Perfect revolver?

[Pete453]

There are NO open tops firing 475 Linebaugh ammunition and if any one tried shooting my heavy 45 LC loads in one I want to be far away.

I don't understand why this is such a heated topic. Colts were designed when the only propellant was black powder, and they were designed to handle fouling and keep running. They were a high quality, hand fit, firearm. They were more than strong enough for the intended use and they held up fine. So what's the point?
If you want to fire modern handguns, there are guns built for the intended use, use what you like. I have both, I use them according to what I want to do with them. I don't get the debate????

 

[45D]

Right. Just because something was designed for a particular use doesn't mean it can't excell beyond it's intended purpose. There's nothing wrong with "over engineering" . . . today they call them Freedom Arms! The only reason I use my experience with my '60 with the previously mentioned unmentionable ammo is to "enlighten" some folks as to just how great and capable the open-top platform really is ( especially when assembled/built as designed)!!!
The original 1863 '51 Navy I just recently have posted about was an eye opener for me as to the "quality" of materials used. I've "tuned" the flat springs on a couple of originals and handled/ disassembled a few for photos but this one was the first to get holes drilled and all the upgrades I do for modern reproductions. The copies we have at our fingertips definitely have better materials overall than used for the originals. Drilling and tapping the original was much easier than the reproductions. So, that's my experience with originals and looking for the limits of the modern reproductions.

Mike

 

[frankie]

They are all good as long as they are Ruger Old Army"s. Just my opinion.

 

[John May]

Despite the Draconian Gun Laws here in the UK, in 50 years of shooting I have managed to own repros of most C&B Revolvers and I can honestly say, for me, a retired Truck Mechanic with large but not overly large hands, the 1860 Colt Army is the ultimate revolver, it fits, is functional when treated right and is the most attractive revolver ever designed. Just my opinion and most likely goes against what a lot of shooters prefer but there it is.

As I generally shoot competition I use a Hege Remington 1858 clone (which can batter my middle finger somewhat!) but I have owned most of the available repros including Walkers, Dragoons, Rogers and Spencer and a lovely Ruger Old Army with fixed sights which was highly desired by a fellow Club member.
The only brasser I ever owned was a Spiller and Burr knock off in .36 calibre which might hit a barn door.... if you were inside.

I am currently looking for an 1860 and have seen a Centaur which is very expensive and only in average condition. The search goes on and it will most likely beg the question, answered elsewhere, Pietta or Uberti or possibly a Colt later repro?

 

[French Colonial]

I don't understand why this is such a heated topic. Colts were designed when the only propellant was black powder, and they were designed to handle fouling and keep running. They were a high quality, hand fit, firearm. They were more than strong enough for the intended use and they held up fine. So what's the point?
If you want to fire modern handguns, there are guns built for the intended use, use what you like. I have both, I use them according to what I want to do with them. I don't get the debate????

The debate stems from a member here who contended that the open top is a stronger platform than revolvers with a top strap, and your right there is no debate.

There is no way an original open top Colt is as strong as a original with a top strap.

No Rugers involved

 

[45D]

I gotta agree, there can be no debate where ignorance abounds.

Mike

 

[nick_1]

obviously the cylinder is the weak link. If its not strong enough to handle what your pushing through it then bad things will happen. Obviously this is why the ultra magnums are 5 shot rigs. that being said to suggest that a walker or dragoon is stronger than a red hawk or Blackhawk seems a bit out there...

 

[45D]

obviously the cylinder is the weak link. If its not strong enough to handle what your pushing through it then bad things will happen. Obviously this is why the ultra magnums are 5 shot rigs. that being said to suggest that a walker or dragoon is stronger than a red hawk or Blackhawk seems a bit out there...

The cylinder IS the pressure containment for sure but we're talking about the "platform" . . . the platform is the support structure for the cyl.
If you have a cyl that handles 44Mag, you can't use it in a Colt SAA, the platform won't hold it. Likewise. the Remington platform won't either. I'm not sure the Remy would handle a steady diet of the ammo my '60 shoots ( haven't gotten that far yet).
What I do know is a Remy that I had (long ago) bent just from shooting / loading (apparently) too hard lead balls. The same balls allowed me to shear the loading lever screw on a Dragoon or Walker (can't really remember)! That's pretty substantial but the "platform" wasn't changed in any way.
What DOES hurt the open-top platform is incorrect build ( which is all open-top reproductions built until Pietta corrected theirs 12 yrs or so ago) . . . which is why they can and will get sloppy over time ( depending on the tolerance stack).

