Which cap and ball pistol?

stew71 · Post by **stew71** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:17 pm

Taking the plunge into blackpowder shooting and I seriously can't decide between which model replica to purchase.

1851 Colt Navy
1860 Colt Army
1858 Remmy Army

I'm leaning towards the Colt Navy. It just looks "right" to me. So does the 1860. Oh hell.... maybe I'll just sell something from the back of the safe and buy 1 of each. Of course I can also get those 45LC conversion cylinders for the Remington model.....hmmm...

jeepnik · Post by **jeepnik** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:22 pm

I'm partial to the 1860 style myself. This one is the most fun of all. Talk about smoke and flame.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:23 pm

That's a .36, right Jeep?

I'd like one of those in .44...

ndcowboy · Post by **ndcowboy** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:31 pm

Definitely has to be the 1860 in .44, at least in my book. Don't buy a 1851 in .44, since that was never actually produced. If you buy an 1851, get a .36, which is period correct.

Post by **AmBraCol** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:37 pm

Is it for style? For pure shootin' fun? Each one fits in a different spot. You actually need to "buy 'em both" - or in this case, all three.

The 1851 was Wild Bill's sixgun of choice. It has its own romance and allure. Elmer Keith wrote that the old '51 36 caliber round ball killed far better than the more modern 38 spl. The 1860 is of course THE sixgun of the Late Unpleasantness. It was carried by both sides, although the North of course had far greater access to them. If I recall correctly it was issued in greater numbers than all other revolvers combined during that conflict. And then there's the Remington - solid frame, solid gun - but finickier about fouling than the others. You can fit it with far better sites and probably get more accuracy out of it over the long haul - but you're going to have to wipe it down more often during extended range sessions.

Or you could just bite the bullet and pick up a Ruger Old Army. It's the one that Sam Colt WOULD have built if he'd had access to the materials we have today.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:46 pm

The biggest advantage to the ROA is the ability to use a Cartridge Conversion cylinder that actually fires all 6 AND has the bullet fit the bore.

FWIU the other conversions for the "real" repros suffer a lot in the accuracy dept especially the .36s

Doc Hudson · Post by **Doc Hudson** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 5:26 pm

Answer one easy question and then you will know the answer to YOUR question.

How well do you like the way a Single-Action Army's grip feels in your hand?

If the answer is that you LOVE the feel of the Peacemaker, the gun for you is the Moddel of 1851 .36 Caliber Colt Navy Model.

IMO the Model 1851 has the perfect grip shape for single-action revolvers. Colt apparently thought so as well since they used the same grip design on their brand new cartridge revolver they made for the Yankee Army.

If your answer is "Nope, I don't much care for the feel of a Peacemaker," my response is that you are clearly a sick individual. Take four asprins, go to bed and see your doctor tomorrown morning.

Post by **Hobie** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 5:36 pm

They are fun... 1862 Police, 1858 Remington #2, 1858 Remington #1, and Ruger Old Army are all good fun. All will WORK for you as well.

Str8man · Post by **Str8man** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 6:06 pm

ndcowboy wrote:Definitely has to be the 1860 in .44, at least in my book. Don't buy a 1851 in .44, since that was never actually produced. If you buy an 1851, get a .36, which is period correct.

Colt may have never produced that gun but they did exist in one form or another, I saw at the JM Davis gun museum a navy that was re-bored and fitted with a rebated cylinder and read that this was occasionally done on revolvers with bad bores.
There were also direct rip offs and patent infringements of Colts by Manhattan arms and a few others and you were likely to find almost any configuration.
My favorite is the 1861 Navy.
I have an original that I shoot occasionally.
The replicas have too long of a barrel and need to be shortened to 7-1/2 or 7-1/4 to look right but I think the 61 Navy was the most beautiful revolver Colt ever produced.
My next C&B though will be a second model dragoon which I plan to have the barrel shortened to 5-1/2 inches.
I see a lot of original dragoons that have that modification done to them and like the look and the convenience of the shorter barrel while keeping the powder capacity of the dragoon cylinder.
That will likely be my next revolver and project.
I still find the 61 Navy to be the most beautiful sixgun ever produced though.

marlinman93 · Post by **marlinman93** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 6:48 pm

jeepnik wrote:I'm partial to the 1860 style myself. This one is the most fun of all. Talk about smoke and flame.

