1851 VS 1860 Thoughts?

[JesterGrin_1]

I have been kicking around the idea of getting either a 1851 or 1860 Navy. Any thoughts on these two types of revolvers?


I already have the Rolls Royce of Black Powder Revolvers. The Ruger Old Army Stainless. But was thinking of something a bit different. :bigsmyl2:

[bigted]

personally I like the 1862 navy/civilian. it is the lite shooting 36 and is terribly accurate without using a lot of lead nor powder.

if steel knockdown is required then id go with the spiffy 1860 army. both these revolvers are the same frame size and grip frame size so mixing up the grip frame that fits your hand is a can do proposition.

I have 1 of each but I cut the '60' down to a 5.5 inch barrel and the '36' came with the same 5.5 inch length. I installed the '60' grip frame complete that I found on fleabay on the 1862 and have not looked back as my hands are on the large size.

if economy is the thing then id go for either the 36 cal 1851 or 1862. if the 44 is the game of the day then by all means go with the 1860 army ... you will fall in love with either if a few mod's are done to keep em runnin free and reliable.

[StrawHat]

The "62" bigted is talking about is from Pietta and is nothing more than the 1861 Navy with a short barrel. The 1851, 1860 and the 1861 all share the same frame. The grips straps on the 36 calibers are a bit shorter than the gripstrap on the 1860. I have 60s and 61s. I really like the 60s for the fact they provide the largest caliber on the same platform. Having said that, my favorite pair of revolvers are my 1861s. I suggest you try to handle one of each and see what fits your hand the best. If you can, try to handle revolvers from Pietta and from Uberti. Uberti gripstraps are closer to the feel of the original Colts but some prefer the feel of Pietta.

[docone31]

I have a steel frame Navy in .44. I believe it is 61.
I have reshaped the grip according to Mike Belliview on his video, and reworked the trigger and rear sight. It handles much better now.
A comfortable pistol to shoot.
I have large paws, so it is a little small. My little finger is under the base of the grip.
It is a good pistol to shoot and maintain, and fun as well. Accurate, attractive, and comfortable.

[dondiego]

You'll need to buy them both to compare!..................maybe two of each.

[Hickok]

First let me say, I own both Pietta's and Uberti's and I think Uberti's are of better quality and workmanship.

With the 1861 Navy, the front sight is easier to replace and file so you can have the gun shooting to point of aim. These handguns tend to shoot high at 25 yards, as they were combat weapons and intended for a body hit from the muzzle out to 75 or 100 yards or so with a center of mass hold. For pin point aim/accuracy at 25 yards you will need to drive out the front sight blade and replace it with a taller front sight. A brass door key works perfect, as it is easy to trim and file down into the taller front sight shape. Simply peck it back int the slot in the barrel anfter shaping and file it down to zero the gun.

On the 1851, the front sight is a small brass pin/post. It can be removed, and be replaced with a piece of brassing rod and shaped and filed down to zero the gun. THe rear sight is a notch cut into the nose of the hammer on most Colt percussion handguns. You can file this notch slightly to right or left to adjust windage, if it is not too far off. Not really hard to do on either model, or you can simply have someone with a milling machine mill a dovetail into the barrel and put a dovetail sight in place. You can adjust windage by moving the front sight with this dovetail set-up.

I really prefer the 1860 .44 caliber as it has the larger Dragoon hand grip.

[pworley1]

You can't go wrong, I like the lines of the 1860 a little better.

[Omnivore]

Man, that's a tough one. You'll have to try them all and see what you like. The '51, '60 and '61 are all good, but don't forget the '62 Police (the real '62, not Pietta's cut-down '61). That cut-down '61 that they bizzarely call a '62 also looks nice, if'n you think you'd like the shorter barrel.

I have a '62 Police with a 5.5" barrel, and I like it a lot, or rather I WILL like it a lot once I get the new front sight on it. It's the pocket 31 cal frame with the rebated cylinder to make it a 36, same as the '60 Army is on a 36 frame with a rebated cylinder to make it a 44 (See what you did, Pietta; now we have to qualify our terms). I also like the '61 navy, which I have in 7.5".

Any of them are to be considered "project guns" unless you happen to get extremely lucky. There are several videos, and several articles on line that tell you how to fix some of the standard problems like POA/POI, and cap handling issues. I tend to replace the nipples right away with ones having a smaller flash hole, such as Treso or some other having the same, smaller hole size. That'll help reduce hammer blow-back and caps sticking in the hammer safety notch. There are other fixes also. Barrel to frame fit/cylinder gap issues, and loading cutout mofidication for loading conicals are among the others, and the issues vary according to the make and model.

[JesterGrin_1]

Sorry Gang. I have really been thinking about it and since I currently have the Ruger Old Army in Stainless I do not think I will purchase something of lesser quality.

But just an FYI Cabela's has the 1860 Army with extra cylinder for $199.00.

[pietro]

.

I also have an ROA, but the Colt open-top's have a certain appeal.

IMO, the choice is between:

Do you prefer a .36 cal (1851) or a .44 cal (1860), because the 1860 uses an 1851 frame that's had it's floor milled out for the larger front half of the .44 cylinder ?


Do you prefer an octagon barrel (1851), or a rounded/streamlined one (1860) ?

If you'd like to try a .36 cal, but prefer the 1860's streamlined barrel, then look around for a 1861 - which is the 1851 frame with a streamlined barrel.


I happen to have two open top .36's, a 6-shot 1851 Navy (octagon bbl), and a 5-shot 1862 Pocket Police (streamlined barrel) on the smaller-then-the-1851-frame .31 cal Model 1849 frame, milled out for the larger front half of the .36 cylinder, ala M-1860. :veryconfu :D


.

[fouronesix]

Have to agree that these type revolvers are a matter of subjective taste. While the ROA is surely strong, it really isn't a true repro of any original- kind of like comparing a FA or Ruger BH to a Colt SAA. But one obvious candidate hasn't been mentioned that may be the strongest within the true repro group- the Rem 58. I have all the basic models mentioned- but they are originals that can't (or more correctly, shouldn't) be shot. For whatever reason, my favorite is the little 49. From a strength standpoint, little doubt the Rem 58 is the strongest. For a shooter repro, I'd lean toward the Uberti Rem 58. But that's just me.

[swathdiver]

Sorry Gang. I have really been thinking about it and since I currently have the Ruger Old Army in Stainless I do not think I will purchase something of lesser quality.

Then get yourself an original C-Series 1851 Navy with the square back trigger guard or an F-Series 1860 Army. There is no comparison between holding these two and an Italian repro and I have some repros that suit me just fine. The Colt Royal Blue bluing on the Navy must be seen to be admired, it's beautiful and without comparison.

[JesterGrin_1]

But just an FYI Cabela's has the 1860 Army with extra cylinder for $199.99.

Sorry I guess it was one of those Hour sales as it went back to $249.99. It will show $199.99 on the main page of pistols but when you go to add it to the cart it goes to $249.99. I really felt like that was a bit sneaky.

[Hickok]

I have a '58 Remington and they are very good revolvers. They are ready to go right out of the box, just a little front sight filing, (mine had a nice tall front sight and made zeroing easy.) The solid top strap makes them strong and accurate. But the grip angle just doesn't compare with the "feel" of a good Colt repro such as Uberti. The Uberti's follow the original Colt backstrap/grip angle pretty close to the originals. Some other makes of repros flair the bottom of the grip out like a trumpet shape, something Sam Colt did not do on his handguns. If you pick up a Uberti Colt and another repro, you will immediately "feel" a difference. The Uberti just feels right!

I have cut down and reshaped Pietta's backstrap and grips, and it makes a big difference in how they fit my hand. Sam Colt really got it right when he designed the grip area on his revolvers, and the Uberti's are more true to his original design in this area. Just my opinion owning several revolvers in both makes. Others may not agree.

