Which Cap & Ball revolver is better

[Ifishsum]

1. I choose a: Colt 1860 Army
2. The Colt fits better to my hand, more shots before needing a cleanup, I much prefer the thinner trigger and it feels lighter to me, plus it's just a more elegant looking revolver to me.
3. Yes, my first C&B was a Remington NMA but after I got the 1860 it gets shot a lot more often.

I will say the Rem shot much closer to POA out of the box, but with a taller front sight on the Colt it is a joy to shoot. Both are Piettas, and arbor length was perfect on the Colt.

 

[duelist1954]

The poll is closed. Thanks to everyone who participated.

 

[RON in PA]

Even though the poll is closed I'll comment.

If the only handguns we were allowed to have were either the 1860 Colt or the Remington, I'd choose the Colt because it functions better as a black powder weapon, it handles the fouling much better allowing more shots before cleaning is necessary or before the gun becomes inoperable.

 

[72coupe]

Let us know when the article comes out. I wish to purchase it.

 

[Dave Markowitz]

The Rogers & Spencer is better than either.

 

[Malamute]

I dont know the focus or intent of the piece you're writing. If talking modern guns, great, but modern guns and impressions dont really jive with historical ones.

The Remingtons had some problems with QC and reliability early on. There were some Plains Cavalry officers that elected to leave revolvers behind when issued Remingtons because so many of them had burst cylinders and serious reliability isses, they said the men had no confidence in them. The Colts were generally liked or at least considered much more reliable. I believe Remington improved their guns over time, but the bad impression had already been made in many peoples minds.

 

[Tommygunn]

I dont know the focus or intent of the piece you're writing. If talking modern guns, great, but modern guns and impressions dont really jive with historical ones.

The Remingtons had some problems with QC and reliability early on. There were some Plains Cavalry officers that elected to leave revolvers behind when issued Remingtons because so many of them had burst cylinders and serious reliability isses, they said the men had no confidence in them. The Colts were generally liked or at least considered much more reliable. I believe Remington improved their guns over time, but the bad impression had already been made in many peoples minds.

Hmmm. Interesting ... because when Colt introduced the model 1860, it had a full -fluted cylinder and during testing, a number of those cylinders burst, which alarmed the armory doing the testing, as well as causing Colt to redesign the cylinder, which led to the non-fluted scene-bearing cylinder we now associate with the revolver ....but the chambers were also redesigned to have a built-in taper, that, and eliminating the flutes, on top of a stronger steel being used (IIRC) led to a better, stronger cylinder.
I would not have thought that Remingtons would have had problems with burst cylinders ....but I guess it happened. Too bad it apparently happened in the field and left such a bad impression on the troopers.
However, it seems to me by the end of the Civil War, the Remingtons became pretty popular among those troopers who wished to purchase their revolvers upon mustering out of service. That's my recollection .... though possibly I could be wrong ....

 

[Malamute]

I believe I read about in the book(s) Firearms of the American West, by Garavaglia and Worman. It was the first I had heard of it, but they have quotes and references from original sources.

Excellent books, by the way, both parts 1 and 2

http://www.amazon.com/Firearms-American-West-1803-1865-v/dp/0870814834

Yes, apparently besides the flutes and chambers on the Colts 1860 guns, I think they changed the steel alloy as well. I dont recall the exact details, perhaps someone can fill in the blaks.

 

[MCgunner]

Colt's are great if you don't wanna hit anything. I've had a couple, admittedly not the 1860, but the 1851. I don't care much for 'em. They shoot 50 feet high at 5 yards and just ain't accurate in my experience. Okay, I exaggerated, but they shoot WAY too high. Some say they're regulated for 75 yards. Sounds reasonable, but I don't shoot that far with a pistol.

My 5.5" Remmy is ACCURATE. I can actually HIT things with it at 25 yards. Therefore, the Remmy gets my vote. It's also a lot easier to swap cylinders with which I like because not only do I have 3 cylinders for it, but I have a .45ACP conversion for it that's just as accurate and shoots to the same POA as my cap and ball cylinders. This thing shoots 2.5" groups at 25 yards. THAT is useful. The '60 might match that, but a LOT higher above POA making it impossible for me to adjust for.

Comes down to it, my ROA kicks both gun's butts. But, that's another story. I actually enjoy shooting the Remmy, the Colt not so much.

 

[RON in PA]

MCgunner, with a Colt aim for the belt if you want to hit 'em in the chest.

