Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Muzzleloaders 1860 Army

Never loaded or shot one these.Can someone give me the lowdown? Thanks!

The colt 1860 Army has the most comfortable revolver grip ever made and they are 1 piece revolver grips.

The factory supplied sights on a 1860 Army will impact about 9 to 12 inches high depending on the load. They were designed to hold "DEAD" on a soldier belt buckle and hit him center chest.

When a shoulder stock was placed on the 1860 Army the bullet will hit dead on a 50 yards.

The Colt revolvers have 1 flaw in that the cylinder stop "leaf" spring is weak and prone to breakage and rendering the revolver useless on the battle field. Also when fired the revolver must be tipped to the side to assure the percussion cap falls away and not down into the the hammer area which will render it non firing as well.

The Colt 1860 Army usually will accept a .454 ball with some of the round ball trimmed when seated. I have lead sluged several revolvers and found the bore to be .470. This was much larger that the cylinder size. Shot like Sc*t. I had the cylinders drilled out to fit the bore size which was .475 (ball size) minus .005 for cylinder seating.

After doing so they shot as well as my S&W 686.

I just absolutely love the 1860 army grip...but I do feel the Remington 1858 .44 is a better pistol. Many of the North-South skirmish Assoc. buy the Remington 1858 revolver in .36 Cal and have the cylinders bored out to .40 cal and replace the .36 barrel with a .40 barrel. They buy or cast their own .40 round balls. These old revolvers will shoot accutely with any modern pistol.

Do not buy any cheap Italian imported revolver..look at the Uberti revolvers.

Doc

[Never loaded or shot one these.Can someone give me the lowdown? ]

While I don't shoot CAS, or any other competition involving heavy/continous shooting, I've been shooting an Italian/clone 1860 Army for the last 6 years, right alongside my Ruger Old Army, w/o any issues.



Mine shoots commercial .457 lead round balls, shaving off a neat little ring as they're being seated with the loading lever - same as the Ruger.

I use 30gr Pryodex "P", and seal the mouths of all chambers with Crisco lard, right out of my kitchen to avert any chance of a chamber crossfiring, or a chain-fire.

Any cap 'n ball revolver is easier to reload if it's stood on it's butt in a small wooden reloading stand - which is easy to make (like I did) and even easier to buy from someone like Dixie Gun Works ( www.dixiegunworks.com )for about $15.



The Crisco keeps everything loose/greasy, and makes the revolver easier to clean at the end of a day's shooting - which MUST be done !

I remove the grips/gripframe, the cylinder, etc, and clean it with very hot tap water that both cleans the BP fouling AND heats the metal for fast moisture evaporation in the nooks/crannies where it's hard to get at for drying.

After cleaning, a coat of oil is generally recommended, until the next shooting session.

.

That is pretty much it, except to say the problem with the caps of which Doc speaks, is easily solved by cocking the piece with a flourish. This generally flips the spent and blown-apart cap out of the way. Many times, caps will have to be squeezed together a bit, sort of crimped, in order to get them to stay on the nipple, especially if utilizing this type of cocking.

The Remington Army is certainly the stronger design, but by 1860, when the new Colt Army revolver was first made, the solid frame revolvers were well known. Colt could've went with such a frame, which they eventually chose to do with their model 1873. It is my opinion they stayed with the open top due to the ease of flipping the spent caps away, something which is more problematic with the solid frame.

Perhaps Rangr's is different, but unless I'm mistaken, those I have owned shot .451" round balls or other projectiles. The standard load is usually 28 grains of FFFg. The cylinders will get out-of-time fairly easily.

I have owned Uberti's, Armi's, Colt reproductions and an original. I saw little difference in the quality of them, though I have seen some lousy ones at gunshows. The good news is that the poor quality is usually visually very evident. One type I would stay away from would be the brass framed guns. They never existed until the 1950's or 60's, even in Confederate copies.

Thanks for all the info. Wish I could post pics.

FWIW, The commercial .454 lead RB's I buy/shoot as posted above are Speer's item #5135.

.

