Remington 1851 Max loads

[No-One]

I have a Pietta Remington 1851 .36 cal with seven cylinders.. and an uberti .44 Remington 1851 with six cylinders. The extra cylinders are so I don't have to reload. I can get 72 shots with these pistols before reloading.

The pietta loading lever broke. The uberti loading lever the screw was always backing out on the loading lever so I took it off both pistols.

Now both Remingtons reload faster and it does not affect performance of the pistols.

I read that back in the day many pistols didn't have loading levers. So they got loaded by setting the cylinder on a piece of wood and a hammer was used to tap in the ball.

So I did the math and turns out that loading with a hammer is cheaper than buying new gun parts. I noticed you need a punch with the hammer to seat the ball tight.

Or you can sadle up and do max loads. I fill a chamber full with powder to the top. No wads I just set the ball.on the powder and beat it in with a hammer.

The .36 sounds like it's shooting 38 + powders. The 44 kicks and sounds like a magnum 44 going off. I estimate about 52 grains of powder in the 44.

I Shoot the. 36 caliber 42 times in a row. Then the 44 cal 30 times in a row. Cylinders never explode or of that stuff these 22 grain cowboys claim. I shoot all head shots.

I don't cowboy load neither I use saftey pins and notches like the gun weapon was intended to.be used.

Someone tell me what I'm doing wrong and why. Also how many rounds it will.take to damage the pistols. I have the empty tins of caps to prove over 1000 shots so far no problems.

This learning curve right here used to be the difference between a dead man and a live gunslinger. Stop parroting each other and get to know your weapons.

I see people crying about accuracy with extra powder. Get a tighter grip on your pistols dummy. Target loads ain't gonna save ya from Josey Wales 100 yards off shooting Colt Walkers at ya. Might need to load according to what you are up against.

Loading levers were made to be broken. Hammer time.

 

[whughett]

I do, but can’t vote. My bride of 57 years may object to girls touching my gun.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Well, it certainly sounds like he knows his '51 Remington's!!! (A man's gotta know his weapons)

Mike

 

[Thomasss]

There really is too many variables to tell how long your cylinders may last. And it may not be just the cylinder. In conventional firearms everything else takes a beating too.
My friend's Bisley would bind up the center pin after a few cylinders of shooting. Weaken metal is progressive. It gets weaker over time. You really didn't mention what powder and type you were using. You may want to try a FF powder which would reduce the pressure quite a bit. Another point is, you and anyone near you would be in great danger if your gun bursts or you happen to have a chain firing.

 

[Lyle]

I have a Pietta 1851 navy in 36 caliber. The spout on my flask lists 24gr. This is my normal load. I have read that about 27gr is the max for this gun. I have shot the max several time. I have been using Pyrodex P or Schuetzen 3f. Colt’s original information was to fill the cylinder full leaving enough room to seat the ball. Attached is a copy of the Colt instructions.

 

[paul harm]

No-one, I don't believe Remington made a revolver in 1851. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Colts patent didn't run out till 1856. Number two, your estimate is off - maybe 38grs in a Remington 44 is max, not 52. Have you ever measured a load, or just pour in the powder till no more will fit ? Third, Remingtons' loading lever is what holds the axle in tight , so no, cowboys didn't run around with a punch and hammer to reload - they used the loading lever as intended. All you shoot is head shots ? Have you even patterned your guns with different loads ? It's one thing to ask questions, but to spout off a bunch of crap is non seance. Sorry to be so hard, but some things need to be corrected.

 

[.38 Special]

If not regularly beating on my guns with a hammer makes me a sissy, then I guess I'm a sissy.

 

[whughett]

No-one, I don't believe Remington made a revolver in 1851. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Colts patent didn't run out till 1856. Number two, your estimate is off - maybe 38grs in a Remington 44 is max, not 52. Have you ever measured a load, or just pour in the powder till no more will fit ? Third, Remingtons' loading lever is what holds the axle in tight , so no, cowboys didn't run around with a punch and hammer to reload - they used the loading lever as intended. All you shoot is head shots ? Have you even patterned your guns with different loads ? It's one thing to ask questions, but to spout off a bunch of crap is non seance. Sorry to be so hard, but some things need to be corrected.

Actually several models of percussion revolvers didn’t have loading levers. My Paterson didn’t. I had to buy one that was inserted into the wedge slot. once the barrel was removed. You are certainly spot on with the rest of the post however.

 

[arcticap]

The .36 sounds like it's shooting 38 + powders. The 44 kicks and sounds like a magnum 44 going off. I estimate about 52 grains of powder in the 44.

The only time that I shot a max .44 load the blowback caused the hammer to reset.
Does that ever happen with your .44?

 

[Blackpowderwarrior]

30 grains of OE in my 44's every shot.its what my powder spout throws. I have put 35 grains of OE in my SS 1858 on occasion but the added muzzle flash and recoil wasn't conducive to target shooting

 

[webrx]

So just for clarity. 1851 Remington? Are we talking a 44 1851 or a 44 1858?

I usually shoot 25 to 30 in steel frames and 20 in brass frames.

for both .44 1851s and 1858s.

 

[gtrgy888]

I haven’t found much reason to load more than 23 grains in a .36. I used to crush down 30 grains of 777. The loading lever bent and the arbor worked loose from loading pressure alone. The extra power was barely noticeable through wood. That power also came at the expense of at least 2 cap jams per cylinder and a dropping loading lever after each shot. Girls touched my gun, so it was worth it for awhile, but my entourage of nubile admirers did get annoyed waiting for me to reset the lever and pick fragments out of the action every shot. Nothing frustrates the cuties more than a gun that won’t work reliably. And they hardly notice how hard it shoots in any case.

 

[rodwha]

I haven’t found much reason to load more than 23 grains in a .36. I used to crush down 30 grains of 777. The loading lever bent and the arbor worked loose from loading pressure alone. The extra power was barely noticeable through wood. That power also came at the expense of at least 2 cap jams per cylinder and a dropping loading lever after each shot. Girls touched my gun, so it was worth it for awhile, but my entourage of nubile admirers did get annoyed waiting for me to reset the lever and and pick fragments out of the action every shot. Nothing frustrates the cuties more than a gun that won’t work reliably. And they hardly notice how hard it shoots in any case.

Was this an ASM? I’ve read they’re the ones spoken of when speaking of poor quality. 30 grns should be about max with a ball and T7 certainly compresses more than BP. Of course measures all vary, sometimes greatly. I’ve also been told the Pietta Remington Pocket is quite weak and has broken.

 

[gtrgy888]

Was this an ASM? I’ve read they’re the ones spoken of when speaking of poor quality. 30 grns should be about max with a ball and T7 certainly compresses more than BP. Of course measures all vary, sometimes greatly. I’ve also been told the Pietta Remington Pocket is quite weak and has broken.

An Uberti. I was unpleasantly surprised.

 

[45 Dragoon]

An Uberti. I was unpleasantly surprised.

Shouldn't be surprised, all Uberti arbors are short. If not corrected, the wedge will work loose and the force from firing will eventually loosen the arbor. I am sure you didn't loosen it just by loading, you can shoot corrected Walkers with a steady 60 gr diet of trip 7 and not loosen the arbor.

Mike

 

[gtrgy888]

Shouldn't be surprised, all Uberti arbors are short. If not corrected, the wedge will work loose and the force from firing will eventually loosen the arbor. I am sure you didn't loosen it just by loading, you can shoot corrected Walkers with a steady 60 gr diet of trip 7 and not loosen the arbor.

Mike

I have good reason to believe it was the loading force. After fixing the arbor with epoxy and continuing to fire maximal loads, it didn’t come loose again after I started loading exclusively with a press. Even maximal charges push much less than their full ~200 foot pounds of energy on the arbor threads. I was definitely putting more weight than that on the lever to bend it. After correcting the arbor length, I’m still wary about heavy compression with the loading lever. A 23 grain paper cartridge seats just about right without requiring lots of torquing down.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Ok whatever. My normal load sends a 250gr lead bullet out the muzzle at 900+ fps. That's well over 400 ft-lb of energy being produced on an open top platform revolver using smokless powder (they are conversions) . . . every shot. That's on a Dragoon series as well as '60 Army models (no boutique loads for any particular revolver, they all eat the same!! Lol ). No loose arbors.

I realize I'm not using the loading lever for loading on my revolvers but the loading force needed to push a soft lead projectile (ball or conical) isn't anywhere close to the force needed to pull the arbor threads. I've bent a Remington from loading/shooting over sized and or too hard balls but that is a testament to the design flaws of the Rem. design. I don't believe you or anyone else has the ability to pull the arbor threads in a brass frame while loading it. To pull typical arbor threads would require roughly 4,000 - 6,000 lbs.
So, I'd guess your arbor was loose from the get go (a lot of them are) and was pounded from shooting. Correctly re -torquing the arbor along with correcting the length will produce a revolver that you can't tear up. The open top platform is an extremely robust design when executed correctly. Poor execution of the open top design is why the easier to execute top strap REM. is erroneously regarded as the strongest.

