[Vermonter]

Is the ROA the most reliable? Cap jams, ignition, timing, etc?

[mike101]

The ROA is the most reliable in terms of internal parts not breaking, unlike Italian guns. The Ruger has all coil springs, and is built like a tank. I've never heard of anyone having timing problems with one, though I suppose anything is possible. Caps do get jammed sometimes, but such is the case with all percussion revolvers.

I haven't tried them yet, but I've read that Tresco nipples help with cap jams. They have a smaller flash-hole, which allows less blowback through the nipple. Try them. They're not expensive.

[DMZ]

I have one of the very first ROA made, #140-xxx37, which was made in 1972, I think. I carried it as a back-up sidearm when I was hunting during the muzzleloading hunt. It has taken a fair number of rabbits and blue grouse.

I still carry and shoot it as it is one of my most accurate revolvers. The bluing is quite worn from holster use and faded, but it is still tight as can be and I have never had any problems with it.

[mike101]

Vermonter, if you don't have one already, get one. You can't go wrong with a ROA. I recommend stainless. The best prices I've seen are at Bud's Gun Shop, though you might do as well locally.

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/advanced_search_result.php?keywords=ruger+old+army

[ArmedBear]

Another opinion about Italian guns based on cheap ones from the 1970s or early 1980s, when it was expected (incorrectly) that many replicas would be wall-hangers... Mike is right, that's something to look out for, but "unlike Italian guns" is simply inaccurate.

I have one of those old ones, and the internals are soft, as in the sear and hammer! Bad! It's an 1858, and I'm retiring it to the wall. Still looks decent. Doesn't work decent, though.

However, a new Uberti is a different animal. I have a recent 1858 that's top-notch. I did a piece-by-piece comparison, and it's amazing how different a gun can be, especially inside, when it looks the same. Search for Uberti here and in Revolvers and you will find others who have been pleasantly surprised, especially guys who got soured on Italian guns in the 1970s and early 1980s.

Some guns from back then are good, too. I've got an old Rogers and Spencer replica that's an excellent gun. It was quite expensive, even back then, though; it is a quality gun inside and out. The R&S was the last original design, made at the end of the Civil War and never used in the fighting. Like the ROA, it was designed to improve on the shortcomings of older models.

That said, Ruger has some truly modern design features, whereas replicas are replicas. The ROA is a fine piece.

However, a new, quality replica from a higher-end maker will serve quite well, also, if you want to shoot something "period". There have been several pictures here lately, of hunters who have used them to bag small game. Just don't try to save $50.

[DMZ]

Armed Bear -

I bought a repli' 3rd Model Dragoon in the early 70's. It is marked "Western Arms Corp., Santa Fe, NM." on the barrel. But is also marked A. Uberti on the frame. I used to shoot it quite a bite 20 years ago, but have had it in semi-retirement since then. It always shot well and seems very tight.

I am considering getting a R&D conversion cylinder for it.

Is it a wallhanger or a shooter?

[ArmedBear]

If it works well, I'd call it a shooter!

Why not?

The old gun I got was not a Uberti. The problems I had were quite noticeable. The trigger cut my hand when I shot it, since the soft sear formed a nasty burr and got stuck in the hammer notch and made the trigger pull REALLY ugly. I smoothed it out, but it was really soft. The lever latch springs got so weak over time (not use, just time) that the lever would fly down with every shot.

I was going to fix it, but I figured that I'd really have to replace all the "innards" and the cast frame (turned purple, BTW) was probably pretty soft, as well. I still might fix it, but I think I might apply the cash towards a stainless Uberti with target sights instead.:)

AFAIK Colt used Uberti to make its reissues. The company has always been a good choice, from what I understand.

And if you had the sort of problems I've seen with soft metal and poor springs, you'd notice it by now.

Why not keep using yours?:)

[mykeal]

+1 to what Armed Bear said.

Good answer. It's a shooter.

[mike101]

"It is marked "Western Arms Corp., Santa Fe, NM." on the barrel. But is also marked A. Uberti on the frame."

It's an Uberti. Western Arms was one of the brands they were sold under, back in the '70s and '80s. I don't know if they were an importer, or just a retailer.

It's true, I haven't bought an Italian gun since the early '80s, but I still see people complaining about breakage and timing. Maybe it's rarer than it used to be. But, I can tell you, you won't have those problems with a Ruger. So, if you're primary concern is reliability, I'd go with the ROA.

[4v50 Gary]

Jamming caps is a matter of finding out what caps works best for a particular gun. I've had caps jammed on my Ruger Old Army but it's hardly the gun's fault. Know your equipment. BTW, material and workmanship and durability of the Ruger Old Army is excellent.

[O.S.O.K.]

but based on my other Rugers, I'd say that yes, the ROA is the most reliable cap and ball being offered.

However, I do not own one but rather a nice collection of Ubertis and Piettas.

They all function great and are much less expensive than the ROA.

I regard the ROA as a modern design blackpowder revolver.

I like the replicas as they are duplicates of the original Colts and Remingtons, etc.

So, I guess it just depends on what you want.

[DMZ]

Thanks Mike101 and ArmedBear.

BTW, I don't shoot my Dragoon much because 90% of the time I grab the ROA as it is more accurate and it doesn't weigh 6 lbs. :D

[ArmedBear]

Another thing to note.

A Colt replica is an open-top with the rear sight on the hammer. That's not exactly the recipe for a tackdriver.

A Remmie, Rogers and Spencer, or other replica with a solid frame will be a lot more like the Ruger WRT accuracy. Put modern sights on it (R&S and Remmies are even available from the factory with modern target sights) and it will be more so. Pedersoli makes nice versions of both guns, competition grade, for a hefty sum.

The original looks like this:
http://www.dixiegunworks.com/images/RH1320.jpg

I'm not sure who makes this particular gun, but Dixie will probably tell you. It's got modern adjustable target grade sights grafted onto it.

http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?cPath=22_92_187_189&products_id=2569
http://www.dixiegunworks.com/images/SS1148.jpg

They want $275. It should be a great shooter, if it's from a good maker. Worth a look, at any rate.

Or this stainless Remmie from Uberti, for $325:
http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?cPath=22_92_187_189&products_id=4057
http://www.dixiegunworks.com/images/SS1180.JPG

If you want a "period" gun with some modern enhancements, they are availalble.

The original sights on a Remmie do leave much to be desired.:) I have fun with mine and it shoots groups a lot like a SAA or a modern defensive revolver, with the original sights. But target sights provide a MUCH better picture.

The original R&S sights are quite good, with a great sight picture, though they appear to be crude when you first see them. They're not adustable, though.

[BigBlock]

I agree, the newer Italian guns can be of very good quality. My recently purchased stainless Euroarms 1858 is a beautiful machine. I have yet to have a single misfire or jammed cap, even after leaving it loaded in a humid environment for several months. I wouldn't hesitate to trust it with my life, and it only cost me $250 from DGW.

[SAKOHUNTER]

+1 for the ROA being reliable and Buds seems to have the best prices for new ones.

If you want to save some bucks then I have a nice used one for sale over at the trading post.:D

[Old Fuff]

During the 19th century the open-top Colt's were considered to be more reliable because they tended to collet less powder fouling on the basepin. After two or three 6-shot cycles, Remington New Army's sometime tended to hang up the cylinder and it would have to be hand-assisted to turn.

The lockwork between the Remington and Colt were so similar that neither had any advantage over the other.

However the Remington, with its topstrap frame was more rugged and could take more abuse, and in some cases were more accurate because the barrel was screwed into the frame, and not held by a wedge through the base pin.

Today the Ruger Old Army is unquestionably in first place, if duplicating an original revolver isn't part of the picture.

[ROA]

HELL YES, THEY ARE THE MOST RELIABLE!!!... I think they are the easiest to clean, and made extremely well, in terms of design, and proportion. Some people say they are meaty, and I think they are definitely more substantial than traditional models, but to me I love my Rugers, they re-define bp revolvers. I feel safer when shooting with them, and they are easy to clean and take care of!! Go with ruger, and you will not want anything else! I went backwards, i got all the ruger old army's in both finishes and all sizes, and I just got my first colt 1860 army- i'm kind of worried about having to take it apart to clean, seems like a very sensitive situation...

[ArmedBear]

After two or three 6-shot cycles, Remington New Army's sometime tended to hang up the cylinder and it would have to be hand-assisted to turn.

Not my experience with replicas. Some dimensions have been changed, if imperceptibly, on quality replicas. Maybe the clearance is one of them.

After enough rounds, yes, things get pretty fouled. But that's black powder shooting in general.

[DixieTexian]

Replicas=Boobies

ROA=Bras

You now have the knowledge to make a quality decision.

[Shotgun Willy]

That's right, leave it to a Texan to get his priorities reversed.:D
Bill (Okie)

[Old Fuff]

ArmedBear:

Not my experience with replicas. Some dimensions have been changed, if imperceptibly, on quality replicas. Maybe the clearance is one of them.

