tpelle
Member
I just received a new Pietta 1851 from Cabelas, and while in the past I've been a booster of Pietta, I have to say that this 1851 is the worst thing I've seen in a long time.
My previous experience with cap and ball revolvers has consisted of three 1860 Army 44's, and a Remington 1863, all by Pietta. The first 1860, bought probably 20 or so years ago, had a too-short arbor, but otherwise was OK. A few years ago I bought another 1860, and it was great, as was the Remington, and yet a third 1860. I was confident by then that I would be OK with this 1851 when I saw that Cabela's had them on sale.
Upon receiving the revolver I knew that I would have to rework the cylinder bolt over, both to fit it to the width of the cylinder locking notches as well as to adjust the timing of the bolt release so that it released into the lead in grooves. I have done this to all of my Pietta's.
As is usually the case, the well-known Guido the Gorilla had installed the barrel wedge, and I had to use a brass punch to knock it out. I went ahead and tuned the bolt, and prepared to reassemble the pistol. That's when I found the first serious problem.
It seems that the barrel locating pins on the bottom of the frame didn't match up very well with the holes in the barrel lug. I ended up using a file to relieve the bottom and sides of the pins, as well as take a little off of the length of the pins. Before initially disassembling the revolver I had noticed a slight gap between the barrel lug and the frame, but I attributed this to Guido forcing things together with superhuman strength when he installed the wedge. (They wouldn't be installing the barrel wedge with a hydraulic press, would they be?)
The wedge needed to be thinned down quite a bit to even begin to get the barrel back on. I've just about got it now, but maybe have to go just a little more.
Luckily my work on the pins as well as thinning the wedge have got the barrel fitting pretty good now, and the barrel to cylinder gap looks pretty good.
My final issue is that the hammer, just before it comes all the way forward, is dragging on the left side of the recoil shield. This is pretty minor in terms of the correction that it needs - just a smidge stoned off of the slot, so I'm not too concerned.
I have to say, not even my first ever 1860, from way back in the pre-CNC days, had this many problems!
Honestly, had I known this was that bad, I'd have packed it back up and sent it back to Cabela's. However, since I had already modified the bolt I didn't feel right about exchanging it. So, as they say, in for a penny, in for a pound.
Now, for a question. I noticed that this 1851 does not have a capping groove (nor did the last 1860 I bought.). On the 1860 it was simple matter to cut one in myself. However I looked on the web ay pictures of actual antique 1851's, and found that most of the ones depicted do not have capping grooves either. So I suppose that having an 1851 Navy without a capping groove is still authentic?
My previous experience with cap and ball revolvers has consisted of three 1860 Army 44's, and a Remington 1863, all by Pietta. The first 1860, bought probably 20 or so years ago, had a too-short arbor, but otherwise was OK. A few years ago I bought another 1860, and it was great, as was the Remington, and yet a third 1860. I was confident by then that I would be OK with this 1851 when I saw that Cabela's had them on sale.
Upon receiving the revolver I knew that I would have to rework the cylinder bolt over, both to fit it to the width of the cylinder locking notches as well as to adjust the timing of the bolt release so that it released into the lead in grooves. I have done this to all of my Pietta's.
As is usually the case, the well-known Guido the Gorilla had installed the barrel wedge, and I had to use a brass punch to knock it out. I went ahead and tuned the bolt, and prepared to reassemble the pistol. That's when I found the first serious problem.
It seems that the barrel locating pins on the bottom of the frame didn't match up very well with the holes in the barrel lug. I ended up using a file to relieve the bottom and sides of the pins, as well as take a little off of the length of the pins. Before initially disassembling the revolver I had noticed a slight gap between the barrel lug and the frame, but I attributed this to Guido forcing things together with superhuman strength when he installed the wedge. (They wouldn't be installing the barrel wedge with a hydraulic press, would they be?)
The wedge needed to be thinned down quite a bit to even begin to get the barrel back on. I've just about got it now, but maybe have to go just a little more.
Luckily my work on the pins as well as thinning the wedge have got the barrel fitting pretty good now, and the barrel to cylinder gap looks pretty good.
My final issue is that the hammer, just before it comes all the way forward, is dragging on the left side of the recoil shield. This is pretty minor in terms of the correction that it needs - just a smidge stoned off of the slot, so I'm not too concerned.
I have to say, not even my first ever 1860, from way back in the pre-CNC days, had this many problems!
Honestly, had I known this was that bad, I'd have packed it back up and sent it back to Cabela's. However, since I had already modified the bolt I didn't feel right about exchanging it. So, as they say, in for a penny, in for a pound.
Now, for a question. I noticed that this 1851 does not have a capping groove (nor did the last 1860 I bought.). On the 1860 it was simple matter to cut one in myself. However I looked on the web ay pictures of actual antique 1851's, and found that most of the ones depicted do not have capping grooves either. So I suppose that having an 1851 Navy without a capping groove is still authentic?
