Author Topic: Qugiley shot (Read 1878 times)

ssjohnnie · « **on:** August 16, 2009, 01:54:02 PM »

this is what happens on a rainy afternoon was wondering if anyone has made or attemped to make the Quiley shot with there BC 45/70 you know the one three shot on a bucket at a long dang way off off hand..........................

Graybeard · « **Reply #1 on:** August 16, 2009, 05:58:26 PM »

I can promise you that if anyone does at the distance shown in the movie they'll miss it three times of three and likely 100 times of 100. Buckets hit dead center don't generally tend to jump stright up in the air them flip over either. But ya gotta admit it looked good in the movie.

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #2 on:** August 17, 2009, 12:03:33 AM »

I am with Bill on this - it makes a great story. Paper patched bullets and all. It is part of the mystique of the old big bore black powder guns. A little truth and lots of exaggeration. I like the story of Indians attaching an Army Fort, then they fell back 1/2 mile to regroup - an Army Sharp Shooter stood up on the Fort wall and shot an Indian Chief at 1/2 mile ( a much bigger target than a bucket). I am fairly certain it was done (it was well documented anyway), but you got to admit it was a lot of luck involved too. If it was common, they would have shot all the Indians while they were out there, not just one. Oh, and I never heard how many tries it took. Modern guns are much more accurate as a whole and a 1/2 mile shot is not easy off hand if not darn near impossible. I have to admit they make good stories.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 17, 2009, 12:35:55 AM »

The story you are refering to was at Adobe walls Texas, the shot was made by Billy Dixon. They claim the range was 1576 yards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_%22Billy%22_Dixon

Smokin Joe · « **Reply #4 on:** August 17, 2009, 03:59:53 AM »

1538 yds by survey

billy_56081 · « **Reply #5 on:** August 17, 2009, 04:08:49 AM »

A long ways no matter what. Bad medicine!

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #6 on:** August 17, 2009, 05:36:08 AM »

As I said interesting, but like it was described; a shot of the century - not common. Then there is the 600 yard shot at a running deer with a handgun that Elmer Kieth made - and witnessed. Great stories

dpe.ahoy · « **Reply #7 on:** August 17, 2009, 01:44:58 PM »

They are great stories, but remember Elmer was shooting a wounded deer and had to take several shots to connect and bring it down. Tom Selleck actually spent time with Mike Venterino (afraid I just butchered the spelling of his last name) to learn how to shoot the Sharps rifle, made right here in Montana. Big Timber Montana still has the Sharps factory. DP

quickdtoo · « **Reply #8 on:** August 17, 2009, 02:13:07 PM »

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_11_51/ai_n15402263/

The Quigley rifle: now, for the rest of the story
Guns Magazine, Nov, 2005 by Mike Venturino

Some of the most errant nonsense pertaining to firearms I've ever read has been found on various Internet "chatrooms." There's one item, however, I can give you the straight scoop on. That is the rifle used by Tom Selleck in the 1990 movie Quigley Down Under. I've read posts on various chat rooms saying the rifle used by Selleck was an Italian-made copy, or it was actually made of aluminum, or made of rubber, or it was in .45-70 caliber.

All wrong. First, there were actually three identical rifles. Movie companies buy essential props like those rifles in threes. One to be used by the star, one to be used by the stunt double and the third in reserve in case something happens to either of the first two. The Shiloh Rifle Co. of Big Timber, Montana, built those rifles. I know that for sure. I handled all of them prior to their being shipped out to the movie company.

All American

They were built in the summer of 1989 and in July of that year Tom Selleck and the movie's producer Megan Rose visited the Shiloh facility in Big Timber. I was invited to participate in a little live firing with Selleck, and we used one of my own Shiloh rifles for that. It was in .44-77 caliber, the first in that chambering that Shiloh had built. (I wish I had hung on to it, but sold it in 1990.) The few hours spent with Selleck were memorable--especially in seeing how avid he was to do a good job in the firearms handling parts of his role. Megan Rose even supplied me with a copy of the movie's script and invited my comments. No, my name didn't make it into the movie's credits, but I do still have the check stub for the modest stipend they paid for my services. It was all great fun for me.

But back to the rifle itself. The Model 1874 Sharps Shiloh built for the movie was a custom one and incorporated features they already offered. It used their standard Number 3 buttstock with straight grip and military-style curved buttplate, but it had to be given a 15 1/4" length of pull to fit the 6'4" tall Selleck. Also, a patch box was inlaid into the stock's right side, and the initials "MQ" inlaid in gold on the receiver's right side. Barrel length was 34", configuration was full octagon, and barrel weight was Shiloh's No. 1 heavy. The rifle's forearm had a pewter tip, and a mid-range vernier tang-mounted peep sight built for Shiloh by The Riflesmith of Sheridan, Montana, was mounted to each rifle. Shiloh's No. 111 globe front sights were also fitted. The rifle's action and buttplate were color case hardened and the barrel given a blue finish. After completion, each of the rifles were slightly "antiqued" by Shiloh's custom gunsmith so as not to appear brand new in the film.

The .45-110

Now hear this. Those three rifles were not built as .45-70s. They were chambered for the longest cartridge the original Sharps Rifle Company ever put in a rifle. In olden days it was called the .45 2 7/8", meaning the caliber was .45 and the case length was 2 7/8". Today we refer to this same cartridge as the .45-110, meaning caliber .45 and 110 grains of black powder for a charge. Actually, in its original day, the .45 2 7/8" was loaded with anywhere from 90 to 120 grains of black powder. Bullet weight was usually 500 to 550 grains.

Aluminum Barrel?

None of the Quigley rifles were built of aluminum or rubber, but once movie production started one was sent back to Shiloh to be fitted with an aluminum barrel. The reason was the 13 1/2-pound rifles were so heavy that in the action sequences, where they were used as clubs, the movement was too slow to "look good" on film. And no, I don't know if it was the aluminum-barreled one that got thrown on the ground near the film's end, but certainly one of the three did.

Here's one last bit of information. Megan Rose told me when the movie production was over, Tom Selleck would get one of the rifles, she would get one and the movie's director would receive one. According to my friends at Shiloh, Tom Selleck had obtained all three rifles, and two have been sent back to the Shiloh factory for refurbishing. The "spare" didn't need refurbishing because it never got used in the making of the movie. However, it was a genuine rifle thrown on the ground towards the movie's end, and the people at Shiloh have told me Selleck said he certainly felt bad doing that to such a fine rifle.

Although I did get to handle the movie rifles, I didn't get to shoot them. However, soon alter 1990 Shiloh added a "Quigley Model" to their catalog. These rifles are identical to the movie rifles in all respects except that the initials "MQ" are not available. Also, Shiloh will chamber the "Quigley Model" in .45-70 besides the .45-110.

One of Shiloh owner's, Bob Bryan, built himself a Quigley Model in .45-110 caliber and allowed me to borrow it on two occasions. I took it to Hank Williams Jr.'s ranch for some long-range shooting at a buffalo silhouette placed at a surveyed 956 yards. Once a sight setting was found, bouncing 525-grain bullets off it was no great feat.

I borrowed the same rifle again some years later in order to obtain some chronograph data for my book Shooting Buffalo Rifles of the Old West. Loaded with 90 grains of various black powders and a 544-grain roundnose bullet, the Quigley gun clocked from about 1,325 to 1,375 fps and would hold five shots into about 2" at 100 yards. Even with a 13 1/2-pound rifle, recoil was "noticeable."

Here's one last snippet. On the day we were shooting with Tom Selleck, he noticed I always grounded the rifle's butt on my toe instead of in the dirt. He asked me why. I said that kept the butt clean and dirt didn't get ground into my shirt on firing. He told me he would do the same in the movie. If you see this fun old flick again, watch near the end when the British soldiers retreat from the ranch yard. Quigley starts to ground the rifle's butt between his feet, then stops and moves it over to his toe. People around me in the theatre the first time I saw the movie wondered why I got such a laugh out of that part.

That's the story of the Quigley rifles, as I know it.

SHILOH RIFLE MFG CO.

PO BOX 279

BIG TIMBER, MT

(406) 932-4454

WWW.SHILOHRIFLE.COM

PHOTOS: YVONNE VENTURINO

Duke used the Shiloh Quigley Rifle to bounce bullets off this buffalo silhouette at a surveyed 956 yards.
COPYRIGHT 2005 Publishers' Development Corporation
COPYRIGHT 2005 Gale Group

billy_56081 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 17, 2009, 02:24:25 PM »

Thanks for sharing that story Tim.

matthewquigley · « **Reply #10 on:** August 17, 2009, 02:48:27 PM »

i am still in awe

THANKS FOR SHARING it made my day

Sourdough · « **Reply #11 on:** August 17, 2009, 03:11:23 PM »

As for the Adobie Walls story. I have that in a book where they interviewed William (Billy) Dixon.

