-
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 -
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
Colt 1851 Navy VS Colt 1862 Navy?
- Thread starter John V.
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
rodwha
58 Cal.
The way the loading lever works. The newer model uses a ratchet style and from what I've read from others it loads projectiles in a more direct straight downward motion which helps with some conicals that can tend to lean upon loading.
If you are asking about the Colt 1861 Navy (?); it is primarily different from the 1851 in that it has the "creeping" or ratchet loading lever as rodwha said and a round barrel like the Colt 1860 Army.
The '61 Navy (sometimes called 'Officer's Model') is a streamlined version of the '51 as mentioned above...both .36 caliber. If you did mean '62 Navy, it was actually a 5-shot .36 but built on the smaller '49 Baby Dragoon frame but with a rebated cylinder like the '60 Army had to allow chambering to a larger caliber. They took a bit less powder than the '51-'61 Navy versions but were popular officer's sidearms or pocket revolvers with more punch than the .31 small framed guns.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 11,996
- Reaction score
- 5,944
The ratchet lever system was a nice improvement to facilitate the loading of bullets with more resistance. For the 1861 it allows a bullet to be swaged to conform to the chamber. Can make it a surprisingly powerful and accurate revolver. Late 1970's started using a bullet cast with an inexpensive Lee 9mm mold altered with a 3/8" bit. The powder gets compressed, the bullets get form fit to the chambers, the revolver (same one) is accurate.
According to Flayderman's Guide, the later Colt percussion pistols were:
1860 Army Revolver: .44 cal, 6 shot
1861 Navy Revolver: .36 cal, 6 shot
1862 Police Revolver: .36 cal, 5 shot
These were all the streamlined style with the creeping loading lever.
There is something Colt made that many call a "1862 Pocket Navy".
This is a .36 caliber, 5 shot revolver and was sometimes called a "Model of 1853" because its barrel and loading lever is similar to the older Colt 1851 Navy.
It uses a stepped (rebated) cylinder to essencially put a .36 caliber cylinder on the small frame like the Colt 1849 Pocket Dragoon used.
This is the pistol Wes/Tex was referring to.
Its serial numbers seem to be closely linked to the 1862 Police Revolver and it is thought to have been made in the 1863-1865 time period.
This explains the reason the older style pistol is now called a 1862 Pocket Navy.
I haven't heard of any replicas of this pistol being made.
1860 Army Revolver: .44 cal, 6 shot
1861 Navy Revolver: .36 cal, 6 shot
1862 Police Revolver: .36 cal, 5 shot
These were all the streamlined style with the creeping loading lever.
There is something Colt made that many call a "1862 Pocket Navy".
This is a .36 caliber, 5 shot revolver and was sometimes called a "Model of 1853" because its barrel and loading lever is similar to the older Colt 1851 Navy.
It uses a stepped (rebated) cylinder to essencially put a .36 caliber cylinder on the small frame like the Colt 1849 Pocket Dragoon used.
This is the pistol Wes/Tex was referring to.
Its serial numbers seem to be closely linked to the 1862 Police Revolver and it is thought to have been made in the 1863-1865 time period.
This explains the reason the older style pistol is now called a 1862 Pocket Navy.
I haven't heard of any replicas of this pistol being made.
rodwha
58 Cal.
Uberti has been making a copy of the 1862 Pocket Navy:
https://www.uberti-usa.com/navy-army-and-police-revolvers
Another thing I forgot to mention about the difference between the '51 and '61 Navy is the blade sight instead of post.
https://www.uberti-usa.com/navy-army-and-police-revolvers
Another thing I forgot to mention about the difference between the '51 and '61 Navy is the blade sight instead of post.
Last edited by a moderator:
Good information above. It might help to think of the model you are asking about as very similar to an 1851 Colt Navy but scaled down, smaller frame, other parts smaller, lighter and having the rebated smaller cylinder in five shot .36 caliber.
If you had several of these models laid out in front of you it would be easy to understand. Websites, auction sites, forums and printed catalogs can often lead to confusion even when read carefully.
When all else fails me, I remember President Abraham Lincoln's famous line: "Do not believe everything you read on the internet." :rotf:
If you had several of these models laid out in front of you it would be easy to understand. Websites, auction sites, forums and printed catalogs can often lead to confusion even when read carefully.
When all else fails me, I remember President Abraham Lincoln's famous line: "Do not believe everything you read on the internet." :rotf:
My know it all computer and Chrome browser won't let me open the Uberti web site but I looked on several other web sites and found that you are correct.
As I mentioned, the 1862 Pocket Navy, unlike the 1862 Police revolver has the old style octagon barrel and toggle style loading lever.
Uberti, as usual, is making a replica of that exact gun.
(This is why I try not to say things like didn't, never, doesn't, etc.
Every time I do, I am proven wrong. :rotf: )
As I mentioned, the 1862 Pocket Navy, unlike the 1862 Police revolver has the old style octagon barrel and toggle style loading lever.
Uberti, as usual, is making a replica of that exact gun.
(This is why I try not to say things like didn't, never, doesn't, etc.
Every time I do, I am proven wrong. :rotf: )
Been there, done that, got the headache! :wink:Zonie said:
Lot of confusion exists with model numbers and names since Colt used different terms than the military and modern collectors and shooters tend to mix both at random. For size comparison, this photo shows (in descending order)
Whitneyville Walker, cal. 44
Third Model Dragoon, cal. 44
1851 Navy, cal. 36
1862 Police, cal. 36
The models 1851 Navy, 1860 Army and 1861 Officer's Model are all the same frame with the 1860 having a rebated cylinder to increase the caliber to .44. The several versions of the so called 1853 and 1862 are small framed like the .31 Baby Dragoon and/or Wells Fargo versions except Colt used the same rebated cylinder to up the caliber to .36. If you're not confused by now, you're not paying attention! :wink: :haha:
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/fb/2e/3a/fb2e3afa6e568bc062298812371075a0--handgun-firearms.jpg
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 3,882
- Reaction score
- 943
I see "Colt 2nd generation pocket navy" revolvers advertised on Gun Broker. .36 caliber 5 shot rebated cylinder with octagonal bbl. Looks like a scaled down 1851 navy. If it is like my 2nd gen pocket police, it is best suited to small hands.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 11,996
- Reaction score
- 5,944
Just accessed the Uberti page to view the revolvers.
They got 4 1/2" through 6 1/2" barrels. Nice!
They got 4 1/2" through 6 1/2" barrels. Nice!
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2012
- Messages
- 545
- Reaction score
- 256
The 1862 Pocket Navy and Pocket Police have the same 1849 frame and grip but the police has the round barrel, creeping loading lever and a half fluted rebated cylinder while the Navy has the octagon barrel/loading system and round rebated cylinder.
I have 3 2nd generation Colt 1862s and One Uberti Police that I have outfitted with a 3 1/2" barrel.
I have 3 2nd generation Colt 1862s and One Uberti Police that I have outfitted with a 3 1/2" barrel.
AZbpBurner
54 Cal.
There's a technical summary of Uberti's build of the 1862 Colt: It $ucks Big Time. Here's why:
I rec'd mine about 3 years ago & hopefully they've since corrected the problems that I and several other buyers encountered around that time. It certainly was uncharacteristic of Uberti's usual outstanding quality.
Mine had a spot on the cylinder that dragged on the frame. The wedge wasn't wide enough to tighten the fit to minimize end shake, or free play of the cylinder along the arbor. An attempt in correcting the wedge dimensions still didn't correct the failure to fire problem and the cylinder still has more free play than any of my other Uberti's - additionally, it looks like either the reach of the hammer nose was insufficient, or else the nipples were too short. Replacement Treso/Ampco nipples were of correct dimensions to allow hammer to reach & fire each cap on the new nipples.
The 1862 Colt is a sexy-looking scaled-down version of the 1861 Navy. The pi$$y little front sight is so short to prevent any precision shooting. It's a well-made gun, but poorly fitted, not at all up to Uberti's legendary high quality manufacturing standards.
At 15 yards it shoots about 15" too high. Someday I'll figger out if the soft brass front sight is press fit or threaded, although in an initial attempt in removing, I got the feeling that it would just twist off. A little time with the drill press & some brass stock & I'll make a taller front sight. Meanwhile, it's been sitting in its' box on a shelf waiting for me to retire sometime late next year to begin work on it & a bunch'a pending projects.
I rec'd mine about 3 years ago & hopefully they've since corrected the problems that I and several other buyers encountered around that time. It certainly was uncharacteristic of Uberti's usual outstanding quality.
Mine had a spot on the cylinder that dragged on the frame. The wedge wasn't wide enough to tighten the fit to minimize end shake, or free play of the cylinder along the arbor. An attempt in correcting the wedge dimensions still didn't correct the failure to fire problem and the cylinder still has more free play than any of my other Uberti's - additionally, it looks like either the reach of the hammer nose was insufficient, or else the nipples were too short. Replacement Treso/Ampco nipples were of correct dimensions to allow hammer to reach & fire each cap on the new nipples.
The 1862 Colt is a sexy-looking scaled-down version of the 1861 Navy. The pi$$y little front sight is so short to prevent any precision shooting. It's a well-made gun, but poorly fitted, not at all up to Uberti's legendary high quality manufacturing standards.
At 15 yards it shoots about 15" too high. Someday I'll figger out if the soft brass front sight is press fit or threaded, although in an initial attempt in removing, I got the feeling that it would just twist off. A little time with the drill press & some brass stock & I'll make a taller front sight. Meanwhile, it's been sitting in its' box on a shelf waiting for me to retire sometime late next year to begin work on it & a bunch'a pending projects.
I think Colt put full-fluted and half-fluted cylinders on nearly everything at least once. The M.1860 and M.1862 are the most encountered...other models in far less numbers. My all time favorite is this one! :wink:
https://jamesdjulia.com/wp-content/uploads/images/auctions/252/images/org/35422.jpg
A few full fluted Dragoons made it into the 2nd Generation series and seems like a fairly good idea on a revolver of that weight.
https://jamesdjulia.com/wp-content/uploads/images/auctions/252/images/org/35422.jpg
A few full fluted Dragoons made it into the 2nd Generation series and seems like a fairly good idea on a revolver of that weight.
Last edited by a moderator:
rodwha
58 Cal.
Now that is a sweet pistol there! Can't say I've seen one fluted but that is wicked!
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 11,996
- Reaction score
- 5,944
Bravo 4-4 said:
That gear tooth set up on the loading levers and large openings for bullets to rotate under the loading ram (adaptations to war needs) are actually the big differences. The exterior changes were changes in improving castings but for us are eye candy.
If the frame and cylinder are the same, are the barrels interchangeable? Will an 1861 navy fit a 1851 navy frame?
Similar threads