 

[MCgunner]

I prefer it hitting where I look. I have a 10" gong target on my back yard range and that thing is dead meat off hand with the Remmy from 35 yards. It's safe from the Colt until I get into point shoot range.

All this crying about the Remmy gumming up. All it takes is a little wipe of the cylinder pin with a wet rag about every three cylinders full. Even when not using multiple cylinders, I pull the cylinder and load on a press off the gun, anyway. AND, pulling that cylinder is the ultimate in simplicity.

The Remington is just a better gun, period, case closed, I said so. But, whatever, I still shoot the Colt now and then, not often, prefer the Remmy or the ROA because I know where the ball is going with those. I like my guns accurate. Maybe I'm strange.

 

[eastbank]

i shot my 58 rem 36 times in a row with 37 pulls of the trigger as one cap was not fully seated and the next pull of the trigger set the charge off, i was useing crisco with a little bees wax for lube. and the gallon oil can was full of holes at 20yards. eastbank.

 

[MCgunner]

Is this the black powder version of the 9mm vs .45 debate...or maybe the Glock vs 1911 debate? Far more amiable discussion, I must say. But, then, nobody DOESN'T like a cap and ball revolver no matter the design. It's just preferences. Personally, I won't own a Glock.

Cap and ball guns are about fun shooting, to me, anyway. There certainly are other reasons to own 'em, history, economy, etc. For me it's just about fun (and economical) shooting with big guns that go "boom" instead of "pow". My testosterone levels go up every time I shoot one. This, of course, sways my preferences. I like shooters. I really see no reason to limit myself to one model, though. Hell, I wanna own 'em ALL! Thank GOD they're generally more affordable than cartridge guns. I just paid 600 bucks for a Blackhawk convertible in 9mm/.357. I coulda bought 3 Remmies or 3 1860s, Piettas, on a good Cabela's sale for that and not had to do any paperwork, delivered direct to my door!

 

[ImperatorGray]

Even though the poll's closed, I'll throw my two cents in.

"Better" and "preference" are two different things. You ask me, the Remington is definitely better for being so much stronger. Also, the notches between cylinders are wonderful.

But I prefer the Colt for my own use just for ergonomics, looks, and a history tied to my home state.

But if I wanted to shoot it hot and long, I'd own a Remington.

 

[45 Dragoon]

As far as I'm concerned, the Dragoon (any of um) beats um all. More power, shoot all day and tomorrow with no binding , very accurate, stronger. The frame of the Remie is awfully puny where the rammer runs through it and I have BENT a Remi loading it!! I NEVER BENT a Colt!!! The arbor has much more shear and tensile strength. I don't see why folks are so quick to jump on the "stronger than an open top" wagon. It's not (I'm pretty sure its been scientifically proven). I only shoot smokless cartridge ammo now, but my Kirst converted '60 (Pietta) shoots the same (warm) 45 Colt loads that I shoot in my Dragoons!! (and my El Patron Comp and my 5 1/2" Remie !!!! I love um all!!!!)

As far as accuracy goes, one built correctly (basically none today are) will maintain accuracy far longer than the shooter.

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com

 

[BCRider]

Colt's are great if you don't wanna hit anything. I've had a couple, admittedly not the 1860, but the 1851. I don't care much for 'em. They shoot 50 feet high at 5 yards and just ain't accurate in my experience.

The two 1860's and the 1851 I've got would have agreed with you before I punched out the front sights and replaced them with taller versions. I posted about this work in;

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=718779

When the new sights were in and trimmed to suit the load I like to shoot the guns were able to be aimed right at the bullseye in a target at 15 yards and put a sub 2 inch group together with both the 1860's. The 1851 has another issue or two and hasn't been shot yet.

s this the black powder version of the 9mm vs .45 debate...or maybe the Glock vs 1911 debate? Far more amiable discussion, I must say.

You spoke just a hair too soon.... and then along came 45Dragoon with;

As far as I'm concerned, the Dragoon (any of um) beats um all......

And got all hoity toity on us....

Hey 'Goon. You WOULD think that since the guns are named after you....

 

[Crawdad1]

Either a higher front sight or 'V' notch the Colt's hammer sight or both and you have solved the problem of the Colt shooting high. First thing I do on getting a new Colt is to notch the hammer.

I don't know Mike but there are some pretty impressive Remingtons out there.

 

[45 Dragoon]

BC,
lol! You crack me up!!

