[mec]

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=32323&stc=1&d=1133969965

The bottom one is an early original with small trigger guard. The top one is one of a number that most people claim can't possibly exist. They with colt boxes and papers assembled, rough and in the white with no front bead. They have absolutely no proof or makers marks anywhere on them.

This one is engraved by a very talented guy now deceased. Unfortunately, these were not quality revolvers. They have brittle, unfitted action parts and the chambers don't align with the barrels very well.

[Across The Pond]

I sooooo wish that I owned that engraved one!

Here's a picture of my navy, a Uberti proofed in 87 (marked AS) - it's a charcoal blued one, now very nicely worn - apart from the Uberti marks and the lack of a Colt address, it almost looks genuine... it has a dovetailed high front sight, apparently similar to Sam Colt's very own. (read that in some book, can't remember the authors..:D )

A forthcoming auction at Holt's in London (on Dec 13) includes an original London model, some remaining finish, expected to make £3000-£5000. :eek:
I'll make a point to see what it sells for.

Great guns!

[mec]

looks good. also looks like you dovetailed in a high front sight. Bet it shoots good.

[Across The Pond]

looks good. also looks like you dovetailed in a high front sight. Bet it shoots good.

You're right - almost certainly better than me! - I shot it on the THR virtual match this month, two handed at 30 feet. Mostly the group was about 2 inches, with a flyer taking it out to 3 inches. (why does it always do that... :rolleyes: )

Dave

[Beartracker]

Now my wife is going to ask me why the key board is wet and I'll have to tell her I was drooling over a couple of 1851 .36 Navy's, Lol.
People are always saying that the 61 is the most beautiful C & B out there but after seeing ,holding them side by side I just can't agree. Maybe my taste are just strange, I don't know . But I like the 51 better!:)
I was reading a book ( Think it was the same one Across the pond was reading) and they had an artical about the 51 in there and gave it very high praises. For the past few weeks I have been trying to decide which one I want and I see no reason not to get the 51.
Many years ago I was working 6 days a week and 10-12 hours a day and had no time for myself. I bought me a 51 and I never even fired it and sold it for less than I paid back then. Kicked myself in the butt for years over that dumb move.
By the way.... that book is one that anyone who loves BP Pistols or Revolvers should own. It's like the Bible of cap & ball and written by a couple of great guy's who know there stuff when it comes to BP.
You can get it at Amazon .com or Barnes and Noble.......It's called :
"Percussion Pistols And Revolvers" History, Performance And Practical Use
Written by Johhny Bates And our own Mike Cumpston AKA Mec.

[mec]

"I was working 6 days a week and 10-12 hours a day and had no time for ..."

That's the key. To fully enjoy these smoke wagons, you need a bit more time on your hands than might be the case with modern guns.

[Beartracker]

Mec,You got that right! Now I have the time , lot's of time and no money, Lol. Guess my next moves are going to be a 1851 Navy, extra cylinder, a couple of lee mold's for my 1858's with round ball and conical for the 51 and a good lead meltng pot with the spout. Now if I can just get to that check book before my wife wakes up....:)
In all the years I have been in this BP smoke I have never cast my own. My Dad and I spent many hours casting Civil war soldiers from lead when I was a kid. That was long before they decided lead was bad for you.

[mec]

I can recall a lot of ancient gunwriters who cast a lot of bullets. Some of them became demented but I believe it was the Whiskey and not the lead/ cadmium/antimony fumes that did it.

[Beartracker]

Mec, Do have any other hints for smoothing up the 51 besides the one's in your book? It seems to me that it's not much different than smoothing the 58, just built a little different is all I can figure.
Also do you have any Idea what Sam Colt used for the front sight on his 51?
On my 58's I used german silver for the blade on one and a 1858 half dime on the other.Well it was actually less than a half dime by the time I got it sighted in,Lol. Just kept removing it from the slot and taking some off the bottom until I had it where I wanted it and then used a touch of silver solder on it. One of my son's layed claim to that one :)

[mec]

Don't know what he used. Some people have taken a close look at his 51 in pictures and said that he had a higher front sight. I've also see some originals with other than bead sights- like the lower one in the picture -though I don't know when it was installed. I just accessed my original picture which is fairly large and zoomed in on it. It appears to be a steel blade sight dovetailed in and looks like iron/steal. The gun itself is fairly early. Could have been factory or could have been installed later after maybe the original bead got knocked off.

I've also seen originals with taller than usual front beads and don't know whether they were replacement or not.

I have a totally unfounded theory that the beads on these things were made short to make it harder to knock them off the gun rather than to establish a 75- 100 yard zero. Just a guess, but I've found the 36 navies to shoot pretty flat to those distances anyway.

