Desert Scorpion
Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 223
Which caliber were 1871-1872 open tops chambered in back in the 1800's. And which is the 1871 and which is the 1872 because I know there is a navy and an army model.
1871-1872 Open Top Revolver
- Thread starter Desert Scorpion
- Start date
- Status
oneshooter
Member
The caliber was 44 Henry Rimfire. Don't know about the Army/Navy part.
Oneshooter
Livin in Texas
Oneshooter
Livin in Texas
Following the Civil War, Colt had a tremendous quantity of left over parts for various cap & ball revolvers. The ideal answer would be to use them up making revolvers that could shoot metallic cartridges such as the .44 Henry R.F. that had been developed during he war. The problem was that the Smith & Wesson company controlled a patent that covered boring a chamber all of the way through a cylinder. Unless S&W would license Colt to use this patent they were dead in the water. Back before 1856, when Colt held the basic revolver patents, S&W and inquired about making a revolver. Colt said, “No!” so now Smith & Wesson told they’re competitor in Hartford CT. to go pound sand.
Colt did develop a cartridge system that didn’t require the chamber to be bored through the chamber (Thuer Conversion) but it was complicated and didn’t prove to be popular. Thuer style guns were made on all of the basic Colt revolvers, running from the 1849 Pocket Model through the 1860 Army, using special Colt cartridges.
Colt then began designing better conversions that would use regular RF and CF cartridges, even though at the time they couldn’t build any guns. These included the Richards Conversion (named after C.B Richards) and the Richards-Mason Conversion (named after C.B. Richards and William Mason) who were working for Colts. Revolvers using these conversions were made up using surplus C & B parts, with original barrels and modified cylinder assemblies – again running from the small Pocket Models to the 1860 Army. Colt introduced a series of .38 and .44 Colt CF cartridges, and also chambered some for existing RF rounds.
The 1871-72 Model was yet another conversion with improvements over the previous ones. But it was only made from Feb. 1872 through June 1873. They were chambered in .44 Henry RF, and the last of the open-top revolvers based on earlier caplock revolvers. Some were made using Navy backstraps and trigger guards, while other were assembled with the same parts from 1860 Army’s but had new frames that eliminated a rebated step in the cylinder, and the conversion ring at the front of the breech that was necessary when using a C & B frame.
To further confuse the issue, all went into production about the same time in 1872 when the S&W patent expired. Colt was making all sorts of revolvers using various combinations of new parts, combined with left over Civil War inventory.
Clears as mud ???? I thought so. :banghead:
Colt did develop a cartridge system that didn’t require the chamber to be bored through the chamber (Thuer Conversion) but it was complicated and didn’t prove to be popular. Thuer style guns were made on all of the basic Colt revolvers, running from the 1849 Pocket Model through the 1860 Army, using special Colt cartridges.
Colt then began designing better conversions that would use regular RF and CF cartridges, even though at the time they couldn’t build any guns. These included the Richards Conversion (named after C.B Richards) and the Richards-Mason Conversion (named after C.B. Richards and William Mason) who were working for Colts. Revolvers using these conversions were made up using surplus C & B parts, with original barrels and modified cylinder assemblies – again running from the small Pocket Models to the 1860 Army. Colt introduced a series of .38 and .44 Colt CF cartridges, and also chambered some for existing RF rounds.
The 1871-72 Model was yet another conversion with improvements over the previous ones. But it was only made from Feb. 1872 through June 1873. They were chambered in .44 Henry RF, and the last of the open-top revolvers based on earlier caplock revolvers. Some were made using Navy backstraps and trigger guards, while other were assembled with the same parts from 1860 Army’s but had new frames that eliminated a rebated step in the cylinder, and the conversion ring at the front of the breech that was necessary when using a C & B frame.
To further confuse the issue, all went into production about the same time in 1872 when the S&W patent expired. Colt was making all sorts of revolvers using various combinations of new parts, combined with left over Civil War inventory.
