C&B Revolvers. . .Which One?

[Bigslug]

I have this strange recurring itch that hasn't been scratched.

Seems there's this odd debate going on in my head between a '51 Navy and a '60 Army. I thought I'd ask the assembled multitudes to weigh in with their opinions on the merits, technical and otherwise.

The '58 Remington has an outside shot, but really, seems to "modern" with its solid frame for the itch to truly be satisfied. The '75 cartridge version has a shot, but not the purpose of the current exercise.

If you have a love for any of these or their close relatives, please chime in. :drinks:

[tashaner1123]

I have them all. For a first C&B Revolver, you can't go wrong with a steel 1851 Navy. 36 Caliber, one of the best balanced of them all. The 1860 Army is a good looking one as well, 44 caliber. You really can't go wrong with either. Check out YouTube and Duelist1954 - he has lots to say on the subject.

[trails4u]

I have several .36 Navy pistols and also have a '58 Remington. I like them both....they have different good and bad qualities about them. Ease of cleaning, sight picture, history, nostalgia, etc., etc.,.... Once you have one, you'll eventually have many. Or you could just start buying Colt Walkers, and then you might end up with a few of those as well. :)

[arcticap]

1st. I'm a Remington fan all of the way simply because the cylinders are made to be swapped out in no time flat.
You can buy extras, load them on a loading press and have them ready to go with only needing to keep the cylinder pin lubed.
Some don't like the Remington grip and complain about interference with the trigger guard which is the trade off.
I shoot with 2 hands so I don't care.
Plus there's a Remington target model with a rear adjustable sight.
And now Dixie sells a Pietta Remington with a slightly larger grip frame that allows more room for guys with larger hands.
Remingtons do not have nearly as many cap jam problems as the Colts do.

2nd. The '60 Army has sexy lines and a round barrel.
It also has a ratcheting loading lever and was originally made in .44 so it's closer to being true to the original.
The grip is more suited for traditional one handed shooting.
It will shoot high and the sights [hammer notch] will need to be adjusted

3rd. The '51 is often said to have a slightly sloppier action than the '60 due to having more cylinder play.
That may be the result of enlarging what was originally a .36 frame and reproducing it as a .44 for the reproduction models.
But some folks like the '51 grip and octagon barrel better, and that's their choice.

Both the Remington and the '51 are also made in .36 if that's the '51 Colt that you're after and not the .44.
The Pietta .36 Remington holds more powder and is built on the same .44 Remington frame so it's heavier but more potent.

But all of the Uberti Colts are known for possibly needing some work done right out of the box due to their short arbor design flaw.
That's why it's hard to beat a Pietta as being the best bang for the buck.
If money isn't an object than disregard the need for fine tuning and make your informed choice.

Cabela's offers some of the best prices, but Old South Firearms sells Traditions Piettas that come with the Traditions 1 year warranty
at very competitive prices depending on their stock and which models are being discounted which frequently changes.
Not trying to offend anyone, but we all have our biases and pocket books to consider. :wink:

[GhostHawk]

I just never cared for the Navy style. Prefered a solid frame gun so I went with the Remington in .36 with adjustable sights. Still have it, don't shoot it. I'm lazy, black powder is too much work. Have considered looking for a conversion cylinder for it.

If you can find those round red plastic caps, it makes a terrific cap gun. :)

[Bigslug]

Arcticap - lotta good intel there. Thanks!

The Hickockian connection of the .36 Navy has a lot of appeal, as does the blue/gray nature of the '60. Probably gonna have to start wrapping my fist around guns to see what moves me.

Anybody ever take game or do any milk jug/wet newspaper science with these things?

[LAGS]

I bought a Colt Second Generation 1851 Navy .36 with the square back trigger guard , brand new back in the 70s.
I still have not fired it.
I like the gun , but the grips and trigger guard are just too small for my hand.
My finger barely fit in the guard , and the square back guard digs into my other finger.
So that is something you need to check before you make a decision.

[pietro]

The Hickockian connection of the .36 Navy has a lot of appeal, as does the blue/gray nature of the '60.

Probably gonna have to start wrapping my fist around guns to see what moves me.





FWIW:

A Colt 1860 model (and it's clones) have a gripframe that's larger/longer (downward) than the Colt 1851's do - which most folks find more comfortable to shoot.

A Model 1860 (and it's variations) have round barrels with a sleeker frame design to house the loading ram.

A Model 1851 have octagon barrels and a squared-off frame housing the loading ram.


Having owned a number of different C&B revolvers over the years, I found that a Pietta will give you the most value (in shooting) for your dollars than the others.


Here are most of the various configs:

https://dygtyjqp7pi0m.cloudfront.net/i/28542/24910090_2.jpg?v=8D39E070FB7B7F0


I am lately enamored of the more petite C&B revolvers, and have chosen a 5-shot .36 Colt (type) Model 1862 Pocket (below, compared to an 1860)).


https://v6q9s5t8.ssl.hwcdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/1-117-696x427.jpg


I shoot mine all day, lubing via Crisco lard atop the loaded bullet - which, while sloppy, makes cleanup a snap.



.

[Beagle333]

While I own Navies (.36 and .44) and a Remmie, I must say the 1860 .44 wins my vote easily as my favorite.

[ofitg]

Arcticap - lotta good intel there. Thanks!

The Hickockian connection of the .36 Navy has a lot of appeal, as does the blue/gray nature of the '60. Probably gonna have to start wrapping my fist around guns to see what moves me.

Anybody ever take game or do any milk jug/wet newspaper science with these things?

Ed Sanow published some gelatin test data back in 1998 - his "One Shot Stop" values were calculated, based upon the gelatin test data, so you might take the "One Shot Stop" values with a grain of salt....

---------------------------------------------------------------------

https://i.imgur.com/rwukmui.gif

[MostlyLeverGuns]

I've got most of the 'standards', an 1847 Dragoon, 1860 Colt .44, 1851's in .44 and .36, the little 5 shot .36, a little 5-shot .31 and an 1858 Reminton .44. All Italian clones of course. The best 'feeling' of the bunch in my hands are the 1851's followed by the 1860's. While I like the mechanics and solid frame of the 1858 Remington, I just can't reach the the hammer to cock the Remington with one-hand as easily as the 1851's and 1860's, the Remington just lacks that 'feel'. On 'MY LIST' is the 1861 Colt .36, it just looks good. If I had to choose, an 1861 or 1851 Colt's (clone) in .36 would be my choice for a first fun C+B revolver. Uberti or Pietta both are well-made, Uberti might have a very slight edge, though the importer can make a difference, Cimarron, Taylor's...

[Bent Ramrod]

The most user-friendly, IME, is the 1860 Army. Easier to load, with better rammer leverage, easier to cap with fingers, if you have to pinch the caps slightly, and the big cylinder arbor holds enough grease to keep the thing running for 60 shots or so. The one I had also shed busted caps better than some of the other designs. A friend with a 51 Navy seems to get a cap fragment down under the hammer at least once every range session. Having to take a loaded, capped cylinder off a disassembled gun to clear it, with greasy hands, could be a safety problem.

Colt was the only manufacturer who studied the gas flow out of the front of the chambers into the barrel, and tried to minimize the driving of fouling back into the cylinder axle. He got a patent for it (I forget the number).

When I go out cap and ball shooting, I want to keep shooting until I run out of something: caps, balls, powder or targets. The cleanup is the same, whether one shot of 100 are fired. After ten cylinders full, I pop out the wedge, wipe the arbor with a damp cloth, regrease, reassemble, and fire some more. After the wipe, it’s maybe 3-4 cylinders before things get draggy again, but another wipe and grease and things keep going.

A friend with a Remington was doing good to get four cylinders full before things started gunking up. That skinny axle and tiny hole in the cylinder doesn’t hold much lubricant, so the wipe and grease was much less effective.

I just plink with the things, so I see no significant difference in accuracy between the open top and solid frame revolvers.

All bets are off, of course, if you think a given style is Cool. The Heart wants what the Heart wants. :mrgreen:

[LAGS]

My Second Generation Colt was from what I hear made by an Off Shore Company , but I can't remember which one.
It is very well made compared to some of the recent imports that I have seen.
But now the Colt has a Third generation made in the 80's but I don't know it was the same manufacture.

[BlackPowderLove]

The Navy is a nice balanced pistol and shoots well. .36 is a nice little load for shooting and inexpensive. I really like my Army though in .44 It is a shooter and big enough to do some hunting with as well.

[one-eyed fat man]

I have a 2nd generation Colt 1851 Navy, an Uberti 1860 Army and a Euroarms Remington 1858 New Army.

The Remington clone is .44 caliber, has the nicest sight picture and no cap troubles. it will shoot round balls and conicals, but will foul out faster than the Colts.

The 1860 Army is the sleekest looking and the Army grip frame is the best feeling of the bunch. Nominally .44 caliber, it takes .454 diameter bullets as opposed to .451 for the Remington.

The Colt Navy is the fastest handling, lower recoil of the .36 caliber a major factor. (As a kid I wondered if sailors were easier to kill.)

Most of the cap troubles can be eliminated by pointing the barrels straight up when cocking the Colts. Any cap remnants are then more likely to fall clear rather than causing misfires getting jammed between the hammer and the frame

The Remington is almost perfect with a six o'clock hold on a 25 yard rapid fire pistol target.

Both Colts do indeed shoot high at 25 yards, however, they are hit the point of aim at a 100. Really useful when you challenge your buddy with his modern plastic pistol to ringing the 100 meter gong.

[Hickok]

I have Navies, Remmies, but my favorite is the Colt 1860 Army. When I pick it up, it just feels right!

HINT, if you want to make a new front sight so you can file it down and zero at closer range, get a brass door key, or any door or car key, and start filing, cutting and grinding it down.

[1Hawkeye]

Any of the three will do just fine. I would also recommend any made by pietta because of their quality and value. The only thing to remember is you don't want one with a brass frame cause the frame won't hold up to much use.

[dondiego]

You are going to need one of each. Start with the one on sale.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

I've got several.....hard to chose between the '51 Navy and the '60 Army. I'm pretty sure it won't matter which one you start out with -- you'll probably sooner than later wind up with both!

No one seems to have specifically mentioned the 1861 Navy, which is still "period authentic" and which has the lines of the Army with the Navy caliber. I think it's my favorite.

And then, there's the pistol that never was, the .44 Cal. '51 Navy as made by Pietta. For those who like the .44 Cal., but admire the lines and balance of the old Navy model.

DG

[RED BEAR]

I would say its just a matter of personal preference. I think the 1851's just plain look and feel better in my hand and i just love the little sheriff's model. And this is just a personal thing i don't like the looks on the 1860. I had a rogers and spencer full frame and it just felt clumsy in my hand. I have never really liked large guns for me the smaller the better. But this is just a personal preference.

[Good Cheer]

Always preferred the best pointing of the lot, the .36 caliber 1851, until John Taylor rebored one to .40.
239155

[Fly]

I have them all from the .36 s to the Dragoon. IMOHOP the 58 remy is what I would carry in battle if I could
only choose one. They are the most reliable. The colts fit your hand best & point of aim is best. But Colts have
cap jams much more often but can be modified to help that. Design of having to pull the front of the pistol off
to remove cylinder not good. Nothing holding it on but a wedge sucks. Remey is a one peace frame the only
sliding the cylinder rod forward removes the cylinder. I love them both but Remy would be my first choice. You
will buy another anyway sooner or later(wink).

Fly

[RogerDat]

Another for the Remington. 1858 Remington "New Army" in .44 caliber can be had in shorter barrel style, longer 14.5 inch or target model with adjustable sights. Swapping cylinders and stronger full frame are attractive.

After that I would consider something smaller in .36 caliber. Or the Walker for the larger charge capacity.

In the end I do think feel in hand may be the best deciding factor as it is doubtful the C & B is going to commonly be a SD weapon where rapid (somewhat) reloads will matter. If hunting is a goal it could be the higher velocity of the Walker might be attractive. Again reload speed doesn't matter. Myself I liked the full framing and engineering of the Remington, besides Eastwood made them look really cool in Pale Rider. Of course he also made the Walker look good in Jose Wales so there is that to consider.

[bob208]

my first was a 1858 Remington .44. along the way I have had most of the others. a 1858 Remington will be the last I will sell. I would say if just getting started a Remington would be the easiest to learn to shoot and care for.

[Walks]

I shot a 1851 .44 replica & a 1860 Army for my first year in SASS. Replaced the 1851 .44 with a 1860 Army.
Switched to Colt .44spl Smokeless.

Later on I bought a pair of 1858 Remington .44's for Sidematches.

For shooting in Competition, I'd go with the Remingtons.
For fun and balance the Colt 1860 Clone is FUN. Easy to handle Cap problems when not shooting in Competition.

[arcticap]

There's a lot of good info. posted in this thread.
It probably took me a couple of years of reading threads by experienced C&B shooters before I was able to become more
familiar with all of the different models and their quirks.
A couple of things that I decided before purchasing one was:

1. I did not want to deal with cap jams if possible.
2. I did not want to deal with gun smithing if possible.
3. I did not want to load on the frame if possible because it's slow and can get tedious.
I wanted to maximize having fun firing the gun and then be able to get on with cleaning it.

But before I even went and bought a Remington, I bought a nice loading press first.
So I never even loaded a cylinder on the frame.
And then made sure to obtain some extra cylinders.

Since the cylinder is getting removed for loading off the frame anyway, then that provides easy opportunity to lube the
cylinder pin which is the major drawback of the Remington.

I measure the powder charges at home and put them into vials, load 3 cylinders, go to the range and fire them off,
reload 3 more cylinders, lube the pin and then fire 3 more.

Even doing it as efficiently as possible, if I fire 50 - 60 shots and it takes 2-3 hours, I still need to go home
and clean the gun.

So I'd rather not waste a lot of time measuring out powder and ramming balls while at the range.
With the loading press, I can probably load 3 cylinders as fast off the frame as someone else can load one cylinder on the frame without a press.
A loading press can be home made or cost anywhere from $35 - $100 or so.

And that's without needing to deal with any gun smithing problems, cap jams, wedges and stuff like that.
The choices are all a trade off as far as which model and how much shooting a person wants to do.

It's a whole different scenario if a person is able to shoot in their own back yard and take their time loading and dealing with issues that can crop up.
For me, the range is only a 15 - 20 minute drive.
But if someone has to drive farther to go shooting, and deal with a slow loading & shooting process, then that all needs to be considered,
how many shots that you can fit into your schedule including range & driving & cleaning time.

The way I looked at it, the choice of which gun to buy was pretty much already made up for me.
It was either the Remington, Ruger or Rogers & Spencer.
I started off with the Remington target model and haven't looked back.
Some guys love their Dragoon, the Walker, '60 or '51, it doesn't matter.
Because they enjoy what suits them, their hand size, their needs, their lifestyle, their range situation and knowledge base.

If this post can help someone else down the road then it's time well spent.
If I had to decide overnight and didn't know one model from the other, then it would still take me a couple of years to decide. ;-)

[rfd]

IMHO, the best value in a quality percussion revolver is the .36 pietta '51 navy IRON frame.

https://i.imgur.com/NbgTjky.jpg

[pietro]

.

Oh, YEAH ! !

Stay away from brass framed C&B revolvers !

.

[Gtek]

I probably have a couple of each and I still can't make up my mind! Good advise on steel frame, then you will figure out how undersized the cylinders usually are and how even a brand new one is never perfect in spec or timing. Then you start buying spare parts and learning how to time and fit, then you see cheap ones and know you can save them, and then------------------haven't got there yet.

[TheOutlawKid]

1861 navy or any .36 cal...u can shoot roundball or a 140 grain kaido conical if u want more punch thats similar to shooting a .44 cal, im a huge fan of the navy caliber..i feel its very underrated. I shoot a custom conical thats got large lube grooves...weighs 130 grains and shoots as accurate as a roundball.

[MostlyLeverGuns]

Army 44 vs Navy 36 - somewhere I saw/read/remember that the Army had 44's because they had the need to slow down/stop horses, cavalry and such. The Navy revolvers were .36 because 'only men' were normally encountered for ship boarding and ship defense. The 1861 Navy kinda combines the grace of the 1860 Army with the handiness of the 1851 Navy. Shooting them is the only true way to figure the best for your hands, one of each is a good start.

[Buzzard II]

I prefer Uberti guns, but that is my preference. My FIRST would be the 1851 Navy. After that, well, a little is good, a lot is better and too many is just enough. I would also stay away from brass frame guns, far away.

[Tom W.]

Years ago I had a Remington and my buddy had a '60 Army brass framed. His looked better, but mine shot better, maybe because I was used to it.
One cold rainy day when I was home I got a phone call. My buddy said that he'd shot his foot off.
What had happened was he was in his back yard shooting in the drizzle and somehow brought the revolver past the top of his foot. We called the Hospital and I drove him down there. The bullet left a crescent at the end of his foot, never leaving his foot, and didn't leave his sneaker.
The Sheriff's people came in and asked " Tom, did you shoot him?" I said no and they said ok and that was that.....My buddy got the bullet and made it into a necklace that he wore for years....

[yeahbub]

I second what was said of leaving the brass frame revolvers on the dealer's shelf. The brass is soft and the frames will stretch over time and timing will become a problem, particularly with the open-frame Colt types. Even with the steel frame, the '51, '60, '61, '62 Colts all have the smaller cylinder pin in the frame, and if used hard, some few of them will get loose in the frame. Not so much the .36's, but that pin is the only thing holding the assembly together and is the weak link in the design. The Walker/Dragoon doesn't have this problem as the pin is a good bit larger and I don't recall ever hearing of this happening, but others might chime in on this. That said, I've owned an 1860 Army and an 1861 Navy, full charges with conical boolits were the order of the day and they're both tight. For strength, durability and accuracy, I vote for the Remington 1860 New Model Army, commonly known as the 1858 Remington. The Pietta's version has the most ergonomic grip/trigger guard configuration. The cylinder diameter is also larger than the Colt .44's, generally providing more clearance when turning conicals under the rammer when loading. Any of them will load a round ball, but conicals stick up a bit higher and need more frame clearance to rotate them under the rammer. Many people like to load the cylinder off the gun and you can load any boolit style you want that way, but you'll need a tool box of paraphernalia to do your loading and a place to do it. That's fine at a bulleye match or just paper punching with friends, but for walks through the woods, you'll want to look into consumable/paper cartridges containing the charge/lube wad/boolit and carry a supply in an Altoids box in your pocket along with a capper and you can load anywhere. Once you shoot a few, slip a fresh one in a chamber, ram it in, repeat. They are historically correct and were even commercially produced well into the 20th century. You can go to http://1858remington.com/discuss/index.php/topic,9898.msg167537.html#msg167537 and take a look at how it's done. Berksglh also posted a video with a quick and easy technique to produce them. Omnivore, who posts here, also has put a lot of thought into the details of their production and has been very informative.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Thanks for posting that link. Very informative.

[charlie b]

We used to shoot paper cartridges in our CB revolvers a lot when out hunting jack rabbits. But, for bench work the Rem was loaded by removing the cylinder. The colts we loaded on the pistol as removing and replacing the forward end was such a pita. I also rarely used grease over the bullets. We made sure the balls or conicals shaved a good portion of lead to seal the chamber. Never had a multiple firing.

As many have mentioned the Rem was my favorite but the grip was poor. I changed mine into a birds head and it worked much better. The colt grips were really nice. And for looks the 1860 Colt .44 was the best looking.

I do have to admit I have not shot a CB in over 20 years.

[DEVERS454]

The 1860 is nicer to load and has a blade vs bead sight. It's also a 44 which I find to be a bit more accurate. For CAS, 36s just don't knock down the steel like a 44.

Remington's are finicky about the cylinder pin. I have cut really thin grooves in one of mine and smear it with lube and it makes a difference.

I think most colt clones are a bit more fragile than Remington's.

But colts are easier to tune and get working buttery smooth.

[Good Cheer]

Another for honorable mention is the .36 caliber 1858 Remington rebored to load .41 Mag molds, making it a .41 Special shooting caseless ammunition. Not as handy as the 1851 shooting .410 round ball or an attempt at duplication history (Colt prototyped the .40 caliber 1851) but it is a fine caliber.

Need to find time to shoot more. Work can really interfere with fun.

[BlackPowderLove]

Here is my Army... LOVE this hog leg!!! I am rolling paper cartridges for it with RB. I would like to get a Johnston and Dow mold from Eras Gone to try with it.

239261

239262

[bedbugbilly]

It up to you and your personal preference.

I have been shooting '51 Navies for 55 + years and have owned a number them - for the past 15 years or so I've been using an Uberti. Nothing wrong with Pietta though - they both will shoot just fine no matter what model you get.

My preference for the Navy is because that's what I learned on - an original one. I love the balance of it and when I was a kid, took quite a few rabbits and a few tree rats as well . . plus other 4 legged critters on the farm. I have all of them however, from a Walker down to a '49. I have a Remington Navy - don't shoot it as much as the Colt clone but it is a good shooting revolver. The advantage of the Remington is that you can quickly drop the cylinder out if need be. Some like the Remmy for the top strap - but the '51 Navy was in production from the inception until well in to the time when cartridge guns were being made - one of Colt's most popular handguns.

If you're not used to shooting C & B, just be advised that most will shoot high - it's not like shooting a SA/DA with adjustable sights. The '51 Navies that I have changed the front sights on - with a taller sight to top POI - all have been post sights - basically brass rod - and it's a fairly easy job to change one and make a new sight out of a piece of brass uncoated brazing rod. I much prefer shooting SA and you soon "learn" your revolver - how it shoots and where you need to aim - don't get discouraged as the whole process is a lot of fun.

whatever you decide on - enjoy it and have fun.

I have no dog in any of this - but round balls shoot just fine - if you decide to really "get in to it" and want to shoot original style conicals - either .36 or .44 - take a look atet the molds from Eras Gone. I recently bought one of the .36 Colt Cartridge molds and one of the .44 Johnson and Dow style - have some cast up but have to wait until I'm back in MI to see how they shoot.

[Bigslug]

No one seems to have specifically mentioned the 1861 Navy, which is still "period authentic" and which has the lines of the Army with the Navy caliber. I think it's my favorite.


Would it be correct to say that the '61 Navy is then identical to the '60 Army in all respects but caliber?

[Der Gebirgsjager]

No -- it's smaller overall. More like the '51 Navy in size.

[Good Cheer]

The '61 frame, cylinder and barrel sub-assemblies are scaled down from the '60.
I cannot speak to how faithfully today's manufacturers are holding to Colt's patterns.
On the 1858's there's been a bit fudgery committed.
My 1970's vintage Navy Arms 1861 is a lean mean shootin' machine but I've never put a set of mic's of it next to an original Colt.

[Bigslug]

The '61 frame, cylinder and barrel sub-assemblies are scaled down from the '60.
I cannot speak to how faithfully today's manufacturers are holding to Colt's patterns.
On the 1858's there's been a bit fudgery committed.
My 1970's vintage Navy Arms 1861 is a lean mean shootin' machine but I've never put a set of mic's of it next to an original Colt.

Hmmmmmm. . .how about the '61's grip? Also scaled down from the '60, or that larger, roomier size?

[Der Gebirgsjager]

239328
Click to enlarge

Same size as the '51. Here's mine. You can tell I like it, because it's been used a lot. Don't tell me it looks like it's loaded -- yes, it is. If you want the bigger grip you'd do better with the '60 Army.

[1Hawkeye]

Ok guys we gotta quit this now cause I'm starting to look at the pietta's on the cabela's website and they have all three at my local one. Lead us not into temptation [smilie=b:

[Pigboat]

Ok guys we gotta quit this now cause I'm starting to look at the pietta's on the cabela's website and they have all three at my local one. Lead us not into temptation [smilie=b:

I always enjoy helping others spend their money :smile: Midway has several Uberti's on sale right now including the Walker

[Markopolo]

Yep to the above.. we have them all, navy’s, army’s 36 cal through 44cal dragoon. My personal favorite is the steel frame Pietta 44 with a short barrel. The short one is convenient to carry, and I will be getting one of them conversion cylinder’s for that one in particular to shoot 45LC. I am pretty sure the conversion cylinder will fit in any of my Pietta 44’s. I like the way the shorty feel and how it’s balanced.. It can become a carry gun alternative for me... I do also roll my own paper cartridges as they make loading quick. A lot easier for me then removing the cylinder as my wedge’s stay tight.

