Which pistol to buy for 1st?

[Idaho Elk Hunter]

I am looking at buying a BP pistol and want a revolver. I was looking at 1860 Army and the 1851 Navy (I think?) that shows the brass instead of steel frame. Is the 1851 Navy a good pistol to buy?....the price around $125 in cabelas and the 1860 Army is about $185 if I remember correctly. Is the frame as sturdy as the 1860 Army on the 1851 Navy?

Jim in Idaho

 

[JeffS]

If you can go to a store that has a bunch, see what feels comfortable in your hand. Opinions vary a lot. Personally I like the 60' Army. Fits my hand great and points nice.

In my experience most people like the 51' Navy best for feel. I think that is the same grip shape as used on a Colt SAA? (someone correct me if Im wrong) Seems to be the case that people with really big hands like the Army, and more normal hands prefer the Navy. Personally, I wouldnt worry about the brass grip frame if the 51' is your choice. If so, I would get the .36cal

I also like the Dragoons a lot, although they are heavy, and the Walker is great fun, but a beast to carry.

The Remington 58' is my last choice, (very uncomfortable to me) but many people love them.

Again, I'd go with what feels best. I have owned all of the above, and they all are really cool, no question. There are plenty of others I didnt mention too.

Others will surely jump in with more opinions.

 

[Kid Ray]

Hi Jim Bob,

My first is a '51 Navy, but as others have pointed out, once fired I was hooked, and now want a '60 Army also...

In regards to the brass frame, the '51 Navy comes with a brass frame or a steel frame with a brass grip frame. I have no experience with the brass frame (mine is steel) but the general opinion is that it is not as strong as the steel frame.

I think buy which ever you like first... you will probably end up with both!

---
Ray

 

[MikeChapin]

I'll add my vote for the 1851 Colt. My first was an Excam brass frame .44. The other two are Navy Arms .36 kits that I picked up cheap and put together. My brass frame .44 shot loose after a while and I got it repaired but did not shoot it much after that. The .36s are still going fine after 20 years or so.

If you want a brass frame, go for a .36. If you want a .44 I would recommend a steel frame.

I will agree with Vaquero on the Remingtons. The butt always felt too small to be comfortable but a lot of people like them.

 

[jdixon]

Though they are not period correct, I would suggest a Ruger Old Army - it has a lot of features designed in to it that the old replica revolvers do/did not have, easy to clean, take apart, you can dry fire it, adjustable sights, coil main spring instead of a V spring, and it packs a bigger whollup then those that you mentioned. Ruger OA's are on par with Walkers ballistically. They have made these things for years and parts are very easy to find. A new Ruger OA will set you back $600.00 or more, if you look around you can find a good used one for $300.00 or even less.

Of your list I would go with one of the Colt designs for one reason - they are easier to load. The Remington, though a very nice looking piece, has nipples that are buried in the rear of the cylinder in such a way that tear drop and/or in-line style cappers can't get to them. Therefore to load you wind up putting caps on with your fingers. This adds significantly to the amount of time loading - at least for me, as compared to a Colt which can be capped with a capper.

One draw back on the Colts however is that they tend not to shed their cap fragments as well as the Remington and jam up more becuase of it. Still this problem is not as irrating as the capping issue I stated above IMO.

You mentioned the brass frames - IMO stay away from those. Brass framed revolvers tend to get loose over time especially if you run maximum charges through them.

Bottom line really is get what makes you happy - shooting these old style guns for most is such fun that they end up aquiring several more as time goes along.

 

[Don]

Jim Bob,

Your choice depends a lot on what you want to do with it. Is it just for occasional plinking? Is it for serious competitive target shooting? If it is for more causal shooting than brass frame guns are OK. It is true that they will shoot loose after awhile but if you keep loads under 25 grains and load the cylinder off the frame(loading on the frame stresses it) than you will get years of servise out of it. If you find that maintaining a cap and ball too much of a pain in the rear(which it can be) and lose interest then you haven't spent a lot of money. If you plan on doing cowboy action shooting or competitive target shooting than steel frames are the best. As to Colt or Remington thats up to you. I own both and love the feel of the Colts but the Remingtons shed spent caps nicely where as the Colts jam up frequently. I've addressed that by puting small peices of plastic tubing called cap keepers over the caps and nipples. This helps a lot but doesn't completely eliminate the problem. Any way as others have said, no matter what you get first you'll probably end up with others.

