Has anyone fired a REAL 1851 Navy?

[CaptainKirk]

I love my EXCAM 1851 Navy in .36, but having said that, I wonder if anyone on this forum has had the opportunity to fire the Real McCoy, and if so...
How does it compare to the replicas?
Action, feel, balance, pointability, etc?
A lot of dirt gets dumped on some of the "cheap Italian imports", and I know mine took a bit of work to improve the action. Can't imagine mass-produced firearms 150 years ago would be that much better (NOT referring to the custom stuff used by famous gunfighters, but rather, everyday soldiers or cowboys)
Any input on this?

My little troublemaker...

 

[Norinco]

I've had the chance to cycle an original Colt SAA. The action was smooth. Other than that, I can't say anything for the quality of the original Colt cap and ball revolvers.

 

[1911nutjob]

I don't have an original 1851, but I do own both an original and replica 1860 army. The replica is a reasonably close uberti charcoal finish, which I have been told is one of the better ones out there. I replaced the fluted cylinder it came with to the rebated type. That said, they do feel "different" in the hand, but I can't quite put my finger on it. They fill the hand pretty closely and balance pretty close, but it's not exact, and the loading lever definitely has a differing thickness dimension. I haven't weighed them to get an exact number, but the replica has a more noticeable heft to it. The hammer spur on the original is wider, and has a coarser crosshatch cut on the thumb portion. If you waterfowl hunt, the colt barrel is "whippier", if ya know what I mean. The original's lockwork has only three audible clicks vs. the replica's four, and isn't as crisp, but let's give it some credit since it rolled out of the factory circa late 1862.

 

[JV Puleo]

I have, albeit many years ago. I have also shot the M1860 and the Starr SA. In the 50s one of my friends belonged to a local muzzle loading "all percussion" pistol team, all or nearly all of whom shot 51 navies. They would challenge local police departments, all of which were armed with .38 caliber Smiths or Colts, to matches. They usually won but my friend attributed much of that to shooting first and filling the indoor ranges with smoke!

Also, there is a new book in the works by Peter Schiffers in which he shoots and assesses the qualities of nearly all of the CW revolvers. Peter's work is based on shooting originals only. Without disclosing too much, I can say that the best feature of the 51 Navy was its dependability, not its accuracy. In fact, what we think of as "accurate pistol shooting" was hardly even thought of at the time. There was virtually no organized marksmanship training in the US army until after the CW (for rifles or pistols) and the majority of CW soldiers who carried a revolver had never handled one before enlisting. The handgun was an adjunct or a replacement for the saber and as such only had to be able to kill someone at a range of 6 feet... It was important that it went off every time the trigger was pulled and that was how its effectiveness was measured.

As to your comment abut production... there is no doubt that the originals are far better made. The reproductions have some small advantages in metalurgy - not necessarily strength - because it is far easier now to know exactly what the alloys being used consist of. But, reproductions are proportionately much cheaper than the originals were. The $25 that an M1860 cost in 1861 was the monthly pay of an Infantry Lieutenant...
No one (especially the army) was expected to have to tweak their new revolver to get it to work properly so what you refer to as a "custom" job was the ordinary situation in the 1860s.

 

[dave_person]

I shoot an original 1863 Sharps carbine and handled (but not shot) Colt Navies and Army revolvers made during or just prior to the Civil War. In all cases the fit, finish, and smoothness of action are better than the repros. In particular, the springs have a wonderful oily smooth feel lacking in the modern copies. During the mid-1800's, materials were dear but labor cheap. Today, materials are cheap but labor dear. As a result, the guns made during the mid 19th century often have excellent finish and fit all of which was facilitated by skilled hand work. Today that rarely is the case except on the high-end products.

dave

 

[Mike M.]

I own and have shot an original '51 Navy. It's smoother than the repros...and as others have mentioned, were priced accordingly.

 

[Kevin Makel]

I shoot an original 1863 Sharps carbine and handled (but not shot) Colt Navies and Army revolvers made during or just prior to the Civil War.
dave

I have a new model 1863 arsenal converted to 50-70, It still shoots great! Would love to fire an original 1851 Navy sometime.