Remington vs Colt, it never ends...
- Thread starter ZVP
- Start date
HisSoldier
New member
It has been said that soldiers later in the war tossed their Colts to the sides of the trails when they got a Remington.
From an engineering standpoint the Colt is very poorly designed, so much so that I have to wonder what possible reason Sam Colt had for the cantilever design, as it has no advantages (Except in ease of manufacture) and many weaknesses. Weakness is weakness, and saying that since it was a BP arm weakness doesn't matter is baffling to me, why would one design a firearm to be weak?
What happened is that competition resulted in a superior design, which is why a competitive manufacturing world is good for everyone. If the open top design were superior newly designed revolvers would have them today.
Also, theoretically the Remington should be more accurate, not less, and if they are less accurate it has to be because of something other than the solid frame causing it. I suppose with the hammer back the sight length is slightly longer on the Colt, but the fact of the rear sight's tiny available area and it's movement should more than offset any such advantage.
Even Colt abandoned the cantilever frame later, long before smokeless powder came along, by the way.
From an engineering standpoint the Colt is very poorly designed, so much so that I have to wonder what possible reason Sam Colt had for the cantilever design, as it has no advantages (Except in ease of manufacture) and many weaknesses. Weakness is weakness, and saying that since it was a BP arm weakness doesn't matter is baffling to me, why would one design a firearm to be weak?
What happened is that competition resulted in a superior design, which is why a competitive manufacturing world is good for everyone. If the open top design were superior newly designed revolvers would have them today.
Also, theoretically the Remington should be more accurate, not less, and if they are less accurate it has to be because of something other than the solid frame causing it. I suppose with the hammer back the sight length is slightly longer on the Colt, but the fact of the rear sight's tiny available area and it's movement should more than offset any such advantage.
Even Colt abandoned the cantilever frame later, long before smokeless powder came along, by the way.
Smokin'Joe
New member
The open top design is not weak. And Colt had a top strap design 20 years before Remington.
Infantrymen were issued sidearms at the beginning of the war but soon tossed everything they didn't have to have including revolvers and bayonets. The only ones to have revolvers for the rest of the war were cavalry, officers and some artillerymen. C.S. cavalry carried from 4-6 revolvers of whatever make they could get. U.S. cavalry used what they were issued.
Colt went to a top strap because the military wanted it.
The open top wasn't weak considering what it was designed to shoot. The top strap design was obviously superior in withstanding higher pressures from BP cartridges and later, smokeless powder cartridges. I doubt the idea for the top strap design was to make a more solid frame as much as it was to ease disassembly, but turns out it does make a stronger frame. Thanks to Colt, or whoever thought of it. As HisSOLDIER said, the top strap design has survived to this day and the open top is history. To argue this is to lie to yourself.
Handguns were not issued items to infantry privates.
The early war (1861) line infantryman was as adventurous and obsessed with gear like our couch commandos are today. First long march and a lot of things were tossed including big knives, revolvers, clothing and other non issue items. After the first battle where they were proven useless , the bullet proof vests (they weren't) were tossed. The lighter the better.
I suspect that a lot of guns in the tintypes or other images belonged to the photographer's studio. There's an image of Geronimo with a Dance revolver. I doubt he ever used one.
The early war (1861) line infantryman was as adventurous and obsessed with gear like our couch commandos are today. First long march and a lot of things were tossed including big knives, revolvers, clothing and other non issue items. After the first battle where they were proven useless , the bullet proof vests (they weren't) were tossed. The lighter the better.
I suspect that a lot of guns in the tintypes or other images belonged to the photographer's studio. There's an image of Geronimo with a Dance revolver. I doubt he ever used one.
Smokin'Joe
New member
Isn't that the way it's supposed to be? Engineers design products to perform a certain function. Then they add in a safety factor to prevent catastrophic failures. This is true of cars, buildings, dams, aircraft and guns. Neither the Colt open top design nor the Remington top strap design could handle a modern magnum load. They were not designed to.