Well, it seems that the 1862 police may not make that great of a shooter. I know that the real serious NSSA pistol shots all shoot Remingtons or Rogers and Spencers. Does anyone have any luck with Colts? I have a Remington but I like the look and feel of a Colt so much better. Does anyone shoot an 1851 Navy with any luck?
Thanks!
SAC Member
I have a Pietta 51 Colt that is very accurate. I find I shoot bette though, with my Ball Remington 36 cal. Trigger is wider on the Remington. Could just be me though. One day I'm giong to use the Colt in the team match and see how it goes. Might even look for a used Uberti 1860 to try.
Rich
Bob here hazlewood; Had problems with my colt -wouldent shoot rite .What Idid was to measure the chamber to bore and see the difference Most repro chambers are the same size as the lands in the barrel _NOT good and -WHY -you paied for it - Seems all iv'e seen have this problem. It shoulde'nt be, but to fix it can be expencive.Options are cutting a good focing cone - allining cylinder to barrel .Then fire lap the barrel -Then You got somthin! Did all these things to my old colt and brought er back ta life! E-mail for work.Robert filbert 7th Va .CoE Hazlewood Vol.
While I´m totally new on this board, I have been shooting original antique percussion revolvers for some 20 years. The reason for joining this board is that I´m now planning to add a Civil War breachloading percussion carbine to my collection, and the guys at Antiqueguns.com sent me in this direction for tips on loading and shooting.
Forgive my bad english, I´m from Sweden and thus english is not my first language.
What I´ve found with regards to the difference between shooting a Colt percussion vs. fixed barrel gun such as a Remington or a Whitney or R&S is that the precision of the gun itself if in a mechanically sound state is pretty much equal for target purposes out to 40 or 50 yards. I can´t say that one is better than the other as far as what the gun is capable of.
I haven´t really made any serious attempts at hitting anything at further distances than 50 yards, so I don´t know if there´s any difference there.
However, what the Remington and other "fixed barrel" revolvers have that the Colt´s don´t is a better sight picture, this goes for the replicas also. The "worse" the shooter, the more difference there will be in the results, there´s a reason that modern precision competition pistols have the sights that they have. Such things as lighting also plays a part, under bad lighting circumstances, the better sights of a Remington plays an even bigger part in the shooters ability to actually hit the target. However, a reasonably good marksman with a Colt will beat an average marksman with a Remington every time (of corse the opposite is just as true).
There are other matters that may play a part, Colt´s can have a bad fit between the barrel and frame, due to wear or in the case of replicas due to bad manufacturing tolerances. This can cause the barrel to either wiggle around between shots (that should be noticeable to the shooter) or it could cause the barrel to end up in a slightly different position for each time it´s been off the frame, thus causing the grouping to vary.
On the other hand, then we´re talking about a worn gun, and that´s no different than a Remington shooting badly due to a worn out cylinderaxle. Worn out guns should either be left on the wall, or repaired.
I like any Civil Warr percussion revolver, and have or have had at least one of each of the major types in my collection at one time or another. I prefer the Colts for "sentimental" reasons, it was all you could see on the TV when I was growing up.
Because of sentimental preferences, I prefer shooting Colts, and have won my local clubs BP revolver championship with a Colt more than 15 times out of the 20 I have competed. I´m not telling you this to brag, but to tell you that if you prefer a Colt, and get yourself a good one in sound condition (regardless whether original or replica) it won´t be the gun that stops you from hitting what you aim at.
Edit: with regards to the m1862 Colt, or any of the Pockets, I´ve found them to be slightly more difficult to find the perfect load for. I´m guessing this has to do with the smaller quantities of powder, the smaller the ideal charge, the bigger the difference if you don´t make every charge exactly the same.
The smaller grip frame of the Pockets makes it even harder, depending on the size of your hands. For the greatest precision it is not only important but crucial that you grip the gun exactly the same way for every shot. A smaller grip makes that harder than a larger one that fills the hand well.
But more importantly, a smaller gun with a shorter sight-radius emphesises the problem with the sight picture. With a longer sight-radius, you see if the barrel "shakes" about more easily. Again, compare to modern precision competition target pistols or revolvers, you rarely see them with 3" or 4" barrels, do you?
Given the correct charge of powder, the correct sized ball and the right shooting technique, they´re no less accurate at 25 or 30 yards than the bigger guns. At further distances, the lighter ball seems to have less stability and thus less accuracy.
Regards!
Anders Olsson
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks