Also remember back then tooling wasn't like today. They didn't CNC and set the machine up for different jobs but each machine was sometimes very specific. A jig that was set up to guide to drill holes in the frame only did that. A tool set up to mill octagonal barrels couldn't be changed to machine round ones.
Notice the 31 caliber barrel lengths were 4", 5", and 6" and the 1862's were 4.5", 5.5" and 6.5" yet the so called "1865" was the 4", 5", and 6". That's because the tooling was set that way they just changed it to drill a larger caliber.
tooling was expensive to make and useless for making anything else. Colt made millions selling tooling all over the world, especially to Russia, and many of the patents the Colt company held were for tooling. Sam Colt, not Henry Ford, introduced the assembly line
And remember Colt called both of these "Pocket Revolvers of Navy Caliber". 36 was Navy, 44 was Army. It had nothing to do with barrel shape or loading lever style it was caliber.
A 44 Navy is not only historically inaccurate but completely and utterly nonsensical.
Compare the 1861 Navy (holster size frame round barrel creeping loading lever 36 caliber) with the 1860 Army (holster size frame round barrel creeping loading lever 44 caliber) and you get the idea. The only difference between the Army and Navy, besides the belted cylinder and rebated frame, is the caliber
