safety features of 1858 remington

[tiberius10721]

U know i was having a conversation with my neighbor about about the safety of handguns and basically my neighbor wants a gun but is scared of dropping a handgun and having it go off or a small child getting a hold of it and shooting themselves with it. So i thought about this for a long time and then told my neighbor have u ever considered owning a 1858 black powder replica pistol and then my neighbor said to me "what is that"well anyways I showed him my remington and explained to him how it had the half notches in the cylinder for the hammer to rest on in case u dropped it and I also explained how much harder it would be for a child to load it than it would be for a modern day pistol.So I was just wondering does anybody think my train of thought is wrong?It seems to me like the 1858 remington design has a great amount of safety features with its design.I shoot mine almost every weekend and feel thats its not only accurate as all hell but also is very reliable and makes for a great home defense weapon.Of course I know a 12 guage pump shotgun is the best home defense weapon.I personally feel black powder firearms are underated,but then again if to many people had them then there would be some kind of restriction for them also.

[mykeal]

I'm not sure where you're going with this.

First of all, on the 'safety notches': They are certainly a lot safer than leaving the hammer down on a loaded and capped chamber, but one would be safer still by leaving the hammer down on an empty chamber. And that's a feature that ALL revolvers have.

Second, neither 'feature' is prevention for the case where the child pulls the trigger. Now, on a single action revolver like the majority of bp percussion revolvers, one has to pull the hammer back to full cock before pulling the trigger is effective, and that's certainly a help in preventing an inadvertent discharge by a very small child; they won't have the hand strength to accomplish cocking the gun.

But, at some point a child gains that strength, and now there are no features of the gun that will help. The only answer is education, and that's the thing you need to impress on your neighbor. Small children are naturally curious. If they find a hidden gun, they will play with it, and if it's a 'forbidden' object, one that Daddy has aroused their curiosity about by loudly saying, "NO! Keep your hands off that gun! It's dangerous!", they'll get a big thrill by finding it and playing with it. Education does two things. It teaches them to respect the gun for what it is, a tool that can be fun to use if handled right and something that can hurt them badly if handled wrong (like a power saw, for instance), and it removes the curiosity and the tendency to play with it.

The safety features are not in the gun. They're in the mind.

[tiberius10721]

the point I was trying to make about safety was the fact that its a lot harder for a child to load a black powder pistol than a modern day firearm because there is so much more involved in loading one.For example even if u have a loaded cylinder for a 1858 remington u can keep it seperate from the gun and it still takes some know how to install it in the pistol.

[Gatofeo]

Have your neighbor buy a Browning Hi-Power in 9mm caliber.
Mine has a hammer spring of 32 pounds!
That's normal! Browning Hi-Powers leave the factory with hammer springs of 32 pounds.
Trying pull back a slide against that! Heck, I can barely do it, let alone a small child!
Hi-Powers also have a slide recoil spring of 16 pounds. So, it takes nearly 50 pounds of lift to pull back the slide on a Browning Hi-Power if the hammer is down.
When I have to load my Hi-Power, I pull the hammer back to cock, then pull the slide back. the hammer resting against the rear of the slide adds a lot of resistance.
Also, the Hi-Power has a magazine disconnect safety. If the magazine is removed, the trigger cannot be pulled and the hammer can't be dropped.
I removed the magazine disconnect on my Hi-Power, as I don't like that feature.

I keep hearing rumors that Browning will discontinue the Hi-Power. I hope not; it's a wonderful pistol. And it doesn't carry the stench of a Glock or Glock-like guns.

But seriously, the Hi-Power is probably a poor choice for your neighbor. A double-action .38 revolver with 4-inch barrel, loaded with wadcutters, is a good home defense gun. He can keep it locked in one of those pistol boxes that requires a coded sequence to open, instead of a key.
A pump shotgun is also a good house defense gun. Any intruder who hears the slide being racked on it will almost certainly leave in a hurry. Alas, it's difficult to secure loaded, readily accessible to adults, yet posing no danger to kids.
Loading any gun while the intruder is coming up the stairs is a recipe for disaster.

Any cap and ball sixgun is a poor home defense gun. The Remington's safety notches can be easily overriden by pulling back the hammer a bit and rotating the cylinder. Most children would know enough to pull that "thing sticking up" (hammer) and get into trouble.
Depending on local humidity, the powder can also draw in moisture and render it useless. Not the sort of thing you want in a gun relied upon to save your life.

My own home defense include a .38 snubnose loaded with 148 gr. wadcutters, a 20-gauge pump shotgun loaded with No. 3 buckshot and the aforementioned Browning Hi-Power loaded with 115 gr. jacketed hollowpoints.

Someone breaks into my home and the coroner will mutter, 'Sheesh ... this guy get caught in a munitions hailstorm?"

[mykeal]

the point I was trying to make about safety was the fact that its a lot harder for a child to load a black powder pistol than a modern day firearm

That's a good point. I made the assumption that he'd be using the gun as a home defense weapon and thus be keeping it loaded.

I'd still lobby for education for his kids as the most effective way to prevent a child-gun accident.

