Original Colt Cartridge Conversions

[arcticap]

A brief article contains some detailed information about Colt factory cartridge conversions for their percussion guns. --->>> https://www.texasranger.org/wp-cont...Unique-Colt-Army-1860-Richards-Transition.pdf

Several designs were made between 1868 - 1873 when the Colt SAA was introduced.
In 1868 the S&W patent on cartridges expired, but the White cylinder patent didn't expire until 1869, which led Colt to develop ways to improvise.

The total number of Conversions is 46,100, which includes the following:

• Police and Pocket Navies the largest number (24,000) produced in .38 caliber.
• Thuer Conversions 5,000 in all calibers
• Richards Conversions 9,000
• 1851 Navy Richards-Masons 3,800
• 1861 Navy Richards-Masons 2,200
• 1871-1872 Open Tops just under 6,000
• Richards Transition Conversions 2,100 (the fewest converted Colt’s manufactured)2

 

[45 Dragoon]

'71 /'72 Open Tops weren't conversions.

Mike

 

[Tommygunn]

45 Dragoon is right, the 71 @ 72 Opentops were made that way, but they do resemble conversions in some ways. Conversions milled off the rear of the cylinders were the nipples were set and the Opentop models didn't require this.
To make the converted cylinder work in conversions, a metal ring containing the loading gate was added to the front of the recoil shield.

I find both to be interesting guns and own a Uberti conversion of a .38 Richards/Mason conversion revolver with octagonal barrel (supposedly made from the 1851 Navy) and two opentops, a 71 model with brass TG and BS, in .45,and a 72 model in .38, which has blued steel TG and BS. The 72 also has the longer Army style grip.

 

[arcticap]

'71 /'72 Open Tops weren't conversions.

Thanks for the clarification.
That statement was an excerpt that was copied & pasted which said:
"The total number of Conversions is 46,100, which includes the following:"

I added up the figures of all the conversions, leaving out the number of 1871-1872 open tops, and the total of 46,100 was accurate.
So the article didn't count the open tops as conversions.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Yap, I guess the confusing part is why list them in a list they don't belong in? Might as well add '73 S.A.A. . . . just for consistency sake . . .
They could have listed the "in house" Dragoon conversions but . . . they aren't on the list . . .

Mike

 

[StrawHat]

I have had these two for longer than I can remember. ASM’s version of the Richards conversion. Not a 100% Chinese copy but close enough for me. Chambered for the modern 44 Colt.




Good shooters and always a conversation starter.

Kevin

 

[arcticap]

I have had these two for longer than I can remember. ASM’s version of the Richards conversion. Not a 100% Chinese copy but close enough for me. Chambered for the modern 44 Colt.
Good shooters and always a conversation starter.

They're very beautiful Strawhat, thanks for sharing.

Guns International has a for sale category: Colt revolvers - Conversions 1867 - 1878.
There's quite a few for sale that can all be seen on a single page. --->>> https://www.gunsinternational.com/g...revolvers-conversion-1867-1878.c135_p1_o6.cfm

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I guess the confusing part is why list them in a list they don't belong in? Might as well add '73 S.A.A. . . . just for consistency sake .

Quite true, the problem is that apparently they are called "conversions" in some reference sources, perhaps even marketed as such back in the 1870's, when they were not....

For example, Guns International is selling his handgun, and text reads,
" Because of the high serial number on this one, it was probably produced in the last part of the 1870s. " So it was post 1873, and was what we today refer to as an open-top, and further if you actually look at the barrel on the handgun you can see this was never a cap-n-ball revolver.



And this would explain why the OP's source would list them as "conversions" when nothing was "converted", and they were factory produced as they appear, and why the numbers don't jive, with the numbers being a correct count of actually converted handguns.

LD

 

[45 Dragoon]

I get where you are coming from but none of the '71 / '72 OT's had rebated cylinders. The "S" barrel was a big change from the cap gun counter part and defiantly better aesthetically!! Thanks.

Mike

 

[StrawHat]

...They're very beautiful Strawhat, thanks for sharing...

Thank you. They are fun to shoot. 200 grains of bullet and a full casing of powder makes for a decent load.


Kevin

 

[CraigC]

Quite true, the problem is that apparently they are called "conversions" in some reference sources, perhaps even marketed as such back in the 1870's, when they were not....

For example, Guns International is selling his handgun, and text reads,
" Because of the high serial number on this one, it was probably produced in the last part of the 1870s. " So it was post 1873, and was what we today refer to as an open-top, and further if you actually look at the barrel on the handgun you can see this was never a cap-n-ball revolver.

View attachment 959996

And this would explain why the OP's source would list them as "conversions" when nothing was "converted", and they were factory produced as they appear, and why the numbers don't jive, with the numbers being a correct count of actually converted handguns.

LD

I don't know why but there's some confusion about what is considered a "conversion". To be made as a percussion gun first is not a requirement. If it is a percussion frame converted to cartridges, it is a conversion. Many Colt "conversions" were made from new frames and barrels and never existed as a finished percussion gun. They're still cartridge conversions and they were made for years after the 1873. Further, all the Richards-Mason conversions utilized new S-lug barrels, whether they were built on new frames or existing percussion guns.

The reason the 1871-1872 Open Top is not a conversion is that it was built on a brand new, dedicated cartridge frame.You can see in this picture of my Cimarron, there is no conversion ring.

 

[ShotgunDave]

CraigC. I have seen your 72, several places around the interwebs. It is a thing of beauty to behold, and my all time favorite Open Top Colt. You Sir, have created a masterpiece.

 

[CraigC]

Thank you! It is one of my absolute favorite sixguns.

 

[Blackpowderwarrior]

I have had these two for longer than I can remember. ASM’s version of the Richards conversion. Not a 100% Chinese copy but close enough for me. Chambered for the modern 44 Colt.

View attachment 959926 View attachment 959927 View attachment 959928


Good shooters and always a conversation starter.

Kevin

Those 2 ol gals are gorgeous!

 

[Brutuskend]

I don't know why but there's some confusion about what is considered a "conversion". To be made as a percussion gun first is not a requirement. If it is a percussion frame converted to cartridges, it is a conversion. Many Colt "conversions" were made from new frames and barrels and never existed as a finished percussion gun. They're still cartridge conversions and they were made for years after the 1873. Further, all the Richards-Mason conversions utilized new S-lug barrels, whether they were built on new frames or existing percussion guns.

The reason the 1871-1872 Open Top is not a conversion is that it was built on a brand new, dedicated cartridge frame.You can see in this picture of my Cimarron, there is no conversion ring.

View attachment 960175

Dang, that's purdy!

 

[StrawHat]

View attachment 960175

Craig,

That revolver has always been amazing. Michael Gouse as I recall. I may send one of mine to him for similar treatment.

Very nice.

Kevin

 

[StrawHat]

Those 2 ol gals are gorgeous!

Thank you.

Kevin

 

[CraigC]

Craig,

That revolver has always been amazing. Michael Gouse as I recall. I may send one of mine to him for similar treatment.

Very nice.

Kevin

He does a great job. I need to send him something else to scratch up.