Who stole your barrel?

tman · Post by **tman** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 6:54 pm

i always wanted a 1860 colt converted to .44 henry rimfire flat.

jd45 · Post by **jd45** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 7:11 pm

I'll tell ya what I did. I bought a Uberti mfg'd 1860 Army WITH fluted cylinder in .44 from Dixie, cause I LOVE the graceful lines of it, AND I bought a Uberti mfg'd 1858 Remington, (I think they call it a "New Model") WITH an R&D Conversion cylinder to enable me to shoot .45 Colt cartridges as well as C&B..........tho the C&B cylinder has never been used. LOVE EM BOTH! jd45

O.S.O.K. · Post by **O.S.O.K.** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 7:37 pm

I have all three of those that you are considering and like them all.

If you are just after a fun range pistol, then buy the 1851. It's less expensive to feed, is more powerful than you would think and is very accurate.

It would make a good small game gun too if you're inclined to employ it for that. Albeit challenging!

If you want to use a conversion cylinder or shoot hot loads or possibly use it for close-range deer hunting then buy the 1858 Remington. It's easy to remove the cylinders from this model and they are stronger due to the top strap frame.

If you want the range pistol but want more poop - the 1860 is very fun as well.

My two.

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 7:53 pm

What Doc Hudson said. I happened to have had a pair of 1851s in .44. best of both worlds.

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 8:21 pm

I love my 58's they just fit my hands well. I dont have anything against the colts I love the looks of them I just donn't care for the way they fit my hand. I say you take the time to handle them all and pick the one that fits the best.

jhrosier · Post by **jhrosier** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:51 pm

I talked the wife into buying me this 1860 Army for Christmas.
It is the Uberti with charcoal blue from Buffalo Arms.
I have only got it out once to shoot and was very pleased with it.
It has what I think are the best looks of all of the percussion revolvers.
It is easy to see why it was so popular in its' day.

Jack

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:49 pm

Old Ironsights wrote:That's a .36, right Jeep?

I'd like one of those in .44...

Mine's a .44

The 1860, hands down. IMESHO, it was the pinnacle of the development of the black powder cap & ball revolver. The balance is just something that words are hard pressed to give justice to. Powerful, sleek, beautiful - you won't regret it!

Grizzly Adams · Post by **Grizzly Adams** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 11:12 pm

ndcowboy wrote:
I still find the 61 Navy to be the most beautiful sixgun ever produced though.

[/quote]

+1

Cap and ball Colts never got any better. All the balance of the 51 Navy, with all of the improvements of the 1860 Army.

20cows · Post by **20cows** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 11:15 pm

I like the '51 and '61.

I have a Pieta "62 Police", but it's really a shortened barrel '61.

Ray Newman · Post by **Ray Newman** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 12:23 am

Another vote for the Ruger Ol' Army.

stew71 · Post by **stew71** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:21 pm

I was just over at the local shop and was handling all 3 models. The '51 was absolutely sweet. Same for the '60. Both felt just about perfect. The '58 was not quite as "right", but that conversion cylinder route will ensure it stays on the list, just further down. No...I think I'll be going for the '60 Army first then pick up a Navy pistol for my birthday this summer. These are for range fun and woods loafing. I'd love to try one on a coyote up close!!

I'll have to keep an eye open for that Ruger too.

jd45 · Post by **jd45** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 6:01 pm

O.S.O.K.......that '51 Navy sure served Wild Bill well for those many years, didn't it? And in one of Uncle Elmer's books he explained how, in spite of its smaller caliber, it certainly had adequate stopping power with full loads & that oh so soft, (read that expanding) round ball! jd45

Str8man · Post by **Str8man** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 6:51 pm

jd45 wrote:O.S.O.K.......that '51 Navy sure served Wild Bill well for those many years, didn't it? And in one of Uncle Elmer's books he explained how, in spite of its smaller caliber, it certainly had adequate stopping power with full loads & that oh so soft, (read that expanding) round ball! jd45

I'm not recommending you try it but I read a jornal by Granville Stewart from the 1860's and 70's where he said the Navy Colt was an excellent deer killer at up to 100 yards.
I can't imagine it myself but it was written at the time and in his journal so I assume they must have used them for that.
Pretty amazing that they did.

