One of the rarest models of LeMat grapeshot revolver is this, the “Baby” LeMat. This is a substantially smaller gun than the normal LeMat, although it retains a 9-shot cylinder and a central barrel. In the Baby, however, the cylinder is in .32 caliber (rather than the standard .42) and the central barrel is .41 caliber instead of .63 (and in this specific pistol, the central barrel is rifled, where they are normally smoothbore).
These Baby LeMat revolvers were made under contract for the Confederate Navy, although production was very slow, and the contract was cancelled when even the first shipment of guns have not been receiver many months after it was scheduled. In total, only 100 of the guns were manufactured, and these were inspected and delivered to a Confederate representative in London shortly after the contract was revoked (the CSA agreed to take those guns which had been finished at that point).
Interestingly, I found that the Baby LeMat handles quite well. The standard LeMat is a very heavy and poorly balanced handgun (in my opinion), but the reduced size and weigh of the Baby has an effect on its handling out of proportion to the measurable difference. Perhaps if this had been the standard model for the gun, they would have been substantially more popular on the open market…
I immediately noticed that the Julia Auction sign was missing from the background on this video (perhaps an OOPS! moment?) but such a logo/watermark would not be too difficult to add to the video later if desired.
It must be an odd feeling disassembling something so small that’s worth nearly a hundred thousand dollars. I wonder if, on a price per pound basis, this is one of the most expensive items being auctioned? (though I think I may have stumbled upon the absolute cheapest-by-weight weapon, selling for about $2/pound, here — http://www.jamesdjulia.com/item/3033-394/ )
“Say hello to my little friend!!” BOOM! The Baby LeMat certainly looks more ergonomic than the usual large cavalry model with respect to one-handed shooting from the hip.
I’m happy that you’re using a relatively unsoiled version of the Confederate flag. The problem is that the CSA never seemed to get itself together on choosing a flag unless I’m totally wrong. The more controversial Confederate flag is a rectangular version of the square flag used by the Army of Northern Virginia. In hindsight, perhaps the White Supremacists use the “Southern Cross” because it is more jarring than the older “Stars and Bars.”
Did I mess up?
That Confederate flag is “controversial” by definition, isn’t it.
But not for me. Since I lived for a bit in South I came to better comprehension of Southern history and gained good deal of sympathy for their cause.
To back it with little piece of poetry:
http://civilwarpoetry.org/confederate/postwar/magnolia.html
The CSA (Rebels) we’re traitors to the United States. Their generals were, for th most part, graduates of West Point and served with their fellow graduates during the Mexican American War. The CSA wanted to ‘leave’ the USA (an option not permitted in the Constitution) because the wanted to maintain Slavery as part of their agrarian economic system – keeping other US citizens as chattel servants (slaves). And that was the reason behind their decision to attempt to leave ‘the Union’.
As ever the victors write the history and most people believe it.
And before you think”what a racist rube!” My great uncle fought bushwackers for the union as a corporal in merills horse.
paul hershy instead of talking about gun you want to take a stab at the south, very ignorant of the facts of why the war was fought . if you would like to increase your knowledge you should read “The South Was Right” by the Kennedy Bros
The USA (Rebels) were traitors to Great Britain. That was also “not permitted” under British law. The difference was only in who won the war.
“Say hello to my little friend!!”
Man, just imagine if these baby LeMats became common after the war and you have some ruffian luring a gentleman into a shady alleyway to rob him.
“Why yes, good sir, you have a knife. I, however, have a SHOTGUN.”
Then the wall becomes a nice 19th century version of a Jackson Pollock painting.
There is no kill like overkill. I guess a pocket shotgun with 9 pistol rounds as backup would scare the pants off any mugger.
Rare to see wheelgun with 9 chambers. It came handy during boarding and defending against boarding, I guess.
