cap and ball revolvers, should i go stainless?

i dont watch a lot of westerns, or movies for that matter, grew up in cities, and im a student in engineering... so, its not like i seen these old revolvers in movies and thought they would be cool or anything like that.. my first experience with single action revolvers was actually handling and shooting one a relative owned when i was younger, and to this date, not without many attempts, have i found another handgun that could equal a colt SAA in handling, pointability, or balance... and good balance in a handgun speaks volumes more to me than magazine capacity, erroneous "stopping power" reports, etc

reason im looking to go even older than that now is because i did own the remington and loved the utlitarian practicality of cap and ball revolvers... even if the entire world runs out of ammunition there will always be the components for gunpowder and soft lead available... heck, they come with their own reloading press built in

so, if the 44 caliber 1851 isnt exactly legit, what is it then? essentially an 1860 frame with an 1851 front end?... i actually prefer the more rustic, simple lines of the 1851 over the 1860.... but one last question to those that have handled them.... how well does the 1851 or 1860 balance when compared to an 1873?
 
Last edited:
I would have to disagree with the person who said not to buy the Ruger Old Army. Other than they are not made anymore and on used ones the prices are creeping upwards I see no reason not to buy a good used one if you find it. They are built like a tank, shoot well, and obviously hold their value. I have one and it's not something I would sell. Good luck, you'll have lots of fun once you start shooting cap and ball guns, They are addictive!
 
so, if the 44 caliber 1851 isnt exactly legit, what is it then? essentially an 1860 frame with an 1851 front end?... i actually prefer the more rustic, simple lines of the 1851 over the 1860.... but one last question to those that have handled them.... how well does the 1851 or 1860 balance when compared to an 1873?
Click to expand...

Its the rebated frame and cylinder of the .44 army with the barrel assembly and smaller grip frame of the 51. The 73 and 51 both have the same grip frame and balance very well. The 73 has a shorter barrel so IMHO balances a little better but the 51 is a natural pointer.
 
then i think ill get the '51... how would its grip compare with that of the 1858, which i felt fit my hand really well when i had one?
 
To me the 51 has the best feeling grip and points more naturally. You do have to curl your pinky finger under it like you do on a 73 tho. The 60 has a longer grip frame but it doesn't feel as good to me. I never really got into the .36 till a year or so ago and I was really surprised by it. Historically they didn't come with a 5 1/2 inch barrel but that doesn't mean there weren't some cut off after purchase.
 
then i think ill get the '51... how would its grip compare with
Click to expand...
The 1873 "Peacemaker" has the same grip as the 1851 Colt Navy.
Colt knew a winner when they had one....
 
the grip is something im not sure about... my hands are rather large right now, have to buy extra large work gloves, so without being able to handle one before purchase (small town so i have to buy online) im just trying to determine if the smaller grip will fit my larger hands

im curious though.. is it just the same style of grip frame between the 1851 and 1873, or are they actually identicle, and interchangable?.. that would be really cool if i could change out the grip frame later if i found the stock one a bit too small

as for barrel size, wasnt 8 1/2 standard for the navy, 7 1/2 for the army... i have seen some original pieces modified back in the day to be shorter.. seems it wasnt too uncommon to see law enforcement officers chop off most the barrel, remove the ramrod, and convert it into a snubnose they loaded off of the revolver.. so id imagine 5 1/2" was probably done as well..

would be nice to have something a bit shorter and lighter, but im not sure how the removal of two inches will upset the balance or natural pointability... so im still trying to decide on barrel length

also, im still trying to determine if a lighter 36 calibers lighter overall weight and easy handling are worth the loss of the extra power found in 44 caliber models
 
I think ill avoid pietta... just learned their grip frames are WAY off from originals, and ubertis are quite close... i think traditions and EMF use pietta parts... so im trying to decide who i should buy from, but a question i have is this... will a .44 caliber 1851 still handle like a standard 1851, or will it handle more like an 1860, meaning if i were to go for a 44 caliber id be better off with an 1860, and better off with an 1851 if i decide to go with 36?
 
im curious though.. is it just the same style of grip frame between the 1851 and 1873, or are they actually identicle, and interchangable?..
Click to expand...
Good question - I don't know since I've never had an 1873 and an original 1851 to try playing mix and match with.