Old Time Hunter · Post by **Old Time Hunter** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 7:00 pm

They all work well:

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 8:26 pm

I'm quite partial to the '51 Navy, but will agree with AmBraCal that you really need to get yer paws around the various types and at least get a feel for how they balance... That said, yer intended use may also dictate that you choose one over the other.

As for you other fellars... there's a reason the '60, '61 & '62 fall short of the allure of the '51... that "creepy" lever!

The VERY best from Mr. Colt:

GEOFF · Post by **GEOFF** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:33 pm

Griff,

Those are beautiful!!

What are your thoughts on the square back trigger guard on the 1851 Navy??? Was this an original option??? And which do you like better, the square or round???

Also if you don't mind, really quick, update me on the REAL Colt reproductions. The first one was back when I was a kid, back in the late 70's they continued the original serial numbers and everything. What do they call that series?? It's the best, right?

Then I see a lot of "signature series" Colts for sale over on gunbroker. Are these less desireable?

This has no doubt been covered but I'd like it if you'd give me a "refresher" course!

DRIVE CAREFUL OUT THERE IN THAT SWEET KW!

Geoff

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:16 am

The 2nd series of Colt BP pistols used their own serial numbers. Some models were made in select years, but the 1851 was produced during the entire run. The first 2nd series 1851s were introduced in 1971 and made up 'til '78. The most desirable were the "C" series, from 4201 up to abt. serial # 24899 under the "Blue Dome". The "F" series were made fom 1978 thru 1982 at the Iver Johnson plant using Colt processes, inspection and marketing; with serial numbers running from 24900 through 29150. The "F" series has a very slightly bigger grip (abt. 1/8" longer) than the "C" series which are IDENTICAL to the originals. The silver square-back trigger guard is from the 1st model of the original production. The 2nd, 3rd & 4th models of original production had the round trigger guard. The C series guns all use the Colt Royal Blue, while the F series guns use the darker Colt Blue.

The Signature Series were made by a company formed under Anthony Imperato, The Colt Black Powder Company and again used Italian parts and were simply made using the Colt name under license. I believe they were also assembled @ the old Iver Johnson plant in NJ. They can be fine guns, but fit and finish isn't quite equal to either the C or F series.

I have two Colt C series, one Signature Series and then finally, one ASM (Armi San Marco) that was made of parts left from the Colt production. It is virtually identical to the Colt C Series in size and parts will interchange... but the fit and finish is not quite equal to the Colts.

The square-back trigger guard is a little smaller and some pudgy fingered folks find it difficult to use... the round is more generous in size.

The most desirable in all models are the "C" series, then the "F" and lastly the Signature Series. BTW, all the Colt marked clones use the silver backstrap & triggerguard.

Hope that answered your question. Some of the info above is from a fellow SASS member and I quoted him liberally.

jlchucker · Post by **jlchucker** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:25 am