“wheelgun with 9 chambers”
With .4-something, yep. But there are .22 rim-fire revolvers with capacity equal to 9 (namely H&R Model 999)
There exist also 9-shot variant of Nagant revolver:
see photos here: https://reibert.info/threads/devjati-zarjadnyj-trexlinejnyj-revolver-sistemy-nagan.578128/
And advert here: http://www.air-gun.ru/social/readtopic/devyati_zaryadnyiy_trhlineynyiy_revolver_sistemyi_nagana
(notice that it is Pre1917Russian language, so don’t be confused by sign not existing in modern Russian)
it states that 9-shot version is very good copy.
it give following specs:
7-shot (original):
mass: 1 7/8 фунтов (1 фунт = 0,4095 kg, so it give ~0.77kg)
overall length: 5 1/4 вершок (1 вершок = 4,4cm so it give 23.1cm)
price: 30 rubles
9-shot (copy):
mass: 2 1/8 фунтов (~0.87kg)
overall length: 6 вершок (26.4cm)
price: 18 rubles
7-shot (copy):
mass: 1 фун. 75 зол (1 золотник = 4,266g thus mass ~0.73kg)
price: 15 rubles
(all data not mentioned are equal for that of 9-shot (copy))
Cartridges (100 examples):
price: 8.50 rubles
Price in what? 900 dollars? I thought Russia has rubles.
Is caliber same as original?
Linked site is in fact Ukrainian, I’m not sure why first offer is in dollars, but following are in грн i.e. hryvnia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_hryvnia
Ruger also has models with 9 chambers for .22 lr.
There exist also 9-shot .22 revolver from High Standard: Sentinel
http://unblinkingeye.com/Guns/Sentinel/sentinel.html
And smith&wesson made a 10 Rd kframe
.22lr also I think chiappa has a 12rd 22lr single action.lol
I’ve wanted one of these since I saw a full size reproduction in a Navy Arms catalogue back in the 1980’s but never had the money for one.
I have a replica LeMat and it seems to have the same wrongs as this and all others I have seen.
1: The ramming loader contacts the ball so soon after after disengaging it from the barrel clip that you get almost no leverage. It’s a very awkward movement compared to the Remington 1858 and the Colt 1851s.
2: The shotgun position of the hammer seems to be at such an angle that it sometimes takes several recockings to get it to fire the percussion cap.
I once had a chain fire from a chamber to the shotgun. Usually I fired the shotgun first, but tried once tried the chambers first. When that shotgun fired its ounce of buckshot at the same time on the first shot, it reared back and the hammer gouged out a piece of meat from the base of my thumb. That as a learning moment!
Hmmm… How about a modern version, with 9 chambers for .327 Magnum and a center barrel chambered for .45 Colt/.410 shotgun…. Yeah I’d buy it.
“Yeah I’d buy it.”
What about http://homicide.northwestern.edu/docs_fk/homicide/laws/national_firearms_act_of_1934.pdf
Which say:
The term “firearm” means a shotgun or rifle having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length, or any other weapon, except a pistol or revolver,(…)
This is case is vague, as this weapon would be at same time revolver AND shotgun, or no?
There’s an exemption for rifled barrels that can take either .410 or .45 colt. Smith and Wesson, Taurus, and Magnum Research all make .410/.45 revolvers, Rossi makes a .410/.45 revolving rifle and (if you don’t mind the pain) Bond Arms has made their 2-shot .410/.45 derringer for a number of years now. If Bond Arms can make a 2-shot break open gun in this caliber then a 1-shot gun should be an easy score.
What about 44-Shot which is shotshell version of .44-40 Winchester cartridge?
http://jefenry.com/main/The44-Shot.php
I’d buy one also.
We already ran across another French revolver used by CSA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfDPwgzbv1s
Ironically, just a few years later the French during the Franco-Prussian war were trying to buy as many revolvers from the US as they could. While France had many revolver designers and some pretty good designs, their army had neglected to acquire an official revolver in the 1860s and was still equipped with single shot pistols. Once the war started, the domestic producers didn’t have the capacity to provide even close to the required numbers of revolvers to the army.
“still equipped with single shot pistols”
Some were conversion from flint to percussion – see Modèle 1822 T bis
http://www.pistol3d.com/percussie_m1822_tbis/m1822tBis.html