[kirpi97]

tiberius10721, your basic premise involved a loaded revolver and using the safety notch as some sort of prevention of accidents. Though it is safer than having the trigger setting on a loaded cylinder, it is by no ways perfectly child-proof.

When mykeal offered his advice, he took that assumption and pointed out the pitfalls. His final advice is the best that can be given whether you have a loaded BP or modern firearm in the house-EDUCATION.

But then you came back with a slight modification. That of keeping the loaded cylinder apart from the revolver. But this same practice can be employed with a modern firearm. I can store the clip, the slide, the bolt, or the cylinder separate from the actual firearm. Thus achieving the same safety precaution.

If what you meant was that leaving the revolver unloaded, it was easier to load a modern day cartridge as opposed to loading an unmodified BP revolver, you may well have a point there. It does take more to load an 1858 than it does my H&R 32.

However, the black powder revolver has equal dangers if loaded without the proper training. The child could do as much mischief to himself with an 1858 as he can with a .22.

Again, I side with mykeal, it is the training and education provided by the parents that will do more for protecting the child from firearm related mishaps than any safety feature placed on said weapon.

[kirpi97]

I just got to start eating my Wheaties or get something faster than dial-up. Mykeal beat me with a response by minutes. But who's counting. Me.

[tiberius10721]

First off I would never leave a loaded pistol in my house because i have a child in my house who has friends that come over so what i do is leave an empty cylinder in it.I have a loaded cylinder that I keep separate from it that I can install in it in like 3 seconds.

[mykeal]

Does the 3 seconds include the time it takes to go to the loaded cylinder and remove it from it's hiding place?

[ClemBert]

Well, first off it sounds like the father needs to get educated. From what is implied I don't think it is even appropriate for him to consider buying a firearm until he goes through a safety training program. Have him go to a gunshow and take an available safety training class or one offered by a local gunshop.

Second, if sounds like we need to hear more about what his intent is for a firearm...to have fun plinking, home defense, competition shooting, wants to play cowboy, etc. How can we possible give well thought out advice if we don't know what the intention is?

[arcticap]

It seems to me like the 1858 remington design has a great amount of safety features with its design.

The main hazard of cap & ball revolvers is their potential for chainfires which creates a safety disadvantage IMO.

[Smokin_Gun]

The main hazard of cap & ball revolvers is their potential for chainfires which creates a safety disadvantage IMO.

Not at all main hazard with a properly sized ball and fitted cap. The Operator is the main hazard with a cap & ball revolver.
How many chain fires have you had in say 25 years?
I have had two and both were in differant Revs on the same day hours apart in my first year or Month of shooting C&B Revs.
I haven't had one since, knock on wood...

Any cap and ball sixgun is a poor home defense gun.

I strongly disagree with that statement.
Also I disagree that BP when properly loaded is humidity absorbant...in has been proven up to 150 years non-aborbant when loaded in a chamber.
I proved my own Revs to be good at least up to a year and a half I have tested.

[madcratebuilder]

The Operator is the main hazard with a cap & ball revolver.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!

[Smokin_Gun]

:O) MCB!

[tiberius10721]

It seems to me if the operator of a black pistol is educated and has experience in its use it can be a very safe and effective weapon.The disassembly and maintenance of of these guns does not seem that bad.

[madcratebuilder]

It seems to me if the operator of a black pistol is educated and has experience in its use it can be a very safe and effective weapon.The disassembly and maintenance of of these guns does not seem that bad.

Yup. The Remy or most open top Colts are about as basic a revolver as you can find. I don't even have to remove my shoes to count all the moving parts.

Two books I would recommend are "Percussion Pistols and Revolvers" by Bates & Cumpston. This one covers loading, operation and general maintenance. "Gunsmithing Guns of the Old West" by D. Chiconine covers both single and double action black powder cartridge and cap and ball pistols. Geared more for the DIY gunsmith.

I originally bought the Chiconine book for repairing a pair of old break top Smiths, I found the cap and ball info very informative.

[arcticap]

Quote:
The main hazard of cap & ball revolvers is their potential for chainfires which creates a safety disadvantage IMO.

Not at all main hazard with a properly sized ball and fitted cap. The Operator is the main hazard with a cap & ball revolver.
How many chain fires have you had in say 25 years?
I have had two and both were in differant Revs on the same day hours apart in my first year or Month of shooting C&B Revs.
I haven't had one since, knock on wood...

Notice that I said "safety disadvantage" and not "hazard".
I was speaking relative to the safety features of cap & ball revolvers in comparison to smokeless revolvers.
Cap & ball revolvers are at risk of chain firing since it's simply the nature of the beast.
Folks can blame chainfires on any cause that they want, but what ever happens once a gun fires isn't always under the control of the operator. If a cap loosens or falls off from heat, recoil or cylinder shake, it's not always preventable by the operator at all.
IMHO not all chain fires are as easy to explain away by simply blaming them on operator error.
In the real world, statistics would indicate that smokeless revolvers are much less prone to a having a chain fire no matter how many safety features the 1858 Remington has.

[Hawg]

Speaking from experience chain fires are not especially dangerous to the shooter. The balls fired from chambers not aligned with the barrel do not have much force and only go a few feet. The worst you get is your forearm peppered with exploded cap particles. No damage to a steel framed Remington. Never had one with a Colt so can't swear to that.

[Smokin_Gun]

IMHO, any Shooter operating a firearm or a C&B antique firearm is directly held responsible the very second they load and have it in hand.
From pre inspection/cleanin', to "Round" balls that have a swedge ring when pressed, and proper Powder and Charge.
Condition of Cones and a good snug fit of the caps so as they won't fall off during recoil or a 10,000F gaseous venting.
Pointing in a safe direction, and not shooting anyone that ya din't mean to shoot.

Other than of that list the Operator may not be responsible ... :O)

[drftrman]

My NMA Remington is a fire breathing beast, even with light loads. It blows fire and sparks everywhere. I wouldn't want to use it for home defense. I would be afraid of starting a fire, or at the least causing a dirty mess . I use a 12 ga coach gun, with a S&W 686 back up for protection.

[sundance44s]

Can`t ya just see the head lines in the morning news print ....Armed homeowner shoots intruder with his cap and ball revolver and saves the state tax dollars ..the intruder was killed and cremated in one shot from his trusty 44 . Thanks to quick acting neighbor with garden hose most of the house was saved from the fire ................might need to rethink this black powder for home defence stuff ..

[tiberius10721]

anything that can cremate an undocumented gang sounds good to me!

[Doc Hoy]

With any firearm there is at least some associated danger when it is loaded, but with black powder and substitutes is there not the additional danger of the powder itself which is more volatile than smokeless powder and more dangerous in the way it it packaged. (A pound of loose powder is easily detonated and packs a wallop!)

I agree with whoever said that a lot of education is in order.

As I do with any of my posts, because I am a novice I will solicite the thoughts of the experts. Am I overreacting to the powder issue?

[mykeal]

is there not the additional danger of the powder itself which is more volatile than smokeless powder and more dangerous in the way it it packaged. (A pound of loose powder is easily detonated and packs a wallop!)

I won't disagree with the 'more volatile' characterization since you didn't use a qualifier like 'much' or 'a lot more', etc.

But I'm not in agreement with 'more dangerous in the way it is packaged' and 'easily detonated'. I don't think it is. Can you explain how you came to those descriptions?

[Doc Hoy]

Mykeal,

My initial reaction and my thought process as I made the comment came from a lot of assumptions that I and the other shooters made when I was involved previously. (mid 1970s). So when you questioned my comment, I thought, "Well everybody knows that black powder is more difficult to store and handle than cartridges."

Then I said, "Not so fast...That could be an old wives tail (Old wives get a bum rap.)"

So I did a little reading and a little talking and here is what I came up with.

Josh Grosse of International Practical Shooter's Confederations says, "“Black powder is messy, smelly, smoky, and corrosive, and not as safe to handle or store as smokeless powders.”

Unfortunately his comment is limited in its usefulness because he mentioned "smokeless powders" and not the cartridges that are loaded with smokeless powders. The other part of this is that I may be making a lot of incorrect assumptions about Josh Grosse's credentials. It would not be the first time someone got bad gouge from the internet.


I talked to the gentleman who operates the major gun shop in this area and he told me that the shipping requirements from the Virginia Department of Transportation are different for loose powder than for cartridges but he was at pains to describe whether the measures afforded more or less protection for loose power. This implies that the VDOT can not decide whether they think that loose powder is harder or easier to handle than cartridges.

Of more importance is the fact that the fire department places much more stringent storage requirements on black powder and the substitutes than they do on cartridges.

One of the things that was behind my "packaging" reference in my post is the fact that a little kid might look at a container of Pyrodex that has not been properly stored without realizing that it is dangerous. This is much the same issue as household chemicals stored under the sink in easy reach of toddlers. I do agree that a toddler with a bullet may be in as much danger as a toddler with a hand full of Goex. But at least he is not likely to mistake the bullet for Ovaltine. So now you come behind the kid and find black powder on the floor. I think it is logical to be more concerned than if you find a bullet on the floor. The bullet, you pick up. You slap the mess out of the kid for playing with the bullet, and you slap the mess out of the person who didn't properly store the bullet. The bullet goes back in the box. The kid goes back in the crib and the shooter stands with his nose in the corner for half an hour.

How is this process different if you find black powder (even a small amount) on the floor.

There are right ways and wrong ways to clean it up but they don't involve dumping it in the trash can or putting it back in the container, at least I don't think they do. Did I get it all? Did my kid eat any? If there is any under the couch that I missed and then someone goes over the area with a vacuum cleaner with an electric motor with brushes and slip ring what would be the impact? Perhaps the same as if they sucked up a .38 round.

I agree that the things around the house that will make powder detonate will also make a cartridge go off. But the way powder is packaged makes it more likely that powder will come into contact with those things than a bullet.

Keep in mind that we are not talking about things that are properly stored and handled. Part of the discussion centered around the fact that Tiberius' neighbor really should get a little training before he makes the next step.

This is where I am coming from.