Remington 1861 Army

tokguy

tokguy

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
94   0   0
Location
Buffalo Republic
Newest ( OK oldest actually) toy in the box.
Remington Army.
Sporting a Pietta bbl and a Pedersoli / Uberti cylinder.

It was already changed up when I got it, so purists; don't slag on me for altering it.
Manufactured in March 1864 as far as the interweb tells me of the S.N.

I've been running 454. dia balls( think it wants .457 dia) over a waxed felt wad( to eat up Chamber volume as 30 gr still lets the rammer bottom out) over 25 gr of FFg ( Swiss ) BP.
Shoots a trifle high but other than that shoots quite well.
I do grease the chambers prior to shooting BTW. Someone helpful would have suggested that from the next picture

Sadly, I'm in sight of the bottom of the BP. Has anyone used the Alliant substitute?

And a cylinder loading press is going to be happening, along with a spare cylinder, as soon as I narrow down whether it's Pedersoli or Uberti that's req'd. My cylinder has proof marks, I've just not had the time to track them down yet.Has anyone here used / purchased a press here in Canada?
I'm pleasantly surprised as it came in at about 30 % of the average cost of a comparable Colt yet has superior strength. Two 'fer!
But what a hog to pack anywhere! I can't imagine the horse pistols; e.i. Walkers and Dragoons.
Only in the movies was anyone strapping one of those on their leg, I'm guessing.
 
So that is 1858 frame with Uberti cylinder in it? Did you have to make any other adjustments in order to time it right?
 
It came all set up actually.
After doing a little surfing I discovered Pietta cylinders are 2.20 inches and Pedersoli ( and obviously Remington ) cylinders are 2.0 inches in length, that's what this one measures.
The hammer appears changed but the hand looks pretty weathered.
The Gentleman I bought it off ran 35 grains in it under rd ball. I tend to shoot mine lots so I'm going to dial it back to 25-30 grains of BP and probably only 20-25 of BP substitute.
Surprisingly affordable too.
 
Remingtons rule - Colts drool!

When my Colt-fan buddies are busy tightening screws on their "wedgies" and dealing with cap fragments jamming the action, I'm happily popping caps with my Remmies.

Enjoy!
 
Sharps '63 said:
Remingtons rule - Colts drool!

When my Colt-fan buddies are busy tightening screws on their "wedgies" and dealing with cap fragments jamming the action, I'm happily popping caps with my Remmies.

Enjoy!
Click to expand...

^Myself, I brought this up before and was soundly thrashed here for suggesting the Remington was superior to the Colt sixguns by someone who will remain nameless. ;)
 
Civil war numbers, quoted from Elmer Keith's 'Sixguns' -
" the Government purchased some 129,156 caliber .44 Army 1860 Colts and some 2,056 of the 1851 Navy model. The Government also secured some 12,000 .44 Army and 2,500 Navy Colts of private dealers throughout the country early in the war"
"In comparison, the Government purchased 115,563 .44 Remingtons and 12,251 Remingtons in .36 Navy size, plus another 4000 of both sizes from private dealers."
"While the first army contract price of .44 Colts was $25.00 each, competition with Remington soon brought the price down and the price was cut to $14.50 and later $14.00 for the Colt.
Remingtons first sale to the army brought $15.00, and the price was later lowered to $12.00, but, after the Colt (factory) fire, the price of Remingtons was raised again in1864 to $15.50"
"The gun was better designed in many ways than the Colt and with more strength where needed and better sights and a better frame and hammer arrangement. Grips were nearly as well shaped , and, had the Remington been out as long, it might well have given Colt more competition"

And I definitely agree with the last statement.
 
Brutus said:
^Myself, I brought this up before and was soundly thrashed here for suggesting the Remington was superior to the Colt sixguns by someone who will remain nameless. ;)
Click to expand...

It's pointless to debate which of the two is "better". We're hobbyists, and we need not justify our quirks and preferences. To each his/her own.
BTW, when cocking the 1860Colt, rotate your wrist outwards- and the spent cap pieces fall out, not into the action.
 
I've a 1851 Navy (Pietta)that has naturally pointability like no other.
On the other hand the Ruger Old Army does nothing for me, had one and got rid of it. Didn't feel right.
The Remington is right in the middle.
Doesn't point like a Navy (not a 1860 army fan, not as right in the hand as a Navy) but it's a vastly stronger and simpler design.
And I can afford a Remington without feeling guilty; yes even a tweaked one leaves me guilt free.
C & B Colts are overvalued, antiquated design IMO. Although if we could actually use a repro C & B like our neighbors to the south, I could put up with the idiosyncrasies of the Colt design I suppose.
But the more powerful Remington will stay in my stable for now
 
The Remingtons have never had the cachet of the "wedgie" Colts, but like other ACW designs with a top strap, the rigidity of the solid frame was mechanically superior.

I've owned several "wedgie" repros over the years, but the only one I hung onto is a 2nd gen .44 3rd Model Dragoon. It has none of the vices of the smaller Navy models.
 
@ SIGP2101
I just recently installed a Pietta "Remington spare cylinder into my original 1858 Remington 44 cal and only had to polish up the end of the cylinder to get it to slide in. Had no other adjustments to do as it timed right up. Part number A432/ST 44 from Marstar. Just used some 200 grit sand paper to do figure 8's on and finished it with a polish job with dremel.
 
Metman2 said:
It's pointless to debate which of the two is "better". We're hobbyists, and we need not justify our quirks and preferences. To each his/her own.
BTW, when cocking the 1860Colt, rotate your wrist outwards- and the spent cap pieces fall out, not into the action.
Click to expand...

Agreed they are all lots of fun to own and shoot. Myself someday I want to purchase the one Colt open top that I would keep. And Shrarp's 63 could you expand on your open top Colt experiences please? The reason I ask is that there are some rumours out there of some Colts being more reliable models or designs then others.

To add to this confusion Hickok5 once did a bit walking down the treed shooting lane with a Colt Dragoon (?) and he had to physically advance the cylinder for at least three times.
I wonder if he had the wrong size of percusson caps??

Need some informed opinions from the members here please for myself, and future referance for others too maybe?
 
Last edited:
outlan22 said:
@ SIGP2101
I just recently installed a Pietta "Remington spare cylinder into my original 1858 Remington 44 cal and only had to polish up the end of the cylinder to get it to slide in. Had no other adjustments to do as it timed right up. Part number A432/ST 44 from Marstar. Just used some 200 grit sand paper to do figure 8's on and finished it with a polish job with dremel.
Click to expand...

THANK YOU!

I have original 58 in need of few spare cylinders and one solid conversion unit in ACP. Unfortunately Marstar is sold out.
 
Brutus...rather than hijack this thread I will start another on the subject of Colt open top revolvers in which I will relate some of my experiences with the various models.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom