"Complaint against the Remington"

[TIZWIN]

Hello friends--as a new owner of an Uberti Cimmaron NMA, I decided to do a little research about the history of this sixgun.  In my reading, I was surprised to find references to some unhappiness with the revolver in the immediate post-Civil War frontier.  This was surprising to me, as I am impressed by the efficency of the design, which I'm sure members here will concur has distinct advantages over the classic Colt pattern.

 I refer specifically to a judgement in "Wild Bill Hickok, Gunfighter," by Joseph G. Rosa (a historian of some note and a leading authority of Wild Bill), that "although it looks stronger than the Colt 1860 Army, it was not as well made, accurate, or as reliable."  He states this in the context of the incident in which Bill had his confrontation with a couple 7th Cavalry troopers.  Apparently, Bill was saved by a misfire from a NMA.  Rosa states that, "ordnance reports reveal that they were notorious for misfires or for blowing up on occasion."

Additionally, I read in the excellent reference, "Arming and Equipping the U.S. Cavalry," by Dusan P. Farrington (an exhaustive and detailed volume), "No adverse reports on the Colt revolver (1860 Army) have been found wheras complaint against the Remington is a matter of Ordnance Department record."  He goes on in some detail with a litany of reports of the sixgun's failings.

This is surprising to me, as I have always thought that the original guns were at least as well made as the Colt equivalent.  Am I missing something?  Is it because the weapons issued post-1865 were tired out from Civil War service and had not been re-furbished? 

Has anyone encountered these reports before, or had personal experience comparing the two?  I ask the questions purely academically, though this venue is obviously for the Remington advocate.  Not trying to start the old Colt/Remmie debate really, just expressing my surprise at finding this information.

I thank you all in advance for any thoughts or opinions.

[willyboy]

Colt's revolvers had been in continous use since the Paterson in 1836,People were simply more familiar with it,and Remington was the ''new kid on the block''.Colt's were SO familiar that folks often refered to any revolver as a ''Colt''.The Remington's cylinder pin has no  ''fouling grooves''[actually lube grooves] and is smaller and a more precise fit than a Colt,leading to jamming if the user doesn't properly maintain his revolver.Personally,I prefer the Remington and find it to be more accurate,but with the possibility of days in the saddle and no ''down time''for maintenance,it's easy to see why a lot of the old timers stood by thier Colts.

[Montana Slim]

TIZWIN,

I've read those accounts and more citing the "inferiority" of the Remington pistols issued and numerous requests to be issued Colts as replacements. Some of this can surely attributed to a preference for the Colt, based on familiarity and known performance....But, the fact there are many similar statements leads me to believe that Remington quality just wasn't consistent. Users may have had a preference due to known design advantages which give the edge to a Colt as a superior combat pistol. Of course the Remington having a few pluses of it's own. Another possible problem in the "field", so to speak, may have been a shortage of proper ammunition, specifically percussion caps, for the Remignton since Colts were so much more common. Seem there were numerous logistics problems in both the CW & the old west. Not a surprise considering the number of different firearms in use.

Modern materials and techniques generally provide a superior product in modern reproductions. IMO, the Remington is the obvious choice for it's ease of manufacture, superior accuracy & strength. But I still see the Colt having an edge as a combat arm.

Slim

[Advertising]

[willyboy]

There are of course testemonials to the Remington as well the most famous of which is Buffalo Bill's ''it never failed me'' letter,citeing it's use while he was an Army Scout.

[Cuts Crooked]

  Rosa states that, "ordnance reports reveal that they were notorious for misfires or for blowing up on occasion."

Additionally, I read in the excellent reference, "Arming and Equipping the U.S. Cavalry," by Dusan P. Farrington (an exhaustive and detailed volume), "No adverse reports on the Colt revolver (1860 Army) have been found wheras complaint against the Remington is a matter of Ordnance Department record."

 

That's interesting! Has anyone ever read these "ordnance reports"? I have never even heard of them! I should very much like to see them or reproductiopns of them because I have often found that when something is "common knowledge" it is just as often as not, untrue! (experts have been guilty of this as much as anyone!)

[TIZWIN]

Gentlemen--I appreciate the responses.  Here are some additional quotations from Mr. Farrington's book.  "A report from General Christopher C. Augur, commanding the Department of the Platte to Gen. Alexander B. Dyer, Chief of Ordnance, complained of poor materials in the Remington leading to burst cylinders, of weak springs and of hammers that did not reach the nipples to fie the caps.  Quoting from a field report it continues 'the defects reported in the Remington revolvers are of greatr consequence and destroy the confidence of the men in their arms...Colts have never to my knowledge, been found fault with any important particular.'"  Two reports from 7th Cavalry officers:"from Captain Frederick W. Benteen, Company H, came the opinion 'the Remington pistol is a tolerable pistol for years ago; the revolving springs get out of order very easily--a company of cavalry is supplied with no tools to repair arms...' Lt. Edward Godfrey, commanding Company K, thought the Remington 'springs are weak and get out of order.'"

[Waterloo St. Clair]

Certainly sounds like quality control issues to me.  And while the quality of the materials has certainly improved over time, the quality control issue stills looms.  I was just considering a "what if" scenerio.  What if I had been required to use the C&B revolvers I have purchased straight out of the box in a combat situation.  Out of eight revolvers purchased (four Colts and four Remingtons), two were non-functional out of the box, and two needed major adjustments to make them reliable.  That's 50% of the revolvers that, had I been in the field with no tools, I would have considered either rejects or of questionable reliability.  It's understandable that if Remington had poorer quality control in their first production runs they could easily have gotten a bad reputation in spite of having a superior design. 

