Best cap and ball revolver of the Cap and Ball Era?

Status
Not open for further replies.
'58 Remington for durability and design but the '51 has the best ergonomics to me.
Did Wild Bill stick with the '51 because it was the best pistol available or because it was what Hickok was comfortable with due to familiarity?
Click to expand...
I would guess the latter as in his later years his vision was pretty bad.
 
Cap jams were not a common thing in the day of the C&B revolver because the caps available at that time properly fit the cones on the revolvers.

When I grew up and started shooting C&B revolvers the originals were not uncommon on the firing line. In my hand, the Colt felt natural and the Remington was not nearly as comfortable. Nor, because of the grip, as accurate.

And many carried the C&B long after the cartridge revolvers were introduced because you could always find caps, powder and lead. Cartridges took a while to become commonly available. Often when a fellow found them, he bought a lot of them because he might not see them again.
 
Strawhat,

If cap jams were not a concern, can you explain why some Manhattan(or the very similar Bacons I forget which) went to the trouble of patenting and manufacturing a system to protect their basically colt rip off actions from cap fragments? Basically it was a light flexible steel shield between the hammer and the nipple being struck and between the back of the cylinder and the breech face ( with its hammer opening) of the revolver.

I also rather liked the seemingly much more secure safety arrangement of the Manhattans they had extra bolt slots on the cylinder so the hammer rested between caps AND the cylinder was locked to prevent turning even if dropped.

There is one for sale on GunBuyer.com at the moment, but you seldom hear about them. This one has been "Reserve not met" for a couple of years at least. It is a first model navy (they made a few thousand in 1860)and has no cap guard.

For the nth time let me say I wish someone made an affordable copy of the Kerr from London Arms Company. Almost the entire production went to the CSA (Some say THE most imported revolver of the war in the South)and yet one scarcely ever hears of them.

-kBob
 
Like Strawhat, when I was getting interested in shooting original cap & ball pistols were common on many shooting ranges. I inherited an original London Colt 1851 Navy and bought ($50) a "no-matching-serial-numbers" U.S. stamped Colt 1860 Army in 1960. By far, the .36 Navy revolver was more accurate and easier to shoot. The Army revolver feels good in my big hands and points well but the accuracy past 20 yards is just not there. At one point I bought an original 1858 Remington "Army .44", as well.

The Colt "open-top" design has some features that shootists appreciated: Easy break-down for cleaning, Large, grooved, cylinder arbor that resisted fouling induced problems with cylinder turning, and the ability to set the cylinder/barrel gap using the barrel wedge. My original Remington Army revolver's cylinder usually seizes up about half-way through the first reload unless I stop and clean the cylinder pin.

The only reason the "Army .44" was less accurate than the "Navy .36" had to do with the same size barrel wedge and frame on both calibers. The heavier .45 caliber balls slamming into the forcing cone caused much more stress and barrel flexing than the smaller .375" round balls. .36 caliber "pocket pistols" suffered from the same problem. The 1849 Army (Dragoon) has a much bigger frame and barrel wedge and is as accurate as the Navy revolver if properly loaded. Of course, the 1849 Army has a much bigger cylinder arbor and barrel wedge to deal with the significant stress with the .45 caliber round ball and larger charges of powder.
 
kBob said:
Strawhat,

If cap jams were not a concern, can you explain why some Manhattan(or the very similar Bacons I forget which) went to the trouble of patenting and manufacturing a system to protect their basically colt rip off actions from cap fragments? Basically it was a light flexible steel shield between the hammer and the nipple being struck and between the back of the cylinder and the breech face ( with its hammer opening) of the revolver.

I also rather liked the seemingly much more secure safety arrangement of the Manhattans they had extra bolt slots on the cylinder so the hammer rested between caps AND the cylinder was locked to prevent turning even if dropped.

There is one for sale on GunBuyer.com at the moment, but you seldom hear about them. This one has been "Reserve not met" for a couple of years at least. It is a first model navy (they made a few thousand in 1860)and has no cap guard.

For the nth time let me say I wish someone made an affordable copy of the Kerr from London Arms Company. Almost the entire production went to the CSA (Some say THE most imported revolver of the war in the South)and yet one scarcely ever hears of them.

-kBob
Click to expand...

kBob,

That is a great post and exactly why I started the thread. I never heard of the Manhattan/Bacon revolvers or the extra bolt stop technology or cap fragment shield or the Kerr from London Arms Company. What more can you tell us about these revolvers?
 
At the end of the Civil War the soldiers when mustered out they were given the option of purchasing their side arms. Although there were over twice as many 1860 Colts as 1858 Remingtons, the Remington sold 2 to 1 over the Colt by the men who depended on them for their lives.
 
I would choose the 1851 Navy. However I would customize it by having the barrel cut back to 6 1/2", dovetail front sight, easy on the trigger and Ivory grips. (I saw a actual Navy in a museum that was set up this way).

Around 1874 - 1875 I would also get a 1858 Remington with a second cylinder chambered for that new cartridge round. I would keep the first cylinder set up for loose powder and ball just in case those new fangled cartridges don't catch on.
 
I just watched a video on this Kerr revolver . . . . . . . . .

I would keep my Dragoon inna heartbeat!! I gotta say, my first " one hole /six shots" revolver was a pair of '60s from Pietta (yap, they would both do it!!) As far as I'm concerned, my Dragoon has range, strength, accuracy, less parts and last but not least . . . .BEAUTY!!!!