Mike

 

[woodnbow]

If not regularly beating on my guns with a hammer makes me a sissy, then I guess I'm a sissy.

Pat McManus once told of a stranger approaching him as he was disciplining an errant shotgun with a tire iron... maybe this is what the OP is doing?

 

[woodnbow]

Ok whatever. My normal load sends a 250gr lead bullet out the muzzle at 900+ fps. That's well over 400 ft-lb of energy being produced on an open top platform revolver using smokless powder (they are conversions) . . . every shot. That's on a Dragoon series as well as '60 Army models (no boutique loads for any particular revolver, they all eat the same!! Lol ). No loose arbors.

I realize I'm not using the loading lever for loading on my revolvers but the loading force needed to push a soft lead projectile (ball or conical) isn't anywhere close to the force needed to pull the arbor threads. I've bent a Remington from loading/shooting over sized and or too hard balls but that is a testament to the design flaws of the Rem. design. I don't believe you or anyone else has the ability to pull the arbor threads in a brass frame while loading it. To pull typical arbor threads would require roughly 4,000 - 6,000 lbs.
So, I'd guess your arbor was loose from the get go (a lot of them are) and was pounded from shooting. Correctly re -torquing the arbor along with correcting the length will produce a revolver that you can't tear up. The open top platform is an extremely robust design when executed correctly. Poor execution of the open top design is why the easier to execute top strap REM. is erroneously regarded as the strongest.

Mike

Mike I think he’s talking about compressing Triple 7. Not the efforts needed to load a ball...

 

[paul harm]

whughett, the OPs thread is titled a 1851 REMINGTON, not Colt revolvers. All the Remingtons came with a loading lever and as I said it's what keeps the axle in the gun.
I don't believe there's a design flaw with the Remington because someone was trying to load hard lead/ oversize balls. That's a mistake of the operator, not the gun. Load and shoot the gun as it was intended to and you won't have any problems with bent levers.
Notice how the OP hasn't come back. He was just a troll.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Mr.harm, the point was obviously missed. It wasn't about me loading the wrong projectile, the point was the Remington frame failed, the open top won't under the same "abuse" (unless you can apply 4-6K lbs) . The frame failed because it's too thin for that kind of abuse, the open top is very chunky . . . it's a tank!
Here's more insight, even with a "short arbor", the open top frame won't fail when loading . . . but the Remie can/will (with the same abuse). The bullets i shoot are common hard lead . . . could be the failure happened just from loading ( probably) but if it was a combination, open top still wins.

Mike

Oh, i agree about the troll.

 

[woodnbow]

....
Notice how the OP hasn't come back. He was just a troll.

OK who made the fake NOOB!??

 

[Blackpowderwarrior]

I have came to similar conclusions as Mike about the open top Design. Contrary to alot of information passed around on the web as single action gospel the Open top Colt is a MUCH stronger design and will run all day. After three cylinders full my remmy starts to bind up. I also have noticed that my stainless remmy is no where near as strong and solid feeling as my Colt. You can definitely tell the difference if you own both and take them out shooting at the same time. Now that being said I have grown to love my remmy and it's lovely in it's own right. But if I could only own one sixgun it would be the 1860 open top Pietta

 

[45 Dragoon]

Bpwarrior, you're a wise man !!! Lol!!

In all seriousness though, both designs do what the design was intended for . . . and they do it very well! The Colt was purely an assembly of function, the forces applied would be handled masterfully by a design from the mechanical age. Great inventions are really the "line in the sand" . . . the starting line for the "better mouse trap". Though Colt introduced a top strap design (Root) he sided with what made more sense for him (that obviously only lasted till his death though). The Remington variant of the top strap was the epitome of simple!!! Solid piece frame, screw in barrel, 2 screw action . . . a design good enough that it helped turn the direction of an industry.
Anyway, I argue that the open top design (correctly done) is the superior of the two but that doesn't mean I'm not a fan of the Remington. I love the Remington for exactly what it is. It, to me, is the go to revolver for a competition S.A. (as in Cowboy shooting). It lends itself to an easy shift from cap gun to cartridge gun with the pull of the cyl pin . . . which means the same setup can be used in any category from cap gun up!! With coils inside, it will totally show a Ruger "how it's done" !!!

Just so y'all know where I'm coming from . . .

Mike

 

[rodwha]

The way I see it is with Colt’s design he needed it hefty since the arbor handles most of the stress, and Remington and others spread the stress along the frame more requiring less steel needed to handle it. Both clearly worked well for what they were designed to do.