Tell Me About Kirst Konverters

[Driftwood Johnson]

You raise some very good points. I guess what was holding me back from getting a Howell conversion was that I wasn't sure if I would be able to carry 6 rounds safely with the hammer in the safety notch. In my 1858, the percussion cylinder has safety notches, but if I try to turn cylinder with my hand without bringing the hammer back, the hammer will move to a live round. I just don't want that to happen with a conversion.

Howdy Again

Let's not confuse apples and oranges. Ken Howell does not offer a six shot 45 Colt conversion cylinder for the 1858 Remington. 44 Colt yes, 45 Colt no.

The only six shot 45 Colt conversion cylinder on the market is the one marketed by Taylors. This is the one Ken Howell designed and patented, with the slightly canted chambers so the rims do not interfere with each other. Howell sold his patent to Taylors, for what ever reason I do not know, and the only company that is currently offering a six shot 45 Colt conversion cylinder for the 1858 is Taylors. They are having somebody else make them.

Anyway, to answer your question, I have an Uberti 1858 in hand that came used with one of the six shot Taylors (R&D) cylinders. No, the safety notches cut between the firing pins on the cylinder cap do not positively capture the hammer and prevent the cylinder from rotating by hand. Probably with a little bit of surgery to the hammer nose, this could be corrected, but as the cylinder comes from the factory the hammer nose does not sink deep enough into the notches for the notch to completely capture it. This has never been an issue for me as I only use these revolvers in CAS and we can only load five, so I simply leave the hammer down on an empty chamber.

As I believe I stated before, the reason I went with this style cylinder is not the fact that it has six chambers. I went with it because I did not need to cut a loading gate slot on the side of the frame. With this style of conversion cylinder that would be pointless anyway, since the cap revolves with the cylinder. The reason I went with this style of conversion cylinder is because it is so easy to pop the cylinder out to empty it and reload.

To pop the empties out, I keep a small length of brass rod in my gun cart. If I could I would simply pop the empties out with the end of the loading lever, however the latch at the end of my old EuroArms Remington is slightly too wide to fit into a chamber. The end of the Uberti loading rod does fit. I suppose I could file down the width of the EuroArms latch slightly, but have never bothered. It is no big deal to keep a brass rod handy.






I will say, that my R&D Cylinder equipped Remingtons are the most accurate 45 Colt revolvers I own. More accurate than my Colts, clones, or Rugers. I have always believed this is because the chamber dimensions on the R&D (the six shot ones) are tighter than the chamber dimensions of any of my other 45 Colt revolvers. In fact, when I load up a batch of 45 Colts, I always keep one of the R&D cylinders handy to use as a cartridge gauge. Experience has shown me that any of my reloads that will drop right into the R&D cylinder will automatically chamber in the looser dimensions of any of my other 45 Colt revolvers. Any rounds that have a slightly 'bulgy' crimp that will not drop right into the R&D cylinder get run through the crimp die again until they fit.

In this photo I am set to load a batch of 45 Colts, and the R&D cylinder is standing by, ready to be used as a cartridge gauge. Yes, I get a little bit anal when I am loading.






A few historical photos. Here is an 1858 Remington converted to fire cartridges. Notice a loading 'gate' has been carved into the side of the frame to allow cartridges to be loaded.






Here is another one that has had a loading gate added, not too different from the Kirst idea.







Here is a Colt Richards Conversion. One of several designs that Colt came up with to convert Cap & Ball revolvers to shoot cartridges before the advent of the 1873 Single Action Army. Pictured are a few original 44 Colt (not 45 Colt) rounds that used a heeled bullet. The round that was developed for these revolvers.






The original cylinders were cut down to get rid of the C&B nipples, and a 'breech plate' was attached to the frame behind the cylinder.






The breech plate had a loading gate attached to it.






The breech plate also had a spring loaded firing pin mounted in it.






