• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

Chamber capacity: Remington New Model vs Colt 1860

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Aug 4, 2004
Messages
8,448
Reaction score
3,114
Location
West central Texas
I have had several of both over the past 40-some years, and never actually measured the chamber capacities of the two designs. I don't know why it never occurred to me to do so. There is probably not a significant difference, if any. Just thinking about this stuff while trying not to scratch another cap and ball itch.
It's the same old story: Love the sights and ease of cylinder removal with the Remington, but hate how that trigger guard abuses my knuckle. Love the lines, grip and pointability of the Colt, but struggle with the sights and getting that dang barrel wedge to fit right yet come out easily.
 
I have had several of both over the past 40-some years, and never actually measured the chamber capacities of the two designs. I don't know why it never occurred to me to do so. There is probably not a significant difference, if any. Just thinking about this stuff while trying not to scratch another cap and ball itch.
It's the same old story: Love the sights and ease of cylinder removal with the Remington, but hate how that trigger guard abuses my knuckle. Love the lines, grip and pointability of the Colt, but struggle with the sights and getting that dang barrel wedge to fit right yet come out easily.
The main thing with the wedges is two fold, proper fit (length, taper and thickness) and of hardened steel. Most factory wedges are to soft in my opinion so I make my own of hardened tool steel and they work much better for me.
I've not measured the capacity difference either but would expect the rebated 60 cylinder to have less volume.
 
Bill,

You got my curiosity for the cylinder chamber capacity so I got out my trusty Vernier calipers and measured the depth of several cylinders that I have for my Uberti 1858 and 1860. I measured from the protruding nipple base inside each cylinder chamber up to the lever of the chamber opening. I took into consideration that each nipple's base would have slightly different threaded depth into a cylinder chamber by a few thousandths of an inch which would either add of subtract form the overall chamber depth. All cylinders measured have SliXShot nipples. I averaged the following measurements from two 1858 and two 1860 cylinders:

Uberty 1858 1.382"
Uberty 1860 1.270"

It appears that the 1858 is just a tad deeper than the 1860.
 
Last edited:
Bill,

You got my curiosity for the cylinder chamber capacity so I got out my trusty Vernier calipers and measured the depth of several cylinders that I have for my Uberti 1858 and 1860. I measured from the protruding nipple base inside each cylinder chamber up to the lever of the chamber opening. I took into consideration that each nipple's base would have slightly different threaded depth into a cylinder chamber by a few thousandths of an inch which would either add of subtract form the overall chamber depth. All cylinders measured have SliXShot nipples. I averaged the following measurements from two 1858 and two 1860 cylinders:

Uberty 1858 1.382"
Uberty 1860 1.270"

It appears that the 1858 is just a tad deeper than the 1860.
The interior chamber rebate diameter of the 60 Colt will allow less volume as well. The most accurate way to measure volume is to pull the nipples, plug the threaded hole with modeling clay flush with the chamber bottom and fill with water. You can hold the clay flush with the chamber bottom by inserting a flat end dowl down chamber while pushing clay in from the outside of the nipple hole.
Weigh the cylinder empty and record, now set up on end and with a syringe fill the chamber level full and weigh the whole shebang again . The difference between dry and filled weight will be your volume difference in grains of water.
I got to thinking that instead of filling the whole threaded nipple port with clay why not just plug the very bottom end of the nipple port itself with a bit of clay and reinstall. Much easier to clean up and serve the same purpose.
 
Just noticed that Pietta has followed Uberti's lead by going to a dovetailed front sight, as reported. It appears the rammer nose must still be modified, however, to accommodate the Johnston and Dow bullet from Eras Gone molds.
 
Last edited:
The question and the answers in this thread have been interesting. At this time, the only blackpowder revolvers in my possession are a Uberti 1st Model Dragoon and a Colt Blackpowder '51 Navy.

It has been my understanding that the chambers in the 1860 Army are either tapered or "stepped," rather than being truly cylindrical. Is this accurate? It would be interesting to see CerroSafe casts of chambers from the various revolvers compared.

"Abused most cruelly..." I would like to commend @BillinOregon for that authentic old-time vocabulary! :thumb:

Best regards,

Notchy Bob
 
For reference, a .45 LC contains 40 grains of black powder

I just think it's interesting that it seems like 40 grains is a "heavy charge "for a .44 cap and baller , but was the standard charge for the Colt Model P.

I stay with 30 gr of 3f in my .44's and it feels plenty powerful enough

The Remington will fit 40gr and a ball in the chambers, but 30 and a heavy conical is all you will get into it.
 
Thanks, fellas. I broke down and bought the last Pietta 1858 in stock at the El Paso Cabela's. I will try to teach myself an altered grip to avoid having the knuckle on my middle finger being "abused most cruelly" by the rear of the trigger guard upon recoil.
Mine will abuse the knuckle too. It's called too much powder. Shoots very good with 22 grains for a ball or 18 with conical.
 
Back
Top