[Arcey]

Ok, honest question.  Not being a smart-ass (ain't easy for me).

What is a 'revolving spring'?

[sundance44`s]

revolving spring ? i give up . what is it ..  the only real problem i`ve ever read about in the early remington ..was the use of rifleing twist that twisted to the right and caused the barrel to unscrew or at least get loose when fired .. but remington fixed the problem by useing a left twist in their rifleing ..soon after finding out they had a problem .. don`t know how long that took , it didn`t say .. probally not long after a few hit the field .

[St. George]

I'd hazard a guess and say that the 'revolving spring' referred to was the hand spring.

If it's damaged or broken - cylinder rotation doesn't happen.

That being said - and all things being equal and using brand-new revolvers 'as-issued' - to many, the Colt 'feel' is more natural than the Remington.

No doubt this also played a part in preferences.

For accuracy - that big 'trough' on the Remington topstrap is great - but for the fast 'snap' shot taken in combat -  the natural pointability of a Colt is Hell on Wheels for the average Trooper.

The Remington as well as the Schofield is an aquired taste for a shooter and they have to want to learn their idiosyncracies.

No doubt lower Quality Control was a big factor in wartime production - but today - steels are stronger, and tolerances are closer than they were on the originals - plus - their springs are far better-made and add the increased measure of reliability.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

[sundance44`s]

Geeze wiff all the bad reports on the remmie.. kinda makes me wonder bout me whole life now .. anyone know a good colt forum i can hang out in ?

[Sunwapta Haze]

I'd hazard a guess and say that the 'revolving spring' referred to was the hand spring.

If it's damaged or broken - cylinder rotation doesn't happen.

Interesting to note, if this is the case, that the hand spring is still a weak point on the Remingtion replicas. 

Regardless, I like mine and wouldn't trade 'em for anything.  'Course I got no real basis for comparison as I have only bought Remmies ('75s and 58's) because I prefer the look of them. 

[Marshal Will Wingam]

For accuracy - that big 'trough' on the Remington topstrap is great - but for the fast 'snap' shot taken in combat -  the natural pointability of a Colt is Hell on Wheels for the average Trooper.

I find the pointability of the Remington far superior to any of the Colts. A snap shot for me is too high on a Colt and right on with the Rem. I guess it depends on the shape of the shooters hand.

[St. George]

Exactly...

You can't 'force' your hand to recognize a grip's 'comfort' when there is none for 'you' - you can just learn how to deal with that particular piece and shoot accordingly.

In combat - 'ergonomics' plays a big part - as does familiarity with the weapon

You may be a passable shot with one - and a great shot with another - the difference between a torso hit and a headshot.

Either way - slim difference - what's in front of the muzzle goes down - but in 'controllability' what fits 'you' is the best choice for you.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

[sundance44`s]

Fit is important for target matches ... cofidence in the piece you are given to defend  your self with makes a whole lot of difference , and with the military one size fits all . wepons that have a history of malfunctions didn`t last long in our military .. i gotta salute the colt 1911 though , good choice Uncle Sam .

[Comanche Kid]

Sounds like the Ford/Chevy war all over again. I guess that no matter what is printed about any gun, caliber, manufacturer, there will always be someone of a different opinion. As for me, I have shot both Colt and Remington, and will stick with my Remington. It just feels better built and is easier for me to point and shoot accurately. I guess it boils down to what ever works best for the individual shooter. My guess would be that is was the same back then as it is today. Just be happy we are still able to shoot either of these great firearms.

[sundance44`s]

Hey it might make for an interesting shootin match Colt vs. Remmie //have a tatical course of fire , someone set it up i`ll be there ...maybe like myth busters .. 

[St. George]

A 'tactical' course of fire wouldn't prove anything whatsoever.

All things being equal - if each shooter was an experienced handler of his revolver of choice - it'd boil down to the guy who'd done the most shooting under stress/timed conditions with a decent measure of success.

What 'competition' would be between the men - and not their weapon - as the weapon is just the 'tool' and not the 'skill'...

Hell - for all anyone knows - somewhere 'out there' is one really deadly guy shooting a nickel-plated Hopkins and Allen XL 8 - and he's faster and more accurate from the leather than Bob Munden 'and' Thell Reed combined...

Best to just enjoy that which you do, since 'all' of them are fun to shoot as intended.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

[Yankee John]

Another possible problem in the "field", so to speak, may have been a shortage of proper ammunition, specifically percussion caps, for the Remignton since Colts were so much more common.

I just checked the percussion cap fit on both of my original Colt 1860 and Remington New Model Army.  All nipples are in excellent original condition, with no mushrooming.  The fit is EXACTLY the same for both.

Not really surprised,  as I'm sure that the Army had a specification on these, so that there was no need to have "Colt" and "Remington" specific caps to complicate things.

As far as "feel" goes,  Keep in mind that the grips on most replica Remington NMA's are VERY different from the originals (especially the Piettas). Charlie/Dragoon has said many times that the Euroarms version is the closest to the originals.  You would be amazed at how different (better!) an original Remington feels in your hand as compared to a Pietta.

That being said,  I still love my Piettas!

FWIW,
John