Subtract that energy from the energy at the muzzle of the revolver and we get the actual change in energy resulting from transit in barrel. Then if one measures the muzzle energy from a barrel which lengthis equal to cylinder length + revolver barrel length, he can subtract the cylinder energy and compare the final energy changes. By dividing this figure into the revolver barrel's change, the ratiowould reflect the efficiency as a consequence of gas spillage at the cylinder/barrel junction. So if the change in muzzle energy of the revolver were identical to that of the solid barrel, the efficiency would be 100%.

The efficiency of the revolver barrel does indeed interest me. I hoped some one might know something whichwould help to determine that.

Sounds like alot of fun. I'd like one myself, but I'd like to have so many other things that it'll have to wait. Lee, I think, has taken 2 deer with cap and ball revolver. Maybe not BOOM-flop but definitely crack-flop.

no names on the barrel at all

Pull the cylinder out and check the front face for markings. My replica cylinder has a marking that looks like a badge on the one side of the face of the cylinder and directly across from it a star like marking with the letters PN under it. I believe they may be italian proof markings. The original cylinder was so badly rusted I doubt I could see any if there were any. I doubt an original had any proof markings as they probably did not even proof those.

I have a replica also but can't remember the make. I put it together as a kit about 1977 asI remember it. Mine uses a notch in the hammer spur for a rear sight. Yes it is a trick to clean too. Used a lot of grease so it wouldn't chain fire.
I haven't even looked at it in a couple years. I think I will to see what markings are on it.

Al

i am almost positive that is an elli pietta import. to my knowledge, they are the only company that makes this gun. it is called the "cattleman's carbine." cabelas sells them. my cousin has one . . . they are fun to shoot. if you see quite a few proof and import marks, then it is a pietta import

remington made this gun as well. Im sure this is a replica because it looks too new too be a org.