Clears as mud ???? I thought so. :banghead:
Old Dragoon
Member
Actually Rollin White's Patent (Smith and Wesson were Liscencee's) expired in April 1869. Colt and Remington and every other mothers son were designing and building(gunsmith's) conversions (privately owned) before the expiration date. Per Bruce McDowell's Colt Conversion Book. Remington had 46 RF conversions in the field (Army) for testing as early as 1868. You could produce them but you could not sell them without Rollin White's blessing and the crossing of his palms with money.
The Remington revolvers were produced under license from Smith & Wesson, and thus were "legal." Revolvers made by others that had bored-thru chambers were not, and some of the makers got sued by S&W.
Colt contacted the Army in January, 1871, and offered to referbish and convert 1860 Army model revolvers under the Richards patent. They received an order later that month, and begain to deliver revolvers around August of that year. But by February, 1872 they were also making .44 model 1871-72 revolvers, which were considered to be an improvement over the 1860 conversions.
With the exception of some cap & ball conversion work done for the Army (on 1860 model .44 revolvers) and the Navy (done on 1851 model .36 revolvers) most of the so-called "conversions" were really new guns made up using surplus parts from the Civil War, and produced from 1872 into the early/middle 1880's.
Colt contacted the Army in January, 1871, and offered to referbish and convert 1860 Army model revolvers under the Richards patent. They received an order later that month, and begain to deliver revolvers around August of that year. But by February, 1872 they were also making .44 model 1871-72 revolvers, which were considered to be an improvement over the 1860 conversions.
With the exception of some cap & ball conversion work done for the Army (on 1860 model .44 revolvers) and the Navy (done on 1851 model .36 revolvers) most of the so-called "conversions" were really new guns made up using surplus parts from the Civil War, and produced from 1872 into the early/middle 1880's.
Franco2shoot
Member
Bore thru explanation?
I love these historical threads.. but there's a term you folks are using that I do not understand.
I own a Pietta open top 1860 Colt, and a Remington 1858, one got the Army grip the other Navy, but can't recall which is which. I have always wanted a Mason-Richardson conversion, just so I could have the era covered from cap-n-ball through cartridge. Noticibly, Pietta and Uberti seem to have shy'ed away from the conversion revolvers, presumably because they are unreliable, or would cost more than the public is willing to spend.. also, I believe the only calibre available is .36 and there seems to be less market for the ..36 than the .44 or the .45 Long Colt cartridge which I favor..
Any words of wisdom as to where I could get a solid Mason-richardson conversion?
KKKKFL
I love these historical threads.. but there's a term you folks are using that I do not understand.
I own a Pietta open top 1860 Colt, and a Remington 1858, one got the Army grip the other Navy, but can't recall which is which. I have always wanted a Mason-Richardson conversion, just so I could have the era covered from cap-n-ball through cartridge. Noticibly, Pietta and Uberti seem to have shy'ed away from the conversion revolvers, presumably because they are unreliable, or would cost more than the public is willing to spend.. also, I believe the only calibre available is .36 and there seems to be less market for the ..36 than the .44 or the .45 Long Colt cartridge which I favor..
Any words of wisdom as to where I could get a solid Mason-richardson conversion?
KKKKFL
Jamie C.
Member
1860 Richards-Mason Conversions
Cimarron Has a few other conversions as well.
1858 New Model Army Conversion
J.C.
A "bored-thru" chamber is one where the charge hole goes all of the way through the cylinder (as in modern revolvers) so that a metallic cartridge can be inserted from the back. Cap & Ball revolvers had a nipple or “cone” at the back, so a charge of powder and a ball or bullet had to be loaded from the front.
A man named Rollin White took out a patent on a revolver design that used a bored-thru chamber (but not metallic cartridges) in 1855. Horace Smith and Daniel B. Wesson were pioneers in developing metallic cartridges, and in fact their earlier work eventually led to the Henry and Winchester lever-action rifles as well as modern metallic cartridge revolvers.
In 1856, Smith & Wesson wanted to make a cartridge revolver, but they realized they couldn’t unless they controlled the White patent. So they made a deal with White and bought exclusive rights to manufacture revolvers under his patent.