Regarding bullet choice, I usually load 45 Schofields for my Remingtons. I use the very flat, stubby Big Lube bullet I designed, the 45 J-P 200. Second from the left. No problem with them in any 45 Colt cylinder. The round on the far left is one of my 45 Colt reloads with the Big Lube 250 grain PRS bullet. When seated in one of the R&D cylinders, the nose of the bullet is about 1/16" short of the front face of the cylinder. I only load Round Nosed Flat Point bullets for all my Cowboy guns.

 

[Blackpowdershooter44]

I don't think it's that much of an issue for the Kirst 45 Colt conversion.
I'm shooting this stuff out of my 2 conversions:
https://www.sgammo.com/product/45-l...lt-200-grain-lead-bullet-american-cowboy-ammo

Plus have shot 255gr 45 Colt re-manufactured Cowboy ammo in my Kirst 58 conversion in the past.

Thanks for the info, next time I go to the gun store I'll pick up some rounds for the conversion.

 

[Blackpowdershooter44]

Howdy Again

Let's not confuse apples and oranges. Ken Howell does not offer a six shot 45 Colt conversion cylinder for the 1858 Remington. 44 Colt yes, 45 Colt no.

The only six shot 45 Colt conversion cylinder on the market is the one marketed by Taylors. This is the one Ken Howell designed and patented, with the slightly canted chambers so the rims do not interfere with each other. Howell sold his patent to Taylors, for what ever reason I do not know, and the only company that is currently offering a six shot 45 Colt conversion cylinder for the 1858 is Taylors. They are having somebody else make them.

Anyway, to answer your question, I have an Uberti 1858 in hand that came used with one of the six shot Taylors (R&D) cylinders. No, the safety notches cut between the firing pins on the cylinder cap do not positively capture the hammer and prevent the cylinder from rotating by hand. Probably with a little bit of surgery to the hammer nose, this could be corrected, but as the cylinder comes from the factory the hammer nose does not sink deep enough into the notches for the notch to completely capture it. This has never been an issue for me as I only use these revolvers in CAS and we can only load five, so I simply leave the hammer down on an empty chamber.

As I believe I stated before, the reason I went with this style cylinder is not the fact that it has six chambers. I went with it because I did not need to cut a loading gate slot on the side of the frame. With this style of conversion cylinder that would be pointless anyway, since the cap revolves with the cylinder. The reason I went with this style of conversion cylinder is because it is so easy to pop the cylinder out to empty it and reload.

To pop the empties out, I keep a small length of brass rod in my gun cart. If I could I would simply pop the empties out with the end of the loading lever, however the latch at the end of my old EuroArms Remington is slightly too wide to fit into a chamber. The end of the Uberti loading rod does fit. I suppose I could file down the width of the EuroArms latch slightly, but have never bothered. It is no big deal to keep a brass rod handy.

View attachment 808828




I will say, that my R&D Cylinder equipped Remingtons are the most accurate 45 Colt revolvers I own. More accurate than my Colts, clones, or Rugers. I have always believed this is because the chamber dimensions on the R&D (the six shot ones) are tighter than the chamber dimensions of any of my other 45 Colt revolvers. In fact, when I load up a batch of 45 Colts, I always keep one of the R&D cylinders handy to use as a cartridge gauge. Experience has shown me that any of my reloads that will drop right into the R&D cylinder will automatically chamber in the looser dimensions of any of my other 45 Colt revolvers. Any rounds that have a slightly 'bulgy' crimp that will not drop right into the R&D cylinder get run through the crimp die again until they fit.

In this photo I am set to load a batch of 45 Colts, and the R&D cylinder is standing by, ready to be used as a cartridge gauge. Yes, I get a little bit anal when I am loading.

View attachment 808829




A few historical photos. Here is an 1858 Remington converted to fire cartridges. Notice a loading 'gate' has been carved into the side of the frame to allow cartridges to be loaded.

