ATTN: Pistolsmiths-Is the "Convential Wisdom" wron

[Southron Sr.]

The "Conventional Wisdom" is that Rigid Frame( a.k.a. Remmies and Rogers & Spencers) revolvers have a stronger frame, hence are more suitable for use in N-SSA pistol competition.

There is a very interesting report on the internet by an engineer that got the "Bug" to purchase his first percussion revolver for informal target shooting. After he examined all of the replica models available, he was still in a quandry which one would be the "best."

As he worked for an automobile manufacturer, he had access to some rather sophistical CAD equipment used to design new autos. Well, he entered the specs on both the replica "Solid Frame" revolvers like the Remington and also the specs on the repro Colt "Open Top" revolvers and let the computer crunch the numbers.

'Lo and Behold,' the computer picked the Colt "Open Top" design as having the most "Rigid" frame! Now, computer glitches can an do occcur, but the engineer ended up purchasing high quality repro Colt Dragoon and was very happy with his choice.

So, there is a posibility that the "Conventional Wisdom" about S.F. revolvers having the most "Rigid" frame is in error.

Anyone that goes to Skirmishes and participaates in the Pistol Matches can tell you that the R.F. replicas have a virtual monopoly on the firing line.

Maybe, just maybe that Old Sam Colt was a better gun designer than we give him credit for being. If his O.T. design is superior, why are the replica Colt's relegated to the plinking range and not being "acccurized" and used in competition?

Fellow Skirmisher, Joe Bilby, in his well researched and superbly written book: "Civil War Firearms" reports that he has an Euroarms M1860 that was accurized by the late Tom Ball and it is capable of shooting some very good groups at 15 yards.

Another reason that the S.F. revolvers are the favored arm is pistol competition is that the rear sight is a groove cut into the top of the frame. Colt's O.T. design uses a "V" notch cut into the nose of the hammer which is much less desirable when it comes to target work.

Robert M. Reilly reports in his book: "United States Military Firearms, 1816-1865," that a few Colt 3rd Model Dragoons and Model 1860 Army Revolvers came equipped with FOLDING LEAF REAR SIGHTS dovetailed into the rear of the barrel, just ahead of the cylinder. Since these sights are found ONLY of the 4 Screw, "Military Models" designed for an attachable shoulder stock; then with proper documentation the Small Arms Committee would probably approve both 3rd Model Dragoon and Model 1860's equipped with these flip up sight leaves. The sights employed on both models are identical.

Of course the advantages of using flip up rear sights on an accurized replica Dragoon or M1860 would be numerous:

1. Windage adjustment during the "Sight-In" process would be easy as the rear sight could be simply tapped left or right as needed.

2. The short folding leaf could be "set-up" for 25 yards and the long leaf for 50 yards. This would be SUPERIOR to the sighting arrangements on the S.F. revolvers.

ANY PISTOL SMITH INTERESTED IN A 'WINTER PROJECT?'

If either an original Colt 3rd Model Dragoon or M1860 with the flip up rear sights could be located in a museum collection, then it would be necessary to measure the sights on that pistol to obtain its dimensions. Repro sights could be made by any competent machinist on a milling machine. Installing the sight would be just as simple as locating and cutting a dovetail in the breech end of the barrel.

A fully accurized, high quality, 3rd Model Dragoon equipped with those rear sight might, just might make a very accurate revolver for use in N-SSA pistol competition. The Dragoon has a lot of metal in the cylinder and the barrel of a Dragoon is, in effect, a "Semi-Bull" barrel with its thick breech section.

So, does this sound like an interesting winter projecct to anyone? What do you thiink?

Maybe, just maybe, it would be fun to see some acccurized O.T. revolvers in use in N-SSA pistol competition, giving the Remmies and Rogers & Spencers a 'Run for their Money!!

HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYONE!

[Mike McDaniel]

First, don't use a Dragoon. Too heavy. Use an Army or Navy model.

Second, Tom Hobbs liked to epoxy the barrel to the frame - which made cleaning a bit of a trick.

Third, the other reasons why the R&S and Remington are popular are the rear sight and triggers. A rear sight on the barrel takes care of the first issue, but the narrow trigger will increase the perceived trigger pull.

All this being said, I have long wanted to try a Colt Navy for competition. The big problem is finding a base gun that compares to a Hege Army Match or a Feinwerkbau R&S.

