[1858]

Does anyone have any experience in this area? Good idea, bad idea, pros/cons, accuracy/reliability/indexing issues, etc.? I've been browsing the cascity web site and sent an email to a Kirst cylinder conversion distributor to ask his opinion but no response yet.

Thanks.
:)

[ArmedBear]

I was considering it. Then it occurred to me that I could get a pretty nice single action for a few bucks more -- including a Colt conversion or Open Top replica, if that's what I wanted.

Then I found a Blackhawk in excellent condition for just over 300 bucks, started reloading for it and forgot all about the cartridge conversion idea.

So I just shoot my cap-n-balls as god intended, and play around with more durable single actions and centerfire cartridges. YMMV

[1858]

I was considering it. Then it occurred to me that I could get a pretty nice single action for a few bucks more

I have a pair of USFA Rodeos and a pair of Ruger Blackhawk Bisley's all in .45 colt, but what I don't have is a Remington 1858. As my member name would suggest, I have a thing for the Remington 1858. However, the reason why I don't own one yet is that I don't want to buy a Uberti or Pietta or any other non-US replica. Recently I "discovered" the Ruger Old Army which is available in stainless steel with a 5-1/2" barrel. A Kirst cylinder conversion would make this into a nice .45 Colt centerfire revolver. It's not a cheap path to take so that's why I thought I'd get some real-world experience here.

:)

[Hud]

1858,
You might want to ask this question on the black powder forum.
I have seen several posts there on the subject.

I have never been into black powder but always liked the looks of the old Colts & Remingtons. I was aware of the ROA's but of center fire conversions , I was not.
Were it not for the cost (I am Scottish decent..read cheap), the ROA with a conversion would be the way to go.

A couple of months ago my local toy store had two Pietta 1858 Remingtons on consignment, both with .45 Colt Kirst conversions, but no BP cylinders (not a problem since I probably wouldn't shoot BP anyway).
One was a 1999 standard sight sold by Navy Arms with a 5 round, equaly spaced chambers.
The other was an unfired 2006 target sight model sold by Cabellas with a 5 round cylinder & a safety chamber.

My pusher made me a deal I couldn't refuse & I bought both. If I told you what I paid, you would have to kill me.
The '99 is living with my son & I kept the '06. I haven't found any cowboy loads yet to try mine out but that sucker locks up tighter than my Blackhawk & ought to be a hoot to shoot.

[BCRider]

I'm fresh into the percussion deal with a couple of Uberti Remingtons. But so far the results when shooting black powder more than make up for the extra work to load and cap them. Time will tell if I change my mind but one of the local CAS folks smiled and mentioned when I was rushing to get capped for my turn that they'd all been down this road and went over to center fire. But they still get all nostalgic and bring them out for a day now and then. He thought I showed a lot of chutzpa to jump in and go percussion right off the bat instead of going cartridge. But what the heck, in for a penny, in for a pound.... :D

All of which is to say that I agree with the others. The cost of the conversion cylinders is darn near the cost of a new gun, let alone a used one. Just leave your BP cap guns as they are and enjoy them. Get a new gun or two instead of the conversions.

[1858]

Just leave your BP cap guns as they are and enjoy them.

I don't have any yet! I'm thinking about a pair of Ruger Old Army revolvers like these assuming that the Kirst cylinders are a good idea in terms of accuracy and reliability. The Kirst cylinders are in the $250 range and a pair of Old Army revolvers with consecutive numbers is about $1,200. Ruger doesn't make them anymore so they're not going to get any cheaper. If USFA made a centerfire 1858 or similar, I'd have bought one (or two) already.

http://128.171.62.162/hawthorn-engineering/thr/ruger/old_army/old_army_1.jpg

http://128.171.62.162/hawthorn-engineering/thr/ruger/old_army/old_army_2.jpg

http://128.171.62.162/hawthorn-engineering/thr/ruger/old_army/old_army_3.jpg


You might want to ask this question on the black powder forum.
I have seen several posts there on the subject.

Thanks ... I'll sniff around over there and see if I can find some useful information on cylinder conversions. So how much did you pay for the two Piettas ... I can take it? I like the fixed sight versions shown above.

