Comparing a couple of '51 Navy's.

[Desmond]

I lucked into an old/new Cimarron 1851 Navy today, NIB for $200 in a private buy. Seller says he has had the gun for around 10 years.

Comparing it to my 4 month old Uberti '51 Navy shows guite a few attractive differences between the two. The Cimarron is made by Uberti.

The rear of the grip frame of the Cimarron has a more pronounced flair, more like an original, than does the Uberti. I can only feel a slight difference in the way each gun feels in the hand.

The casehardening on the Cimarron is much lighter on the frame and hammer, nice but lighter.

The grip to grip frame fit is better on the Uberti with no gaps or overhangs. The Cimarron has a couple of overhanging brass area's that are fairly noticeable. Wood on the Cimarron grips is much darker and with no figure at all.

Markings on the Cimarron are limited to a small BU on the right side of the frame at the barrel/loader/frame junction and on top of the barrel "Address Cimarron Fredricksburg Texas". The both have the Uberti name, caliber and black powder only stamp under the loading lever.

They make a nice pair, I'll have to make a partitioned presentation box for them and shoot the '58 Remington Navy.

Desmond

 

Why does everyone have an obsession with the Navy?

 

[George T.]

I have a Cimarron 1860 that is about a year old and it is finished as well as any revolver of any make that I have ever seen. It shoots very well as well but it is almost 18 inches high at 25 yards. I am going to order another hammer and start deepening the rear notch. I want a back up in case I screw the job up. Geo. T.

 

[cynthialee]

Why does everyone have an obsession with the Navy?

It fits the average persons hand well enough. It is affordable for all shooters. It is actually fairly accurate once you figure out your pistol. It was used by soldiers, gunfighters, cowboys and common men. It fits well with a lot of personas one may wish to portray.

 

[necchi]

Why does everyone have an obsession with the Navy?

After you've had an opportunity to handle and fire several of the other standard models of Colts you'll understand the feel of the grip, weight and balance the 51 has in your hand.
It's just one of those winning classic designs that hit everything right with the ergonomics of a cap and ball revolver.
Add the 36cal being a pleasure to shoot as well as accurate and still have plenty of hitting power to do what it was designed for.
Some things just become the time tested design that others try to duplicate and the 51 is one of those.

 

[cynthialee]

oh yeah:
it also doesn't use allot of lead and powder

 

[M. De Land]

I wouldn't mess with the hammer, I'd just add a front blade to lower the point of impact. Like this: This gives the gun a six o'clock hold on the bull at 25 yards. It still wants to shoot to the left though so I have to center the right side of the Hammer V on the blade center. Even with that the gun seems to be every bit as accurate as my 58 Remington or ROA.
This Gun needed quite a bit of work to bring up to speed. It has a new trigger and wedge as well, both made of O-1 tool steel. It's a Pietta.

Mike D.

 

[Heelerau]

I have an old Uberti London Navy colt of about 1976 manufacture, it points and handles beautifully , lovely balance, has been zeroed to 6 0clock at 25yds (same as my 3rd Mod Dragoon) and is a real tack driver. Have had it for donkeys years and have only just started to shoot western action with it. I now know why the likes of Hickok carried a brace of them. Great ergonomics before the phrase was even coined. No recoil and plenty of punch.

cheers

heelerau

 

[PRM]

Why does everyone have an obsession with the Navy?

Why? The Navy was the pinnacle of Colt's design in the C&Bs... everything else was an afterthought :slap: :stir:

 

[54ball]

Why does everyone have an obsession with the Navy?

This guy sure liked them even after cartridge revolvers were available.

 

[M. De Land]

Notice the paddle trigger in the 58 gun. This was added later after seeing one on another gun some where. It really is a good mod for a target gun. It moves the trigger to the back of the bow and is infinitely adaptable to any grip.
If I had it to do over again I would make a paddle trigger for the 60 as well although it would not be original looking but then neither is the front blade, they just work. Mike

 

[AZbpBurner]

BU indicates a 2004 Proof Date.

I don't have an 1851, but I did have a 40 year old Uberti 1860 that needed some work.

Somewhere along the way, Uberti decided to make some subtle changes to their revolvers, so that current spare parts won't fit older versions. My plan was to replace a beat up brass trigger guard with a new one. The new was of a different configuration altogether that not only didn't come anywhere close to fitting the grip, but the screw holes were larger, and the hole for the hammer spring was larger, SAE and not metric.

