Greetings from New Zealand.
Hi all,
Picked up a nice 1858? Remington, finally, after much searching.
I'm no expert on these, so was after your collective advice on a few things.
Firstly, it appears to match in respect to the frame, barrel and trigger
guard.
Various parts are stamped with a "P" and "W"
The serial number is also pencilled on the inside of the grips.
Also on the inside of the grips is an ink stamp "AK"
Initially I thought there was no stamp on the lower left grip, but possibly
there is a remnant?
The cylinder has a different number, but still bears the "W" and "P",
possible period replacement?
The gun overall is in good order, tight and still has blue in many places,
if a little patchy.
I gather from the serial lists here its made in August 1864,is there
anything else can be gleaned from the serial number?
The holster I have no doubt is from a later period, it does show some age
and is very well made but not from the 19th century I don't think.
Anything info or opinions on the above and from the photos much appreciated.
Remington 1858 #93676
Re: Remington 1858 #93676
Apologies for all the pics.
Re: Remington 1858 #93676
Photos in my further two posts need to be released by moderator?
Re: Remington 1858 #93676
Welcome to the forum Hammergun,
You may be the first Kiwi to join us here. You are correct on the manufacture date, and that all the little letters are sub-inspectors marks, so this was made for the US gov. Remington normally didn't put serials on the cylinders, or the grips unless some fitting was required. That still doesn't explain the non-matching cyl number. That number is in the Beals serial range, and it isn't the first 4, or the last 4 numerals of the serial, so I have no idea what the number may mean. The grip escutcheon looks like a replacement, so either it or the grip is a replacement. I know next to nothing about holsters so I can't help with that, other than it is a cross draw holster. It might have been for a horseman, or a policeman. Or just someone that prefers a cross draw holster.
It is still in nice condition and should be a good shooter, or make a nice display.
Daniel
You may be the first Kiwi to join us here. You are correct on the manufacture date, and that all the little letters are sub-inspectors marks, so this was made for the US gov. Remington normally didn't put serials on the cylinders, or the grips unless some fitting was required. That still doesn't explain the non-matching cyl number. That number is in the Beals serial range, and it isn't the first 4, or the last 4 numerals of the serial, so I have no idea what the number may mean. The grip escutcheon looks like a replacement, so either it or the grip is a replacement. I know next to nothing about holsters so I can't help with that, other than it is a cross draw holster. It might have been for a horseman, or a policeman. Or just someone that prefers a cross draw holster.
It is still in nice condition and should be a good shooter, or make a nice display.
Daniel
Re: Remington 1858 #93676
Thanks very much Daniel,
Yes Ive searched all over the net for cylinders with numbers,but it seems unusual as you say. It is in keeping with the overall wear on the gun so I suspect it was replaced a long time ago. Interesting its marked with a P and W the same as the rest of the gun.
When you say the escutcheon looks to be replaced how is it different? The grips are numbered to the gun with pencil so maybe replaced the same time as the cylinder.
I did notice looking at various photos online my mainspring is partially out of its slot. Should I loosen the springscrew and push it into place or best to leave it alone?
Much obliged.
Yes Ive searched all over the net for cylinders with numbers,but it seems unusual as you say. It is in keeping with the overall wear on the gun so I suspect it was replaced a long time ago. Interesting its marked with a P and W the same as the rest of the gun.
When you say the escutcheon looks to be replaced how is it different? The grips are numbered to the gun with pencil so maybe replaced the same time as the cylinder.
I did notice looking at various photos online my mainspring is partially out of its slot. Should I loosen the springscrew and push it into place or best to leave it alone?
Much obliged.
Re: Remington 1858 #93676
I've always wondered why most people call the New Model Army Remington "1858 Remington". This 1858 date only refers to the patent granted to Fordyce Beals on September 14,1858, concerning the loading lever which holds the cylinder pin in place.
This device was first used on the third model .31 caliber Remington Pocket revolver (see photo below) and the patent date was after that marked on all following percussion Remingtons.
Regarding the New Model Army revolver, this model was produced starting in 1863 and thus should rather be called "1863 Remington".
This device was first used on the third model .31 caliber Remington Pocket revolver (see photo below) and the patent date was after that marked on all following percussion Remingtons.
Regarding the New Model Army revolver, this model was produced starting in 1863 and thus should rather be called "1863 Remington".
- Attachments
-
- Remington Beals Pocket gauche - 83.jpg (254.2 KiB) Viewed 4522 times
Re: Remington 1858 #93676
Yes it was a bit of a journey figuring out what the proper model was. It was advertised as a Remington 1861,but as you say most refer to it as an 1858. I guess its mainly because all the replicas are called 1858's.
So Ive stuck with "new model army" or "1863 Army".
So Ive stuck with "new model army" or "1863 Army".