Dave Dworshak
40 Cal
hopefully you have caps
I like how they look too; you just have to be careful to get reproductions of guns that were actually made. For example, there were no brass framed 1958 revolvers made in the Civil War era.
I will send pictures tonight.
I like em!Here are pictures of my reproduction brass-framed B.P. revolvers.
From top to bottom:
Spiller & Burr, which was a brass-framed version of a Whitney.
Griswold & Gunnison, with barrel cut back to 5". This modification could have easily been made during the Civil War or afterwards with technology available at the time. Astute observers will notice an extended hammer pivot screw that allows attachment of a shoulder stock, which is fun to use occasionally.
Griswold & Gunnison, with original length 7-1/2" barrel length. The G&G revolvers were a version of the 1851 Colt, but with brass frames, round (not octagonal) barrels, and smooth, non-roll marked cylinders.
All Confederate-made brass-framed revolvers were 36 caliber, as far as I know. No 44's were made until the late 20th century, and are not historically correct.
View attachment 158102
Good points. I seldom shoot my revolvers, so long term use is not an issue. As a result, I just like the look and feel of the Colt 1851. My 1 1/2 cents worth. PolecatB P Arn (posts #17& 19) is dead on regarding brass frames. I have about 30 C&B revolvers, some reworked by the best out there, and I have some brass frame ones in that number but they are historically accurate and not fantasy guns. My first revolver (50+ years ago) was a brass frame one, all I could afford at the time and I would not be afraid of buying and shooting one regularly today. Shot with moderate loads, cleaned and lubed they will last a long time with no problems.
.36 or .44? The amount you would save in a summer might buy you a latte at Starbucks. Recoil isn't a consideration as you can load either down.
Uberti or Pietta? I used to think Uberti was tops but the vast majority of mine are now Pietta and with no more issues than the Ubertis I have.
Colt or Remington? The Remington offers a lot of advantages specially for the uninitiated. Freedom from cap jams and ease of disassembly for cleaning are the most important. The Colt can be subject to cap jams if not worked on and is a little more difficult to disassemble. If you are an experienced blackpowder shooter then a Colt shouldn't pose any problems but the Remington is a little easier to learn on. You may have to partially disassemble a Colt action to remove spent caps that are locking it up (I have) and are you comfortable with that?
Good looks and pointability, the Colt wins hands down.
Not a thing.Thank you all so much. If I ever go broke, I'm blaming you all! 5 guns in 4 months, what the heck is wrong with me??
Ive had both in the last year in an 1860 army. For ball shooting only, Pietta. Conicals, Uberti, they have room to load them. Pietta grip frame is a touch bigger. Both are fine pistols, you wont go wrong whichever you choose. The suggestion to start with a 58 remington is sound advice, cause as was said, you'll have several down the line. I own a Pietta 58. That would be my suggestion if going remington, they have a bit more room behind the trigger guard and wont beat up your knuckle if you have largeish hands. Any way you go you cant go wrong, all your choices are great guns. Get one, get a bullet mould, and shoot it, ALOT! You'll learn how to manage it and really enjoy it, like most of us here. Welcome to the family, and the forum, its a fantastic obsession!Would any of you recommend Uberti or Pietta over the other? What’s the quality difference, if any? I heard that they were both solid.
Ah Geez, sorry to hear that. I remember that time in my life too,,I'm seriously debating buying my first cap and ball revolver.
Enter your email address to join: