OT - Another 1851 Colt

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:43 pm

Several months ago I purchased a new Signature Series 1851 Colt from a pard on the SASS Wire. Although not the exacting copy the 2nd Series are, it is a very nice, new, unfired gun. Got it with the box and all the paperwork, as NIB. I immediately took off for CA and dropped it off a gunsmith well noted for his C&B work, (oft champion SASS shooter with such). I picked up 2 other C&Bs he'd worked on at the same time.

Jump to present: Just picked it up from the gunsmith with all the mods and an action job needed for competition (not that it will do ME any good)! It sure is smoooooth.

Although I love my Colts, Ruger had an excellent idea. I've had this same mod done to all my Colts used in SASS matches, and to date, have only needed one spring replaced; it was installed in 1987. I cannot truthfully say how many rounds have gone downrange thru that revolver, but... I'll venture to say, far, far more than most C&Bs. While I've only broken two many hand springs on unmodified Colts, I've seen too many others break, not to want it done. Might ruin any collector value... but their value is in the shooting for me!

One small hole: A little coil spring and plunger, shave off the back of the hand... viola, one very rugged and reliable cylinder turner:

And, since flat springs are a little prone to breakage and wire is more flexible; in my experience the coil has a much longer life with very consistent action.

Also had guards put in place to keep the caps from following the hammer back into the action to match my two other '51s. I had to drop off my old Armi San Marco clone to have a new hand installed. The old one had started slipping off the back of the cylinder and was beginning to round off. Hoping to get another 1851 and begin competing in the Josie Wales category where offered... maybe I just write some stages where 3 handguns are needed, in addition to a rifle and shotgun! Let's see, 3 1851's, 2 extra cylinders; searching for another 2nd Series and another ASM, oh, heck that's enough! Naw, need to get an extra cylinder for each gun, maybe then I can shoot a whole match without having to reload!

Now I need a Iron Framed Henry, an 1873 Short Rifle, and a hammer shotgun! Does the list ever get any SHORTER?

Now, I gotta get out and try this little gem out! Hmmm.... what sorta game, 'sides rabbits, would be appropriate for a .36 cal. 1851? Might wanna backup for havelina, but deer @ <50 yards I think would be fair game... anyone with any experience?

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 11:02 pm

Griff,

My first revolver was a 1851 Navy. I shot more rabbits and armadillos than I could count and it was just about perfect for this work. Nothing feels better in the hand.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 11:16 pm

Yea, even my brother-in-law when he fondled this piece remarked on how natural holding it was. I normally don't like long barreled revolvers, but... the 1851 is just SO comfortable!

'Dillos, now why didn't I think of them!? Probably my immigrant status showin up.

GEOFF · Post by **GEOFF** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:38 am

Griff,

Very informative post.

I don't know much about cap&ball revolvers so a couple of questions.

1) Do you normally use just the round balls?

2) How much FFFg powder usually.

3) After the powder is in the chamber describe the bullet and lube combo that works best.

4) Do you stick with 1851's cuz they feel better to you than 1860's etc...????

5) In competition like you were mentioning are 1851's far more prevalent due to the feel and shootablity???

I do know what you mean about an 1851 feeling so good in the hand. Part of it is that heavier barrel with the smaller hole drilled in it.

Thanks!

Geoff

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:17 am

GEOFF wrote:Griff,
Very informative post.
I don't know much about cap&ball revolvers so a couple of questions.
1) Do you normally use just the round balls?

Yes, The balls are usually easier to load, and since little knockdown is required, the 77gr RBs are sufficient. I do have a conical mold, just that it is a little more labor intensive. Both work VERY well.

2) How much FFFg powder usually.

In competition I use a 17 gr spout on my flask. For other carry purposes and for those truly HUGE knockdowns, I have a 21 grain spout and break out those conicals. Huge difference, can we say, .38 to .357Mag!

3) After the powder is in the chamber describe the bullet and lube combo that works best.

Whoa! BEST? That's a can of worms! I'll just decribe my formulas: For ease of loading, I drop in the powder, press in one of WonderWads pre-lubed wool (or some substitute that appears to be wool) and press in the ball. For long term storage loaded between shoots, I dump in the powder, press in the ball and then cover the ball with a stiff non-pretroleum lube, I like Thompson Centers "Bore Butter". For lubing non-lubed wads, I've soaked 'em in leavin's from the fry pan... shhh, don't tell the wife!

4) Do you stick with 1851's cuz they feel better to you than 1860's etc...????

Yep, that extry Â½" on the 1860 barrel & Â¼" on the grip is just plain uncomfortable!

5) In competition like you were mentioning are 1851's far more prevalent due to the feel and shootablity???

I think that the '51s have a more ardent following... The grip frame is identical (as much as two things can be identical), to the SAA, and lover's of that grip tend to prefer the 1851, while those that seem to prefer or are more comfortable shooting Rugers, like the 1860 if they want a traditional C&B. The 1858 Remingtons are also very popular. With it's thinner hammer and topstrap, they are less prone to having caps follow the hammer back into the workings; its different shaped hammer and grip are also noted points for some folks preference.

I do know what you mean about an 1851 feeling so good in the hand. Part of it is that heavier barrel with the smaller hole drilled in it.
Thanks!
Geoff

The fellar that did the work on this one showed me his favored competition guns, original 1860s that he's pretty much done all the work I had done to mine. When knockdown pistol targets were the norm (and they're still sometimes present), the .44s were almost mandatory to ensure they went down. That's pretty much the only time I break out the conicals. I can usually knock down anything a .38Spl can as long as I hit it up high. So I just slow down and aim a little finer.

Others have opened up the notch in their hammers, added a taller/thicker front sight; however, I believe in the maintaining the original lines. While I'll tune the innards to the best working order possible, I really like the exterior to maintain that air of authenticity. Probably duplicious of me, but... who ain't full of contradictions?

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:45 am

Very cool! I love C&B revolvers!!!

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 9:58 am

Griff,
Thats a beaut!! I just picked up a pair of 1851's, made and stamped for Colt from Sixgun. I am interested in the work done on yours and the gunsmith you used. Could you send a PM to me so I could contact him and have the work done on mine? thanks.

Ben_Rumson · Post by **Ben_Rumson** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:22 am

Also had guards put in place to keep the caps from following the hammer back into the action to match my two other '51s.

Griff, I'd be interested to hear or see a foto of what these guards are.. Thanks

Bullet Bob · Post by **Bullet Bob** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:25 am

I think the 1851 is one of the best looking guns ever. Here's my Signature model:

And here's a link to a pretty good article about the 2nd and 3rd generation Colt blackpowder revolvers. Hopefully no one will bother to sprain their fingers pounding on their keyboards that ". . if it wasn't made in a Colt factory by Colt employees it's not a Colt!". But heck, if it makes someone happy. . .

https://www.bluebookinc.com/Info/PDF/PO ... tBlack.pdf

jazman · Post by **jazman** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:24 am

That gun looks smooth just sitting there! I don't know much about C&B, and probably won't ever have one, but really like learning about them. Great post, thanks. Jim

coyote nose · Post by **coyote nose** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:01 pm

Here is my 3rd gen sig series. Bought it in 1997. Have over 1200 rounds thru it. LOVE IT. Look at the factory wood grips!!!

Broke the hand spring once, may consider doing your modification to it. Quite interesting. Never thought about getting rid of the leaf spring that powers the hand. Hmmm.......thanks for the post and for giving me MORE work!!!

[/img]

coyote nose · Post by **coyote nose** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:09 pm

As long as I am at it, here is a rabbit to fall to the navy.

These 3rd gens took a lot of heat from the gun press. Guntests magazine did a lot of trashing of their fit and finish but I have to tell you I have owned 4 and each has been a true masterpiece. Just saw a 1861 Navy at the last gunshow at a great price (350, unfired in the box). Had to buy it.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:26 pm

rjohns94, PM in the works.

