Cimarron quality vs. Uberti notion....

[jgh4445]

One of my friends, a guy I shoot with almost every weekend is 80 and was a gun dealer for over 20 years. He had a lot of dealing with Ubertis and Colts and Ruger SAA types over the years. He and I were talking about my latest Uberti purchase and he told me the following about Uberti and Cimarron. I have no reason to doubt him but wanted to see what you guys think.

He told me the reason that Cimarron Model P’s shot to POA today was that back in the early days of Uberti 1873, they all shot high and to the right or left, never to point of aim. He said he bought a ton of them from Mike Harvey (Cimarron) and would almost always have to send them back. He said that in the early days, Uberti would make a bunch of frames and put them in a box, then cylinders, then barrels etc. He went on to say that as they built revolvers they just reached in the box and got a frame, barrel, cylinder etc., and assembled them.

Supposedly, per my friend, Mike Harvey made a bunch of trips to Italy and got the gun maker to start “line boring” the cylinders with the axis of the barrels and got them to keep all the parts of one gun together during the assembly process. He also insisted on certain finish standards for guns that were to be marked "Cimarron". This supposedly resulted in a more accurate revolver and contributed to the notion that Cimarrons were built to better specs than the run of the mill Ubertis. Mike Harvey reportedly guaranteed his Model P’s to shoot to POA. My friend says he and Harvey spoke often and at length on many occasions on this subject and the information I wrote in this post came directly from Mike Harvey. What say you guys?

 

[RPRNY]

It sounds entirely likely. With changes in manufacturing associated with the introduction of CAD and CNC, it is also now a matter of lore, and, no longer true. I had a Cimarron marked Uberti Remington 1875 "Outlaw" 2015 production. Still shot slightly high. But, neither of my Uberti Schofields are Cimarron marked and they shoot even higher vs POA. So...

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

As I stated on my answer to your question about the Remington 1875, talking about Point of Impact in relation to Point of Aim is meaningless unless you specify a distance. A typical revolver bullet leaves the muzzle heading slightly up. The as gravity takes over, the bullet arcs over and starts heading down. The bullet will cross the line of the point of aim twice, once on the way up and once on the way down. So discussions of point of impact vs point of aim are meaningless unless one specifies the distance.

Regarding your friend's statement about Uberti line boring the cylinders specifically for Cimarron, It sounds like a lot of hooey to me. EVERYBODY makes cylinders the way you describe. Cylinders, as well as frames, barrels, and all the other parts are machined to final dimensions separately. Everybody does it that way, Colt, S&W, Ruger, as well as all the old traditional revolver manufacturers who are no longer in business. That is part of the American system of interchangeable parts that Sam Colt and others developed in the Connecticut River valley over 150 years ago. To line bore the chambers separately after installation of the barrel is the province of custom revolver makers, not mass production companies such as Uberti. It is simply more expensive to line bore a cylinder than install a completed one taken from the stockroom. You can rest assured that if somebody was line boring chambers as a regular part of production, the gun would cost more.

Years ago we used to hear all the time how Cimarron's revolvers were better than other importers' because of the extra care that went into making them. That old wive's tale has been pretty thoroughly put to rest these days. Other than distinctive marking, and some barrel options not available to other importers, Cimarron's guns come off the same assembly line that the other importer's guns come off of.

Remind me to tell you sometime about the Cimarron Cattleman I used to own that had the worst trigger pull of any single action revolver I have ever owned, and if that wasn't bad enough the barrel was not screwed on correctly and the front sight leaned to one side. So much for how much better Cimarron revolvers are.

 

[jgh4445]

Responded to you in the earlier post.

 

[DPris]

I would tend to doubt the line-boring.
I've seen differences in configurations between importers, but no indications Cimarron's production guns get special treatment.
Line-boring also wouldn't do anything to make them shoot to point of aim better, that's a function of sight regulation.
Denis

 

[blue32]

I have a Cimarron P I picked up a few years ago that shoots point of aim. I refused transfer on another when it showed up with a sub par finish.Then again, I bought a 61 Navy from Taylor's a few months ago that is just as accurate, if not more so. My Taylor's is noticeably tighter and sports deeper hues on the CCH finish. The wood fit is slightly better too.

