USFA 1858 Remington

[Old Fuff]

I'll bet that the USFA model probably have progressive rifling, gain twist, like the Dixie Gun Works' "Shooters" revolver by Pietta.

I wouldn't bet on it, especially on their regular production models. Why? Because the original Remingtons didn't have this feature, and I don't think that international target shooters are part of their targeted market. However they might build a special gun for some special shooters, but I don't want to think about what it would cost.

Excluding the combat shooting and cowboy games, most if not all of the top U.S. shooters that compete at international levels usually use European firearms.

 

[Rachen]

Excluding the combat shooting and cowboy games, most if not all of the top U.S. shooters that compete at international levels usually use European firearms.

In that case, Pietta will probably be the sole competitor with USFA, and with these prices, I think USFA would have to change it's rates, since the Piettas are also excellent. They handle good, look good, and shoot good. According to Dixie, the "Shooters" revolver did win many top level competitions since it was first built in the 1980s.
The regular Pietta 1858s, the ones built for heavy duty work in the fields or woods, are just as excellent, just minus the progressive gain twist. However, they are still as accurate as you want them to be.
Also in the Blackpowder Annual magazines, most Cowboy Action Shooters use Italian replicas for the heavy duty work. There was one article by Mr. Peterson where he talked about using cartridge conversions in both the .36 and .44 1858s'.

For such a high priced revolver such as the USFA Remmie, I would think that most people who would get that revolver would most likely keep it as a display piece instead of a shooting piece.

 

[sundance44s]

Geeze all I was wanting was an American made 1858 Remington , made from 4110 steel equal in quaility as the ROA....The only problem I`ve ever had with the repro pistols made in Itiliay is the soft steel they use . Like I said Ruger did it .R&D and Kirst use 4110 makeing the conversion cylinders , and they are made in the USA ..After makeing mods on several of my Itiaian pistols , cutting the barrels down like going through , cold butter .I`m sure most of you have seen the Colt open tops with the dents and dings around the wedge ...Trust me I`ve bought several used and those dents and dings can be sanded out ....too easy . like wood working . Then again ..there are alot of modern fire arms out there ..like the m16 ..composite metal frame and a stock ,made by a toy company . They have just never appealed to me ..I like firearms that feel like they are built well ...not because I read some where they are .

 

[Old Fuff]

The Old Fuff has gone to some lengths to point out that both major Italian makers do indeed turn out quality guns at affordable prices. They could be better, but then they’d be more expensive and people would complain about that. The materials they use are more then equal to that used in the original guns, and I seldom examine an old cap & ball Colt that doesn’t have dings around the barrel wedge.

There has been a lot of discussion concerning accuracy on this thread, but I wonder how many shooters can handhold and shoot one of these revolvers and produce groups that might be smaller then what the revolver is capable of in a machine rest? Unquestionably the best of the European match revolvers will out perform an out-of-the-box Uberti or Pietta, but how many members discussing the issues can shoot well enough to take advantage of the difference?

I highly doubt that any American manufacturer is going to tool up and produce the revolver that Sundance would like to see, because the market is too small and at the price some would expect (or at least want) they’d go broke. Ruger dropped the Old Army because sales didn’t justify continued production. If they offered at the same price, an identical gun that was a true Remington clone they’d pick up a little business, but not much – because only a small minority of all cap & ball revolver shooters would care enough to pay the extra cost. In the overall picture at Ruger, cap & ball revolver sales were a drop in the bucket at best. Any other manufacturer would see the same picture after making a market study. Perhaps we should be glad that we have what we do. If the Italians folded we'd end up with nothing.

 

[Bad Flynch]

>In that case, Pietta will probably be the sole competitor with USFA, and with these prices<

Not necessarily. I own both a DGW/Pietta "Shooter's Revolver" and Pedersoli 1858 Remington. Each is a fine gun both and are roughly in the same price category. I think that the DGW goes for ~$675 and the Pedersoli for ~$835; that's not too much difference.

Both of those guns are well made and impeccably timed. They feel great when the action is cycled and they shoot much better than I can. The Pedersoli has a matte finish, which is especially advantageous on a bright day. Both have comparable sights--dovetailed front sights and notch-type rear sights.

The Pedersoli has a Lothar-Walther barrel which is great; the DGW has a gain-twist barrel. Both revolvers shoot much better than I can. I am going to buy the pour kit adapter that Midway sells for shooting rests because it will fit my Ransom Rest, they say. Comparing one each of the revolvers will not prove much except what load they like the best. The sample size is too small to draw any other conclusions.

The ball size for each gun is different by a few thousandths.

If'n 'n' when I get around to buying a USFA, it will be carefully scrutinized and tested. However, I have no doubt that it will be a fine gun, because my USFA Single Action is so darn good, right out of the box.

 

[arcticap]

Most of you fellers' know that we don't really own our guns anyway, we're only renting them while we're living here on this earth until our days are over. After all, we just can't take them with us beyond the grave.
So if ownership does end up becoming a type of rental, then it all boils down to paying a rentalship price which breaks down into being an annual fee, but paid in advance with a partial return if and when the gun is eventually sold off (if ever).
A $1500 gun (if the USFA 1858 does end up costing that much), ends up costing $75 a year over a 20 year period. And if it's traded-in sometime during that time period, the final price can possibly end up being even less on an annual basis.
If a person re-sold it for $1000 after 10 years, then the final price comes out to being $50 per year for 10 years of rental.
So it's just like an expensive car (hopefully without the upkeep expenses), and there is always a way to justify the final cost of buying an expensive gun.
And isn't money just a means to obtain a small degree of happiness in this life? Money certainly doesn't always provide as much happiness in and of itself simply by possessing it, because sometimes it does need to be spent in order to be given the opportunity to produce it.
So when guns & happiness are involved, whatever floats our individual boat is what's the most important to satisfy any of us!

 

[Jim Dandy]

When guns & happiness are involved, whatever floats our individual boat is what's the most important to satisfy any of us!

I'd prefer to retire before I'm 90.

 

[sundance44s]

The wife asked me to make a list of names and ser# for her of all the reproduction guns I have , she was worried with me haveing such a large collection ..she wouldn`t have a clue what they are or what they are worth when I go to the happy hunting ground ....heck she might end up here giveing them away ..LOL ...I don`t have anyone to leave them to ...I had a last request from my father when he passed to keep what I wanted of his gun collection and put the rest of them in a deep river...I`ll rest that on my wife to do ..I haven`t done that yet ..and won`t ...I`ll never be a great shooter with anyone of them ...I just have too many , and enjoy shooting each and every one I have .

 

[mainmech48]

Guys, IMO we're discounting several Very Large factors when we automatically assume that the price is 'way outta line in comparison to the base model Italian replica.

First of all, the Italians have been at it long enough to have long ago amortized not only their initial design, engineering and tooling costs, but all of the subsequent technology upgrading as well.

Secondly, aside from a couple of special order models at much higher prices, most of the authenticity in the Italian replicas is basically cosmetic. Compared directly to a genuine period Remington, they differ in some significant details. They're slightly smaller in most dimensions and the rifling is very different, just to name a couple of the biggest.

Third, the level of craftsmanship displayed in terms of smooth function and quality of fitting/finishing on even the nicest of their standard production 1858 replicas that I've seen tends to be 'spotty' at best. Less frequent on the Uberti's, granted, but still not exactly what I'd call stellar.

Even with CAD/CNC technology, setting up a line for a whole new item isn't a simple or inexpensive process. Engineering costs money, programming costs money, debugging both during prototype runs costs more money, skilled labor costs money to find and retain and so does training those production and assembly folks in the details needed for the new product.

All of that has to be recouped before any profit is realized, and the smaller the projected number of units they'll sell is, the higher the percentage of those costs each one will have to reflect in the pricing.

Neither the SAA or the Remingtons are modern designs, and even with the advances in manufacturing technology they aren't machines where everything can just be dropped in or screwed-on, it'll all work together in perfect harmony, feel as slick as snot on a glass doorknob and shoot where you point it.

If they make the Remingtons to the same standards of quality and authenticity that their SSA's exhibit they'll surpass everything else out there, and not just in price.

"Value" is a term that's always relative and always highly subjective. Only the guy shelling out the money can tell you "why" something's worth what he spent to him.

 

[sundance44s]

Every time I ask a serious collector what a piece is worth ..I get told it`s worth what someone is willing to pay for it ...I see this being put to the test on GunBroker all the time .

 

[GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL]

Old Fuff is right.... Well, I'm through with the '58's for awhile. I'm a Walker man anyway on the bottom line. Going shoot mine a few times this evening. Damn glad I'vd got a good one made by Uberti instead a piece of that trash Colt was producing back then where every time you pulled the trigger you waited for the damn cylinder to blow up in your face....

 

[mykeal]

So it's just like an expensive car (hopefully without the upkeep expenses), and there is always a way to justify the final cost of buying an expensive gun.

I like the way that man thinks.

 

[Timthinker]

Speaking for myself only, I can remember shooting some extremely inaccurate caplock revolvers some years ago. In fact, some of them shot so poorly that I found a crossbow could produce superior accuracy to them. Those negative experiences led me to seek accurate BP firearms. This is the reason I have championed the ROA revolver and Knight rifles. Now that the ROA has been discontinued, I have considered the Pietta "Shooters" revolver as a potential replacement for the Ruger. It appears others share my interest in this gun as well. The point here is that once you shoot an inaccurate BP revolver, then an obsession with accuracy become quite understandable. I hope this posting explains my passion for accurate BP firearms.


Timthinker

 

[English Bob]

Well I'd love one, sure I's pay it for something well made and it sure as hell wouldn't be sitting as no display piece.

Guess we'll never get them over here though.