I'm sorry but the Kerr is BUTT UGLY!!!!

I'm thinking my Dragoon will have done its job before anything could have been in range for the Kerr. I've also heard that even after the cartridge era started, a Dragoon (not the little one) was a prized possession of folks heading West. They too saw the need for a hearty gun that could reach out and get your attention!!

Course, that's my opinion (but really, the Kerr IS Butt ugly . . . . . and it has a percussion rifle lock for cryin out loud!!!!)

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
 
I would have to go with the 1860 Army, because .44 is better than .36. The main problem with the Remingtons was that fired caps jammed in the top strap and hung the guns up, where the Colt could be turned over and shaken. I might go with a Cooper for its usable double action, but they were not made in .44.

Now, if Colt had ever brought that .40 Navy into production....

Jim
 
kBob said:
...Strawhat,

If cap jams were not a concern, can you explain why some Manhattan(or the very similar Bacons I forget which) went to the trouble of patenting and manufacturing a system to protect their basically colt rip off actions from cap fragments? Basically it was a light flexible steel shield between the hammer and the nipple being struck and between the back of the cylinder and the breech face ( with its hammer opening) of the revolver.

I also rather liked the seemingly much more secure safety arrangement of the Manhattans they had extra bolt slots on the cylinder so the hammer rested between caps AND the cylinder was locked to prevent turning even if dropped.

There is one for sale on GunBuyer.com at the moment, but you seldom hear about them. This one has been "Reserve not met" for a couple of years at least. It is a first model navy (they made a few thousand in 1860)and has no cap guard...
-kBob
Click to expand...
Possibly to cover up a design flaw in the Manhattan revolver. These were copies of the successful Colts patent revolver and not exact copies. They are also the only company to have used such a device. If jams were common, would not every producer of C&B revolvers market something similar?

I like the idea of the extra bolt notches. Manhatttan is not the only company to have used that, but I can not recall the other at this moment. Fingers, help me out!

And the first model did not incorporate the shield. Speculation on my part but the shield could be viewed like fender fins on cars.

Having said that, I have incorporated a cap shield into one of the Pietta copies. Not perfect but it worked. Eventually, that revolver went down the road and was replaced with a Uberti. The cylinder was fitted with proper cones and I do not have cap jams. I also fitted a cap post between the hammer and the cone. A simpler solution than the shield.
 
Last edited:
I think some Confederate makes had the extra notches I have pics of a lot of these different types on my site

My understanding was twofold. One that the softer metal used in the older caps were less prone to splitting and jamming and two, that it was common to point a percussion revolver up when recocking, back in the day, to avoid jams so they did happen
 
How about a British (or US Mass. Arms version) Adams?
The Adams pretty much ran Sam Colt out of London.
I think a double action is worthwhile.

Of course the French Navy led the world to breechloaders with a pinfire in 1858. A revolver so solid that most were converted to centerfire in the 1870s.
 
Well, a Kerr and an Adams are some different, even if Mr Kerr did work for Mr Adams at one time.
Adams made a lot of mileage off their double action and larger bore than the Colt London Navy. And I didn't know we were having a beauty contest.
 
Well, you're right about the differences. At least the Adams doesnt look like it uses leftover rifle parts and it isn't a beauty contest . . . . . or is it?! You know the old " form follows function" thing. Well, if one takes a look at early Colts designs and their progression, it's apparent that all the other successful revolvers followed suit as far as grip angles. Even the Remie/Beals got it right only to have Colts follow suit with the full frame, "post patent", '73. My eyes are so trained toward the " American" form of SA that all others seem . . . well . . . ugly. I'll try and refrain in the future. I will say that in keeping with the op intent of this post, my Whitneyville Dragoon fills all the criteria and it all functions beautifully and it just happens to BE beautiful doing so !!! Wooo hooo!!

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
 
Colt did not "follow" Remington by adding a top strap to the SAA. The top strap was added at the request of the Army during the trials to adopt a new revolver to replace the 1860. Colt had submitted an Open Top in 44 caliber. The Army tested it and the request was made to add a top strap and change the chambering to 45 caliber. Both were good ideas but not necessary.
 
I don't understand the extra notches...

Did those guns have two bolts for locking the cylinder? What problem did the extra notches solve?
 
Remington 1858 due to durability and extreme accuracy (a good original will shoot into 1.5 inches or less at 25 yards). IF I was expecting a lot of close-range work, an Adams or single-trigger Tranter - though I have to confess that the loading levers on those guns leave a lot to be desired. (Yes, I own original examples of all three)
 
My apologies Straw,
I don't know all the history on um, but I do know how to work on um.

I know about the military trials and such but didn't know they were the ones that suggested the top strap.

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Loaded cap and ball revolver.
Replies
23
Views
3K
ontarget
ontarget
W
  • Locked
Will Homemade percussion caps work in cap and ball revolver?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
4K
Pocket
Pocket
Gatofeo
  • Locked
Choosing a cap and ball revolver
Replies
3
Views
1K
Shanghai McCoy
S
Smokepole14
  • Locked
Do cap and ball revolvers require a permit
Replies
16
Views
13K
wittzo
W
Gatofeo
  • Locked
So you want a cap and ball revolver?
2 3
Replies
65
Views
32K
madcratebuilder
M
Back
Top