C&B replica revolvers

[bender]

ok, first off, I did use the search function, and I did find some older threads about replicas - uberti, palmetto, pietta,etc...

Now for my thread:

The movie Pale Rider was on again tonight... been on every couple nights this week on AMC... and once again I watched the street cleaning scene... where he is shooting his 1858 remington new model army, and swapping cylinders...
thanks for the help in my Pale Rider thread.

Now I'm all fired up in getting one or more of these C&B replicas - walker, dragoon, 1851 navy, 1858 new army, etc. I think 3 would be enough. An early "big & heavy" gun such as the walker, a later more streamlined gun - maybe an 1851 navy, and then the remington new model army - since it is different than the colts, and I can get the cartridge conversion cylinder for it.

So I'm asking about the replica companies. Are uberti replicas decent quality, how "historically accurate" are they? Are any other companies a better deal for the money? Where are good places to get them? I found these companies that sell them: midway, bronells, fall creek suttlery, dixie, and others.

thanks for any comments

 

[arcticap]

From reading posts about C&B revolvers, I've learned that it's preferable to buy from an outfit with a no hassle return policy.

 

[RON in PA]

For a long time Ubertis have had the reputation for being the best replicas, but in the last few years Piettas have improved their standing with many folks.

 

[bender]

how are both for "historical correctness"? I mean, if an original gun had a hammer with a FP, I don't want the replica to have a bunch of added modern safety features all over it.

 

[bender]

ok, never mind this thread. I'm going to buy this book instead:

Percussion Pistols And Revolvers: History, Performance and Practical Use

 

[Old Fuff]

Don’t run away so fast…. But yes, do buy the book.

Let’s see about some of your questions.

The two main makers of these replicas are Uberti and Pietta. Uberti is now part of the Beretta empire, and both companies make quality products that are historically correct, and do not have any modern safety features added to them. This is both good and bad, because you do have to use extra care when shooting them. You can get cartridge conversion cylinders for both the New Model Remington and more popular Colt models, such as the 1851/61 Navy and 1860 Army.

While these companies make good guns, they aren’t all equal. Some importers pay extra for additional hand fitting, while others import the base gun so that they can sell it for less money. That’s part of the reason you may see a wide spread in price between different companies that appear to be selling the same revolver.

From the point of view concerning exact attention to detail in duplicating the original gun I believe that Uberti makes better Colt reproductions, where Pietta makes the better Remington, but I am nit-picking about fine details. Either will do for what you want too do. I base my opinion on having owned a number of original 19th century guns that the reproductions could be compared to.

If you intend to shoot the revolver, one of the Dragoon series is a better choice then a Walker. Yes, the Walker is the biggest, but shooting it can be a pain in the behind, and it is very heavy to hold up. The 1851 Navy is a joy to shoot, and economical too.

Shooting black powder revolvers can be great fun. Welcome to the club.

 

[J.T. Gerrity]

Another thing to consider re: "historical correctness" is the fact that Pietta blatantly stamps their pistols with "Made in Italy" and other garbage in extremely obvious locations (sorry; really a sore spot with me), whereas Uberti does a better job of hiding their stamps. If you really want to get carried away with "H.C.", get a 2nd gen or Signature Series Colt... as accurate (and expensive!) as they get...

 

[mec]

Hand one of the modern replicas to a mid-late 19th century shooter and aside from the peculiar barrel markings, he would find nothing out of the way about it. With any of them, you need to be prepared to put up with more aggrevation than with a modern revolver. It helps to have a bit of time on your hands. Even so, the percussion revolvers are very gratifying.

 

[Tommygunn]

Hand one of the modern replicas to a mid-late 19th century shooter and aside from the peculiar barrel markings, he would find nothing out of the way about it.

Hmmm, wouldn't he find the shiny black "bluing" a bit unusual? Of course, if you showed him the charcoal bluing.... I find that I like it better, but it just doesn't hold up as well.

