Taylor's New Model No 3 Frontier


PDA






duelist1954
May 24, 2013, 06:02 AM
Taylor's & Company in Winchester, Virginia are carrying a reproduction of Smith & Wesson's New Model No 3 Frontier Model revolver. This gun is build by Uberti and is chambered for .45 Colt cartridges. In this video I'll give you some background on the New Model No 3 Frontier, and we'll take it to the range.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IIKC4Bv1d4

If you enjoyed reading about "Taylor's New Model No 3 Frontier" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
72coupe
May 24, 2013, 09:15 AM
Entertaining Mike.

I knew a guy that had a very large safe full of No. 3s, Russians and Schofields.

1KPerDay
May 24, 2013, 11:57 AM
Another great vid. Thanks

AethelstanAegen
May 24, 2013, 12:04 PM
Awesome news. I didn't think Taylor's was going to pick it up again...I know what's on my next-to-acquire list. Thanks for the info and the great video.

I had heard that the Uberti Schofields tend to not work well with black powder loads. Is that true in your experience? Does the No. 3 do a better job?

4v50 Gary
May 24, 2013, 12:17 PM
Thanks for the review.

Driftwood Johnson
May 25, 2013, 10:34 AM
Howdy Mike, nice video

For what it's worth, the originals tended to shoot high too. I read that a while ago in one of Mike Venturino's books. A few years ago I was lucky enough to find an original New Model Number Three. I can verify that they tend to shoot high. Probably about six inches high at normal CAS pistol target distances. I always have to remember to aim low on the target. Mine was made in 1881, then sent back to the S&W factory and refinished in 1965. Today it still looks brand new.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/smith%20and%20wesson/My%20New%20Model%20Number%20Three/myNewModelNumberThree02.jpg

One of the folks on your video page asked what they cost back in the 1880s. The previous owner of my New Model Number Three lettered it and I got the letter with the gun. It was part of a shipment of four guns that went to a Boston store, and the factory price was $13.00 each. I do not know how much the store sold them for.

I see your Taylor replica gums up after a while with Black Powder. I assume it has the same shortened gas collar that all the other Uberti Top Breaks have as a result of lengthening the cylinder to accept 45 Colt, but not lengthening the frame the same amount, with the resulting shortened gas collar. When S&W chambered the New Model #3 for 44-40 they lengthened the frame on the 44-40 and 38-40 models, to accommodate the longer cylinder without sacrificing the length of the gas collar. They did the same thing with the Double Action models too.

Mine is chambered for 44 Russian and I can shoot it with Black Powder loads for an entire match without needing to clean anything, owing to the design of the gas collar.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/smith%20and%20wesson/My%20New%20Model%20Number%20Three/040.jpg



I agree with you, the sights are very difficult to see on the originals.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/smith%20and%20wesson/My%20New%20Model%20Number%20Three/latch_zps8ff55f08.jpg

1KPerDay
May 28, 2013, 01:07 AM
Awesome!

the Black Spot
May 28, 2013, 09:47 AM
Sweet!!

CraigC
May 28, 2013, 12:16 PM
Very cool and now I want one!

Texas Moon
May 30, 2013, 02:41 AM
price?

Archaic Weapon
May 31, 2013, 06:18 PM
Remember one important thing, they aren't kidding about only loading five unless you are going straight into a situation where you know you will need six. Accidents happen.

jgh4445
June 1, 2013, 10:00 AM
Mike, another fine, informative video. Thanks. How is the weight and overall bulkiness compared to the Uberti Schofield?

MagnumDweeb
June 3, 2013, 10:34 AM
I feel like you have to really enjoy the nostalgia of these designs in order to get one. For the price of one I could get a gently used S&W Model 25 in .45 ACP, new production S&W Model 22 1917, or bargain 625 that's seen some use.

Don't get me wrong, beautiful gun, I want one, but for a gun where you can only load five out of six, it's not a SD/HD gun. It's a range toy. My other concern would be can it take modern .45 LC loads. Like pushing a 250 grain LSWC to 900 fps out of a 7.5" barrel. A 250 grain LWSC traveling in excess of 750 fps is quite deadly but why not want one you can push to 900 if it's safe. If I got one I would handload it down to 650 fps but I'd like the strength of the gun to allow me some flex room.

I'm just curious. Back when these guns were made heat treating the frame was almost unheard of. Now it's routine and a good way to strengthen the frame for modern smokeless powder loads. Are these guns getting their frames heat treated or are they just being reproduced for a very niche market. I think it'd be a shame to not have these frames heat treated, personally.

CraigC
June 3, 2013, 11:46 AM
It's a range toy.
That's a matter of perspective. Lots of folks actually "use" these archaic guns regularly and I would be one of them. I don't have a #3 Frontier but I do have a Schofield and I intend to use it. This particular sixgun is no less usable than any other single action revolver. As far as strength, some folks have them machined for moon clips to shoot .45ACP. So 900fps is well within its capabilities.

Driftwood Johnson
June 3, 2013, 08:42 PM
I feel like you have to really enjoy the nostalgia of these designs in order to get one. For the price of one I could get a gently used S&W Model 25 in .45 ACP, new production S&W Model 22 1917, or bargain 625 that's seen some use.

Don't get me wrong, beautiful gun, I want one, but for a gun where you can only load five out of six, it's not a SD/HD gun. It's a range toy. My other concern would be can it take modern .45 LC loads. Like pushing a 250 grain LSWC to 900 fps out of a 7.5" barrel. A 250 grain LWSC traveling in excess of 750 fps is quite deadly but why not want one you can push to 900 if it's safe. If I got one I would handload it down to 650 fps but I'd like the strength of the gun to allow me some flex room.

I'm just curious. Back when these guns were made heat treating the frame was almost unheard of. Now it's routine and a good way to strengthen the frame for modern smokeless powder loads. Are these guns getting their frames heat treated or are they just being reproduced for a very niche market. I think it'd be a shame to not have these frames heat treated, personally.

A couple of things. These guns are proofed to accept SAMMI Spec ammo. So they will take anything that does not exceed 14,000 psi. How fast the bullet moves and how heavy helps define pressure, but it is not the entire story. Keep the loads down to 14,000 psi and the gun will be fine. Go more than that and you are on your own.

Regarding heat treating the frame, it is really the cylinder that is the pressure vessel in any revolver. Not the frame. I do not know whether Uberti heat treats the frames on these top breaks, I doubt it. But I suspect they do heat treat the cylinders to withstand SAAMI max loads.

I really do not know what a SD/HD gun is, perhaps somebody could enlighten me on that. But a few weeks ago we had a pretty long discussion about 'dream guns' and several posters said they would love a Top Break revolver that could take high pressure loads. I explained then and I will explain again that a Top Break is not a very good platform for high pressure loads. They have several weak points. The latch is the first one. Just about the strongest Top Break revolvers ever made were the British Webly revovlers. But the latch on the Webly was much more massive than the latch on a S&W #3, any of them. The hinge is a weak point too. Thirdly, is the two part method of construction. Excessive pounding of recoil tends to stretch the lower portion of the frame, while the upper portion tends to remain unstretched. This is what ruined so many of the old 19th Century guns. They were shot loose when fired with heavy Smokeless powder loads. The result can be a gun that does not lock up properly but is loose at the latch. I have seen plenty of old Top Breaks ruined this way. Modern steel will help prevent that from happening, but it cannot make up for the basic weakness of the design. That is why Smith stopped producing these guns and changed over to the solid frame Hand Ejectors at the turn of the Century. A solid frame is better able to put up with the pounding of recoil than a Top Break.

Are they Range Toys? Well, that shot of me shooting one is not a typical range outing. I am shooting it at a Cowboy Action match, and I am really putting that 132 year old gun through its paces. Yes, I am shooting it with Black Powder, I would not dream of shooting any of my old guns with modern Smokeless. But I can assure you I was shooting it as fast as I could cock the hammer and pull the trigger, which I do with all my antique #3 Smiths (four of them so far).

Are the modern Schofields, Russians, and New Model Number Threes niche guns? Absolutely. But I can tell you there are plenty of Cowboy shooters out there who would love to have a pair.

Archaic Weapon
June 3, 2013, 10:22 PM
Until I had some accidental discharge issues, I can honestly say that a Schofield in .45LC was my carry gun, and at 25 yards it slang lead like it was 25 feet. Handled recoil excellently, good trigger, good stopping power, even with standard factory loads. I never had anything I shot at get away from me.

Loyalist Dave
June 4, 2013, 03:15 PM
I had heard that the Uberti Schofields tend to not work well with black powder loads

I see your Taylor replica gums up after a while with Black Powder. I assume it has the same shortened gas collar that all the other Uberti Top Breaks have as a result of lengthening the cylinder to accept 45 Colt, but not lengthening the frame the same amount, with the resulting shortened gas collar.

Yep mine did, which was really a shame as in my hands they were some of the most accurate out-of-the-box handguns that I ever owned. They would gum up so much in a five stage match that the cylinders would get out-of-time, and I'd shave lead (in the .45 Colt chambering folks).

I took it to the gunshop where I bought them, and asked if they couldn't do something about the problem, which also showed up, to a lesser degree, when using Universal Clays in my loads. They couldn't help me they said and bought the revolvers back.

So you say this problem doesn't show up with those revolvers chambered for .44 Russian and the .44-40? I may have to look at those as I really liked the revolvers, teeny sights and all.

LD

Driftwood Johnson
June 5, 2013, 10:20 PM
So you say this problem doesn't show up with those revolvers chambered for .44 Russian and the .44-40? I may have to look at those as I really liked the revolvers, teeny sights and all.


Sorry, did not mean to mislead you. The problem is not the caliber, it is the length of the cylinder and the lack of a long enough gas bushing to deflect powder gasses away from the cylinder pin. When Uberti designed their version of the old S&W Top Breaks, they lengthened the cylinder to accommodate longer cartridges such as 44-40 and 45 Colt. But not wanting to alter the overall length or appearance of the guns, they did not lengthen the frames a proportionate amount to accommodate the longer cylinder. Instead they shortened the gas collar to fit the longer cylinder into the same size frame. The result was, with the shortened gas collar, the guns do not perform well with Black Powder.

I have not personally inspected one of the new Taylor's New Model No3s, but I inferred from Mike's comments about its inability to shoot Black Powder for very many rounds that it too has the same shortened gas collar.

I don't want to hijack this thread, so follow this link to see my explanation of why the new Uberti Top Breaks generally do not perform well with Black Powder.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=671027&highlight=rare+treat

If you enjoyed reading about "Taylor's New Model No 3 Frontier" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!