Remington-Beals 1858 mechanism

[Mizar]

Hello,
I was just watching the new video from Balázs Németh (Youtube's capandball channel) about the different Remington revolver models - he made a brief comparison between the original Remington-Beals and the New Model Army. One thing that got my attention was the bolt design in Beals - single leg, obviously that leg still acts as a spring (I imagine a recess cut inside the frame) to reset the bolt after dropping. So, the question: does anyone have a reasonable explanation why did Remington choose that design for the bolt? After all, Colt's patent for the revolving mechanism (double legged bolt design included) did expire in 1857, and the revolver was introduced about 1861. Furthermore, the Beals patent from 1858 covers only the loading lever mechanism, but not the firing mechanism.
Bellow I'm attaching the video in question (Beals bolt shown from the 1:50 min mark) and a screen shot showing the one legged Beals bolt (left) compared to the NMA bolt (right), top view.

 

[Crawdad1]

He makes excellent videos. I watch him all the time. I figure that Remington went a little to far trying to simplify the Colt's internals with the one screw for both the trigger and cylinder bolt stop instead of the two screws of the Colt. So initially the bolt stop only had the one leg.

Also of interest is at 3:34 he mentions the dovetailed brass front sight. That old Remmy shot well at both 25 and 50 meters.

 

[45 Dragoon]

I would assume the thickness of the hammer was responsible for the single arm (I was taught arms instead of legs lol!). Obviously, the 2 armed part offers a more balanced, more stable/less able to bind part. This would necessitate the reduction in the thickness of the hammer in the cam area and thus, we have the Remie hammer we all know and love !!

Also of note, notice the left arm (the "working" arm) is much thinner than the support arm. Just like they're supposed to be!! That thickness is the reason "light" main springs get blamed (falsely) for light strikes in one gun but not another . . . . (there's a hint in there somewhere!! Lol!!)

Mike

 

[Mizar]

Crawdad, my thoughts exactly - simplification of the mechanism. And the bonus is more robust sear & full cock notch.

Obviously, the 2 armed part offers a more balanced, more stable/less able to bind part.

The reason why Remington choose to follow Colt's design in the NMA I believe. But I just wanted to make sure that I'm not missing something with the one arm (leg) bolt design.

 

[Crawdad1]

Mizar, didn't you buy a Hege Remington for competition a few months ago or was it a Pedersoli?

I know Ojh just bought a Pedersoli Remington to compete with.

 

[Mizar]

Unfortunately not, Crowdad - just a lowly Pietta 1860 was added to my humble "collection".

 

[Ephraim Kibbey]

Thanks Mizar, that was very interesting!