Early rifle: >long range >slow rate of fire Revolver >short

A lever action Winchester wouldn't have had a much slower rate of fire than a revolver. The primary advantage of revolvers was ease of carry and concealment.

File: MP419-CimRevCarbine-18-45LC.jpg (17KB, 600x250px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 600x250px

>>3125016
They did, it wasn't very good

>>3125046
Why?

File: colt_1855.jpg (25KB, 600x191px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 600x191px

But they did.
Had issues with all the chambers going off at once, but it did ok regardless. Simple fact is technology progresses far quicker than military adopts it. One metallic cartridges came around, the revolving rifle was redundant.

>>3125052
>The principal problem was that gunpowder would sometimes leak from the paper cartridges in field conditions, lodging in various recesses around the firing cylinder. Hot gas leaking from the gap between the firing cylinder and the barrel would ignite this powder, which would in turn, ignite all of the powder in the chambers waiting to be fired. This is known as a "chain fire" and was a relatively common failure with early percussion revolving firearms. When this happened with the Colt Revolving Rifle, a spray of metal would be sent forward into the left arm and hand of the user

>>3125016

They did but by the point self-contained cartridges came around (remember that revolvers began as black powder and ball weapons) lever actions allowed for a much larger bullet and more bullets in a lighter weight form. Compare a pump action 410 shotgun (5-8 rounds with a tube magazine, 20+ rounds with a box magazine) to a 410 revolver (six rounds and can't take hot loads without exploding).

Why do people still buy and use revolvers if they're literally obsolete?

>>3125154
You work with what you're comfortable with. Plus revolvers can handle much more powerful catridges and are as reliable as a pistol can be.

File: carabine-revolver-perrin-1865-militaire-cal-11mm-fr-xixe.jpg (119KB, 1040x1040px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1040x1040px

Cylinder rifles had several safety problems because of the gas leak between the chamber and the barrel, and the possibility of chain-fires when the caps were loosely fitted (according to Samuel Colt himself).

One solution to these problems was to wrap both hands around the trigger guard, which is the reason for the presence of the spur you see in >>3125046's pic. But then, it wasn't' really a carbine anymore.

Also, cavalrymen seemed to prefer short weapons. They had no problem carrying 2, 4 or 6 (!) handguns, whereas even in the Napoleonic Wars they were reluctant to carry their carbines.

>>3125154

Much easier to maintain and some people prefer how they fire.

File: woman_with_medieval_violin_by_jortog.jpg (72KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1024x682px

>>3125053
I love them. I reminds me of the many violin designs that they made before they arrived at its final form.

File: Thumb6.jpg (21KB, 400x305px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 400x305px

>>3125052
>>3125016

Ever seen what happens to a hand or arm in front of a cylinder?

File: i aint no senator's son.jpg (63KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 499x499px

>>3125154
>need

File: e1917_1.jpg (426KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

426KB, 1024x768px

Revolvers are awesome

File: 45-70-compare.jpg (30KB, 500x399px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x399px

>>3125154
Using magnum rounds in a standard magazine fed handgun makes the grip too large to handle properly unless you have giant hands.

Regular handguns win in every aspect with the exception of style points.