Cap n' Ball comparison Colt 1860 Army vs Remington 1858 Army

[45 Dragoon]

Curioushooter, "clearly"?!! Please tell us how so. I laid out the comparisons from experience in my post above but all you give is an opinion. Of course we all know about opinions so maybe you could enlighten some of us.

Mike

[armoredman]

Can I just point out that even with minor historical inaccuracies, haven't started rolling my own paper cartridges so I am still loading from flask to powder measure to chamber at the range, regardless of which one is stronger/tougher/longer lasting...I am having a damn fine time shooting what I have. I will be getting a Guns of the West 44 caliber paper cartridge maker when I can, too. In the meantime, I am taking the 1860 back to the range as soon as I can

[Ithaca Gunner]

The Remington wasn't even available during the war, from what I've read.

The Remington was available during the war. First as the Remington-Beals, Model of 1861, (adopted year, and not quite the refined gun we know as a reproduction, but very similar) and the ''New Model'' 1863, (the one we know from reproductions). The Remington was numerous for two reasons, first, it was less expensive than the Colt, second, the fire at the Colt factory which caused a lapse in production of their Army model, (but quickly recovered).

Very few enlisted Infantry carried a handgun, and most who did bring a personal handgun to war brought a small pocket size gun which was soon abandoned, traded off, sold, or sent home. The enlisted, ''sidearm'' sometimes spoken of would be the bayonet. Officers bought their own and not only carried them, but used them if the fighting was close at times, but remember, these infantry officers would already have their swords out leading their men, the revolver even in this case was the last weapon used. Some enlisted artillerymen would carry a large revolver, and there's plenty of stories to back that up, but the revolver was a cavalry weapon and certainly used as a club from time to time in close actions. The horse soldier had three weapons, (normally) a shoulder arm, best employed dismounted, a sabre, and a handgun for mounted close in fighting. Confederate General, J.E.B. Stuart was mortally wounded at Yellow Tavern in May 1864 by a revolver fired from a Union horse soldier. Yes, they were effective.

[Soundguy]

I know the richards mason conversions sold by cimaaron can be had in 38spl. I love mine. shoots nice.. and no top strap...

[bedbugbilly]

It always amazes me the squabbles that break out over "which is stronger/which is better".

People point out how the Remington was more popular because it was stronger, etc. The main reason that the Remington became popular mid-war had nothing to do with strength or better . . . it had to do with price. Clt's contracts with the government for the 1860 army was $25.00 per unit (pistol). Mid-war . . . Remington, a competitor of Colt secured contracts with the government for their revolver at $12.50 per unit (pistol) - half the price of the Colt.

People also pass along the fallacy that "extra cylinders" were carried for quick reloads in battle. They often point out as proof original revolvers having cylinders that don't match with the pistol. The reason for this is simple and is pointed out in a book written by a Wii Marine who relates his friendship with Civil War Verterans. I have the book . . bought it years ago but can't for the life of me remember the author or title . . but is was mainly in reference to the 1851 Colt Navy. In it, he relates how a veteran told him how the pistols were cleaned after a battle. A wooden bucket or similar container was filled with hot water and made soapy with lye soap. The cylinders were removed and tossed in and the pistols wer hung by the trigger guard on the edge of the bucket or container and the barrels suspended into the water. They were allowed to soak, then removed and wiped down and cleaned the best they could and reassembled. The pistols were the same model so any of the cylinders would fit any of the pistols and they often were mixed up. I have studied the Civil War for 60 years, have collected for the same amount of time and worked professionally presenting programs on the lives of the common Civil War soldier. I have yet to see on documented first person account in regards to the common practice of carrying "spare cylinders". It is documented that many partisans such as some of Mosby's Raiders carried "multiple pistols" and that is certainly believable. A Cavalry Trooper (Union) was armed with a pistol, carbine and cavalry saber. Unmounted and acting as skirmishers, the carbine was utilized because in most castes, the models they carried were capable of firing more rounds per minute than a standard infantry rifles or smoothbore musket.

While some pistols may have been brought from home and carried initially by a infantry soldier, in the Union Army regulations required that they be armed with a musket and bayonet. The first long march weeded out any extra weight that they had to carry and a pistol would be one of the first thing to be discarded. The tactics of the time required the infantry soldier to utilize the longerm and bayonet.

