Original 1858 Remington New Model Army vs original Colt 1860 Army percussion revolver

[@grahampalmer9337]

The Coilt's greater penetration may, simply, be down to wood density. Had you been able to shoot the same block in the same place that would have been a more representative test.

[@ericv7720]

It might be, too that the bullet deforms less quickly due to lower velocity.

[@motlencore89]

as far as the accuracy test goes, i did notice that the colt bore was pretty corroded and pitted, while the remington bore looked pretty clean. that probably had a large influence on the colts accuracy.

[@CaliPatriot88]

If I was fighting in the Civil War I'd take the Remington over the Colt in a heart beat. Stronger frame and you can swap out cylinders for a quick reload.

[@Clodnir]

In the colt you can change the cylender for a quick realod to but yes the remington is the best for quick realod

[@SonOfTheDawn515]

Except no one swapped cylinders like that

[@Kentucky_Caveman]

@@SonOfTheDawn515 everyone seems to forget that

[@Gieszkanne]

@@SonOfTheDawn515 Not soldiers for sure but I could imagine that some civilians did do that.

[@garysmith4425]

Watched a video where a swap was made faster than the Remington.

[@Frozenwinter84]

Fantastic video! Great to see a couple of original guns like those out at a range instead locked away and never getting shot.

[@jayn8392]

Couple of my favorite old percussion revolvers. I especially like the design of the Remington, just a very nice looking piece.

[@josephg.2988]

How fortunate to have originals in working order! Great video!

[@therightisright8276]

Great video! I prefer my Remington for several reasons over the Colt but enjoy both. Keep those great cap and ball videos coming, you provide a great service as a steward to these weapons and history.

[@phillipkalaveras1725]

Without the Colt, there would be no Remington Good point, Thanks

[@OdinX316]

I really appreciate the honest assessment you conducted on these two pieces of history. Well done sir and very informative!

[@tyrssen1]

A delightful video, thank you! I've fired replicas, because that's what I have; to see these old originals in action was a real treat!

[@sandmanhh67]

Which revolver is better? Easy.... The Beaumont Adams of course ;-) And I think you agree?

[@nilodrallub7812]

REMMYS RULE !!! I love my 1858 New Army reproduction by Pietta and use it as part of my personal defense . These guns are rock solid reliable and a joy to shoot. If you buy a second ( or third ) cylinder for them you can reload about as fast as a modern handgun a'la "Joe Kidd" . Thanks for making this Vid , your new subscriber from California !

[@MrReded69]

nilo drallub I believe the Clint Eastwood movie you're thinking about is Pale Rider.

[@filianablanxart8305]

Pale Rider used the interchangeable cylinders . Joe Kidd used SAA, plus a battle pickup C96 Mauser . Both those are just movies . In real life Civil War, and " wild west " , serious users carried extra complete revolvers .

[@piplawless8982]

Thanks for a great video, When you said 30 grains of Swiss and saw the barrel of the colt I was waiting for a big bang. I had a 1861 Remington but had kittens every time I fired it. I now have a ruger old army which still has its share of problems. they got it pretty much right with the Remington except for the cylinder pivot which has a tendency to bind. Nice guns Bravo.

[@emperorconstantine1.361]

With that Remington...who started to think, “I do not shoot with my hand, he who shoots with his hand has forgotten the face of his father, I shoot with my mind...”

[@cees123456789]

Roland :)

[@NPCSN]

Lmao, best book series I’ve read in years.

[@rainmechanic]

Most shooters couldn't get a better group size shooting one handed at 50 meters with a modern handgun then you got with that 58 Remington...

[@wyattguilliams2621]

From what I hear most people are taught to just make shots within a one foot diameter or less if necessary Plus modern guns hold 7-30 rounds per mag so they don't have the "you need to make each shot count" mentality shooters had back then instead of blasting away in a controlled spray and pray I know not every shooter is like this it's just on average for those who don't go shooting as often as others more dedicated to marksmanship If that makes sense

[@jcksnghst]

@@wyattguilliams2621 it does make sense. Just like it made sense when you said, "From what I hear...". Lol! ;p

[@QuantumPyrite_88.9]

I have both the Colt and Remington originals and both replicas . My groups at the same distance shooting one handed are better than what's shown in this video . Shooting 2 handed produces greater accuracy , but cavalry had to hold the reins for a horse and fire with the other hand . I'll stay with what the gunfighters preferred = Remington

[@patrickmcleod111]

Oh yeah, well I put all my bullets through the same hole in the paper at 50m, AND then I find all 6 bullets perfectly lined up back to back in the wooden backstop behind the paper target! Beat that! Lol

[@jcksnghst]

@@patrickmcleod111 mine reload themselves after hitting the center bullseye.

