Discussion Colt vs Remington

[Joe Whitworth]

"I had one of your largest sized Revolver Pistols at the bloody battle of Inkermann, and by some chance got surrounded by the Russians. I then found the advantages of your pistol over that of Colonel Colt's, for had I to cock before each shot I should have lost my life. I should not have had time to cock, as they were too close to me, being only a few yards from me; so close that I was bayoneted through the thigh immediately after shooting the fourth man." (from a letter to Adams from: J.G. Crosse, 88th Foot (Connaught Rangers)

Lt. Col. George Vincent Fosbery: "An officer, who especially prided himself in his pistol shooting, was attacked by a stalwart mutineer armed with a heavy sword. The officer, unfortunately for himself, carried a Colt's Navy pistol of small caliber and fired a sharp-pointed bullet of sixty to the pound and a heavy charge of powder, its range being 600 yards, as I have frequently proved. This he proceeded to empty into the sepoy as soon as he advanced, but having done so, he waited just one second too long to see the effect of his shooting and was cloven to the teeth by his antagonist, who then dropped down and died beside him. My informant told me that five out of the six bullets had struck the sepoy close together in the chest, and all had passed through him and out of his back."

Hmm, claiming a "heavy charge" with a conical bullet and 600 yard range for a Colt Navy seems to question Fosbery's knowledge of the Colt Navy. I agree on the advantages of double action over single for quick work unless you fan your Colt cowboy style I like big .45 caliber bullets and carry a SA/DA auto. SGT. Alvin York with his .45 showed how a handgun could be used offensively in a pinch, but he wasn't on a horse YMMV

 

[bayonet]

And disappears as soon as the hammer starts falling.

ahhhhh is that what he meant..................well gosh darn it he should of said so!

 

[bayonet]

True. BUT, we have people on here saying they are useful over tens of yards - on horseback! And against infantry! What they forget that if infantry are attacked by cavalry, they fire at the horses - a bigger target and certainly upsets the rider when the horse goes down. (King Henry V's archers at Agincourt (1415) didn't kill many knights in heavy armor, they unhorsed them - and the foot soldiers finished them off!)
Handguns are pretty useless beyond a few yards and not much use in battle.
The Brits during the Crimea War (1854-55) and the Indian Mutiny (1857) preferred the .44" 5-shot double action British pistols to Colt's .36" 6-shot single action revolvers because they could get all 5 shots off before 2 on the Colt, and the heavier round disabled the opponent far more reliably. It stopped the opposition before they got to bayonet/sword-length. Again, there are many who trumpet about how much more accurate the single action Colts (et al) were yet, as you say, they were not used over particularly long distances. Yes, a double action is a much heavier and longer trigger pull which upsets aiming, but if you are just 'pointing'' ....

"I had one of your largest sized Revolver Pistols at the bloody battle of Inkermann, and by some chance got surrounded by the Russians. I then found the advantages of your pistol over that of Colonel Colt's, for had I to cock before each shot I should have lost my life. I should not have had time to cock, as they were too close to me, being only a few yards from me; so close that I was bayoneted through the thigh immediately after shooting the fourth man." (from a letter to Adams from: J.G. Crosse, 88th Foot (Connaught Rangers)

Lt. Col. George Vincent Fosbery: "An officer, who especially prided himself in his pistol shooting, was attacked by a stalwart mutineer armed with a heavy sword. The officer, unfortunately for himself, carried a Colt's Navy pistol of small caliber and fired a sharp-pointed bullet of sixty to the pound and a heavy charge of powder, its range being 600 yards, as I have frequently proved. This he proceeded to empty into the sepoy as soon as he advanced, but having done so, he waited just one second too long to see the effect of his shooting and was cloven to the teeth by his antagonist, who then dropped down and died beside him. My informant told me that five out of the six bullets had struck the sepoy close together in the chest, and all had passed through him and out of his back."

and so the .45 was developed due to the lame .38 so in your last paragraph a good example (P.S. should of just gave 1 good head shot!).

 

[Joe Whitworth]

The rear sight disappears as you pull the trigger because the hammer falls out of your line of sight. Makes "follow through" real difficult.

For all of about 15 milliseconds until it goes boom and the target is lost.

 

[Old Soldier]

and so the .45 was developed due to the lame .38 so in your last paragraph a good example (P.S. should of just gave 1 good head shot!).

In an action like that, you don't think that fast.

 

[Trooper "D"]

When target shooting at a little black circle, using the sights is how it's done. Like any sport, it probably is a waste of time though!
Follow through is important in hitting a golf ball, baseball, or doing most anything in sports.

I thought follow through was throwing the empty pistol at the enemy and drawing a bowie knife while screaming like a banshee.

 

[Old Soldier]

I thought follow through was throwing the empty pistol at the enemy and drawing a bowie knife while screaming like a banshee.

No. That is despiration.

 

[bayonet]

In an action like that, you don't think that fast.