 

[45 Dragoon]

"Line- boring" the cylinder is what folks get from the likes of Freedom Arms. It just doesn't happen on a $500.00 S.A. Heck, even Colt doesn't do that.
It'd be nice though . . . . . (it's the "hot rodder" in me . . . . you know, camless engines and such . . . . . look up Koenigsegg camless engine . . . . amazing!!)

Anyway, I have to agree with DJ as far as the distance is concerned. A revolver (or any gun)that hits poa at 20 yds., 30 yds., 40 yds.,and 50yds., doesn't exist. And Denis is correct, the reason for "line-boring" is for a revolver to shoot 5/6 times like the same revolver rather than a revolver shooting like 5/6 different single shooters.

Mike

 

[DPris]

Line-boring's for group sizes, not point of aim regulation.
Denis

 

[jgh4445]

Dang Mike, didn't mean to disturb your nap! You do know that when I get one, it, and the Patron are coming for a visit right?

 

[CraigC]

The bit about lineboring is nonsense, without any doubt. The only production guns that are linebored are the Freedom Arms 83 and 97 and it's part of the reason why they're $3000. It's also part of the reason why custom linebored conversions cost about twice what a traditional conversion costs. As stated, it has to do with accuracy, not point of impact.

As DWJ said, the way you described the way they build the guns is the way they all do it. There's nothing wrong with it, as long as it's done right.

That Cimarron is importing a better gun than all the other importers is just their marketing. They have QC staff at Uberti and that is it. The stuff you hear about them being fitted and finished in the US or that they receive a higher grade of guns or that they tune them in the US before shipment is pure myth. In the real world, there is no difference between the various importers. I have guns from Cimarron, Taylor's, Dixie Gun Works, EMF, Stoeger, etc., and there is no difference between them. In fact, the new guns I just bought from DGW are the best Uberti's I've ever seen. Also, the only Uberti I've ever had to send back was a Cimarron and it was for fit & finish issues.

 

[DPris]

Harvey HAS had to "do battle" with the Italians over the years, but any replica importer who's dealt with them very long has their own tales to tell.
With the exception of certain guns that Cimarron does give special treatment to here in the US, the only real difference among most of their standard production stuff lies in some finishes & some configurations.

Basic quality on the majority of their guns is the same as everybody else's.
Quality is always something of a gamble among Italian guns, and sight regulation across all importers' brands is a primary point of concern.
Denis

 

[Gordon]

Howdy

As I stated on my answer to your question about the Remington 1875, talking about Point of Impact in relation to Point of Aim is meaningless unless you specify a distance. A typical revolver bullet leaves the muzzle heading slightly up. The as gravity takes over, the bullet arcs over and starts heading down. The bullet will cross the line of the point of aim twice, once on the way up and once on the way down. So discussions of point of impact vs point of aim are meaningless unless one specifies the distance.

Regarding your friend's statement about Uberti line boring the cylinders specifically for Cimarron, It sounds like a lot of hooey to me. EVERYBODY makes cylinders the way you describe. Cylinders, as well as frames, barrels, and all the other parts are machined to final dimensions separately. Everybody does it that way, Colt, S&W, Ruger, as well as all the old traditional revolver manufacturers who are no longer in business. That is part of the American system of interchangeable parts that Sam Colt and others developed in the Connecticut River valley over 150 years ago. To line bore the chambers separately after installation of the barrel is the province of custom revolver makers, not mass production companies such as Uberti. It is simply more expensive to line bore a cylinder than install a completed one taken from the stockroom. You can rest assured that if somebody was line boring chambers as a regular part of production, the gun would cost more.

Years ago we used to hear all the time how Cimarron's revolvers were better than other importers' because of the extra care that went into making them. That old wive's tale has been pretty thoroughly put to rest these days. Other than distinctive marking, and some barrel options not available to other importers, Cimarron's guns come off the same assembly line that the other importer's guns come off of.

Remind me to tell you sometime about the Cimarron Cattleman I used to own that had the worst trigger pull of any single action revolver I have ever owned, and if that wasn't bad enough the barrel was not screwed on correctly and the front sight leaned to one side. So much for how much better Cimarron revolvers are.

IF they were lined bored they would be $1000+ revolvers like Freedom Arms.

 

[MaxP]

IF they were lined bored they would be $1000+ revolvers like Freedom Arms.

You can't even get a badly used and abused FA 83 for $1,000.00 any more. A new Premier Grade FA will set you back nearly $3K. You pay for all that goodness!

 

[45 Dragoon]

Dang Mike, didn't mean to disturb your nap! You do know that when I get one, it, and the Patron are coming for a visit right?

Hey Jim!! Not meant neg. at all, just giving an idea about line boring. To do that on a mass production basis would still make the revolvers way expensive. It would definitely be the way to build THE ultimate tack driver.

And, of course!! You'll be amazed at the difference in the El Patron, and the "other" one will feel just like it!!! I'll probably talk you into a full "Rugerizing" of one if not both (Coil hand spring, coil bolt spring and coil trigger spring! = no broken springs). Lightest action/ easiest handling S.A. ever without the problems of the Ruger and the "run of the mill " coil S.A.s!

Mike

 

[jgh4445]

Didn't take it negatively at all Buddy! Rugerizing huh? That mean I need to bring my New Vaaquero too???

 

[Mike Harvey]

One of my friends, a guy I shoot with almost every weekend is 80 and was a gun dealer for over 20 years. He had a lot of dealing with Ubertis and Colts and Ruger SAA types over the years. He and I were talking about my latest Uberti purchase and he told me the following about Uberti and Cimarron. I have no reason to doubt him but wanted to see what you guys think.

He told me the reason that Cimarron Model P’s shot to POA today was that back in the early days of Uberti 1873, they all shot high and to the right or left, never to point of aim. He said he bought a ton of them from Mike Harvey (Cimarron) and would almost always have to send them back. He said that in the early days, Uberti would make a bunch of frames and put them in a box, then cylinders, then barrels etc. He went on to say that as they built revolvers they just reached in the box and got a frame, barrel, cylinder etc., and assembled them.

Supposedly, per my friend, Mike Harvey made a bunch of trips to Italy and got the gun maker to start “line boring” the cylinders with the axis of the barrels and got them to keep all the parts of one gun together during the assembly process. He also insisted on certain finish standards for guns that were to be marked "Cimarron". This supposedly resulted in a more accurate revolver and contributed to the notion that Cimarrons were built to better specs than the run of the mill Ubertis. Mike Harvey reportedly guaranteed his Model P’s to shoot to POA. My friend says he and Harvey spoke often and at length on many occasions on this subject and the information I wrote in this post came directly from Mike Harvey. What say you guys?

Sorry but Ole MH has not spoken to Uberti about line boring. He has made LOTS of trips to Italy. He has spoken to all the Uberti's, many times. Now he speaks to Berettas. Lots of truth here. In the beginning the front sight was too low. All shot high. The Factory made 500 cartridge guns a year. This was probably 1983. They were copying a 3rd Gen Colt but had none in the factory. I sent a 1st gen over there and that is the gun they use today when they need one to reference. Now they make 40,000+.

 

[Mike Harvey]

Howdy

As I stated on my answer to your question about the Remington 1875, talking about Point of Impact in relation to Point of Aim is meaningless unless you specify a distance. A typical revolver bullet leaves the muzzle heading slightly up. The as gravity takes over, the bullet arcs over and starts heading down. The bullet will cross the line of the point of aim twice, once on the way up and once on the way down. So discussions of point of impact vs point of aim are meaningless unless one specifies the distance.

Regarding your friend's statement about Uberti line boring the cylinders specifically for Cimarron, It sounds like a lot of hooey to me. EVERYBODY makes cylinders the way you describe. Cylinders, as well as frames, barrels, and all the other parts are machined to final dimensions separately. Everybody does it that way, Colt, S&W, Ruger, as well as all the old traditional revolver manufacturers who are no longer in business. That is part of the American system of interchangeable parts that Sam Colt and others developed in the Connecticut River valley over 150 years ago. To line bore the chambers separately after installation of the barrel is the province of custom revolver makers, not mass production companies such as Uberti. It is simply more expensive to line bore a cylinder than install a completed one taken from the stockroom. You can rest assured that if somebody was line boring chambers as a regular part of production, the gun would cost more.

