Poll/Opinion: Grip frame for shortened 1860

[burnse]

I have a Uberti 1860 which I plan on cutting down. for the sake of handling 26-30 grain loads, which do you think would be best. Note: I DO plan on carrying this, so ease of draw and concealability is an important factor.

I am deciding between a traditional bird's head shape and the thunderer shape. If you think plays an important enough role, let me know. Thanks!

Edit: I should mention two other things - I find that, while the 1860 grip points well, it is a bit large for my tastes, and I also plan on eventually getting a howell-style cylinder for BP cartridges.

 

[rcmodel]

I would think since you have to cock it with your thumb each shot, you wouldn't want the DA hump from a Thunderer grip getting in the way.

The traditional SA grip is made that way for a good reason.

rc

 

[arcticap]

The Thunderer grip looks like it would provide more purchase for the hand.
It's also looks like it provides more room which would all add up to being more comfortable and secure while cocking and firing.

Uberti Thunderer photos:

http://www.gunblast.com/Cimarron_Lightning-Thunderer.htm

Uberti Birdshead photos:

http://www.uberti.com/firearms/stallion_bisley_and_cattleman_bird_head.php

 

[rcmodel]

Part of the design of the SA grip was so the gun could roll up in the hand and allow easier reach to re-cock it with your thumb.

The hump-back bump on the Thunderer grip was to help lock the gun in your grip so it didn't roll up.
You didn't have to cock it with your thumb, because it was a Double-Action.

But the OP's 1860 isn't.

rc

 

[arcticap]

The Thunderer is a single action pistol so Uberti must have chosen to install it for a reason besides it having been a double action grip.
It's probably because it's more comfortable and fits the hand better verses the birdshead being slightly more concealable and affording less room.

 

[rcmodel]

The Thunderer is a single action pistol so Uberti

Yes, but the Thunderer grip design, and the Thunderer & Lightening names were first used by Colt in it's first DA revolver in 1877.

Uberti used it due to the nostalgia associated with it.
But it was still first and foremost a DA grip design.

rc

 

[45-70 Ranger]

Use the mainspring, grip, and gripframe from a '51 or a '61 navy. Then it would be like a SSA and you'd have a smaller grip that would roll up in the hand when shot for re-cocking. That would be simple, but not exotic as some might forsee.

 

[Prairie Dawg]

I shoot a pair of 3" 1860 armies & have found that, fo controlling the gun, standard Navy plowhandle grips work much better than either the Thunderer or birdshead grips.

I like the looks of thunderer grips and put them on my Angels at first.
But I found that in actually shooting the gun, the standard grips worked so much better.

I do have two Avenging angels (1860 & Ruger Old Army) with a standard birdshead grips and two others with Thunderer grips. But the ones I shoot most often, because of the issues with controlling the gun, have Navy plowhandles

Just my experience.
--Dawg

 

[Fingers McGee]

It really boils down to which one you can handle best. Like PD, I'm kinda partial to the Navy/SAA plowhandle grip. I've shot .45s with the birds head and thunderer grips & found that the Navy grip still works best.

 

[madcratebuilder]

A factory made grip is fine but I like something a little more personal on my Avengers. The grip frame has a lot of material and has room to be reshaped. Leave the wood panel on and start removing material.



I do like this old one.