Classification of an "1858 Revolving Carbine"

As stated the Remington Revolving Carbine is non-restricted, although they look like an 1858 Remington handgun they have a tang sticking out of the frame were the stock is attached. Similar in appearance to the popular handgun they were produced later in 1865.
 
Thanks for both of your responses.

Why do the springs differ between the two?

I believe I saw in another thread, bollox, that these can be ordered through any establishment that already stock Uberti products.
 
Taffer said:
Why do the springs differ between the two?
Click to expand...

The mainspring of a revolver goes pretty much straight down into a slot at the front of the gripframe ....

Uberti1858revolver_zps0136a06a.jpg


The spring has a different configuration entirely in the revolving carbine, where it projects back between the stock tangs, and is bolted to the lower tang ....

Uberti_1858_RevolverCarbineschem_zps5416e21d.jpg
 
bollox said:
Any for sale in Canada? I would love one of these to go with my '58's..
Click to expand...

Go to the Stoeger Canada website and use their Dealer Locator for Uberti retailers, then check them out. If they don't have one, they can possibly order one in ....

Ubertirevolvingcarbines_zps8ee2fe2f.jpg


Every once in a while I get an urge to get one of these (in particular, the "1873 revolving carbine" chambered in .45 Colt, which is what I shoot in all my "cowboy action" firearms) .... but then I remember the time I shot one and how awkward it was .... That little spur on the bottom of the triggerquard on both these models is there for a reason - instead of holding this with your non-trigger hand out front, like any normal rifle or shotgun, you must support the carbine holding onto that spur, or you'll get potentially severe gas burns on that arm from the cylinder/barrel gap. Don't forget that this is what is happening out there every time a revolver (whether it is cap-and-ball or cartridge) gets fired!

muzzleandcylindergapflash_zps710f3c9b.jpg


(There is another, perhaps even more important, reason to keep your hand behind the cylinder face with the percussion model - what if you had a chain fire with your arm and hand out there? :eek:
 
Yowch! I wouldn't want that to happen to me, that's for sure!

There are definitely some obvious drawbacks in terms of ergonomics but it seems like a fair trade-off to have a non-restricted cap-and-ball revolver of some description you can legally take onto crown land without shelling out $1000+ for an antique!
 
Taffer said:
Yowch! I wouldn't want that to happen to me, that's for sure!

There are definitely some obvious drawbacks in terms of ergonomics but it seems like a fair trade-off to have a non-restricted cap-and-ball revolver of some description you can legally take onto crown land without shelling out $1000+ for an antique!
Click to expand...

The H Pieper carbine is a much better gun than that remington hand burner. the mexican army ordered a bunch from H pieper in belgium. H pieper also masde a revolver very simlar to the carbine the big feature that had everyone else beat was they were gas seal when the guns fired the cylinder was pushed forward closeing the cylinder to barrel gap.
The pistol was the same i just happen to have a pre 1898 Revolver made by pieper its a 8mm and its 7 shot gas seal when fired its the best made pre 1898 handgun ive seen yet better than the french 1892s and H pieper went onto build the SA styer pistols as well as others the guy was ahead of his time.
The Pieper revolver has a reboudning hammer to i assume the carbine is the same.
I would love to get the Pieper carbine. be a nice match for the revolver.
there very rare guns tho.
I love the way the gas seal works the Nagant brothers stole the idea from Hernry Pieper when he let his patent run out on the gas seal designe.
Took me years to find the revolver im sure the carbine will take as long to find.
 
I have an older 1873 in 357 magnum. It doesn't have the trigger guard spur. Sweet gun.
I'm planning to convert one of my 1873 44 magnum revolvers into a carbine, with a 20" octagon barrel and a brass grip frame and fancy walnut stock.
 
5point9straight6 said:
I have an older 1873 in 357 magnum. It doesn't have the trigger guard spur. Sweet gun.
I'm planning to convert one of my 1873 44 magnum revolvers into a carbine, with a 20" octagon barrel and a brass grip frame and fancy walnut stock.
Click to expand...

That's nice.

But don't expect the CFC to change the classification from restricted to non-restricted.

This will not happen, even if you had a gunsmith place a 30 inch barrel onto that frame.
 
All the reasons stated by GrantR along with the better in every manner lever rifles is why these revolver carbines were never a huge hit in the market at the time. But for those of us that like shooting for fun they are really something different.

In practical terms one of the Rossi 1892 clones with the 16" barrel is as compact and light and doesn't suffer from the same hand placement issue. But it doesn't have the same panache as a revolver carbine by a long shot.

The price on these is pretty good. What I'd love to see is a 10 shot version in .22LR. I'd buy one of those in a blink!
 
The 1858 carbine isn't the most practical but I think mine will be fun , I haven't shot mine yet but hope to soon . Just need some warmer weather . It is my way of playing with a cap and ball without a restricted licence .
 
I wonder why the Rossi revolving carbine is classified restricted. A friend of mine started a gun shop last year and had to send all his back because they said they screwed up and he couldn't sell them until he was licenced tosell restricted firearms.
 
It's not just the gas coming out of the front of the cylinders that you have to worry about. I found that when I put my cheek onto the stock to aim I was peppered with bits of exploding cap. You really have to hold the carbine at arms length to shoot it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom