Black Friday 1858 Remington

[USMA65]

No pics, gun has been shipped. The point is that Pietta cut corners. They took a part that functions evidently well in the .44 cal gun and tried to grind it down to accomodate the .36 cal gun. In doing so they caused a butt joint that completely eliminates the option of altering your powder load for maximun efficiency of your gun, and worst yet, makes it difficult to ascertain that your ball is actually fully seated. The latter can be deadly. Just a couple of weeks ago someone on this forum posted pictures of a revolver not loaded correctly, which blew apart. They posted a picture and narrative. I don't want to be that guy, nor do I want anyone else to be. That is why Mr. T and myself have reported what we did, and hopefully, Pietta, Cabela's and those on this forum will understand, correct, and/or support the effort.

 

[jamesthomas]

The loading lever on any hand gun should the same diameter for the full depth the chamber. JMHO. Not just part way.

 

[nkbj]

Wow. Now I'm really really glad that I made myself not hit the button.
If I'd bought one it would have been sent off to be another conversion to .40 bore to use off the shelf .41 revolver molds.
So I saved money all around!

 

[swathdiver]

Folks, the 1858 Remington Belt Model .36 caliber revolver is one of Pietta's hidden gems.

Save for an improperly manufactured part, there's nothing wrong with these guns.

I reckon, that if the part was made to your specifications, that it would jam in the chamber with light loads and mar up the cylinder face for starters. They've been making these things for decades, ours is from 2008, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with the design.

How much powder by volume in grains occupies a chamber with the rammer fully seated against the cylinder face with a ball underneath it?

My math says 14.47 grains of black powder and that is without a wad. Add the wad and you'll be under 12 grains.

Good grief fellas!

 

[jamesthomas]

If I'm spending $200.00+ dollars on a pistol I don't expect any part to be improperly manufactured!!.

 

[azmntman]

There only $199.00! :rotf:

 

[swathdiver]

If I'm spending $200.00+ dollars on a pistol I don't expect any part to be improperly manufactured!!.

Who does? :idunno:

It's one thing if a part has a bur and fits lopsided. Quite another for fellas who've never shot their new sixgun to declare a design, that's been manufactured for at least 30 years and has ZERO reported problems, defective and then declare such on a forum.

Photographs would have helped tremendously. If it is not too late, and y'all think it would help, I'll post pictures of my daughter's gun when I get home.

 

[necchi]

They've been making these things for decades, ours is from 2008, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with the design.

How much powder by volume in grains occupies a chamber with the rammer fully seated against the cylinder face with a ball underneath it?

My math says 14.47 grains of black powder and that is without a wad. Add the wad and you'll be under 12 grains.

Good grief fellas!

Interesting addition to the thread.
I just looked at my 44,
I wonder if folks realize that the rammer actually needs to be 44 for at least some of it's length so it will move properly in it's hole in the barrel section?
Otherwise they'd have to remake the entire barrel casting,, not only just drill and rifle the barrel blank for 36 but re-manufacture the casting to accept the smaller rammer and pivot.

If what you say about the less then 15grns is true,, what's the problem?

 

[swathdiver]

I wonder if folks realize that the rammer actually needs to be 44 for at least some of it's length so it will move properly in it's hole in the barrel section?
Otherwise they'd have to remake the entire barrel casting,, not only just drill and rifle the barrel blank for 36 but re-manufacture the casting to accept the smaller rammer and pivot.

Exactly right! :hatsoff:

Well, at least someone will come across a great deal in the bargain cave soon. :rotf:

 

[Terry Fairchild]

Right you are, Necchi !
When I extended the .36 diameter dimension on the plunger I left enough of the original .44 diameter stuff so the the plunger still glides soothly. I had considered turning the entire plunger to .36 and making a bronze bushing to insert in the frame but it works ok the way that I have cobbled it.
I would NOT have shot this gun the way it was when delivered.
Either poor engineering ,poor manufacturing or poor quality control.
It really doesn't matter to me if they've been making these things for a zillion years,the one I got was wrong!

 

[swathdiver]

It really doesn't matter to me if they've been making these things for a zillion years,the one I got was wrong!

So how long did your plunger extend into the chamber before turning it down?

Did you check my math and measure out your own chambers?

 

[Terry Fairchild]

Originally it extended into the cylinder .215", a little less than 1/4"

 

[swathdiver]

Originally it extended into the cylinder .215", a little less than 1/4"

That's quite a bit less than other examples! So how long is it now and did you get a chance to compute the volume of powder it will compress?

 

[USMA65]

Mine was ground at an angle....something some seem to not be able to understand, no matter how often I say it. Therefore a .36 cal round ball could not be seated in the chamber past the opening. Poor manufacturing. And I repeat, and Mr T agrees, to have shot this gun the way it was delivered could have been dangerous, regardless of powder measures and any other argument. If you have a Pietta and are happy with it, I'm happy for you. I actually was impressed with the appearance; until I saw the flaw. And again, words mean things....don't forget that Cabela's wanted it back, and I agreed to do so.
Let's all watch some football and quit beating this to death.

 

[swathdiver]

You mean me? Nah, I understand you and said so.

Cabela's will always take it back, it's not worth the risk. It would cost them a whole lot more if they refused to take it back and something happened. Just good business.

As for football, the booze, scantily clad women and the poor behavior of the players, it's best if it stays outside of our home and away from my children. :td:

So, let us know when your replacement arrives and let's hope it's not a Friday or Monday gun.

 

[USMA65]

"So, let us know when your replacement arrives and let's hope it's not a Friday or Monday gun".......Swathdiver
:grin:
I will and guess what, I'm going to give Pietta one more chance!!

 

[Terry Fairchild]

Found a plunger for my 1858 on e-bay. Listed( and looked like) for a .36. For 12 bucks thought I'd chance it.
Got it yesterday and it's perfect!
The turned down portion was longer than on the original plunger that came with my gun.
SO, my conclusion is that the plunger on my as- delivered .36 was made too short, a manufacturing and Q/C problem at Pietta. Not a design issue.
My original alarm still stands,however, because if an unsuspecting buyer gets one with a too- short plunger, loads it,compresses the ball unseated and shoots it :"Cowabunga"
I shall dedicate no more bandwidth to this topic

 

[swathdiver]

Can I induce you to let us know how far the new part extends into the chamber now?

 

[Terry Fairchild]

Original plunger was machined to .36 cal for~.215".
Replacement plunger was machined to.36 cal for ~.437".
Replacement plunger puts that ball right home!
Now that .36 gets shot routinely along with the rest of my 8 revolvers. I'm a happy camper😀

 

[Terry Fairchild]

Got the replacement loading lever from Pietta yesterday, directly from Italy.
As promised, the lever and plunger.( I needed just the plunger)
The plunger is for a .44, NOT .36!
Must have been a lot lost in the translation from American to Latin!!
Nonetheless, the gun is a keeper thanks to the correctly made plunger I found on eBay.
I now have a spare loading lever/plunger for a .44 cal.