View attachment 808830




Here is another one that has had a loading gate added, not too different from the Kirst idea.

View attachment 808831





Here is a Colt Richards Conversion. One of several designs that Colt came up with to convert Cap & Ball revolvers to shoot cartridges before the advent of the 1873 Single Action Army. Pictured are a few original 44 Colt (not 45 Colt) rounds that used a heeled bullet. The round that was developed for these revolvers.

View attachment 808832




The original cylinders were cut down to get rid of the C&B nipples, and a 'breech plate' was attached to the frame behind the cylinder.

View attachment 808833




The breech plate had a loading gate attached to it.

View attachment 808834




The breech plate also had a spring loaded firing pin mounted in it.

View attachment 808835




Regarding bullet choice, I usually load 45 Schofields for my Remingtons. I use the very flat, stubby Big Lube bullet I designed, the 45 J-P 200. Second from the left. No problem with them in any 45 Colt cylinder. The round on the far left is one of my 45 Colt reloads with the Big Lube 250 grain PRS bullet. When seated in one of the R&D cylinders, the nose of the bullet is about 1/16" short of the front face of the cylinder. I only load Round Nosed Flat Point bullets for all my Cowboy guns.


View attachment 808837

I always enjoy your posts, thanks! I take it you own several originals?

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Just the Richards Conversion in those photos.

 

[drobs]

Take your conversion cylinder (minus the revolver) with you to the local gun shop and try a round or two for fit. Ask the clerk / owner for permission 1st.
I doubt you'll have a problem. The only 45 Colt Kirst cylinder that might have issues is their 1860 Colt Conversion. That one requires shorter than normal 45 Colt ammo.

By the way - should be we be saying Happy Birthday? Did you just turn 21?

Note, I think you will find that the conversion cylinder is kind of an expensive let down. For a few $50 to $60 more you can buy a Uberti 1873 Hombre in 45 Colt or 357 mag. Or keep an eye on Gunbroker and find a deal like I did recently, a $200 Uberti El Patron Competition. My 1st Uberti Hombre 357 mag was $250 NIB + shipping and FFL transfer.

I also found a Pietta 1860 Army used on Gunbroker that came with a 45 Colt conversion cylinder (not Kirst) for $260. Deals like that appear Gunbroker frequently.

 

[AlexanderA]

If I could I would simply pop the empties out with the end of the loading lever, however the latch at the end of my old EuroArms Remington is slightly too wide to fit into a chamber. The end of the Uberti loading rod does fit.

I just checked my mid-80's vintage Euroarms (Armi San Paolo) Remmie, and the end of the loading lever does fit into the conversion cylinder chambers. This could be a difference in when the guns were made.

One thing I did have to do on that gun is replace the too-stiff mainspring. I used an Uberti mainspring, with the sides thinned down a tiny bit so that it wouldn't overhang the frame.

 

[AlexanderA]

No, the safety notches cut between the firing pins on the cylinder cap do not positively capture the hammer and prevent the cylinder from rotating by hand.

The safety notches on my Howell 5-shot cylinders are on the circumference of the cylinder and not on the rear cylinder cap. They engage the bolt rather than the hammer nose. This is possible because there is more metal between the chambers in a 5-shot cylinder. In a 6-shot cylinder, there would be a danger that the extra notches would break through into the chambers, because of the thin web of metal over the chambers. Still, the safety notches are not quite as deep as the regular locking notches.

 

[Blackpowdershooter44]

Take your conversion cylinder (minus the revolver) with you to the local gun shop and try a round or two for fit. Ask the clerk / owner for permission 1st.
I doubt you'll have a problem. The only 45 Colt Kirst cylinder that might have issues is their 1860 Colt Conversion. That one requires shorter than normal 45 Colt ammo.

By the way - should be we be saying Happy Birthday? Did you just turn 21?