[Yancey von Yeast, 8073]

I am in total agreement. I would love to see open tops on our lines. At one time (he no longer shoots with us) we had a member on our team that shot an open top in .36. It would be nice to say it was luck, but he is a great pistol shot. One day during individuals I watched him shoot a 50 3x at 25 yards. The gun was out of the box and not accurized. Now, years later, I suspect that it was a model that is not approved and none of us including him, knew it. Everyone told him it would get loose and maybe it would have, had he shot it long enough. It was pretty neat to see, however.

[P.Altland]

Not a Navy, but there's an Hege 1860 Army on Gunbroker. Well maybe not. Confused after looking again that it says Hege Uberti and the price is awful low.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIt ... =146620508 (http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=146620508)

[Mike McDaniel]

It's a Uberti. Hege is the German equivalent of Dixie Gun Works. They sell all sorts of stuff. My RUMINT is that the Army Match Maximum revolvers that we think of were actually made by Feinwerkbau.

[Terry Davis 10639]

I have an 1860 army I intend to get set up "someday". It feels better in my hand than the smaller grip of the remington, and I shot an1860 army for many years as a teen.

Problem is it hits way right and high, so until I get the front sight dovetailed and raised, there isn't much point in shooting it.
I would say sighting it in is probably the biggest deterent for many since it takes some work to make it shoot to POA.

Terry

[Jason Connerley 12390]

We ran the pistol range at the last Fall Nationals and I saw a handful of Colts at individuals, to include a Dragoon but they were far and few between. There was also a gentleman firing a LeMat during the team match and he did pretty well with it. That said the only Colt style revolver I have is a Walker and I'm not in a rush to bring it to the line! :shock:

Happy Turkey Day everyone!

[hp gregory, 9128]

i guess it depends on what you plan to do with a revolver. if you want to shoot team events at 25yds im sure a decent colt would do just fine without a lot of work. i have a 36 colt that shoots just fine.
there are a lot of reasons people choose remingtons and rogers over colts. in my case the rear of a rogers is wider which makes it easier for my aging eyes to get a good sight picture. i choose a rogers over a remington because the trigger guard on most remingtons sits against my middle knuckle when i grip it. this makes it painful for me to shoot a remington. so the rogers is my personal choice. other people prefer remingtons for similar reasons.
there is nothing wrong with a colt. they can be made to shoot just fine. the same things that make remingtons and rogers shoot well can be applied to colts just as easily. it all comes down to differant strokes for differant folks.

hp gregory

[Southron Sr.]

The main point of my first post on this subject is that IF the Small Arms Committee would "Approve" repro Colt Dragoons and Model 1860 Army revolvers with the Flip-Up Rear Sights for Skirmish use, these revolvers would have sights that are SUPERIOR to the sights on Remmies and Rogers & Spencers.

On a repro Colt Dragoon or Model 1860 Army Revolver, the short leaf could be "sighted-in" for 25 yards and the long leaf for 50 yards. An accurzed repro Colt with the Flip-Up Rear Sight would be very competitive in N-SSA Pistol Competition!

There is a very plausable theory that states that the reason so few Colt Dragoon's and Model 1860 Army Revolvers with Flip-up Rear Sights are in existence today is because both models saw extensive use from the early days of the Civil War and few survive today.

So, does anyone know of any museum that has either an original Colt Dragoon or Model 1860 Army in their collection with the Flip Up Rear Sight? If I could find one, I could measure the sight and make a set of drawings. Then it would be a simple matter to get a machinist to mill out a few repro Flip-Up Rear Sights, install them on some repro Colt's and try them out!

HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO EVERYONE!

[Don Dixon]

The institutional wisdom is that reproduction Colt pistols shoot loose over time. I've never owned one, and have never tried to shoot one loose. But, that was the opinion Tom Ball expressed in conversations I had with him, since you cite him as an expert. Tom said that he had worked on Colts, recommended against trying to accurize them, and only did so at the request of individual customers.

Joe Bilby's observation that a Ball accurized Colt revolver shot good groups at 15 yards is immaterial. No N-SSA matches, or MLAIC international matches, are shot at that distance. Although the MLAIC match for original revovlers at 25 meters is named the "Colt" match, no one shoots Colts in it. But, almost anything will shoot good groups at 15 yards, including my .380 "belly gun."

In order to have the Small Arms Committee approve anything, you will have to document that a minimum of 100 of either the Dragoon or the 1860 Army were manufactured with the flip up sights and in Federal or Confederate service. A "few" will not suffice. Nor, will civilian sales. Other people have run into this problem with other arms they would like to use. I would dearly love to use my Muster 1851 Swiss Feldstutzer, for example, but the Federal government only bought one of them from the Swiss for technical exploitation

Placement of the rear sight on the barrel in front of the cylinder would give you a much shorter sight radius than that found on a stock Colt, or on the Remington or Rogers and Spencer. Consequently, I think that you may find that the flip up sight might not give you the advantage that you seek. You would also need to modify the pistol to fit the shoulder stock, although you could never use it in competition, since "approved" arms have to generally conform to the cofiguration of the original arms.

Lastly, the Dragoon is a heavy thing to hang out there and try to shoot accurately.

Regrds,
Don Dixon
2881V

[Mike McDaniel]

Yup. You MUST have a gun that will deliver at 50 yards. That's where the revolver aggregate is won. Grand Agg, too.

[Stefan]

Southron, it would be interesting if you could please post the link to the information you mentioned. Not having seen what the CAD guy did, I think this is probably a case of garbage-in-garbage-out. I am guessing that the CAD system predicted that the Colt design is stronger because of the massive size of the cylinder pin. However, that is not the weak spot of the design. It is the fact that two large pieces of metal, the frame and the barrel, are linked together and held in place with a wedge that can work lose. When that happens, the gap between the cylinder and the rear of the barrel changes and therefore the pressure behind the bullet. This causes the bullets to leave the gun with different velocities and, if it gets really lose, in different directions. When the velocity varies it doesn’t help if the rear sight is on the barrel.

In order to make a Colt work, the length of the cylinder pin must first be fitted to the barrel. That means that the length of the pin is adjusted so it bottoms out when the cylinder-barrel spacing is what it should be. On most repros the pin is made too short and the manufacturer uses the wedge to adjust the spacing. I have seen new guns where the wedge is driven in so far that the cylinder can’t turn. After the cylinder pin is fitted, the wedge and slots must be adjusted. However, the wedge can still come out during shooting. I think it is correct that Tom Hobbs indeed expoxied Colts together at one time. However, his last idea was to redesign the wedge itself so that the little retaining screw that prevents the wedge from dropping free from the barrel was used to lock the wedge in place. These problems, plus several other features, make it much harder (much more expensive) to accurize a Colt than any of the other revolvers. But they certainly look good.

[Southron Sr.]

If I recall correctly, that fella that posted that thread a repro Colt having a rigid frame than a Remmie can be found on the MLAGB website under the "Pistol" section. By now, it is probably in their archives as I read it over a year ago.

Now a couple of comments about the original M1860's with the flip up rear sights. Here is my theory: At the beginning of the war, only two private arms factories were in full production. These were the Colt and Sharps companies.

While there was a general shortage of arms in 1861 to arm the rapidly expanding Union Armies, there was also a severe shortage of carbines with which to arm the Union Cavalry,

What most likely happened is that the Ordnance Department ordered several hundred (if not thousands) of Colt M1860 Armys equipped with both the shoulder stocks and flip up rear sights to issue to troopers, as something of a substitute "carbine."

Since these Colts were ordered and delivered early in the war, very few survived to this day. A thorough search of Ordnance Department records would probably confirm this theory. If proof is found and when it is presented to the SAC, would result in these (with the flip up rear sights) repro M1860's being "Approved" for Skirmish use.

As for "accurizing" a high quality repro M1860.

If you look at the original design of both the U.S. Model 1911 .45 Auto Pistol and the U.S. M-16 Rifle, it would seem that neither design could be "accurized" for "Match Accuracy."

Yet, ingenious gunsmiths have successfully "accurized" both M1911 .45 Autos and M-16's. Both of these arms have won more than their fair share of medals in target matches over the years.

Compared to either a M1911 or an M-16, "accurizing" a high quality repro of the M1860 would be almost "childs play" for a talented pistolsmith!

[tonyb]

I've had my Rogers & Spencer for 20 years now and it's still unfired. One day I'm gonna shoot it. :shock:

[Ken Hansgen, 11094]

I've always thought that longer sight relief on a Colt, between the front sight and the rear sight on the cocked hammer, could be some advantage. You'd throw that away with a rear sight on the barrel.

[Mike McDaniel]

A long sight radius is not always an advantage. It highlights any flaws in your hold and shaking, and thus promotes "chicken finger".

[Don Dixon]

It took a LONG time to develop the 1911A1 National Match pistol, and the match M16 rifle, as we currently understand them. I have, for example, a Colt manufactured 1911A1 National Match from the 1930s. The trigger is excellent, but the accuracy when fired from a Ransom Rest is only marginally better than the standard 1911A1 pistols. The advantage would have been the trigger.

"Talented" gunsmiths of my acquiantance at the Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU) and the Marine Weapons Training Battalion tried for 20 years to make the M9 (Beretta 92F) shot at a level comparable to the later versions of the 1911A1 National Match pistol, before MSG Sams at AMU finally figured out how to do it. Their level of frustration in the process was interesting. They had the tools, could afford the costs, and could literally throw their mistakes away until Sams finally got it right. We are talking about hundreds of trashed pistol receivers here. If you know of someone who has 10, 20, 30, 40, Colts to screw around with, the equipment, and the time that no one is paying them for, they might be able to figure out how to build a pistol that might compare with the Ball or Tri-L Remingtons. They would be very hard pressed to build something that would compare with the Feinwerkbau Remingtons, which are the very top of the line. Anything that they did with the Colts would have to be non-visable.

House of Representatives Executive Document 99, 40th Congress, 2nd Session, contains a message from the President responding to the House's request for a detailed accounting of the Federal arms purchases during the Civil War. EX DOC 99 is generally considered THE dispositive list of what the Federal government purchased. The listing for Colt's Patent Firearms Company between 4 June 1861 and 27 December 1864 contains no Dragoon or New Model Holster pistols purchased with shoulder stocks.

Good luck.

Regards,
Don Dixon
2881V

[Don Dixon]

Mike,

Since we both shoot other things in our other lives, how come none of the free pistols have a short sight radius, or very few of the international level air pistols? The short Morini is the only air pistol I can recall. :)

Regards,
Don

[Stefan]

Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough. If I led you to believe that a Colt revolver just cannot be accurized I made a mistake. You certainly can have it done if you are willing to pay for it. I tried to describe a small part of the work that would go into accurizing a gun like that. This work is time consuming and therefore very expensive. Especially if it is done by a “talented” gun smith (many $/hr x many hours = lots of $). If the barrel isn’t perfect and/or the cylinder line-up is poor, there is much more work that needs to be done that further adds substantially to the cost. You can buy a Colt and luck out. It may shoot quite well and need minimal work, but the odds are against you. The closed top revolvers are simply much sounder engineering designs. We are simply looking at 150 years of engineering and free market development, which has concluded that the open top design is inferior. The evidence is that no modern revolver is built that way. It is like arguing about why we are not using steam powered cars instead cars with combustion engines. You can list some advantages with a steam powered car, you can make one work, and there might even be a small group of people who would be willing to buy one, but it is not a market that is likely to be satisfied by manufacturers any time soon.

[Mike McDaniel]

Don:

If you look at a Steyr LP10, you can move the front sight over about a 40mm range...and the rear sight nearly as much. Morini CM162s have a fixed rear sight, but the front sight is equally adjustable.

As to the free pistols, I would point out that the "short" Toz-35 is considered the gun to beat...while the Morini CM84 has an immense amount of adjustment available. I dare say that with the right accessories, I could move the front sight on mine over nearly a 6-inch range.

And we both know that if you are playing in that league, you have to be pretty good to start with. A 4-ounce trigger does a lot to cure 'chicken finger' issues.

[Southron Sr.]

Mr. Dixon, Sir, you have my deepest respect for your in-depth knowledge.
Back in 1977 I signed up for the Small Firing School at Camp Perry and had the pleasure to meet and talk with several members of the Army's Advanced Marksmanship Unit. To a man, they were all friendly, knowledgeable and willing to share their knowledge with other shooters. They were a great bunch of soldiers.

I have done enough research of original documents in archival sources to know that it is good to start with a theory and then go thru the original documents with a careful eye. Sometimes you find your theory was correct and other times, you are completely suprised with what you find.

For example, The great "mystery" about the Georgia Armory Rifles is why they went out of production in 1863. No one knew for sure.

Well I searched and searched thru the Georgia state archives until I found an article in an 1863 Milledgeville, Ga newspaper that announced that the Georgia Armory was being converted into a cotton card factory!

See, by 1863, the Confederate Ordnance Department was supplying all Confederate troops with small arms, so the states did not need to provide their own state troops with arms any longer. At the same time, Georgia was running a severe deficit in state finances.

Hence the armory was converted into a cotton card factory that could make and sell (at a profit) cotton cards. These cards were sold to Georgia women so they could make cloth to not only clothe their families, but also thein menfolk fighting far away from home in the armies.

So as far as the the "stocked"
M1860 Colt Armies with the flip up rear sights are concerned, more research has to be done. For example, the U.S. Navy also purchased several lots of M1860's from Colt, not to mention the number of states that purchased them also.

Sooner or later, with enough research, the true story of the stocked M1860's with those flip up rear sights will emerge! But for the present, the mystery contrinues!

THANKS EVERYONE FOR YOUR REPLYS!

HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO ALL !!!