1851 Navy

[user 49399]

Picked up this Pietta 1851 Navy in .44 caliber at our local gun shop today. Already had the holster and flask. It doesn’t bother me whether it’s historically correct or not.

 

[Hawk54]

Picked up this Pietta 1851 Navy in .44 caliber at our local gun shop today. Already had the holster and flask. It doesn’t bother me whether it’s historically correct or not. View attachment 138239

Nice pistol.

 

[hawkeye2]

Never let historical accuracy get in the way of fun.

 

[user 49399]

Never let historical accuracy get in the way of fun.

You got that right!

 

[BullRunBear]

Nice! Looks like it was used but cared for. You probably know but keep the powder charges light and that brass frame will last for many years. And you get the superb handling of the 1851.

Jeff

 

[B P Maniac Shooter]

Never let historical accuracy get in the way of fun.

Correct again. It never bothered me, I prefer shooting over rendezvousing any day.

 

[Stantheman86]

It's more historically accurate than the brass frame 1858 Remingtons and 1860 Armies .

Because......Schneider & Glassick made a few prototypes in .44. So, technically these brass .44 Navies are accidental copies of those.

 

[user 49399]

Nice! Looks like it was used but cared for. You probably know but keep the powder charges light and that brass frame will last for many years. And you get the superb handling of the 1851.

Jeff

No, it’s brand new. Those are my finger smudges you probably see in the picture.

Your right about the charges. In my 1860 Army steel frame I use light loads too. In fact, I use light loads in all my guns. Saves wear and tear on the gun and shooter.

 

[user 49399]

It's more historically accurate than the brass frame 1858 Remingtons and 1860 Armies .

Because......Schneider & Glassick made a few prototypes in .44. So, technically these brass .44 Navies are accidental copies of those.

That’s interesting! I didn’t know about Schneider & Glassick. Now I have more research to do and I like research. Thanks!

 

[user 49399]

Here’s the Army and Navy .

 

[JRMan]

I bought the exact same gun use with the brass frame. So much fun to shoot! Mine is also extremely accurate.

 

[springfield art]

Picked up this Pietta 1851 Navy in .44 caliber at our local gun shop today. Already had the holster and flask. It doesn’t bother me whether it’s historically correct or not. View attachment 138239

Good find! And, you are perfectly correct not to worry about it's being 'historically correct'. It is a great, fun, interesting shooter, and nobody gives a hill of beans that the "holes" in it are .44 vs. .36. Best of luck, thanks for posting such a nice, clear photo. All the best.

 

[1971fx]

My Pietta .44 will not allow conical bullets under the loading plunger it seems to be cut for a .36 caliber gun in that area it was bought 2 years ago

 

[Stantheman86]

That’s interesting! I didn’t know about Schneider & Glassick. Now I have more research to do and I like research. Thanks!

Schneider & Glassick primarily made bronze frame .36 Colt Navy clones with the octagonal barrels but apparently did make some .44's

I love research too and I will deep dive the minutia of historical facts

People who say the brass frame .44 Navy is a "fantasy gun" are both correct and incorrect at the same time . It depends on how technical you want to get.

The steel frame .44 Navy is also correct because Colt made a prototype of these before obviously going with the 1860 Army , which is essentially just the Navy with a rebated cylinder , larger grip frame and a redesigned barrel.

 

[user 49399]

Thanks for the information. I started reading about those guns this week and have enjoyed discovering what I didn’t know about them.

 

[MSW]

My Pietta .44 will not allow conical bullets under the loading plunger it seems to be cut for a .36 caliber gun in that area it was bought 2 years ago

this can be corrected, but it's something of a pain in the neck. Mike Bellevue (sp?) has a good vid on it.

(1) Modifying the 1860 Army for Paper Cartridges - YouTube

 

[Whughett]

Yep. I preferred the 44’s so as the opportunity presented itself I bough not one but two. One with a 5.5 inch barrel.
As to authenticity that counts as much as a rat’s petunias.

 

[Stantheman86]

Here is mine.

I think the brasser Colts look great after a vinegar soak , and some tarnish on the brass. That's just me, to each their own. I also have 4 of these in .36

 

[Zulch]

Stantheman86, those are nice lookin' Do you prefer the brass frames over the steel? Just curious. I do not have a brass framed revolver. Thanks for the photos. I especially like the look of the .44 on top. Vinegar ya say? Thanks, Z

 

[Stantheman86]

Stantheman86, those are nice lookin' Do you prefer the brass frames over the steel? Just curious. I do not have a brass framed revolver. Thanks for the photos. I especially like the look of the .44 on top. Vinegar ya say? Thanks, Z

I have a few steel frame Ubertis, I just like how the brass frame Colt clones look. I picked up 2 of the .36's when stuff was still cheap and a Pietta brasser was a sub-$200 gun brand new, 2 I got used for almost free and I just got the .44 for about $150

I just take the hammer , loading lever, all the screws , cylinder and barrel and put them in a foil roasting tray, cover them with vinegar, move the parts around every few hours and the next day I pull them out and hit everything with Action Blaster.

I think it gives the guns a neat "service worn" look since the Confederate gunmakers probably would have used a browning or a fragile blue that would have quickly worn off

All of the original Schneider & Glassick, and Griswold revolvers are "gunmetal" but likely because they were all used hard.