Ben_Rumson wrote:
Also had guards put in place to keep the caps from following the hammer back into the action to match my two other '51s.
Griff, I'd be interested to hear or see a foto of what these guards are.. Thanks

A picture being worth 1,000 words; (possibly 2,000 of mine) here ya are, Manhattan Conversion:

Although quite thin, this "gate" sits flush with the face of the recoil shield. You can't see it in the above picture, but it also involves taking some metal off the sides of the hammer and filling the notch in the hammer face (where they fit over the pins between chambers.) This is his latest version, but the two others I had done had slightly thicker shields, similar to the pic below (and you can see the hammer mods):

And a closeup of the hammer (done much earlier than any of mine, this one doesn't have the notch filled, he sez since he started filling it in, this has greatly improved the percentage of caps that remain on the nipple):

(The above revolver is an Italian clone, has a greater gap between the cylinder and recoil shield, these are set forward to keep the cap from falling back in the ratchet).

Coyote Nose, you're most welcome, Sir!

Ben_Rumson · Post by **Ben_Rumson** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:41 pm

Griff.. thanks for taking the time to make those pix...Very nice set up all the way round..I've gotten my Remington nipples in a zone where the RWS caps split upon firing and fall off when the cylinder rotates.. Don't know what I'll do when the fire holes erode too far ...

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:48 pm

Ben_Rumson wrote:Griff.. thanks for taking the time to make those pix...Very nice set up all the way round..I've gotten my Remington nipples in a zone where the RWS caps split upon firing and fall off when the cylinder rotates.. Don't know what I'll do when the fire holes erode too far ...

The guys I converse with ALL say "TRESO Nipples".

GEOFF · Post by **GEOFF** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:19 pm

Griff,

Thanks for taking time to answer my questions so completely. All I have for cap and ball is an old Italian 1851 copy. Has the round trigger guard and I can see right away that I love the squared trigger guard and especially when it is silver plated. I'll have to pull out my Colt book and see what was original.

I have often wondered why Bill Hickock carried 1851 Navy's when he could have had more power. He must have been sold on the handling characteristics on the 1851 too.

I'll have to get some of those lubed wads. Thanks again!

Geoff

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:05 pm

Very nice. I do like the looks of the Colts but my 1858 Rems fit my hand better. One of these days I will have to pick up an 1860 just so I can have from both sides of the fence.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:34 am

JReed wrote:Very nice. I do like the looks of the Colts but my 1858 Rems fit my hand better. One of these days I will have to pick up an 1860 just so I can have from both sides of the fence.

Jeremy, I'm on the waiting list for a pair of the announced USFA Remmie '58s in the "Navy" .36 cal. configuration. Hopefully, they'll be as true to the originals as their SAAs are.

GEOFF · Post by **GEOFF** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 7:52 pm

Fill me in a bit on the USFA Remingtons. I didn't even know they were making these. I've got a couple of their SAA and they are excellent!

Is the .36 Remington the same grip size as their .44?????????

Griff what is the reason you are going with .36's??????????

Geoff

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:33 pm

Okay,

So I'll ask the 'doh' question.....Cabela's has a brass frame 1851 for about $140......are they worth buying, or are they fancy row-boat anchors?

Comal Forge · Post by **Comal Forge** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:49 pm

I always wondered about the great paradox - the old .36 C&B revolvers were actually .38's (.375) and the cartridge .38's are actually .357 (or ".36 caliber")...hmmm

At any rate, Elmer Keith once remarked that the .36 had a good reputation as a fight stopper. The '51 also handles quite well (as everyone who owns one can attest) so I think those characteristics must be why Hickok carried them. I'll bet he handled them in expert fashion.

