• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Pietta 1851 Navy cylinder jams

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I have yet to find a modern replica of a firearm that can't use a little tuning. Even when the old original revolvers found their way into a pistol smith, sometimes directly from the manufacture. Fine stones, needle files and study of the action with attention to detail can produce, along with heavy lube a pleasurable weapon.
The cartridge fires are no different, polish , spring tension and forcing cone dressing can make a big, big difference.
 
I must admit a personal preference for the 1851 Navy pistol above all others. I prefer the smaller grip frame of the Navy to that of the .44 Army, and I prefer the .36 caliber to the .44. I recently acquired an 1862 Pocket Police, but I have not fired this gun enough to come to a decision as of yet. It is a 4 1/2 inch barrel version, and the necessary short rammer is barely functional. I am in this pistol cheap enough to fit a replacement 6 1/2 inch barrel and rammer, and that change may happen.
A less expensive fix for that short rammer lever is the Slixhand which is an aluminum extension that makes loading easy and protects the hand from that sharp catch. Got one and use it a lot.
Bunk
 
I may go whole hog and fit the 62 Pocket Police with the unfluted cylinder and barrel group from the 6 1/2 inch 1862 Pocket Navy, a gun which I prefer in all ways.
 
I would love to take a trip back in time, circa 1865-1870 and listen to the old guys talking shop about their original Colts and Remingtons. Has anyone on this forum read enough journals and other sources to know if them old boys had similar complaints and fixes?

My most reliable shooter, after purchasing and shooting 15 or 20 reproductions from the 1960s ASMs and ASPs to a 2020 Pietta, is still my first purchase, an Uberti 1861 Navy, in early 2017. I was a bit anal about reading and watching videos as much as possible before ever firing it. I religiously followed Blackie Thomas’ advice about deburring and polishing internal parts. Except for an occasional cap jamb it is accurate, has a fine action, and is a delight to shoot.
 
I would agree with the general consensus that the 1858 Remington Beals patent revolver is a superior design to the Colt, except for the smaller cylinder pin. The smaller the hole, the greater the effect of black powder fouling. That is the only fly in the ointment of an otherwise great design. Incidentally, the 1875 Remington and the 1873 Colt were neck and neck in the army trials in the early black powder cartridge days, but the removeable and maintainable cylinder bushing introduced with the Colt decided the day. I have had to open the cylinder pin hole(s) up a bit to get any reliability approaching the Colt on every Remington repro I have purchased.

Well . . . I would say the general consensus isn't quite right . . . especially if all things are equal . . . equal being "both revolvers built as designed" not as "attempted". The open top design is actually rather over engineered for the task. That said, the EASIER design to produce (and correctly!) is the top strap which obviously is in use today. If the most important thing was ease of removing a cylinder, I would agree the top strap wins. And, to be clear, I really like the Remington S.A. revolver!! They can be made into a 19th century Ruger equivalent!!!

Mike
 
I bought a matched pair of Pietta 1851's some years ago, and I have not had opportunity to shoot them much, but right out of the factory they needed tuned up. The bolt is a bit too wide for the cylinder notches, the lock work is burred and dragging causing slow hammer fall and poor ignition. All of these issues can be addressed and corrected, but it is pain with a new gun that should run good out of the box. Colt's cap and ball mechanism is not difficult to understand, or to time, and parts are readily available. The cowboy action crowd has really put these pistols to work, so the tuning information is readily available. I don't know if the original Colts gave these issues or not, but you just about have to fit up your own gun to get one worth shooting a lot. Keeping the cylinder pin greased is very important, about 18 rounds in my experience is the end of reliability before a tear down and thorough cleaning. The big secret to keeping spent caps out of your lock work is to have the recess in your hammer nose welded up and dressed flat. The recess "grabs" spent caps and pulls them off to drop into the lock work. Most pistols use the recessed hammer, whether the locking pins are present or not. Got that tip from the cowboy action guys, my hammers will lose their locking pin notches in the near future.
I got a 1858 remington which has a small cylinder pin never knew to grease it and yet I would spark off 50-60 rds at least with no problems
 
I had a similar problem with my Pietta 1851 Navy.
What I found was that the #10 caps were not seated all the way onto the nipple , thus not letting the hammer rest far enough down , to reset the bolt. I make sure now , that the caps are seated all the way.
 
I would love to take a trip back in time, circa 1865-1870 and listen to the old guys talking shop about their original Colts and Remingtons. Has anyone on this forum read enough journals and other sources to know if them old boys had similar complaints and fixes?

