Cartridge Conversion Revolvers Pt. 2-Richards-Mason Revolvers 

I have conversion cylinders for a few of my Percussion revolvers in .45 LC. I also bought Uberti factory conversions like the ones you have. My 1858 Rem. + conversion cylinder is super accurate. I reload .38 LC and .45 LC to CAS specs.

Thanks. They're hard not to like

@@triplefshooting 100% agreed.

Yeah the timing is a little cumbersome lol. I kinda wondered the same

These are some of the most interesting and best looking revolvers in my opinion. I've always been drawn to the "make it work" idea that still ends up looking this good

@@triplefshooting Currently trying to get my hands on an 1860 cartridge conversion (the one with the removable ejector hidden in the ramrod) and swap that bit out with a Kirst Konverter ejector to simulate the type two conversion you showed.

Always happy to spread the love for these awesome guns. Thanks!

I think it was just luck of the draw... I can't think of any reason it should be any smoother. Unless the barrel assembly fits a tad different on the arbor or something?

Thanks very much. I do wonder how accurate uberti's nomenclature is on their replica firearms.

Thanks! These are definitely among my favorites. Planning on a video over the spencer carbine soon!

@@triplefshooting looking forward to it

I believe Forgotten Weapons has at least one really good video on the subject with a conversion pistol. I don't remember it having the lever though

Thanks! I agree that the 1860 is one of the best looking out there. I absolutely love these conversions. Need to do a video on the dragoon conversion we have

Always fun to see people using something other than an 1873 SAA in CAS.

That's more of an explanation than I've ever heard!

Sort of. The first 38 cartridges were designed to shoot .375 bullets out of Colt and Remington conversion percussion revolver barrels (.375 groove to groove). Those old cartridges used heel base bullets that were the same diameter as the OUTSIDE of the case (.375) and only the recessed heel of the bullet went into the case mouth (.357)...similar to the 22 short, long and long rifle cartridges do. Later when they started making guns designed specifically for cartridges...they went away from heel base bullets. And started using bullets that measured the diameter of the INSIDE of the case (.357). But by that time the 38 designation had stuck. The 38 Special cartridge never used a .375 bullet, but because it was just a longer version of the 38 Short and 38 Long Colt...it was called a 38. It wasn't until Elmer Keith created the 357 Magnum in 1934 that the actual diameter of the bullet was used in the cartridge designation. That's why a 357 Mag revolver can shoot any of the preceding cartridges (38 Short, 38 Long, and 38 Spl) as long as they're loaded with inside case diameter bullets (.357)...and not the outside case diameter heel base bullets (.375). Hopefully this makes sense.

@@triplefshooting Great shooting by the way!!!

Yes, the 1860 Long Cylinder Conversion is one beautiful gun!

I tend to run fairly light loads through mine. I hope that I never run into that problem myself. So far so good but I don't have over 1,000 on my 45 colts. I definitely have that or more on the 38s, but they seem to be handling it well.

Unfortunately I don't have a great ammo recommendation as I've been reloading 38 for a while now. Before I would use pretty much what I could find at the local gun store since they didn't carry much. I'd definitely keep it low pressure

@@triplefshooting Will do...Murdochs has Federal in 130 grain that does 840 fps. Or do you think thats too hot?

@@heavyheavy5947 I would imagine that's fine. I'd just avoid anything +p. The load data I use says that the 130 grn at that speed is on the low-mid range. It's actually pretty close to the loading I use regularly.

@@triplefshooting Okay thanks. Surprising more people don't do load range videos for these guns since they kind of require consideration in that regard. Appreciate it brother

Not everyone respects the right to self-defense. It's sad when a country keeps that from the people.

Thanks for the info! I'm mostly going off of how Cimarron markets their revolvers. I always appreciate better information.

@@triplefshooting sure, Ian at Forgotten weapons has a good video on the Richards type 1. Explains the differences. Also Mike at Duelists den, has a few videos and good info on them as well. Check them out.

