Remington vs Colt, it never ends...

"The Us gov chose the colt single action army because it was more accurate harder hitting and worked when the others (S&W, Remington ) would not. I read the report made by the army, I think few who read it would choose anything else"


Since we're in a black powder forum, my assumption is that we're not talking about the Single Action Army... we're talking about cap and ball pistols. History is history, and once metallic cartridges became the norm, the Colt's were the more sucessful design. That's not subject to much debate.


Back to cap and ball:

For fondling and admiring, the Colt designs are both beautiful and varied. Interesting to examine their evolution and design, and with a large variety of designs they are fun to collect. No doubt they are esthetically pleasing to behold and fun to shoot.

But to really take out and shoot, to remove cylinders and exchange, to use with cartridge conversion cylinders, etc... the Remington design is definately more friendly. When Bill Ruger wanted to build a modern cap and ball pistol, he did not use a Colt as his basis, he used a Remington. There's a reason for that. It's a stronger and more modern design.


Willie

.
 
Willie,

Actually Bill Ruger used his own Blackhawk as inspiration for the ROA, which itself was conceived from the C-O-L-T designed SAA.
 
"Actually Bill Ruger used his own Blackhawk as inspiration for the ROA"

For lockwork and frame, yes, it is a cousin to the other Ruger cartridge guns. Those, BTW, are not even close to being mechanically copies of the SAA. They are "stand off" copies from a cosmetic standpoint.

For layout of the loading lever and other modifications to cap and ball, it is absolutely inspired by the Remington and it bears no resemblance to any of the Colt cap and ball pistols.

Not to mention the name... New Army (Remington) and Old Army (Ruger). Or is that just coincidence? :rolleyes:


Willie


.
 
I know that it never existed in days of yore, but that SAA cattleman in cap and ball that Uberti puts out makes a swell shooter. Got one with 2 extra cylinders,and it makes a nice Colt replacement.
 
I've owned both 1851 & 1860 Colts and 1858 Remingtons.

There are plus' and minus' for both.

Remys plus'
1. Extremely quick change cylinder.
2. Stronger rectangular frame as opposed to Colt open top frame.
3. Easier to remove trigger guard and clean.

Remys minus'
1. Hammer located higher (than a Colt's) and harder for me to easily cock.
2. Stronger hammer spring (than a Colt's) makes cocking harder.
3. Feels "top heavy" and nowhere near as balanced (to me, my opinion) as a Colt 1851/1860.

Colt 1851/1860 plus'
1. In my opinion I like the balance of the 1851 & 1860 much better than 1858 Remy.
2. Hammer is more natural reach for my thumb than an 1858 Remy.
3. Hammer & spring is much easier to cock force wise than 1858 Remy.

Colt 1851/1860 minus'
1. Open top frame theoretically not as strong as Remy closed rectangle frame. (The significance of this is debatable depending on loads used).
2. Cylinder takes longer to change than a Remy does.
3. Sometimes get spent caps falling into gap between hammer and frame and jamming action, where this does not happen with the Remy.
4. More frame screws required to be removed to access bolt and bolt spring area for cleaning or replacement of parts.

Recently I sold my Pietta, stainless, shortened barrel, target sights 1858 Remy along with its "stainless like" R&D .45 colt cartridge conversion cylinder.

I kept my two nickel & gold 1860 Pietta Colts which are currently my only two black powder revolver handguns. Those I won't sell.

To me the plus' of the Remy do not offset the top heavy feel and lack of balance nor offset the much harder to cock Remy hammer. Not only much harder force wise to cock, but also feels harder to access with the thumb.

The Remy is a fine revolver. I've owned two of them. I just prefer the 1860 Colt personally. I like its balance over the Remy, it fits my hand better, and is easy and natural for my thumb on cocking.

With different people's hands and fingers being different sizes and strength, it's an each to their own thing and whatever works best for them.

The 1860 Colt works best for my hands. Someone else's experience may differ.





.
 
