What's your opnion of those .44 caliber Navy models?

I know Hawg and Fingers feelings about the .44 "navies", lol!, and i respect them. However, my first bp revolver was a steel framed 60. I still have it, i like it well enuff, but i never would have become the bp enthusiast i am today if had not been for a "abomination", that being a sheriff brasser pietta .44. I fell in love with that gun, and about 30 or so revolvers later, i still hold a fond spot in my heart for it. I just like the way it feels. Historically accurate, nah. I have guns that are, and if i really want to get into the period, i have a couple original S & W's, circa 1886 to 1894 or so that i can load up bp cartridges for. But i have love for my brasser .44's, and my brasser.31's.
 
I would like to acquire an 1851 steel frame .44 and add a conversion cylinder (Taylor's, Howell's, Kirst) for .45 Colt to obviate the tedious cleaning of BP/Pyro and have a pistol that shoots mild smokeless rounds with the pointability/balance of an 1851.

Just purchased a new Pietta 1851 .36. I like it immensely, but had I thought out the purchase of a new gun better, I would have changed my mind, except I bought it just for the massage factor and it was on sale at Cabela's for a nickel less than 2 C notes. Something soothing about it. I know I can purchase cowboy heeled bullet loads for it, and am considering buying a Lee Loader and a scale to do homemade rounds once I make the plunge for a cylinder that costs nearly twice what I paid for the pistol. :eek:

I still like the 1851 Navy for looks and balance. JBH was right.

Guns are fairly addictive, eh?

Jim
 
I suspect grip frame size crossed with the .44 preference partly drives the ".44 Navy" market.
People with average hands seems to prefer the Navy sized grip frame...likely why that's what ended up on the SAA.
 
Bigdog
A simple weightd every cylinder ( I pour from a flask to a measure then to the gun just because of safety concerns) 22 gr of Pyrodex, some COW, a felt lubed wad and a ball.
Real BP is hard to get here where I live!
Great accuracy, plenty of boom, and no recoil.
HTH,
ZVP
 
Last edited:
Grim-frame?

Doesn't Pietta make the .44 Navy? Then you also get the "Pietta hook" grip!
I have lately come over to the .36 Navy for everyday carry and shooting, for the economics of it, lot more balls/lb. of lead and more shots/lb. of powder.
I also like the sight picture of the '51.
 
Oh how I despise that misshapen piece of the revolver!
I own 3 Piettias and have had to reshape the forward edge a bit and then do a major reshape to the rear portion. I first round off the edge, then do the vertical rounding ( careful not to go too far and creating a sharp edge by filing into the sholder stock cut). To make each individual gun "fit" you need to allow for grip thickness, you try and fit many times.
My Police model Piettia needed no reshapeing at all due to grip thicknesses! Even the "point" doesn't dig into the Palm of the Hand! Odd but true!
Generally, one has to reshape the rear of the grip though.
The end result is a modified
Gunfighter" grip shape as some companies call their shapes.
Mot of all you try to make the revolver sit low in the hand. with the web of the trigger hand close as possible toward the front of the gun.
Sounds complicated but takes less then 1/2 hr with steel wool rubbing, changing files to cut the brass and final polishing. Usually no stain necessary.
I wonder who the fool is that first adopted this awful shape anyhow?
 
@ Gunfixr:

If you're going to shoot it a lot, get steel.
Back in the 80s, I stretched a 36 cal navy frame in about a year, a lot.
Still sits on the mantle, hasn't been fired in decades now. With the end slop, it may not fire.
Click to expand...

Ok, I'm gonna ask the stupid question:

If a brasser open top gets stretched, I'm thinking one might be judiciously able to "bend it back" to close to original tolerances? I don't own a brasser and only have a steel Pietta 1851 Navy .36 cal.

I have read many treatises about tightening up Pietta and Uberti 1851's using many various methods. I somehow cannot believe that some brass frame revolvers (or its parts) that have not been totally abused cannot be rescued somehow with modern machine tools just because of some frame stretching, and I would think it would be at the top (open) end. Brass is soft and can be re-bent somewhat easily using some type of ingenuity, I would think.

Push back, please.
 
Because its not just bending, its also stretching and when its rebent it wont always go back to where it was and its not just stretching its also battering of the recoil shield which shows up first. I suppose both could be fixed but IMO its just not worth the effort.
 
If a brasser open top gets stretched, I'm thinking one might be judiciously able to "bend it back" to close to original tolerances?
Click to expand...

Bending and stretching are two different things. Bending is like making a spoon look like a letter "L". Stretching is like pulling the ends of a rubber band in separate directions. How do you bend a stretched out rubber band back into shape?
 
OK! Just wanted to get it straight in my brain.

I'm always one for salvaging things. I guess those stretched brassers are just wallhangers or parts guns. Thanks for the info.

Glad I bought steel.

Jim
 
The frame doesn't really get stretched. Either the frame threads for the arbor get stripped (breech position of the barrel is now more forward) or the recoil ring on the recoil shield gets pounded back (indented by the back of the cylinder) so the cylinder will then move more rearward. Either case will make one think the frame has "stretched" because there is more back and forth movement of the cylinder along the arbor.
 
I'm with Hawg, .44 cal 1851 Navies.....are an abomination.
Click to expand...
Horse hockey! There's nothing not to like about a big bore Colt with an octagon barrel. They're made in Italy for God's sake, you really gonna hold a historically incorrect chambering against them? Aren't you also hot for stainless replicas? Come on guys, live a little.
 
My steel-frame broke recently. The trigger bolt spring broke (I don't know how they came up with the name 'trigger bolt spring'). Now the hammer won't stay cocked. Perhaps I should take the thing entirely apart for cleaning, not just take off the barrel and cylinder. What do you think?

I've taken the part off my brass-frame .44 Navy and was about to put it on the steel-frame but the screw holding it on the steel-frame stripped since it is as soft as lead. Now I need a counter-clockwise drill bit to back the screw out.

I'll have to relegate the brasser to 'parts gun' and buy another steelie during the next holiday sale at Cabelas. I can't wait.
 
@Model12Win

I love my Pietta Colt .44 navy, it's got the brass frame the confederates used because it was cheaper and doesn't rust.
Click to expand...

Nope, you're right. Brass doesn't rust, but it does corrode faster than steel (look for the brown/green color) and it does discolor rapidly when exposed to natural oil/dirt from your hands. Luckily it can be shined up with 0000 steel wool in seconds.

I wish the repro manufacturers would make frames from bronze (like the old swords in the BC Greek/Persian eras). Stronger and last a lot longer.
 
I was quoting Fingers, the stainless comment was directed at him.

I've got everything from .31 pocket models to the Walker and Dragoon, along with everything in between and the four .44 1851's are among my favorites. Big bore + octagon barrel = good stuff!

Lighten up. If I was going to be 'that' picky, I'd only buy Colt's. :rolleyes:
 
Yep, I'm on the lookout for all of the SS models made by Uberti. They are all accurate to the originals except that the alloy used SS rather than carbon steel/malleable iron. I do not have a problem with brass framed Colt style open top revolvers as long as they are in the correct .36 caliber. There were numerous brass framed Colt styled revolvers made back in the day; but, NONE OF THEM WERE .44 Caliber!
 
I guess making them in an alloy that didn't exist is fine, as is making them in Italy, as long as they're not made in a chambering that did exist but was not offered. Mmmmkay.....that's not hypocritical at all.

The point being, I think you guys can say you don't like them, or prefer something else, without calling them an abomination and putting everyone who owns one on the defensive. At least, that's how mature, respectful adults converse. I think stainless Colt percussion replicas are an abomination but would never say that in polite conversation. I suppose the notion of "polite conversation" is a foreign concept on the `net.


Admittedly, I do own a pair of Pietta laser engraved, polished in the white, Marshal Model 1851s in .44. But they're mainly used as BBQ guns now days.
Click to expand...
Do you consider yours abominations, or is that only if they belong to someone else???
 
Last edited:
I like the stainless guns. I don't own one - wasn't willing to pay the premium for the Stainless, but I sure do like the ease of maintenance of stainless guns! :)

Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top