Remington 1851 Max loads

[45 Dragoon]

Well, for sure it was for the most part "new territory" but belt pistols and pocket models soon followed.
The frame size can be minimal but the cyl remains larger because of the arbor. The perimeter design must "enclose" the cylinder but the cyl can utilize a small dia. pin. I think the most reasonable thing to do from a production situation is definitely a cast/forged frame with a screw in barrel . . . at which point, your almost done! Less machine work/finish work = more profit.

From a strength perspective, the 4 sided box is the weakest structure. For a revolver, the cyl is the most important part for containing pressure and fortunately the frame is the support system for the cyl. In the Remingtons corner the top strap is the main stress section and unfortunately it is narrow, thin and has a sight groove to make it even weaker. The front section of the frame is extremely thin and almost non existent in some areas but it's stress from firing is fairly minimal (just be careful loading!! Lol).
The open top has a much more compact "box frame" which also being much more substantial, lends itself to a much stronger support structure. If you think of the arbor as the "top strap" for the O.T. it may make more sense. The barrel assy is quite a robust support for the arbor and the whole package is excellent for its intended purpose!

Of course, we have what we have today in S.A. design with top strap design firing extremely powerful ammo but if you look at the structure itself, it is quite the "beefed up " support system . . . for a cyl that can contain a grenade!! No argument from me!

Mike

 

[44 Dave]

Another design development comes with a bored through cylinder where the recoil shield has the bullet directly against it and different directional forces on the cylinder.

 

[paul harm]

All I was trying to say was under normal loading of soft lead balls [ what is normally shot in muzzle loaders ] the Remington will hold up just fine. I've owned 10 of them over the years [ since the early 70s ] and never bent a loading lever. For over 10 years I shot at the nation range all day long, every day with a 1858 Witelowe [ SP ? ] or Lyman and never bent a lever. Not saying you can't do it because as Mike said, he has. Guess I can't image how much pressure had to be put on the lever to bend it.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Mr. harm, maybe you're reading too fast . . . I didn't bend the lever . . . I bent the frame. The frame collapsed onto the cylinder. So, I guess I wasted a lot of time " pecking " out an explanation of the differences in the two designs but it has nothing to do with the bending of the lever. Actually though, I "spelled it out" for those who may not have seen my explanation before so, no big deal. And, there's no animosity between us. I agree with you totally about loading the correct projectile . . . that the Remie is a fine weapon and all that . . . but, if you happen to NOT load the right thing, you may bend the frame of all things!! A loading lever is easily replaced, a frame? Why bother . . . it's definitely compromised.

Sorry for the apparent confusion .

Mike

 

[Gordon]

I load 30 grains ,easily, in my Lyman .36 Navy 1858 and with correct sized balls and a Wonder wad it loads easily. I load five grains less in my 1862 Police, Max. And although the 1851 might take 30 max , I back off to 26-28 . The length of the cylinders are different in those three. My only ramrod free revolver is the 1849 " Wells Fargo" .31 . That thing is difficult for me to load anyway and lives with a .32 S&W cylinder.

 

[45 Dragoon]

My only ramrod free revolver is the 1849 " Wells Fargo" .31 . That thing is difficult for me to load anyway and lives with a .32 S&W cylinder.

A most EXCELLENT way to load an open top !!!!

Mike

 

[Barr]

If you need a magnum buy a magnum. Trying to hotrod a budget import repro Bp revolver is foolhardy. It’s your dime and face however.

For the record I use Hodgdon recommended max loads when I desire. Whopping in the ball with a punch deforms the nose of the ball and has inconsistent seating pressure. Both are bad for accuracy.

If I need more power in BP I use a .44 or Old Army.

 

[Captain*kirk]

Is this thread for real?
"1851 Remington"? Firing without the loading lever (which holds the cylinder pin/axle secured) because "gun parts are more expensive than a hammer"?



For the sake of discussion (because the OP is obviously a troll or a jokester), the 1858 Remington, in reality, is an 1863 model, as the 1858 patent was for the Beals, which Eli Remington bought the rights to but did not get into production and distribution until 1863 with the New Model Army (NMA) and Navy (NMN) revolvers. Without the use of a loading lever or mechanical stop to keep the cylinder pin anchored, it would most certainly back out until it popped loose from the rear frame hole and the cylinder would bind.
Now, as to max loads...I've managed to squeeze as many as 40 grains of Pyrodex P into a NMA cylinder...once...and all it did was burn extra powder, make excessive smoke, create excess recoil, and throw target accuracy out the window. If you want to burn powder buy a Walker. For the most part, a steel frame BP revolver will handle as much powder as you can stuff down it's craw and still turn the cylinder without shaving lead.

 

[ShotgunDave]

Is this thread for real?

(because the OP is obviously a troll or a jokester)

BINGO!!!

 

[Rebel Dave]

I also don't think the O P is legit. He hasn't been back to this thread since he started it.