A couple of days earlier, Billy had been practicing shooting at the bluff Quina Parker and the rest of the Indians were standing in front of. Bat Masterson came out and noticed Billy watching the Indians. Bat Masterson then asked Billy, "Why don't you take a shot"? Billy sat down, pulled out his shooting sticks, and took the shot. Billy said the front site completely covered all the Indians. One Indian is hit in the arm, but the shock causes him to fall off the horse. At this point Quina Parker decides his medicine is bad, and calls off the attack.

It's a very interesting story, recommend everyone read it if you can find the book it is in. I can't remember the title of the book off the top of my head, I'll have to go look it up. Rog

tykempster · « **Reply #12 on:** August 17, 2009, 03:23:16 PM »

How was this "Quigley" movie shot, and how big was the bucket? I would certainly try it with my 45-70, although not a Sharps...I would also videotape it!

quickdtoo · « **Reply #13 on:** August 17, 2009, 03:42:04 PM »

Here's another Mike Venturino article: The Battle of Adobe Walls myth vs reality: the facts have been twisted over the years, but the real story is still astounding

Tim

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_6_51/ai_n13781619/

Jimbo47 · « **Reply #14 on:** August 17, 2009, 04:50:28 PM »

Thanks for the link Tim.

Kinda puts things into perspective of how hostile the land was back in the late 1800's.

My ancestors landed in Texas, at Galveston Island, after the long ship voyage from Poland, and made the trek by foot and wagon to settle east of San Antonio in 1850.

There had to been some interesting times back then, with Indians and outlaws still roaming the country side.

Chas. · « **Reply #15 on:** August 17, 2009, 05:27:59 PM »

This was discussed on another forum a while back. If you make some assumptions about the speed of a quarter-horse, and count the seconds after Whitey(?) picked up the bucket, it was calculated at about 675 yds.-not good odds of hitting that bucket 3 times. What's more movie-esque is the newspaper ad that Quigley sent Marston with 3 shots that you could cover with a soda can. And it had the words "900 yards" penciled on it.

mauser98us · « **Reply #16 on:** August 17, 2009, 05:51:58 PM »

One of those Quigley rifles was at the NRA convention in Phoenix this year. I beleive it resides in the NRA gun collection now, I did take a pic of it with my cam phone but it did not come out too well. I did get a good pic of Dirty Harry's Model 29 tho.

Oldshooter · « **Reply #17 on:** August 17, 2009, 05:53:11 PM »

Quote from: quickdtoo on August 17, 2009, 03:42:04 PM

Here's another Mike Venturino article: The Battle of Adobe Walls myth vs reality: the facts have been twisted over the years, but the real story is still astounding

Tim

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_6_51/ai_n13781619/

Good read, thanks Tim

Sourdough · « **Reply #18 on:** August 17, 2009, 07:54:08 PM »

Yea Tim thanks for posting that.

The book I have also relates how some guys tried to duplicate Billy Dixon's shot. They went to the location, put up life size targets, and made a lots of smoke. I remember there was controversy over the distance. Also about the quality of the Black Powder they were using. They said that todays Black Powder lacks the quality, and consistency of the English powder used by the Buffalo Hunters. The purity of the ingredients used in making Black Powder today, is not as good as the products made back during the mid 1800s.

Graybeard · « **Reply #19 on:** August 17, 2009, 11:14:12 PM »

I often question the accuracy of Venturino's articles. I used to enjoy his writing but of late it seems a huge bore to me. I've about given up on reading him and normally just skip right on past his articles now.

I'm pretty sure that a good long while back the NRA did an interview with Selleck and he said he purchased that rifle personally for use in the movie. Dunno how accurate that was either however but that's how I recall the NRA report on it in the interview with him. I'm not positive of it but I think he donated it to the NRA. Seems this was back in the time frame when fat rossie was on his case so heavy.

lonewolf5348 · « **Reply #20 on:** August 18, 2009, 12:37:02 AM »

Tim:Good read thanks for sharing

Oldshooter · « **Reply #21 on:** August 18, 2009, 05:12:00 AM »

Quote

The purity of the ingredients used in making Black Powder today, is not as good as the products made back during the mid 1800s.

Now that to me is amazing, you'd think it would have improved! but maybe it did they just call it something else..smokeless!

petemi · « **Reply #22 on:** August 19, 2009, 03:35:42 AM »

These stories just reinforce my faith in big, fat, slow bullets at long range. That's why my .45-70 Handi is always handy. Every hunter/shooter should read "Forty Years With the .45-70" (revised) by Paul A. Matthews. ISBN: 0-935632-84-0

Pete