I'm planing to buy a first Black powder revolver probably at the end of this month. first I was looking at the Ruger Old Army, but this particular revolver is just too expensive here in Belgium due to the $/€ exchange (it would cost me well over $ 800 :what: ).
so now I have set my mind on the Remington new Model Army 1858 in .44 calibre. it would be a Pietta, an Uberti or maybe even a Pedersoli replica. these Italian ones are much cheaper for me since there is no artificial influance of the $-rate on these particular revolvers.
my question now is: is the Remington .44 a good revolver for a black powder newbie :confused:
and how about reliability, accuracy and power?
I would mainly use it for funshooting at 25 yards, and probably only shoot a 100 rounds a year. this would be my third handgun, and I want a BIG intimidating big-bore revolver without having the cost of a .44 magnum (already have a .357 magnum). black powder seems to fit in here since it is fairly cheap and generates a lot of muzzle flash, noise and a huge cloud of smoke, making it a powerful (or at least a powerful-"looking") revolver.
any input whatsoever will be highly appreciated :)
If you enjoyed reading about "Remington New Model Army 1858" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
August 14, 2003, 09:27 PM
Do a search here and someone mentioned a gunstore that was selling the blued version NIB for $259. Why not mail order it from here if there are no legal restrictions? It's the best BP revolver around.
August 15, 2003, 03:54 AM
thanks for the input gary, but unfortunately I will never be able to pull that of being here in a country run by socialists and liberals (I think you know enough now :uhoh: ).
August 15, 2003, 12:49 PM
My friend has an Uberti Remington 1858 that I shot severel times. It's the most accurate thing in the black powder world. My friend even shoots it better than his Beretta 92f!
If possible, go with the Uberti. The craftsmanship is better as the Pietta, but it's also a tad more expensive.
You'll have a LOT of fun with it and, for that reason, you'll shoot more than 100 a year!
August 17, 2003, 06:16 PM
I have both Pietta and Uberti replicas of the Remington. Both makes have been reliable and reasonably accurate, given the limitations of the platform.
My Ubertis are generally a bit better in the fit and finish, but they're also more expensive. I've never seen a Pedersoli-made Remington, but the Sharps and dueling pistol replicas that I have handled have been extremely nice.
With any of them, the most common problem in my experience has been that accumulated fouling will affect functioning somewhat sooner than it will on the Colt-type revolvers. The small diameter cylinder base pin and tighter barrel/cylinder gap are more apt to start binding or dragging with extended firing.
Many folks consider the Remingtons to be the acme of percussion revolver design. They are inherently more rugged due to the closed frame design, and easier to shoot accurately with their superior, if still rudimentary, sights.
Modern adjustable target sights are an option on both major makes, and are worth considering if your main interest is not "authenticity".
If there is somewhere that you can examine and compare examples from each maker, preferably side-by-side, locally it will no doubt help you decide which suits your tastes and pocketbook best. Whichever you choose I think you'll find that shooting percussion revolvers can be great fun.
August 18, 2003, 06:24 AM
thanks for the input guys, I really appreciate it :)
there is a guy on my shooting range who has bought a couple of percussion revolvers back in '91 just before the law changed and you couldn't buy them anymore without a license. he is a well-known member at the range who can be trusted.
he has one of the remingtons left, brand new and unfired and sells them at $ 200 (which is a good price here in Belgium). the only thing that bothers me is that it has a brass frame.
he's going to show me the remington next weekend. but what I do like to know for now, is wether the brass frame is any good or not :confused: I heard it is not as strong as steel, any truth in this?
August 18, 2003, 04:18 PM
Personally, I'd pass on any revolver with a brass frame. While they can be very attractive "decorators", their utility as "shooters" is limited.
The revolver models made during our War Between the States which used brass as frame material did so from dire necessity. The Confederacy had neither the materials nor the manufacturing facilities to produce machinery of a revolver's relative complexity in the quantity needed.
Brass was substituted for iron or steel for many reasons. All of them were for the sake of expediency-not function. While the resulting weapons were usable, they were also inferior to their "parent" arms in several key aspects.
Almost all of the Confederate-made revolvers which used a brass frame were of .36 caliber. IMO, this was primarily done in order to maximize the service life of the weapons. The additional stress due to the heavier powder charge and ball of the .44 would just wear them out too quickly.
The sulpher and other compounds in black powder fouling and residue from the priming mixtures used at the time will attack brass to a much greater degree than iron or steel. Even today, those shooters who use black powder for competition or recreation in cartridge arms must take extraordinary measures to conserve the brass in their cartridge cases for reuse.
While brass framed revolvers given meticulous maintenance will hold up to moderate use, they will always wear out faster than those with steel frames. They are much less tolerant of improper or inadequate cleaning and lubrication. Any reproduction revolver made of modern materials will be stronger than the originals, but brass is brass. It will always be softer and more malleable than steel. It was not the best choice for this purpose 150 years ago, it was simply the only workable alternative that they had.
Steel will give you much longer service be just as "authentic". If I were you, I'd wait until I could find an all-steel Remington replica, especially if the one you're looking at is a .44 caliber.
August 19, 2003, 08:40 AM
Brass frames have a tendency to elongate under use. If you want a good long term shooter spend the extra money for steel.:D
August 19, 2003, 09:00 AM
thank you all for your income :) I will wait untill I can get my hands on the all-steel model, since brass is kinda cheapo :D
August 29, 2003, 11:19 AM
I prefer uberti's but I do own both. Right now Midway arms.com
has 1858 remingtons for $165.00 on sale and they are uberti's. That has to be the lowest price I have ever seen for new blue uberti's. I just ordered one, sale ends the 31st Aug. Pietta's are on sale for $155.00.
August 30, 2003, 05:20 PM
I've been seriously pleased with my steel-frame Pietta 1858 ever since I bought it three years ago. Funny thing about the .44 cap-n-ball is that you can blow a nice hole through a seasoned 2x4 close up, but it'll bounce right off without leaving much of a dent at 100 yards (yep, had too much time on my hands). That .454 caliber round ball may rank rather low in ballistic coefficiency, but they're fun to shoot!
I was just taken back by the size. I ordered mine straight from the pages of a Cabela's master catalog, not having actually seen an 1858 Remington. A bit bigger than I thought (longer than my Taurus 669 or S&W 686 by a good margin).