You do if you practiced it a thousand times or more in training. BUT back then they no doubt did not and did not have the ammunition to do so. As today you do. Love it when someone else pays for the ammunition (mostly), thank you taxpayers (which I am one)!

 

[ConfederateCanuck]

Cylinder swaps are a myth. My first cap and ball was a Remington, I was happy with it until I bought my first Colt. Colts are pretty, Remingtons aren't, the smooth flowing lines of the Colt are more pleasing to my eye. Remingtons foul up quickly, getting sticky and binding the cylinder causing a bent hand spring when trying to cock the hammer. After firing 2-3 cylinders the Remington is done shooting until the cylinder pin and cylinder are disassembled and cleaned, I get tired of shooting a Colt before it becomes unshootable due to powder fouling. YMMV

Just fired 8 cylinders without cleaning or wiping....didn't even remove thecylinder. Still rotates easily without any of the problems you mentioned. Is yours a repro? Mine is an original

Other advantages noticed today....no cap jams, easier to put a cap on nipple than on Colts because there is more space and the nipples are angled outward slightly. No doubt on my mind that this woukd be the percussion revolver I'd trust in combat.

 

[Old Soldier]

Which pistol was better and more over favorited by troops in the field ? Me personally I like the remington new model army . I carry a reproduction on my belt when I go to reenactments.

Just to go back to the start, Which one was best? I doubt if you would get an answer since there were not that many types of pistol on issue for 'Other-ranks'. You got what you were given (and signed for!) You either liked it, or you didn't. From the sound of it, you did not get much practice in shooting it (just like the rifles) but got practice in drilling with your sword or carbine - yes flippin' HORSE-SOLDIERS. Pistols were not on issue for the poor old infantry.

Officers, on the other hand supplied their own weapons, including the pistol - whether they needed it or not! The Colt appeared in 1860 and the Remington in 1863, so there was not an immediate choice. Equally, the buyers had little knowledge of using a pistol in combat. The Navy was a popular revolver, but it's stopping power was limited, hence the introduction of the .44 revolver. There was a general dislike of foreign weapons, especially 'self-cocking' revolvers, but some were available - even the Adams and Beaumont-Adams made by the Massachusetts Arms Company (but only in .36 for some reason). I will assume that US customers preferred the gentler .36 as .44 was rather ... brutal. The Confederates , of course, got Adams and Kerr revolvers supplied with their P53s as well as Lefaucheux. Besides, Federal suppliers seemed unable to supply large numbers, certainly in the early days.

So which one was best? The one that suited YOU. The one you could use without too much hassle - and could hit a target you aimed at. Pistols are especially concerned with personal choice - the one(s) YOU found best, that fitted your hand, that balanced well, that had the best trigger-pull, that pointed easily, that drew easily and didn't take too much cleaning. Even more important was that it WORKED when required.

 

[Joe Whitworth]

Just fired 8 cylinders without cleaning or wiping....didn't even remove thecylinder. Still rotates easily without any of the problems you mentioned. Is yours a repro? Mine is an original

Other advantages noticed today....no cap jams, easier to put a cap on nipple than on Colts because there is more space and the nipples are angled outward slightly. No doubt on my mind that this woukd be the percussion revolver I'd trust in combat.

Interesting, I have 3 repos all by different makers. Perhaps today's better CNC machining holding closer tolerances then 160 years ago isn't always such a good thing. Are you using Black Powder or a substitute? I've only used real Black powder, mostly Goex 3F. Has your original had grease grooves cut in the cylinder pin? This is the supposed cure to slow the onset of cylinder pin stickiness. The issue was never important enough to chuck up a pin and turn some grease grooves in one but others have and reported improvement, sounds like a rainy day shop project. The much larger diameter and grease grooved arbors on the Colts (repos and originals) seem more immune to fouling binding the cylinder. YMMV

 

[Jim in Wisconsin]

The quality of blackpowder and even humidity make a difference in fouling. Modern substitutes like Pyrodex don't clog up as bad as actual blackpowder.
I wouldn't think a cavalry soldier would shoot enough times to jam it up. His horse is supposed to get him away from trouble!
If he's in an actual firefight he needs a carbine.
I wonder how many times a revolver was actually used in combat.

 

[ConfederateCanuck]

Interesting, I have 3 repos all by different makers. Perhaps today's better CNC machining holding closer tolerances then 160 years ago isn't always such a good thing. Are you using Black Powder or a substitute? I've only used real Black powder, mostly Goex 3F. Has your original had grease grooves cut in the cylinder pin? This is the supposed cure to slow the onset of cylinder pin stickiness. The issue was never important enough to chuck up a pin and turn some grease grooves in one but others have and reported improvement, sounds like a rainy day shop project. The much larger diameter and grease grooved arbors on the Colts (repos and originals) seem more immune to fouling binding the cylinder. YMMV

Shooting 3F blackpowder. The pin is smooth...no grooves. I do put a crisco and beeswax lube in the loaded chambers to keep fouling soft.

