It followed me home...Uberti 1872 Open Top

[451 Detonics]

I think I'll keep it. It is a Cimarron import of the Uberti Early Model 1872. These were made by Colt as a cartridge revolver rather than being a conversion like the 1851's and 1860's. It was the last open frame revolver made before Colt introduce the 1873, the infamous Peacemaker. The originals were made in 44 rimfire, mine however is chambered for 38 Special making it nice and cheap to shoot.

The action and trigger on this handgun are very smooth, balance is very similar to an 1873 with the same barrel length (5 1/2"). The trigger breaks without any creep and the grips feel right at home in my hand. The bluing is excellent however the case colors are weak, but I am judging the case colors against my Ruger BH Turnbull did so it is somewhat unfair. The grip are nice straight grained one piece walnut.







Now to wait for the weather to clear up some for a trip to the range. I have a wide variety of 38 ammo on hand to try in it and will probably load up some with Trail Boss as well. Should be a fun gun!

 

[Oyeboten]

Very nice!


We will be looking forward to the Range Report!

 

[451 Detonics]

Hopefully it will start drying up some around here, sadly the road to our range runs through a swampy area and it would be iffy in a 4X4 right now...

 

[Hondo 60]

Love the brass back strap & trigger guard.
I have an 1873 Cattleman like that.
45 Colt of course

 

[CraigC]

Good guns and a lot of fun to shoot. Mine is a 7½" .44Colt and is one of my favorite sixguns. Yes, unfortunately, the case colors are usually pretty bland on the Italian replicas. Mine is better than most in that regard.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I've been thinking of getting one for a while now, that one looks great. My next revolver is going to be either one like that or a short Bird's Head revolver although eventually I'll buy both.

 

[calaverasslim]

I have 2 and luv them both. I have been approached several time to sell or trade but won't do it.

I first bought the RM Conversion in 44 Colt, but soon bought the special cylinder and shoot them regularly.

I next bought the 72 used. It is stamped 44 Colt but a previous owner put in a special cylinder. This is one of the most accurate pistols I own.

Bottom line, they have found a home and ain't moving on.

 

[gunboat57]

I have a mechanical question about that open top 1872. Does the ratchet hand have the two prongs on it like the 1873 or just one like the older 1860?

 

[451 Detonics]

Don't know....haven't taken it apart yet...

 

[CraigC]

I'm fairly certain the hand has only one tooth.

 

[gunboat57]

You can tell by just removing the cylinder and cocking the hammer enough for the ratchet hand to stick out a bit.

No hurry, just curious.

 

[awgrizzly]

You can tell by just removing the cylinder and cocking the hammer enough for the ratchet hand to stick out a bit.

No hurry, just curious.

You can't just remove the cylinder without pulling the gun apart. I have one like that and checked... it has two one above the other.

BTW, that case hardening color isn't real. It's coloring applied to the surface of the metal. Be very careful cleaning it because a strong solvent or excessive rubbing can damage the coloring.

 

[gunboat57]

Thanks, Awgrizzly. That answers a question I've had for a while.

On the 1872 and 1873 Colts the ratchet teeth on the cylinder were moved 1/12 of a turn to allow for cartridges to load from the back. The teeth are in between the chambers. So the hand needs two prongs to complete the turn when cocking. On the older cap and ball models, the ratchet teeth were aligned with the chambers. Only one prong needed.

Now I'm wondering how it was done on the conversions. When the chambers were bored through, didn't that cut away the ratchet teeth on the cylinder? I wonder how those were done.

Maybe I wonder too much.

 

[goon]

gunboat57 - the Open Tops are different from conversions. If you look you can see that they use a full length cylinder with the loading gate in the recoil shield whereas conversions use a cylinder that's had the rear machined off and a ring added.
Not that this helps answer your question at all though...

 

[LightningMan]

My original 1860 Army 1st Model Richards Conversion has 2 prongs to rotate the cylinder. LM

 

[gunboat57]

Goon and Lightningman, thanks for the replies.

Lightningman, are the ratchet teeth on your 1860 conversion between the chambers? or in line with the chambers? I'm guessing they're between the chambers if you have a 2 prong hand.

And yours is an original conversion? Any idea when it was converted? I'd love to see pics if you have some.

 

[LightningMan]

gunboat57, My conversion was manufactured in 1871 or 1872, but if you think about it all first model richards conversions of the 1860 army never started out as percussion firearms. That is they never left the factory as such, Colt simply used the remaining parts from them. So in reality, the first model Richards isn't a conversion. And yes the ratchets are between the chambers. I haven't figured out how to get photos from a disc to post on a forum like this, when I do I will do so. LM

 

[CraigC]

All 1860's started out as percussion guns and would indeed be considered "cartridge conversions". The fact that some may not have been shipped as percussion guns does not change that fact. They were still converted into cartridge guns with a conversion ring and other modifications before leaving the Colt factory and all the Richards Type I's and Type II's utilized percussion barrels. The Open Top model is not a conversion but Colt's first dedicated cartridge revolver, which actually preceded the cartridge conversions.

There were guns that were shipped from Colt as cartridge conversions and there were some that were returned to Colt's for the Richards cartridge conversion. So no, not ALL Richards Type I conversions were sold that way. There's a picture of one of each on page 96 of Dennis Adler's book. He goes on to say that the Army ordered 1200 of its own percussion 1860's to be converted with the Richards cartridge design.

 

[gunboat57]

I think I found the answer I was looking for. I read Charles Richards patent 117461 of 1871. Here's a portion of the description of his conversion method:



So the cap and ball ratchet on the cylinder was cut off and a new one made that had the teeth in between the chambers. Now it all makes sense.

 

[LightningMan]

CraigC, Its just how you look at it, I know they are conversions, by most definitions. I was putting a spin on it by looking at it from a different perspective. I had to go back to my book by Bruce McDowell to remember the difference's. There were 2 different First Model Richard Conversions, as one type is grouped as First model Original Cartridge Richards, and the second being, First Model Richards, Converted Percussion Range. Page 159 3rd paragraph; The First Model Colt Richards revolvers which were made as original breeach-loading metallic cartridge guns were serial numbered from 1 through 5000 number range. Moving to page 167; Most of the percussion range Richards will be found to be in the 190000 to 200000 serial range, as these revolvers were from the most part, made up from overstock percussion parts in the Colt factory inventory. And yes those 1200 or so ordered by the army were also stamped as such with a U.S. above the wedge, and in Bruce McDowells book, he lists them as U.S. Richards Conversions. They were originally percussion revolvers, sent back for the conversion process.

 

[451 Detonics]

Well...I'll let you guys figure out the details...lol...

I am just back from the range and am happy as a puppy with a new bone. The gun shot very well albeit about 3 1/2 inches low and an inch left. Point of impact I can bring up some by switching to a slower powder, will try some Trail Boss loads. The ammo I shot today was my old Bianchi Cup load using a tumble lube Lee 158 SWC at about 850fps. Dropping that down to 750 should bring it up a bit and the slower burning powder will help as well. It shot this group of about 3 inches at 20 yards with me shooting it in the classic one hand bullseye form. I am sure as I get use to the gun I can tighten that grouping up a bit. The tiny sights do take some getting use to...



No problems at all with the gun, functioned beautifully.