|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 28, 2012, 06:50 PM | #51 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 27, 2009
Location: on a hill in West Virginia
Posts: 789
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by MJN77; March 28, 2012 at 06:57 PM. |
||
March 28, 2012, 08:19 PM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Well let's scale it down a bit. We both start with empty revolvers. A colt for you, and a remmy for me. You start loading yours and I'll run directly at you and try to crack your head with the butt of mine. No cheating! Once and for all, that should prove the remmy is better....
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. |
March 29, 2012, 09:47 AM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 25, 2009
Posts: 643
|
How far apart are we? I can get one loaded and capped pretty quick.
|
March 29, 2012, 11:26 AM | #54 |
Junior member
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Posts: 374
|
Noz,
Why don't you just charge him first and club him to death. |
March 29, 2012, 11:30 AM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 30, 2010
Posts: 1,635
|
I count 61 revolvers up there.
At $300 a piece, that's an $18,000 wall of revolvers. Probably warrants an insurance rider. Steve |
March 29, 2012, 01:09 PM | #56 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. |
||
March 29, 2012, 09:04 PM | #57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 27, 2009
Location: on a hill in West Virginia
Posts: 789
|
What makes you think the empty revolver would be my only revolver?
|
March 29, 2012, 09:35 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 7,172
|
From a mechanical point of view, I would imagine the Remingtons would take top honors for their solid frame and relative few parts.
It seems to me that increased frame strength+fewer parts=superior weapon. |
March 30, 2012, 01:40 AM | #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2005
Location: Central Connecticut
Posts: 3,166
|
That would be true if placing form over function.
But if putting function first, then its harder to judge which one actually functions better. It could also be judged based on accuracy instead of strength, or accuracy instead of function. So then what should the criterion be? The criterion should be based on what's most important to each individual consumer. Then each consumer judges or votes using their own pocketbook when they decide which one to purchase. And since every gun has its own quirks, then maybe one particular Colt is better than an individual Remington, and then yet another particular Remington is better than another totally different Colt than the 1st. Some may just be better than others, but maybe not better than all of the them. Last edited by arcticap; March 30, 2012 at 01:48 AM. |
March 30, 2012, 05:39 AM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 21, 2000
Posts: 1,345
|
Acutully from the idea in 1865 was the rem is a total fail due to the soild frame. If its a .44 mag with 2400 for sure but BP its a total fail. The top frame deflects all the BP gunk down into the action and the things jam like a 1930 M-1 trial gun. Plus they are hard as all heck to cap so there is a reason why they surplused all of them in 1865-66. also you can tear down a gunked up colt faster.
|
March 30, 2012, 06:01 PM | #61 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
|
Quote:
|
|
March 30, 2012, 09:09 PM | #62 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 9, 2007
Location: Oregoncoast
Posts: 1,793
|
It has been said that soldiers later in the war tossed their Colts to the sides of the trails when they got a Remington.
From an engineering standpoint the Colt is very poorly designed, so much so that I have to wonder what possible reason Sam Colt had for the cantilever design, as it has no advantages (Except in ease of manufacture) and many weaknesses. Weakness is weakness, and saying that since it was a BP arm weakness doesn't matter is baffling to me, why would one design a firearm to be weak? What happened is that competition resulted in a superior design, which is why a competitive manufacturing world is good for everyone. If the open top design were superior newly designed revolvers would have them today. Also, theoretically the Remington should be more accurate, not less, and if they are less accurate it has to be because of something other than the solid frame causing it. I suppose with the hammer back the sight length is slightly longer on the Colt, but the fact of the rear sight's tiny available area and it's movement should more than offset any such advantage. Even Colt abandoned the cantilever frame later, long before smokeless powder came along, by the way.
__________________
CNC produced 416 stainless triggers to replace the plastic triggers on Colt Mustangs, Mustang Plus II's, MK IV Government .380's and Sig P238's and P938's. Plus Colt Mustang hardened 416 guide rods, and Llama .32 and .380 recoil spring buttons, checkered nicely and blued. |
March 30, 2012, 09:18 PM | #63 |
Junior member
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Posts: 374
|
You are entitled to your opinion.............even if it is bogus!
|
March 30, 2012, 09:26 PM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 27, 2010
Posts: 211
|
The open top design is not weak. And Colt had a top strap design 20 years before Remington.
|
March 30, 2012, 09:33 PM | #65 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
March 30, 2012, 10:04 PM | #66 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 8, 2006
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 2,772
|
Don't confuse him with facts. He wants to believe it, let him. He'll sleep better.
|
March 30, 2012, 10:16 PM | #67 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Quote:
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. |
|
March 31, 2012, 05:15 AM | #68 |
Staff
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 21,824
|
Handguns were not issued items to infantry privates.
The early war (1861) line infantryman was as adventurous and obsessed with gear like our couch commandos are today. First long march and a lot of things were tossed including big knives, revolvers, clothing and other non issue items. After the first battle where they were proven useless , the bullet proof vests (they weren't) were tossed. The lighter the better.
I suspect that a lot of guns in the tintypes or other images belonged to the photographer's studio. There's an image of Geronimo with a Dance revolver. I doubt he ever used one.
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe! |
March 31, 2012, 05:47 AM | #69 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 27, 2010
Posts: 211
|
Quote:
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|