[@annehrobsky6627]

Let's make one thing perfectly clear. Colt and Remington martial revolvers were manufactured with only one cylinder, sold with one cylinder, and issued by the military with one cylinder. Neither army during the Civil War provided spare cylinders nor pouches in which to carry loaded spare cylinders. Wild Bill Hickok relied on two complete Colt Navy revolvers. Nobody reported him bristling with spare cylinders. Colt's "Directions For Loading Colt's Pistols" clearly states, "The Cylinder is not to be taken off when loaded." This myth about switching spare cylinders is a tall tale that has been repeated so often it's become accepted as fact.

[@mcmax571]

+Anne Hrobsky You're wrong this time. It is a fact that the fastest way to reload a cap-and-ball is to switch cylinders many men back then did carry spare cylinders and the military had a accouterments box for carrying cylinders.

[@perldog07]

+mcmax571 the Colt Patterson issued to the rangers came with spare cylinders according to some historians. Certainly the New York reload was the most popular method but I believe that many did keep spare cylinders if they could get them. It only makes good sense and many vets have told me that i a firefight you do what is necessary to stay alive.

[@brankododig1585]

+mcmax571 The fastest way to reload a cap and ball is to grab the other loaded revolver.Carrying a loaded and capped cylinder, esecially with the more volatile percussion caps of the civil war era (then they used mercury fulminate as opposed to modern lead stipenate) would've been risky, the reload itself would be fiddly on the move, and it's slower then just grabbing the other gun.I have not managed to find one credible source confirming this "cylinder swap" reload method.

[@filianablanxart8305]

Revolving RIFLES were issued with spare cylinders, never revolvers . Never say never, and if you can imagine something, it probably was attempted at least once by somebody . That said , the number in the real world back in the day was essentially zero . If the only source of an extra cylinder was to cannibalize another revolver, you're not going to throw away the rest of the revolver . And disassembling and reassembling a Colt in the middle of a gunfight isn't really faster than reloading with paper cartridges . ( Yes, in the modern day , Pietta extra cylinders are cheap , and people do pre-load a buncha cylinders before a range trip . But that is Now, not back Then .

[@steelgila]

That seems an anomalie...The Colt with 15 or 20 something fps(excuse me mps) less velocity than the Rem. yet with greater penetration. Perhaps the molecular(or cell-wall) density must vary somewhat from block of wood to block of wood?

[@angeliliev2651]

shot from colt hit at the edge of wooden block and bullet slip between two blocks. That is why it penetrate more. rest whole be alternative physic, and in violation of law for conservation of energy.

[@jamedd4461]

The army tests for guns at the time was with pine blocks

[@loftparty7984]

Yes but with 100s of tests into the middle of blocks, NOT like what happened here!

[@filianablanxart8305]

Yes , pine boards was the historically correct test medium . In the modern day , the best medium is calibrated Ballistic Gelatin ( US Mil uses 20% , most civillian and LE testing uses 10% . 10% actually better replicates human tissue, but the Military first established the 20% standard , and either seeks continuity, or suffers from beaurocratic inertia .) It may have been different wood density, or the 50fps faster Remington may have hit the threshold of greater expansion .

[@The_Austin_Doell]

New Model Army is my favorite Revolver of all time.

[@woodsmansfinest3814]

great video! proud to own an uberti remington!

[@robbyrobrob1]

Well done. Too bad the Colt is inferior to the Remington, the Colt is so much better looking - oh well.

[@RobertBlevins]

Ha ha...don't believe the hype. Colts are better balanced, less front-heavy, and have fewer problems. They are quite accurate if you keep gun clean and do loads equally.

[@RickKratzke]

I found this video to be well made and looking forward to more of this type

[@k1j2f30]

Love your channel, always interesting, reliable information and honest opinions. You shoot, describe and cover so much information on each of the many great and wonderful historical firearms and your video coverage of each weapon is excellent as well. However, I would like to just add my $0.02 worth on the accuracy test you performed on the Colt and Remington revolvers. Judging from the views of the barrels you showed starting @ 4:16 in this video, the Remington clearly shows a much better condition bore compared to the Colt. The Remington revolver obviously was treated much better (cleaned and maybe even loved more) in it's early live than the Colt was. Thus, I feel this add a great deal to the superior bullet patterning of the Remington on the human targets. One thing I can not explain is why the Colt, shown by the chronograph (shooting the the same bullets and powder loads) is producing slower bullet speeds than that of the Remington, yet produces superior penetration. Anyway, thanks again for another great video.

[@thesprinkleddonutforge2774]

Nice video kind sir. I appreciate it as I've been given a Pedersoli 44 replica of the Remington in mint condition. I will not use the pistol until I have gathered all available data on it. So far, your channel has the best content relevant to my research. Subscribed!

[@mikeblair2594]

I realize that this reply is three years to late but, I did notice that the colt had a much poorer bore than the Remington. I imagine that would go with the worn finish. that said, everything you said about the colt is true.but I would say that if the bores are comparable, the accuracy would be comparable. no?

[@capandball]

I agree Mike, regarding the Colt the only question is weather it will shoot to the same spot after disassembly and reassembly or not. That 1860 Colt is a fine shooter with roundballs on the other hand. Pitted or not it can produce competition grade groups.

[@trum4n6969]

Speaking as a history student, I can think of nothing that I want to do more than what you do. Good on you, sir.

[@smartacus88]

The grip frame of the 1860 is much more ergonomic and comfortable, but the 1858 is a superior revolver in every other way. I had a machinist friend of mine modify the grip frame of my replica stainless 1858 by opening it up some behind the trigger guard to make it more like the 1860 grip. I also had him enlarge the nipple windows on the cylinder to allow for use with a capper. Lastly he deepened the safety notches on the cylinder just a little, for stronger hammer contact. I put in a lighter trigger spring and polished the sear and hand. I have what I now believe to be the perfect percussion revolver.

[@antiqueguns]

Colt's were much more popular during the Civil War with soldiers, in fact soldiers would throw a Remington away if they could pick up a Colt Navy or Army on the battlefield. The open frame of the Colt let those guns be fired longer before having to be cleaned. A Remington could fire about 2 cylinders before becoming so clogged with black powder residue that it was worthless until cleaned. Today the call is different, serious shooters want the Remington due to the solid top strap, they are more accurate, and since target shooting will allow someone to replace or clean the cylinders frequently. Also with use, Colt's get worn where barrel meets the frame, so they become less accurate than the Remington or Rogers and Spencer.

[@dtnetlurker]

That is completely opposite actually and there are sources to prove it. Soldiers would readily pitch any Colt to save on weight and just use their rifle and bayonet or would trade a Colt and something else in addition to it just to get a Remington, because Colts had a design flaw with the opening to the action being right under where caps would fall in and jam. It was very well known and they were very inconvenient to clean out in the field. They had paper cartridges that made them a bit easier to reload but these were often used up quickly and supply lines were often cut off. Remington 1858 revolvers were a huge innovation that changed revolver design forever. There is absolutely no doubt about it. The first modern revolver.

[@jeremylinton6237]

the colt is an ugly weapon,,remy is beautiful!

[@patrickmcleod111]

The Remington is a more modern design, despite being released 2 years earlier than the Colt! I don't understand how lower muzzle velocity equals less penetration of the SAME bullet.... There must've been some inconsistency with the hardness of the boards.

[@billmelater6470]

Unless you have a typo, lower velocity will generally mean less penetration.

[@tbjtbj4786]

@@billmelater6470 that kinda depends. A lot on the bullet. If the bullet expands more at the higher speed it can penetrate less because of the larger size. I remember shooting times doing a test. With the 458 win mag and the 45-70. With both loaded with a 500 solid the 458 penetrate more as expected. But with a 450gr sp the extra speed of the 458 made it expand and the 45-70 penetrate more. Then they loaded them with the 45-70 300gr hp. The 45-70 penetrated more. The speed that the 458 had it going it came apart like a varmint bullet.

[@billmelater6470]

@@tbjtbj4786 Sure, if the bullet is designed to break, expand or otherwise destabilize at higher velocities it will not penetrate well. However if penetration is the desired outcome, velocity does matter. But that comes down to what the projectile does on impact.

[@tbjtbj4786]

@@billmelater6470 yea no doubt. But the reason why I point it out here. With cap and ball the ball probably 100% lead. So it should expand more at a higher speed. But your right if the bullet doesn't expand or they expand the same the faster one should penetrate more. With this i know board was the standard penetration test back in the day. But you could have differences in the wood to that could change small number testing.

[@blacrow7]

Norm: these 44 black powder guns are more powerful then a modern 357 magnum.

[@UPNEXTONJBTV]

yah but the powder they used back then was a lot different, it burned slower and not as hot as black powder today.

[@capandball]

J.B. Packer Actually very good qulaity blackpowders were available during the 19th century, like the British Curtis & Harvey or the Schiesspulver in the Austro-Hungarian Monarcy. We made several ballistic tetst to determinate the strength of these fine powders compared to modern Swiss blackpowder. The method was simple: II worked with an original 1845 Jagerstützen. I knew the exact load used back in the 19th century, and I took the ballistic tables from the original manuals. I adjusted my modern load until I could recreat the same ballistics with the same bullets. It worked well. There was not much difference between the Siwss 2Fg and the military Schiesspulver of the mid 19th century.

[@UPNEXTONJBTV]

Cool. Thanks for being nice about it. Do u work for a gun company or are u just the luckiest man on earth lol

[@capandball]

J.B. Packer One of the luckiest ones for sure. :) With many good collector friends. :) But my comapny is trading with historic arms so its a profession as well.

[@Fuzzybeanerizer]

***** No way is the Walker more powerful than a .44 Magnum of any reasonable barrel length. Personally I'd probably rather have a top-quality Walker replica than just about any .44 Magnum ever made, for collection purposes and ignoring money value, but smokeless powder is just a lot more potent than black powder is. What is the .44 Magnum with a 240 grain bullet, maybe 1400 feet per second? I don't know offhand but I'd be amazed if the Walker could break 1200 FPS with the same weight bullet and a full chamber of black powder.

[@snoebay88]

I have both these pistols (repos) and shoot them both frequently. I do prefer the 1858 as it is more accurate and the grip suits my small hands. Would love to have an original but at the last gun show an 1860 Colt was going for 3K !

[@DessieTots]

In the Clint Eastwood film 'Pale Rider' the hero is walking and reloading his pistol but there is no evidence or reference to percussion caps when he's reloading. Would this be an accurate depiction of the firearm at this time in history?

[@job38four10]

Pale Rider, my favorite western. Around 1870 cartridges was introduced, with the surplus o Civil War pistols, many were fitted with conversion cylinders so they could shoot 45 colts, so yes the movie for once was right. I have two conversion cylinders for my Pietta 1858 Rem. very fast to swap

[@DessieTots]

Job38 It's seems that Clint Eastwood is possibly quite knowledgeable about pistols. In the preparation for 'Unforgiven' he asked for a selection of pistols to be brought to the film set and without hesitation selected the most appropriate models for the date period the film is set in.

[@job38four10]

The first thing I look for when watching westerns, is Period Correct firearms, maybe Clint learned that from his early westerns, because my next favorite western is (The Good the Bad and the Ugly), the revolvers are all wrong, but I still like the movie.

[@Prowbar]

Job38 Four they are cartridge conversions in The Good The Bad And The Ugly. In the other movies from the trilogy Clint uses a SAA with custom grips and a 5.5 inch barrel. And in Pale Rider Clint uses a Remington 1858 and reloads by swapping cylinders.

[@filianablanxart8305]

*IF* anyone actually did cylinder swaps in the percussion era , they would have been already primed . Yes , Cartridge Conversions were widely used back in the day . Both actual percussion revolvers converted , and factory built using stocks of leftover parts, after the US cancelled all existing contracts at the end of the war . But they Weren't in .45 Colt . Individual gunsmiths undoubtedly used others also , but factory conversions were primarily .38 Rimfire, .44 Rimfire, .46 Rimfire, .38 ( Short) Colt, .44 Colt, .44 Remington . These converted guns were popular long after the introduction of proper cartridge revolvers . For the first 5 years or so of the 1873 Colt SAA , most of the production went to the Army contract, and they were rare and expensive on the civillian market . And the converted ( & converted designs) were 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of an 1873 Colt or 1875 Remington, or S&W No 3 , making them very attractive to buyers . The Remington conversions were slow to reload, and Open Tops not as durable as solid frames , but most people didn't fire thousands of rounds at a time , and they were just as fast for the first 5 or 6 shots, and .4r Colt or .44 Remington was plenty powerful enough for defense, or most hunting . They were widely enough used that ammo for .44Colt/ .44Rem was available until 1941 .

[@cavtroopermunoz]

Good video. It's rare to see two working pisols left over from the war of northern agression.

[@therealhawkeyeii7888]

I always assumed you were Italian. Now I see you are Hungarian.

[@therealjackfisher]

Colt ugly as hell and it looks unsolid. Just by looking at colt I would never buy one.. Remington or cattleman is the way to go. And if you want a historical gun to carry get a derringer.. Colt and Remington are big and heavy and the pocket version, well impractical.

[@federicopulixi5339]

I do prefer the Remington, but wow, are you wrong by saying the colts ugly! This isn't the nicest model available, I prefer the navy, but it's still a gorgeous gun. But hey, to each his wn!

[@dfxjedi]

+Jack Fisher I think the Colt looks far better than the Remington.

[@BuddyTheGermanShepherd]

I would like to buy a reproduction for self-defense. But in my country, you can just own the real antiques which were made before 1880. I think it's really dangerous to shoot with a 150 years old gun. I heard many stories about cylinder explosions. It can actually blow your hand off. What should I do now?

[@82c10]

This was an awesome video. Lots of history, and spewing information. Love it. On another note, I actually prefer the grip of the Remington over the colt. My hand has a more positive lockup on the Remington grip shape. And I actually have fairly large hands

[@kathryntruscott6351]

The bore of the Cot looks a bit rough, which might account for the poorer accuracy.

[@Andrew-en6pu]

Well, I'm sticking with the Remington then.

[@QuantumPyrite_88.9]

Wild Bill Hickok would agree with you .

[@filianablanxart8305]

Nothing wrong with prefering Remingtons , but Hickok was a Colt user . His close friend in real life , Bill Cody was a famous user of Remingtons .

[@QuantumPyrite_88.9]

Some of the most famous pictures of Bill Hickok show him carrying a Remington pistol . Sometimes stuck in his belt and with no holster and often carried as 2 in what is called a brace of pistols / one under each arm in shoulder holsters . Hickok killed a man in a duel on the sidewalk of downtown Springfield Missouri . There is a brass plaque in the sidewalk where he stood and the range was aprox. 45 yards . His handgun was a Remington .

[@hassonpecot4365]

The Remington wins

[@carlosbah4623]

Good video. But I'd change the penetration test material for another more homogeneous, like clay. Wood is not reliable for that, a slight change in grain orientation or density and the penetration of the bullet would be different

[@KrzysztofGrabinski]

Yes, ice bricks could be also very interesting targets for penetration. IMPORTANT NOTE: If you compare penetration, you shouldn't focus on how far did the bullet go, but how well did it "share" its energy into destroying the target. That's the point of them. You can compare for example 9mm Luger in FMJ or HP versions and which kicks harder? HP - and it does penetrate less, but it expends and releases more energy at smaller distance, so the tissue of the body is much more devastated. Keep that in mind!

[@GetTheFO]

He was doing it like the US army did it's trials. Yes, they aren't very good ballistic mediums, but he was going for historical accuracy.

[@hugofilipeantunes]

Also, the remington hit the center block, the colt hit the space between blocks, so, obviously suffered less resistance...

[@hangemhigh2000]

I agree, I see the Colt went thru the stack between the 2 by's. the best cap and ball revolver is the one Josey Wales uses. The Uberti 1847 Colt Walker. Its the biggest and baddest gun ever made.

[@GetTheFO]

Mr. Midshipman Uberti is a replica company...

[@donmartin9533]

Another excellent review/comparison. Thank you!

[@banjoman5000]

I own two Colt Navy revolvers and a Remington, and I have never had problems with the Remington. Every time I fire one of the Navy revolvers, a cap falls down into the action.

[@bgdavenport]

Who knew Hungary has a muzzleloading team? My British Facebook friend recommended this video. I'll be looking for more! REally well done analysis!

[@dk2853]

I do believe the Remington New Model Army is the best black powder revolver you can buy. In fact, I just bought one myself.

[@jonskowitz]

definitely agree that the sight picture is better on the Remmy, and the Colt is more comfortable, and easier to clean. I think it's odd that you keep getting caps jammed in the action; when i do get a jam its usually the cap getting stuck between the cylinder and the frame.

[@chainsawjackson944]

Remington is a stronger design , but the colt will definately get you laid more.

[@atvheads]

I am lucky to, i have both of them. :)

[@w.p.958]

I have replicas of both too!

[@atvheads]

@@BuddyTheGermanShepherd Buy an original in shooting condition. They dont blow up if there is nothing wrong with them, and loaded with the right bullet and black powder only. The last one is extremly important. But, they are not 100% reliable as a selfe defense weapon. I dont like the idea at all.

[@atvheads]

@@BuddyTheGermanShepherd Aha Svensk. Ser helt ok ut, men skjuter du på en anfallare med en bp revolver så ligger du pyrt till.

[@atvheads]

@@BuddyTheGermanShepherd It dont require storage license like black powder if you live in Sweden, black powder is states as explosive. But Pyrodex is also good, and not so hot like Triple 7 The bad things about these substitutes is that they make the revolver harder to clean, and might jam the revolver drum faster. But bp weapons has to be cleaned after every use anyway, or they rust.

[@atvheads]

@@BuddyTheGermanShepherd No, you can buy a Original revolver in Sweden, and pyrodex and T7.

[@RushBuzzing]

Having looked down the bores of both pistols, it is hard to be jubilant in the results of the accuracy tests. The barrel of the Colt looked so bad that I would consider having it rebored/lined. The Remington had better care over the years and it's condition was head and shoulders above the Colt.

[@steveinkentucky]

Thank you for the great comparison video! I have an 1851 Navy in .36 caliber. I am hoping to get a second revolver in .44 this time. I like the swappable cylinders of the Remington. According to Duelist1954, the Ted Cash capper will not fit the Remington, due to the shape of the cylinder nipple housing. It is such an easy capper to use, that I'd hate to give it up. Using a bit of a cliche', the Colt looks a bit more "Civil Warish"... Two would match what gunfighters like Wild Bill Hickok wore. I will agree that the very design of the Remington sights make them both more reliable and a quicker sight acquisition. Thanks again for the great video.

[@reachvictoria3386]

You may want to look into the Polish Star capper for ease of use.

[@fabrb26]

why did your colt have the notch for the handle but not the screw on the frame under it ? It's a civilian or GB version ?

[@blackpowderfirearmenthusia3194]

Thank you, the video was very informative and fun to watch. I also love knowing the specs of how each revolver performs. Iike the chronograph but I do not understand the metric system, so I don't know what the feet per second fps was, lol. But that's okay, thank you for sharing the video with us and the revolvers are beautiful and look like fun to shoot.

[@77janeck]

250 m/s is 820 fps, 1 meter/second is equal to 3.28 fps.

[@worldfilmclips1]

Well done professional video. I first found out about these model guns by watching Clint - Pale Rider. I have a few video clips of this movie on my YT channel - "dbache". Clint uses one in "Pale Rider Shootout Scene".

[@codered7453]

I had a choice between a Colt 3rd gen (Signature Series) 1860 and a Remington New Model Army a few months back and after handling each, I readily chose the Colt. It fit my hand much better and pointed so naturally that i had to have it. The Remington might be a little stronger but its a moot point even with shooting Triple 7, up to 40+ grains ive not experienced any malfunctions, cap jams or misfires. With 38 grains of 10+ year old 777, it chronographs 1180 fps with a .454 143gr roundball. The Remington 1858 is very nice and I'll be buying one directly if i cant find a decent Ruger Old Army for sale, but ill carry the Colt as my EDC until i expire. Its proven reliable thus far and ill bet my life that if i happen to call on it, that itll acquit itself most effectively. Excellent video and historical commentary.

[@chopperking1967]

Thanks for sharing your BEAUTIFUL originals in this video!

[@alvogel3448]

A flawed comparison: (A) Each gun is an individual, so comparing just one against the other is not statistically valid. Compare 50 original Colt and Remingtons against each other, and you would likely reveal trends.(B) Accuracy test should have been done from a benchrest, with hands on a solid rest, to eliminate any "wiggling around." Shooting one-handed is not a good indicator of either gun's accuracy capability.(C) Original paper cartridges from that period varied widely in bullet weight and powder charge. Search the internet for an article posted by Gatofeo entitled, "Found! Original Loads for cap and ball revolvers." Gatofeo, who knows a great deal about cap and ball revolvers, concluded that there was no real standard for bullet weight and charge; contractors assembled cartridges with vast differences. However, I applaud you for sticking to only one bullet weight and powder charge. This was good statistical method.(D) I also was pleased to see that you fired these revolvers at 50 meters. The originals, and most of the reproductions, were sighted to hit to point of aim at anywhere from 50 to 100 yards. The revolver, with its six shots, was thought of as a substitute to the largely single-shot (Henry and Spencer not counted) rifle.(E) I believe your bullet diameter of .452 was too small for these original revolvers, which resulted in poor accuracy. The gain twist rifling of the original Colts and Remingtons was noted for producing very fine accuracy. The late gun writer Elmer Keith notes that he had a Colt 1851 Navy about 1910 that, with lead ball (no size given) and powder charge nearly filling the chamber (no weight given) and felt wad soaked in melted beeswax and tallow would put all of its 6 balls into one ragged hole at 20 yards. Others have praised the accuracy of the old revolvers with gain twist. Today's modern cap and ball revolvers have constant-rate twist, not gain twist (a few Remington patterns made for target shooters, with gain twist, are an exception).(F) The Colt jammed from a spent cap, but I believe this didn't become a big problem until people started using the old, original guns with caps made in the 20th century. I have a few tins of caps made in the 19th century, and the copper is thicker than today's caps. Consequently, the old cap gets a tighter grip on the nipple. Today, people buy new nipples that are slightly larger than the old nipples, which compensates for the thin copper of today's caps.A very fine report, but until we can challenge 25 to 50 original Colts in very good condition against 25 or 50 original Remingtons in the same condition, we'll probably never know how accurate the old guns were. There are many contemporary accounts that praise their accuracy, and they were almost certainly more accurate than the later .45 and 9mm issued to militaries during the 20th century.With my own Uberti-made Remington .44, and the Lee 200 gr. conical bullet, I can put six bullets into a 1-1/2 circle at 20 yards from a benchrest. I believe the gun is capable of slightly better accuracy, despite its constant rate rifling, but my 63-year-old eyes are not!-- GatofeoRemote Utah DesertApril 19, 2018

[@bobjohnson4213]

Very interesting! I use Gatofeo #1 lube with my cap n balls. The ugly cat knows his business. Don't underestimate the old antiques! A local journalist, noticing my 25-yard groups, did an article on my cap n ball Colt in the local paper. These were the most effective military handguns ever made, as they were the primary arms of cavalry troops. Elmer Keith noted an 80-something YO Civil War veteran he knew in Montana could put every shot in a fence post at a full gallop on horseback.

[@wraith67]

Hard to believe this vid is nearly 8 years old. Both my 1858 and 1860 are fussy about the Lee conical, the 217gr Eras Gone By conical bullets with the recessed heal are much easier to load. I would concur that the 1858 is a superior piece, but the 1860 is the more attractive gun IMO. The difference in velocity between the my Colt vs Remington was 2.3% (lead to Remington) on average with 3F 777 (322mps vs 315mps).

[@lynnewainfan3000]

this helps, but does not answer, a question I've been researching: why didn't Doc Holliday have a Remington? It's more reliable, accurate, quicker to reload the whole cylinder than the Colt Doc used. Doc's uncle gave him is 1851 Navy Colt (standard 7-1/2" barrel), so it likely had sentimental value. But Doc's other revolver was either a 41-caliber Colt double-action Lightning/Thunder (a relative reported recently) or a short-barreled single-action Colt .44 (reported by a newspaper). Why not a Remington 1858?

[@grifce]

I shoot 50 gr in my Remington.i can hit you 100 yrds.thats 50 grn. FFF 180 grn chronical bullet w wax wad.between bullet and powder .chronogram around 800 ft pr sec. Been shooting it over 35 yrs.its stronger than the walker..killed deer with it and hogs. It is well. Mine does have a longer barrel. Although at 100 yrds the bullet is wobbling some but hits its mark on 12x12 inch target..colts shot faster.but remington shoot more true.

[@kennethconnors7532]

I do like your reviews, you are thorough and seem always to do what we would like to see...

[@daveyjoweaver6282]

Great test with these two beautiful and historical pistols. Kind Thanks and Many Blessings! DaveyJO in Pennsylvania

[@Faust1169]

you can't do penetration one bullet.

[@cull510ender]

I agree, and shooting pine blocks is not good especially if the colt bullet was near the edge and split the wood.

[@deejayimm]

What is the difference between the barrel cylinder gap of both of those original firearms? I only have replicas, and the 1858 has a slightly tighter gap which should mean that if one gun was going to have higher pressures and velocities than the other with the same load, it would be the Remington. Unless you're having caps blow off... It would be interesting to know if the deviation was just from firearm to firearm or if the deviation is in the replicas.

[@samspencer582]

At 3:00 on the right and little bit down where the wooden handle ends there is a little gap against the steel behind the trigger guard. I hope you understand what I mean with this. I have ordered a Remington Model 1861 and it´s made in 1862 and I saw in the photos about the gun I ordered that it had this little gap too. Is it nothing I don´t have to worry about? Have they restored the wooden parts of the gun handle and it´s because of this there is this gap, or is it common and nothing to worry about? I still wait for my Remington 44 so I can get it from my local Post office. I live in Sweden and these original black powder guns is very expensive, but there is no need to have any license if the guns are made before the year 1890 and that the guns is not loaded with cartridges, but a replica from Italy needs a license even if it uses cap and ball. Strange laws in Sweden, but maybe because the replicas is made after 1890. In Sweden it´s allowed to own and shoot with black powder guns, but not allowed to buy black powder, but you are allowed to own some amount of it if you have some kind of license to store it at your home. Now someone says the caps is not allowed to buy and others say it is still allowed. If you know one who have a license for a hunting rifle or any other gun, then he can buy powder for you and that is legal and that you can store it at your home.

[@JongsungChoi]

would it make any form of difference in the case of the navy percussion revolvers to install the percussion primer caps 1st and then load the paper cartridges next just so the loading process wouldn't be painstaking

[@NeilTremblay-rg7hk]

Very good review. I have two Pietta 1858 New Army revolvers and they both can shoot hole in hole groups. I use a .454 round ball.

[@garrettgridley]

Great video, great presentation. Best video I've seen for blackpowder revolvers so far.

[@F84Thunderjet]

The barrel on the Remington was in much better condition than the Colt. Overall, the Remington was in much better condition. Revolvers were used at much closer range than 50 meters during the Civil War.

[@robnewman6101]

The Adventures of Huck Finn 1993. Deputy Hines. He has a Revolver.

[@DanielNighteyes]

Great video!! I know I am "late to the party" by several years. However, I still want to add two things to the discussion. I have also handled and fired originals of both of these revolvers, and have used Uberti replicas of them in competition. First, as to the grip size and comfort, my personal experience is the exact opposite. I have large palms and shorter fingers. I found the 1860 Colt grips to be too long and "fat" whereas the 1858 Remington grips fit my hands very nicely. Many of my fellow competitors had the same experience, and actually replaced the 1860 Colt grip frames with the smaller 1851 Colt grip frames.They are interchangeable. Second, part of the reason for the above is a difference in the way the revolver is held in "combat" or competition. The video shows you and your associate placing all four fingers on the grip. Most post-Civil-War shootists let their fourth finger slide below the grip (difficult or impossible to do on the unmodified 1860 Colt). This change actually offers better control and, because it helps the pistol "roll upward" in the hand so the thumb can engage the hammer spur, greatly facilitates the second through fifth shots.

[@xwing8029]

Which one of these is better in modern replicas? Is modern 1860 less reliable too?

[@jeepsblackpowderandlights4305]

dont have an 1860, but i do have two 1851 and two 1858.. i know theyre replicas but my 1851 are more accurate

[@journeyquest1]

I bought the Pietta 1858 in 5.5 barrel. Will use conversion cylinder in 45 LC.

[@journeyquest1]

The Remington must have been the superior design since Colt copied it.

[@ralphwatten2426]

Nice comparison but I have two issues. It looked like the barrel condition of the Remington was much better. The Colt can be capped with a capping tool to make capping faster while the Remington could not.

[@Fuzzybeanerizer]

Ralph Watten Definitely agree about the bore condition. He could compare accuracy just for fun, but it is wrong he does not mention the bore condition as a factor. He seems like a nice guy but that one point makes the whole video seem either ignorant or biased. Also he needed to say something about the opposing velocity vs. penetration results. Wood density variations, the uncentered hit with the Colt, there are various explanations, but SOMETHING needed to be said about results which would/should seem contradictory to thoughtful yet inexperienced viewers.