Hello Doc
I have Noticed what you say here to be very True as my 1860 Army shoots 9" or a Little Higher at the 20 Yard line.would it work to increase the hammer notch Depth they use as a rear sight plane to drop the Point of Impact to Point of aim ? Thanks in advance for any Insight...Thegeneral

General,

I had the front sights removed on 2 revolvers and a dovetail cut into the barrel with a drift front sight installed. All I had to do was drift the front dight for windage ( point of impact) and file the front blade down for a dead center impact.

I did file down and widen the rear hammer notches so the front blade would fit into the rear hammer notch.

Same process for a round ball full stock or half stock rifle.

Doc

Hello Doc
I am sure a dove Tail Re-Mounted sight would work out Great, but I was attempting to keep the Cost down in the Process. Is it worth the time and will their be Enough Point of Impact difference if I do go ahead and Deepen the Hammer Rear sight Groove it all ready has ? or am I Just wasting my time trying this ? Do you think it will weaken the hamemr assembly by Notching The Top of The Hammer Deeper ? Thanks in advance for your Insight on this.... Thegeneral

General,

I felt it was worth the time, at 15 yards my 1860 arny will hold a group with 5 holes touching..there is always one bad cylinder in every revolver.

If you want I will ship my 1860 to you so you can shoot it and then you can judge the front drift sight for yourself.

Doc

Hello Doc
I never doubted that the addition of the front drift sight on your revolver worked out well, But perhaps you missed my Intent, or scope of my Issue ? I was wondering if Notching the Hammer top sight deeper would allow moving the Poiint of Impact to be Point of aim at 20 Yards ? Mine is currently shooting 12" High at the 20 Yard Line. Regards, Thegeneral.

stuart,
I filed the notch deeper in a '51 Navy and it worked out quite well for lowering impact.I would reccomend removing the hammer and putting it in a vise.Filing with the hammer cocked puts a lot of stress on the sear notch (can't think of the right terminology).I actually broke one doing it this way when I was in my teens.

Hello Ruger #1
Thank's this is the answer I was Looking for... Thegeneral.

No problem.

General,

No mis-understanding from me but I think I did miss your "front sight" intent. I had a Colt 51' Navy (Army San Marco) that I filed the rear sight down quite a bit.
But not enough to lower the impact to suit me...a front sight was added.

The 51' navy is a fine looking revolver but the smallish grip as compared to the 1860 Army did not suit me so I sold it after I had the custom work performed on the revolver.

My "offer" of my 1860 Army was just a friendly gesture. These old Colt replicas
will group very well once the cylinder and bore "balls" ARE SIZED THE SAME DIAMETER. The Civil War officers that carried them were not handicaped at all.

Doc

Hello Doc
I am a Little confused here, Please excuse my Ignorance. My front sight is Too High right now as it is shooting so high, so I Filed a bit off it to Drop The Point of Impact to suit my Point of Aim and it did not move the Point of Impact Down enough from my Point of aim to correct the problem. It would seem to me that adding any kind of sight that would be Higher in profile than what I have now, Being the short Brass Ball it has, will worsen my problem ? That is why I asked if Notching the Top of my Hammer deeper will correct the elevation problem ? I don't have an Issue with Windage Just elevation. The Gun is Grouping well using .458" Lead Balls at this time...Thegeneral

Unless this has changed, on any gun, the front and reat sight work opposite to each other in adjustment.

To "lower" the bullet impact you lower the rear sight. You move the rear sight to the direction you desire the bullet impact.

The front sight "works" opposite to the rear sight method of adjustment You want a higher impact you lower the front signt. You want a lower impact you raise the front sight.

You can balance both front and rear sight adjustments in conjusction to each other but since you are working with a "Fixed" sighted "Cap N' Ball" revolver I would do one sight at a time.

I doubt you can "Notch" the rear hammer deep enough to completely have a dead on impact BUT you will lower the impact several inches but that depends are how you are "sighting" your front sight brass bead.

Are you holding the "TIP" of the brass bead at the bottom of the V notch or the brass tip level with the top left & right wings of the V notch?

Doc

Hello Doc
You are right about the sight changes, I Mis-Spoke here. I am Holding the front sight as deep into the rear sight as I can and it is still real high Hits on the Target. I will try to Notch the hammer deeper and see if it helps some. Thanks, Thegeneral.

Doctor_Encore,

Sent you a PM

CaptMasterson