A correctly built/ operated open-top with close tolerances won't destroy
itself and is quite strong and (apparently) will easily handle lower "Ruger only" loads that I've proven, rather than just saying they're stronger than other platforms. And, I've never said the open-top can handle "ultra magnums" or that Walkers/Dragoons are equal to RH's or BH's. ( Colt SAA's aren't either . . . but they have a top strap . . . )

I guess proof doesn't sit well with some folks . . .

Mike

 

[Pete453]

The debate stems from a member here who contended that the open top is a stronger platform than revolvers with a top strap, and your right there is no debate.

Right, and people claiming Remington repros are stronger are taking things out of context also. Just cause Rugers are tanks doesn't equal Remingtons are tanks. Comparing the two designs and using Rugers and freedom arms as examples is some of that funny new math. The 18th century designs do what they're supposed to, it's a silly argument. And yes, you can put those funny loading cylinders in them and push them beyond original design intent. So what? They'll both go bang. Both repros are way stronger than the originals anyway.
I was just sayin, it's silly to argue over, I don't get it. But, hey, if you guys are having fun with this, by all means, have fun.

 

[Dude]

What's the problem? 45D built a custom gun from a Colt open-top that reliably and stably shoots modern magnum loads. Seems pretty obvious proof to me that the open-top is much stronger than most realize. Why all the debate? I don't get it.

Evidently the 'closed-top' needs to be as beefy as the Ruger for comparable strength.

As for answering the original question - that's a tough one. It's like asking what's the perfect tool. Depends on the job...

But the 51 Navy just feels so 'right' in my hand. Love the others, the Walker, Dragoon, 1860 army, 1860 navy, but not so much the 58 Remington, though I like it too.

 

[Stantheman86]

I buy and trade abused, neglected and unwanted revolvers. Here's a couple of brass frames that no longer serviceable. Besides the recoil shield being battered the threads are also gone. How it was done I have no idea. Maybe they used smokeless in them. I also have tried to shoot out a brasser. Chamber capacity loads, loose powder loads, 4f. Not even a ding on recoil shield as of yet. I have one where the arbor was still tight but the recoil shield was beat up. I smoothed it out and used a Pietta cylinder in it because Pietta cylinders are a little longer than most other brands. I also had one steel frame that the arbor was pulled out of the frame. Both the frame and arbor threads were goners. I gave that frame to a buddy said he was going to fix it. Should find out soon how and what he did.

I won't touch older brassers for this reason

The new brass alloy used by Pietta seems more than capable of holding up to realistic use

The steel used in percussion repros is very mild, there's not much of a difference in steel vs brass now in my opinion

 

[45D]

What's the problem? 45D built a custom gun from a Colt open-top that reliably and stably shoots modern magnum loads. Seems pretty obvious proof to me that the open-top is much stronger than most realize. Why all the debate? I don't get it.

Evidently the 'closed-top' needs to be as beefy as the Ruger for comparable strength.

As for answering the original question - that's a tough one. It's like asking what's the perfect tool. Depends on the job...

But the 51 Navy just feels so 'right' in my hand. Love the others, the Walker, Dragoon, 1860 army, 1860 navy, but not so much the 58 Remington, though I like it too.

Bingo.

Mike

 

[Griff093]

So, what do y'all think? What percussion revolver or other handgun do you think is "perfect"?

I'm pretty sure of one thing... a picture does equal a thousand words. The one on the bottom left is my first 1851 copy, made in 1985 and purchased by me in late 1986. It's marked by ASM, but all the parts for Colt 2nd series fit it. As do the two Uberti spare cylinders I have for it and the others... all Colt 2nd series... and one Signature Series.

If I add in my 2nd favorite:

I do admit that I'd prefer it if the Patersons simply functioned better. They're awkward handling... but just so darned good looking!

After that it becomes a jumbled mess and I have to then prioritize based on use and intent; and includes unmentionables... whatever those are!

 

[CaptainVane]

If you mean BP well, I cant even decide which of my 3 in avatar is my favorite so never mind, carry on.