239372

239370

It fits me well... I would suggest a good set of nipples from track of the wolf, or some shiny stainless ones.. no cap problems with good nipples.. the stock nipples seem to have a bigger hole and allow enough blowback to dislodge the nipples and cause the cap jamming issues folks talk about... never had that issue with the TOW better nipples installed.. fit is better, and hole is smaller.. keep a close eye on the length of the nipple though.

Marko

[BlackPowderLove]

Hmmm.... looks to be a nice day out. I need to roll up some .36s and go shoot the Navy, seeing how it must be feeling neglected with my 1860 shooting this past year.

[Wag]

I've had a slow burn (no pun intended) for a C&B revolver for a very long time. I can even see myself buying one and never shooting it. Just to hold it in my hand........

I've also done all the planning and budgeting for the revolver and the powder and the caps and the equipment and the dies to cast the round balls and...... and.........

The room is spinning around me now!

--Wag--

[Pigboat]

You guys have uncovered my itch again. After reading all the recommendations in this thread it's time to take inventory and see what I don't have :mrgreen:

[Texas by God]

I want one of the five shot .36 Police models. I've only owned two c&b revolvers- a Colt reissue 3rd model Dragoon and a brass frame "Confederate Navy"- both .44s. I was always amazed at the accuracy of these contraptions!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[1Hawkeye]

And WHO says black powder isn't a gateway drug???:kidding: I was doing the math at lunch to see what a 51 navy and a 60 army would cost me from cabela's :roll:

[Markopolo]

Don’t forget in your math more lead, more BP, and maybe a new mold??? Might as well figure a couple jewelers files to slick things up on that new gun or 2.. don’t want no hidden costs..

[Battis]

For what it's worth....I have an original Remington New Model 1858 .44 that came with a spare Pietta cylinder that fits perfectly. My Pietta 1860 Army .44 is one of the smoothest, best handling revolvers that I own. Uberti's are great guns, too, maybe a little more "finished" than Piettas. Since most of the C&B guns need some degree of fine tuning right out of the box, don't overlook used cap and ball revolvers, as long as they weren't abused. Colt 2nd Generation revolvers are, in my opinion, very authentic, and the 3rd Generation Colts are very purty (though the 3rds aren't considered "real" Colts, even though Uberti had a hand in both). High Standard made some great repros - again, I'm pretty sure Uberti was involved. Brass framed revolvers are not authentic unless they're a Confederate copy (Spiller & Burr) - keep the charges down and they'll be fine.
My original Colt 1851 .36 and a Pietta.
The recoil shield of the Spiller & Burr is beat up (not by me).

[1Hawkeye]

Yep I figured for the molds the rest I have plenty. The only thing that is stopping me is I remember the clean up on a cap and ball.

[charlie b]

LOL, yep. It is easy. Bucket with soapy water. Disassemble completely and drop everything but the grips in there. :)

And, yes, that is what keeps me from buying a few. :)

[arcticap]

The barrel blanks used for the Pietta 1861 [.36 cal.] models are the same that they use for their 1860 .44 Colts, except with a different bore diameter.
They're heavier than the Uberti 1861 which have a slightly different barrel taper.

And the Pietta 1861 [London model] has an 8 inch barrel compared to the Uberti 1861's 7.5 inch barrel.

The Pietta 1861 London model also has a steel grip frame and trigger guard as does one of the two Pietta 5.5" Sheriff 1861 models, while
their other 5.5" Sheriff 1861 has a brass grip frame and brass trigger guard but at a lower price.

All 3 of the Pietta 1861 models are available from Dixie Gun Works.
Another interesting feature they have is that according to Dixie, they all use #11 percussion caps instead of #10's.

As a side note, quite often the Pietta .36 models can use the factory swagged .375 balls while the Uberti .36's require .380 balls.
But I'm not sure if the Pietta 1861's can also use the .375 balls or not, since the Dixie spec.'s indicate that their chamber diameter is .376.

[Texas by God]

On cleanup- I just put the barrel & cylinder in the dishwasher- works great. The frame just gets brushed off and oiled.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[1Hawkeye]

When I finished the basement I put in a slop sink just for cleaning muzzle loaders.

[Good Cheer]

The barrel blanks used for the Pietta 1861 [.36 cal.] models are the same that they use for their 1860 .44 Colts, except with a different bore diameter.
They're heavier than the Uberti 1861 which have a slightly different barrel taper.

And the Pietta 1861 [London model] has an 8 inch barrel compared to the Uberti 1861's 7.5 inch barrel.

The Pietta 1861 London model also has a steel grip frame and trigger guard as does one of the two Pietta 5.5" Sheriff 1861 models, while
their other 5.5" Sheriff 1861 has a brass grip frame and brass trigger guard but at a lower price.

All 3 of the Pietta 1861 models are available from Dixie Gun Works.
Another interesting feature they have is that according to Dixie, they all use #11 percussion caps instead of #10's.

As a side note, quite often the Pietta .36 models can use the factory swagged .375 balls while the Uberti .36's require .380 balls.
But I'm not sure if the Pietta 1861's can also use the .375 balls or not, since the Dixie spec.'s indicate that their chamber diameter is .376.

Do you by chance have the Pietta 1861?
If you do, could you measure the chamber walls at their thinnest?

[arcticap]

Do you by chance have the Pietta 1861?
If you do, could you measure the chamber walls at their thinnest?

I don't own one.
Perhaps someone else here does and can help obtain that measurement.

However, the Kirst Konverter [.38LC] gated conversion cylinder for the Pietta 1851 and 1861 are the exact same unit.
And the Howell conversion cylinder is also the same for both models.

[1Hawkeye]

Be careful about using.380" diameter balls in a 61 because you can strip out the caming surface in the barrel. I learned that the hard way.

[Safeshot]

I much prefer the Remington (.36 s and .44 s)(Steel Frames). Really like the conversion cylinders in .38 Special and .45 Colt respectively. Hollow base RN lead or hollow base wadcutter lead for the .38 Special Conversion Cylinder. About any lead bullet, of the proper size for the .45 Colt Conversion Cylinder. Much easier for me to disassemble, clean, reassemble and load the Remingtons. Remingtons are more accurate (at least for me). Just one persons opinion.

[Safeshot]

I much prefer the Remington (.36 s and .44 s)(Steel Frames). Really like the conversion cylinders in .38 Special and .45 Colt respectively. Hollow base RN lead or hollow base wadcutter lead for the .38 Special Conversion Cylinder. About any lead bullet, of the proper size for the .45 Colt Conversion Cylinder. Much easier for me to disassemble, clean, reassemble and load the Remingtons. Remingtons are more accurate (at least for me). Just one persons opinion.

[TheOutlawKid]

Articap...dixies website is a typo for the chamber size...its actually .367-.368 ,i have one. I even called them up and spoke to the gunsmith about it bcuz i was hoping i got a gun whos chambers were a couple thousandths over groove diameter. But nope...the 6 and the 7 are just switched. I had a horrible issue buying that gun from dixie, they had mailed me old stock....a pietta with a date code of 2014 with a cylinder gap of almost an 8th of an inch. I had to getna replacement bcuz i wasnt going to accept a 5 year old gun with a huge gap. The replacement was no better...they mixed and matched it with a gun date code body of 2017 but barrel from 2015 and the arbor is slanted to the right so when i look down to aim u can clearly see its pointing to the right instead of dead on straight. Although both measured the standard pietta .367-.368 chamber measurement.

[Good Cheer]

I've been making boolits for percussion revolvers since the seventies.
Favorite way is to size a boolit on the back half or two-thirds so as to have it seat into the chamber and the front of the boolit shear off like a round ball. Pietta's chambers really make for some back room tinkering

[arcticap]

Articap...dixies website is a typo for the chamber size...its actually .367-.368 ,i have one. I even called them up and spoke to the gunsmith about it bcuz i was hoping i got a gun whos chambers were a couple thousandths over groove diameter. But nope...the 6 and the 7 are just switched. I had a horrible issue buying that gun from dixie, they had mailed me old stock....a pietta with a date code of 2014 with a cylinder gap of almost an 8th of an inch. I had to getna replacement bcuz i wasnt going to accept a 5 year old gun with a huge gap. The replacement was no better...they mixed and matched it with a gun date code body of 2017 but barrel from 2015 and the arbor is slanted to the right so when i look down to aim u can clearly see its pointing to the right instead of dead on straight. Although both measured the standard pietta .367-.368 chamber measurement.

You could try Old South Firearms and see if their Traditions Pietta 1861's are any better.

[ofitg]

I've been making boolits for percussion revolvers since the seventies.
Favorite way is to size a boolit on the back half or two-thirds so as to have it seat into the chamber and the front of the boolit shear off like a round ball. Pietta's chambers really make for some back room tinkering

Good Cheer, what equipment do you use to re-size the rear half of a boolit?

< Bigslug - my apologies for the thread drift >

[Bigslug]

Getting an education to be sure. . .

I'm liking the ratchet/pawl cam system on the rammer of the '60/'61 pattern guns. Extra leverage seems like a plus.

Also like the simplicity of the '51's brass pin front sight - easy to sort out your elevation issues.

I was mostly sleeping through it this morning, but I did get a kick out of Idris Elba's double-action, swing-out cylinder, .45 Colt-firing '58 Remingtons in The Dark Tower.:roll:

[Good Cheer]

Good Cheer, what equipment do you use to re-size the rear half of a boolit?

< Bigslug - my apologies for the thread drift >

A Lyman 450 press. I just don't push them all the way down into the sizer die.

[1Hawkeye]

Whew, I made it home from the show without giving in. A dealer had a palmetto copy of a colt 1862 pocket navy for 180.00 unfired and I was able to just walk away.:smile:

[Markopolo]

Hawlkeye??? How could you?? Lol

[1Hawkeye]

Had it been a Uberti or second gen colt copy I would have picked it up but being a palmetto I just kept walkin. It seemed a little high to me for a palmetto. Up at Ft.Shenandoah during the nssa nationals most palmetto's are in the 130-150 range.

[yeahbub]

As for the clean-up/corrosion issue, I've been using American Pioneer Powder 3fg and have found that, unlike real BP, it is nicely compressible and very forgiving of a bit too much powder in the chamber. I'm not sure what the manufacturer says about compressing it a bit, but I've never had an issue with it. Clean-up is a snap with just plain water and I've never seen any evidence of corrosion, even a pistol that hasn't been cleaned in a week. Also, for those who modify modern boolits to be used in the undersize chambers, APP is not BP and lubes for smokeless present no problems. I lube my .36 conicals with Carnauba Red and they work just fine. No concrete-like encrustations in the bore or anywhere else. It doesn't tie up cylinder rotation as quickly as BP either. The one difference that is unfavorable for some folks is that velocities are somewhat less with APP, but they go through the paper just fine. YMMV. I've not heard what the possibilities are with a Dragoon or Walker with a fully charged cylinder, but maybe someone here can fill us in on that.

[Ozark mike]

The strongest is the roa next is the 1858. The most powerful is the Walker the most comfortable is the 51 and the 60 colts. I wanted the roa for a long time but settled on a 1858 clone. Had to do a little action work but is a solid shooting gun I carry it as my defender against the 2 legged critters in town and for policing the woods I carry my 45-70s

[yeahbub]

One of the models I wanted but is no longer produced is the Rogers and Spencer .44. A very strong solid frame design for its time. Thick top strap. A fellow at a BP club I once belonged to got one and customized it for bullseye shooting. Full diameter chambers, refined sights, smoothed the action. Modern revolvers would have been hard pressed to do better than what he could with it. They still show up for sale now and then, sometimes new in box.

The primo Remington to get is the one produced for a year or two by Pedersoli. Forged frames, properly dimensioned chambers, match grade barrels. Good luck finding one. They go for quite a bit. Interesting. . . I just looked at their website and those Remingtons are still there. No price, though. Sure would like one of those, but maybe it's like a Maserati - if you have to ask how much it goes for, you can't afford it. No time to look into it further. . .

[Good Cheer]

Once upon a time (1970's) there was a shooting type magazine article about the five shot .577 Webley manstopper.
If somebody started making replicas I'd probably just have to go get one.

[Ozark mike]

One of the models I wanted but is no longer produced is the Rogers and Spencer .44. A very strong solid frame design for its time. Thick top strap. A fellow at a BP club I once belonged to got one and customized it for bullseye shooting. Full diameter chambers, refined sights, smoothed the action. Modern revolvers would have been hard pressed to do better than what he could with it. They still show up for sale now and then, sometimes new in box.

The primo Remington to get is the one produced for a year or two by Pedersoli. Forged frames, properly dimensioned chambers, match grade barrels. Good luck finding one. They go for quite a bit. Interesting. . . I just looked at their website and those Remingtons are still there. No price, though. Sure would like one of those, but maybe it's like a Maserati - if you have to ask how much it goes for, you can't afford it. No time to look into it further. . .

The only thing I don't like about the Rodgers and Spencer is the cylinder pin which is the same as the roa other than that it is at the top of the list

[Good Cheer]

With the various replica versions being made of revolvers that never existed you'd think maybe someone would come out with companion pieces for folks with rifles shooting .490/.495 and .530/.535 round ball. A double action five shot using .535 round ball...
Oh yeah!:guntootsmiley:

[pakmc]

Hi bigslug, I'm orginally from Port Arthur Tx. Kin folk had a patch of marsh just out side of the city limits. (a couple of hungred areas of marsh land) I was alouded to go and shoot the C&B pistols that I had at that time.(I don't remember what models or even what calibers.) but nutria where fairly plentyful and once in a while a rabbit would jump up. every once in a while we(a friend and I ) would shoot a nutria and once we got a rabbit. all where one shot kills. once we even got two nutria's! ok, and we shot at a lot of them. after jamming up the guns with black powder we'd wash them off in a bar ditch dry them off as best we could, load them back up and go hurting some more.(All that land is now the city dump) and this was the time of Crisco over the ball in the cylinder.and yes, this was about 45-50 years ago.

[Tracy]

My overall favorite is the '58 Remington. Among the Colts, I like the 1860 Army because it feels best in my hand and also looks better to my eye than the '51 Navy.

[midland man]

i love my pair of 1851 ranger colt pistols 36 caliber as they are very nice to hold in my hand and they shoot very well!

[Hanshi]

The one I'd choose over all the others would be the 1862 Pocket Police .36 in any barrel length. This would fill all my c&b needs. I've owned the .58 Remy and the Rogers & Spencer and both were comparable to most modern revolvers in accuracy and also pretty powerful. Downside was the weight; they were too heavy for extended carry. The little 1862 PP would be IT!