However, after i posted here after going to shoot, when I went to clean the gun the cylinder pin was stuck due to fouling and I had to tap it out with a rubber mallet. Next time I will clean after a few cylinders, or at least at the end before the lube/fouling mix begins to harden.

Absolutely no issues experienced while firing though.

 

[Trooper "D"]

Just fired 8 cylinders without cleaning or wiping....didn't even remove thecylinder. Still rotates easily without any of the problems you mentioned. Is yours a repro? Mine is an original

Other advantages noticed today....no cap jams, easier to put a cap on nipple than on Colts because there is more space and the nipples are angled outward slightly. No doubt on my mind that this woukd be the percussion revolver I'd trust in combat.

All four of mine are repros and I havent had any real problems with them. Different manufacturers and the cylinders still fit each other. The Rogers and Spencer revolver is a sweet dream. Much like a Remington but with a different ramrod stay system and bell horn shaped grips. The cutaways for placing caps are just awesome. Recommend the Rogers and Spencer revolvers if you can find any original. The repros are made well and hold up to hard usage.

 

[Trooper "D"]

Shooting 3F blackpowder. The pin is smooth...no grooves. I do put a crisco and beeswax lube in the loaded chambers to keep fouling soft.

However, after i posted here after going to shoot, when I went to clean the gun the cylinder pin was stuck due to fouling and I had to tap it out with a rubber mallet. Next time I will clean after a few cylinders, or at least at the end before the lube/fouling mix begins to harden.

Absolutely no issues experienced while firing though.

The lube is your saving grace. I use Crisco and Bore Butter mixed together. My real problems come from shooting blanks with Quick Grits as wadding. No lube so the powder crust doesn't get softened. That's why I carry a can of spray lube to keep everything spinning properly.
I have an 1860 Army cut down to about 5" and the loading lever removed. The problem with it is that the cylinder can overshoot the chamber and stop off kilter. Doesn't do it all the time. I've never been a supporter of fanning a revolver and this is one reason why. Accuracy is the other reason. Looks good one TV but one mess up and you look the fool.

 

[Trooper "D"]

The lube is your saving grace. I use Crisco and Bore Butter mixed together. My real problems come from shooting blanks with Quick Grits as wadding. No lube so the powder crust doesn't get softened. That's why I carry a can of spray lube to keep everything spinning properly.
I have an 1860 Army cut down to about 5" and the loading lever removed. The problem with it is that the cylinder can overshoot the chamber and stop off kilter. Doesn't do it all the time. I've never been a supporter of fanning a revolver and this is one reason why. Accuracy is the other reason. Looks good one TV but one mess up and you look the fool.

I mistakenly replied to myself. Now who looks the fool! HA!

 

[Trooper "D"]

The quality of blackpowder and even humidity make a difference in fouling. Modern substitutes like Pyrodex don't clog up as bad as actual blackpowder.
I wouldn't think a cavalry soldier would shoot enough times to jam it up. His horse is supposed to get him away from trouble!
If he's in an actual firefight he needs a carbine.
I wonder how many times a revolver was actually used in combat.

Pistols apparently were used quite heavily by some. Guerrillas and Mosby's men are two examples.

 

[Old Soldier]

I wonder how many times a revolver was actually used in combat.

I suspect rarely. No, not because they never got to fight, but the revolver is limited in its range. There is no point in firing a .36 or even a .44, at a target 100 yards away when you are advancing - or on the receiving end of an assault, although I am sure it was done. You really have to see 'the whites of their eyes'. Equally, you would not be seeing any hits - those earlier quotes I posted were actions within 5 yards!

So were they? Certainly to let them know you are there and all 5 or 6 cylinders would be gone by the time you got to the line in a field operation - if you lasted that long. An infantry officer wielding a pistol would also made himself a target for an enthusiastic rifleman. Certainly, they would be used in ambush or house actions, especially for cavalry escaping an ambush. i suspect it would be no different from today except, of course, you only had 6 shots. No time to reload in action with non-cartridge pistols! Officers' swords were not just for show.

 

[Joe Whitworth]

I suspect rarely. No, not because they never got to fight, but the revolver is limited in its range. There is no point in firing a .36 or even a .44, at a target 100 yards away when you are advancing - or on the receiving end of an assault, although I am sure it was done. You really have to see 'the whites of their eyes'. Equally, you would not be seeing any hits - those earlier quotes I posted were actions within 5 yards!

So were they? Certainly to let them know you are there and all 5 or 6 cylinders would be gone by the time you got to the line in a field operation - if you lasted that long. An infantry officer wielding a pistol would also made himself a target for an enthusiastic rifleman. Certainly, they would be used in ambush or house actions, especially for cavalry escaping an ambush. i suspect it would be no different from today except, of course, you only had 6 shots. No time to reload in action with non-cartridge pistols! Officers' swords were not just for show.

Outside of cavalry engagements I agree. The ratio of recovered fired long gun projectiles compared to pistol projectiles I've metal detected is about 100 or more to 1 around here. YMMV