What are you putting your money on. Draw

[cynthialee]

either one will do wonderfully
but my preference is to the Colt

The way a Colt feels in my hands and the way it is easy to point and shoot just feels right.
Now if'n it would be a fire fight and for some ungodly reason I couldn't get to a proper modern gun, I'd want the Remington and a couple of ready to go cylinders for fast reloading.

Daily carry in the old west...especially if'n I was doing the pilgrim across the west to California thing, I'd sport a 1851 or an 1860 under my petticoats. No one would likely even know as the daily dress of women of the time was rather excessive. A little large for a 5'8" individual but not too large to use properly.

(now of course a muff gun would be needed for going to events where a bigger hog leg would be uncalled for and that would be the Remington Pocket Pistol)
so I'd need a couple of guns, depending on the situation

but realistically I'd most likely only have access to a shotgun or fowler set by the door of the cabin or under the seat of the buckboard

 

[Whughett]

Doesn’t the cylinder contain most of not all of the pressure until the bullet enters the forcing cone then exits the barrel. The recoil shield then accepts the backwards forces generated.
The only photos I’ve seen of castrophic failure not related to a barrel being plugged was always of the cylinder blowing.

 

[Rock Home Isle]

Well there’s a resident expert on Colts revolvers in these here pages that would disagree with the Remy stronger than a Colt idea. I’d be inclined to agree with that, the massive Colt arbor in line with recoil and all that. Seems to me that upper strap only allows fo a better sighting arrangement and all that skinny base pin does is foul after a few cylinders. But then again I just like the Colts.
As to why Colts went to the closed frame. IMO perhaps it’s a lot easier to manufacture a casting drop forged as one piece, then screw a barrel into that than all the machining and fitting a one piece barrel onto an arbor must take, and the sighting arrangement does lend itself to better sights.

I just love those old colts…

 

[TrapperDude]

Ackshually… the open top design is restrained at the arbor which is at the center of the cylinder. The barrel lug, at the bottom of the frame, has no bearing on restraining the assembly.
The real “problem ” with the Remington frame is the very thin section where the frame tapers under the loading port. Colt and Remington both fixed this in the 1873 and 1875 models respectively.

Ackshually, there is torque imparted to the frame at the base of the recoil shield where it meets the frame because there is no top strap.

Just imagine how beefy the frame of an open-top revolver would be if it were chambered in a modern Magnum loading.

As to your reference to the Remington, I already addressed it. My discussion is related to the relative strength of open-top versus top strap designs--not Colt versus Remington.

 

[TrapperDude]

The reason Colt went with the enclosed frame had more to do with the desires of their biggest client, the US government than strength of the assembly. The governmentis bigges complaint with the open top was not strength but the known issues around wedge wear.

BTW, the government ordered 2500 frames at one point. Frames only, no cylinders or barrels. I wish I knew more of that backstory…

And that wedge IS a weak point in the open-top design--a weakness that doesn't exist in a top strap design.

 

[IronHand]

Optimally, a Kerr revolver with the DA mechanism. Faster to shoot, solid frame, far less fowling problems or cap jams.

A Beaumont Adams would be my second choice.

I might have to settle for a single action Kerr as almost all the imports were SA

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/kerr-revolvers-an-english-source-for-confederate-arms/
IronHand

 

[TrapperDude]

Doesn’t the cylinder contain most of not all of the pressure until the bullet enters the forcing cone then exits the barrel. The recoil shield then accepts the backwards forces generated.
The only photos I’ve seen of castrophic failure not related to a barrel being plugged was always of the cylinder blowing.

That is quite true. But revolvers begin to fail over time as parts stretch or compress from repeated recoil. The wedge does get compressed over time in an open-top design.

 

[Bad Karma]

A poor craftsman blames his tools. I own and shoot most of the grip/gun styles mentioned here equally well, within my own ability.

Same here. I’ve had a few Remington revolvers and those have been very accurate shooters to the extent of my abilities. I don’t mind tucking a pinky under the butt, do it on the Navy/SAA frame and have no problem with that at all. The problem, if you can call it that, is that I prefer full charges in my cap revolvers and I have large hands with long thick fingers. The Remington grip frame was designed to fit an average person of the 1870’s and apparently didn’t fit them all that well either since the area behind the trigger guard was opened up at least 3/16” on the model 1875. I can shoot that revolver comfortably with hot blackpowder loads while the ‘58 bites my knuckle with every shot.

 

[Billy Boy]

I want whatever Doc Holiday was carryin'.

wm

A 10 ga double is sweet but so hard to conceal….

 

[Whitworth]

I'm sure to those who were ventilated whether it was an open top Colt or closed frame Remington made no difference. I liked my first BP pistol, a Remington. Then I got a Colt YMMV

 

[TrapperDude]

I'm sure to those who were ventilated whether it was an open top Colt or closed frame Remington made no difference. I liked my first BP pistol, a Remington. Then I got a Colt YMMV

Hey, that's the order in which I got mine, too. It's fun to put hands on different design concepts, isn't it?

 

[Whughett]

Hey, that's the order in which I got mine, too. It's fun to put hands on different design concepts, isn't it?