I have also seen many reenactors who portray Artillerymen, carrying a pistol. wasn't so. Every man on a gun crew was assigned a number and that number was responsible for a certain job . . . loading with the ram, sponging with a ram or using a screw ram, thumbing the vent, priming the pieces, standing at the limber chest to cut fuses to length as ordered for time of flight, carrying the charge from the limber chest to the member who introduced it into the bore, etc. In time battle when engaged, the job of the artilleryman ws to "serve the piece" and keep it firing. When the enemy as charging the piece or close, an artilleryman armed with a revolver wold have been too tempted to defend himself if he carried a revolver and not do his assigned task in "serving the piece". Union artilleryman were issued the 1840 Artillery Saber but many considered this saber as "extra baggage" and many years ago, I read a first-person account of one Union Artillery battery that was on the march and when they left camp one day, they moved on and on the side of the road near where they had camped the night before, all of their sabers were stuck in the ground and abandoned.

Some say the Remington made the Colt obsolete. IMHO, this is hogwash. It's a view of people living in today's throwaway society. A soldier was required to use the weapon issued to them - whether it be a Colt or a Remington - THEY BOTH SERVED THEIR INTENDED PURPOSE. And . . . they both served people well many years after the war and after the introduction of the metallic cartridges. And yes . . many of the Colts and the Remingtons were converted and both shot the same cartridges with no real issues. And talking about "obsolete" . . . Colt's best selling revolver was the 1851 Navy . . . and the Colt company was not stupid. Even after the introduction of metallic cartridge revolvers, they had piles of parts left over and they continued to offer the 1851 Navy up into the 1870s - and people purchased them and they didn't consider them obsolete. There were issues with patent rights certainly . . . but they also offered the conversions and people purchased them as well.

I have been shooting cap and ball revolvers for 60 years . . . and as much as I hate to admit it, I have way too many of them . . Colt, Remington and other makes of various models . . and they are all good revolvers. Some have plusses and some have minuses . . . but some folks like Glocks and others S & W. In the end though . . . it's pretty silly to get i to debates over "which is better and which is stronger . . . because thee will never be a definitive answer. Life is too short to let those things become an issue. If a person likes a certain make and model . . . then go for it and have fun and enjoy it . . . that's what it's all about.

[Tar Heel]

^^^^^ What he said ^^^^^^^

[Tar Heel]

When we took pictures of each other in 'nam, we always hung every available piece of ordinance, every gun, and every knife we could muster on ourselves to look ******. I suspect that in 2100 some jokers will be debating what we carried in the field in 'nam. "Well I have a photo of a recon Marine carrying an M60, 28 grenades, dynamite sticks, lasers, smoke, 9 knives, a Saw, a M16A1, and a SAA 45 Colt to go with the 1911. That must have been what they were issued." Debates will rage on about what we carried and what was best, and how many magazines we carried for each gun. Too funny! In the end, I would have carried and used ANYTHING that worked.

If the Gunny said leave it behind, you left it behind and never missed it. If the Gunny said bring two, you can bet your butt it will be very very important for your continued breathing. You brought three.The reality in 65-75 and the opinions decades later are significantly divergent. Even now I hear these bogus stories and myths about this and that decades ago in a jungle far away. If it wasn't written down and vetted by a reliable source, it's all scuttlebutt.

[sharps4590]

I just wanna see an over pressure black powder load in a percussion revolver. Waddaya use, 4f in a Walker?

[M-Tecs]

I just wanna see an over pressure black powder load in a percussion revolver. Waddaya use, 4f in a Walker?

Not a Walker but actual 4F pressures here. Actual pressure testing showns 4f not quite the bogyman mythology has it.

https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/t....128510/page-2

https://castboolits.gunloads.com/sho...4F-Blackpowder

[45 Dragoon]

Not to mention, I'm pretty sure a pocket model out sold all other models but let's not let facts get in the way . . .
The open top design is defiantly more costly to manufacture which is precisely why the top strap design is still made today. Too often what is "perceived" is regarded as something that it is not. There is no argument (only heresay and wives tales ) that the "over designed" open top Colts revolvers are superior in ergonomics and strength (how would they know otherwise?) Because all of the reproductions of such have been wrongly manufactured compared to a simpler design is a false claim that the Colt is a lesser example than the flimsy Remington. Just because the Remington can "survive" and the manufacture of a simpler design is prevalent in modern S.A. revolvers (although with very thick top straps and frames) today in no way is a statement of lesser strength or durability of the Colts design.