Note, I think you will find that the conversion cylinder is kind of an expensive let down. For a few $50 to $60 more you can buy a Uberti 1873 Hombre in 45 Colt or 357 mag. Or keep an eye on Gunbroker and find a deal like I did recently, a $200 Uberti El Patron Competition. My 1st Uberti Hombre 357 mag was $250 NIB + shipping and FFL transfer.

I also found a Pietta 1860 Army used on Gunbroker that came with a 45 Colt conversion cylinder (not Kirst) for $260. Deals like that appear Gunbroker frequently.

You found an 1860 army with a conversion for $260? Sounds like I need to check out Gunbroker more often! I didn't realize the Colt conversions require a shorter cartridge, good to know.

Oh, and no, my birthday is not for a few months.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

In a 6-shot cylinder, there would be a danger that the extra notches would break through into the chambers, because of the thin web of metal over the chambers. Still, the safety notches are not quite as deep as the regular locking notches.

Howdy Again

I don't think so. With most six shot cylinders from any revolver, the regular locking notches are positioned directly over the chamber. This is in fact the weakest part of the cylinder, the metal is often only a few thousandths thick at this point.






If one were go cut extra locking notches to keep the cylinder locked between firing pins, the notches would be cut at the much thicker section between the chambers.






As a matter of fact, some of the early Richards conversions had 12 locking slots on the cylinder, those between chambers were to keep the cylinder locked with the hammer down between chambers.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

You found an 1860 army with a conversion for $260? Sounds like I need to check out Gunbroker more often! I didn't realize the Colt conversions require a shorter cartridge, good to know.

Howdy Again

I found my Stainless Uberti 1858 used, with a blued R&D cylinder at a gun show a bunch of years ago. I don't remember exactly what I paid for it, but I seem to recall it was about what most used single action revolvers were going for. Sometimes you stumble upon good deals. This is really the only way that a conversion cylinder is cost effective with the 1858. My old EuroArms Remington had been purchased so many years ago (1975) that purchasing a conversion cylinder for it was pretty much like buying a new cartridge gun for a little bit over $200.

 

[AlexanderA]

I don't think so. With most six shot cylinders from any revolver, the regular locking notches are positioned directly over the chamber. This is in fact the weakest part of the cylinder, the metal is often only a few thousandths thick at this point.
If one were go cut extra locking notches to keep the cylinder locked between firing pins, the notches would be cut at the much thicker section between the chambers.

Good point. It seems that the depth of the regular locking notches, in a 6-shot cylinder, would be extremely critical. Not much margin for error there.

In a 5-shot cylinder, there is more latitude because the regular locking notches are positioned in the thicker portion between the chambers. Now, Howell's safety notches are directly over the chambers. That's probably why he makes them shallower than the regular locking notches.

It seems to me that in a percussion cylinder, where the chambers are not bored all the way through, this would not be as much of a problem.

 

[Michael Tinker Pearce]

Good point. It seems that the depth of the regular locking notches, in a 6-shot cylinder, would be extremely critical. Not much margin for error there.

In a 5-shot cylinder, there is more latitude because the regular locking notches are positioned in the thicker portion between the chambers. Now, Howell's safety notches are directly over the chambers. That's probably why he makes them shallower than the regular locking notches.

It seems to me that in a percussion cylinder, where the chambers are not bored all the way through, this would not be as much of a problem.

This is correct. When Remingtom did their first conversion on the Army model it got a 5-shot cylinder in .46 Remington Rimfire (which is actually a .45 caliber cartridge, but you know... marketing.) This was a five-shot conversion very similar to a Howell; it had to be removed from the gun to reload and had a back-plate, pierced around the edges for the hammer-nose to strike the rim. The combination of needing room for the rims and locating the locking notches in a stronger position led to the decision to make it a five-shooter, and it had very positive safety notches to rest the hammer-nose between cylinders. The back-plate also helped to make the gun reliable; large-bore rimfires tended to 'balloon' against the breech, which could jam a revolver. The back-plate prevented this.