[@Corsair092]

Sir, a Colt shooter, would raise the barrel of the pistol after the shot, then cock the hammer. This would allow the spent cap to fall free of the action. Still agree the Remington is the superior design.

[@edsonsantos222]

Eu gostaria de ouvir os comentários em português. Sobre este Revólver é possível?

[@spottydog4477]

I wonder how many Johnny Rebs were on the receiving end of these two beautiful honeys..........

[@anthonykubis5575]

The reality is you would like whatever weapon you were issued. unless you picked one up on the battlefield or had enough money to buy your own weapon and ammunition you really had no choice.

[@omnitron]

Ok seroius question... it will be very hard to answer. What is better. Black Powder, patch, ball and greas or black powder, patch, greas and ball on it. Some peoples tell that pro black powder shooters put grease under the ball... What is myth what is true?

[@omnitron]

Powder, patch grease bullet. This sequence. I mean. But what difference between powder, patch, bullet, grease. This way. So grease under bullet should be better. No blowing out grease after each shot like with grease on the top of bullet... so.

[@mikepoteet1443]

Well, looks like I'm buying a Remington. I hope my Colts are able to play nicely.

[@-Gunnarsson-]

im getting sick of that echo the shooting range makes. Its just unappealing and ruins the experience :D

[@dustinh4175]

Those pistols helped end slavery in the united states. My greatgreatgreat grandpa could of carried one.

[@DickTickles]

I'd love to see you do a versus video of both these guns or their modern replicas against a Ruger Old Army.

[@DanielNighteyes]

Having actually used all three in Cowboy Action Shooting competitions, my impression is that the Ruger Old Army is too big and heavy. That makes it slower. As always, opinions and preferences differ.

[@filianablanxart8305]

CAS uses relatively large multiple targets at close to moderate distances , so speed of handling is emphasized . ( Not criticising , just observing .)

[@kuplayfordvalls6781]

The Regminton looks so much advanced and modern!

[@kdurk7546]

Your the best in the business. Your descriptions are top notch

[@1uptospeed]

great review their capandball thanks.

[@yasinyayk2959]

Orjinal dedemden kalma var ilgilenene satış yapılır

[@duster0669]

I'll admit it. I like the Remington better. Just saying...

[@lawrencehudson9939]

You look so young in the older video. Well done comparison of the two revolvers.

[@LMNOP12]

My Grandpa had three of it...interesting thing is 2 of them are still in good condition

[@tonisales5876]

Maravilhosos 👍

[@GoobNoob]

I'm assuming he's not a fan of colt.

[@dr.eugeniodacruz4391]

Poderia ter aqui pra nois brasileiros a um preço acessível e sem burocracias adoraria poder comprar mas e só um sonho fazer o que ne

[@ArcMasterArc]

By the way, I just got my Remington a couple of weeks ago and I am enjoying shooting cap & ball.

[@BuddyTheGermanShepherd]

A reproduction or the original? Isn't it dangerous to shoot with a 150 years old gun?

[@Clodnir]

Hello can you make a video original vs uberti and pietta pls ? ^^

[@CITYPREPPER016]

Did anyone notice colt had the cuts for the stock but only 3 screws?

[@strayfiftynine9151]

America made, old west guns and he is talking to us in meters. What the heal?

[@jordanhicks5131]

Yup, Remington is better as far as I'm concerned

[@TheBoringEdward]

I love the design if these weapons.

[@annehrobsky6627]

Remington had a superior design, but couldn't deliver on quality control and metallurgy. The revolver also arrived late in the Civil War, The US Army hated Remington revolvers because they misfired and burst. Wild Bill Hickok's life was saved in 1869 because a .44 Remington pointed at his head misfired, the result of poor machining tolerance.

[@mcmax571]

+Anne Hrobsky You're right. During the ACW Soldiers preferred the Colt to the Remington because Colts were better made and more reliable.

[@dannychavez310]

I will proble buy the Remington , but the colt looks better

[@janlindstrom7776]

Hi there Danny...Sweden calling. I,ve had 3 Remingtons 1958, all warn out to practise and competission. Get yerself a side stick and feel your R....try and switch hands and shoot...aiming with yer right/left eye. Secret is in tha bullit making. and the differnse between the bore and the drum. It needs to be as thigt as U can get it. there should not not be aproblem. when U get it rigt...U should get it right.. perhaps U should add a little support to the hand U are using....

[@janlindstrom7776]

And do not forget tha fat whithch is very importante and the fore loading...begiin whith 20 grains of blackpowder then 10 grains of corn flower and then a roundbullit, when U puch it down witth the rod there should be a ring of led coming of..if not U need a biggerround bullit...and here comes the fat, lar and soap. mix em so they get a thicktexture ....this is trye and trye again...And remember....Be 1with the bullit, feel it, want it, practis again and again.

[@TheOldMan-75]

The Remington is such a beauty

[@borisdobrynin2318]

Эти пушки сейчас стоят больших денег..