Hammer/nipple contact on Rem NMA 58 vs Colt Pattern 1851

D

DG45

New member
I noticed something today about the way the hammer face strikes the nipple caps on my Pietta replica 44 cal. Remington 1858 NMA versus the way the hammer face does that on my Pietta replica of a .36 cal. 1851 Colt Navy pattern revolver.

As I've said before, I believe the Remington is overall the superior gun, however, not every feature is superior, particularly not the hammer, which is awkward to cock and I've noticed when firing it that the knuckle on my "bird" (middle) finger hits the trigger guard every time I cock it, and that gets to be old, pretty quickly.

I also noticed today for the first time that face of the hammer on my NMA replica does not seem strike the nipple flush, but at a sharp angle, while my Colt replica seems to strike the nipples flush or very nearly so.

I wonder if that angled hammer strike will cause nipple damage on the Remington, and maybe some misfires? Hasn't happened yet on mine but I haven't fired it much. It seems like the hammer face could have easily been designed to strike flush, but just wasn't.

I guess I could try to file the hammer face myself to change the angle, but am afraid if I do it may not hit the cap with enough force to ignite the charge.

Has this ever caused anyone problems or is my gun just out of whack?
 
I have noticed...

....That the manufacturer does not always put the same nipples in the revolver. By that I mean two different size nipples in the same revolver.

Got an ASM Walker that way. I am fairly certain the nipples were original because everythig else was nearly as unfired.

Have a Rogers and Spencer (I think it was the R&S) that one of the nipple had to be backed out in order to discharge the chamber. That revolver was sold to me as being completely original.

My G&G purchased new from Cabela's has no two nipples exactly the same size, but all chambers fire.


If this happens then it is not very hard to believe that your revolver may have been shipped with longer than standard nipples. Might want to pull them out and compare them to nipples from other revolvers you own. It would be convenient if your revolver couldn't decide which cap to take or if it only takes 10s loosely. That way you could take a coupla thousandths off the cone and get a little tighter cap fit while improving the hammer to nipple interface.
 
Zullo 74, Remington NMA's are simple, rugged,reliable, powerful, accurate, easy to disassemble and reassemble, quick to reload by using an additional cylinder, has a top strap for additional frame strength, can be converted to cartridge use by purchasing a conversion cylinder, and can be converted back again by replacing the original cylinder.

The additional frame strength provided by the top strap is useful for firing heavy BP loads, but is also useful for firing a serious cartridge load.

I'd call those superior features. But nobody's saying it's perfect. On the minus side, It's not as sleek looking as a comparable Colt BP revolver, some people don't like the handgrip fit on the NMA (but I'm not among them) and the hammer does leave something to be desired. (The Colt hammer is much better ergonomically, and seems to hit caps flush.)

Best of all, a good steel replica of the NMA can be purchased today from Cabella's for $189.00 and until Sept. 6, you can get $20 off that. Not bad, I'd say.
 
Cabelas has the same deal on steel framed Colts too. BTW there are conversion cylinders for Colt type revolvers. Also, I have a Remmie type and a bunch of Colt type guns because I prefer the Colt type. :D
 
I prefer Colt's but I have four Remington's and one Colt on the way. Go figure.

Colt loses nothing by not having the top strap and the Remington is still limited to the same loads the Colt is.
 
Another argument that no one's going to win.


I really don't have much experience with either gun, and experiece can often change first impressions, but the Remington is quicker to reload if you own an extra cylinder.(I do.)

I know it's quicker to reload that way because I have a Colt 1851 pattern gun and own an extra cylinder for that too.

Of course, the 800 pound gorilla at the Pietta factory installed the wedge on my Colt pattern gun, and that really left a bad taste in my mouth, because I thought they were supposed to be that tight (until Hawg set me straight).

It's been much faster to reload (but not as fast as the Remington) since I learned you're not supposed to drive the wedge in with a sledgehammer. Maybe somebody will tell the Pietta gorilla.

I think I would like the .44 Colt pattern gun more than the 1851 Colt pattern because I think the handle might fit my hand better than the 1851. Maybe that's what I'm missing. Think I'll buy one since you say I can get one of those for $169 too.