I agree Uberti does a better job hiding their markings, usually under the loading lever, and bottom of the frame. But Pietta's on the side of the barrels doesn't bother me. Just wish the Italians didn't have their own wierd way of abbreviating words: "F.LLIPIETTA" doesn't readily translate into "Fratelli Pietta" to me, or "Pietta Brothers."

But then, I'm an uncouth American, not a suave, sophisticated european.....

 

[Plink]

My experience with Uberti and Pietta mirrors Ron in PA's. I had always been a fan of the Uberti because early on, they were a better built gun than the Pietta. Apparently Pietta has picked up the quality control a lot and I'm not sure if there's any difference in quality now. Both make guns that are very close to the originals. So close that in some cases, the parts would interchange with the originals.

 

[mec]

Not really. Most of the period guns have a black finish that resembles the current hot blue process. The rust method of blueing was common and resulted in a black finish -shiney or not depending on the metal polish.
The bright blue on the so called corbon blue replicas more resembles fire blue than carbona. It is genrally confined to screws and other small parts on original guns.

 

[bender]

wow, a lot of action here all of a sudden... I'm still gonna get that book, since it supposedly has reviews and commentary regarding all the various replicas available.

the fact that Pietta blatantly stamps their pistols with "Made in Italy" and other garbage in extremely obvious locations

that would irritate me also.

ok, I do intend to get a few different styles as mentioned above. An early "big & heavy" one... a walker or dragoon, then a later "smaller" one such as an 1851 navy, and then the 1858 remington... cuz it was in Pale Rider

Back in my early 20s (the early 1980s) I built one of those CVA kit percussion pistols. It shot well and was fun. Then in the later 1980s, I bought an original trapdoor springfield 45-70, which I handloaded using Pyrodex. So I have some minor experience with this stuff. These C&B revolvers will also be a "father & son" thing. My son (going on 9) is really into guns, and loves the old historical stuff.

Went to sportsmans warehouse today and saw a bunch of uberti replicas, including a Walker (pretty damn big), and an 1858 remington new model. Quality looked fine. I also looked at an 1851 Navy replica (brass frame) which was over $100 cheaper than the others, don't know why. Don't know if it was an uberti or not. I was disappointed in sportsmans prices on these things.

 

[Old Fuff]

Brass frame guns are cheaper to make, and therefore lower priced. But they don't hold up well. If you intend to shoot, rather then buy a decorator stick to steel framed guns. Brass in the backstraps and triggerguards is not a problem.

 

[dispatch55126]

Brass is softer, true, but I think it's failing falls into the same urban legand catagory as greasing the top of each chamber to prevent misfires. What I mean is I have a brass framed 1851 with two cylinders and have probably put on the order of 200-300 rounds through it without any signs of weakness. Properly maintained, it should last a lifetime.

 

[bender]

going to drive up to Cabela's tomorrow. Its 50 miles up the highway from my house. Never been there. Hope to see lots of these replicas, and better prices than sportsmans warehouse.

 

[sundance44s]

Sundance44s

If these guns will be your first cap and ball revolvers ...to own and shoot ..i`d strongly suggest you buying the 1858 remington first ..after you`ve enjoyed shooting it for a while ...then leap into colt country , the Colts aren`t a good starting place for some one new to this type revolver .
A good friend of mine started out with an 1851 colt navy 10 years ago ...he shot it once or twice and then hung it on the wall ... too much trouble ..last year he got back into shooting cap and ball revolvers again after me letting him shoot my 1858 Remmington ...he ordered one the next day..now he enjoys shooting every week .

 

[dispatch55126]

I disagree. My first cap and ball was the 1851 and in some ways I like it better than a modern. IMO, the balance, weight and feel is much better on the 1851 than the 1858. Look at all of the models, hold, and make up your own mind. I was alittle weary about a pistol without a top strap at first but you'll see how substantial the center post is.

 

[Old Fuff]

Brass is softer, true, but I think it's failing falls into the same urban legand catagory as greasing the top of each chamber to prevent misfires.

Neither is an urban legand. 200-300 rounds is next to nothing, and in time the cylinder base pin gets loose where it's threaded into the frame and starts to wobble. I have also seen some frames cracked between the base pin hole and the hand slot. The grease not only prevents chain fires, but is necessary to keep powder fouling from cakeing up in the barrel.

 

[bender]

ok, yes I probably will buy the 1858 new model first. I also want the cartridge conversion cylinder for it.

Let me be sure I understand this. Say I have the C&B 1858 remington. And say I also have an R&D cartridge conversion cylinder for it. Now am I to understand that I can go back and forth between C&B and cartridges with the same gun...? What needs to be done? What about the hammer, does it stay the same? Does the C&B cylinder just come off easily, if so how?

 

[sundance44s]

Sundance44s

The R&D conversion cylinders have 6 fireing pins no altrations needed ...load and fire right out of the box ....the kirst conversion holds 5 shots the R&D hold 6 ... i have one of each .. both are well made and about the same price . Also the Kirst cylinder has one fireing pin and it stays in place by a non revolving recoil sheild ..the cylinder revolves in the recoil shield .
I do like my R&D best because i figure 6 fireing pins is better than one , in the deep woods ... or on a creek bank .

 

[dispatch55126]

I do use a wad out of habit and it keeps the powder in the cylinder (I load the powder in the cylinder before I install it on the pistol. It's easier and less messy). If you are using the right sized ball, it'll shave a small ring of lead and provide the seal needed. It is much more likely that a chain fire would occur through the nipple. Greasing the top of the chamber is a good idea for the break in, but my pistol gets less messy and IMO its easier to clean without the chamber grease.

 

[J.T. Gerrity]

R&D IMHO is the way to go; less hassle than the Kirst - it slips right in. Yes, you can easily switch from cartridge to B.P. when using the R&D as there normally are no modifications necessary to the hammer or other parts of the gun. I have one in my "Cattleman's Carbine", and, to be honest, haven't used the B.P. cylinder since!
Also have to agree with the Dragoon over Walker for the "heavy" gun, in part due to problems with the Walker as outlined in other threads in this forum!

 

[Donny]

I love the brass vs. steel arguments I see on BP forums. Some swear they are nothin but junk and others paraise them without reservation. I own 6 c&b revolvers and 4 of them are brass. I own a 1851, .36 in steel and a Remington 1858 in steel. The steel guns are the ones I would use for coyboy action use (if I ever get into it) or heavy use. However, I enjoy my brass frame guns very much and wouldn't trade them away. In my .44 brass revolvers I stick with a powder charge of 25 grains of pyrodex P and 20 grains of the same for the .36's. This keeps wear down to a minimum while still offering ballistic energies that get the job done. If I need something with some real umph I load the steel Remington with 28 to 30 grains and a heavy conical and can be confident it will put just about anything down it needs to. For back up while hunting or target shooting the brass frames work fine. Pietta makes good brass frame guns. Don't know if I'd trust Palmetto or ASM though. Is steel a better long term investment? Sure, but the brass frame guns are good for getting into the sport and for casual use. Less of a value than they used to be since the dollar has gone down compared to the euro. Have a hard time paying what some are asking for brass frame revolvers these days. Used to be a great deal at around $100. Still a great deal as far as hanguns go.

Donny

 

[dispatch55126]

Earlier you had mentioned you had reservations about a safety on the pistol. On all of my pistols with a six shot cylinder, I only load 5 cylinders and let the hammer rest on the empty cylinder when I carry it.

 

[Franco2shoot]

R&D Cylinder

As mentioned previously... the R&D has individual pins and this is a plus.... I have had mine for over 2 years now, and last week was the first problem... one of the pins was stuck down hard after being fired... It was such a small amount of travel, that on unloading I didn't recogize the protrusion.. I dropped 6 clean LC's in but on trying to seat the back plate found it would not seat correctly... when I pressed the pin out the back retaining screw came out.. I had to fuss with it and tap on it for some time before I could get the whole assembly to screw back in correctly... At this point I checked the other five and found them all to be loose.. I highly recommend R&D shooters to check thie firing pin plate and make certain that all pins are captured and tightly held in place. Perhaps someone better qualified than I can describe this or provide an up close shot...


KKKKFL