This deal had a tremendous impact on U.S. history, because for all practical purposes during the Civil War, and early Indian Wars thereafter, Union troops were armed with Cap & Ball rather then metallic cartridge revolvers. Had the White patent not been in place, and under Smith & Wesson’s control, they might have been able to obtain Colt and Remington revolvers that used that same .44 R.F. cartridge made for the Henry rifle. As it was this didn’t come about until 1869 or later.
Today, reproductions of these early cartridge revolvers are made that use the following cartridges – but stick to reduced loads or black powder.
.32 S&W and .32 S&W Long
.38 Colt and .38 Special
.44 Colt
.45 Colt and .45 ACP
A man named Rollin White took out a patent on a revolver design that used a bored-thru chamber (but not metallic cartridges) in 1855. Horace Smith and Daniel B. Wesson were pioneers in developing metallic cartridges, and in fact their earlier work eventually led to the Henry and Winchester lever-action rifles as well as modern metallic cartridge revolvers.
In 1856, Smith & Wesson wanted to make a cartridge revolver, but they realized they couldn’t unless they controlled the White patent. So they made a deal with White and bought exclusive rights to manufacture revolvers under his patent.
This deal had a tremendous impact on U.S. history, because for all practical purposes during the Civil War, and early Indian Wars thereafter, Union troops were armed with Cap & Ball rather then metallic cartridge revolvers. Had the White patent not been in place, and under Smith & Wesson’s control, they might have been able to obtain Colt and Remington revolvers that used that same .44 R.F. cartridge made for the Henry rifle. As it was this didn’t come about until 1869 or later.
Today, reproductions of these early cartridge revolvers are made that use the following cartridges – but stick to reduced loads or black powder.
.32 S&W and .32 S&W Long
.38 Colt and .38 Special
.44 Colt
.45 Colt and .45 ACP
Old Dragoon
Member
Remington actually had S & W build some of their conversions as they were not set up to do it at the time. A lot of the "Factory" conversion Remy's were in fact done by the S & W Factory. Whitneyville Armory did some under liscence from Rollin White too. Some were converted by Remington and The Armorys for private owners. Rollin White's pattent did not cover individuals from having their own pistols converted by Remington or the armories.
Bruce MC Dowell thought that Remington had their 46 Rimfire Conversions in Army field test without the Rollin White royality being paid because they were not being "sold" only tested, and at the time late 1868 the Rollin White patent was about to expire and it was widely known that Rollin White would not be able to renew his patent, because of all the havoc it caused the Military during the Civil War.
I'm working on an Original 46RF Remington 5 shot Conversion now, it has also been converted to C.F.
It has the original S/N's under the bbl and on the grip frame, then 3 different small numbers on the grip frame, also a Large "B" on the grip frame and the TG. This "B" I believe is the latest conversion to C.F.
The other small numbers (2 are 4 digit in the 3XXXX series and one is a two digit number 4X ) I believe these to be repair numbers and possibly one of these is the factory conversion to 46 RF number. This pistol had all the Sub-Inspector marks on it and was possibly issued in the Civil War before being converted, or perjhaps warehoused, but it was purchased by the Army.
I have never seen this many numbers on a Remy grip frame before. usually the coinversion numbers are found on the hammer, under the TG, on the Grip Frame and under the bbl and behind the recoil shield. This pistol was missing the recoil shield that had been dovetailed into the frame. I made a new one for this pistol, among other work.
The 46 R F Remington conversions could use the 46 RF Long Remington(rifle) cartridge as well as the 46 RF cartridge.
Bruce MC Dowell thought that Remington had their 46 Rimfire Conversions in Army field test without the Rollin White royality being paid because they were not being "sold" only tested, and at the time late 1868 the Rollin White patent was about to expire and it was widely known that Rollin White would not be able to renew his patent, because of all the havoc it caused the Military during the Civil War.
I'm working on an Original 46RF Remington 5 shot Conversion now, it has also been converted to C.F.
It has the original S/N's under the bbl and on the grip frame, then 3 different small numbers on the grip frame, also a Large "B" on the grip frame and the TG. This "B" I believe is the latest conversion to C.F.
The other small numbers (2 are 4 digit in the 3XXXX series and one is a two digit number 4X ) I believe these to be repair numbers and possibly one of these is the factory conversion to 46 RF number. This pistol had all the Sub-Inspector marks on it and was possibly issued in the Civil War before being converted, or perjhaps warehoused, but it was purchased by the Army.
I have never seen this many numbers on a Remy grip frame before. usually the coinversion numbers are found on the hammer, under the TG, on the Grip Frame and under the bbl and behind the recoil shield. This pistol was missing the recoil shield that had been dovetailed into the frame. I made a new one for this pistol, among other work.
The 46 R F Remington conversions could use the 46 RF Long Remington(rifle) cartridge as well as the 46 RF cartridge.
Steve499
Member
Ahem! Where's the picture of that piece, Dragoon?
Steve
Steve
Old Dragoon
Member
I'm afraid to post pictures of this piece, I'm sure the owner doesn't care, but I don't want to be overrun with folks wanting me to replace their lost recoil shields.....ROFLMAO!
I'll try to get some of it before I send it back home.
I fired it today and I think it's the first time this century and maybe last too, that it has been fired. It likes 44 Spcl brass full of BP with the 44 Rem. 248 grn outside lubed bullets. It also likes 44 Mag brass full of Bp with the same bullet. I'll try 44 Russian brass and the same bullet tomorrow.
It does not like 44 Colt brass with 28 grns Bp and the same bullet. She shoots it fine, but forces that brass into the chamber as the rim is too small a dia. Not a bad stick, but a stick in the chamber none the less.
The 46 RF and the 44 mag/44 Special rims are almost the same dia, if not the same and the pistola loves those.
This pistola has a unique firing pin system that I have never seen before. It consists of a flat piece of steel (swing arm) that acts as the rear site (original rear site machined out of the groove) and it is pivoted by a pin through the frame at the rear top of the frame. This arm is about a half inch long and has a firing pin located near the bottom that pivots with the arm into the primer.
This feature made making the recoil shield real interesting as I had to work around that feature. A simple firing pin hole in the recoil shield would not work due to the arc that the arm and firing pin travels. So I had to cut a square window in the area of the firing pin. I was afraid that this would cause the primers to back out. Not the case, as the firing pin and arm keep the primers in place. WHEW!!
I have a little timing work to do on it yet, but She ROCKS!
I want one! An original 46 RF Conversion with the 5 shot cylinder.
I'll try to get some of it before I send it back home.
I fired it today and I think it's the first time this century and maybe last too, that it has been fired. It likes 44 Spcl brass full of BP with the 44 Rem. 248 grn outside lubed bullets. It also likes 44 Mag brass full of Bp with the same bullet. I'll try 44 Russian brass and the same bullet tomorrow.
It does not like 44 Colt brass with 28 grns Bp and the same bullet. She shoots it fine, but forces that brass into the chamber as the rim is too small a dia. Not a bad stick, but a stick in the chamber none the less.
The 46 RF and the 44 mag/44 Special rims are almost the same dia, if not the same and the pistola loves those.
This pistola has a unique firing pin system that I have never seen before. It consists of a flat piece of steel (swing arm) that acts as the rear site (original rear site machined out of the groove) and it is pivoted by a pin through the frame at the rear top of the frame. This arm is about a half inch long and has a firing pin located near the bottom that pivots with the arm into the primer.
This feature made making the recoil shield real interesting as I had to work around that feature. A simple firing pin hole in the recoil shield would not work due to the arc that the arm and firing pin travels. So I had to cut a square window in the area of the firing pin. I was afraid that this would cause the primers to back out. Not the case, as the firing pin and arm keep the primers in place. WHEW!!
I have a little timing work to do on it yet, but She ROCKS!
I want one! An original 46 RF Conversion with the 5 shot cylinder.
Franco2shoot
Member
thick
As in I'm a little...
If I take the cylinder out of my Pietta open top I can see where someone that wanted to convert it would need to remove the nipples... but were it me, I would drill from front to back first, then slightly over size the rear so the cartridge would seat. Next you would need a gate along the side, and one would need to replace the hammer so it would strike the edge for a rimfire, or put a point on the hammer for a center fire..
