hrgrisso
Member
I heard a rumor that S&W was remaking the Schofield B/T revolvers. Anyone have a website? I've always wanted one in a full power load: That I wasn't afraid to shoot (i.e. historical value).
Schofield Revolvers
- Thread starter hrgrisso
- Start date
- Status
40SW
Member
Why not just get an Uberti or Cimmaron?
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
S&W did make the Schofield again from 2000- 2002, as part of the Performance Center Heritage Series.
As far as I know, there are no plans to do it again, and it seems unlikely.
http://www.gunsamerica.com/97692866...s-Replica/S_W_Performance_Center_Schofiel.htm
rcmodel
As far as I know, there are no plans to do it again, and it seems unlikely.
http://www.gunsamerica.com/97692866...s-Replica/S_W_Performance_Center_Schofiel.htm
rcmodel
MikePGS
Member
They do currently make a model (or at least have one listed on their website). It goes for 4500, and shoots 45S&W http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...d=10001&productId=58453&langId=-1&isFirearm=Y
40SW
Member
Are you folks aware that you can safely shoot a .45 Schoefield in pistols chambered for the .45 Colt. If this is redundant, I am sorry, but I thought I would share this with folks.
Best bet is the one that Urberti makes now. Its beefed up to hack the .45 load and takes the standard .45 load too. Only down is they cost like twice what the Uberti Colt SAA repros go for but still a lot less than the less tru to original Smiths at 4500 bucks.
I'd recommend the Uberti Schofield. I had one and it was an excellent gun. Uberti makes quality reproductions although they tend to be a bit expensive. But nothing near the cost of the Smith Schofield. Think the Uberti 1s currenty around $800.00 + - .
hrgrisso
Member
Thanks
I appreciate the feedback. I'm thinking the Cimmaron just so I don't have the case hardening on the top strap that Uberti does. I like the looks BUT I like things a touch more practical etc. (read less maintenence required)
I appreciate the feedback. I'm thinking the Cimmaron just so I don't have the case hardening on the top strap that Uberti does. I like the looks BUT I like things a touch more practical etc. (read less maintenence required)
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
Use caution on buying a Cimmaron Scofield.
If I'm not mistaken, they are still being made by Armi San Marco, and are prone to big trouble.
The Uberti made ones are a much much better gun.
BTW: That high-dollar S&W is a one-of custom shop gun from the 2002-03 production run.
They just haven't sold it yet!
If they do, they will probably engrave another one.
rcmodel
If I'm not mistaken, they are still being made by Armi San Marco, and are prone to big trouble.
The Uberti made ones are a much much better gun.
BTW: That high-dollar S&W is a one-of custom shop gun from the 2002-03 production run.
They just haven't sold it yet!
If they do, they will probably engrave another one.
rcmodel
Fisherman_48768
Member
I've got one of the Uberti's imported by Navy Arms back in 1994. I have no idea how many rounds have gone down range and it's never given me a bit of trouble. I have to load the 45 Colt rds short or use 45 Schofield as the cylinder is just a tad bit shorter than Rugers and Smiths are.
Deer Hunter
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2005
- Messages
- 4,097
May want to take a look at the Berretta Laramie. Based on the S&W, but a bit stronger action.
jdomin
Member
The new S&W 's Schofield's are highly collectable .
At one time, 4-5 yrs ago, Armi San Marco did make the Schofields for Cimmaron Arms. They were POS. Now all the Schofields are made by Uberti, and just marked with the dealer's name. Taylor, Navy Arms, EMF, etc, all made in the same factory. When I lay my Uberti No. 3 (Larmie), next to my Schofield, the only difference is the grip shape, and latch. Don't forget the "Russian" model with the hook on the trigger guard. I've shot my Schofield in SASS matches for almost five years with no problems. (except I keep missing the targets).
Anyone using the Beretta Laramie Schofield?
I followed up and found this link to the Beretta Version of the Schofield. Looks like a winner to me; you have an adjustable rear sight. That has been a problem for me with fixed sight revolvers, had several that I just cannot do much of anything with because there is no way to get them to shoot to point of aim.
I read something about having to seat the bullets short for Schofield cylinders. I use standard 45LC brass and use commerical cast bullets. What sort of OAL is required for these revolvers.
http://www.beretta.com/index.aspx?m=74&idc=2&ids=58
I followed up and found this link to the Beretta Version of the Schofield. Looks like a winner to me; you have an adjustable rear sight. That has been a problem for me with fixed sight revolvers, had several that I just cannot do much of anything with because there is no way to get them to shoot to point of aim.