As to action tuning, I stay away from altering the trigger/full cock notches because I don't want to cut through any case hardening that might be there. I also avoid removing metal from the main spring as it is advantageous to have a pretty solid hammer blow to set off some brands of caps. I've been lucky with recent revolvers in that the uberti's come with light triggers right out of the box. Bates will put a dab of epoxy on the hammer face right under the full cock notch to limit engagement. - sometimes it sticks and sometimes not. An older trick is to bore a hole in the hammer face, install a pin to serve the same purpose and file or stone to the proper engagement. One thing that sometimes lightens the action overall is using one of the wolff or other coil trigger bolt springs in place of the flat, two -pronged leaf. Just shooting the gun tends to lighten the action-particularly with a new gun.

On my 61 navy, in addition to stuff in the book, I've done some light filing and polishing on the star/cylinder ratchet and it seems to have removed some burrs or rough places. In any case, it sure has smoothed up the cycling.

[Beartracker]

Thanks Mec, The trigger springs on both of my Remingtons have been tapered and thined a little but I did them very slowly and kept checking them until I was right where I wanted to be. They have never broke so I guess I lucked out. Also I lightened the trigger pull but this is something I do not recommend for anyone to do. As for smoothing up the action it took some stoneing and sand paper but they feel like they run on ball bearings now.
One of the articals in your book mentions that Sam Colt replaced the front sight on his 51 with a dove tailed sight but it showed no pictures or mention of what he used. Thanks for the info and advice.

[mec]

bates has no problem thinning the springs on his guns and does't seem to have any breakage problems either. I'm chicken in that respect.

[Across The Pond]

Here's a closeup of my front sight blade... this works really well, and can be adjusted for windage if necessary. Makes the gun shoot POA at 30 feet with light target load of 15-18Gn/vol of 777 and a .380 RB.

ATP

[Beartracker]

ATP, Great job on that sight! It looks really solid too. About the only thing I did different on mine is once I had the windage set I marked the sight alignment with a scribe and then I took out the dove tail and tapered it to match the edges or contours of the barrel.
Your sight looks much stronger than mine but so far they have held up. On four on my green river barrels of my smokepoles I dove tailed it took me forever! Guess I was just affraid of screwing up my first ones and that was many years ago :uhoh: Thanks for showing the close up pics!. Mike

[mec]

a fine job on that and my guess is that it will be pretty close at considerably longer distances.

[Across The Pond]

a fine job on that and my guess is that it will be pretty close at considerably longer distances.

Yes, at 25yds I aim about 12 o'clock on the ten ring of the PPC target that I mostly use. (this drives me mad, as I started with 10 metre airpistol, and am a 'six'o'clock hold' fan)

Anyway, the group centres nicely round the ten - but I am not so proficient and my shots often stray out into the eight at that distance. This does however provide my thinly-veiled excuse for lots and lots of practice!! :D

By the way, +1 for the '51 being the better looking gun. I just can't get on with the looks of that improved rammer and smooth bbl on the 61. I will complete my perfect set of Colts in 2006 - with the addition of a Dragoon. My favourite gundealer here has what I believe is a 3rd gen (Uberti made, Colt finished) genuine Colt. He'll want mucho money but every day goes by I find a new reason to justify it!!

ATP

[mec]

I just adjust my expectations with these things and am still amazed how well they shoot even with the crude sights etc. Bates keeps pulling out unfired guns I didn't know he had. Last week, it was a second generation Colt Dragoon with real bone charcoal case hardening. Amazingly pretty guns and they do keep going up in value.

[Beartracker]

ATP, Shooting with the sight at 6:00 is the way I shoot too and always have. My dad always said you can't hit what you can't see and if you cover the spot with your sight you can't see it. He was right of corse,:)
I also shoot with both eyes open even with a scope'

Mec, adjusting for the sights is the way it was done back when also. It seems to me that much has changed over the years. When they had the shoot out at the OK corral I would be willing to bet that there was a whole lot of point and shoot rather than take careful aim and shoot:uhoh:

[mec]

I believe so too. Much shooting much missing and at very close range. I've always sighted my cartridge for point of aim-it being hard to determine 6 o'clock on a revolver. For the first few decades, this was no problem as my senile presbyopia was late in coming. In the last partial decade however, picking out the sights over like-colored backgrounds has become more difficult. For this reason, I definately understand the six o'clock hold. Some of the targets I shoot are covered with a light colored patch so I can see the sights better -regardless of where they actually hit.

[Across The Pond]

I have taken to using a carbide lamp to blacken the sights on the navy - it really helps for me, especially with definition of the rearsight outdoors. Although I mostly shoot for accuracy, I sometimes shoot CAS* with the '51 Navy and find POA better for that.

* yes! we can still have some fun here - it's not all been banned - in fact since losing IPSC when the cartridge pistols were stolen by the government, CAS has really taken off with some of the 'action shooting' crowd.

ATP