Remington Vs. Colt revolvers

[drache]

They were all killed by Remingtons

Frank James prefered a Remington 1875 and he died of old age

You know another guy who liked Remington? George A. Custer....

And from what I understood Frank James used to use a Colt .44 as well as a Colt Navy in .36

I know you were joking but....

Wild Bill Hickok - Shot in the back of the head with a ".45 Single Action Revolver"
"Doc" Holliday - Died in bed from complications of TB, drinking, and laudanem
Richard Francis Burton - Died of a heart attack
Ned Kelly - Hanged
Robert E Lee - Died of pneumonia



Buffalo Bill Cody, James Younger, Captain Bill Mcdonald, as well all carried Colt's

 

[89diesel]

It was in a book called "Remington Army and Navy Revolvers 1861-1888".

There was a problem with the arbor pins stretching so Remington recalled the revolvers and remade them with different arbor pins (which also required changing part of the frame).

Remington uses a floating pin. Impossible to stretch the pin, since its only attached at only one end.

 

[Short Knife Johnson]

They were all killed by Remingtons

Frank James prefered a Remington 1875 and he died of old age

That just might be because he wasn't too picky about pictures that were hung crooked in the family home.

My question would be between the two...which one is loaded? 'Cause I call dibs on that one.

 

[dingus]

Frank only used that percussion Colt till they brought in the cartridge guns then was useing a Remington 1875.
He used Colt SAAs to as did most people.
I cant see anyone that had a compleat choice of firearms not takeing a Cartridge gun over Cap and ball.
Outlaws lives depended on the guns they carried.

Keep in mind a Remington 1875 was a more expensive weapon than say a SAA Colt back when they were new.
Not near as many were made.

I ask this Question of any guy who swears his colt is the best gun ever made?

Have you held and shot a Orignal 1875 Remington Army model Revolver ?
Well Have you punk!

Anyway all kidding aside there both Great! guns.

i wouldnt have two SAAs if they were not Ex firearms.

Not as good as a S&W but there OK

 

[simulate]

1851 Colt Navy any day (of course Im biased). If they were good enough for Wild Bill Hickok, John Henry "Doc" Holliday, Richard Francis Burton, Ned Kelly, and Robert E. Lee, then they are good enough for me.

I agree, and they were only .36 calibre, enough for Hickok and the rest! It's not the size of the bullet but where it goes, according to Wild Bill.

 

[drache]

I cant see anyone that had a compleat choice of firearms not takeing a Cartridge gun over Cap and ball.

Colt had the conversion kits for their Cap and Ball revolvers to turn them into Cartridge revolvers.

Wild Bill's were cartridge 1851 Colt Navy's.

 

[dingus]

Colt had the conversion kits for their Cap and Ball revolvers to turn them into Cartridge revolvers.

Wild Bill's were cartridge 1851 Colt Navy's.

Good Point i forgot about the conversions.
I had a 1862 Colt converted to 38 RF it was a very well made fine firearm.
I sold it but i sure liked it.
It was plenty strong enough for the RF ammo it used to even tho it was open toped.

 

[Olof]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember reading somewhere that "Buffalo Bill Cody" used 1858 Remingtons and said "they never let me down". This was when he was a scout during the Indian wars.
I did read that the US Army tested a number of revolvers in around 1873 (could off a bit here). The new (then) Colt SAA in .45 Colt proved to be very reliable in firing over 200 rounds of .45 BP rounds without binding up like other SA revolvers were reported to do.

Doesn't answer the original question, so I would think it would be a matter of choice. I myself am partial to Remingtons (1858 & 1875).

 

[brooksy]

were all revolvers used by the union in the American civil war marked U.S?

 

[tula]

I prefere the colt 1860 army and 1861 navy to anything....but thats just my opinion, remys are well made too.

 

[drm3m]

The New Model 1858 Remington Army revolver is an accurate, well balanced, solidly
constructed pistol, with the ability to do a spare cylinder change rather quickly....
quite hard to beat ...IMHO.

This pattern holster was used for both the Remington and Colt Army revolver.
This particular holster is manufacturer marked; E. ###lord, Chicopee, Mass.

This is not my photo...however it does show the 44 caliber cartridge for these two revolvers.
(Thanks to the fellow that I borrowed it from...I can't remember who he was.)

David

 

[Southlander]

Historically Colt revolvers are awesome.

That said the Remington design was far superior and Colt must have agreed because the 1873 SAA design looks more like a Remmy than the old open top colt!

 

[Short Knife Johnson]

Well my opinion with gun selection of the folks of the Old West was more one of opportunity. Firearms back then were way more expensive then than now. With some exceptions. When cartridge revolvers rolled around, eople didn't just dump the cap and ball and switch to the new thing the 170's brought. A Colt. Remington, or Smith cost around $18 to $20. A Merwin Hulbert cost around $22. Could you imagine paying those prices today? Exhorbitant! You could convert your old gun for about $2.50, and use the outside lubricated rounds. Outlaws would likely steal their pistols and rifles. Sound familiar? Legitimate folk would obtain things piecemeal (bought, or won durng gambling, in lieu of payment, etc..). Which is why I don't think matched sets of pistols are overly common. Lots of photos I've seen, the subject is wearing mismatched sidearms if they were lucky enough to have two. Hey, it goes bang, most of them could be repaired in the field with what was at hand, I'll just stuff it in my belt.

