• 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

What are you putting your money on. Draw

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I agree the 1858 has some nice features, BUT it does not have the 1860 grip.
It is true that the 1858 has a small grip, but if you just let your pinky go underneath it like you would with a pocket gun, it actually shoots very nicely. Try it out some time, and you will see that holding it that way results in pointing it being similar to pointing your finger. After spending some time shooting it that way, you'll find that it is actually pretty comfortable.
 
I have several 58’s and I have run of the mill size M/L size hands and my grip naturally wants to hold on like that with the pinky under any way.
 
It is true that the 1858 has a small grip, but if you just let your pinky go underneath it like you would with a pocket gun, it actually shoots very nicely. Try it out some time, and you will see that holding it that way results in pointing it being similar to pointing your finger. After spending some time shooting it that way, you'll find that it is actually pretty comfortable.
The reason you grip it that way is because you run out of grip. You may like how it feels and that is fine for you. I do not. Don't need salesman talk to try and convince me what I do and do not like. You seem to put across that you invented your grip style and everyone else is too dumb to know how to adapt to that style without instruction. You use that grip style out of necessity because of the small grip on the Remington. And while it is perfectly OK for you it is not for me, nothing wrong with choice. Was just referring to a fact.
 
A poor craftsman blames his tools. I own and shoot most of the grip/gun styles mentioned here equally well, within my own ability.
Your abilities are outstanding. The only ability you seem to lack, is the ability to have a preference or to accept that other people may have even if you don't.
 
You are most unkind sir. Just pointing out one’s ability to adapt to different styles of hand guns. An ability that might prove useful some day.
And. no my abilities are actually limited but they are my best.
 
The reason you grip it that way is because you run out of grip. You may like how it feels and that is fine for you. I do not. Don't need salesman talk to try and convince me what I do and do not like.
Well, I have a deal for you! With my booklet, available for only $19.95, you too can learn to love the 1858 grip so much that you saw off your 1860 grip to match!
You seem to put across that you invented your grip style and everyone else is too dumb to know how to adapt to that style without instruction.
Many people actually don't know, and they appreciate learning about it.
You use that grip style out of necessity because of the small grip on the Remington.
I never said otherwise. I also heard that it was intentionally designed that way so that the pinky can flip it back forward faster after it rolls back in the hand under recoil.
And while it is perfectly OK for you it is not for me, nothing wrong with choice. Was just referring to a fact.
AND I WAS ALSO JUST REFERRING TO A FACT.
 
Your abilities are outstanding. The only ability you seem to lack, is the ability to have a preference or to accept that other people may have even if you don't.
The only ability you lack is the ability not to be offended by differing opinions. If you don't want to learn multiple platforms, that is most certainly your prerogative, but you don't need to get personal with people because they explain the virtues of them or the virtues of learning many as @Whughett tried to do.

Neither of us got personal with you. We just explained the value of a grip design and why it might be good to learn to use it.
 
The only ability you lack is the ability not to be offended by differing opinions. If you don't want to learn multiple platforms, that is most certainly your prerogative, but you don't need to get personal with people because they explain the virtues of them or the virtues of learning many as @Whughett tried to do.

Neither of us got personal with you. We just explained the value of a grip design and why it might be good to learn to use it.
I am not offended at all. Your preference for other than colt handguns does not effect me. And I am not offering lessons on how to grip the colt 1860. Of the black powder handguns which one would I choose to save my life. The 1860 colt, and that is nothing more than just my choice. I do not identify with a poor craftsman, just have my personal preference. Have handled the Remington many times, and just do not like it and all your talking or lessons do not make a difference. You are the one trying to convince me to agree with your choice. Not trying to push colt on you.
Well, I have a deal for you! With my booklet, available for only $19.95, you too can learn to love the 1858 grip so much that you saw off your 1860 grip to match!
I missed these on a quick read, I knew you were selling something. I do not need to spend 19.95 to learn how your method. You just can not understand your method is for you, and mine for me. Kind of hard for you to accept.
 
