Shot my 1860 Army and 1858 Remy today (pictures)

M

maillemaker

New member
So I finalized my carving on my new replacement 1860 Army sight today.

I'm not getting very good groups with it though.

Here are the results of shooting it off the bench and off hand:

http://imgur.com/a/08tMF

I also shot my 1858 Remington. Off the bench it shoots a single hole in the paper. However the sights are about 4 inches off to the left. I've got a dovetail replacement but I am waiting for my gunsmith to get his mill running again.

http://imgur.com/a/XL3Rh

Steve
 
M

maillemaker

New member
I think the 1858 is as tight as it gets, blowing a single hole in the paper.

I'll probably play with loads in the 1860 some more but 30 grains was what I found gave the best accuracy. This may be just as good as it gets with this one.

Steve
 
H

Hellgate

New member
Sometimes reaming the chambers to a little larger, like from .448 to .450 or .452 the using a .454 ball will give better accuracy by matching the blullet leaving the chamber at almost bore diameter.
 
S

swathdiver

New member
Of the two Pietta .44 Remmy's that we shoot regularly both have different spec chambers and grooves.

If the chambers on both are reamed to .450 or .451 that will put them both at or just over groove diameter within the desired spec of .001-.003. Chamfering the mouths of the chambers then would probably allow the use of .454 balls but would probably go with .457s.

Doing this work increases pressure which in turn increases velocity and makes the guns more accurate. Would also like to chamfer their muzzles and cut the forcing cones to 11 degrees.

This work was done to a .36 revolver and its a tack driver.

That being said, if I had a gun like Steve's, I'd leave it alone and tinker with another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top