I started experimenting with cap and ball repro revolvers back around 1972, when they could be ordered thru the mail for around 40 bucks a copy or so from EMF and others. I've had the 51 navy (both regular and the squareback version); a 31 Colt model-5 shot with a 5 inch barrel; a second and third dragoon (the latter came without the flip-up rear sight depicted in its ads at the time); a Colt model 1860 Army; and a Walker copy. I later had both a 36 and 44 Remington copy. Of all of them, the 51 Navy (36 cal of course), the 31 (not produced for years I don't think), and the Remington-style 44 were the most fun to shoot overall. The Dragoons were bulky, heavy. The Walker was heavier, but shot well, and cleaning it was as big a job as lugging that gun around was. Still, the Walker was accurate, and my brother won a couple of matches with it--even beating a guy who had a single-shot TC pistol that was produced back in the '70's. The 31 was cheap to shoot because you could buy a 5 pound bag of single-0 buckshot at the time for about 5 bucks and the balls fit perfectly. It was an accurate little piece, but certainly not a pocket pistol. The Remington copies were remarkable for two things: The 36 for some reason was really LOUD! It shot well, but really BARKED! The 44 ended up being my only cap and ball revolver--in fact, my only revolver of any kind for years. It's the only cap and ball revolver that I still have. Accurate, plenty of power, easy to carry--mine was shortened to 5 1/2 inches by my gunsmith, but now I see these are being commercially sold with that barrel length. Back in the day, it was possible to buy genuine black powder, and 3F was what I normally used in all of these. Today, if I had to choose just one version, I'd probably pick an EMF 44 Remington, full-length, unless I was really feeling affluent--then I'd go for a Ruger Old Army. Whatever I'd choose would be blue, not stainless--my own personal preference and because in any case you'd have to completely clean the gun just to keep things working properly.

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:38 am

Interesting Griff - thanks for the history. I'll have to keep in mind that you have all this knowledge.

GEOFF · Post by **GEOFF** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:16 am

Thank you all for the great info above!

Griff, you answered all of my questions perfectly! I'm moneyed out right now but at least I'll know what to keep an eye out for!

Over on gunbroker, item #124347055 I see there is a "C" 1851 Colt, 2nd gen. The reserve is $800. Is this high or about right for one of these??? And how often do you see them???????? Is their hammer spring tension and action smoothness about like the originals??

'Stew71, I know this is your thread, hope you didn't mind me jumping in and asking a couple of questions!

Geoff

shdwlkr · Post by **shdwlkr** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:58 pm

Which cap and ball pistol? It depends what you are looking for I have an 1849 pocket, 1851 navy and a ruger old army . I shoot from .320 round ball to 457 round ball. I like to shoot them all and the little 1849 is the most fun. the ruger old army is the most effective and the navy will get the job done if you do your part.
When choosing a cap and ball pistol you need to know what you are going to use it for and then buy accordingly. My pocket is a target plinker shoots .320 round ball, navy shoots .350 round ball and the Roa shoots .457 round ball and is able to handle any charge that keeps the ball below the cyclinder. Yes you can shoot 4f in it but for what reason I can't understand as it works just fine with a sensible load of 3f which is my powder of choice.

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:10 pm

I like the 1860 and since my great grandfather was in the CW I think it may be right for me. Pietta made a pretty one so I got it.

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:11 pm

Griff - who made those holsters?

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:12 pm

The C&B I'd most like to have at the moment other than a 5" ROA (and in many ways I'l like to have it more than another ROA) is an NAA Super Companion (.22 "Magnum" ...)

Super Cap & Ball Companion Kit (with Spare Cylinder)
Part Number: NAA-22M CBK
Suggested Retail Price: $273.00

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:17 pm

Now be careful there with that cannon OI; trying to chronograph the regular model is how I did this.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:25 pm

Well, obviously that chrony had to be put down. It's terrible when those things attack.

I'm really interested to know what 4gr 4F under a 30gr bullet acts like...

A .22 RB would be 17gr... over 4gr FFFF... HMMMMMMmmmmmm

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:05 pm

Old Savage wrote:Griff - who made those holsters?

I bought them thru "Texas Jacks" in Fredericksburg, TX... rumor has it they're made by El Paso Saddlery.

GEOFF wrote:Thank you all for the great info above!
Griff, you answered all of my questions perfectly! I'm moneyed out right now but at least I'll know what to keep an eye out for!
Over on gunbroker, item #124347055 I see there is a "C" 1851 Colt, 2nd gen. The reserve is $800. Is this high or about right for one of these??? And how often do you see them???????? Is their hammer spring tension and action smoothness about like the originals??
'Stew71, I know this is your thread, hope you didn't mind me jumping in and asking a couple of questions!
Geoff

Geoff, I think that's just a tad high... but so must everyone else... it's been there for over a year.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:39 pm

Not a C&B... But it looks like one and may be more useful/fun in some ways...

