modern shoulder stocked revolver manufacturer

Status
Not open for further replies.
WestKentucky

WestKentucky

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
13,142
Location
Western Kentucky
I have zero experience with cap and ball revolvers. I have plenty experience with caplock and inline rifles though. I want a shoulder stocked revolver, and I don't give a rip whether it is "historically correct" nor do I care about barrel length. I have a centerfire buntline I can convert, but would prefer to avoid tax stamps and NFA headaches. Any suggestions?
 
Traditions/Pietta makes both a 12" 1858 non historical Remington with a hammer screw attachment stock and a 12" historically accurate 1851 with a cut recoil shield attachment shoulder stock. Old South Firearms generally has both of these and the different shoulder stocks in stock. With some work, the hammer screw type stocks appear to be modifiable to fit many modern cartridge sixshooters, but then theres that SBR thing to deal with. I have been thinking about buying an 18" Uberti Remington revolver rifle barrel, taking it to a gunsmith to rethread it to fit the Pietta 1858 frame and a cartridge conversion cylinder so I can use it with the stock without the SBR requirement.
Come to think of it, how does the modern Rossi Circuit Judge revolving rifle solve this issue or does it?
 
Last edited:
Not yet mentioned, but anyway....

When shooting any revolver with an attached shoulder stock, be absolutely sure that the left hand (of a right-handed shooter) is held well back from the front of the cylinder!

Otherwise a multi-chamber discharge can do horrendous damage to your supporting hand.
 
Old Fuff said:
Not yet mentioned, but anyway....

When shooting any revolver with an attached shoulder stock, be absolutely sure that the left hand (of a right-handed shooter) is held well back from the front of the cylinder!

Otherwise a multi-chamber discharge can do horrendous damage to your supporting hand.
Click to expand...
I never understood why they didn't incorporate a blast plate on the lower left side. It would only add a couple ounces but would protect the arm. Since its not integral to the frame I wouldn't trust one added on to do much more than become schrapnel. Like most things in history though they would have incorrectly assumed everyone was right handed meaning that the left arm is forward on the grip and they would only have had to protect approximately 45 degrees of the cylinder gap. Would their have been a concern of blowback ??? Maybe one of these days when I buy a minimill I will tool up and produce the frame that I want complete with left side guarding. Heck I may leave the whole left side enclosed so I don't even get blast from caps.
 
I never understood why they didn't incorporate a blast plate on the lower left side.
Click to expand...

I believe they didn't because training manuals of the day illustrated the correct way to do it, and if the text and illustrations were ignored it was... well tough luck.

That, and they didn't want to go to the expense and trouble of modifying all revolvers that could have a stock attached, regardless if they were issued or not. The most common example would be Colt's 1860 Army model.

The problem I see today is that we have many new shooters that are completely unaware of the risk, and have never been shown the "right way," or read any books or manuals.
 
Old Fuff said:
I believe they didn't because training manuals of the day illustrated the correct way to do it, and if the text and illustrations were ignored it was... well tough luck.

That, and they didn't want to go to the expense and trouble of modifying all revolvers that could have a stock attached, regardless if they were issued or not. The most common example would be Colt's 1860 Army model.

The problem I see today is that we have many new shooters that are completely unaware of the risk, and have never been shown the "right way," or read any books or manuals.
Click to expand...
Agreed 100% on guns intended as pistols, but some of the true revolving rifles, carbines, and shotguns could easily have had the modification. Even the earliest long guns used the same basic stance we use now, and they were well aware of the ridks of chainfire, spitting lead shards, or even simple gap blast. On the purpose built long guns it SHOULD have been a consideration. Maybe it was, maybe it wasnt.
 
As I recall some of the early Colt Paterson prototype and perhaps even production revolving shotguns and rifles had shrouds around the cylinders but that did not satisfactorily solve the potential offhand forgrip injury problem. Was it not Berdans Sharpshooters who were initially equipped with 1855 Colt revolving rifles some of whom experienced off hand injuries despite their training?

It is a simple solution to use a two handed grip to keep the off hand away from danger. I have considered adding a spur trigger guard to my 1858 to increase comfort and ensure a firm steady grip with the off hand.
 
Last edited:
Rossi's revolver rifle/shotgun thingees do have a shroud.

Shielding the right side of a "muzzle loading" revolver action would be challenging as one would still need to be able to load the thing.

I try not to stick my fingers in the hedge clippers while using them. Find out how to operate any piece of machinery before using it.

Yes 1st USSS was armed with 1855 Colt revolving rifles initially despite promises of Sharps rifles during recruitment. They were later replaced. Yes there were or are some reports of injuries from forward placement of the non firing hand. There were also reports of lack of accuracy, some complaining the rifles were less accurate than standard Muzzle loading service rifles. The accuracy fix was to choose only one chamber of the cylinder as the "sniping" chamber and hold the others in reserve, that is take a shot, reload that spent cylinder and shoot it again, repeat ad infinitum.

-kBob
 
"...is there any safety issue regarding the cylinder gap on the modern Rossi Circuit Judge revolving rifle/shotgun?"

The Judge carbine I saw at the local gunshop had a blast shield around the cylinder gap which seems to solve the risk from gap blast. A blastshield would not solve risk from chain fire with having a forearm on a percussion revolver. Chainfire is not a cartridge revolver problem, but is a real percussion revolver problem.

I would use a hand-around-hand hold with any shoulder stocked revolver. I have seen illustrations of cartridge revolvers with shoulder stocks: a Webley revolver shoulder stock that replaces the grips and a Smith & Wesson revolver detachable shoulder stock that serves as a holster. They look cool but they weren't common (I believe) because the minuses outweighed the pluses. I frankly am surprised by local success of the Judge carbine.
 
Think the grip for a Buntline derived from 1851 Navy (just doesn't have the notch): Get a "51 shoulder stock (http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?products_id=12456) cut your notch and try (as long as it's a cap & ball). Pretty sure you can get a cap & ball cylinder for your shooter (I'd try this one first, http://www.vtigunparts.com/store/sh...?id=19&cat=Uberti+1873+Cattleman+Black+Powder) depends on your "kitchen-table" smithing abilities! Reviews for this revolver haven't been too kind to it (multiple chainfire reports, ftf misfires, etc). If you're open to making it easy, buy one of these (http://www.oldsouthfirearms.com/tra...warmy44calsteelframe12octbarrelbuffalo-2.aspx) and then get a stock to fit (same rig I have). Then, just get a conversion chamber for when you want to shoot cartridge, and put on the stock and grab a couple of spare cylinders for when hunting cap and ball!
 
Last edited:
I've thought that a Walker would make one heck of a carbine. And if a spare barrel were bought and bored smooth it might make a nice small game getter figuring it would be fairly similar to a .410 with that large capacity chamber.

Might also be a nice handy weapon to have if you find yourself needing to track a wounded hog in somewhat thick cover.
 
I've read of someone who had his Dragoon modified for the Colt stock. The screw(s) were also added. Either which way would work for me!

I've also considered a custom stock for my ROA, or even my Remington, where a grip panel is replaced by the stock piece so that it can be extended to get the caps further from my face!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
A Modern BP Self-Defense Revolver
2 3 4 5
Replies
100
Views
7K
robhof
robhof
D
  • Locked
Colt 1860 Shoulder Stock
Replies
8
Views
3K
elhombreconnonombre
E
T
  • Locked
Show us your shoulder stocked cap and ball handguns
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
unknwn
U
T
  • Locked
Shoulder stocks for Ruger Old Army?
Replies
10
Views
2K
higene
H
Malachi Leviticus Blue
  • Locked
Pietta 1851 & 1860 Revolver Shoulder Stocks
Replies
13
Views
5K
expat_alaska
expat_alaska
Back
Top