From what I read, the modern made percussion revolvers that have been been put out by COLT in recent years are of Uberti manufacture, and have been dressed up, polished and blued to the COLT company specs, and then stamped with their logo.

These revolvers can be "addictive" as you will end up owning a collection before you know it!

They are very accurate once you begin to gain experience in their use. And yes, they can fire groups just as accurate as modern revolvers @ 25 yds when "done right."

There is a learning curve. As for me, I don't like the "Crisco" over the ball on the end of the cylinder. I prefer a felt wad over the powder charge and then seat the ball. Wonder wads work great , or you can make your own from wool/felt soaked in lube.

Tight fitting cones/nipples are good, loose is bad. I like really tight cones/nipples, and then take a small file and dress them down until the caps fit nice and snug. Loose percussion caps can fall loose on firing, and cause a chain fire.

"Chain firing" has been debated and argued since these revolvers were created. I tend to agree with Sam Colt himself, in that it is caused primarily by loose caps and not fire jumping across the forward end of the cylinder and getting around a loose fitting ball or a ball not lubricated.

I had it happen once in the 1970's early in my cap and ball "learning curve", and it was definitely due to loose fitting caps, as the balls were covered with Crisco over the end of the cylinder. (Really messy, and I now only use wads over the powder.) Not something I want to repeat, kicked like a 44 mag, didn't hurt the gun, but a hard lesson learned.

Chain firing continues to be argued, but I definitely know loose caps can cause it. Thousands of rounds latter and I have never had it happen again, as I always "tune/file" my cones/nipples for a tight fit with caps.

[Hickok]

125945 Some of my "hog legs"

[warren5421]

The pistol that the Old Army is close to is the ROGERS & SPENCER REVOLVER it was out about the time the war ended. A better pistol than the Colt or Remington. Ol Top (on SASS web site) uses a pair made/imported by Euroarms. If you want a pistol that everyone will look at get a Le Mat made by Pietta, 10 shot with one being a 20ga shotgun barrel.

I have shoot cap and ball guns starting around 1958 or 59. First was a Colt 1860 Army that a neighbor’s grand-dad carried in the conflict of the 1860's. I like the 1851 Navy model best of the ones I have shot. I own several of the Colt second gen guns made in the 1970's, not the Colt sig series made in New York in the 1980's. Second gen on, Colts were made from Uberti parts finished in the states. Parts are easy to get if something breaks. Most second gen Colts seem better fitted than the Sig run.

The one Remington I like is Remington Pattern PEDERSOLI Target (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/scheda-prodotto.asp/l_en/idpr_55/pistols-remington-pattern-remington-pattern-pedersoli-target.html) it costs but will shoot very small groups if you do your part. It is 2-3 times the cost of most reproductions.

I shot SASS for many years and started with the Ruger Old Army, not a better cap and ball gun out there. Arthritis forced me to look for a gun with recoil that didn't kill my hand. I can do the 1860 Army as it recoils different than the Ruger but the .36 fills better on my hand so the Navy. Try an 1851 Navy you might be pleased with the results. The 1861 Navy is more pleasing to the eye.

One thing to remember is "Never Drop The Hammer On A Cap With Another Loaded Chamber Having No Cap On The Nipple"

[Hickok]

One thing to remember is "Never Drop The Hammer On A Cap With Another Loaded Chamber Having No Cap On The Nipple"

Amen to that!!!

[swathdiver]

I have seen original 1st generation '51 navies with the "tail". Not all tails are the same however, not even on my Pietta sixguns. We have two Griswold & Gunnison's and they point very naturally, best pointers of all my full sized sixguns but pale in comparison to my 2nd Gen C-Series Colt. Don't like the Uberti grips either, I tried. I gather it just depends on yer hands and those are the guns that fit MY hands the best. Then there's them 2nd Gen 1860 Army's...