The only movie I've ever seen that included the Merwin Hulbert revolver was Tall Tale, and someone on that production must have loved guns because there's also an evil railroad tycoon who uses a C96 with and without the stock.
Indeed, sadly even among the western genre fans. I likevthat as opposed to most westerns when they give everybody a civilian or artillery SAA, they actually showed a variety of revolvers.
https://i.imgur.com/djK7AMu.png
BIG
IRON
I don't recognize the one on top, what's that thing dwarfing a walker?
3 months ago
Anonymous
I am pretty sure it was a revolving rifle that was cut down and modified into a pistol
3 months ago
Anonymous
>
https://i.imgur.com/djK7AMu.png
BIG
IRON >I don't recognize the one on top, what's that thing dwarfing a walker?
Anon's a reddit poster.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HuntShowdown/comments/152edoq/lemat_mk_ii_uppermat_gave_me_a_new_weapon_ideas/?rdt=42960
3 months ago
Anonymous
Watched the Forgotten Weapons vid on that thing. I guess it was made by the first Bubba.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I almost posted the utube link on the Colt 1855 10 gauge Super Red Neck instead of the reddit one.
Also.... Imagine This! A United States of America, where the citizens were Free Men and a sawed off shotgun was Legal.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Hell yea brother...These lazy kids today don't know about hard work like we used to...
God Bless Israel
3 months ago
Anonymous
Well, the ATF didn't exist back then. I wonder how much of a b***h is the recoil on that thing.
Isnt ian kind of a commie turd? I never got into forgotten weapons. Someone said he keeps inserting politics into his videos and while some of that im sure is necessary for the historical background its just not something i wanna hear about when im watching gunvideos.
I dunno, I only watch FW vids about antique guns and haven't noticed political shit other than for historical context purposes that you mentioned.
I tend to avoid guntubers vids about political bullshit. I understand that guns and politics are heavily linked but I couldn't care less about the political ramblings of guntubers, whether I agree or disagree with them. Not the reason I go to their vids for.
Ian seems to be very well informed about the historical gun he's talking about and has the skill to transmit said information on a concise and understanable manner. That's all I care about.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Well, the ATF didn't exist back then.
and in our lifetime it'll cease to exist.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Well, the ATF didn't exist back then. I wonder how much of a b***h is the recoil on that thing.
[...]
I dunno, I only watch FW vids about antique guns and haven't noticed political shit other than for historical context purposes that you mentioned.
I tend to avoid guntubers vids about political bullshit. I understand that guns and politics are heavily linked but I couldn't care less about the political ramblings of guntubers, whether I agree or disagree with them. Not the reason I go to their vids for.
Ian seems to be very well informed about the historical gun he's talking about and has the skill to transmit said information on a concise and understanable manner. That's all I care about.
it used to be called the bureau of indian affairs
3 months ago
Anonymous
bureau of indian affairs is still around tho. it turns 200 next month
3 months ago
Sage
Isnt ian kind of a commie turd? I never got into forgotten weapons. Someone said he keeps inserting politics into his videos and while some of that im sure is necessary for the historical background its just not something i wanna hear about when im watching gunvideos.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Nah, you are thinking of a guy he used to work with named Karl. Ian is nigh-autistic about avoiding politics
3 months ago
Anonymous
It seeps out sometimes, like this video, although containing much historical information, is also rather opinionated and politically motivated, with him trying to make hitler look as moronic as possible.
Hot take incoming. I dont think they were popular for a reason >Slick clean design >Fast unloading system >but you cant use it to reload the cylinder and have to close the gun up and use it like a SAA with a gate.
It was marginally faster then other gate loaders but slower then the Top Break actions
The early models dont seem to have much goin for them compared to a Smith, but when you get to the later ones, a Double Action 6 shot .44-40 with a 3 inch barrel that comes with a spare 7 inch barrel it really seems like you couldnt ask for much more with it
>It was marginally faster then other gate loaders but slower then the Top Break actions
This, if you've ever shot one irl you'll realize it's the worth of both worlds
>unloading is finicky and not as fast as topbreak >loading is as slow as gateloader, but frame isn't as sturdy
Exactly, they are super cool shooting irons but they arent nearly as good as people make them out to be. Still would shoot the crap out of a modern repro in .357 or .38
Ive messed with quite a few smoke wagons. The Smith Top breaks are easily the best. The Colts and Remingtons are good, but the Smiths just outclass them by miles. Id wager they are better then the Merwin & Hulberts. I do wish there were more cartridge conversions of some of the more esoteric cap and ball six guns like the Starr and the Rogers & Spencer.
Apparently Cimarron has been working on these with Uberti for years
>the virgin gay gun is expensive to manufacture and are boutique pieces nobody's ever heard of >the chad Colt is easy to mass produce and makes all men equal
>the virgin gay gun is expensive to manufacture and are boutique pieces nobody's ever heard of >the chad Colt is easy to mass produce and makes all men equal
>Carried foreign revolvers with him during his last stand
LOL.... And the proof is archeologist have found over 10,000 Webley .442 cases at the battlefield
On Remington's it hold the cylinder pin in, so it needs to stay with them. With Colts though, you dont need it, and you could keep it but keeping it there can get annoying if it falls when your using the gun cause the lever can go into the cylinder and stop the gun
>LeMat revolver >You have seven shots of .42 or .36 >you cap a bunch of dudes and have to reload >someone bayonet charges >you have a secret 16 gauge "frick off" switch >shred their face off at <10 feet
I dont think there is a great way to do it. Maybe if they chambered it in .38 Wadcutters or 38 Colt. Pretty sure the cylinder is shorter then standard .38 Special
Rifles: Winchester 1892/1894, 1860 Henry, 1866 Yellowboy & mare's leg rifles are pretty good looking too.
Revolvers: 1877 Colt Thunderer, Remington 1858 Sheriff, 8" Colt S.A.A., Lefaucheux M1854, The LeMat, 5.5" Remington 1875, Colt Dragoon (2nd Model), Remington 1861 Navy. I also like pepper box revolvers as well.
Pistols: The Mauser C96 & the Luger P08 (Artillery if you count that).
I agree. I like the look of the 5.5" the best but the 8" is also cool because it's the one that Angel Eyes uses.
Winchester's 1892 would come too late to really be part of settling the west, but that is easily my favorite followed by the 1886.
>Winchester's 1892 would come too late to really be part of settling the west, but that is easily my favorite
https://i.imgur.com/YRN5T0V.jpg
1860 is my fav lever based just on looks/nostalgia.
But when it comes to actually buying and using one, the 1892 is my favourite awell, it's simply TheBest™.
My least fav of the classic winchesters is probably the 73/76, i just think the sideplate makes them kinda ugly.
1860 is my fav lever based just on looks/nostalgia.
But when it comes to actually buying and using one, the 1892 is my favorite as well, it's simply TheBest™.
Extremely good taste and was surprised to see the 1892 mentioned here.
Im very upset at you Mr poster. Since I saw this picture the other day I have been searching for a Rogers and Spencer repro that someone had converted in a similar manner and I have a mighty need
These traditional spears are very beautiful and often overlooked for bows and guns. I'm from Texas and the Wild West era was a long time ago, but the government that perpetuated genocide across the American West is now becoming unstable. We may very well outlive it in our lifetimes.
>no wonder they lost
The vast majority died of disease anyway. We didn't put a dent in them until we showed up with revolvers and lever actions because tribes like the Apache were 10x more effective with a bow than an infantryman was with a musket.
Indians back then looked at us like neets; too soft and reliant on technology and conveniences. If they weren't straight up savages it would have been quite a bit more tragic that they were wiped out.
As if the indigenous weren't raping, slaving, and cannibalising each other a long time before colonial settlers arrived. Heya hoya heya hoya
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Slave_Lake
For me, it's the Volcanic pistol. I love these stupid underpowered primitive gyrojet revolver pistols. I can't help it, I just love wacky experimental weapons.
And a hearty HEYA HOYA HEYA HOYA HOYA HOYA HO AH HOYA WEYA HOYA HEYA HOYA HO WAY HO WAY HEYA WEYA to you too, my fellow AmeriKKKanski of New Yorksgorod.
Its a cold steel frontier bowie. I typically dont wear it much because its so large. (Dragoon for scale) Sometimes i will use it to clear brush. It has a nice blued blade so i dont want to completely trash it.
I really gotta take a pic like this one day. I dont have as many revolvers as you, but ive got a SAA and a few top break .32s, and ive forged a few bowies the past year so i could probably get something nice
Go for it. I like seeing other peoples collections. I actually have a lot more than what is pictured. I actually dont think I have a photo of my more recent acquisitions yet. I am constantly buying selling and trading, although its mostly buying.
Why didnt I hear about this until right now?
Cimarron is making a budget 87. I used to have a century one but I sold it because it was so irredeemably shit. Even after polishing the internals, it couldnt get a grip on the spent shells and it needed a ram rod to cycle.
Does anyone have the new cimarron? I might buy one with my tax return.
Im probably gunna avoid it. the PW87 put such a bad taste in my mouth for 1887s. Plus the 1897 is such a better gun. Id look for it on GB before Id buy direct from Cimarron. They dont ever sell under their MSRP
Its 560 at buds.
I had a really bad time with the chinese 87, but i really wanted to like it. I figured if the cimarron was really that bad, i could sell it pretty easily. I sold the chinese one damn near instantly at a gun show. I have faith in cimarron because I have yet to get a bad gun from them.
> I sold the chinese one damn near instantly at a gun show.
Same, I listed mine online and in 2 hours I was meeting a guy at Wally World to sell it. If you are hankering for one Id jump on it. If I get one im gunna wait until they start selling the 26 inch barrel. Id love to take it Hunting
Okay, I looked into it, those things are dirt cheap. They used to carry much nicer ones that Taylor's still sells, I remember handling one at their shop and coming so close to buying it... I think I eventually blew my load on a new Ithaca 37 instead.
How budget is budget? The Century chinkshit ones are like $600, is this comparable? Because I'm not paying over $1000 for this shotgun, it's a fundamentally shitty design.
Maybe I'll make a trade, although I kinda like my chinkshit
I think the problems with it are less rough edges and more "it's an experimental design from 1887"
Just a heads up, Cimarron basically just imports spaghetti repros with a bit more QC requitements and a rollmark. If I'm not mistaken those are Chiappa 1887's with the cimarron roll mark
You are in fact mistaken. These are built in CHYNA. Theres a few posts in this thread already. They arent made by the same factory as the old PW87s and they would appear to be solid reliable shotguns. They arent blued as nice as the Chiappa built 87s but they are mechanically sound
Oh pull the medicine stick out of your ass seething-horse, it was a joke. Maybe you should have stuck to your favorite western era guns instead of whining about ebil Amerigga because your drunk ancestors thought beads were awesome. Take another hit off the peace pipe and chill, no need to burn my wagon.
1860 is my fav lever based just on looks/nostalgia.
But when it comes to actually buying and using one, the 1892 is my favourite awell, it's simply TheBest™.
My least fav of the classic winchesters is probably the 73/76, i just think the sideplate makes them kinda ugly.
I served under Nathan Bedford Forrest, where did you serve?
I meant from seeing them in movies, it always stood out the most to me over the other types, and always felt the most a treat when i did get to see it.
(picrel probably isnt the best example as apparently its a volcanic not a henry, but frickit close enough, it still has the look)
The West didn't die until about 1918-1920 and also had a short revival in the 1930s. The oil towns of the 1910s that people like Frank Hamer made their names in were just as wild as the 1860s cow towns that people like Wild Bill got famous in.
It bothers me that Wild Bunch doesn't allow other early automatics as well as DA revolvers from that era. I've seen more pictures of men of the era with Lugers and C96s than I have with 1911s.
Yeh, CAS in general has too many rules for its own good i think. Getting your kit together for it doesn't feel natural, like you have to base your guns(and outfit etc) around what they want to see, not necessarily what you wanted. Though its a problem common to all shooting sports.
Cowboy Action in general is way too stringent on some of their rules. Its just USPCA with single actions and cowboy hats. Id love a more loose division in 3 gun that basically combined Wild Bunch and Cowboy Action. Want to run my 1866, 1897 and a Luger
Those guys are buttholes. Really stuck up and they have that boomer mentality of being better than you. Its really just a circle jerk over the expensive guns they bought with their pension. They really dont want to keep it going after they die I guess.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I honestly dont know if this is bait, I dont like CAS and I know this isnt true. They literally all run Rossi's and Ubertis
3 months ago
Anonymous
>circle jerk over the expensive guns they bought with their pension
Even tuned guns aren't usually over $1500 and barely anybody runs actual antiques. You can all the guns you need for around $2000 if you look, maybe even less if you're using cap and ball revolvers.
I remember going to a match to just watch, and while it was cool, literally everyone had 4 3/4 Single Action Army's, 20" barrel Winchester 73's, and Stoeger coach guns. ONE guy had cartridge converted 1851's with the full length barrels, an 1866 carbine, and an hammered coach gun, and he shot with all black powder.
I remember getting a Ruger Blackhawk years ago, and I thought that I could go shoot in a cowboy action shooting event if I wanted. That was when I found out I need another revolver, a shotgun, and a lever action rifle, and on top of that, the Blackhawk isn't allowed because it has an adjustable rear sight. I realized then that cowboy action shooting is fricking gay, and I hate it even more now because I'm tired of looking at everyone making SAA reproductions and clones but nothing double action.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Nothing double action
Like the Thunderer and Lightning? Its because they are junk and always break
3 months ago
Anonymous
Wouldn't it be great if we had some modern reproductions with modern metallurgy so we could properly judge the design instead of basing our opinions on guns that are 120+ years old?
3 months ago
Anonymous
don't be that guy
3 months ago
Anonymous
>muh modern metallurgy
Why is it that every single moron on this board will mindlessly chant this slogan whenever someone brings up 1800s repros? You do know that modern steel won't magically fix a bad design, right anon? >but the guns are old
Then why does no one ever have the same complaints out of the Colt 1878, S&W .44 double actions, DA Merwin & Hulberts, or any of the other double actions of the era? Those guns are just as old, but in comparison to the 1877s they work fine. Even the assortment of Bulldog clones don't have these kinds of issues even though they were basically the equivalents of Raven .25s of their day. Why is it that, even in the era in which they were made, the 1877s were regarded as fragile?
3 months ago
Anonymous
That's a fine list of firearms that have not been remotely common since the late 1800s, so I could not tell you why nobody today complains about them.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>firearms that have not been remotely common since the late 1800s
Unlike the 1877, right? That's so common that people still carry it today after all.
3 months ago
Anonymous
what exactly is the issue with the 1877, like do we know exactly. Like if it breaks so much, what makes it break
3 months ago
Anonymous
Uncommon doesn't mean nonexistant. Just what's the percentage of people who actually carry a lighting?
what exactly is the issue with the 1877, like do we know exactly. Like if it breaks so much, what makes it break
From wikipedia:
>The M1877's early double-action mechanism proved to be both intricate and delicate, thus it was vulnerable to failure of self wienering. The design had a garnered a negative reputation and earned the nickname "the gunsmith's favorite". Because of the intricate design and difficulty of repair, gunsmiths to this day dislike working on them.[2] Gun Digest referred to it as "the worst double-action trigger mechanism ever made".[4] Typically, the trigger spring would fail and this would reduce the revolver to single-action fire only.
3 months ago
Anonymous
ez, just make a better trigger spring
3 months ago
Anonymous
I don't know the specifics, but the design was, apoarently, intrincate and hard to work with. Even nowadays not many gubsmiths can work on the 1877s. The 1878 apparently solved these issues.
I guess you could make a modern version with an updated mechanism, but then it would be a replica in apperance only.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Colt 1878, S&W .44 double actions
Why don't they repro those? I'd go for one.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Not many people know or care about the 1878 so there's not a repro market substantial enough for them.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Why is it that every single moron on this board will mindlessly chant this slogan whenever someone brings up 1800s repros? You do know that modern steel won't magically fix a bad design, right anon?
Reprogays are just poorgays who wished Uberti would sell a gun for $450 when they don't realize they could just save up for an extra month buy an original colt lightning for $600
Cowboy Action in general is way too stringent on some of their rules. Its just USPCA with single actions and cowboy hats. Id love a more loose division in 3 gun that basically combined Wild Bunch and Cowboy Action. Want to run my 1866, 1897 and a Luger
Their firearm regs are very stringent for some reason.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I really wish it wasnt. like, spending around $2k for guns just so you can play cowboy is a very big barrier to entry for most people. Like, you alwyas need 2 revolvers, when like that was very rare in the actual old west! Something like a 1 revolver 1 shotgun division would be so much easier to get into.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I agree, that and the targets being at 15 feet is also very unappealing. CAS is fun and people enjoy it I guess. Sad reality is that its mostly old boomers who do it so when CAS really dips in popularity Uberti and Pietta are going to have a hell of a time staying in business. Really want them to make some more esoteric six guns before that happens
His club probably let them use other autos, but the official rules don't and you just know how boomers are about meaningless rules like that. I've seen a few clubs that still allow other stuff, but not many.
I remember watching a video on the Colt Walker and a comment sent me into orbit, more or less "I want a handgun that can kill a horse, by bludgeoning if necessary."
I want an 1892 lever, but unfortunately i believe that would mean the only divisions i could shoot in would be wild bunch or B-Move. Understandable i guess that they they wouldn't want a later model gun in the other divisions, but it also means that i have to dress like a moron, for b-movie my outfit must be bright/colourful/goofy/budgetlooking, not just by their strict point-like system that it must contain enough specific pieces that they have listed, but then also at the discretion of a judge, who can then decide if the outfit ive put together actually looks moronic enough.
The West didn't die until about 1918-1920 and also had a short revival in the 1930s. The oil towns of the 1910s that people like Frank Hamer made their names in were just as wild as the 1860s cow towns that people like Wild Bill got famous in.
Yes, which sucks major butt. Right before they stopped importing them they made 20 in .38 Special. I just special ordered a SAA through them and it came up in conversation with the sales rep. Pretty sure they stopped in 2021
With the different arguments over when the old west actually was, ive always gone with >Pre 1870ish Cap and Ball Wild West >Post 1870-1890 Classic Old West >1890-1920 New West
Bassically the 1851 Navy era, the Single Action Army era, and the 1889/92 era
>wild west ended when AZ and NM became states in 1912
With this late end date we get some early automatics, some of which can still hold their own today and even a few that mog later designs.
Anyone know much about pommel holsters? I know they were the main way to carry like Walkers and Dragoons, but what about after that? were they still being used by the SAA days?
After the Civil War, pommel holsters pretty died out. Lever guns could put out as much or more fire than a pair of revolvers could so there was really no point in having them anymore.
