Colt Country | Home of The Almighty Colt

 
Yap, well, it's just me and Honey  at home these days. We see our kids and grandkids often though.

 Today -
  Went to church-
  working on guns .

Lawyers,  "folks in THE business", FFL's, .  .  .     of course ultimately, you do what you're comfortable with.

The 'conversion era' was a brief hiccup in time that really only ran from around the end of the ACW (1865) until the advent of the first factory big-bore cartridge revolvers, the Colt 1871-72 Open Tops, and then onto the Model T of firearms, the Colt 1873 and Remington 1875. Yeah, those earlier conversion guns probably kept on ticking, but the percussion era was effectively done for at that point. So if you are trying to scratch an itch to fill that short period of time with a conversion gun, go for it .  .  .

  I did, and that "itch" lead to me doing what I do for a living today .  .  .  no matter how "long" the "hiccup" was, ( during the whole 40+ yrs of c&b era revolvers) it IS a "thing" or there wouldn't be  "factory" offerings from the manufacturers.  I really don't want to call Walt Kirst or Kenny Howell or even Taylor’s  and tell them they should "hang the conversion thing" up because it's  not  "cost effective" .

This thread was started with the idea that feathers may be ruffled  and mine are not, I'm just trying to give honest replies to what's been posted in this thread. 
  First,  the "cost thing" is a moot point  .  .  .  if you can't afford it or "justify it "  then obviously you can't or shouldn't do it.
  If all you want is a RM or an Open Top then fine but you can't buy a converted Walker or Dragoon  from the "factory ". (even though Colt converted some Dragoons). Therefore,  a DIY is your only option  OR you can send it to me  .  .  .
 What you'll get back is far superior to the  "factory" alternative  !!!.  My own "60 Armys" in 45acp  digest 45acp +p's  easily as well as my Dragoons digest 45C +p's  and more  .  .  . I would NOT shoot these loads in the "factory" pieces!!
   I've worked on ALLof the above mentioned revolvers  and can easily drill into all the "factory" versions just as easily as the "C&B" revolvers. .  .  . the "given support system" is perfectly  capable of being a perfect support system for everything offered "factory " or "aftermarket"  (aftermarket being the better default).

 Maybe "you get what you pay for"  is the better way to go  .  .  .

Mike

IIRC, the ROA is basically a Blackhawk in terms of steels and such, thus making it far stronger than your typical Uberti. And as I mentioned previously, Uberti makes replica firearms perfectly suited to modern jacketed smokeless store-bought rounds. So if a guy is determined to shoot that stuff, buy the right gun for it IMHO. You would probably break even on pricing between a new gun and the cost of converting a C&B to a cartridge gun, and have the confidence of knowing your firearm can handle what you throw at it today, tomorrow, and 10 years from now. I love my Howell and feel very comfortable shooting BP 45LC loads through my Remmy.
Mike, you're in a little different situation as you actually assemble and tune the guns you shoot. My main reason for starting this conversation is due to all the really bad advice out there on forums and social media being heeded as gospel by newbies and other that have no concept of what they are playing with. (Dynamite)
If these people would simply stick with the limitations the manufacturers spell out very clearly, there wouldn't be any problems to begin with.
That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

   Cap, I agree with you and I'm definitely not trying to put myself on a pedestal.  For the great "unwashed" that would be the best practice.  But for the shooter "steeped" in the setup of these revolvers there's a whole  "nuther" world to "practice" or "experiment" in !!! So, as long as the gated cylinder fits in a revolver that I set up and has .003" endshake or less, it is fine to shoot the loads I'm shooting .  .  .  otherwise,  send it to me and I'll "make it work".

Quote from: 45 Dragoon on July 05, 2024, 05:52:13 AM

Another aspect from the business end of conversion cylinders is,  the manufacturer doesn't know WHAT type of "rattle trap" some customers may be installing their products  in .  .  .  which gets you back to Ruger recommending "no handloads".
  As far as barrels go, I asked Walt if jacketed bullets would wear them out, his response was "not in your lifetime"!  So, unless he knows something I don't ( heck, I'm only 66 y.o!!),  I'd say it's not a worry. Set up correctly, these revolvers are perfectly fine and can be treated just as any other modern SA revolver.

  As far as Howell cylinders (and "Taylor’s"), they don't have 100%  support for the cartridge case to back up against (the other end of the pressure column) like the Kirst plate/ring does. Therefore,  I'd say tier1 loads should be considered maximum loads.

This information is also for the open-top platform which is superior to like top-strap designs  ( Remingtons etc.). Of course the ROA is a modern design with a thicker top strap and can definitely handle tier2 loads.

Mike

Good comments, Mike. If I build a conversion revolver, I will probably use a Kirst cylinder. But I will also probably use a Pietta '58 Remington. If it turns out that the barrel doesn't last long, it would be pretty easy for me to make a new barrel from a modern blank. Although, I suppose it wouldn't be too difficult to put a liner in an 1860 Army barrel.

  I hear ya, and thanks !  The Pietta Remington is what I'll be testing soon as well because I have a 5 1/2"er  45C  as well. My problem with Pietta is the Remingtons have a 1 : 16 twist  but their open-top platforms are 1:30 or 32" .  .  .   maybe not the best for "elongated" bullets.  Uberti's on the other hand are 1 :16" across the board .  .  . basically begging for a conversion cylinder. Changing open-top barrels would be easiest with Pietta  as Uberti barrels would need to be fitted for sure along with a new arbor correction spacer.

Mike

Yep, I think most are rather "speculative"  .  .  .   which is exactly why I shoot what I shoot in them. It's different when you know what the "other" side of the equation is (what the cylinder is capable of). Then you're free to test the "support system".  What the manufacturers say is what they CAN say and still afford to stay in business (liability is expensive).  Ruger still suggests "No reloads" in their revolvers  .  .  .
  So, since I  build my revolvers to MY  specs and with Kirst Konversions,  I report what these revolvers are capable of If they are treated similarly. Therefore,  it's not speculation on my side, I'm actually shooting them. This does only extend to Ubertis though as I've not done the same with any other makes.
  With that said, I'm perfectly confident shooting +p  ammo with my revolvers.  They show absolutely no accelerated wear.  I would obviously NOT repeat any of my tests with any original with a modern cyl.  Most of my shooting with 45acp in my '60's has been with jacketed bullets.  The barrels are perfectly fine.  My older Dragoons (that started me down this road) will be treated with mostly jacketed as well for testing purposes.  I'll update as things move along and will answer any questions that I can.
That is the scoop.

Mike

Very nice Mike!!

Marshal Will, I recently obtained a early 3rd gen. Colt SAA that was very lightly used. However,  the original owner had done that leather pad under the mainspring trick. I recall back in the 70's & 80's that was the recommendation in many gun magazines. I tried it back then and found very little difference. Anyway back to that recent purchase. The owner must have installed that leather pad when the gun was pretty new because on taking the grips off the whole area around the mainspring/backstrap/trigger guard was covered in rust. You would know better what type of leather would cause that. It cleaned up quickly though. Fortunately the rust didn't intrude any farther as this particular SAA was a full blue model with what looked like extra polishing, about what the older Pythons used to come with.

  Which is why "real gun tuners" ( Jim Martin) teach NOT to use a leather for that.  A steel washer is better.  I don't use washers anymore,  I'd rather get the main to the tension desired.
Mike

I've always measured from half cock. I hook my scale under the nose of the hammer and check the weight when it starts to move.  That's where the 4 lb hammer pull comes from. It's all repeatable numbers.
  In my experience,  they tend to run anywhere from 6 lbs  to 9lbs+  .  .  .  2nd Gen Colt's are all over the place. Just checked two 2nd Gens .  .  . '60 Army is 8 lbs, Walker is 7lbs.
 
Measuring just gives me an idea of how much "dressing " I'll need to do to get to 4lbs.

Mike