5 shot .22WMR, 4" bbl

Loading Lever is actually the cylinder pin.

http://www.northamericanarms.com/EARL.html

jeepnik · Post by **jeepnik** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:43 pm

Old Ironsights wrote:That's a .36, right Jeep?

I'd like one of those in .44...

It's a .44. Much fun, smoke and flash.

awp101 · Post by **awp101** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:31 pm

Old Ironsights wrote:Not a C&B... But it looks like one and may be more useful/fun in some ways...

5 shot .22WMR, 4" bbl
Loading Lever is actually the cylinder pin.

http://www.northamericanarms.com/EARL.html

Now that's pretty cool! Will it take the cap and ball companion kit?

Grizzly Adams · Post by **Grizzly Adams** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:13 pm

Ray Newman wrote:Another vote for the Ruger Ol' Army.

The Ruger Ol Army is truly a fine cap gun. I shot Frontiersman (SASS catagory requiring two C&B pistols.) for a year, and I used a pair of ROAs. Almost felt like I was cheating!

Those dang thangs are the most dead on reliable cap guns ever made. No challenge at all!

Lastmohecken · Post by **Lastmohecken** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:54 pm

I own a stainless steel Ruger Old Army, and I truly believe it's the finest cap and ball sixgun ever built.

When we start talking about replicas, I would choose about any of the Colts over the Remington, mainly because just about all of the Remington replicas have a roughter action, and the hammer spring always seems to stack really bad when you cock it, where a Colt has a much smoother action, and I like the Colt grip better.

It's true the Remington probably shoots more accurate, but if you want an accurate colt, just mount a rear sight on the barrel like Elmer Keith did, probably have to have a taller front sight also, but you can get accuracy out of a colt that way.

I did try an original Remington, one time, and the action in it was much better then any of the Remington replicas, I don't know why, but they just never get the replicas right in that regard, when it comes to a Remington cap and ball. The originals seem to be much better in that department.

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:16 pm

Thanks Griff - found what I want there.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Fri Mar 13, 2009 9:06 am

awp101 wrote:
Old Ironsights wrote:Not a C&B... But it looks like one and may be more useful/fun in some ways...

5 shot .22WMR, 4" bbl
Loading Lever is actually the cylinder pin.

http://www.northamericanarms.com/EARL.html
Now that's pretty cool! Will it take the cap and ball companion kit?

No. Entirely different firing mechanisims...

Though if there is enough call for it I'm sure Sandy would oblige with a C&B version....

Post by **Hobie** » Fri Mar 13, 2009 9:23 am

I think Uberti's new(er) forged frame Remingtons are very close to the originals in feel. I've handled 3 originals in the last couple of months. One is being set up as a shooter, it had been reblued sometime in the past, after the fella bought it for $100. Needed a front sight.

The OLD repros like my Lyman branded Italian made repro from 1972 has a smaller frame and likely the geometry of the internals were different just to fit in there.

awp101 · Post by **awp101** » Fri Mar 13, 2009 7:36 pm

Old Ironsights wrote:
awp101 wrote:
Old Ironsights wrote:Not a C&B... But it looks like one and may be more useful/fun in some ways...

5 shot .22WMR, 4" bbl
Loading Lever is actually the cylinder pin.

http://www.northamericanarms.com/EARL.html
Now that's pretty cool! Will it take the cap and ball companion kit?
No. Entirely different firing mechanisims...

Though if there is enough call for it I'm sure Sandy would oblige with a C&B version....

Ack, I just went to the website and saw what you meant. I thought it was a replacement cylinder for the regular Minis. Kind of a reverse conversion cylinder.

the telegraphist · Post by **the telegraphist** » Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:38 am

1860 army, have owned and shot the 1851 Navy, lovely gun accurate but does not have the boom, know what I mean.
Sure the Ruger is a fine iron, but it just aint authentic, the army is. 30/35g by volume of fffg with my iron with 457 round ball is total accurate and total fun, I use Swiss fffg, expensive but very consistent.