.40 cal 1851 Navy?

[Mk42gunner]

I have been thinking, wondering really, about one of these since I saw a picture of one in one of Elmer Keith's books years ago; then I saw a post here that had pictures of one of the four Colt actually made in a museum.

I wonder why Colt didn't make any more back in the day? Not enough difference in performance from the .375 RB? As I recall he made some pretty close caliber choices with the Pattersons.

I have never liked the idea of a .44 caliber Navy, like you can get from most of the importers of Italian reproductions since they aren't at all authentic. A .40 on the other hand sounds intriguing.

One other reason is I have several .36 navies that take a .375" ball, and one lone stranger that needs a .380 to be right. I got to thinking about what would be needed, seems to me like a rebore and new rifling of the barrel and reaming of the cylinder.

I know none of this would ever pay for itself, in fact I would be money ahead to do a cartridge conversion with a barrel liner.

Thoughts?

Robert

[John Taylor]

Get a 40 caliber barrel liner. Problem is they are 5/8" in diameter. Someone sent me a picture of a Paterson Colt that looked like the barrel was replaced by cutting the old barrel off just above the cylinder pin and brazing a new barrel on.165729

[StrawHat]

From my reading, Colt did not introduce the 40 caliber 1851 because at the time he was experimenting with it, he was also designing a 44 caliber version with a different barrel style. The introduction of the "Silver steel" made the 44 caliber version possible so, they went with it and the Colt 1860 was introduced. The 40, while a good idea, would not have fared as well as the 44 especially with military contracts.

Kevin

[Mk42gunner]

Get a 40 caliber barrel liner. Problem is they are 5/8" in diameter. Someone sent me a picture of a Paterson Colt that looked like the barrel was replaced by cutting the old barrel off just above the cylinder pin and brazing a new barrel on.165729
John, The barrel liner makes more sense than setting up a rifling bench for a one time use.

I'll probably never do it anyway; just something about oddball guns that sticks in my mind and I occasionally think about them.

From my reading, Colt did not introduce the 40 caliber 1851 because at the time he was experimenting with it, he was also designing a 44 caliber version with a different barrel style. The introduction of the "Silver steel" made the 44 caliber version possible so, they went with it and the Colt 1860 was introduced. The 40, while a good idea, would not have fared as well as the 44 especially with military contracts.

Kevin
Kevin,
Better steel allowing an even more powerful revolver (the 1860 Army) on the same frame sounds even more likely.

I think we tend to forget just how much and how fast technology was advancing in the middle of the nineteenth century. If you think about it they went from single shot percussion muzzle loaders to widespread use of centerfire repeaters in the span of forty years.

Robert

[StrawHat]

Consider if Allyn had perfected the Trapdoor before the end of the war instead of just after it ended. A single shot rifle firing a 58 caliber rimfire cartridge.

Kevin

[Wayne Smith]

Consider if Allyn had perfected the Trapdoor before the end of the war instead of just after it ended. A single shot rifle firing a 58 caliber rimfire cartridge.

Kevin
That's exactly what the original Trapdoor was! Then 50-70, and then the Army went with the 45 caliber.