:)

[Stainz]

My wife bought me a ROA many years ago - when we were dating. I had said I missed my old C&B BP clone, my first revolver (Ford was Prez...). One reason to consider a CF conversion, Kirst or Taylor, is simple: A C&B revolver didn't require a Fed 4473 form to purchase! You could legally have a paperless CF revolver, albeit a slow one to reload. I'd have to remember where I buried it in the yard first - in that sealed container - with that slingshot for backup.

I'm sorry for the diatribe, but the 'No paper!' cry is echoed from a guy hawking his conversion cylinders at a recent gunshow. The BP is really fun as a C&B - and mine is reserved for those hot & humid windless days of summer when you want to clear a few adjacent lanes at the range. That sulfer smell - and cloud - really can hang around then. Another plus - you can't see the black helicopters!

I'm getting old, I guess. My idea of .45 Colt fun these days is a 625MG - with smokeless propellant!

Stainz

[Franco2shoot]

Krist is but one avenue. It involves carving out the side with a dremel, and I didn't like that. The other conversion (the way I went) allows you to keep the frame unmodified. Check out this link http://fcsutler.com/fccwrevolverstestimonial.asp

Its called the "R&D" conversion. You just pop out the BP cylinder and insert the new one. The new one is a two piece affair that contains a firing pin for each cylinder as part of the cylinder. It is extremely easy to load/unload and has worked for the past 2 years flawlessly. Chambering .45 Long colt cartridges, the Uberti sends them downrange very accurately. It wasn't cheap, but it was less than Krist. And I can reload it faster than my 1911.

KKKKFL

[1858]

Stainz, an evocative but confusing post ... so you like or don't like the idea of a Kirst conversion cylinder? To be honest, I have no interest in shooting blackpowder loads, but I do like the look of the Old Army since it's very similar to the New Army. I also like the fact that it's stainless and it's made by Ruger ... a revolver company with a reputation for strong frames. I'm thinking that a 5-chamber Kirst cylinder in the Ruger Old Army frame could put up with a lot more than just anemic CAS loads. I'm not talking Blackhawk stout but somewhere between 6gr of Trail Boss and 20gr of H110.

Krist is but one avenue. It involves carving out the side with a dremel, and I didn't like that.

Take a look at the right side of the recoil shield in the third photo ... :)

:)

[ArmedBear]

Not sure why you'd want an ROA, and then convert it, but if that floats your boat, I guess.

An ROA's frame is elongated in front, but it won't feel, balance, or look anything like an 1858. They weigh about a pound more, the grip frame is enlarged Colt, not Remington, and the barrel is round with a Colt SAA sight on it. They have never been all that aesthetically appealing to me, but they're objectively appealing, as a cap-n-ball revolver, especially with adjustable sights, despite their excess weight.

Since you sort of changed the question, how do I feel about a cartridge conversion for a Ruger Old Army? I think it's utterly silly, when you take everything into account (price, weight, aesthetics of revolver, and the ready availability of excellent, better-balanced centerfire Ruger revolvers for close to the price of the conversion, with the same barrels and grips).

[Old Fuff]

Most cap & ball revolvers have bores that are way oversized for the metallic cartridges that will likely be used in a conversion. This doesn't present a safety problem, but it usually has some negative affect on accuracy, and may result in excessive leading in the barrel.

A noteable (and perhaps only) exception to this is the Ruger Old Army, but unless you want to alter the frame you will have to remove the cylinder to load and unload metallic cartridges.

Those revolvers made in cartridge converted style in the first place generally don't have either problem. The bores are the right size, and they are equipped with loading gates.

Like ArmedBear I think it makes more sense to spend the money to buy a revolver that is intended to fire cartridges in the first place (a used Ruger Blackhawk is only one example) then to buy a conversion cylinder. The ROA is the only one I would otherwise consider.

[ArmedBear]

That said, if I had the cash and a use for them, I might get that pair of guns -- but as cap-n-balls, not with an eye to converting them.

BTW if one has to remove the cylinder anyway, a cylinder loader makes loading pretty pleasant and quick. It's one of those "why didn't I get this thing years ago?" items.:)

[1858]

A noteable (and perhaps only) exception to this is the Ruger Old Army, but unless you want to alter the frame you will have to remove the cylinder to load and unload metallic cartridges.


I didn't know this. I was under the impression that the cylinder conversion has an integral loading gate. THIS is why I started this thread and if indeed the cylinder does have to be removed to load/unload then that's unacceptable to me.

