Best Barrel Length for .44 cal 1858 New Model Army?

[TTv2]

The thread for the 1862 Police barrel length got me to thinking about how barrel length with the NMA is more critical than the Colt percussion revolvers because the Colt's can have their barrels easily changed while the 58's... not so much.

I own both a 5.5 and an 8 inch Pietta 1858 and I have to say that the 8 inch doesn't feel much more heavy or cumbersome than the 5.5 does and it's certainly accurate. I haven't shot the 5.5 yet, but when I do, I'm planning to only use a conversion cylinder for it.

Planning to buy a 12 inch Buffalo model when I find a steel one for a good price, but I think they're too large for most people to shoot them.

I've seen snub nose versions that people have modified. I have to say those look great, but due to the frame size, they're still bulky and heavy.

Overall, I think the 8 inch is the best, which is the traditional length.

 

[Armored farmer]

I really like my 5 1/2 inch '58, but for actual cap and ball use....the 8 inch barrel is best because ofvthe longer loading ram.
However, i think the 5 1/2 inch gun would be best for bp cartridges imho,

 

[bannockburn]

Had an 8" barrel on my Navy Arms 1858 Remington Army and felt it was too heavy out front. When I got another Remington a few years ago this time I opted for a Pieta 1858 Remington Navy in .36 caliber with a 6 1/2" barrel. Like the way it handles and balances in my hand; feels a lot better than the Army model did.

 

[rodwha]

I suppose it depends on the use. Mine are hunting weapons.

I’ve always felt for a revolver that 4” was ideal as a carry secondary weapon whereas 6-8” was ideal as a primary hunting weapon. The 12” model would certainly be good as a primary weapon but it seems to be that adding the carbine stock would make it a nice close range in the thick of it weapon.

 

[paul harm]

I've always shot just the 8" version at targets and found the weight out front seems to steady up the gun from waving around. When I shot SASS I had two 8" Remington copies of a Outlaw, or I think it was a 1875. I never found the 8" over the 5" version to handicap me any.Guess it depends on what you plan on doing with it. Oh, I have the 12" and I don't think it's real practical. Nice, but no cigar.

 

[drobs]

The 5" seems like it would be more handy if your sitting around a camp fire.

 

[bannockburn]

drobs

Like the 5" barrel on the Remington '58! Looks like it has just the right proportions to go with the rest of the gun.

 

[Eyrie G. Dogg]

Like most here I could go on and on extolling the virtues and beauty of the various Remington's but that would just be preaching to the choir. These are Piettas acquired new from Cabelas. The 8” is a 2000 [BN], the 5.5 and 6.5 are from 2011 [CH].

I agree with friend drobs, that the 5.5 is ideal for camping and sitting by the fire. It’s a handy package and good for strong side wear. I use cross draw rigs for the 8 and 6.5 inchers. History and .44’s are big with me so maybe the 8” is my fave - at least until I pick up and use one of the others. The internals on each have been slicked up after a fashion and are all fine shooters and trusty friends.

 

[TTv2]

I've always shot just the 8" version at targets and found the weight out front seems to steady up the gun from waving around. When I shot SASS I had two 8" Remington copies of a Outlaw, or I think it was a 1875. I never found the 8" over the 5" version to handicap me any.Guess it depends on what you plan on doing with it. Oh, I have the 12" and I don't think it's real practical. Nice, but no cigar.

Yeah, the 12" isn't practical unless you're looking for that extra punch for deer hunting or are looking at shooting at extended ranges like 75+ yards or you want something for adding a shoulder stock to.

 

[Steel Hayes]

When I got another Remington a few years ago this time I opted for a Pieta 1858 Remington Navy in .36 caliber with a 6 1/2" barrel. Like the way it handles and balances in my hand; feels a lot better than the Army model did.

I love the accuracy from my Pietta 8” and the .44 is a tack driver, but the 6.5” barrels just seem to feel more balanced(I personally enjoy the .36).
P.S. bannockburn, didn’t we enjoy these a while ago?

 

[Panzerschwein]

5 1/2" is not historical, and for me, I've little interest in them because of that. The 8" gun wins it.

 

[piettakid]

I prefer the 5.5" but the sights are poor. I'd like one with target sights like you can get on the 8s, but i don't think that's available.

 

[drobs]

I was searching for threads on trigger springs for the Pietta 1851 and bumped into this thread over on the 1858remington Forum:
http://1858remington.com/discuss/index.php/topic,5248.0.html

Improve your Pietta 1858 for $15

Hi, there is a nice improvement you can make on your Pietta 1858 revolver for $15, add a Wolff 32280 reduced power (main) spring. I have installed this spring in each of my eight Pietta 1858 revolvers.

The benefits:
1. Much lighter trigger pull.
2. Less impact on cap and ball nipples.
3. Less impact on conversion cylinder firing pins.
4. Ease of installation and removal.
5. Less stress on the revolver.
6. You will enjoy fondling your revolver more.

I have fired thousands of rounds with both cap and ball and Taylor (R&D) conversion cylinders without a single fail to fire.

This improvement has been mentioned before, but was buried in another subject. After experiencing the improvement anew after installing the Wolff spring in my newest Pietta 1858, I thought it would be worth mentioning again.

After you install the Wolff spring, tighten the mainspring screw so it is flush with the revolver frame.

BTW, I have no financial interest in either Pietta or Wolff. {L*

Edit: information updated.

Regards,
Richard

I went ahead and ordered 2 mainsprings from:
https://www.gunsprings.com/index.php?page=items&cID=3&mID=1&dID=96

I'll be home on the 10th of July to test them out. Sounds like these springs significantly improve the Pietta 1858 handling.

 

[bannockburn]

drobs

Thanks for the info! Look forward to your range report in July.

 

[RecoilRob]

I couldn't decide so we've got a pair of 5.5's and 8's with a 12 just for fun.

 

[bannockburn]

Steel Hayes

I love the accuracy from my Pietta 8” and the .44 is a tack driver, but the 6.5” barrels just seem to feel more balanced(I personally enjoy the .36).
P.S. bannockburn, didn’t we enjoy these a while ago?

Oh, we probably did but I always thought it was so much fun to do "Show and Tell" in grade school when I was a kid!

 

[noelf2]

I went ahead and ordered 2 mainsprings from:
https://www.gunsprings.com/index.php?page=items&cID=3&mID=1&dID=96

I'll be home on the 10th of July to test them out. Sounds like these springs significantly improve the Pietta 1858 handling.

I've had that spring on my 5.5" Remi for a couple years now. It does make for a real nice action. I've only used it for cartridges in a conversion cylinder. Plenty of impact for the firing pins, but I can't vouch for the c&b cylinder with it.

I prefer the 5.5" barreled Remi.

 

[351 WINCHESTER]

The 5.5" balances much better than the 8" as it is muzzle heavy. The 8" will give more velocity.

 

[Trek]

I say at least one of each size, but if I had to pick only one, it would have to be the 8". The reason is because it is more historically accurate. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I know, Remington only made the New Model Army in 8" barrel length. I know some would say that some people back in the day probably cut them down, but I have never seen an original that had been cut down since the 1860's. All the originals I have ever seen were factory stock length. I realize that not everyone is as concerned with historical accuracy, but for me, that is the main reason for having one of these in the first place.