What was a more valuable implement, the revolver or the rifle?

The rifle by an extremely large margin.

>>34229727
/thread

>>34229717
The revolver was a huge development in handgun technology, giving shooters the ability to make consecutive shots without reloading in a small and practical design was astounding.

>>34229717
To cavalry, seamen, and artillery crews the revolver was far more useful.

Infantry were the only people who really needed a rifle, and many of them carried a revolver on their belt anyways.

>>34229882
evidence?

>>34229899
Nigga wut

>>34229882
Yet the pistol is dwarfed by the amount of rifles in service, Rifles are more important than pistols

e.g Battle of Crete, Battle of little Bighorn

>>34229899
Not the person you were replying to and this is speculation, but here's my reasoning...

>cavalry
It's pretty difficult to shoot a long weapon like a rifle or rifle musket on horseback. You can use something like a carbine, but a rifle? Revolvers and sabres would make more sense.

>seamen
Excluding marines, it seems more viable and "comfortable" to equip yourself with shorter length weapons when on a ship due to close quarters. It's the same reason sailors or seamen used cutlasses rather than full length infantry or cavalry sabers.

>artillery
Artillery crews are busy operating their guns or mortars. If they see an ambush coming their way, it makes more sense to switch to a revolver (something smaller) to quickly defend yourself.

>infantry
Well, this is obvious. During the era of line infantry (and light infantry) tactics, having a more accurate weapon at further distances is going to be more advantageous. The majority of an infantryman's time is going to be spent using his rifle or musket rather than his sidearm. Would you rather use a rifle or revolver to engage at enemies 200+ yards away?

Smooth bore revolvers were and still are terrible.

The rifle saved firearms from being shotguns

>>34230364
Wut
The Civil War revolvers are all rifled, so are the vast majority of all others

File: clint.jpg (85KB, 680x478px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 680x478px

>>34229717
When the man with a .45 meets the man with a rifle, you said, "The man with a pistol is a dead man." Let's see if it's true.

>>34230364
I think you missed the point.
>>34230615
Well you gunna pull those pistols or whistle Dixie?

>>34229717
Neither. Logistics won the war of northern aggression.

File: 1861 WA colored litho.jpg (989KB, 1556x2100px) Image search: [Google]

989KB, 1556x2100px

>>34229882
>>34230338

Civil War reenactor (Confederate artillery) here

Revolvers were actually standard issue kit for the Washington Artillery's enlisted men when they first mustered into service in 1861. This was done under the belief that if they needed to be involved in an actual firefight, it would be in close quarters defending against an attack, for which case the revolver was the better choice.

However, in late 1861/early 1862, most of the regiment was forced to turn over their revolvers to Quartermasters for redistribution to the cavalry and officers (the Confederate Army suffered a near perpetual arms shortage).