Last edited:
The only time that the extra strength of the top strap gun should come into play is if you are going to smack someone up the side of the head.
 
heres the thing i have never understood. there really is no evidence to support that a feller carried spare cylinders and swapped them out. if it was done, why hasnt anyone ever found one single photo from the period showing a person carrying multiple cylinders?


cylinder removal and insertion does take longer with a colt. if the wedge comes out its a pain, but with the remington ive seen on here that if you go to far with the cylinder the whole thing ties up and creates a real major issue to get it to go into place.
so toss up on that.
ive read a few posts on here about guys who didnt seat the ball down properly in a revolver. the colt guys seem to either pull the cylinder out pull the bullet out or they remove teh barrel, advance the cylinder by hand and reinstall the barrel and shoot.
on remingtons ive read of unlucky guys who spent the afternoon with a pocket knife cutting excess lead off the bullet till itwas flush with the cylinder face.
botha pain, but colt clearly wins in that.

the only time the remingtons come down to a clear victory is a rear groove sight that never changes from shot to shot. and longer longevity to the full frame.
 
the only time the remingtons come down to a clear victory is a rear groove sight that never changes from shot to shot. and longer longevity to the full frame.
Click to expand...

In most cases my Colt's have been more accurate than my Remington's but it only shows up from a bench.
 
I purchased a Uberti Remington M1858 , the following are my comments on the Remington design.

It is clearly superior to any Colt caplock. Firstly most Colts have 12 visible screws. The Remington has six. To access the inner lock works on a Colt you have to remove six screws, three trigger guard screws, one mainspring tension screw, and two back strap screws. On a Remington you have to remove one guard screw, one grip screw, and one mainspring tension screw. The Remington only uses two side plate screws to hold in lock works, the Colt uses three. There is one tiny screw on the Remington cylinder hand that I had to unscrew to remove the hammer and the hand. Maybe there is a trick that I have not figured out yet. Unfortunately, something that is true for all replica actions, most screws are unique, and a couple will be so very similar that it is easy to start them in the incorrect hole.

The cylinder in the Remington design is easily removed by dropping the ramrod and pulling out the cylinder pin. The parts fit is tight and requires jiggling, but it is far better than the Colt. The Colt requires an involved process: First, removal of the barrel wedge. This entails loosening of the wedge screw, and then driving the cylinder wedge out to the side. For me I need a drift in addition to a rawhide mallet. The barrel is usually tight on the cylinder pin, I use the rammer against the cylinder face for leverage. Considering the loss of coordination under stress, the number of hand movements, the number of loose parts involved, it is hard to believe that soldiers in battle exchanged cylinders for a quick reload. I wonder if this is some sort of a myth.

In the seventy rounds I fired, I did not have one exploded cap jam the action. This shows the intelligent design of the Remington. The closed frame prevents a cap from getting between the hammer and the frame. It is not unusual in six shots to have one or more exploded caps come off a Colt nipple and fall in between the hammer and the frame. If a cap falls into the lock works, sometimes it takes needle nosed pliers to clear the debris. If you fire a Colt enough, you will learn to flick your wrist as you cock it, in an attempt to toss the busted cap clear of the revolver.

The Remington nipples are slightly angled outward, making it easier to push a cap on. The Colt nipples are perpendicular to the cylinder. There are notches next to the nipple which are just the right size to clear a capping tool. Depending on the colt replica, you do not have safety notches between the cylinder. The Remington has them and thus is a safer action.
 
The Remington was a 1st Generation revolver, the Colt a 3rd, and the whole notion of the revolver was still pretty new back then, so they had a lot of refining based on experience to do.
Supposedly "back then they did" a lot of things for which there is no documentary or photographic evidence. Given the somewhat complicated and cumbersome photographic processes of the time there was little candid photography or snapshots, and i don't most photographers were interested in details of uniforms or armament, in many case Civil War soldiers hold firearms that are the photographer's props. Plus they tried to "dress up" for the occasion. I have read that the Battle of Blood River in South Africa on December 16, 1838 the Boers fightin the Zulus would put the lead balls in their mouths, after they poured the powder down the barrel they's spit a ball down it then thump the butt of their muskets against a wagon or on the ground to seat everything, prime, then fire. Makes sense, but they they actually do it?
 
I don’t understand anyone’s fascination with Remingtons. My first exposure to black powder shooting was with Remingtons, both original and reproductions. I became so frustrated with fouling causing cylinders to seize preventing both rotation and removal that I swore off of black powder for forty years. I guarantee I can swap a Colt cylinder far quicker than a Remington. A properly set up Colt wedge can be easily and quickly removed and, contrary to what some people think, without ever touching the wedge screw. The top strap design of a Remington provides absolutely no advantage for a black power revolver. The Colt design is plenty strong enough to perform properly. Cap jams on a Colt is a problem that can be managed with proper set-up and usage. However, the negative effects of fouling on the Remington cylinder pin is a deal breaker. Add to that the ergonomic advantage of the Colt design and the choice is clear. Colt beats out Remington.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top