[Ian]

Does anyone know anything about Uberti's Bisley? I was browsing through the company's web site, and noticed that they're listed at only $450. By golly, that's something I might be able to afford! And of course, my next thought was "waaaaait...if they're only $450, what's wrong with them?"

Does anyone have experience with these? Are they good guns? Decent accuracy?

http://www.uberti.com/firearms/images/prod_bisley.jpg

[Standing Wolf]

Uberti's quality control is a hit or miss proposition—no pun intended, to be sure!

[Jim March]

First, realize that Uberti SAs don't have transfer bar ignitions, they need to be used with the original Colt SAA operations drill. The only safety on these is the one between your ears. The exception is the Ubertis that are sold under the Beretta Stampede/Stampede Marshal names - those have modern transfer bars.

Uberti will sell varying quality levels depending on the importer's specs. Cimarron is a US importer who specifies the highest level of fit and finish and then does US-based final inspection and customer service. If you want a *good* Uberti, I'd say they're an option:

http://www.cimarron-firearms.com

They sell that Bisley.

They have some Uberti combinations that are available nowhere else.

One big note of caution: if you are ALSO interested in transfer-bar SAs, you need to ponder whether or not you want to own a mixture of "safety and non-safety guns" with different operating drills but similar looks and feels.

See also this thread:

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=112655

My personal choice is NOT to own such a mixture.

[Ian]

Jim - Actually, the only other revolvers I have at the moment are a pair of 1860 Army clones, which also use a "load 5, carry on an empty" sort of mechanism.

[Jim K]

FWIW, I would try to borrow a Bisley and try it before shelling out money for one. They are something of an acquired taste. I admit to prejudice, but I didn't like them when Colt made them, I don't like them any better when Ruger makes them, and I doubt I would like the Uberti version.

BTW, Ian, the original 1860 Colt Army had safety pins in the cylinder between the nipples; the gun was carried loaded by dropping the hammer so the notch in the hammer fitted over the pin to prevent the cylinder from turning accidentally. The repro companies either didn't know what the pins were for or they thought they cost too much, so few repros have them, although almost all have the hammer notch.

Jim

[hawg306]

The one I have was imported by Cimmaron, and after 4 years of ownership, I still can't make up my mind if I like it or not. Caliber is 45 colt, shoots about 4 inches left and 4 inches high with 200 grain handloads at 25 feet. I had to send it back to Cimmaron twice to replace a broken hand spring. The folks at Cimmaron said the fault was mine for dry firing the thing. It sure is pretty though. 5 beans in tha wheel!

[mec]

A careful reviewer on the sixgun community board has one that is very well made and satisfyingly accurate. He recently examined another one-made in the last year or so, that had a lot of tool marks and other apparent problems.

In the last two years, since the Baretta people bought Uberti, I've bought or examined and shot quite a few of the new caplock replicas from uberti. It could be luck or what i'm seening may last only until they locate and get rid of the employee who is building quality into these but they have been a world apart from what we've expected from the Italian c&b makers. The quality of every one of them has been equal to domestic cartridge revolvers that cost twice what these do.

The ubertis have the safety pins between chambers- if the original they are copying did. There is only one on the cylinder of the Well Fargo .31 and none at all on the paterson. This is historically accurate.

[vwfool]

Ian, all I know is that I want one. I've shot my dad's two Ubertis and like them both. One is a 4 5/8" 45LC (SAA grip) labeled Uberti, and the other is a 3 1/2" Cimarron Thunderer in 45LC. Both are great. I do have to agree with Jim on the fact that the fit and finish is better on th Cimarron.

I don't own one, but I have always been a Bisley nut. I think that the Uberti (under any name) would be a good choice. Go handle one and see what you think.

I got a .357 Blackhawk just 2 or 3 weeks ago. I would love to find some wanting to get rid of a Ruger Bisley grip frame, trigger, triggger gaurd, and hammer. I don't care if it is even the aluminum grip frame.

There is just something about them.