This thread is supposed to be a comparison of the Colt vs Remington and if what you say is contrary to "popular" belief or assumption rather than facts, you're chastised for submitting such . . . don't blame me, blame Colt for over designing his revolver!!! Sheeeesh!!!!

Mike

[Soundguy]

If open top was weak..how come no 'walker' Remington with 60 grain cylinders?

[warren5421]

If you collect tin types from the 1860's you see very few people carrying any type of powder dispensers. Most carried paper cartages if they carried any reloads. Changing cylinders was not much of an option, you ever ride a horse all fired up and try to do something that took dexterity. I have a book wrote in the 1880's or 90's with interviews of Calvary that were in the Civil War and how they used their guns, very few talked about carrying a Remington. Most liked the 1851 Navy over the Army or Remington. Remember most of the men were only 5'4"-5'6" so the 51 worked best for them. For the foot soldier the only people in the rank and file with a revolver was the drummer boy with an illegal S&W .22.

I started shooting a 1860 Army, carried by a neighbor's grandpa, in the late 1950's. I have both Colt Armies and Remington's but like the grip of the 1851 Navy. You need to get about a dozen of each and shoot them all several hundred times a week for a few months(12) to see which one fells the best in your hand, by then you will like them all or hate one design. The thumb reach is different for each. Most Civil War soldiers carried 6 in the chambers. Indian War troops had no set uniform but carried a big knife in case they could not reload, ammo load out most times was 20 rounds of rifle and 6 rounds of pistol so they would not wast ammo.

[Good Cheer]

It always amazes me the squabbles that break out over "which is stronger/which is better".

Especially when the best one is the .40 caliber 1851.

[45 Dragoon]

[QUOTE=bedbugbilly;5299058]It always amazes me the squabbles that break out over "which is stronger



Yep, but they do. . . and you can explain it till you're blue in the face so, you let them think what they want and go on. That's exactly how B.S. keeps moving on. Funny how some folks are so interested in history but they pick and choose what's important. Design be damned, "what I think is right and you can't change my mind" . . . so , there's your history . . . it's whatever gets told more than anything else.

Mike

[Tracy]

Hint: What do the names 1858 and 1863 Imply?
Hint #2: what revolver was the second most commonly purchased by the Union Army during the Civil War?

I don't know what you've read, but the Remington was widely issued during the Civil War, especially in the West.

You're right. I was thinking of another Remington product; the Zouave rifle.

[Maven]

To add to the reference to the ML Forum in post #69, Britsmoothy was using FFFFg powder, but the classification of the powder he used was actually FFFg. You can check it out yourself if you read all the posts in that thread. Hmm, FFFFg in a Colt's Walker? No thanks. In a Ruger Old Army, maybe, but FFFg works for me.

[Tracy]

To add to the reference to the ML Forum in post #69, Britsmoothy was using FFFFg powder, but the classification of the powder he used was actually FFFg. You can check it out yourself if you read all the posts in that thread. Hmm, FFFFg in a Colt's Walker? No thanks. In a Ruger Old Army, maybe, but FFFg works for me.

Yeah, I would be leery of 4F in a Walker. Weren't they known for blowing up? Modern metallurgy notwithstanding, I think I would stick with 3F in even a repro Walker.

[almar]

I use lube pills cut from lube sticks. Pour the hot beeswax and paraffin into the barrel (muzzle blocked with ear plug), let it cool and harden, push the stick out and cut perfectly sized lube pills as needed (placed over roundballs in cylinder).

boy i have to applaud ingenuity when i see it. Good thinking.

[almar]

I have both and getting rid of one over the other would be a difficult task. Maybe in my particular case i would choose my Remington, only because of its incredible accuracy with almost any load and projectile.

[derek45]

Adjusting the Colt rear sight V in the hammer is easy and straight forward.



I use a milling machine. The above works for the average user.

I carefully did this and zero'ed my 1860 Army.

Man,.....is it much more fun to shoot. I shoulda done this years ago.

I may have to change my vote LOL to the 1860

took a VAC day and goofed off all day. It was wonderful