Rebel Dave

 

[paul harm]

Mike, you're right about me reading too fast. You bent the frame, not the lever. But I'm still curious about what you were loading to bend a frame. God, I'd hate to meet you in a dark alley and I'm 6'4" at 275#s. There's no way I could push hard enough on a thin loading lever to bend the frame. At least I don't think so. I just shoot RBs in my 58s, either a 451 or 454. Usually the 451s because they don't creep and are easier to seat. What were you loading when the frame bent ? I have never heard of anyone ever doing what you did. Have a good day and enjoy your BP 6 guns.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Hey Paul, I think it was a combination of both loading and shooting. And, I can't tell you if it was too hard of lead or/and too big of round balls. I don't think I was casting at that time (did that later). I only noticed it when the cylinder started dragging while I was loading it. There's another thread that had someone else chime in saying he had done the same thing so I'm not the only one.

Mike

 

[paul harm]

It just seems like something with the loading lever system would bend first.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Like I said, it may be more on the shooting side if it were due to hard lead. Seems like more folks have lost more sleep over this than me!! If I'd known it was going to be such a hurdle I might have taken notes and or paid more attention but . . . I didn't. I was shooting just for the fun of it. Never thought there would be forums on the Internet (reckon AL Gore and Bill hadn't strung up the Internet yet!! Lol) and it would be so important.
My plan this summer is to do some test shooting with some rather "high power" 45C loads in my Dragoons as well as the '60 Army, not to test the cyls but to test the open top design once and for all. I won't be testing the same loads in a Remington . . . maybe if I had a ransom rest.

Mike

 

[JCooperfan1911]

There is no such thing as an “1851 Remington.”

I’m sorry but all of those responses in the poll sound downright ignorant. My guess is you are new to black powder revolvers? Try and educate yourself on them before focusing on “maximum loads”.

 

[paul harm]

I think your views were pointed out in not such a direct manner. Mike in post two, and myself in post five said as much so not ALL the post sounded ignorant, thank you sir.

 

[Blackpowderwarrior]

For what it's worth my open tops have taken some pretty stuff loads. The design is not to be disrespected. Hell I'd say in *MY OPINION* the 1860 army is the best revolver design ever made. Mine will literally Run all day continuously with 30 grain loads

 

[AlexanderA]

Some here are taking the OP seriously. It was obviously intended as a joke.

 

[whughett]

I think the OP was just shaking the bushes to see what would jump out.
And watta you know some interesting stuff has…….

 

[gtrgy888]

For what it's worth my open tops have taken some pretty stuff loads. The design is not to be disrespected. Hell I'd say in *MY OPINION* the 1860 army is the best revolver design ever made. Mine will literally Run all day continuously with 30 grain loads

That’s why I insist on full chamber loading for a .36 (with BP, not 777). The 1860 has the exact same frame, arbor, and wedge assembly. If a .44 can reliably handle 30 grains, so can the .36.

 

[rodwha]

When I oil my NMA base pin it runs all day long too.

 

[Captain*kirk]

That’s why I insist on full chamber loading for a .36 (with BP, not 777). The 1860 has the exact same frame, arbor, and wedge assembly. If a .44 can reliably handle 30 grains, so can the .36.

Managing to squeeze 30gr into a .36 can be a feat of engineering, especially if you are using a wad between powder and ball.

 

[rodwha]

Managing to squeeze 30gr into a .36 can be a feat of engineering, especially if you are using a wad between powder and ball.

The variances between measures sure allows for it though. With black powder all weighing differently it’s easy to see why. My new adjustable measure now reads about what it weighs with 3F Olde Eynsford. Before it weighed 3 grns more than what it showed. The crappy pistol measure that came with my Pietta is way under weight.

Out of curiosity what is your max charge with or without a wad and ball? My understanding has been in a Colt ‘51/‘61 that it held 30 grns with just a ball.

I don’t own a .36, but think I need to. The Colt ‘62 seems the most appealing as it’s compact and light. With energetic powders and short WFN bullets it’s only comparable to a .380 ACP FMJ that makes bigger holes. But it seems if your going to own just one .36 it really should be a Colt ‘51. I’m a caliber guy though, so for that size/weight I’d just carry my 5.5” NMA. Maybe I need both.

 

[vintovka]

Lost me at "Pietta Remington 1851 .36 cal with seven cylinders.. and an uberti .44 Remington 1851 with six cylinders"

 

[Captain*kirk]

Out of curiosity what is your max charge with or without a wad and ball? My understanding has been in a Colt ‘51/‘61 that it held 30 grns with just a ball.

I can do 30 without a wad if I use grease over the balls. With a greased wad, 25 puts the end of the ball pretty close to the end of the cylinder. I believe I once loaded 30gr with a wad and was shaving a little lead as I rotated the cylinder through. It's most accurate with around 22gr of 3F or Pyrodex P.