I personally prefer the 1860 Army. Part of the reason is that I grew up shooting an original that belonged to my G-G-GPa, who carried it in the Civil War (my dad liked to shoot the old gun back in the 1960's but I have since retired it because one of the chambers has a thin spot in the wall). I have long hands and the 1860 fits me better than other designs. Colts also seem to point better than Remingtons but the first C&B I bought after reaching the age of majority was a Dixie '58 replica. That pistol shot quite well and would stay within 2" at 25 yds all day long - also held more powder, I could put in 40 gr of FFFg if I loaded the ball with no felt wad and just a little lube on top. It had less tendency to jam than my current Colt and almost never trapped cap fragments.

If you have the time to load/reload and your pistol shoots where you aim, you will not be at a disadvantage with a C&B revolver in most handgun situations. I've hunted with mine and have a lot of confidence in where the ball will land at any reasonable range.

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:42 pm

Griff wrote:
JReed wrote:Very nice. I do like the looks of the Colts but my 1858 Rems fit my hand better. One of these days I will have to pick up an 1860 just so I can have from both sides of the fence.
Jeremy, I'm on the waiting list for a pair of the announced USFA Remmie '58s in the "Navy" .36 cal. configuration. Hopefully, they'll be as true to the originals as their SAAs are.

I hadnt heard they were going to make a version. What I have is a pair of EMF Uberti made 58's that I am very happy with.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:23 pm

Nice pistols. Looks like you have everything you need. You might something like it, but a spout to get powder from can to measure with NO mess will be appreciated. I made my own from an old cap and something you might a surplus of; or at least Uncle Sam does... a .223 case. Punch a hole from the inside of the cap, just slight smaller than the case body. Press the case thru the cap so the cap snaps into groove in front of the rim, silver solder the case to the cap and drill out the primer povker w/a 3/8" bit IIRC. Viola! instant spout. I cut a hole in the cap liner and re-used it.

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:53 pm

I may have to try that. For the most part I use Pyro P and found that a 9mm case makes a great powder scoop with some bailing wire twisted around the case head as a handle 1 3/4 cases is right about 30 grains. What I really need to get to speed up the process is a pistol powder flask with a couple different size spouts.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:09 am

Yep, works great on filling the flasks also. I just unscrew the spout, hold the valve open and upend the can. No spills, no mad missus!

Here's the info on the USFA Remmies: USFA site as they've announced an agreement to produce these under license from Remington, in both .44 Army and .36 Navy configurations. I haven't seen anything new on this, so... maybe it was premature!

Ben_Rumson · Post by **Ben_Rumson** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 12:30 pm

I always wondered about the great paradox - the old .36 C&B revolvers were actually .38's (.375) and the cartridge .38's are actually .357 (or ".36 caliber")...hmmm

IIRC the oldtime way calibers were determined was how many a certain size ball diameter there would be in a pound.. 36 cal.= 36 to the pound... But for some reason they I don't know why that didn't apply to something like the 75 cal Brown Bess & others...

gamekeeper · Post by **gamekeeper** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 12:57 pm

Great post Griff, very interesting. I have had two Colt navy types a 1851 and a 1861 plus a 1849 pocket colt. If I ever get back into cap n ball I will try to get my guns fixed up like yours. I was always having trouble with busted caps falling in and jamming the hammer.
By the way I found the 51 much better than the 61, I didn't like the creeping lever.

Comal Forge · Post by **Comal Forge** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:45 pm

Ben_Rumson wrote:
I always wondered about the great paradox - the old .36 C&B revolvers were actually .38's (.375) and the cartridge .38's are actually .357 (or ".36 caliber")...hmmm
IIRC the oldtime way calibers were determined was how many a certain size ball diameter there would be in a pound.. 36 cal.= 36 to the pound... But for some reason they I don't know why that didn't apply to something like the 75 cal Brown Bess & others...

That's close but not the complete story. The "gage" and "bore" labels were direct equivalents - 12 bore is 12 balls per lb; but the .36 cal ball is about 100 balls per pound, the .44 is 55 balls/lb, etc.