@jimh6763 thanks again

@@triplefshooting I have a Richards type 2, and the Richards Mason from Cimarron. I'm told they sent Uberti originals from their collection to copy. Some of the other importers like Taylor's, and Dixie gun works seem to mix and match parts. Not as accurate of a reproduction as Cimarron. They're all pretty fun. Armi San Marcos used to make the Richards type 1, but I think no one makes it now. Only the type 2. The Richards Mason open top I have, looks pretty close to the original s I've seen. It has the barrel like the first gun in your video, but the frame doesn't have a separate recoil shield. It's closer to the 1873 peacemaker. All one piece with the frame. Loading gate looks like a peacemaker as well. Rear sight on the barrel. I like the Richards type 2. Wish they'd of kept the rear sight and firing pin arrangement of the type 1. Guess they were cutting costs

@jimh6763 I can appreciate the cost cutting to some degree as these revolvers seem like they could be more expensive. However, it is always nice when reproductions are as close as they can be. At the end of the day I'm very grateful for companies like cimarron putting out some of the most interesting pieces you can buy. Hopefully they keep doing good business and bringing more old designs.

I can give it a try. Short version is that it was a carry over from the 1851 "navy" cap and ball. I'd have to do some research on why that specific scene was chosen

I doubt a wedge pin set up would last long against full power 44 mag

You can get an open top in 44 special though

@@triplefshooting ONLY known this answer after now SOMEONE liked my coment - the yt are so much pice of crap that dont notify

@@triplefshooting what about 357 magnum - opentop ? I designing a revolver to be Open top - and i want at least a basic hight power caliber

@unknownM_A_N_-_I_A_K_0 It would last longer than a 44, but again I don't think it would be good for it. Open top revolvers aren't known for strength

Have you seen the newer 1860 Bill Hickock conversions? They seem purpose built for old school concealed carry. I'd love to get my hands one to try it out

I will be sure to take a gander at them. I know that wild bill Hickok started carrying a richards conversion 1851 in .38 rimfire during his last several years before he whacked in deadwood

@@Matzah1982 uberti makes a copy of that too. Theyre pretty slick looking. Got my wife some a couple years ago. I didn't know that he actually carried conversions! I guess I should finish reading the biography I have on him lol

I've had these revolvers for a few years now. I didn't realize that they had changed them. I know that the "open top" models are different from the "conversion" models in the sighting arrangement.

@@triplefshooting i must be confusing them with the open top, i think that's the one where they offer that, because i looked it up to check and didn't see that difference either

@@triplefshooting i have a navy grip 45 open top, and remember seeing two army grip open tops with different sighting systems, not conversions my apologies

@HircineHuntsman all good. The models are almost identical but for a couple of subtle changes. Very easy to do, especially considering some websites don't even put up the correct product pic!

@@triplefshooting yeah and im probably blending real history in there too because the RICHARDS Army conversion, by himself i guess before mason has the ram rod ejector thing and a rear sight on the conversion ring.

Not totally sure that it matters there. However, the revolver shown here is sold already converted and is different from purchasing a cylinder conversion kit. If I'm not mistaken, the fluting is only done to reduce weight and doesn't have a major impact on much else. It's always good to see if the seller of the cylinder has a list of compatible cap and ball brands.

@@triplefshooting Great advice, thanks ! When I went to order a cylinder, they said fluted or un-fluted, which threw me off, so I thought I'd better find out ! On my 1858 the cylinder is un-fluted, and I'd like to keep the original look, BUT, a fluted cylinder is lighter weight, and does look good..decisions, decisions...ha !!! Again, thanks again for your input, it was very helpful !

@@GregAkers no problem, good talking to you!

Correct. When I reload cartridges I don't use black powder because I'm lazy and don't want to clean as often! Black powder in a cartridge still makes a good bit of smoke, smokeless will still make a small amount, but you can see a big difference.

They are available and usually run from 500 to 650

I can't even imagine. I'm sure it was well over 1000

@@triplefshooting 15000

@@SlickSixguns my heart stopped...

I believe it was a Wolff Springs single Action kit. They used to run just under $50. Havent bought any in some time though.

@@triplefshooting Thanks!

I would avoid anything but basic target loads or cowboy loads. As far as I understand, heavier loads wear on the wedge pin and will eventually change the fit of the gun and cause problems

@@triplefshooting good to know

I'm keeping it for a potential conversion...