Not so much the revolvers as the quality of today's black powder. My comment was based on field reports submitted during the 1860's. However the open-top design of the Colts, combined with the grooved cylinder base pin which holds grease, make the Colt design slightly more reliable for number of shots fired, when both revolvers are (were) used under similar circumstances. That said, most revolver-armed troops only carried between 6 to 12 spare rounds (as paper or foil cartridges) so maybe the issue is moot. ;)

[Timthinker]

If there are any absolutes about blackpowder revolvers, then the following statement is one of them. The ROA is the most reliable caplock pistol currently produced. This is a strong claim and one I would not venture to make with equally strong evidence. Examine the metalurgy and internal components of a ROA and then compare it to the other caplock revolvers. I dare say the Ruger will win. This is not to say a Ruger is an exacting replica of 19th century revolvers, because it is not. If you seek something more traditional, then you will wish to consider some other brand. But if reliability is your major consideration, I recommend a Ruger without qualification.


Timthinker

[Vermonter]

DixieTexan-
Why would I want to throw a nice ROA on the floor and fondle a replica instead? :evil:

My pennies are starting to collect for a nice ROA. Probably a stainless 7.5" with adjustable sights. Although with those new OSHA rules lurking around, I might order a bunch of powder first, just to make sure I have a good stash.

[Puerto Morelos]

There are things one can do with an ROA that are beyond the scope of anything possible with the Italian guns. That doesn't make the replica guns bad, just that they're in a different class than the ROA. I have made up an all coil Uberti Remington and hardened or replaced every part that needed really good steel. For all that trouble, it still was not up to the design standards of an ROA.

If reliable service is the requirement, the ROA is the choice. If high ballistic performance is the goal, the ROA is the choice. If gilt-edged accuracy is the objective, the ROA is the choice.

Still, there are other reasons to pick an Italian gun. There are many attractive configurations available. They can often be had for less money than an ROA. They go bang a lot of the time and will keep most modest velocity round-ball loads on a pie plate at 15 yards, except that most of them won't shoot to point of aim without some, often much (read that MUCH) work. And this is lots better than trying to pry even this level of function out of an original Colt, Remington, or what-have-you.

If the rational conclusion is not to simply be patient and buy a good used ROA or splurging for a new one, then the rationale is not one for serviceability, but I understand that. There are markets for cubic zirconia, rayon, and velveeta.

If you opt for an ROA and you've found its limits - whether for ballistic performance, accuracy, or aesthetic configuration - please let me know. I'd be glad to show you places to go with an ROA beyond most folks' idea of what a mere muzzleloading revolver can be.

PM

[O.S.O.K.]

The reason I don't own a ROA is that for me, the attraction of the bp cap and ball is the nostalgia. The ROA doesn't really have it - for me.

If I want performance, I'll choose my Ruger Vaquero's in 45 Colt or one of my Blackhawks in .44 Mag. If I really want more, I'll get a .454 Mag or .460 S&W but that's not my cup of tea either.

Black powder for me is not about performance and I think trying to soup-up a bp revolver is a strange pursuit.

If you are interested in this though, then you need to get a single shot muzzle loader or a good 1847 Walker which holds 60 grains of Pyrodex P under a lubed felt wad and a .457" round ball. I haven't chronographed it but I'm sure with it's 9" barrel, its producing a pretty good velocity. It's also pretty accurate despite it's crude sights - mostly because of the long sight radius.

As for hunting, any of the larger frame cap and ball .44's will suffice if you put the ball or conical in the right spot on the animal. I would say that the ROA does have an edge for hunting due to it's sights though - they are very good. My Pietta Remington with adjustable sights is good too but not as good as the ROA's I've look down.

If one wants the most robust, modern design for shooting and the attraction is the smoke and all, or the use if hunting and you want the best sights then by all means, go with the Ruger - it really is tops in that regard.

I don't see any argument here.

[Zeke/PA]

The ROA is brought up every once in awhile on this forum.
I own an Old Army and it is the most accurate handgun in my arsenal.
I use it often for squirrel hunting and I once took a large whitetail doe with the pistol.
Ruger quality is of course built in.
Zeke

[Fiveshooter]

If there are better made and more reliable C&B revolvers than a ROA I have yet to see or shoot one. That being said I have an Italian 58 Remington that at least in my hands gives my ROAs a fair competition in the accuracy department.