Hi all,
I was wondering if anyone could possibly tell me anything about NMA s/n 60415.
It appears to be a private purchase piece, it's in excellent mechanical and cosmetic condition, with much original finish and no pitting.
The revolver is all matching with the s/n repeated on the cylinder.
NMA s/n 60415
NMA s/n 60415
.303, helping Englishmen express their feelings since 1885.
Re: NMA s/n 60415
Looks like March 1864..................Jim
Re: NMA s/n 60415
Many thanks for the info Jim, it's much appreciated.
Cheers John.
Cheers John.
.303, helping Englishmen express their feelings since 1885.
Re: NMA s/n 60415
Sorry to resurrect my very old post guys, but I was just wondering about the foresight post on my example, as it seems rather tall.
Appears to be original to the gun, or at least been on it a very long time.
Same profile as the original, but taller. She's a Civilian purchase gun in excellent condition.
Any advice or insights appreciated.
Cheers John.
Appears to be original to the gun, or at least been on it a very long time.
Same profile as the original, but taller. She's a Civilian purchase gun in excellent condition.
Any advice or insights appreciated.
Cheers John.
- Attachments
-
- NMA sn 60415 (2)-1.jpg (1 MiB) Viewed 813 times
-
- NMA sn 60415 (1)-1.jpg (1 MiB) Viewed 813 times
-
- NMA sn 60415 (3)-1.jpg (661.16 KiB) Viewed 813 times
.303, helping Englishmen express their feelings since 1885.
Re: NMA s/n 60415
Hi John,
The front sight does look a little high, but without a "gun in hand" inspection and getting measurements for comparing to a few other pinched sights, it's hard to tell if its original, or a replacement. Its possible that a batch was made that
was slightly higher than normal, but still within factory specs.
Daniel
The front sight does look a little high, but without a "gun in hand" inspection and getting measurements for comparing to a few other pinched sights, it's hard to tell if its original, or a replacement. Its possible that a batch was made that
was slightly higher than normal, but still within factory specs.
Daniel
Re: NMA s/n 60415
Beautiful gun!!I
Measured the height of the front sight on two of my '58s made in '64. I measured from the top of the sight to the bottom of the barrel flat. The first came from 3/64 and was a military issue. It measures about 0.924". The second came from 7/64 and is a 45 LC conversion measuring about 0.913".
Hope that helps.
Measured the height of the front sight on two of my '58s made in '64. I measured from the top of the sight to the bottom of the barrel flat. The first came from 3/64 and was a military issue. It measures about 0.924". The second came from 7/64 and is a 45 LC conversion measuring about 0.913".
Hope that helps.
Last edited by dieNusse1 on Sat Jan 24, 2026 11:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: NMA s/n 60415
A few pics guys, I'll get it measured, I really appreciate your assistance.
- Attachments
-
- 20260124_105414~2.jpg (545.39 KiB) Viewed 763 times
-
- 20260124_105315.jpg (2.19 MiB) Viewed 763 times
-
- 20260124_105338~2.jpg (624.12 KiB) Viewed 763 times
.303, helping Englishmen express their feelings since 1885.
Re: NMA s/n 60415
From the bottom barrel flat to the top of the foresight, its 0.984" or 25mm dead on, measured with my calipers.
.303, helping Englishmen express their feelings since 1885.
Re: NMA s/n 60415
Hello again,
All the dimensions from bbl bottom to sight top only give that dimension, which supposes that all bbls were identical thickness. The bbls may vary in thickness. For front sight height, measure the thickness of the bbl, and subtract that from the previous dimension to get the front sight height. The one think we won't know is the allowable manufacturing differences in the sights. It may be a little higher, and still be in spec.
Daniel
All the dimensions from bbl bottom to sight top only give that dimension, which supposes that all bbls were identical thickness. The bbls may vary in thickness. For front sight height, measure the thickness of the bbl, and subtract that from the previous dimension to get the front sight height. The one think we won't know is the allowable manufacturing differences in the sights. It may be a little higher, and still be in spec.
Daniel
Re: NMA s/n 60415
Good point!
Measured the 3/64 barrel just in front of the blade. Measures 0.692".
The 7/64 measures 0.682".
The 3/64 has sharp, crisp address stamping on the barrel while the 7/64 appears to have been refinished as the stamping is faint and partly missing. This may (should) account for the 0.010 difference in thickness. Manufacturing tolerances??
So --- a ~0.050 - 0.060" difference between these examples and JC1s gun raises questions.
Measured the 3/64 barrel just in front of the blade. Measures 0.692".
The 7/64 measures 0.682".
The 3/64 has sharp, crisp address stamping on the barrel while the 7/64 appears to have been refinished as the stamping is faint and partly missing. This may (should) account for the 0.010 difference in thickness. Manufacturing tolerances??
So --- a ~0.050 - 0.060" difference between these examples and JC1s gun raises questions.
Re: NMA s/n 60415
Interesting topic, but does it really matter on the sight height? That small of a difference seems that it would be within the tolerances of the time. I'm not familiar with the machinery of the time, so I have no ides as to what tolerances they were able to maintain. Just enjoy the gun at it is.
Daniel
Daniel
Re: NMA s/n 60415
Its certainly interesting, I did wonder if ( with a taller foresight) and being a civilian gun, if it had been specifically set up at the factory for shorter range shooting with this sight setup.dieNusse1 wrote: Wed Jan 28, 2026 9:08 am Good point!
Measured the 3/64 barrel just in front of the blade. Measures 0.692".
The 7/64 measures 0.682".
The 3/64 has sharp, crisp address stamping on the barrel while the 7/64 appears to have been refinished as the stamping is faint and partly missing. This may (should) account for the 0.010 difference in thickness. Manufacturing tolerances??
So --- a ~0.050 - 0.060" difference between these examples and JC1s gun raises questions.
What im trying to find out, is if the factory made different foresight heights.
.303, helping Englishmen express their feelings since 1885.
Re: NMA s/n 60415
I doubt the military vs civilian versions would have different sights but????. The only affect a taller front sight has is to strike the target lower with all other factors being equal. How much this approximate 0.060" difference would make I don't know. We need to take the weapons to the range and burn some powder.
As an aside have you checked whether the sight is fully seated?
As an aside have you checked whether the sight is fully seated?
Re: NMA s/n 60415
As to whether the factory made different sight heights, it certainly is possible, on purpose or by accident, but there are no factory records, so we'll never know. Remington also never threw away anything. If a batch or two of sights were slightly out of spec, they would have been used. Since about 100,000 Army, Navy, and Belt Models were made with the pinched sight, it would be more surprising if every one was made to spec! But we also don't know what the specs were, so we can't know if something is out of spec.
Daniel
Daniel