[Onmilo]

I have owned and worked on Uberti pistols for years.
Quality has really improved in the last ten years but fine tuning is usually the order of business once you get your new revolver in hand, these guns aren't right out of the box perfect.
A little stoning here and there and a replacement spring or two usually corrects the faults one may find.
I know they are pricy and probably no better than any off-brand spring, but I have been using Colt replacement springs when I do work on these guns and cannot find one in the book that has come back for a spring replacement since.
Uberti finally wised up and started putting taller than neccessary front sights on their guns so the owner can actually regulate point of aim now. A good idea long in coming.
If you really want a Bisley I will wholeheartedly recommend you buy the version called the "Bisley Flat top Target".
These guns feature the old style adjustable Colt sights, polished internals, proper throats and leeds, and are suprisingly accurate.

[Ian]

Thanks for the info, guys. I think my first stop when I have the money together is going to be a couple of the Cowboy Action forums, to see if I can find a used one that's had an action job done, and/or had any sight alignment issues fixed.

Are there any companies importing the target models? I found them on Uberti's web site, but not at Cimarron or EMF, and Navy Arms lists them but doesn't appear to sell them (they have no price or item number).

Also, how similar is the Uberti's Bisley grip to the Ruger Bisley grip? I've handled a Ruger Bisley, and really liked the grip style - will there be much difference between that and a Colt replica?

[vwfool]

The Ruger Bisley is a little bit fatter all around. To me it feels a little longer from front to back and a little bit thicker from side to side than the Uberti. This is of course comparing 2 guns with factory grips on them. Lett Custom Grips makes several aftermarket grips for the Ruger. Vintage Industries (sold in Brownells catalog) also makes some that are thinner than the factory Ruger ones and look wonderfull.

[Gunnutz13]

I second that...the Ruger's are fine weapons that are built like tanks. I have one in stainless with a 51/2" barrel and white micarta grips in .357 magnum. Brand New in Box $350. Also bought a nice rig to carry it in from the Texas Gunslinger in...I think...Arlington, TX. His ad is in the back of Guns & Ammo...it's a single holster with leg tiedown in a dark walnut finish...no gingerbread, conchos, or border stampings...if I remember correctly it cost $140, with shipping. Vaya con Dios, Pardner ! :evil:

I've included a pic that is not my Bisley, but you can get an idea of what a Ruger Vaquero looks like...

[Jim March]

I've handled a Ruger Bisley, and really liked the grip style - will there be much difference between that and a Colt replica?

Yes. A *whole* lot of difference.

Right: in the...dang, not sure the timeframe, 1930s I *think*, Elmer Keith and several gunsmiths collaborated on a custom gun called the "Number 5". It featured a significantly altered Bisley grip frame. It was a VERY influencial custom gun and several copies were made at various times.

Ruger seems to have started with THAT as the basis for their "Bisley", but theirs is bigger than the #5 grip frame. Still, with thinner grip panels (Eagle Gunfighters fr'instance) it's pretty close to the #5's feel.

The original Bisley grip was designed to bring the sights to eye level quickly - "Bisley" was the name of a famous-at-the-time shooting competition event and the name was chosen to suggest "target work".

Ruger's "Bisley" (and the #5 Keith was involved in) appears to have been optimized for handling big recoil. Keith was famous for wild-hot 44Spl loads that eventually led us to the 44Magnum. I'm not sure that this was ever spelled out as such by Keith and company and Ruger never advertized their Bisley as a big-recoil alternative but given the effectiveness of the design in recoil control and Keith's known tendency towards big power, it's not a huge jump to think that the design's recoil control abilities aren't accidental.

In other words, the Ruger "Bisley" is basically two generations removed from the original Colt Bisley. There are still "family similarities" that increase when you run thinner grip panels on the Ruger but they're still fairly far apart.

[Ian]

Yes. A *whole* lot of difference.

Alright, I'll make sure I get my hands on one to try out before I put down any cash.

FWIW, I've looked at the Rugers a lot, and I just can't bring myself to like how they look. I want this revolver partly for its style and partly to proactice my target shooting with. I anticipate carrying it from time to time, but not hunting with it - so the extra strength of the Ruger isn't much of a selling point for me.

[Clark]

Based on my two 45 Colts I have had for a month:
1) 1970s Uberti Iver Johnson Cattleman
2) newish Ruger Blackhawk

I must say the cylinder walls on the Ruger are thicker, and the quality of the Uberti is much higher.

My brother the machinist is really into buy American, and it really pissed him off when he saw my Itallian gun so much better made than my American gun. He started yelling, "They didn't break the edges! What kind of amatuers made this?!"