I suspect the former though.
 
i have since learned that they are in fact interchangable, might need one of the screw holes to be redrilled and tapped so the screw matches but for the most part i read the grip frames do interchange

i wonder though if a 73/51 grip frame would fit an 1860 as well?... still trying to decide if i want to go with a 36 or a 44 though
 
i think im going to stay traditional, get an 1851 in 36 caliber... later on ill get an 1860 in .44 caliber... i see two models i can get, one is case hardened with brass grip frame and trigger guard, the other is all steel with a blued frame.... i think ill be fine with 7 1/2 inches for now.. i want to have one exactly as they were produced in 36 with 7 1/2 to get that perfect balance they had, i dont want to disrupt that by going with a bigger cylinder or shorter barrel right now
 
The grip frames are interchangeable between brands and I have heard they pretty much interchange between brands without a lot of work. If you've decided on Uberti its good you decided on a .36 as Uberti hasn't made a 51 in .44 in a number of years. These days they seem to be trying to be more historically accurate. Here's my 51 Pietta.

008.jpg
 
i like that uberti is trying to be more historically accurate... i seen someone take an original 1873 colt grip and put it behind the pietta grip frame... should be a perfect fit, right?... wasnt even close, however the original 1873 grip matched the contour of the uberti grip frame perfectly... i like that... ill start collecting historically accurate cap and ball revolvers, and ill focus on colt for now, the 1851 navy now, an 1860 army later, an 1861 navy snub, and a walker are next on my list
 
i see two models i can get, one is case hardened with brass grip frame and trigger guard, the other is all steel with a blued frame
Click to expand...
Personally - I like the brass.
What I can't decide though is if I prefer the brass bright and polished, or aged as brass does when it's not lacquered.
Both have a great deal of visual appeal.

The steel is supposedly stronger - but - w/a .36cal is frame strength really all that much of an issue?
 
The steel is supposedly stronger - but - w/a .36cal is frame strength really all that much of an issue?
Click to expand...

If you're talking about the actual revolver frame, brass wont handle anything but light loads without beating itself to death, even with a .36. He was referring to the grip frame tho and that makes no difference. The 51 with a steel grip frame is the London model.
 
If you're talking about the actual revolver frame, brass wont handle anything but light loads without beating itself to death, even with a .36
Click to expand...
Hence my question mark @ the end.
Brass or steel, isn't the 1851 Navy in .36 partial to lighter loads anyhow?
 
ive seen .36 cal loads that equal the .38 special in performance on paper... seem some ballistics tests done with the 44 cal model though where it penetrated 9 jugs, almost a tenth when at most ive seen 44 magnum go through was 6 or 7...... so theres an element to these old revolvers you just cant see on paper i guess...

they seem to punch much, much deeper than a cartridge round of similar weight and velocity would... i notice they seem to be more accurate than a lot of cartridge revolvers too, since theres no cartridge, each round is already formed to the shape of the chambers.. there had to be some reason people like hickok preferred these, even sometimes using an 1860 army or walker if he wanted a bigger bullet as opposed to buying a cartridge revolver in .44-40 or .45 colt when they were available

as for finish.. i guess its a toss up, i kind of like the darker colors of the all steel version, but the brass grip and trigger guard does ass a little contrast to it and would probably look really nice if i let it get a dull brown color, or artifically age the blueing to look antique... all preference though i guess
 
does anyone know whether or not pietta has began using the proper shape backstraps now, because the one i seen was flatter in the rear and had more of a "tail"... i was wondering if theyre making an effort to be true to spec now or not?
 
Brass or steel, isn't the 1851 Navy in .36 partial to lighter loads anyhow?
Click to expand...

Nope, I use 25 grains in my 51

does anyone know whether or not pietta has began using the proper shape backstraps now, because the one i seen was flatter in the rear and had more of a "tail"... i was wondering if theyre making an effort to be true to spec now or not?
Click to expand...

Nope, they still have the bell shaped grips.

006.jpg


If they were getting true they'd quit making the 51 in .44 and would quit making the brass frame Colt's and Remington's and the short barrels etc.
They do make a few Confederate guns now that are close enough, like the Griswold and Gunnison, Spiller & Burr and Dance Brothers.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top