I am not offended at all. Your preference for other than colt handguns does not effect me. And I am not offering lessons on how to grip the colt 1860. Of the black powder handguns which one would I choose to save my life. The 1860 colt, and that is nothing more than just my choice. I do not identify with a poor craftsman, just have my personal preference. Have handled the Remington many times, and just do not like it and all your talking or lessons do not make a difference. You are the one trying to convince me to agree with your choice. Not trying to push colt on you.

I missed these on a quick read, I knew you were selling something. I do not need to spend 19.95 to learn how your method. You just can not understand your method is for you, and mine for me. Kind of hard for you to accept.
Uh... You're joking, right? Trying to be facetious? You don't seriously think I was trying to actually sell something for money, do you???🤯
 
Somebody should’ve told that to Bill Hickok…maybe he’d have made through that card game.
Well there’s a resident expert on Colts revolvers in these here pages that would disagree with the Remy stronger than a Colt idea. I’d be inclined to agree with that, the massive Colt arbor in line with recoil and all that. Seems to me that upper strap only allows fo a better sighting arrangement and all that skinny base pin does is foul after a few cylinders. But then again I just like the Colts.
As to why Colts went to the closed frame. IMO perhaps it’s a lot easier to manufacture a casting drop forged as one piece, then screw a barrel into that than all the machining and fitting a one piece barrel onto an arbor must take, and the sighting arrangement does lend itself to better sights.
 
Last edited:
Well there’s a resident expert on Colts revolvers in these here pages that would disagree with the Remy stronger than a Colt idea. I’d be inclined to agree with that, the massive Colt arbor in line with recoil and all that. Seems to me that upper strap only allows fo a better sighting arrangement and all that skinny base pin does is foul after a few cylinders. But then again I just like the Colts.
As to why Colts went to the closed frame. IMO perhaps it’s a lot easier to manufacture a casting drop forged as one piece, then screw a barrel into that than all the machining and fitting a one piece barrel onto an arbor must take, and the sighting arrangement does lend itself to better sights.
As far as the Colt versus Remington argument goes, only an analysis of the structural designs can answer the question, and not having done so, myself, nor having seen an a force vector analysis, I won't weigh in on which might be stronger. I do know that people seem to shoot either one for a lifetime, it seems.

As far as open top versus top strap design goes, in general structural terms, the top strap design will lend itself to something stringer because you have something retaining the barrel and recoil shield, both, from the top and the bottom. With the open top design, you have something retaining the barrel and recoil shield from only the bottom.

Think of it in terms of picking up an object, while trying to keep it level. It is easier to pick up an object from both sides, while keeping it level, than it is to pick up the object from only one side while keeping it level.
 
As far as the Colt versus Remington argument goes, only an analysis of the structural designs can answer the question, and not having done so, myself, nor having seen an a force vector analysis, I won't weigh in on which might be stronger. I do know that people seem to shoot either one for a lifetime, it seems.

As far as open top versus top strap design goes, in general structural terms, the top strap design will lend itself to something stringer because you have something retaining the barrel and recoil shield, both, from the top and the bottom. With the open top design, you have something retaining the barrel and recoil shield from only the bottom.

Think of it in terms of picking up an object, while trying to keep it level. It is easier to pick up an object from both sides, while keeping it level, than it is to pick up the object from only one side while keeping it level.
Ackshually… the open top design is restrained at the arbor which is at the center of the cylinder. The barrel lug, at the bottom of the frame, has no bearing on restraining the assembly.
The real “problem ” with the Remington frame is the very thin section where the frame tapers under the loading port. Colt and Remington both fixed this in the 1873 and 1875 models respectively.
 
Ackshually… the open top design is restrained at the arbor which is at the center of the cylinder. The barrel lug, at the bottom of the frame, has no bearing on restraining the assembly.
The real “problem ” with the Remington frame is the very thin section where the frame tapers under the loading port. Colt and Remington both fixed this in the 1873 and 1875 models respectively.
The reason Colt went with the enclosed frame had more to do with the desires of their biggest client, the US government than strength of the assembly. The governmentis bigges complaint with the open top was not strength but the known issues around wedge wear.

BTW, the government ordered 2500 frames at one point. Frames only, no cylinders or barrels. I wish I knew more of that backstory…
 
Back
Top