Since you sort of changed the question, how do I feel about a cartridge conversion for a Ruger Old Army? I think it's utterly silly, when you take everything into account (price, weight, aesthetics of revolver, and the ready availability of excellent, better-balanced centerfire Ruger revolvers for close to the price of the conversion, with the same barrels and grips).

If the cylinder conversion was technically sound I'd be very happy with the aesthetics of the Old Army and I think it DOES look very similar to the New Army. I already have "excellent, better-balanced centerfire Ruger revolvers", a pair of USFA revolvers, plus a bunch of double action revolvers so that's not the issue.

It seems that I'm back to square one. As I mentioned, if USFA made an 1878 New Army centerfire revolver I'd have bought one already and wouldn't even be considering blackpowder conversions.

Thanks.
:)

[ArmedBear]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3f/Remington_New_Army.JPG/180px-Remington_New_Army.JPG
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/SAA_5773_oN.JPG/200px-SAA_5773_oN.JPG

http://www.armchairgunshow.com/ot57-pix/ap-4451_small.jpg
http://www.chuckhawks.com/ruger_old_army.gif

The ROA looks a lot like a Rogers and Spencer grafted onto a Colt grip frame, with a Blackhawk barrel stuck on it, to me. The ROA and 1858 may look similar in pictures, but not in person. The Remington has a distinctly long and skinny feel to it, whereas the ROA looks and feels a lot "stockier", more like a Rogers and Spencer.

Design is mostly a Rogers and Spencer, too. (I shoot R&S and Remington replicas.)

That might make you feel better about not dropping almost $2000 on something of dubious real value if you don't want to shoot cap-n-ball.:)

You already HAVE a better Colt (USFA) and a better Ruger (Bisley)...

[1858]

ArmedBear, thanks very much to you and Old Fuff. You've both educated me with this thread and I'm the better for it. I'll admit that I've never seen a Ruger Old Army in person so I am indeed basing my comparison between it and the 1858 on photos alone. Your real-world experience with them and the Remington replicas has been most helpful.

:)

[Red Creek]

1858, I've been shooting a pair of 1858s with the R&D conversion cylinders for about 7 years with no problems whatsoever. I shoot .45 Colt with 34 grs of FFG behind a 250 gr RNFP bullet. The .44 cap and ball and .45 Colt bores are the same size so accuracy is not an issue. With those 8" barrels the Remingtons are very accurate. So if shooting the conversions sounds like fun I say go for it.

[Old Fuff]

I believe that some of the conversions include a breech ring with a gate. Others provide a template so you can grind out the recoil shield to the point where cartridges can be inserted or removed from the chambers. But this somewhat compromises the revolver for use in its original form.

It should be noted that the first original Remington conversions required that the cylinder be removed to load or remove cartridges. This, the maker pointed out, allowed the revolver to be used as a cap & ball (with a cap & ball cylinder) in frontier areas where metallic cartridges of the right kind might not always be available.

.44 cap and ball bores can have groove diameters as large as .458" and as small as .450" depending on the maker and/or when it was made. Today's .45 Colt bullets are usually sized to .452". The only maker I've found that was consistent at .452" was Ruger. They who are wise, know enough to slug the barrel of their particular revolver before they order a cylinder. In the past serious shooters would either rebarrel a revolver or bore out the original one and install a liner. This became past history after the Italians introduced cap & ball converted style guns.

[Stainz]

As said, I like shooting my 625MGs in .45 Colt - DA rules, for me. I sold my Rugers - DAs and SAs. I don't miss them - and I had some nice ones - especially .45 Colt capable (SRH, RH, BHG Vaq, SS Bisley BH, BH conv, etc.). The .45 Colts often had the ejector star skip over them in the Ruger DAs, not in the S&Ws. I just got tired of the SAs. That ROA is the only Ruger I didn't sell - that may change as I run out of BP.

The ROA is not a copy of anything - just a serviceable & safe BP C&B revolver. It works great - as built. The Taylor (Same as R&D?) runs $274 + s/h at cost - and may need a new hand/pawl for fine fitting. A lot of moola for a whim - but well less than the least expensive SS .45 BH at MSRP $661 by a bit. Still, while I am interested in the aspect of such a converter for my existing SS ROA, said interest will remain in the conceptual state, as I am just not that interested in an even more troublesome single action .45 Colt.

Good luck!

Stainz

[DMZ]

I bought an R&D Conversion for my ROA a couple of years ago. Cost ~$250 including shipping. The fit was perfect.

I load .45 LC Speer 230 gr LRN over TrailBoss powder. I found that I shoot with it much more than with the percussion cylinder because:

-the smokeless loads I use are very accurate in the ROA
-TrailBoss is a clean burning powder so clean up is quick and easy
-I can shoot over 200 rounds per session with no problems

I still have a Western Arms repli-Colt 3rd Model Dragoon I use for blackpowder shooting, which is a real hoot.

[ArmedBear]

Why the racism, though, 1858?

It took the Italians to turn the Western into a genre that didn't suck, and while the American filmmakers were using 1873 Colts in movies set in 1849, the Italians were using guns like the 1858 in movies set in the Civil War... Cap-n-ball guns, with visible caps, in cartridge belts, but still...:)

Were it not for Uberti, a lot of American classic firearm designs would be dead. As it stands, one can buy some pretty nice 19th-century replica guns, at "shooter" prices.

There's so much to hate in this world. Why the Italians?:)

[1858]

Why the racism, though, 1858? There's so much to hate in this world. Why the Italians?


I guess it all started for me with the decline of the Roman Empire! I'll never forgive them for the Dark Ages that followed ... those were tough times for me.

I bought an R&D Conversion for my ROA a couple of years ago. Cost ~$250 including shipping. The fit was perfect.

Does the R&D conversion require that the cylinder be removed to load/unload?

:)

[ArmedBear]

I guess it all started for me with the decline of the Roman Empire! I'll never forgive them for the Dark Ages that followed ... those were tough times for me.

That was more the Huns' fault, I think. But I still have a Vizsla.:D

[1858]

That was more the Huns' fault, I think. But I still have a Vizsla.

And I have a pair of Rottweilers with consecutive serial numbers ... introduced to Germany by the Romans!!

:)

[Coyote3855]

I have the R&D .45 conversion for the 1858. Yes, you must remove the cylinder and take off the face plate to load and unload. I'm under the impression that the Kirst Konverter now comes with an integral loading gate, but you have to alter the frame (enlarge the groove where the empty comes out) for it to work.

[1858]

I'm under the impression that the Kirst Konverter now comes with an integral loading gate, but you have to alter the frame (enlarge the groove where the empty comes out) for it to work.

That was my understanding, and the recoil shield on the Old Army has a large cutout already ... so I'm wondering if it'd need surgery.

:)

[Old Fuff]

In its cap & ball role I don't think the recoil shield is cut away enough to clear .45 cartridges, but I suggest that you ask the cylinder maker.

Also, if you haven't done so already, check out the Remington New Army conversions being offered at www.cimarron-firearms.com

[Red Creek]

Yes, with the R&D conversion the cylinder must be removed to load. It's a simple operation though. Just watch the preacher in "Pale Rider".

[dev_null]

Two Uberti Remington '58's with Taylor's conversions. Love 'em. More accurate than my Vaqueros ever were. Awesome CAS/SASS pistols.

I'd wear them open carry if I could. :D

[1858]

Thanks to everyone for your thoughts and comments. I just got off the phone with the very nice folks at Kirst who confirmed Old Fuff's post that the cylinder needs to be removed to load/unload. The backing ring doesn't have a loading gate :( . It wasn't clear from the photos on their web site. On the bight side, an extra cylinder in .45 ACP is only $130 and it can be used with the .45 Colt backing ring. Anyway, since I don't plan on shooting blackpowder and the cylinder needs to be removed to load/unload, the Ruger Old Army is no longer an option (for now anyway).

Old Fuff, I did take a look at the Cimarron offerings ... thanks.

Thanks.
:)

[unspellable]

I have a ROA with an RD cylinder. Does it make sense? No. I also bought a nice SA cartridge revolver chambered in 45 Colt for less than the RD cylinder cost. But it's fun anyway. If I were going t obe practical, I woulddn't have half as many revolvers as I do.

As for fitting cylinders. I have fitted spare cylinders for 3 ROAs, (Each with a spare cap and ball and an RD, two cylinders per each.) 2 Blackhawks, and 3 S&W N frames.