I read something about having to seat the bullets short for Schofield cylinders. I use standard 45LC brass and use commerical cast bullets. What sort of OAL is required for these revolvers.
http://www.beretta.com/index.aspx?m=74&idc=2&ids=58
mainmech48
Member
Actually, the Laramie isn't a "Schofield" replica. It's closer to the "New Model No. 3" SA of circa 1877.
FWIW, there's one of the PC run S&W Schofields for sale on the S&W Forum for the same kind of money that they're asking for the Berettas in most of the Gunbroker listings.
Haven't seen the $4500 item mentioned, but infer that it's a highly embellished specimen which only a very rich fella or a fool would even consider actually shooting from the price.
Personally, I wouldn't shoot any of the replicas of any make with anything other than the equivalent of the original BP military loading for the .45 S&W cartridges: 230 gr. lead bullet over 28 gr. BP. That's what the design was made to handle and what it'll last longest with, IMO. Even with modern metallurgy and manufacturing it's still a 130-odd year old design which is more complex and inherently more susceptible to accelerated wear when unduly stressed than the solid strap SAA design.
FWIW, there's one of the PC run S&W Schofields for sale on the S&W Forum for the same kind of money that they're asking for the Berettas in most of the Gunbroker listings.
Haven't seen the $4500 item mentioned, but infer that it's a highly embellished specimen which only a very rich fella or a fool would even consider actually shooting from the price.
Personally, I wouldn't shoot any of the replicas of any make with anything other than the equivalent of the original BP military loading for the .45 S&W cartridges: 230 gr. lead bullet over 28 gr. BP. That's what the design was made to handle and what it'll last longest with, IMO. Even with modern metallurgy and manufacturing it's still a 130-odd year old design which is more complex and inherently more susceptible to accelerated wear when unduly stressed than the solid strap SAA design.
How about modern loads?
I'm considering purchasing an Uberti top-break in .45 Colt and was wondering if any of you have any experience with modern full-power loads in these models. Are these revolvers strictly for the anemic cowboy loadings or are they safe for factory self-defense and/or hunting loads (Winchester Super-X, Cor-Bon, Remington Green Box, Federal Champion, standard pressure Buffalo Bore, etc.)? Also, can moon clips (full or half) be used in Schofields/Model 3's? I'm new to SA revolvers and looking to glean whatever collective wisdom you have to offer. So enlighten me, educate this hapless young newby!
Thanks!
I'm considering purchasing an Uberti top-break in .45 Colt and was wondering if any of you have any experience with modern full-power loads in these models. Are these revolvers strictly for the anemic cowboy loadings or are they safe for factory self-defense and/or hunting loads (Winchester Super-X, Cor-Bon, Remington Green Box, Federal Champion, standard pressure Buffalo Bore, etc.)? Also, can moon clips (full or half) be used in Schofields/Model 3's? I'm new to SA revolvers and looking to glean whatever collective wisdom you have to offer. So enlighten me, educate this hapless young newby!
Thanks!mainmech48
Member
The SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute) pressure specs for the .45 Colt limit the average maximum pressure to 14,000 C.U.P.. This figure is supposed to closely approximate the pressures developed with full case capacity black powder loads, and therefore theoretically should be "safe" to fire in any quality-made revolver originally chambered for the cartridge and in 'good' condition, modern or antique.
While lots of folks will tell you that the original standard BP .45 Colt load was 40 gr. FFg under a 250-255 gr. lead slug, the S&W No.3 was not designed, or originally chambered, for any cartridge capable of developing pressures at that level. Lengthening the frame to take a cylinder chambered for a longer cartridge does nothing to change that.
While you might not immmediately destroy an Uberti Schofield replica firing lead bullet .45 Colt or .44/40 loads at max. SAAMI pressure levels in it, doing so will be very, very tough on it. It will loosen up enough in short order to require a professional rebuild to return it to servicable condition. Not because it's poorly made, but because it was never designed to resist stresses of that level at all.
Any cartridges loaded to meet or exceed the SAAMI maximum levels for .45 Colt should be considered as unsuitable for use in top-break revolvers -period. Especially those using jacketed bullets, as there is even more stress developed trying to push these down the barrel. IIWY, I'd also take very serious note that the modern 'hunting' and 'defensive' pistols and revolvers that these loads were developed and intended for are virtually all at least an order of magnitude stronger than the SAA.
There are no 1/2 or full 'moon' clips made for .45 Colt. While some of the old Webley revolvers originally made for their .455 service round were imported years ago and converted to accept clipped .45 ACP or .45 AR ammo to increase their salability on the surplus market, the Webley's latch design is much stronger than the No.3 - Schofield or otherwise. Not only is the average pressure limit for the .45 ACP much too high (21,000 C.U.P.) for other top break designs to handle, the conversion would be extremely costly - even in the unlikely event that you could find a reputable 'smith willing to do the work.
IMO, if you want or need an 'all-purpose' .45 Colt revolver you'd be happier and better served buying a Ruger Blackhawk or Vacquero, a high-quality SAA or Remington 1875 replica, a S&W M 25/625 or the like.
While lots of folks will tell you that the original standard BP .45 Colt load was 40 gr. FFg under a 250-255 gr. lead slug, the S&W No.3 was not designed, or originally chambered, for any cartridge capable of developing pressures at that level. Lengthening the frame to take a cylinder chambered for a longer cartridge does nothing to change that.
While you might not immmediately destroy an Uberti Schofield replica firing lead bullet .45 Colt or .44/40 loads at max. SAAMI pressure levels in it, doing so will be very, very tough on it. It will loosen up enough in short order to require a professional rebuild to return it to servicable condition. Not because it's poorly made, but because it was never designed to resist stresses of that level at all.
Any cartridges loaded to meet or exceed the SAAMI maximum levels for .45 Colt should be considered as unsuitable for use in top-break revolvers -period. Especially those using jacketed bullets, as there is even more stress developed trying to push these down the barrel. IIWY, I'd also take very serious note that the modern 'hunting' and 'defensive' pistols and revolvers that these loads were developed and intended for are virtually all at least an order of magnitude stronger than the SAA.
There are no 1/2 or full 'moon' clips made for .45 Colt. While some of the old Webley revolvers originally made for their .455 service round were imported years ago and converted to accept clipped .45 ACP or .45 AR ammo to increase their salability on the surplus market, the Webley's latch design is much stronger than the No.3 - Schofield or otherwise. Not only is the average pressure limit for the .45 ACP much too high (21,000 C.U.P.) for other top break designs to handle, the conversion would be extremely costly - even in the unlikely event that you could find a reputable 'smith willing to do the work.
IMO, if you want or need an 'all-purpose' .45 Colt revolver you'd be happier and better served buying a Ruger Blackhawk or Vacquero, a high-quality SAA or Remington 1875 replica, a S&W M 25/625 or the like.
Linear Thinker
Member
S&W Heritage Schofields of 5-6 years ago had numerous issues, mine had to go back 2 times before it started locking up properly and timing correctly.
S&W did pay the postage both ways. Good customer service, but I would have preferred not needing it.
Beretta Laramie is made by Uberti, and is beautifully finished.
Don't have one as yet, but my other Ubertis are excellent.
LT
S&W did pay the postage both ways. Good customer service, but I would have preferred not needing it.
Beretta Laramie is made by Uberti, and is beautifully finished.
Don't have one as yet, but my other Ubertis are excellent.
LT
Well what do you know, I got to shoot a Uberti Schofield in 38 Special this weekend. And I have to agree, looking at the top strap mechanism, it is not a strong design. The backthrust of the cartridge is carried by one screw and one pin. The pin that holds the topstrap latch on, and the screw that joins the frame to the topstrap.
Everything else about the pistol was massive and well made. The trigger was supreb, and the accuracy, never got the thing to hit my target consistantly. It was at least 18" low at 25 yards. Maybe more. And that was with 158 LRN 3.5 grains bullseye in a 38 special case.
mainmech48
Member
Exactly what I was trying to convey. IMO, if one will stay within the parameters of the original cartridges they were designed for there's no reason why a well-built replica or reproduction of the No.3 shouldn't hold up under a good deal of regular use. One just has to keep in mind that it was designed during the blackpowder era and that the original cartridges' case volume was designed to be pretty much limited to their intended 'service' load. It's also worth noting that it would've been tough for a reloader of that period to accidently, or even deliberately, overcharge those cases to any great degree and still seat a bullet. The only smokeless propellant that I can think of offhand where that might still hold true with these cartridges is Trail Boss.
The .45 S&W case is only 1.10" long versus the .45 Colt's 1.29". Military loadings of the period were a 230 gr. bullet over 28 gr. of powder and 250 gr. over 30 gr. respectively. According to Mike Venturino, the government's Frankfort Arsenal quit making the longer rounds as early as 1874, making the issue ammunition for all cavalry units the lighter of the two loads. While some commercial loads of the era were likely at or near the oft cited 40 gr. loading (I've read that most ran from 35-38 gr. under a 250-255 gr. bullet) these were only possible in the old 'balloon head' cases. Modern solid head cases generally won't take that much and still seat a standard weight projectile.
As those original military loads proved to work just fine in the actual combat of the time, why overstress a fine revolver by trying to make it into something it never was?
