tkcomer
Member
I know. But I stumbled on to some CASS forums and the ones that actually work on these guns don't recommend the 45. From what I've studied, the sights on these guns are hit and miss from the factory.
Cimarron Revolvers
- Thread starter tkcomer
- Start date
- Status
Yep, the open tops were never intended for the 45 long Colt cartridge. The originals were chambered for the 44 Colt and that cartridge was designed to be the largetst that would fit in the cylinder. The 45s are a bit too big and the forcing cone cracks easily. The sights are a problem only in that the origianls were sighted to hit at about 75 yards. For closer ranges, if you are shooting at vertical targets (human silhouettes) and aim at the belt buckle you will hit in the torso somewhere. If you are shooting at horizontal or round targets, you might need to install a taller front sight. If you can file a dovetail, this is not a big job.
I like my Richards conversion and am happy with the 44 Colt. If you want a 45, you might consider getting a Model P or some other revolver that was origanally cut for that chamber.
I like my Richards conversion and am happy with the 44 Colt. If you want a 45, you might consider getting a Model P or some other revolver that was origanally cut for that chamber.
tkcomer
Member
Well, the 45 Colt idea is shot. I kinda settled on on that one as I see a few other guns in that caliber that I might acquire. I'll go with the 44 Special. I have read where people file the rear notch a tad deeper if their guns shoot too high. Not sure how to correct if the gun shoots way left or right.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
For what it's worth, my Open Top shoots to the sights, while the 1860 Transition Model appears to be zeroed like the old percussion guns.
It's interesting that they would have issues with the forcing cone in the .45's, because the .44 percussion guns are actually .45's. Maybe the S-lug barrel is thinner in that area than the percussion barrels.
It's interesting that they would have issues with the forcing cone in the .45's, because the .44 percussion guns are actually .45's. Maybe the S-lug barrel is thinner in that area than the percussion barrels.
The original 44 Colts also used a 45 caliber bullet. Heeled and it was/is a pain to reload.
The new Ubertis use a larger diameter cylinder to hold the 45 long Colt cartridges. I believe they also beefed up the from but I might be misremembering that. They did not alter the geometry of the barrel and lug so the forcing cone is the weak spot. Quite a few threads regarding this on the cowboy sites and it was a problem to Colts factory in the 1870s. That is why they introduced the 44 Colt cartridge.
The new Ubertis use a larger diameter cylinder to hold the 45 long Colt cartridges. I believe they also beefed up the from but I might be misremembering that. They did not alter the geometry of the barrel and lug so the forcing cone is the weak spot. Quite a few threads regarding this on the cowboy sites and it was a problem to Colts factory in the 1870s. That is why they introduced the 44 Colt cartridge.
Jesse Heywood
Member
One way is to turn the barrel, which is beyond the ability of most.
Jesse, this works for barrels that are screwed into the frame, sometimes. The open top and the conversions are all built witha barrel held to the frame by a wedge and can not be turned.
The 1860 is the top revolver and the Richards conversion is the bottom one.
Attachments
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
They introduced the .44Colt cartridge because it was the largest case they could use in the cylinder but still fit a large enough heeled bullet to obturate the .45cal bore. There was not enough room for the inside lubed .45Colt. Essentially, they still used the same barrel that would've been used for the .45Colt, had there been enough room in the cylinder.
I'm not all doubting the issues folks are having, I just find it interesting that the issue is with the forcing cone, which would be identical in dimensions to the .44 percussion guns. Which utilized .454" roundball.
messerist
Member
I was in the same dilemma as you tkcomer. I have several SAAs and a Ruger Vaquero all in .45LC so I thought of getting a 72 open top in the same caliber. A visit to the Cowboy Action Shooting Society's site led me to the sub-forum that deals with the "open top" revolvers. http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/board,56.0.html The information there convinced me to buy a .44spcl
tkcomer
Member
That's the site I found that warned of the problems with the 45 Colt.
ironhead7544
Member
You cant turn the barrel to set the windage on the Open Top 1872. What you can do is have a dovetailed front sight installed. Then you can set the windage and elevation for the load you want to use. My Open Top in 38 Special 7 and 1/2" shoots a standard 158 gr load right on at 100 yards. Its about 2 inches high at 50 ft.
For just fun shooting I think the 38 Special is the way to go as the ammo cost is a little less.
When you get the revolver, check the barrel for fit. Might need some work. I think the fit makes a difference with the sights and the point of impact.
Also The 1872 needs a firing pin. The stock ones are sometimes too soft and will mushroom. They will stick in the primer. The Smith Shop has them.
The original Open Top was made for the 44 Henry in rimfire and centerfire. The centerfire was probably a conversion. Ive seen photos of a hammer modified to fire either cartridge. They were Colt's first revolver made specifically for a cartridge and the first combo pistol and rifle with the Henry and 1866 Winchester.
These are neat old style guns and a hoot to shoot. Im probably going to get another so I have a pair.
For just fun shooting I think the 38 Special is the way to go as the ammo cost is a little less.
When you get the revolver, check the barrel for fit. Might need some work. I think the fit makes a difference with the sights and the point of impact.
Also The 1872 needs a firing pin. The stock ones are sometimes too soft and will mushroom. They will stick in the primer. The Smith Shop has them.
The original Open Top was made for the 44 Henry in rimfire and centerfire. The centerfire was probably a conversion. Ive seen photos of a hammer modified to fire either cartridge. They were Colt's first revolver made specifically for a cartridge and the first combo pistol and rifle with the Henry and 1866 Winchester.
These are neat old style guns and a hoot to shoot. Im probably going to get another so I have a pair.
Yes and no. The reason the 44 Colt was developed was the rim size would fit the geometry of the cylinder. It was the largest cartridge Colt could fit in the 1860 cylinder and even then, they had problems.
http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,35765.0.html
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Not true. The .44 Henry had a rim that was too large to fit the 1860 and Open Top. Almost as large as the .38-40 and .44-40. Which is why the .44Colt was developed in both centerfire and rimfire versions. It is also longer than the Henry rimfire.
I'm pretty sure that's what I said. The issue being that the .44 percussion model 1860 was no bigger than it needed to be. Very, very little room to adapt it to cartridge use. So a compromise cartridge was utilized, the .44Colt. Using the biggest heeled bullet possible with the smallest case possible.
ironhead7544
Member
I meant the original 1872 Open Top Colt. It was only made for the 44 Henry. About 7,000 were made. The Army frame with its rebate was smaller and Colt made it larger for the 1872 with a new frame.
messerist
Member
Ironhead, I can dig it! I want one in .38 too.
- Status