Grip fit seems to be entirely unrelated to any association with Cimmarron, but more to the age of Uberti's production.

I ended up brazing in the gouges in the brass, and the repairs are invisible.

 

[Zonie]

Why does everyone have an obsession with the Navy?

The Colt Navy has always been a very popular pistol.

Not only did thousands of people buy them while they were being made but the Confederacy was so convinced they were the best that they wrote their specification for their revolvers to insist that it be a Colt Navy copy.

When Colt designed the 1860 Army, it was the Colt Navy's grip that was chosen although he did lengthen it a little to help with the added recoil of the .44 caliber.

When Colt designed his famious cartridge gun in the early 1870's, what gun did he base the grip and balance on? Yup. The 1851 Navy.

 

[SAJones]

And as my purely personal opinion, it's the most attractive factory made pistol ever made. I have a small assortment of original, 1st & 2nd generations, & my first BP revolver was a Navy Arms 1851 in 1967. Of course, I shoot Remingtons or single shots in target matches.

 

[Desmond]

Well, this Cimarron is such a handsome sidearm I could put on a set of ivory micarta grips, carry it in a fancy carved holster and belt and use it for a Sunday-go-to-meeting BBQ outing pistol. Yeah.

Des

 

[Grumpa]

The '51 Navy made "gunfighting" possible. The previous Walker, Dragoons were horse pistols, too heavy for comfortable belt holster wear. The Navy was an obvious improvement over the early Patterson Colt. As pointed out above, that Wild Bill Hickock preferred his Navies even after the advent of Colt's cartridge revolvers, speaks to their appeal. And, as Zonie points out, the Navy grip is the best pointing of any revolver. (My suspicion is, that the longer grip of the 1860 Army was designed to appeal to the glove-wearing cavalryman; try it, wearing leather gloves, and the 1860 grip becomes very comfortable.)
With the invention of the Bessemer Furnace, it became possible to make a .44 (true .45)all-steel revolver on the same size frame as the (iron) Navy - hence, the Model of 1860 Army.

 

[crockett]

Why does everyone have an obsession with the Navy?

I think it is because the Navy was a historically significant pistol. Wild Bill used one, gen. Robert E. Lee carried one, very popular.
BUT....not the only pistol in town. The Colt 1860 obviously packed more punch and the Rem 1858 was excellent. I think the Whitney Navy is a good looking gun. Heck, they're all great. http://www.google.com/imgres?imgur...mYSUrixDvWg4AP9nYDABQ&ved=0CDMQ9QEwAQ&dur=562
as well as others.

 

[M. De Land]

Well the Walkers did a pretty fair job on the Comanche in the hands of the Texas Rangers.
Those were some pretty lively gun fights to my way of thinking. Now one could dump the horse the Comanche brave was riding on the off side of as he shot arrows at you. The Patterson was an improvement but fragile and in .36 caliber was no horse dumping pistol.
The .51 in .36 was an anti personal gun like the Patterson but again no horse shooting gun.
With the civil war looming on the horizon a heavier caliber was once again needed to bring down horse as well as rider just as the Walker had the Comanche.
Steel improvement and mass production now would allow for a 44 in a smaller package and thus the advent of both the 58 Rem and 60 Colt. Mike D.

 

[poordevil]

No. The United States Mounted Rifles used the Walker pistol....issued in pairs. The Rangers used the Colt Patterson's, in the 1840's

Gun fighting in the sense being used, meaning a gun one carries easily on ones person, as on ones belt around the waist, therefore it is always at hand.

 

[Wes/Tex]

No. The United States Mounted Rifles used the Walker pistol....issued in pairs. The Rangers used the Colt Patterson's, in the 1840's

Though Walker helped Colt design the revolver for his regiment, U.S. Mounted Rifles, 180 of them did go to the Texas Mounted Rifles (called then and now as "Texas Rangers"). Rip Ford makes long references to these revolvers and their problems, his thoughts were that the troopers were loading the conicals backwards, which shouldn't be the basis of many failures. I'm with the crowd that believes many of the cylinder failures were due to Whitney's use of inferior metals to save money on his contract. Ford also reported that 90 odd were turned in at the end of the conflict with Mexico. Wonder how many of those written off were actually stuffed in some Texan's diddy-bag? :wink: