Photobucket

Author Topic: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison  (Read 3774 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KapundBall

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« on: September 14, 2013, 06:06:19 PM »
Just purchased a 2000 Euroarms Rogers & Spencer with extra cylinder. In excellent shape with what appear to be stainless steel nipples on both cylinders.

Just thought I would offer some initial observations and comparisons with my 1970 Uberti 8" 1858. Pics to follow:

Rogers & Spencer:
Barrel: 7.5" octagaon
2.5" around
5/16" (.312") per flat
1 5/8" cyl diameter
Cyl wall narrowest: .078"
Cyl Mouth: .450" (avg)
Wrist: 1 1/4"
Frame height in front of Cyl: 2 3/16"
Top strap width at Hammer slot  3/4"
Hammer width just in front of firing "spur" ext: 3/8" (.375")
Muzzle width across octagon flat: 46/64" (.718")
Backstrap: 3/8"
WEIGHT: 1290 grams (2.84 lbs)

1858 Remington:

Barrel 8" octagon
2.25" around
9/32" (.281") per flat
Cyl wall narrowest : .062"
Cyl Mouth: .450"  (avg)
Wrist : 1 1/8"
Frame height in front of cyl: 2 1/16"
Top strap at hammer slot 3/4"
Hammer Width at spur/ext: 5/16" (.312")
Across muzzle flat 42/64" (.656")
Backstrap: 3/8"
WEIGHT: 1175 grams (2.59 lbs)



While only 1/4 of a lb heavier than the 1858, the R&S feels much larger and more solid, largely due to its bigger grips in my opinion. It has the feel and heft of a Ruger Blackhawk. It is much more balanced than the barrel heavy 1858 but still points well. It feels much more like a modern revolver. The 1858 however feels and looks more elegant. R&S grip is longer and larger, more suited to 2013 sized hands than the 1858 but not having shot it yet, I can't say what this means from a felt recoil and sight management perspective.

While almost everything on the R&S is slightly beefier than the 1858 in a couple of key strength areas, they are the same size, notably backstrap width and frame width.

My initial summary is that the 1858 is a more elegant firearm while the Rogers and Spencer the more brutal and more likely to handle very heavy duty charges - charges really not necessary however to produce desired results. The next thing will be to see how the R&S shoots!















1858 Design Flaws (IMHO):

Grip too short

Uberti build problem:

Factory nipple chamber flash hole too large

R&S Design Flaws (IMHO):

Bullet cut out in frame too small

Hammer thumb spur too high

Euroarms Builld Flaws:

Stainless nipples chamber end flash holes too large




More to follow....

« Last Edit: September 14, 2013, 09:38:03 PM by KapundBall »
I recently mentioned to a friend that I was getting more interested in Black Powder. He said, "What, like Malcolm X and the Black Panthers?"

Offline Mad Dog Stafford

  • The Forum Drunk!
  • Administrator
  • No Life Whatsoever!
  • *****
  • Posts: 23508
  • And away I go! What? Me worry? Nay!!!
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #1 on: September 14, 2013, 10:23:05 PM »
Is the R&S cylinder bigger?
Tombstone(not the pizza kind)
Heaven didn't want me and Hell was afraid I'll take over!

Offline KapundBall

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2013, 01:55:48 PM »
Yes, by .047". Sorry I forgot the 1858 Cyl measurement above - will  edit. This is because the R&S has cylinder walls that are .016" thicker both between chamber mouths and between chamber mouth and outside of cylinder, necessitating a larger diameter cylinder.

R&S
1 5/8" cyl diameter (1.625"
Cyl wall narrowest: .078"

1858
1 37/64" (1.578")
Cyl wall narrowest : .062"


Almost everything on the R&S is just that much beefier, though not backstrap and frame width. Not sure whether this was the case on originals, but it could also be to simplify manufacturing since Euroarms made 1858 Remingtons and R&S revolvers concurrently.  It seems very much that Rogers and Spencer took an 1858 and said, what can we do to copy it and make it better without egregious patent violations?. Capping is made much easier with the large opening around the nipples, for example. But they swung and missed with the loading cutout. I cannot fit Lee 200 gr conicals into the cutout for loading on the gun. And while grip size is much larger and (for me) better, the super high hammer thumb spur would be tricky for finger and thumb length challenged individuals.

It does however feel very solid. As I said, it reminds me more of a Ruger Blackhawk. And it points better than the barrel heavy 1858.  It has however a kind of sinister brutality about it whereas the 1858 Remington is an elegant weapon in design and handling. In fact, the two pistols seem to reflect changes in society for their times. The 1858 was designed in a happier age and age, one before families were torn apart and hundreds of thousands of Americans killed each other in battle, one in which aesthetics were an important factor in design. The Rogers & Spencer reflects the brutal industrial efficiency of the Union being brought to bear to bring a close to that War, one in which function only guided design.

It is however my contention based on this initial evaluation that had the R&S been released early enough to have been distributed to the Army and seen action in the Civil War, it would have made a large subsequent mark on the civilian market. Remember, troops were allowed to purchase their sidearms on release from service. It is a more "modern" and solid gun than either the Colts or the Remingtons. Colt's use of their brilliant 45 cal cartridge may well have still produced the same results, but an R&S buyout by Remington or S&W would have given them the basis for more credible competition.

Oh, one more R&S design flaw. The only significant one in my mind and quite substantial. While some of us my bemoan the inadequate depth of the safety notches on our 1858, that is easily rectified with a little file time. On the R&S, there are no safety notches between the caps nor is there room to file one or more. I find that a piece of leather/rawhide cord placed in the hammer slot will ensure no hammer - cap contact, but the safety notches on the Remington are far superior.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2013, 05:42:11 PM by KapundBall »
I recently mentioned to a friend that I was getting more interested in Black Powder. He said, "What, like Malcolm X and the Black Panthers?"

Offline sltm1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 796
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #3 on: September 15, 2013, 09:48:46 PM »
One thing you'll notice after shooting, the Remmie will bind up after 2-3 cylinders,but the R&S will keep on "tickin"' because of the gas check. Hoqwever I'm a little predjuice cause the R&S is my favorite cap and ball gun, as you mentioned sorta, my take is, "it looks like it's leaning forward, maybe like  lookin' for a fight".
Life's tough...it's tougher when yer stupid !!

Offline Wolfgang

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
    • Wolfgang's Wild West
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2013, 02:44:55 AM »
My buddy "Gun Click Rick" had a R&Spencer . . . . don't recall whut the make was.   He since traded it for a coat . . . anyhow . . I held it in my hand once . . . . found it to be rather awkward.   

Note   Swedish Gunfighter in a movie carrying one.   Very realistic shootin' irons in that movie . . . .

. . . . . . and I can't think of the damn name of it . . . .  .))   Russell Crow is in it. 
Beware the man with one gun,.... he probably knows  how to use it.

Offline bigbuck

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 47
  • Bavaria, home of Octoberfest
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2013, 03:48:04 AM »
Dear all,

by accident :) i was able to get hand on a FEINWERKBAU R&S .44  {L*



Looking forward which one is the better target shooter. The Remi Hege Match or the R&S.

I ll keep you informed


Bigbuck
Do unto others as they would
do unto you, but do it first." Amen

Offline kituwa

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2013, 10:41:50 AM »
How are the sights on it,are they comparable to the ones on the Remmy?

Offline KapundBall

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2013, 12:07:00 PM »
Rear sight is identical to the 1858, a hogwallow trench in the frame. The front sight is a quite tall brass cone that I assume one is expected to file down on sighting in. I wouldn't say they appear to offer any real benefit over the Remington's sights, but I have not yet sighted in, so I can't really say yet.

Bigbuck, Nice Piece!  Look forward to hearing your thoughts on it.
I recently mentioned to a friend that I was getting more interested in Black Powder. He said, "What, like Malcolm X and the Black Panthers?"

Offline BGRooster1

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1172
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #8 on: September 17, 2013, 10:40:46 AM »
 I have both the Euroarms R&S adjustable sight version and the Euroarms fixed sight version . I can pick up either of these and hold it out in front of me and the sights will be inline right away. A very well designed shooter.
 The grip is the type that you will like or dislike on first impression.If you don't like it ,after shooting it you may change your mind or not but you will have done some of your best shooting non the less.
Maj.Bull S. Hitter on the CAS forum

Better to ask forgiveness.Than to beg permission

Cap & Ball revolvers are like Lay's potato chips , you can't have just one!!