They have recently started making somewhat of a comeback though as it's imo the best way to carry an automatic on horseback. My mom carries her Glock in one while riding.
speaking of Walkers and Dragoons, im lookin into them a bit more, the whole "1st 2nd 3rd" model Dragoon thing really feels like it isnt the way to go, it feels like there were realy 6 "Dragoons," 7 if you want to just call them whole family "The Colt Holster Model." Like to the best of my knowledge, no one makes repros of the 1853 Dragoon, even though there were probably more of them historically than say the Whiteville or the 1850/"2nd Model" Dragoon
Im reading though The Modern American Pistol by AC Gould, which is on pistol target shooting written in 1888, but its interesting to see what he calls guns vs what we call them today, especially Colts. The Single Action Army is called the "New Model Army Single Action," the 1878 is called the "New Model Army Double Action," the Lightning and Thunderer are called "New Model .41" and "New Model .38." With Smith and Wesson, its mostly normal, with what we call the New Model No.3 being called the "New Model Army No. 3" and is constantly referred to in the text as the "Russian Model" even though what we call the Russian model is different from the New Model No 3, but it seems he is writing as if any single action in .44 Russian is of the same make. The .44 double action whos name is never really agreed upon by countless collectors is referred to as the "New Model Navy No. 3" which yeah ive seen be used in some other historical documents.
>New Model Navy No. 3
Now that's a new one. I've often heard it referred to as the Double Action Frontier. Calling it a Navy is especially strange considering that .38-40 was as close as they got to .36 caliber and that was one of the rarest chamberings for it.
I had heard Othias mention an upcoming episode of Primer on the "Smith and Wesson New Model Navy" and that made me curious, so I checked my Standard Catalogue of Smith and Wesson and yeah thats what the non Frontier version is called it seems. So for some reason, the double action version of the Number 3 is called the New Model Navy when its chambered in .44 Russian, but the Double Action Frontier when its chambered in .44-40
Im reading though The Modern American Pistol by AC Gould, which is on pistol target shooting written in 1888, but its interesting to see what he calls guns vs what we call them today, especially Colts. The Single Action Army is called the "New Model Army Single Action," the 1878 is called the "New Model Army Double Action," the Lightning and Thunderer are called "New Model .41" and "New Model .38." With Smith and Wesson, its mostly normal, with what we call the New Model No.3 being called the "New Model Army No. 3" and is constantly referred to in the text as the "Russian Model" even though what we call the Russian model is different from the New Model No 3, but it seems he is writing as if any single action in .44 Russian is of the same make. The .44 double action whos name is never really agreed upon by countless collectors is referred to as the "New Model Navy No. 3" which yeah ive seen be used in some other historical documents.
>The .44 double action whos name is never really agreed upon by countless collectors is referred to as the "New Model Navy No. 3" which yeah ive seen be used in some other historical documents.
Smith wesson named it that cause they were fishing for a navy contract, but lost to the colt 1889
If you read gould's sequel book in 1896 (?) he talks about the army pistol trials, including s&w's safety hammerless /lemon squeezer submision to the army trials against the colt 1892
Frontier is 44-40 and some 38-40
New model navy / 1st model DA 44 is in 44 russian
They have different serial ranges, and the frontiers have a slightly longer cylinder/frame for the WCF cartridges
This is basic info in the standard catalog of s&w
The terminal CAS boomers dictate the ol'western repro market, and they only shoot single actions, because thats whats in the movies.
I wish someone made a repro of these.
The market will make superficial cosmetic clones like the henry revolvers and cimarron thunderers, but they will never make an actual repro because the cost to manufacture would be $1k+, and originals can be had for only slightly more than that
What kills cartridge conversions for me is; >you're stuck losing lower powered loads >the gun still has no rifling, >theyre still pretty slow to reload
It does? Ah shit, i must be moronic then.
But why would a round ball need rifling? or i guess they did often shoot conicals.
Always just kinda assumed they were smoothebore, or could swear ive heard it before.
>You don't own any cap and ball guns do you?
No sir, i do not. though i want some, handguns are currently banned here, unless i felt like paying out the ass for a genuine antique.
>What kills cartridge conversions for me is; >>you're stuck losing lower powered loads
221 grain bullet, 33 grains 2f BP average 800 fps on my chrono from my Krist Konversion modded Pietta1851 with the 4 3/4 inch barrel.
and yes they have lands and grooves, mine has a 1 in 30 twist.
and yes they are faster to load than cap and ball but slower than top break and swing out cylinders.
221gr @ 800fps = 314ft/lbs
So about as powerful as a .38spc/380acp, yeah thats fine, and makes sense for a gun of the era, but i believe you're usually converting the gun to .45colt or .45acp, meaning you're stuck using cowboy loadings, which was my complaint, not that i think the rounds are too weak, but that most of the ammo on the shelf in your calibre will be too powerful for the gun, so its only actually giving the ability to use specialty/low powered loadings, thus ammo will still be hard to find for it. And potentially dangerous to just grab and shoot random ammo of said caliber.
Yeah, being a open top I like to keep it moderate and stick to BP because 5 to 10 grains of brand x or z smokeless can have some terible velocity spreads in a large 45 colt cartridge. I have stuffed about 38 gr of 3F BP and got a velocity around 940 +/- which starts showing some real excitement, but that's obviously hard on the design.
I also agree with your statement that off the shelf factory loadings are too hot for a conversion. I've been reloading for... Dam.. 25 or so years and have gotten board and thus got interested in Black Powder Cartage and me trying my hand at a Krist Konverter mod a few years back, I have truly enjoyed the experience.
That being said... I think all serious firearms anons should learn reloading.
BP in handgun loads is only low powered in comparison to modern magnums and Bubba's pissing hot reloads, anon. It's plenty powerful, and the repros are indeed rifled. If your conversion features an ejector rod, loading and unloading is no slower than a modern single action. If you're swapping cylinders on a 1858, it's even faster.
It does? Ah shit, i must be moronic then.
But why would a round ball need rifling? or i guess they did often shoot conicals.
Always just kinda assumed they were smoothebore, or could swear ive heard it before.
Round balls are more accurate with rifling. You may have been thinking of progressive rifling, which most of the originals featured but the repros seldom due because of cost. >progressive rifling is mainly for the benefit of shooting balls and conicals with small bearing surfaces, not really a factor with modern bullets
Is there any written documentation as to why Colt made both the 5 1/2" and 4 3/4" barrel lengths? The 5 1/2" was originally made for the London market, and the 4 3/4" didnt come out until 1879, but is there any reason why they didnt just go with the 4 3/4 from the start? Handling my 5 1/2" and wondering, is it so that you can feel where the ejector rod ends without sticking your finger in front of the barrel?
I'm not sure if anyone wrote it down, but I'd assume that it had to do with basic conservative design. Long barrels were the industry standard for centuries and were beneficial to a good sight picture when shooting one handed. Colt probably noticed that users were having their barrels shortened and identified a potential market.
Is there any written documentation as to why Colt made both the 5 1/2" and 4 3/4" barrel lengths? The 5 1/2" was originally made for the London market, and the 4 3/4" didnt come out until 1879, but is there any reason why they didnt just go with the 4 3/4 from the start? Handling my 5 1/2" and wondering, is it so that you can feel where the ejector rod ends without sticking your finger in front of the barrel?
IDK, but I've read that Bat Masterson was one of the first people to buy one of the 4 3/4" guns when they came out.
Of course that could be fake because Bat would sometimes buy used guns, carve notches in them, and sell them claiming that he used them during his time in the West.
>he doesnt carry a pinfire blunderbuss
Actually this made me think, how did people carry pinfire ammo? it seems like it could get damaged to have it like in a pouch or a cartridge belt. did you just like carry them in a box in your pocket?
Cartridge pouches usually had a wooden insert with holes for each cartridge. I imagine it would be the same for pinfire, but with a cutout for the pin.
lookin around, yeah seems there were a few things. Leather pouches with ammo loops/cups seem common, as well as either box's that had a little wooden insert, or just carrying them loose in a box. Defiantly not something id want to be carrying around in the frontier or war, but yeah i can see being cool with this if i was in like a Victorian Era city
Im lookin through cabinet cards of the late 1800s, like pictures youd go to a studio to take right, and like so many of them have 1875 Remington's? I cannot figure out why. I assume owners of 1875s weren't also coincidently into photography, and these are just props owned by the photographer. But like, is it one one studio that had a few 1875s? Were they just cheap to buy so studios bought them? I really have no idea, just a weird thing I noticed
Depends what you mean. Like, if you were in the 1870s or 80s and wanted to buy a large bore single action cartridge revolver, then yeah a SAA, a Smith and Wesson No.3, a Remington 1875, or a Merwin Hulbert were the main options to choose from in America. There were of course still cap and ball revolvers that were plentiful (and very cheap comparatively) as well as cartridge conversions of them, though I think people over estimate how many conversions of the larger guns actually existed. For actual practical use, the double actions of the era should not be looked over. Colts 1877 and 1878, with the 1878 basically doing everything the SAA does but also with double action, Smith and Wesson with its top break double action .38's and .44's, Merwin Hulbert's .38 and .44 double actions, or one of the many British or Belgian double actions that take the form of either a Webley RIC or a Bulldog revolver. For example, yesterday I found this photograph famously titled The Cowboy, taken in South Dakota in 1888. You can see the grip of the gun the man carries is one of the the later Merwin Hulbert sqaure butt grips for one of their large frame revolvers. If you are talkin about playing TV cowboy, then yeah the options you listed are the go to ones, but in the actual historic late 1800s, youd probably be better armed with say an 1877 Thunderer in .41 Colt. What we consider desirable today is not that different from what they did back then. Today one of the best selling guns is a .38 caliber, 5 shot, double action only Smith and Wesson with an internal hammer. 125 years ago one of the best selling guns was a .38 caliber, 5 shot, double action only Smith and Wesson with an internal hammer. So to answer your question, there were really a lot of options that people chose for different reasons, just like today.
>Today one of the best selling guns is a .38 caliber, 5 shot, double action only Smith and Wesson with an internal hammer. 125 years ago one of the best selling guns was a .38 caliber, 5 shot, double action only Smith and Wesson with an internal hammer.
That's awesome. I got two (one for me and one for the wife) for Valentine's Day one year.
