WI: U.S. Army adopts M1866 and M1873 Winchester carbines for cavalry use.

Suppose the hidebound Ordnance, Infantry and Cavalry officers saw things differently at the close of the U.S. Civil War and decided to adopt, limited to Cavalry units stationed on the western frontier, the Model 1866 Winchester lever action carbine, and later the M1873. How would things be different. Would this affect the Indian Wars? Would the U.S. Army Infantry be forced to adopt a breech loading multi-shot rifle before 1892? Would there ever be a .45 Colt? Might the lightweight fast-firing lever action carbine see general use similar to the .30 Caliber M1 Carbine, but generations earlier.
 
Winchester had a prototype lever gun in 1867 in 45 centerfire caliber that wasn't produced commercially until 1876 Centennial model, for British Army trials. Iron frame, side loading port.

It was larger frame size than the 1873, but same toggle link operation, and much more powerful that the 1866 in .44 Henry Rimfire, of the 44-40 of the 1873

It used these
893_1876cartridges_1.jpg


Basically shorter versions of the 45-70, but similar power.
Colt had the patent on the 45 Colt, but could have done the reverse of Schofield, and made a long chamber that could fire the slightly shorter Colt 45

For use in the Indian Wars, and other conflicts, repeaters beat single shots.

Most soldiers on the Plains never practiced at the accuracy that the Trapdoor was theoretically capable of, so that's mostly wasted
 
The primary reason the US didn't use repeating rifles was because they had to carry everything with them and resupply was questionable at the best. Most troops IIRC never even got to practice with their weapons before going into combat because the number of rounds were so limited. With that in mind its understandable why they didn't get adopted.

That said if they did adopt winchesters, the tactical edge gain would be massive.
 
There were definitely options for repeater rifles and carbines. The Spencer Carbine, for example, saw use in the Civil War among US Cavalry units and some infantry units, pointing to a level of ubiquity of ammunition and cartridges able to be summoned for usage on the frontier.
 
Imagine Little Big Horn if Custer's men all had Winchesters. Custer having Gatling Guns couldn't have hurt either.
Well the issue was more that the Sioux were the ones who had Henry Rifles and other repeaters while Custer had single shot carbines. Add in the tactical disorganization and there really wasn't much about that battle that was up to chance to begin with.
 
Top