Doesn't seem all that complex, and I'm surprised you could patent the process. Another approach would be for the Gunsmith just to replace the cylinder altogether, as well as the hammer, file a notch in the side. With the new cylinder all drilled out for a cartridge, where's the patent issue?
That's where I'm losing the historical story anyway..
Thanks
KKKKFL
As in I'm a little...
If I take the cylinder out of my Pietta open top I can see where someone that wanted to convert it would need to remove the nipples... but were it me, I would drill from front to back first, then slightly over size the rear so the cartridge would seat. Next you would need a gate along the side, and one would need to replace the hammer so it would strike the edge for a rimfire, or put a point on the hammer for a center fire..
Doesn't seem all that complex, and I'm surprised you could patent the process. Another approach would be for the Gunsmith just to replace the cylinder altogether, as well as the hammer, file a notch in the side. With the new cylinder all drilled out for a cartridge, where's the patent issue?
That's where I'm losing the historical story anyway..
Thanks
KKKKFL
MrAcheson
Member
Actually they were probably sued by Rollin White. When White licensed the patent to S&W he made two horrible business mistakes. He gave S&W exclusive rights and he was required to defend the patent contractually. The legal fees from defending the patent practically bankrupted him. In order to make some money, he tried to bring out his own revolver, but he actually had to license his own patent back from S&W to do it.
J.T. Gerrity
Member
If you look closely at the conversions shown above, you'll notice that the cylinder has been bored and shortened, with a machined addition to the frame that contains a loading gate, rear sight and recoil shield. This, along with the improved cartridge ejector, is the patented part; kind of like a modern Kirst Konverter.
The Army found the '72 open-top to be accurate and hard-hitting, but convinced themselves that top-strap revolvers were more reliable (???), thus the Colt SAA was born.
Last edited:
In another context, Rollin White had patented the feature of having a bored-thru chamber in a revolver cylinder. Smith & Wesson had leased exclusive rights to manufacture revolvers under the White patent. Because of the patent, no one, including the U.S. Government, could legally make revolvers with a bored-thru chamber (necessary to use regular metallic cartridges) until 1869. Colt and Remington patents covered certain features incorporated into the conversion systems they proposed to use after the White patent expired, and the bored-thru chamber became a moot point.
It is interesting to note that the 1872 revolvers were chambered for the ".44 Colt's conical bullet rimfire cartridge".
Those that have had the opportunity to try have found that most all the surviving Colt 1872 revolvers are not capable of chambering the ".44 Henry rimfire flat nose cartridge."
Those that can usually show evidence of non factory gunsmith alteration.
I believe Colt Firearms being Colt firearms intentionally made the guns dimensionally different so that the owner had to buy the proprietary Colt cartridges and this little trick made the guns not so popular with frontiersmen who wanted interchangeability in their firearm cartridges.
It is the same reasoning that had Colt introduce the ".45 Colt" cartridge, a cartridge that no other manufacturer would or could offer for years after it was introduced.
Shooters of that time saw metallic cartridges as revolutionary and convenient.
Colt Firearms saw metallic cartridges as just another way to capitalize on the market.
Those that have had the opportunity to try have found that most all the surviving Colt 1872 revolvers are not capable of chambering the ".44 Henry rimfire flat nose cartridge."
Those that can usually show evidence of non factory gunsmith alteration.
I believe Colt Firearms being Colt firearms intentionally made the guns dimensionally different so that the owner had to buy the proprietary Colt cartridges and this little trick made the guns not so popular with frontiersmen who wanted interchangeability in their firearm cartridges.
It is the same reasoning that had Colt introduce the ".45 Colt" cartridge, a cartridge that no other manufacturer would or could offer for years after it was introduced.
Shooters of that time saw metallic cartridges as revolutionary and convenient.
Colt Firearms saw metallic cartridges as just another way to capitalize on the market.
Old Dragoon
Member
Old Fuff,
All the gunmakers COULD make and develop Metallic Cartridge Guns and they did, they just could not SELL them! White 's patent didn't hinder the production or the conversion, just the rights to market them. That is why the Military was so against White's patent being extended...along with all the gunmakers and their distributors. Simply because White tied up everyone and hindered handgun progress during the Civil war. I read somewhere that there had even been an attempt on White's life. The thinking being that if he were dead then the patent was dead as well. Faulty logic I'm thinking.
All the gunmakers COULD make and develop Metallic Cartridge Guns and they did, they just could not SELL them! White 's patent didn't hinder the production or the conversion, just the rights to market them. That is why the Military was so against White's patent being extended...along with all the gunmakers and their distributors. Simply because White tied up everyone and hindered handgun progress during the Civil war. I read somewhere that there had even been an attempt on White's life. The thinking being that if he were dead then the patent was dead as well. Faulty logic I'm thinking.
Absolutely true! That's why I said:
There is a story that I can't confirm, to the effect that President Grant made it clear that if Congress passed a patent extension he would veto it in the national interest. Colt had informed him that if the patent was extended they might be forced out of business, and the government would lose the Colt Armory as a manufacturing facility during wartime or other emergencies.
Even so, White unsuccessfully continued to lobby for an extension as late as 1877.
Old Dragoon
Member
I believe that Statement about Grant was true per McDowell's book.I believe he says that very thing. (I'll have to go back and read up on it)He goes into some of that and the uproar about not extending the patent and why. That is the part where he says he believes that Remington had their 46 RF's in the field before the patent was over, and that they were not royality paid items, because they were for "Test" purposes. I think Remington and the Military in Cahoots in that scheme. Remington produced the 46 RF Long for their rifles and I'm sure supplied the round to the Army, more than enough for just the rifles....say to equip the 46 Rf's in the field.... Since Convieniently, the 46 RF would chamber and fire the 46 R.F. Long as well as the regular 46 R.F.
Everyone was trying to circumvent Rollin White's patent in any way they could...Legally or Shadily.
Everyone was trying to circumvent Rollin White's patent in any way they could...Legally or Shadily.
They had to if they were going to remain in business. The caplock era was just about over. Metallic cartridges weren't perfect, but they were fast to load and unload - plus waterproof.
Colt had tons of parts they wanted to use up. They couldn't take them as an income tax loss back then. Remington could see big bucks selling a revolver that with a cylinder swap could shoot loose powder and balls, or metallic cartridges - a plus on the far frontier.
Old Dragoon
Member
All the makers had tons of parts left over. The Military had thousands of pistols in warehouses of all makes that they needed converted to use the new Cartridges. Lots were sold off as surplus after the war (C & B's) to distributors that wanted them converted also. I must have been a booming business upon the demise of the Rollin White patent.
Somewhere I saw a picture of a Colt Patterson that was converted some fifty years after it was produced. it is the classic picture with the wide cross hatched grips (checkered, but about 1/2 inch between the grooves). Writer surmised that the gun was 50 years old when converted.
Wish I could find that picture again. I thought it was in Mc Dowell's book, but I cannot find it there.
Somewhere I saw a picture of a Colt Patterson that was converted some fifty years after it was produced. it is the classic picture with the wide cross hatched grips (checkered, but about 1/2 inch between the grooves). Writer surmised that the gun was 50 years old when converted.
Wish I could find that picture again. I thought it was in Mc Dowell's book, but I cannot find it there.
TallPine
Member
That just seems so bizarre to me ... getting a patent for a hole in something. I can't imagine what the patent office was thinking
Gaucho Gringo
Member
Old Dragoon, two pictures of the Paterson conversion are in Dennis Adlers book "Metallic Cartridge Conversions" on page 164. One is of the original and the other of the reproduction of it. It also states the original picture was in "Paterson Colt Pistol Variations" by R.L. Wilson & Philip R. Philip.
Old Dragoon
Member
Thanks,
By Gum I knew I had seen it in a book I have. I have Dennis' book also. Haven't looked at it lately. Been doing too much research in McDowell's book for other pards.
By Gum I knew I had seen it in a book I have. I have Dennis' book also. Haven't looked at it lately. Been doing too much research in McDowell's book for other pards.
- Status
Similar threads