Years ago we used to hear all the time how Cimarron's revolvers were better than other importers' because of the extra care that went into making them. That old wive's tale has been pretty thoroughly put to rest these days. Other than distinctive marking, and some barrel options not available to other importers, Cimarron's guns come off the same assembly line that the other importer's guns come off of.

Remind me to tell you sometime about the Cimarron Cattleman I used to own that had the worst trigger pull of any single action revolver I have ever owned, and if that wasn't bad enough the barrel was not screwed on correctly and the front sight leaned to one side. So much for how much better Cimarron revolvers are.

One of my friends, a guy I shoot with almost every weekend is 80 and was a gun dealer for over 20 years. He had a lot of dealing with Ubertis and Colts and Ruger SAA types over the years. He and I were talking about my latest Uberti purchase and he told me the following about Uberti and Cimarron. I have no reason to doubt him but wanted to see what you guys think.

The bit about lineboring is nonsense, without any doubt. The only production guns that are linebored are the Freedom Arms 83 and 97 and it's part of the reason why they're $3000. It's also part of the reason why custom linebored conversions cost about twice what a traditional conversion costs. As stated, it has to do with accuracy, not point of impact.

As DWJ said, the way you described the way they build the guns is the way they all do it. There's nothing wrong with it, as long as it's done right.

That Cimarron is importing a better gun than all the other importers is just their marketing. They have QC staff at Uberti and that is it. The stuff you hear about them being fitted and finished in the US or that they receive a higher grade of guns or that they tune them in the US before shipment is pure myth. In the real world, there is no difference between the various importers. I have guns from Cimarron, Taylor's, Dixie Gun Works, EMF, Stoeger, etc., and there is no difference between them. In fact, the new guns I just bought from DGW are the best Uberti's I've ever seen. Also, the only Uberti I've ever had to send back was a Cimarron and it was for fit & finish issues.

View attachment 759534

The reason Cimarron has this reputation is due to the fact that we were there in the early days when all other importers wanted Cheap, cheap, cheap. What I wanted was quality. The guns were made from poor steel. I had the steel tested in Houston and reported to Aldo himself the findings. Inclusions by the bushel. The steel was poorly finished, machine marks everywhere, poorly shaped and covered by a dozen Italian proof marks and they poorly performed. I sent them the 1st Colt 1st gen SAA in 1985, the 1st they had ever seen. It is still there and still used when needed. About this time Maria Uberti started UBERTI USA.

I started by working with Aldo to get the darn unsightly proof marks hidden. Aldo designed trigger guards and other parts with cut outs (for proof mark placement) so the proof marks were covered when the final guard was in place. Other marks went under the ejector housing and in other places that would conceal them. I went to war with machine marks and paid $30 a gun (and the guns cost about $150 then) to polish away all machine marks including the screw heads. They thought I was nuts. Now I had the most expensive SAA they had ever made. All competitors stayed with cheap.

In the late 80's we started copying every part, one by one from Cimarron's sample 1st gen. By 1990 we had a near 100% Colt replica. Cimarron was selling more SAA's than al the Cheaps combined. Then Maria Uberti upgraded the polish at Uberti USA to a polish 90% of what Cimarron was paying the additional $30.. Aldo did not charge Maria for the better polish. This polish became the standard Uberti polish that you see today. More later, the storm is causing weird stuff to happen and not .....




bought a ton of them from Mike Harvey (Cimarron) and would almost always have to send them back. He said that in the early days, Uberti would make a bunch of frames and put them in a box, then cylinders, then barrels etc. He went on to say that as they built revolvers they just reached in the box and got a frame, barrel, cylinder etc., and assembled them.

Supposedly, per my friend, Mike Harvey made a bunch of trips to Italy and got the gun maker to start “line boring” the cylinders with the axis of the barrels and got them to keep all the parts of one gun together during the assembly process. He also insisted on certain finish standards for guns that were to be marked "Cimarron". This supposedly resulted in a more accurate revolver and contributed to the notion that Cimarrons were built to better specs than the run of the mill Ubertis. Mike Harvey reportedly guaranteed his Model P’s to shoot to POA. My friend says he and Harvey spoke often and at length on many occasions on this subject and the information I wrote in this post came directly from Mike Harvey. What say you guys?

 

[jgh4445]

Thanks for weighing in Mike. Guess that puts that rumor to rest. Welcome to our forum.