Which S.A. Replica Revolver Next?

Arkansas Paul · Jul 10, 2018

Driftwood Johnson said:
Yes.

The Model 1877 Colt came in two calibers, 38 Colt and 41 Colt. The 38 was called the Lightning, the 41 was called the Thunderer. Same gun, two different names for the two different calibers.

Are they as fragile as I've read they are?
From what you read, people don't dare shoot them very often because the internals are so intricate.

I've never handled one, so I don't know first hand.

ArchAngelCD · Jul 11, 2018

Driftwood Johnson said:
They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Personally, i do not find that model to be attractive, I much prefer the traditional lines of a Single Action Army with the old plowhandle grip.

View attachment 795908

I don't know how much experience you have with the 45 Colt cartridge, but when not shooting mouse farts, recoil can be significant. I usually shoot full house Black Powder loads in my Colts with 250 grain bullets. I do not grasp the gun tightly, but instead I hold it slightly loosely, so the grip rotates slightly in my hand during recoil. This allows the muzzle to rise a bit, while absorbing some of the recoil. This allows me to cock the hammer for the next shot as I lower the gun. I can shoot this way all day long without feeling punishing recoil.

I have never fired one of those single action 'Lightnings' with the birds head grip, but it appears to me that the shape will prevent the grip from rotating in the hand, instead transferring all of the recoil straight back into the hand. No, I have never fired a real Lightning either, so perhaps I am wrong.

I have some experience firing the S&W Russian model, with it's big hump (knuckle) on the grip. The knuckle was specified by the Russians specifically to prevent the gun from rotating in the hand under recoil. It does this very well, the recoil is directed straight back into the hand, without any recoil absorbing effects from a rotating grip. Recoil with the 44 Russian cartridge, which has considerably less recoil than the 45 Colt is not unpleasant. I don't know if I would feel the same if the Russian could chamber my full house 45 Colt loads.

View attachment 795909

Personally, if I was in your shoes I think I would be looking with favor at an Open Top or a Richards Mason conversion over the 'Lightning'. It appears Uberti does not chamber the Richards Mason conversion in 45 Colt, so my choice would be the Open Top Navy. The Army model has the slightly longer grip shape of the1860 Army, which does not rotate as much in the hand as the grip shape of the Navy model. The same grip shape that was later adopted for the Single Action Army.

https://www.cimarron-firearms.com/products/revolvers/open-top-revolvers/1872-open-top-navy.html

Funny, I see Bob Wright is recommending the same gun. Funny, we often seem to agree on stuff.

In reality I like the looks of the Birdshead grip more than the function. I really like the form but I know they are not all that comfortable to shoot. I came into this thread thinking the same thing you just suggested, buying either a Richards Mason conversion or an Open Top replica and I will probably do just that. I also like the steel grip frame over the brass.

Unfortunately I can't buy them all right now but the sickness runs deep in me lol...

Kendal Black · Jul 11, 2018

I voted for the short barrelled birdshead because a gun in that configuration is a very practical personal sidearm for its technological level, convenient to carry and suitably powerful.

Edited to add: The hump on the grip just ahead of the web of your thumb is not present on some birdshead style reproductions, and it does not look like anything I would miss.

The Evangelist Cowboy · Jul 11, 2018

ArchAngelCD said:
In reality I like the looks of the Birdshead grip more than the function. I really like the form but I know they are not all that comfortable to shoot. I came into this thread thinking the same thing you just suggested, buying either a Richards Mason conversion or an Open Top replica and I will probably do just that. I also like the steel grip frame over the brass.

Unfortunately I can't buy them all right now but the sickness runs deep in me lol...

Ive often heard that they were uncomfortable to, but mine is not, I shot 100 rounds in the pic above and it was a very pleasant load, this isnt a gun thats going to be shooting ruger only loads, stick to the cowboy - regular loads and youll be fine.

Driftwood Johnson · Jul 11, 2018

Arkansas Paul said:
Are they as fragile as I've read they are?
From what you read, people don't dare shoot them very often because the internals are so intricate.

I've never handled one, so I don't know first hand.

Howdy

I don't know first hand either.

But these guys do.

Driftwood Johnson · Jul 11, 2018

Kendal Black said:
Edited to add: The hump on the grip just ahead of the web of your thumb is not present on some birdshead style reproductions, and it does not look like anything I would miss.

Howdy Again

Do you mean a birdshead grip like this?

Kendal Black · Jul 11, 2018

Driftwood Johnson said:
Howdy Again

Do you mean a birdshead grip like this?

View attachment 796005

Yeah, Merwin Hulbert got it right, just a smooth contour all the way up the backstrap. There is the same concept applied to a Colt:

I don't see a particularly good reason for a single action revolver to incorporate the hump seen on the DA Lightning, though if one prefers that look, fine by me:

CraigC · Jul 11, 2018

In my hands, the hump of the Thunderer style grip is more comfortable and makes it more useful because it keeps the grip from moving in your hand. What I don't like about either one is that they focus recoil into the center of the palm and the grips are usually too bulbous. That said, I still want to try one of the little Model P Juniors in .38Spl or .41LC.

Springfeld · Jul 11, 2018

I say 1851. If your doing a conversion to 45 you can use the same cylinder as the 1860s and parts are everywhere.

Driftwood Johnson · Jul 11, 2018

Springfeld said:
I say 1851. If your doing a conversion to 45 you can use the same cylinder as the 1860s and parts are everywhere.

That is incorrect.

a 44 or 45 caliber conversion cylinder will not fit onto the 1851 frame. There is a relief cut in the water table of the 1860 frame to allow the wider diameter at the front of a 44 caliber cylinder to slide onto the arbor. The 1860 cylinder is rebated, the rear is the same diameter as the 1851 cylinder, however the front is a larger diameter to allow for the 44 caliber chambers. Without the relief cut, a 44 cylinder cannot be fit onto the 1851 frame.

You can see the relief cut in the frame for the front of the cylinder in this Pietta replica of the 1860 Colt.

pietta%201860%20close%20up_zpspcyklwvf.jpg

CraigC · Jul 11, 2018

I think he meant that the 1860 conversions fit the .44cal versions of the 1851. Which they do.

Cocked & Locked · Jul 12, 2018

I voted for the 1972 Open Top just because I have one and I like it.

This one is a .38Colt /.38 Special. If I ran across a .44 one locally I'd probably get it.

I like the Birdshead grips also. I bought this one a few years ago with the intention of converting it to a snub nose. Haven't been able to make myself do it.

bannockburn · Jul 12, 2018

C&L

Like 'em both! Think I like the birdshead version without the ejector rod housing (a.k.a. Shopkeeper's Model). Thanks for sharing!

Which S.A. Replica Revolver Next?

Which Replica S.A. revolver should I buy next?

1851 Navy Conversion

1872 Open Top Army

1877 Birdshead Colt

Arkansas Paul

Member

ArchAngelCD

Member.

Kendal Black

Member

The Evangelist Cowboy

Member

Driftwood Johnson

Member

Driftwood Johnson

Member

Kendal Black

Member

CraigC

Sixgun Nut

Springfeld

Member

Driftwood Johnson

Member

CraigC

Sixgun Nut

Cocked & Locked

Member

bannockburn

Member

Similar threads