Mike what makes you so much more enjoyable than every other firearms video on RU-vid is the lessons and details of the old west that you share. Your channel is one of few that I get excited over a new video.
Whst a great invention that smokeless power is. Fun today to shoot black powder on a humid day when no one is shooting back at you. Different recoil impulse, I perfer the black powder, but at war I want the "new" stuff.
As usual an excellent video! Your BP firearm videos are without a doubt the best on You Tube and your magazine articles are my favorites. Also, thanks to you and this video in particular, I am now going to have to watch, once again, "Pale Rider" as I THINK that movie was one of the first, if not the first, to feature 1860 Army "conversions". In my opinion the 1860 conversions were the sleekest cartridge revolvers of their era, even outdoing the 1873 Colt's Single Action Army in the looks department.....Easy now....Put the ropes and 1873's down....And nobody, especially me, will get hurt.....Keep the great BP videos coming!
You're correct Connor Brown, he did indeed....However, don't forget what the "bad guys" were shooting.....Watch very carefully and you will spot those 1860 conversions ( most likely, considering when the movie was made, prop tool room products).
Mike could you do a video on facts and myths of old west outlaws and the firearms they used? Such as barrel size, did they really load 5 or 6, what size lever actions, were shotguns favored over lever actions, calibers favored, etc...
I love the way you use the recoil impulse to drop the gun against the hammer and then bring it up for the next shot. I do that with my Freedom Arms in .475 Linebaugh. I like the lighter and softer .480 Ruger ammo in that big gun. Great video. Thanks for sharing this. I want to get one of the 2nd models. Such a cool gun. The Colt Walker with the .45lc conversion looks amazing too. Thank you.
i saw one of these in a gunstore about a 2 year ago... it was listed on the tag as a blackpowder revolver and they only wanted $150 for it ... i didn't buy it ... and i have regretted it since... they didn't know what they had XD
I wish Uberti would have made a 1st model conversion with the fixed firing pin and sight on the conversion ring like what ARM did I would buy one. I have all three of Uberti's conversion revolvers of the 1860 Army the Type II the Mason & Richards and the 1872 open top.
Hi Mike. Love the channel and am a big fan. Its great to see the history as well as the shootin' up of old Evil Roy. Thanks for explaining why cartridge revolvers took so long to phase in, despite the major driver of a massive civil war forcing companies to develop and innovate. Patent blackmail.....the hobble to all innovation. Would be grateful if you could offer an opinion on two things I cant seem to find out: 1) Why was the US market and manufacturers much slower at adopting (widespread anyway) the double action system that seems to have been much more popular much earlier in Europe and especially the UK? Ive never worked out why a smart bloke like Sam Colt didnt learn from his run in with Deane and Adams during the 1850s in London and adopt a double action for his revolvers. Even one of my own favorites, the S&W Model 3, is still somewhat weaker than the early top break Webleys that were all but direct copies of it. Given a choice between the Model 3 and the Webley WG Id go Webley any day for the SA/DA option. Given a choice between the Remington New Model Army and the Beaumont Adams....I will take the Adams again for its SA/DA options....and because they made a heavy "dragoon" model in 38 Bore (about .50 calibre). 2) Was there a reason Colt kept on with the open frame revolver design while others like Remington and S&W shifted to the solid frame or with S&W the top break frame? Was a patent issue as well....? Keep up the great content, all the best from this side of the Big Pond, and give Evil Roy hell mate!
I used to own a pair of Uberti 1875 Remingtons. They started out as .44 WCF and I bought a pair of .357 Magnum cylinders for the 1875's and had them bored ot and rechambered for .44 Spl. I was then able to shoot them with .44 Spl, .44 Russian and .44 Colt. I loaded the .44 Colt brass to duplicate the .44 Remington only using inside lubricated Lyman .429667 cowboy bullets.
Mike... On a different note: Question, do you know why the import black powder companies stopped the traditional roman numeral dating system? The companies are now using regular year stamping. Example date of manufacture BN verses 2015, 2016 and 2017. Why the change... if you know?
Awesome video! Really appreciate the information and comparison between the cap and ball 1860s and the current production Uberti revolvers. I was curious how Uberti managed to fit 44sp and 45colt into a frame that originally could only handle the 44colt.
Uberti makes the new "conversions" about 10% oversize to allow for a slightly larger cylinder diameter. This also means that you cannont interchange the barrel from a cap and ball Uberti 1860, so no simple "blacksmith conversion" for those of us who prefer the looks of the original C&B over the conversion. I do wish Uberti would give us that option, like they did with the "Man With No Name" revolver they sell, of the '51 Navy. I would love to have an 1860 army in 45 Colt like that!
Why did they put a steel trigger guard on this reproduction? From every photo I can find of an original the trigger guards are brass or nickel or silver plated brass with a steel backstrap just like the 1860 army. Even the army San Marcos reproduction got it right. I have one of these on order I think I’m going to change the trigger guard out to brass so it looks right. Great informative video Mike.
So, I got a Uberti replica 1872 Open Top in 44 Special. Love it. Anyway, my Pard has on in 45 Colt. Yep, the o.d. of both cylinders, 44 Spl and 45 Colt … measure the same!
I want to see uberti or Pietra or perhaps even another company make reproduction C&B revolvers and cartridge conversion guns that are built to handle heavy smokeless powder loads... That would be great.
I wish Uberti would make a first model Richard's conversion I'd buy a pair. I have a type ll a Richard's & Mason in 44 colt and an open top in 45 colt.
When did they start changing the angle of the chambers on conversion cylinders to accommodate larger rims? Is that just a modern thing with Taylor? Or were they doing that in the 19th century?
My Cimarron Model P has two serial numbers and was put together from parts and sold as new. One cylinder was and is bad and they first denied it and then lied to me about it and refused to fix it. Keep this in mind when ordering from them. JWC
Great video; love your info, skill and enthusiasm. Outfit's not bad either. For those in the market for a Cimarron Richards Transition Model Type II what are the preferences, the appeal of .44 Special vs. .45 Colt. SECONDLY, same question yet 5 1/2" bbl vs. 8" bbl? Considerations for comparisons: balance, heft, accuracy, recoil, sighting, general-overall looks? During coronavirus, with "time on our hands," I ran across GUNS OF THE OLD WEST Spring 2019 issue and re-read with enthusiasm its exhaustive, six-page article on this Cimarron from Uberti.
Mike, have you ever done a video on cartridge conversion on the Navy? How about a reloading video for cartridges for the navy with conversion cylinder?
A few questions on these open-top & conversions Duelist: How do these repros hold up to breakdown and cleaning? Do you use a thousandths gauge between the barrel and cylinder when reassembling? Buy extra hand and bolt springs? Can the wedge loosen up over extended firing / cylinder binding?
Not a bad idea to get extra spring set. All clone type single actions have a tendency to have their bolt / trigger return spring fail over time. I had to replace mine in a Uberti Catlemen 1873. I wwould recommend getting the Wolf replacement springs....they last for ever.
I like old revolvers that have good safety notches & modern ones that have modern safeties, so I can load all 6 chambers, but I just can't see any way to load this one with more than 5, buuuut I can live with loading 5 if I have to.
Mike, another great video. Very timely, as I just purchased a pair of the Richards Type II in 44 Special/Colt/Russian. They're really attractive and unique guns. I also purchased some 44 Colt and 44 Russian factory ammo for initial testing. One problem I ran into with reloading the 44 Colt is that the small rim tends to slip out of the shell plate on the Dillon reloader. Have you perchance had similar issues reloading the 44 Colt? If so, what is your solution to it?
Can I use Freedom Ammunition .45 Long Colt in a 1860 army conversion cylinder? I’m buying from gun auction but they didn’t mention how much or what kind of powder is in it. Just saying that it’s perfect for cowboy action shooting.
Does anyone make or did anyone make one of the Richards 1860 Army Conversion revolver that were designed to take actual .44 Colt ammo? That is with the cylinders bored .444 and the bore to match? I talked to Bowen arms in Louisville, Tenn about making a new Colt SAA in this caliber and they would not make it. I think they were afraid that someone would drop a 44 mag in it.
I've always liked the design of the Colt 1860 conversions. I want one in. 45Colt, maybe not period correct, to do my own Woodrow Call cosplay By the way, Hickok45 said that with the original Colt SAAs that are pre-1896 would not be a good idea to handle modern ammo and should only have black powder fired through it. Do you know anything about that?
Hi mike , i know its late , but do you happen to know if there is a company that has that rear sight on the receiver upper? Ive seen what you're talking about and i see its potential
Dear Mike: I have been observing these modern so called conversions for some time now, and have observed that those that have the backing plates screwed to the rear of the frame like some of Ken Howell's revolvers seem to last better. Would it be advantageous to screw all these backing plate to the frames thus preventing having the whole plate/cylinder parts assemblies from slamming into the rear of the barrel during firing, then recoiling along the arbor into the rear of the frame? I'm sure that when the cartridge fires, it slams the backing plate back along the arbor into the rear of the frame if the backing plate is not secured. What do you think about this, Howell must have screwed his backing plates to the rear face of the frames for good reasons.
I am confused. My black powder .44 are shooting .451 balls. That is .45 caliber. My Uberti conversation is in .45 LC. Every 44 BP I own shoots .451 balls. Where are you getting 44 from?
Have you done another video for disassembly and re-assembly of these conversion revolvers, or is it the same as your disassembly/re-assembly video of the 1860 revolver?? It looks like there'd be a few differences here??
The 1851, 1860, and the cartridge Single Action Army and the cartridge conversions all have essentially the same internal parts. The only meaningful difference between this and the C&B 1860 id the ejector assembly.
duelist1954 At 1:40 you say that Smith and Wesson is the only company that could legally manufacture Metalic cartridge-firing revolvers in the United States. However, the Slocum revolver says otherwise.
So: Was colt (or anybody) even converting people’s personally owned existing ball and cap pistols to cartridge between 1865-1870? In short, if I’m alive in 1866, could I take my army or navy ball and cap to anyone and have them convert it for me?
Smith and Wesson did NOT sue companies that tried to make revolvers with cartridge cylinders. They forced Roland White to pursue such violations to his patent. This was the way Smith and Wesson conditioned the contract, and it almost bankrupted Roland White.
Thank you for this video, I have an Armi San Marcos conversion chambered in .38 special, is there anyplace I can find parts? Specifically the firing pin and spring. Mine shoots great still but just in case I'd like to have backups.
The 1860 army is much more enjoyable for me to handle and shoot due to it having a larger grip than the 1851 navy. Wish that colt would have used the 1860 army grip on the SAA instead of the 1851 grip smh. The 1851 grip is so small.
@@duelist1954 I was thinking about getting one. But I was worried about accuracy. How common of a problem is it? Also does the rear sights make it more difficult to aim in your opinion?