Most of the time the hand and bolt will not be an issue. What seems to be almost invariably an issue is overall cylinder length, end shake, and cylinder to barrel gap. In the case of the SW you can use washers to take up excess end shake if the cylinder to barrel gap works out OK. That doesn't help if the cylinder is too long. On the ROA or Blackhawk, it would in principle be possible to put a washer on the cylinder neck to take up excess end shake. I haven't figured out a practical way to do it though. With a Blackhawk one can machine down the neck or ratchet if the cylinder is too long. It's a dog to get a good measurement before removing metal and you can't put it back. We are talking about removing only a few thousandths here. I will say the RD cylinders were closer to a correct fit to begin with than any of the factory cylinders.

[MCgunner]

I have an old army, but I also have a Blackhawk in .45, so I don't need the conversion. I've thought about a Remington conversion, seems like a neat way to mail order a gun with no paperwork, not that I have any problem BUYING a gun over the counter with my CCW permit, but I'm just sayin'....:D The less the gubment knows about me, the better I like it. I'm one of those "mob anarchists" they can't stand in Washington now days.

[messerist]

Since the topic came up about Ubertis and Piettas being non-American made has anyone heard the rumor that USFA was coming out with a 1858 Army replica?

[1858]

Since the topic came up about Ubertis and Piettas being non-American made has anyone heard the rumor that USFA was coming out with a 1858 Army replica?

I emailed USFA about a year ago asking that very question. They said that they're considering it but not much more than that. As I mentioned earlier, if they offered a centerfire 1858 made to their excellent standards I'd definitely buy one and quite possibly two. Even if they offered a black powder version and a cylinder conversion kit I'd be interested.

:)

[messerist]

I know that there is a gunsmith in Ohio who makes 1858 revolvers. As far as "how" he does it, I do not know. Does he build them from the ground up? Does he buy replicas and tweak them? A good place to check would be the Blackpowder forum here. That is where I saw a post about the gunmaker. They are suppose to be dead on accurate. Hope this helps. Good luck:)

[1858]

messerist, thanks for the tip.

:)

[Cosmoline]

How can you "not be into" black powder? T'aint natural.

[1858]

How can you "not be into" black powder? T'aint natural.

Probably because I've never tried it and the fact that I find brass cases to have an intrinsic beauty ... and there's nothing quite like the feel of loading a single action centerfire revolver ... click, click, click. :)

:)

[ArmedBear]

If you've never tried it, how can you know if you like it?

Granted, I haven't shot the lever-loaders so much since I started loading my own revolver cartridges.

There's nothing quite like the feel of loading a Blackhawk. Click click CRAP clickclickclikclick click click.

[Old Fuff]

There's nothing quite like the feel of loading a Blackhawk. Click click CRAP clickclickclikclick click click.

You must have one of those modernized Blackhawks with the transfer bar safety. My older flat-top has no such bad habits... :neener:

[1858]

If you've never tried it, how can you know if you like it?


I've never owned an elephant either ... I like looking at them ... but wouldn't want to own one. :D

There's nothing quite like the feel of loading a Blackhawk. Click click CRAP clickclickclikclick click click.

I just got through installing a Power Custom hammer/trigger/spring kit in one of the Bisley Blackhawks ... what a HUGE improvement. I can load either with the hammer down or with the hammer at half-cock. To unload, I can set the hammer at half-cock and open the loading gate to unload/load like a SAA. At half-cock, the chambers in the cylinder are indexed so that the ejector rod lines up with each one when the cylinder is rotated back against the stop. With the 17lb hammer spring it's a lot easier to cock the hammer back with the thumb of the gun hand. The kit comes with 18lb and 19lb springs too. The trigger is much, much better although it's a bit on the light side for my liking at around 2lb. The factory trigger is about 5lb 4oz so I'm going to reinstall the factory trigger spring and bend it if necessary to get a 3lb trigger.

Added in edit: I reinstalled the factory trigger spring and bent both the legs up until I got a consistent 3lb 4oz .... PERFECT!! I also installed a stronger Wolff base pin latch spring.

:)

[villachaise]

The R&D conversions are a bit tedious to load and unload, I think.

Once for sale a few years ago I saw a 2nd gen. Colt Walker converted to centerfire, I believe it was 45 LC. Because the Walker I have shoots 454 dia. lead pretty well.
This Walker had a loading gate too, but if I remember right it was pricey, but o-so-neat!

If you've ever seen Seraphim falls I believe theres a later model Dragoon with this conversion, so someone must do it. That's the route I would like to go if I were to plunge...