 

[drache]

Well my opinion with gun selection of the folks of the Old West was more one of opportunity. Firearms back then were way more expensive then than now. With some exceptions. When cartridge revolvers rolled around, eople didn't just dump the cap and ball and switch to the new thing the 170's brought. A Colt. Remington, or Smith cost around $18 to $20. A Merwin Hulbert cost around $22. Could you imagine paying those prices today? Exhorbitant! You could convert your old gun for about $2.50, and use the outside lubricated rounds. Outlaws would likely steal their pistols and rifles. Sound familiar? Legitimate folk would obtain things piecemeal (bought, or won durng gambling, in lieu of payment, etc..). Which is why I don't think matched sets of pistols are overly common. Lots of photos I've seen, the subject is wearing mismatched sidearms if they were lucky enough to have two. Hey, it goes bang, most of them could be repaired in the field with what was at hand, I'll just stuff it in my belt.

This is true.

Just to up this further think of it this way people, a good saddle horse in those days would cost you $20-$25 (not including saddle for another $5-$10) but if you stole a horse, you were hung.

 

[Short Knife Johnson]

Well horses were very valued as a means of getting around, and one would become sentimentally attached to them as well. Just as horse owners do nowadays. I've been told the hardest thing to do is put down your horse. I'm not sure I could do it if I had one. They were also piles of money, so yeah you wold swing for stealing them, and cattle, sheep or whatever else you put your hands on that don't belong to you.

That mentality still resonates in the more wild places of North America today. Namely Montana. When I go there, I can leave my truck with all my camping gear, mountain bike, food, and whatever I bring. Leave it parked in town, and the furthest thing from my mind is that it will be disturbed when I come back. Except Bozeman I hear. Doing that here where I live is something I would never dream of.

 

[BrotherRockeye]

if you stole a horse, you were hung.

they only hung ya if they caught ya

Anybody remember Johnny West?
How come the Calvary boys had Remmy's and all the civilians had Colts?

 

[Short Knife Johnson]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember reading somewhere that "Buffalo Bill Cody" used 1858 Remingtons and said "they never let me down".

That's likely, but probably because Remington was paying him to say that. What he meant to say was "Remington drove a wagonload of money to my door... I'm not made of stone!!" William F. Cody was a glory seeker first and foremost. Not at all unlike the celebrities of today. Not to say the man didn't have skills and balls that clanked, but he always seemed to be around when there was a photographic device going off, and from all accounts regaled endlessly with crazy tales with little veracity. He wasn't the only one pulling all sorts of crazy stunts back then, just the best at spinning them into yarns for which to knit dime novels. The thing about legends, is they seem to grow with the passing of time and addition of proper fertilizer. Eventually choking out other, less spectacular legends with better substance.

Do you hear something? This weird buzzing getting louder!

 

[drm3m]

Another 44 cal. revolver that was used by the U.S.
Model 1858 Army revolver manufactured by Starr Arms Co.
Total manufactured approx. 23,000.

The gun (sort of) functioned as a double action revolver and was replaced in 1863 by a longer barrelled single action variation.

Inspector's acceptance cartouche indicating purchase by the U.S. Gouvernment.

The gun shown below is the 1863 single action Starr Army revolver.
This gun does not belong to me...I don't yet own one....I have always
admired this model....perhaps one day?

David

 

[Short Knife Johnson]

Very cool. There can't be many of those floating around.

Anyone who wants to have their minds blown when it comes to guns of the Old West must go to the Buffalo Bill Museum in Cody. They have no less than 2500 guns on display at all times, everything you can imagine, and lots that you couldn't. My favourite was the experimental Henry repeater with three magazines that were indexed around the barrel. When one ran dry, the idea was to rotate the forearm/ammo dump into postition and ready to go. It looked to hold 3 tubes of 12 rounds each. Load on Sunday, and shoot for the better part of the month.

Oh yeah, just occurred to me. The guns Jesse James carried at the time of his death was a Colt Model 1873 in .45 with 7 1/2" barrel, and a Merwin, Hulbert & Co. First Model (I think or possibly 2nd Model) Army with the square butt in .44 WCF (or "1873 Winchester" as MH marked them) with a 5" barrel. I remember seeing that in a magazine years ago when they went up for auction in 1996. That Merwin was (and will always be) the creme de la creme of handguns.

 

[10x]

I heard there were probs with stretching the arbor pin in the colts. The wedge or the pin would eventually give and need to be replaced. Not a crippling flaw, but has its disadvantages.

To elaborate, I would take a remington if I had to take the remmy if I was unsure of any future maintenance. If I thought I could have access to the occasional tool or part, Colt.

It is only on the brass frame colt copies that the arbour pin would "shoot loose". The steel frame colts did not have this issue.
As for the Remington 1858 - they were a totally different design and did not have this problem.
If the cross pin in the colt is driven in too hard, the revolver gets loose as well, or if the surfaces on the cross pin, barrel and arbour pin are not matched the barrel will wobble on the frame.
That being said the Colt open top frames were less susceptible to fouling than the Remington and easier to clean in the field.

I would take the 1858 Remington over an open frame colt for a number of reasons - mostly because the Remington has less parts to get loose with use and cleaning.