Good Luck

Don

 

[John Taylor]

I would stay away from any with brass frames unless you just want to hang it on the wall. I have had many come into the shop that are shot loose, cylinder sets back into the frame. If your going to spend that much money then add a few bucks and get a steel frame. My first was a Colt navy replica. The old reproductions were 5% smaller than the original, they didn't allow for shrinkage when casting. My personal view is that the Remingtons are better than the Colt design. The Ruger is the top of the line, can't get a better pistol. The Colts may be a little easy to take apart for cleaning but the lack of an upper strap and the famous disappearing rear sight are a draw back. The stainless Ruger is the best for cleaning, take the grips off and stick it in the dish washer ( when the wife is away). :rotf: In reality it should be treated like a blued gun. I have nocked down 200 yard silhouettes with the Ruger.

 

[echo89]

Vaquero, you are correct on the 51 Navy grip being revived for the SAA. I cannot remember the pub I read that in, and can't get to it right now, but I can also back that up by laying my Navy next to my dad's 1gen SAA. They are cut from the same cloth, so to speak.

I have brought up the brass frame issue here previously. I linked the thread below. I think I'll caveat this time: I am not advocating you get one w/o regard to a steel frame. I am passing along the info that if you do, you can shoot it with confidence if you keep the loads light.

One of the moderators here, (Zonie), weighs in these CnB revolver discussions w/ great experience and knowledge. If I get a piece of info from him, I use it. Maybe he'll add to this one as well. If I forgotten someone else that helped me out, no offense.

Now, IMHO, the 51 Navy is one of the finest handling revolvers EVER. If you want to find out if you will enjoy CnB revolvers and stay inexpensive, well, I did it by buying a brass frame 51 Navy, and have been hopelessly addicted ever since. Good luck.
Brass frame wear and tear

 

[Zonie]

As you've found, the brass framed guns can give fairly long service if the loads are kept on the light side.

Mention was made in the "link" about the strengths of brass and steel being similar so approching this from an engineering position, I'll give the following thoughts:
STRENGTH OF MATERIAL:
Cast Brass (C94800)* Tensile strength=50,000 PSI, Yield strength=23,000 PSI

Cast Carbon Steel (ASTM A27-81 Grade 65-35)* Tensile strength=68,000 PSI, Yield strength=38,000 PSI.

The steel has 36% higher Tensile strength and 65% higher Yield strength.

Tensile strength measures how much load it takes to break the part while Yield measures how much load it takes to permanently deform it.

With the basic Colt design, the Yield strength is the area of greatest concern to me.
With this design, the steel Cylinder pin is the only thing that is actually holding the barrel onto the gun. This steel pin is attached to the frame and if the frame material (or the pin) yields in this area, the cylinder pin will move forward.
Because the brass is 65% weaker (yield) heavy loads can cause it to move. As it moves, the cylinder pin will also move making the gun "loose".
Brass will "work harden" if it is bent or moved due to yielding. This hardening makes it more brittle which increases the likelyhood of it's breaking. Under a worst case scenario it could fail allowing the barrel, cylinder pin and cylinder to be blown off of the gun.
This probably wouldn't hurt the shooter but it would end his fun at the range.

Just something to think about. :hmm:

All of this does not mean I do not own any brass framed guns. I do own three .36 caliber revolvers representing three different Confederate manufactures.
I enjoy shooting these guns bur I am mindful of the weaknesses of the materials and use 14-16 grain of powder.

*The materials selected are average in both groups. As I have no way of knowing the actual materials used in these guns the selections may not represent the actual product.

 

[Legionair]

I have the brass framed 51 navy and the 60 army you refer to, both from Cabelas. They are manufactured by Pietta of Italy.

Both are quality revolvers for the price.

As stated by others, if you have a brass frame, use light loads (the manual that comes with the pistol will tell you how much to use).

I've had mine for 2 years, and shoot light in both. Never felt as though they were loosening up (mark your wedge with a needle file, so you can see any drift).

Just an opinion....

Legion

 

[RedFeather]

On the Remingtons feeling small to the hand, I noticed that right off and I don't have overly large hands. Always have to wrap my little finger under the grip. Then I saw where, some years ago, Dixie began advertising a "full size" Remington (at a full size price, I might add). Maybe the grip is longer on that one? Anyone ever seen one?

RedFeather

 

[CrackStock]

I like the Uberti version of the 58 Remington. I had to send 2 Pietas back and cannot say much for those.

Colts are loved by some, but any gun the uses a notch filed in the hammer for a rear sight...

As to brass frames, I understand that these were extremely rare originally and are more common today than they were even during the Civil War. I would not own one.

CS