My most reliable shooter, after purchasing and shooting 15 or 20 reproductions from the 1960s ASMs and ASPs to a 2020 Pietta, is still my first purchase, an Uberti 1861 Navy, in early 2017. I was a bit anal about reading and watching videos as much as possible before ever firing it. I religiously followed Blackie Thomas’ advice about deburring and polishing internal parts. Except for an occasional cap jamb it is accurate, has a fine action, and is a delight to shoot.
One of the recorded stories is that of John Wesley Harden. While on a trail drive from Texas, a Mexican herd got to pressing the one John Wesley was riding for too closely and the cattle started mixing. This promptly escalated into a shooting scrape between Hardin and a Mexican drover. Hardin's gun was a cap and ball Colt with a broken bolt spring, but he finally got off a shot by steadying the cylinder with one hand and shooting with the other, managing to shoot the drover in the leg. A temporary truce was called, but Hardin then promptly went back to camp, borrowed a Peacemaker, and concluded things.
 
I had a similar problem with my Pietta 1851 Navy.
What I found was that the #10 caps were not seated all the way onto the nipple , thus not letting the hammer rest far enough down , to reset the bolt. I make sure now , that the caps are seated all the way.
I seem to recall with my pop's 1861 navy that if you pulled the hammer back all the way but didn't fire it, we would have to pull the cap off to let the hammer down far enough to do just that. Loved that gun, too bad it disappeared when my sister and bro in law got their hands on it after he passed.
 
Just finished 25 rounds with one of my Pietta .44 Marshals. using 20 grains FFFg GOEX, a 1/8" lubed felt wad and .451" ball which shaves a thin wire of lead. The gun has Slixshot nipples and a Lee Gunfighter main spring. I
had no cap jams using Remington #11 caps which worked perfectly for ten rounds. The CCI#11 caps had a couple of second strikes out of ten rounds and RWS 1075 all five had second strikes.
After capping the caps are carefully seated with a dowel and still 1075 will not seat properly on Slixshot nipples.
This is the last of my Remington #11's I think, but in the supply locker is a couple of hundred CCI#11 caps.
I give up on those 1075 caps perhaps a set or two of nipples from TOW that will work with them as in the locker there is a plentiful supply.
My guns have been tuned and work with regularity. Cap jams are rare, but after every shooting session of around 50 to 60 rounds everything goes down to small parts, is checked and cleaned. Maintenance, careful maintenance, checking everything results in dependable working guns. The "pull off the grips and throw in in the dishwasher" I find appalling and does not clean all the internals which is what makes a gun reliable.
I have been shooting this black stuff since Orange Extra Sporting Powder and have learned a thing or two from experience and talking to and reading books by the old timers.
Respectfully
Bunk
 
colts design is stone age compared to the remington
yep pardner you are right it is an ancient designee that only lasted from 1847 to just a couple of years ago by Colt and still manufactured presently in Italy. That open top design progressed from a horse pistol to the 1873 Single action.
Remington and that snazzy new are construction is...
wait a minute
That superior construction did not make it out of the percussion stage to any extent.
perhaps the stone age had something going for it don't you think?
Of course I may be a bit biased with several Colts and not one Remington to be seen.
Don't like them too complicated and too hard to disassemble for a complete cleaning.
Of course I date from the stone age so Colt's suit me fine.
But some people like Ford, and some like Dodge and that is what makes to world go round so let's keep making smoke!
Yr' Obt' Svt'
Bunk
 
As far as pointability--that is shooting off the cuff on the draw, the Colt is so far ahead of the Remington as to be no comparison. The Colt just naturally gets on the target--the Remington takes a bit of maneuvering. IMO. The problem with the Navy, is that they all seem to be sighted so high. You should be able to put a 12 gauge fired case on top of the front site and nail it more often than not inside of 25 yards. A thin higher dovetailed front blade with a bit of windage adjustment does wonders for them.
 
As far as pointability--that is shooting off the cuff on the draw, the Colt is so far ahead of the Remington as to be no comparison. The Colt just naturally gets on the target--the Remington takes a bit of maneuvering. IMO. The problem with the Navy, is that they all seem to be sighted so high. You should be able to put a 12 gauge fired case on top of the front site and nail it more often than not inside of 25 yards. A thin higher dovetailed front blade with a bit of windage adjustment does wonders for them.
On the Colt Navy , you can deepen the notch on the hammer thumb spur. Do it carefully with a hacksaw blade (fine) , and then use a very small triangle file. Use just the blade and pull it toward you to cut. Anyway , it won`t take much to get her to fire point of aim at 25 yards.
 
Back
Top