But getting back to my original topic, if you own a Remington 1858 NMA, look at your gun from the side while pulling it's hammer back a little, then while watching carefully from the side, see the angle at which its hammer face contacts the nipples (or cones I think some are calling them). Its at a sharp angle on my gun.
 
DG45 said:
Has this ever caused anyone problems or is my gun just out of whack?
Click to expand...

I can't say that I ever really noticed or even looked. To be honest I think that the test is whether it works reliably or not. If it stops working reliably then it becomes something to look at more closely.
I think that even the most expensive guns have their flaws and it doesn't always require a microscope to find them.
I don't like to look for troubles, I would rather have them find me.
This sort of reminds me of my car's dash board lights.
Someone told that they weren't called dummy lights for nothing and that I shouldn't pay attention to them unless the car really starts acting up.
I believe it enough that I sometimes tell that to my wife, and sometimes she reminds me too.
I was at the mechanic just last week for a transient but recurring problem, and he said that the readout code was for something inside the transmission which can't be fixed without dropping the whole unit. He recommended to just keep driving the car and live with it because it's not worth the cost of the repair.
 
Last edited:
Hammer/Nipple fingerprint is easy to capture with copper or brass shim stock.

IMAG0118.jpg



See http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=459200
 
articap, you overlook Murphy's Law. (If anything can go wrong, it will.)

I believe in preventive medicine, preventive maintenence, etc. I don't see a Remington NMA replica as exempt from the rule. I don't expect perfection for the price I paid for this gun, or any gun, and this may be the way the hammer fits and strikes caps on every original NMA or replica ever made, but it certainly looks wrong to me.

This gun only cost me $189, and at that price, it wouldn't surprise me if the hammer was incorrectly designed or incorrectly installed or both. If your gun is like mine you won't need a microscope to see the angle its hitting caps. It's particularly noticible when I compare it to the way my Colt replica hammer strikes. It doesn't mean the Remington hammer won't work, and it doesn't mean that I won't use the gun the way it is, but it may mean it will eventually bend, break, or damage nipples, and perhaps cause misfires.

I don't know if it will do any of that. I've owned the gun less than two months and so far so good (as the guy who jumped off the Empire State Building said while passing the 50th floor), but if something's wrong with it, I want to fix it. If something can be improved, I want to improve it.
 
You could cut the nipples down and file the hammer face flat and square. That would quell your worries.
The inexpensive Cabelas/Piettia Remington reproduction is really a fine piece considering it's price! The gun is capable of shooting strictly cap and Ball loads forever and also has the capibility (and quality build) to handle regular cartrige loads via a Conversion Cylinder! What a bargan this is! Strong and cheap! Factor in very accurate and you have one good buy!
The Remington frame is a tall frame, much taller than even a Ruger Vaquero or any of the Colt Clones and defiantelly taller than any open-top. This is not a bad thing, it's just different. Some folks hate it some love it ME? I like the tall frame and also embrace the Colt design too. One places the bore low in the hand, one gives a superior sight picture.
The Remington frame strength is without question and in different barrel lengths, the revolver can preform different functions. The 8" BBL is fine for target shooting and optimal power and the current (and very popular!) 5 1/2' bbl has become afavorite for carry and quick draws! The 5 1/2" Sheriff's model is also very accurate plus it mates well to a conversion cylinder!
You'd be hard pressed to find a better deal than these "sale" Remingtons these days and if you don't have one ya better get one cause you are missing the boat!
My next BP aqusition should be the .36 caliber Remington Belt model because I want a .36 that can extract all the power you can get from this caliber. The big frame will contain any .36 load and it should be as accurate as it's big Brothers also!
tzo sum it up, a Black Powder revolver shooter needs both a Colt open-top and a Remington full frame to get the most out of BP shooting!
JMHO,
ZVP
 
The gun is capable of shooting strictly cap and Ball loads forever and also has the capibility (and quality build) to handle regular cartrige loads via a Conversion Cylinder!
Click to expand...

According to Howell's site they're only for bp or bp equivalent loads, not modern off the shelf ammo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top