C.daddy,
I agree! ! The Remie is easier to make right ( no arbor problem) and they seem to be very accurate. Mine is no different, that's why it's a carry for me. It's the perfect "drop cylinder " gun. That's why I put gated conversions in the open tops (they are NOT great drop cylinder guns!!) Remies are a "great step in the right direction " and very cool but they are what they are.
All that praise aside, to me (and Mr. Colt) , the Dragoons "do it " best!! (With beauty and brawn!!)

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com

 

[CraigC]

1. Which revolver is better:
a. Colt 1860 Army

2. Why do you prefer it? (optional)

3. Do you own both revolvers?
a. Yes


I much prefer the Colt and that's probably why I have a whole bunch of Colt designs but only one Remington. For me, the Colt has a better shaped, more comfortable and naturally pointing grip. Which is also longer for my pinky. For me, it has much better balance and is by far better looking. Both guns have miniscule sights but I don't have a problem functioning with either. Nor do I have issues with the Colt's accuracy.

 

[MCgunner]

Hey, looks are personal preference. I prefer the Remmy look, the closed top frame. Others like the open tops. I do think the rounded 1860 is cool looking vs the dragoon or the 51.

My wife says I'm sexy. I fail to see it since I'm a 63 year old fat man, but I don't argue the point. Personal preference, right?

What I like about the 51 is the grip shape and pointability of the gun. It does point better for me. Haven't shot a 1860, but once. I know the grip on the 51 is preferred by many. I've cut the groove down in the hammer, ain't enough. I would need a taller front sight to correct it. It shoots SO high, I can't adjust my sight picture enough to compensate. Now, my ROA shoots high, too, and I have the rear sight on the bottom. It's a blued ROA, so there's no changing the front sight blade. But, I can put the front sight to the bottom notch of the rear and place the target at the top of the rear sight notch, if you follow that, and I can hit well with it with just a different sight picture. The Remmy is so nice because there's none of that BS.

 

[Crawdad1]

I agree with Mike that the weak point of a Remmy is the loader lever. And another complaint against the Remington is I find the iron front sight on the Remington is harder to see than the brass front sight on the Colt 1860.

However regarding the Remington as I have never owned a ROA so I can't speak from experience but there are people on this board that have said that their Remington out shoot their ROA.

 

[exbrit49]

Own both types

1. Which revolver is better:
a. Colt 1860 Army
b. Remington New Model Army. For me the Remmy, for me I am more accurate with the Remmy

2. Why do you prefer it? (optional) I like having the backstrap and for me, the Remmy is more accurate than the colts,

2. Do you own both revolvers?
a. Yes. have several of each from different manufacturers
b. No

Not sure how this post will turn out but I bet it will be pretty evenly divided between the two models . It more a matter of personal preference.
as noted, I shoot both and have a lot of fun making big clouds of smoke and then seeing a nice round hole in the black of the target!!!!

 

[Indian Outlaw]

Sheesh, Mike. You shut down this poll awfully quick. :/

If the 1860 was better, then why did top-strap guns make "wedge guns" obsolete?

 

[Malamute]

If the 1860 was better, then why did top-strap guns make "wedge guns" obsolete?

"Better" can take many things into account. In the big picture, the solid frame won out. In the period that percussion caps ruled, there was plusses and minusses to both types. The Remingtons can in fact be termed "better" in some regards, but whatever the perceived superiority may not outweigh other factors to many people. The sheer weight of history shows that Colts were used much more, which has some bearing on many peoples feeling about the guns and their history. It does for me. None are perfect. All are fun. Its a win-win either way.

Many dont want or arent capable of dealing with modifications to their guns to get them to shoot closer to point of aim, and the factories that make them arent helping themselves (or us) much in this regard. It seems fairly simple to change the front sight, though mine arent so far off I cant hit things with them. I think they will eventually get small dovetail sights up front.

I'm on board with the absolute coolness of the Dragoons. I'd love to shoot a buffalo and deer with mine.

 

[Fingers McGee]

Well, I was out of town when the poll came down & wasn't able to respond within the window of time allotted to get into the article. IMNSHO, and I'm sure no one will be surprised when I say, the Colt is the better of the two revolvers. It is inherently point shootable and simple to operate. The grip size and angle is more shooter friendly than the high hammer spur and small grips on the NMA and the larger grooved arbor on he Colt doesn't foul as readily as the NMA.

I own a large number of reproduction C&B revolvers that, in addition to the Colt's, includes two Remington's (1 NMA & 1 Beals Navy), one Rogers & Spencer (terrible gun), two Whitneys, a Spiller & Burr, and two ROAs (for investment purposes only ). I only shoot Colt's though; for fun or in competition.