The .45 S&W case is only 1.10" long versus the .45 Colt's 1.29". Military loadings of the period were a 230 gr. bullet over 28 gr. of powder and 250 gr. over 30 gr. respectively. According to Mike Venturino, the government's Frankfort Arsenal quit making the longer rounds as early as 1874, making the issue ammunition for all cavalry units the lighter of the two loads. While some commercial loads of the era were likely at or near the oft cited 40 gr. loading (I've read that most ran from 35-38 gr. under a 250-255 gr. bullet) these were only possible in the old 'balloon head' cases. Modern solid head cases generally won't take that much and still seat a standard weight projectile.
As those original military loads proved to work just fine in the actual combat of the time, why overstress a fine revolver by trying to make it into something it never was?
Phil DeGraves
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,531
One of the Cowboy shooters I used to shoot with had an Italian repro. The action would fly open and dump all the rounds out every time he pulled the trigger. Don't know if it was a Uberti or ASM.
That was the main issue with the ASM guns, bad preponderance of popping open due to lock angle issues. The lock is much better than on the russians and other No-3 guns too with the nice issue of being easy to replace the wear parts. You think thats not a strong design. I agree but compare it to a old original, it is a lot stronger. The other No-3s where very common in 44-40 and seemed to survive that. I forgot to add that the Uberti can also be carried with all 6 charged as they do have a hammer block safety some what along the lines of a new Smith. Pulling the hammer back to the loading notch engages the safety, dont carry it with the hammer all the way down or the pin will be resting on a primer. A short 1/4 inch pull and a double click and its set.
Last edited:
mainmech48
Member
The "New Model No.3" sometimes referred to as the Frontier Single Action was produced from 1885 until 1908. Among the changes from the original configuration was lengthening the frame about 1/8" in order to accomodate the .44/40 WCF cartridge. According to S&W records only about 2072 of that model were manufactured. From 1900 to 1907 74 New Models were made in .38/40 WCF. From 1881 to 1913 approximately 54,000 1st Model DA No.3s were built. The vast majority of these were in .44 S&W Russian, although rare examples are seen in both .44 and .38 WCF. The No.3 most commonly encountered in .44/40 is the .44 DA Frontier made from 1886 to 1916, with about 15,340 built.
I've no idea of just how many examples of the total number of No.3 variations chambered for the .44/40 still survive. I would speculate with a pretty fair degree of confidence that the largest portion of whatever percentage of that number remain in safe firing condition are those which saw the least actual use.
IMO, it is interesting to note that the most produced model in this chambering, and likely the one with the highest percentage of surviving examples, sold considerably fewer than 1000 pieces per year of production. I would speculate that there were perhaps other issues besides cost relative to its competition responsible for this. And I would bet at least even odds that relative durability and maintenance issues were among the foremost of those.
I still maintain that the .44/40, .38/40 and .45 Colt, especially in original full-power loads, place enough additional stress on this design to severely compromise its usefull service life. And that this applies whether the particular piece is an original antique or a modern reproduction. Modern metallurgy may well prolong it to some small extent, but loadings which operate at pressure levels averaging 25-30% higher than those of the .45 S&W and .44 Russian are still pushing the envelope right to its limit and will result in much more rapid wear and deterioration.
I've no idea of just how many examples of the total number of No.3 variations chambered for the .44/40 still survive. I would speculate with a pretty fair degree of confidence that the largest portion of whatever percentage of that number remain in safe firing condition are those which saw the least actual use.
IMO, it is interesting to note that the most produced model in this chambering, and likely the one with the highest percentage of surviving examples, sold considerably fewer than 1000 pieces per year of production. I would speculate that there were perhaps other issues besides cost relative to its competition responsible for this. And I would bet at least even odds that relative durability and maintenance issues were among the foremost of those.
I still maintain that the .44/40, .38/40 and .45 Colt, especially in original full-power loads, place enough additional stress on this design to severely compromise its usefull service life. And that this applies whether the particular piece is an original antique or a modern reproduction. Modern metallurgy may well prolong it to some small extent, but loadings which operate at pressure levels averaging 25-30% higher than those of the .45 S&W and .44 Russian are still pushing the envelope right to its limit and will result in much more rapid wear and deterioration.
I really doubt that standard new.45 at 15,000 PSI can be that much harder than BP original loads in the smaller cases. I imagine it is a bit harder on the things but all the reports I have run across people shoot the heck out of them and they still keep ticking along. I find it hard to belive that Uberti would make a .45 that cant hack the standard ammo when that was their idea for shooting in the things. You also have to consider that the locking system and barrel extention is beefed up over a original for this reasion too. One of the things they also did was omit the gas vent cuts in the upper too so with the longer cylinders the things tend to gunk right up with BP fouling and put you to manual indexing in very few rounds.
- Status
Similar threads