Offline Fingers McGee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 789
    • Central Ozarks Western Shooters
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #9 on: September 21, 2013, 11:54:34 AM »
My buddy "Gun Click Rick" had a R&Spencer . . . . don't recall whut the make was.   He since traded it for a coat . . . anyhow . . I held it in my hand once . . . . found it to be rather awkward.   

Note   Swedish Gunfighter in a movie carrying one.   Very realistic shootin' irons in that movie . . . .

. . . . . . and I can't think of the damn name of it . . . .  .))   Russell Crow is in it.

The Quick and the Dead - Sharon Stone & Leonardo DiCaprio were also in it along with Gene Hackman.
Fingers (Show Me MO smoke) McGee - AKA Man of Many Colts - Alter ego of Diabolical Ken; SASS 28564-LTG-Regulator, rangemaster and stage writer extraordinaire; Frontiersman, Pistoleer, NRA Endowment Life, NMLRA, SAF, CCRKBA, STORM 327, SV115; Founding member, Central Ozarks Western Shooters.  Member:  The Ozarks Posse, Southern Missouri Rangers, Moniteau Creek River Raiders, Butterfield Trail Cowboys.

Cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they should be.  Ambrose Bierce

Offline bigbuck

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 47
  • Bavaria, home of Octoberfest
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #10 on: October 14, 2013, 07:53:37 AM »
Dear all,

Attached an actual picture of my new /used FWB R&S:

Dear all,

With .457 RB, 20 grain CH2 and a 10mm wad it keeps the 8 on 25 yard. More testing will certainly improve up to 9-10....

Greetings

Bigbuck

Looking forward which one is the better target shooter. The Remi Hege Match or the R&S.

I ll keep you informed


Bigbuck
Do unto others as they would
do unto you, but do it first." Amen

Offline Mad Dog Stafford

  • The Forum Drunk!
  • Administrator
  • No Life Whatsoever!
  • *****
  • Posts: 23508
  • And away I go! What? Me worry? Nay!!!
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #11 on: October 14, 2013, 09:43:03 AM »
Hi bigbuck, how do you like it? Does it shoot good?
Tombstone(not the pizza kind)
Heaven didn't want me and Hell was afraid I'll take over!

Offline KapundBall

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #12 on: October 14, 2013, 06:56:13 PM »
Is it just me or does the grip angle and length on the FWB R&S look quite different to the Euroarms?  It seems shorter and more severely perpendicular in Big Buck's photo. It also looks very sinister. Maybe the bluing is a shade flatter?  Looks like quite a death dealer that one. Hope it's shooting well for you.
I recently mentioned to a friend that I was getting more interested in Black Powder. He said, "What, like Malcolm X and the Black Panthers?"

Offline bigbuck

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 47
  • Bavaria, home of Octoberfest
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2013, 06:35:15 AM »
Dear all,

yes i agree the grip design is slightly different i think so too. The bottom of the FWB-R&S-grip is horizontal to the barrel. I think this is not the case with the euroarms. If the grip is shorter i don t know and what would be more original i don t know either. 

Sinister! not bad your descripten and i agree The overall appearance is not so "shiny" like other ones. The FWB looks more like a real work horse not a hip decoration.....
There is no real bluing its more a kind of London grey if at all. And yes this one is made for target shooting with no excuses anymore for the shooter. (T^

regards

Thomas

Is it just me or does the grip angle and length on the FWB R&S look quite different to the Euroarms?  It seems shorter and more severely perpendicular in Big Buck's photo. It also looks very sinister. Maybe the bluing is a shade flatter?  Looks like quite a death dealer that one. Hope it's shooting well for you.
Do unto others as they would
do unto you, but do it first." Amen

Offline Lostcat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
Re: NTM R&S with 1858 Comparison
« Reply #14 on: November 17, 2013, 12:29:44 PM »
I've only shot a Euro arms R&S with target sights. Always groups better than either of my target rems,they are more of a handfull but handle recoil well with RB.
I've found that if the cylinder pin is well oiled and the cylinder or cylinder pin is not removed during a session that I don't get the binding issue with Rems.