9x19 is a weird one. Yes it's been around since 1902, but pretty much only in a full sized military handgun, and then only in Germany. Even by WW2, there were only a handful of 9x19 handguns, and those are going to be for the military anyway. Police still carried .380 and .32 in Europe, and would until about the 70's. Meanwhile in America, there are some 9mm caliber rounds being somewhat popular. .380 is popular, and .38 ACP as well as .38 Super were around. It wasnt until after WW2 that 9x19 really came into America, with the Browning Hi Power, the S&W Model 39, and the Colt Commander being the domestic 9mm's that because available in America in the 50s, as well as surplus guns like Lugers and P38's. So a big part of it was that really before WW2, most countries just used their own ammo. Like 9mm isnt the 9mm we know today as the worldwide NATO and police standard, it was pretty much just the bullet the German army uses and not much else. Also keep in mind in the post Moro rebellion, when the US Army is big on "if its a military gun it needs to be .45" so that is also in the public conscious.
I changed your wording slightly. Also, I couldn't find a picture with a more modern hammerless J frame next to a Safety Hammerless. I might rework this with more effort another time.
So you know how we have competitions for cowboy larping and john wick larping?
Can we get Harry Callahan larping division going? >revolvers >calibers must be .357 or greater >PF of >200 >barrel lengths from 4" - 8 3/8" >shots range from 10 yards to 50 yards >speedloaders and shoulder rigs
Oh thatd be fun, it'd appeal to my specific breed of Autism >Smith Model 10 or Single Action Army >Winchester 97 >03 Springfield, Winchester 94 or a Rem Model 8/81
Oh thatd be fun, it'd appeal to my specific breed of Autism >Smith Model 10 or Single Action Army >Winchester 97 >03 Springfield, Winchester 94 or a Rem Model 8/81
See, I think there's a market for it gentlemen.
Just to ensure large divisions, we may have only 2, one was outlined and the other would be a snub division. >barrel length 3" or less >PF of 130 to accomodate 38 Spl
Oh thatd be fun, it'd appeal to my specific breed of Autism >Smith Model 10 or Single Action Army >Winchester 97 >03 Springfield, Winchester 94 or a Rem Model 8/81
Could call it Fusillade Noir.
I really like the idea and it'd finally give me the chance to use my Winchester 1907 competitively.
Does anyone make a modern faithful reproduction of the classic like Remington Derringer? I know theres the Cobras, but they have safteys and extractors the Remingtons dont
Does anyone know anything about the 1860 Army grip frame? Why is it different from the 51 and 61 Navies, and the Single Action Army? Like Colts "military" revolvers went >Dragoon : Dragoon Grip >51 Navy : Navy Grip >Very very early 60 Army : Navy Grip >60 Army : Army Grip >61 Navy : Navy Grip >Early Open Top : Navy Grip >Late Open Top : Army Grip > Single Action Army : Navy Grip
Is there like, a reason for this back and forth of two grip sizes on what is basically all just the Navy sized frame? >
Like im trying to think what did they think about the 1860 that made them think it needed a longer grip, but then feeling as if that longer grip was not needed on the Single Action Army. I assume it isnt gloves, cause would that not also be an issue on the SAA? Is it easier to pull out of Dragoon style saddle holsters? Is it so that the grip mirrors the size of the the Dragoon grip, which allows the use of the Dragoon style shoulder stock? 1861 Navys, which use the shorter Navy grip frame, dont have the cuts in the recoil sheild needed for the shoulder stock, but the Army does have them, so did they need to get the Army frame longer so that they could use the same stock that was on the Dragoon? And by the time of the SAA, they knew they werent gonna use a stock on it so it went back to the Navy frame? I cant find a single answer, people just say "yeah the Army grip frame is different" but never ask why
My bet would be on shoulder stock. I've heard that was the reason for the 1860 having an iron backstrap.
You might find a better answer from Charles W. Pate's book on the 1860 army.
ok looking around, i did find that the patent for the stock that would be used on late dragoons and the 1860 Army, and yeah it was patented in early 1859, which makes sense to me as a "we should make it fit the old .44 thats already out and the new .44 we are currently making"
I did notice a weird thing though, idk if they ever patented the like stepped cylinder thats on the 1860 and 1862? Was that idea used somewhere before but the patent had already run out by then?
ok yeah, looking at a very very very early production 1860 Army, it is basically just a Navy but with the stepped cylender and the new creeping loading lever. Things they would soon change on the main pattern of 1860 would be lengthing the barrel from 7.5" to 8", making the backstrap iron, and making the cuts in the recoil sheild for the stock, and lengthening the grip. Not counting the lengthened grip, all of those changes also happened to the late Dragoons that were made to be fit with shoulder stocks right? And none of these changes were made for the standard pattern of the 1861 Navy. So i THINK the idea was like, the idea of a "belt" pistol was one that had a Navy grip and a 7.5 inch barrel, while a new pattern "Holster Model" would have a larger grip to fit a shoulder stock, and an 8 inch barrel so that it could be easily used as a carbine, like the Springfield 1855 stocked pistol right? But when they make the Single Action Army, they know they are not going to fit it with a stock, so they keep it in that "Belt Model" shape, Navy Grip and 7.5" barrel. So the original 1860 I have pictured here was supposed to be a .44 Belt Model, but with the changes made to become the 1860 we know it turned into more of a new pattern Holster Model. I cannot find any documentation about this, nor can I find it mentioned in any books or anything
Are older Cap & ball guns like the remington 1858 or Colt SAA easier to get into and start shooting than later cartidge guns like the S&W no 3 or remington 1875? I'm worried about having to reload for old cartidges like 44 Russian or 41 long colt... I have no reloading gear to I think cap & ball might be easier to start with lower barrier to entry
If you're spending money on antiques then you might as well just buy a reloading kit too.
I kinda want to see a repro of that early 1860. A "Belt Model" version of the 1860 seems like it would be great, even more so with a fluted cylinder
3 months ago
Anonymous
As long as you stay within the same manufacturer, the parts will interchange fine. I've put my 1860 grip frame on my 1851 before and vice versa.
3 months ago
Anonymous
yeah the Navy/Belt grips should be easy, and its probably not too hard to move back the front sight and shorten the barrel by that 1/2 inch, but I think all the 1860 reproductions have the stock cut in the recoil sheild
The 1860 was Sam Colt's ideal revolver, so my guess is that he would have moved on to it and dropped the Navy grip frame had he lived longer.
After he died, they probably just used what they had leftover for the Open Tops and then decided that the Navy grip would be better for the SAA because the Navy sold more, not realizing that it sold better because it was made for longer.
The only company that ever put any amount of thought into their designs was Remington.
> Chamelot-Delvigne Model 1873
Just wish it was a stronger cartridge.
Apparently the frame was strong enough that it could have used one without issue.
Are older Cap & ball guns like the remington 1858 or Colt SAA easier to get into and start shooting than later cartidge guns like the S&W no 3 or remington 1875? I'm worried about having to reload for old cartidges like 44 Russian or 41 long colt... I have no reloading gear to I think cap & ball might be easier to start with lower barrier to entry
Am I insane for thinking about dropping $2900 on a very fine condition Remington 1858 new model army? Looks in good condition for a 160 year old gun, about 70% blueing left, but the barrel and frame have non-matching serials
Colt Patersons.
If all else fails, beat em with it.
how solid is that construction? Looks like the bottom part would fly off
For the first mass produced American single action revolver, strong enough.
That thang long ain't it?
What did you just say to me
Hey what the hell did you say just now.
quaaaaaaad
I long for the day that a reproduction run of pic related is made.
Never see them much in movies, games, etc. Wonder why
I see Merwin Hulbert in pics from 1870-80 era, they were semi popular and a really advanced design of the era. IMFDB will list them
Good ole imfdb
The only movie I've ever seen that included the Merwin Hulbert revolver was Tall Tale, and someone on that production must have loved guns because there's also an evil railroad tycoon who uses a C96 with and without the stock.
Off the top of my mind it also appears on The Long Riders
The most unsung great western.
Indeed, sadly even among the western genre fans. I likevthat as opposed to most westerns when they give everybody a civilian or artillery SAA, they actually showed a variety of revolvers.
I don't recognize the one on top, what's that thing dwarfing a walker?
I am pretty sure it was a revolving rifle that was cut down and modified into a pistol
>
BIG
IRON
>I don't recognize the one on top, what's that thing dwarfing a walker?
Anon's a reddit poster.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HuntShowdown/comments/152edoq/lemat_mk_ii_uppermat_gave_me_a_new_weapon_ideas/?rdt=42960
Watched the Forgotten Weapons vid on that thing. I guess it was made by the first Bubba.
I almost posted the utube link on the Colt 1855 10 gauge Super Red Neck instead of the reddit one.
Also.... Imagine This! A United States of America, where the citizens were Free Men and a sawed off shotgun was Legal.
Hell yea brother...These lazy kids today don't know about hard work like we used to...
God Bless Israel
Well, the ATF didn't exist back then. I wonder how much of a b***h is the recoil on that thing.
I dunno, I only watch FW vids about antique guns and haven't noticed political shit other than for historical context purposes that you mentioned.
I tend to avoid guntubers vids about political bullshit. I understand that guns and politics are heavily linked but I couldn't care less about the political ramblings of guntubers, whether I agree or disagree with them. Not the reason I go to their vids for.
Ian seems to be very well informed about the historical gun he's talking about and has the skill to transmit said information on a concise and understanable manner. That's all I care about.
>Well, the ATF didn't exist back then.
and in our lifetime it'll cease to exist.
it used to be called the bureau of indian affairs
bureau of indian affairs is still around tho. it turns 200 next month
Isnt ian kind of a commie turd? I never got into forgotten weapons. Someone said he keeps inserting politics into his videos and while some of that im sure is necessary for the historical background its just not something i wanna hear about when im watching gunvideos.
Nah, you are thinking of a guy he used to work with named Karl. Ian is nigh-autistic about avoiding politics
It seeps out sometimes, like this video, although containing much historical information, is also rather opinionated and politically motivated, with him trying to make hitler look as moronic as possible.
(sorry if this is kinda offtopic for the thread)
Hot take incoming. I dont think they were popular for a reason
>Slick clean design
>Fast unloading system
>but you cant use it to reload the cylinder and have to close the gun up and use it like a SAA with a gate.
It was marginally faster then other gate loaders but slower then the Top Break actions
The early models dont seem to have much goin for them compared to a Smith, but when you get to the later ones, a Double Action 6 shot .44-40 with a 3 inch barrel that comes with a spare 7 inch barrel it really seems like you couldnt ask for much more with it
Id still take a Smith personally. Regardless I want a repro in .357 or .38 like you wouldn't believe
>It was marginally faster then other gate loaders but slower then the Top Break actions
This, if you've ever shot one irl you'll realize it's the worth of both worlds
>unloading is finicky and not as fast as topbreak
>loading is as slow as gateloader, but frame isn't as sturdy
Exactly, they are super cool shooting irons but they arent nearly as good as people make them out to be. Still would shoot the crap out of a modern repro in .357 or .38
Bone Tomahawk has a scene with one that includes an emergency reload.
Ive messed with quite a few smoke wagons. The Smith Top breaks are easily the best. The Colts and Remingtons are good, but the Smiths just outclass them by miles. Id wager they are better then the Merwin & Hulberts. I do wish there were more cartridge conversions of some of the more esoteric cap and ball six guns like the Starr and the Rogers & Spencer.
Apparently Cimarron has been working on these with Uberti for years
>"Apparently Cimarron has been working on these with Uberti for years"
Finally, some good news.
> Cimarron has been working on these with Uberti for years
I have concerns, but I remain cautiously optimistic.
this ain't my first Bodeo, pardner
Underrated
>Carried foreign revolvers with him during his last stand
Why
You know damn well why.
I do not.
Don't lie to yourself or others.
No, we don't know why moron
Yes you do. Don't try to act all clueless or not in the loop.
SUPERIOR
EUROPEAN
TECHNOLOGY
>the virgin gay gun is expensive to manufacture and are boutique pieces nobody's ever heard of
>the chad Colt is easy to mass produce and makes all men equal
>>the chad Colt is easy to mass produce and makes all men equal
Just as Sam Colt envisioned.
Can you arm every man and woman with a gatling gun
no. equality is a false god
We should and a colt side arm.
we can try
The only doge meme that has made me laugh in a long while
your gayness is showing
But Custer wasn't dual wielding french revolvers, he had a pair of Webleys.
Only A PIMP From A Cheap New Orleans prostitutehouse Would Carry A FRENCH Revolver.
Get car accident'd
>gaynus
Ok gaynus.
Good artists create, great artists steal
>Carried foreign revolvers with him during his last stand
LOL.... And the proof is archeologist have found over 10,000 Webley .442 cases at the battlefield
Fricking love They Call Me Trinity
Best movie
I'd still like to know
At least 1 of them was a gift iirc. Rich dudes were giving away guns left and right back then, not like the gays we have running shit today.
this is a good write up on what we know about it https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/custers-last-gun-webley-ric-revolver/248900
Colt Navy cartridge conversion.
>Colt 1851 Richards Conversion.
Agreed.....
I like the ejector rod version with a 4 3/4 barrel.
does the reloading lever do anything when converted to cartridges?
because it looks very wrong when they remove it
On Remington's it hold the cylinder pin in, so it needs to stay with them. With Colts though, you dont need it, and you could keep it but keeping it there can get annoying if it falls when your using the gun cause the lever can go into the cylinder and stop the gun
thanks anon
No Pic but
>LeMat revolver
>You have seven shots of .42 or .36
>you cap a bunch of dudes and have to reload
>someone bayonet charges
>you have a secret 16 gauge "frick off" switch
>shred their face off at <10 feet
Shame there was never a cartridge conversion.
>hurr durr how come pietta doesn't make repro cartridge conversion cylinders for poorgays
just buy a taurus judge you dumb felon
Talk about an overreaction for no reason, gigautism.
Doesn't the GAyTF classify that as a sbs?
Willy Wonka Dr Seuss lookin ass revolver
There are two of them: the pinfire version like pic rel and the centerfire version like pic rel in
too big
>seven shots
9 in the cylinder actually.
Agreed, I want one like Ed Harris had in Westworld.
I dont think there is a great way to do it. Maybe if they chambered it in .38 Wadcutters or 38 Colt. Pretty sure the cylinder is shorter then standard .38 Special
That one used .38 Colt
?si=LuC3rkRaEDuTE3ax
Yes that is the one I was thinking of
>no pic
>Le Mat
I think this is from a reproductions site
remington 1858
Rifles: Winchester 1892/1894, 1860 Henry, 1866 Yellowboy & mare's leg rifles are pretty good looking too.
Revolvers: 1877 Colt Thunderer, Remington 1858 Sheriff, 8" Colt S.A.A., Lefaucheux M1854, The LeMat, 5.5" Remington 1875, Colt Dragoon (2nd Model), Remington 1861 Navy. I also like pepper box revolvers as well.
Pistols: The Mauser C96 & the Luger P08 (Artillery if you count that).
I agree. I like the look of the 5.5" the best but the 8" is also cool because it's the one that Angel Eyes uses.
>Winchester's 1892 would come too late to really be part of settling the west, but that is easily my favorite
1860 is my fav lever based just on looks/nostalgia.
But when it comes to actually buying and using one, the 1892 is my favorite as well, it's simply TheBest™.
Extremely good taste and was surprised to see the 1892 mentioned here.
>picture of Bloody Bill Anderson
>says Wild Bill, as in Wild Bill Hickok
Ah, my mistake, I was reading the thread earlier about Wild Bill and must've got them mixed up while I was naming the file.
Was Hickok more wild than Anderson?
Less actually.
I love the extra flange on the trigger guard for the Russian Model 3s
1860 Army, probably, but what good is a revolver without a couple frens.
Personally? Rogers & Spencer cartridge conversion.
Very attractive
Im very upset at you Mr poster. Since I saw this picture the other day I have been searching for a Rogers and Spencer repro that someone had converted in a similar manner and I have a mighty need
Held an Lightning for the first time yesterday and fell in love
That is one fat, hairy hand
yeah i have the hands of an ogre
How much was it going for?
$1,300
wayy too much 38 lightnings sell for $600-$800 online
Or the 1887
the 87 kinda blows tbh
Rule of cool, b***h.
Was only good in that one CoD game
I case anyone was looking to get an 1887 anytime soon Cimarron started importing a new model that isnt the old PW87s
These traditional spears are very beautiful and often overlooked for bows and guns. I'm from Texas and the Wild West era was a long time ago, but the government that perpetuated genocide across the American West is now becoming unstable. We may very well outlive it in our lifetimes.
Sherman lovers become real quiet when you start talking about his thoughts on the injuns.
No I don’t. Frick all feather headed fools.
Its real easy to fight women and kids. Sherman was a master of it.
1 indian is worth at least a dozen of whatever type of creature you are.
>dies of alcohol poisoning
>dies of old age after having spent most of his life alone in his room jacking off and ordering fast food
>dies of alcohol poisoning at the ripe old age of 27
Check'd
Savages BTFO go shit in a hole
This reads like a vatnik meme post, which oblast are you from Kemosapov?
>perpetuated genocide across the American West
The Comanche have been gone for a very long time anon
Barbarian tier weaponry for the late 1800s, no wonder they lost
>no wonder they lost
The vast majority died of disease anyway. We didn't put a dent in them until we showed up with revolvers and lever actions because tribes like the Apache were 10x more effective with a bow than an infantryman was with a musket.
Indians back then looked at us like neets; too soft and reliant on technology and conveniences. If they weren't straight up savages it would have been quite a bit more tragic that they were wiped out.
As if the indigenous weren't raping, slaving, and cannibalising each other a long time before colonial settlers arrived. Heya hoya heya hoya
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Slave_Lake
For me, it's the Volcanic pistol. I love these stupid underpowered primitive gyrojet revolver pistols. I can't help it, I just love wacky experimental weapons.
And a hearty HEYA HOYA HEYA HOYA HOYA HOYA HO AH HOYA WEYA HOYA HEYA HOYA HO WAY HO WAY HEYA WEYA to you too, my fellow AmeriKKKanski of New Yorksgorod.
This ain't Dodge City and you ain't Bill Hickok
i like these little guys, plus they got used in the phillipines to shoot fillipinos so thats just a bonus
Howdey y'all
Tell me about the bowie knife
Its a cold steel frontier bowie. I typically dont wear it much because its so large. (Dragoon for scale) Sometimes i will use it to clear brush. It has a nice blued blade so i dont want to completely trash it.
I really gotta take a pic like this one day. I dont have as many revolvers as you, but ive got a SAA and a few top break .32s, and ive forged a few bowies the past year so i could probably get something nice
Go for it. I like seeing other peoples collections. I actually have a lot more than what is pictured. I actually dont think I have a photo of my more recent acquisitions yet. I am constantly buying selling and trading, although its mostly buying.
well that was fun getting together
I like it, especially the sawed off side by side. Thanks for posting
Aesthetically pleasing, and family photo pics are always amongst my favourites, so i'm going to have to give it a 10/10
the one you got the idea from too.
Borchardt C-93
Why didnt I hear about this until right now?
Cimarron is making a budget 87. I used to have a century one but I sold it because it was so irredeemably shit. Even after polishing the internals, it couldnt get a grip on the spent shells and it needed a ram rod to cycle.
Does anyone have the new cimarron? I might buy one with my tax return.
They literally just came out but every video ive seen says they are fantastic.
I really might get it. I want to see it in person though. Ive never ordered a gun online before.
Im probably gunna avoid it. the PW87 put such a bad taste in my mouth for 1887s. Plus the 1897 is such a better gun. Id look for it on GB before Id buy direct from Cimarron. They dont ever sell under their MSRP
Its 560 at buds.
I had a really bad time with the chinese 87, but i really wanted to like it. I figured if the cimarron was really that bad, i could sell it pretty easily. I sold the chinese one damn near instantly at a gun show. I have faith in cimarron because I have yet to get a bad gun from them.
> I sold the chinese one damn near instantly at a gun show.
Same, I listed mine online and in 2 hours I was meeting a guy at Wally World to sell it. If you are hankering for one Id jump on it. If I get one im gunna wait until they start selling the 26 inch barrel. Id love to take it Hunting
Oh yeah they are made in China too, not the same factory as the PW87 though. Mike Harvey at Cimarron mentions it in his video from 2 years ago
reviews seem goo, its got my interest
>They literally just came out
wut?
Okay, I looked into it, those things are dirt cheap. They used to carry much nicer ones that Taylor's still sells, I remember handling one at their shop and coming so close to buying it... I think I eventually blew my load on a new Ithaca 37 instead.
How budget is budget? The Century chinkshit ones are like $600, is this comparable? Because I'm not paying over $1000 for this shotgun, it's a fundamentally shitty design.
Msrp is 620
Maybe I'll make a trade, although I kinda like my chinkshit
I think the problems with it are less rough edges and more "it's an experimental design from 1887"
Just a heads up, Cimarron basically just imports spaghetti repros with a bit more QC requitements and a rollmark. If I'm not mistaken those are Chiappa 1887's with the cimarron roll mark
You are in fact mistaken. These are built in CHYNA. Theres a few posts in this thread already. They arent made by the same factory as the old PW87s and they would appear to be solid reliable shotguns. They arent blued as nice as the Chiappa built 87s but they are mechanically sound
Oh pull the medicine stick out of your ass seething-horse, it was a joke. Maybe you should have stuck to your favorite western era guns instead of whining about ebil Amerigga because your drunk ancestors thought beads were awesome. Take another hit off the peace pipe and chill, no need to burn my wagon.
Winchester's 1892 would come too late to really be part of settling the west, but that is easily my favorite followed by the 1886.
I like the winchester 94 and the 1873 the most. The huge receiver on the 73 and the adaptation for long cartridges on the 94 are pretty cool.
The 86 did everything the 94 did, but even longer and stronger. It was still smaller than the 73.
I admit that I might be a little bias toward the 94
>Post 64
ITS OVER
My bias is there too, we like what we like.
92 still saw use in that aspect. It outsold the 73 for a reason.
1860 is my fav lever based just on looks/nostalgia.
But when it comes to actually buying and using one, the 1892 is my favourite awell, it's simply TheBest™.
My least fav of the classic winchesters is probably the 73/76, i just think the sideplate makes them kinda ugly.
> 1860 is my fav lever based just on looks/nostalgia
>nostalgia
It’s not often to have US civil war veterans post here. What a treat!
I meant from seeing them in movies, it always stood out the most to me over the other types, and always felt the most a treat when i did get to see it.
(picrel probably isnt the best example as apparently its a volcanic not a henry, but frickit close enough, it still has the look)
I served under Nathan Bedford Forrest, where did you serve?
Oh my god I just thought of a 76 in 350 and 400 legend. Mah diiiiik
The West didn't die until about 1918-1920 and also had a short revival in the 1930s. The oil towns of the 1910s that people like Frank Hamer made their names in were just as wild as the 1860s cow towns that people like Wild Bill got famous in.
Based wild bunch appreciator. The 1911 was the best gun of the old west.
It bothers me that Wild Bunch doesn't allow other early automatics as well as DA revolvers from that era. I've seen more pictures of men of the era with Lugers and C96s than I have with 1911s.
Yeh, CAS in general has too many rules for its own good i think. Getting your kit together for it doesn't feel natural, like you have to base your guns(and outfit etc) around what they want to see, not necessarily what you wanted. Though its a problem common to all shooting sports.
Those guys are buttholes. Really stuck up and they have that boomer mentality of being better than you. Its really just a circle jerk over the expensive guns they bought with their pension. They really dont want to keep it going after they die I guess.
I honestly dont know if this is bait, I dont like CAS and I know this isnt true. They literally all run Rossi's and Ubertis
>circle jerk over the expensive guns they bought with their pension
Even tuned guns aren't usually over $1500 and barely anybody runs actual antiques. You can all the guns you need for around $2000 if you look, maybe even less if you're using cap and ball revolvers.
I remember going to a match to just watch, and while it was cool, literally everyone had 4 3/4 Single Action Army's, 20" barrel Winchester 73's, and Stoeger coach guns. ONE guy had cartridge converted 1851's with the full length barrels, an 1866 carbine, and an hammered coach gun, and he shot with all black powder.
I remember getting a Ruger Blackhawk years ago, and I thought that I could go shoot in a cowboy action shooting event if I wanted. That was when I found out I need another revolver, a shotgun, and a lever action rifle, and on top of that, the Blackhawk isn't allowed because it has an adjustable rear sight. I realized then that cowboy action shooting is fricking gay, and I hate it even more now because I'm tired of looking at everyone making SAA reproductions and clones but nothing double action.
>Nothing double action
Like the Thunderer and Lightning? Its because they are junk and always break
Wouldn't it be great if we had some modern reproductions with modern metallurgy so we could properly judge the design instead of basing our opinions on guns that are 120+ years old?
don't be that guy
>muh modern metallurgy
Why is it that every single moron on this board will mindlessly chant this slogan whenever someone brings up 1800s repros? You do know that modern steel won't magically fix a bad design, right anon?
>but the guns are old
Then why does no one ever have the same complaints out of the Colt 1878, S&W .44 double actions, DA Merwin & Hulberts, or any of the other double actions of the era? Those guns are just as old, but in comparison to the 1877s they work fine. Even the assortment of Bulldog clones don't have these kinds of issues even though they were basically the equivalents of Raven .25s of their day. Why is it that, even in the era in which they were made, the 1877s were regarded as fragile?
That's a fine list of firearms that have not been remotely common since the late 1800s, so I could not tell you why nobody today complains about them.
>firearms that have not been remotely common since the late 1800s
Unlike the 1877, right? That's so common that people still carry it today after all.
what exactly is the issue with the 1877, like do we know exactly. Like if it breaks so much, what makes it break
Uncommon doesn't mean nonexistant. Just what's the percentage of people who actually carry a lighting?
From wikipedia:
>The M1877's early double-action mechanism proved to be both intricate and delicate, thus it was vulnerable to failure of self wienering. The design had a garnered a negative reputation and earned the nickname "the gunsmith's favorite". Because of the intricate design and difficulty of repair, gunsmiths to this day dislike working on them.[2] Gun Digest referred to it as "the worst double-action trigger mechanism ever made".[4] Typically, the trigger spring would fail and this would reduce the revolver to single-action fire only.
ez, just make a better trigger spring
I don't know the specifics, but the design was, apoarently, intrincate and hard to work with. Even nowadays not many gubsmiths can work on the 1877s. The 1878 apparently solved these issues.
I guess you could make a modern version with an updated mechanism, but then it would be a replica in apperance only.
>Colt 1878, S&W .44 double actions
Why don't they repro those? I'd go for one.
Not many people know or care about the 1878 so there's not a repro market substantial enough for them.
>Why is it that every single moron on this board will mindlessly chant this slogan whenever someone brings up 1800s repros? You do know that modern steel won't magically fix a bad design, right anon?
Reprogays are just poorgays who wished Uberti would sell a gun for $450 when they don't realize they could just save up for an extra month buy an original colt lightning for $600
Cowboy Action in general is way too stringent on some of their rules. Its just USPCA with single actions and cowboy hats. Id love a more loose division in 3 gun that basically combined Wild Bunch and Cowboy Action. Want to run my 1866, 1897 and a Luger
Arizona Ranger wouldn't be to long in towwnnn
They don't allow other autos?
20ish years ago my dad said you could use other autos, but everyone just used the 1911 cause it's ubiquity.
Doesn't make sense they wouldn't allow others but there's not gonna be a better auto loader than the 1911 from that era anyway.
Their firearm regs are very stringent for some reason.
I really wish it wasnt. like, spending around $2k for guns just so you can play cowboy is a very big barrier to entry for most people. Like, you alwyas need 2 revolvers, when like that was very rare in the actual old west! Something like a 1 revolver 1 shotgun division would be so much easier to get into.
I agree, that and the targets being at 15 feet is also very unappealing. CAS is fun and people enjoy it I guess. Sad reality is that its mostly old boomers who do it so when CAS really dips in popularity Uberti and Pietta are going to have a hell of a time staying in business. Really want them to make some more esoteric six guns before that happens
His club probably let them use other autos, but the official rules don't and you just know how boomers are about meaningless rules like that. I've seen a few clubs that still allow other stuff, but not many.
>Chiappa will never make a Spencer Carbine in .357
I am big sad
I remember watching a video on the Colt Walker and a comment sent me into orbit, more or less "I want a handgun that can kill a horse, by bludgeoning if necessary."
I want an 1892 lever, but unfortunately i believe that would mean the only divisions i could shoot in would be wild bunch or B-Move. Understandable i guess that they they wouldn't want a later model gun in the other divisions, but it also means that i have to dress like a moron, for b-movie my outfit must be bright/colourful/goofy/budgetlooking, not just by their strict point-like system that it must contain enough specific pieces that they have listed, but then also at the discretion of a judge, who can then decide if the outfit ive put together actually looks moronic enough.
S&W K-frame.
>1899
>old west
Colt 1889 only commercially available swing out cylinder revolver before 1890
>>1899
>>old west
Yes, it was. See
wrong
Everybody's already seen that report, but in real life it didn't end until much later.
Webley is enough for me
junk
You take that back
J u n k
You should get a bigger one, too, those look a little smoll for protecting yourself from grizz bears innacrown.
Anyone know if Taylors stopped importing the New Model No. 3? It feels like they arent for sale anywhere
Yes, which sucks major butt. Right before they stopped importing them they made 20 in .38 Special. I just special ordered a SAA through them and it came up in conversation with the sales rep. Pretty sure they stopped in 2021
Bringing back the poncho with modern day anti-ballistic tech.
Why wouldn't it work?
With the different arguments over when the old west actually was, ive always gone with
>Pre 1870ish Cap and Ball Wild West
>Post 1870-1890 Classic Old West
>1890-1920 New West
Bassically the 1851 Navy era, the Single Action Army era, and the 1889/92 era
>wild west ended when AZ and NM became states in 1912
With this late end date we get some early automatics, some of which can still hold their own today and even a few that mog later designs.
Anyone know much about pommel holsters? I know they were the main way to carry like Walkers and Dragoons, but what about after that? were they still being used by the SAA days?
After the Civil War, pommel holsters pretty died out. Lever guns could put out as much or more fire than a pair of revolvers could so there was really no point in having them anymore.
They have recently started making somewhat of a comeback though as it's imo the best way to carry an automatic on horseback. My mom carries her Glock in one while riding.
speaking of Walkers and Dragoons, im lookin into them a bit more, the whole "1st 2nd 3rd" model Dragoon thing really feels like it isnt the way to go, it feels like there were realy 6 "Dragoons," 7 if you want to just call them whole family "The Colt Holster Model." Like to the best of my knowledge, no one makes repros of the 1853 Dragoon, even though there were probably more of them historically than say the Whiteville or the 1850/"2nd Model" Dragoon
Are there any new historical cowboy repros from Shotshow this year
Schofield obviously. Easy to load, super sexy.
>no volcanic lever action
baka my head
I hate the Volcanic pistol so fricking much
Still dont undertand why nobody made slaced down 1860 Henry for that volcanic fix.
Are there any good books or guides with info on getting into blackpowder guns?
Im reading though The Modern American Pistol by AC Gould, which is on pistol target shooting written in 1888, but its interesting to see what he calls guns vs what we call them today, especially Colts. The Single Action Army is called the "New Model Army Single Action," the 1878 is called the "New Model Army Double Action," the Lightning and Thunderer are called "New Model .41" and "New Model .38." With Smith and Wesson, its mostly normal, with what we call the New Model No.3 being called the "New Model Army No. 3" and is constantly referred to in the text as the "Russian Model" even though what we call the Russian model is different from the New Model No 3, but it seems he is writing as if any single action in .44 Russian is of the same make. The .44 double action whos name is never really agreed upon by countless collectors is referred to as the "New Model Navy No. 3" which yeah ive seen be used in some other historical documents.
>New Model Navy No. 3
Now that's a new one. I've often heard it referred to as the Double Action Frontier. Calling it a Navy is especially strange considering that .38-40 was as close as they got to .36 caliber and that was one of the rarest chamberings for it.
I had heard Othias mention an upcoming episode of Primer on the "Smith and Wesson New Model Navy" and that made me curious, so I checked my Standard Catalogue of Smith and Wesson and yeah thats what the non Frontier version is called it seems. So for some reason, the double action version of the Number 3 is called the New Model Navy when its chambered in .44 Russian, but the Double Action Frontier when its chambered in .44-40
>The .44 double action whos name is never really agreed upon by countless collectors is referred to as the "New Model Navy No. 3" which yeah ive seen be used in some other historical documents.
Smith wesson named it that cause they were fishing for a navy contract, but lost to the colt 1889
If you read gould's sequel book in 1896 (?) he talks about the army pistol trials, including s&w's safety hammerless /lemon squeezer submision to the army trials against the colt 1892
Frontier is 44-40 and some 38-40
New model navy / 1st model DA 44 is in 44 russian
They have different serial ranges, and the frontiers have a slightly longer cylinder/frame for the WCF cartridges
This is basic info in the standard catalog of s&w
The market will make superficial cosmetic clones like the henry revolvers and cimarron thunderers, but they will never make an actual repro because the cost to manufacture would be $1k+, and originals can be had for only slightly more than that
I just saw the Earps and Doc Holiday go by armed to the teeth!
Frick them gungrabbin Earps
Tell em I lost my Winchester in a boatin accident
Saw Karl the Cuck fleeing at the sight of Wyatt!
I hate that guy so much
Hey Wyatt, how the Hell are ya?!
Colt 1878 Double Action Army "Frontier"
I wish someone made a repro of these.
me too but they never will
The terminal CAS boomers dictate the ol'western repro market, and they only shoot single actions, because thats whats in the movies.
What kills cartridge conversions for me is;
>you're stuck losing lower powered loads
>the gun still has no rifling,
>theyre still pretty slow to reload
>the gun still has no rifling
bruh
I was talking more generally, usually conversions are just a cylinder swap to a capn'ball.
cap and ball has rifling though?
It does? Ah shit, i must be moronic then.
But why would a round ball need rifling? or i guess they did often shoot conicals.
Always just kinda assumed they were smoothebore, or could swear ive heard it before.
You don't own any cap and ball guns do you? Either that or you never bother to clean them.
>You don't own any cap and ball guns do you?
No sir, i do not. though i want some, handguns are currently banned here, unless i felt like paying out the ass for a genuine antique.
>What kills cartridge conversions for me is;
>>you're stuck losing lower powered loads
221 grain bullet, 33 grains 2f BP average 800 fps on my chrono from my Krist Konversion modded Pietta1851 with the 4 3/4 inch barrel.
and yes they have lands and grooves, mine has a 1 in 30 twist.
and yes they are faster to load than cap and ball but slower than top break and swing out cylinders.
221gr @ 800fps = 314ft/lbs
So about as powerful as a .38spc/380acp, yeah thats fine, and makes sense for a gun of the era, but i believe you're usually converting the gun to .45colt or .45acp, meaning you're stuck using cowboy loadings, which was my complaint, not that i think the rounds are too weak, but that most of the ammo on the shelf in your calibre will be too powerful for the gun, so its only actually giving the ability to use specialty/low powered loadings, thus ammo will still be hard to find for it. And potentially dangerous to just grab and shoot random ammo of said caliber.
Yeah, being a open top I like to keep it moderate and stick to BP because 5 to 10 grains of brand x or z smokeless can have some terible velocity spreads in a large 45 colt cartridge. I have stuffed about 38 gr of 3F BP and got a velocity around 940 +/- which starts showing some real excitement, but that's obviously hard on the design.
I also agree with your statement that off the shelf factory loadings are too hot for a conversion. I've been reloading for... Dam.. 25 or so years and have gotten board and thus got interested in Black Powder Cartage and me trying my hand at a Krist Konverter mod a few years back, I have truly enjoyed the experience.
That being said... I think all serious firearms anons should learn reloading.
You are not stuck to cowboy loads.
Any proper cylinder will take a standard SAAMI load.
BP in handgun loads is only low powered in comparison to modern magnums and Bubba's pissing hot reloads, anon. It's plenty powerful, and the repros are indeed rifled. If your conversion features an ejector rod, loading and unloading is no slower than a modern single action. If you're swapping cylinders on a 1858, it's even faster.
Round balls are more accurate with rifling. You may have been thinking of progressive rifling, which most of the originals featured but the repros seldom due because of cost.
>progressive rifling is mainly for the benefit of shooting balls and conicals with small bearing surfaces, not really a factor with modern bullets
I'm not sure if anyone wrote it down, but I'd assume that it had to do with basic conservative design. Long barrels were the industry standard for centuries and were beneficial to a good sight picture when shooting one handed. Colt probably noticed that users were having their barrels shortened and identified a potential market.
Is there any written documentation as to why Colt made both the 5 1/2" and 4 3/4" barrel lengths? The 5 1/2" was originally made for the London market, and the 4 3/4" didnt come out until 1879, but is there any reason why they didnt just go with the 4 3/4 from the start? Handling my 5 1/2" and wondering, is it so that you can feel where the ejector rod ends without sticking your finger in front of the barrel?
IDK, but I've read that Bat Masterson was one of the first people to buy one of the 4 3/4" guns when they came out.
Of course that could be fake because Bat would sometimes buy used guns, carve notches in them, and sell them claiming that he used them during his time in the West.
BIG
IRON
A root revolver and a Colt walker
I personally like the gun
>he doesnt carry a pinfire blunderbuss
Actually this made me think, how did people carry pinfire ammo? it seems like it could get damaged to have it like in a pouch or a cartridge belt. did you just like carry them in a box in your pocket?
Cartridge pouches usually had a wooden insert with holes for each cartridge. I imagine it would be the same for pinfire, but with a cutout for the pin.
lookin around, yeah seems there were a few things. Leather pouches with ammo loops/cups seem common, as well as either box's that had a little wooden insert, or just carrying them loose in a box. Defiantly not something id want to be carrying around in the frontier or war, but yeah i can see being cool with this if i was in like a Victorian Era city
Im lookin through cabinet cards of the late 1800s, like pictures youd go to a studio to take right, and like so many of them have 1875 Remington's? I cannot figure out why. I assume owners of 1875s weren't also coincidently into photography, and these are just props owned by the photographer. But like, is it one one studio that had a few 1875s? Were they just cheap to buy so studios bought them? I really have no idea, just a weird thing I noticed
The 75 was a pretty popular six gun, Just because the Colts were the most popular doesnt mean they were they only ones
>
Are S&W Schofield and Remington 1875 the only worthy competitors for the Colt SAA back then?