My first was a ROA followed by a Colt 1860 sometime in the early 90’s then the flood gates opened and 25 acquisitions later I’m still not satisfied. The average lower price of percussion revolvers makes it pretty easy to build a “one of each” collection.

 

[Bad Karma]

Ackshually, there is torque imparted to the frame at the base of the recoil shield where it meets the frame because there is no top strap.

Just imagine how beefy the frame of an open-top revolver would be if it were chambered in a modern Magnum loading…

I’m not sure if an open top Magnum would need a significantly larger frame. Compare a standard .45 Colt blackpowder frame with Uberti’s Magnum version. The difference is mostly in the materials used. This is purely speculative but if someone wanted an open top magnum I’m sure the wedge/arbor interface could be made impervious to the battering forces they receive.

A 10 ga double is sweet but so hard to conceal….

How big a boy are you?

 

[springfield art]

Well, just for the sake of discussion...

I'm assuming we are limiting the discussion to cap and ball revolvers. In that case, I think I'd put my dinero on a Colt M1860 Army revolver. These are nimble and nicely balanced, with a very ergonomic grip and "pointability." They have the power of a .44 without the weight of a Dragoon. I know a solid frame with a top strap, as on the Remington and Rogers & Spencer revolvers, would be stronger, but the Colt design is strong enough, and in my opinion may be mechanically simpler and easier to maintain. Proper maintenance + good design = optimal reliability.

For what it's worth...

Notchy Bob

I notice the bad guys in the Preacher Eastwood movie mostly had prop 1860's. I love my repro R&S revolver.

 

[Billy Boy]

I’m not sure if an open top Magnum would need a significantly larger frame. Compare a standard .45 Colt blackpowder frame with Uberti’s Magnum version. The difference is mostly in the materials used. This is purely speculative but if someone wanted an open top magnum I’m sure the wedge/arbor interface could be made impervious to the battering forces they receive.



How big a boy are you?

Hard to say right now, I’m larding up fpr winter..

 

[TrapperDude]

My first was a ROA followed by a Colt 1860 sometime in the early 90’s then the flood gates opened and 25 acquisitions later I’m still not satisfied. The average lower price of percussion revolvers makes it pretty easy to build a “one of each” collection.

If my wife wouldn't complain about it, I'd already have a bunch more.

 

[TrapperDude]

I’m not sure if an open top Magnum would need a significantly larger frame. Compare a standard .45 Colt blackpowder frame with Uberti’s Magnum version. The difference is mostly in the materials used. This is purely speculative but if someone wanted an open top magnum I’m sure the wedge/arbor interface could be made impervious to the battering forces they receive.

The fact that there is a removable component in the mix between where the cylinder is and the barrel means that there is a lack of rigidity. To handle high pressures, there really needs to be more rigidity than what can be provided where a wedge holds everything together.

Even the barrel, where it mounts into that lug, is supported only from the bottom. That's a lot of force being generated all from one side, which as pressures increase, would make for some interesting long-term effects, not to mention accuracy with those higher pressures.

 

[Whughett]

If my wife wouldn't complain about it, I'd already have a bunch more.

Well not saying be shifty about but it reaches a point the bride simply doesn’t know. Then again we have reached a point in life that income exceeds what’s owed.

 

[TrapperDude]

Well not saying be shifty about but it reaches a point the bride simply doesn’t know. Then again we have reached a point in life that income exceeds what’s owed.

We hit that point where income exceeds debt a long time ago, but my wife gets annoyed with the space my guns and related stuff take up.

And I used the shifty method when I got my 1860 Army. I figured she wouldn't notice it was something new. She did, though. It probably had to do with the fact that my Remington is stainless, as are my unmentionable revolvers. Oops.

 

[45D]

And that wedge IS a weak point in the open-top design--a weakness that doesn't exist in a top strap design.

Well, that's actually not true.
The wedge is ( becomes) an integral part when installed (driven in) as it is supposed to be. At that point it is as much arbor/barrel assy as either structure when installed.

As far as the open top being able to be a "magnum" let's consider (since we're in a "strength of " discussion) the newest Kirst cylinder for the 1860. It's in 45acp. That ammo operates around 21,000 psi which is 50% more than the long standing 45C at 14,000 psi. I was fortunate to get 1 of 5 pre production cyls a couple of months ago and the 1st to fire it. My Uberti '60 has performed perfectly for the 200 rounds put through it so far and I will say some were higher than "norm" pressure ( won't say what) . . . it was purely for testing the o.t. platform!

So, the open-top design is quite capable of handling a steady diet of 21,000 psi pressures. The wedge is perfect, the wedge slots in both the arbor and barrel assy are perfect.

Obviously the o.t. is an older design than the top strap and the Root revolver ( a Colt top strap product) predated the Remington . . . Colt dropped it and kept the o.t.!!

As far as today's S.A.'s being a Top Strap design, you might notice they are rather "substantial" in the "strap" area to handle high end pressures. It's definitely a cheaper design to produce so, that's why you see it today.

As far as what I would want "back in the day", I'd want to start with a DraGoon and a '60 !!

Mike