Depends what you mean. Like, if you were in the 1870s or 80s and wanted to buy a large bore single action cartridge revolver, then yeah a SAA, a Smith and Wesson No.3, a Remington 1875, or a Merwin Hulbert were the main options to choose from in America. There were of course still cap and ball revolvers that were plentiful (and very cheap comparatively) as well as cartridge conversions of them, though I think people over estimate how many conversions of the larger guns actually existed. For actual practical use, the double actions of the era should not be looked over. Colts 1877 and 1878, with the 1878 basically doing everything the SAA does but also with double action, Smith and Wesson with its top break double action .38's and .44's, Merwin Hulbert's .38 and .44 double actions, or one of the many British or Belgian double actions that take the form of either a Webley RIC or a Bulldog revolver. For example, yesterday I found this photograph famously titled The Cowboy, taken in South Dakota in 1888. You can see the grip of the gun the man carries is one of the the later Merwin Hulbert sqaure butt grips for one of their large frame revolvers. If you are talkin about playing TV cowboy, then yeah the options you listed are the go to ones, but in the actual historic late 1800s, youd probably be better armed with say an 1877 Thunderer in .41 Colt. What we consider desirable today is not that different from what they did back then. Today one of the best selling guns is a .38 caliber, 5 shot, double action only Smith and Wesson with an internal hammer. 125 years ago one of the best selling guns was a .38 caliber, 5 shot, double action only Smith and Wesson with an internal hammer. So to answer your question, there were really a lot of options that people chose for different reasons, just like today.
>Today one of the best selling guns is a .38 caliber, 5 shot, double action only Smith and Wesson with an internal hammer. 125 years ago one of the best selling guns was a .38 caliber, 5 shot, double action only Smith and Wesson with an internal hammer.
That's awesome. I got two (one for me and one for the wife) for Valentine's Day one year.
The popularity of .38 Colt and .38 S&W really perplex me on why 9mm Luger took SO long to catch on here
9x19 is a weird one. Yes it's been around since 1902, but pretty much only in a full sized military handgun, and then only in Germany. Even by WW2, there were only a handful of 9x19 handguns, and those are going to be for the military anyway. Police still carried .380 and .32 in Europe, and would until about the 70's. Meanwhile in America, there are some 9mm caliber rounds being somewhat popular. .380 is popular, and .38 ACP as well as .38 Super were around. It wasnt until after WW2 that 9x19 really came into America, with the Browning Hi Power, the S&W Model 39, and the Colt Commander being the domestic 9mm's that because available in America in the 50s, as well as surplus guns like Lugers and P38's. So a big part of it was that really before WW2, most countries just used their own ammo. Like 9mm isnt the 9mm we know today as the worldwide NATO and police standard, it was pretty much just the bullet the German army uses and not much else. Also keep in mind in the post Moro rebellion, when the US Army is big on "if its a military gun it needs to be .45" so that is also in the public conscious.
I changed your wording slightly. Also, I couldn't find a picture with a more modern hammerless J frame next to a Safety Hammerless. I might rework this with more effort another time.
Those three and Navy Cartridge Conversions.
?si=CMpUR5jIUDg6lB62
So you know how we have competitions for cowboy larping and john wick larping?
Can we get Harry Callahan larping division going?
>revolvers
>calibers must be .357 or greater
>PF of >200
>barrel lengths from 4" - 8 3/8"
>shots range from 10 yards to 50 yards
>speedloaders and shoulder rigs
I have desperatly wanted a like Detective Action Shooting thing
>mid 20th century suit
>5-6 shot double action revolver
> 4 shot pump action
Oh thatd be fun, it'd appeal to my specific breed of Autism
>Smith Model 10 or Single Action Army
>Winchester 97
>03 Springfield, Winchester 94 or a Rem Model 8/81
See, I think there's a market for it gentlemen.
Just to ensure large divisions, we may have only 2, one was outlined and the other would be a snub division.
>barrel length 3" or less
>PF of 130 to accomodate 38 Spl
One event needs to be drawing and shooting in that weird one handed crouching style they used to teach FBI agents
?feature=shared
Could call it Fusillade Noir.
I really like the idea and it'd finally give me the chance to use my Winchester 1907 competitively.
Does anyone make a modern faithful reproduction of the classic like Remington Derringer? I know theres the Cobras, but they have safteys and extractors the Remingtons dont
Best western movie
do the remington ejector rods have springs?
The 1875/90 do. The cartridge conversions didn't as far as I know.
The 75 and 90 do as
said, The modern repros of the New Model Army dont have springs but ive seen some original conversions that did
Does anyone know anything about the 1860 Army grip frame? Why is it different from the 51 and 61 Navies, and the Single Action Army? Like Colts "military" revolvers went
>Dragoon : Dragoon Grip
>51 Navy : Navy Grip
>Very very early 60 Army : Navy Grip
>60 Army : Army Grip
>61 Navy : Navy Grip
>Early Open Top : Navy Grip
>Late Open Top : Army Grip
> Single Action Army : Navy Grip
Is there like, a reason for this back and forth of two grip sizes on what is basically all just the Navy sized frame?
>
Like im trying to think what did they think about the 1860 that made them think it needed a longer grip, but then feeling as if that longer grip was not needed on the Single Action Army. I assume it isnt gloves, cause would that not also be an issue on the SAA? Is it easier to pull out of Dragoon style saddle holsters? Is it so that the grip mirrors the size of the the Dragoon grip, which allows the use of the Dragoon style shoulder stock? 1861 Navys, which use the shorter Navy grip frame, dont have the cuts in the recoil sheild needed for the shoulder stock, but the Army does have them, so did they need to get the Army frame longer so that they could use the same stock that was on the Dragoon? And by the time of the SAA, they knew they werent gonna use a stock on it so it went back to the Navy frame? I cant find a single answer, people just say "yeah the Army grip frame is different" but never ask why
My bet would be on shoulder stock. I've heard that was the reason for the 1860 having an iron backstrap.
You might find a better answer from Charles W. Pate's book on the 1860 army.
ok looking around, i did find that the patent for the stock that would be used on late dragoons and the 1860 Army, and yeah it was patented in early 1859, which makes sense to me as a "we should make it fit the old .44 thats already out and the new .44 we are currently making"
https://patents.google.com/patent/US22626A/en?oq=US22626
I did notice a weird thing though, idk if they ever patented the like stepped cylinder thats on the 1860 and 1862? Was that idea used somewhere before but the patent had already run out by then?
ok yeah, looking at a very very very early production 1860 Army, it is basically just a Navy but with the stepped cylender and the new creeping loading lever. Things they would soon change on the main pattern of 1860 would be lengthing the barrel from 7.5" to 8", making the backstrap iron, and making the cuts in the recoil sheild for the stock, and lengthening the grip. Not counting the lengthened grip, all of those changes also happened to the late Dragoons that were made to be fit with shoulder stocks right? And none of these changes were made for the standard pattern of the 1861 Navy. So i THINK the idea was like, the idea of a "belt" pistol was one that had a Navy grip and a 7.5 inch barrel, while a new pattern "Holster Model" would have a larger grip to fit a shoulder stock, and an 8 inch barrel so that it could be easily used as a carbine, like the Springfield 1855 stocked pistol right? But when they make the Single Action Army, they know they are not going to fit it with a stock, so they keep it in that "Belt Model" shape, Navy Grip and 7.5" barrel. So the original 1860 I have pictured here was supposed to be a .44 Belt Model, but with the changes made to become the 1860 we know it turned into more of a new pattern Holster Model. I cannot find any documentation about this, nor can I find it mentioned in any books or anything
ok this is the least insane way i can present this
The is really good.
If you're spending money on antiques then you might as well just buy a reloading kit too.
I kinda want to see a repro of that early 1860. A "Belt Model" version of the 1860 seems like it would be great, even more so with a fluted cylinder
As long as you stay within the same manufacturer, the parts will interchange fine. I've put my 1860 grip frame on my 1851 before and vice versa.
yeah the Navy/Belt grips should be easy, and its probably not too hard to move back the front sight and shorten the barrel by that 1/2 inch, but I think all the 1860 reproductions have the stock cut in the recoil sheild
wew
I'm very intrigued. Now what is the most insane way to present this?
while looking into all this i was subjecting my friend who does not care about guns into an insane rant to allow me to brainstorm and think
The 1860 was Sam Colt's ideal revolver, so my guess is that he would have moved on to it and dropped the Navy grip frame had he lived longer.
After he died, they probably just used what they had leftover for the Open Tops and then decided that the Navy grip would be better for the SAA because the Navy sold more, not realizing that it sold better because it was made for longer.
The only company that ever put any amount of thought into their designs was Remington.
> Chamelot-Delvigne Model 1873
Just wish it was a stronger cartridge.
Apparently the frame was strong enough that it could have used one without issue.
1851 Navy.
Looted Yankee Remington's better.
11 days
Are older Cap & ball guns like the remington 1858 or Colt SAA easier to get into and start shooting than later cartidge guns like the S&W no 3 or remington 1875? I'm worried about having to reload for old cartidges like 44 Russian or 41 long colt... I have no reloading gear to I think cap & ball might be easier to start with lower barrier to entry
Do you mean like actual antiques or modern reproductions?
Yeehaw
Am I insane for thinking about dropping $2900 on a very fine condition Remington 1858 new model army? Looks in good condition for a 160 year old gun, about 70% blueing left, but the barrel and frame have non-matching serials