The THR Walker Club

[Old Fuff]

I'm going to stick my neck out, because I haven't checked this out to be sure.

But the 2nd. generation Colt's were made using semi-finished castings purchased from Uberti. Therefore I would presume that a conversion cylinder for a Uberti would work in the Colt.

I suggest that you check with the cylinder manufacturer.

Another thing that hasn't been brought up should be. As a rule of thumb, the bore (groove) diameter on these cap & ball revolvers is way oversized for the .452" bullets used these days in .45 Colt ammunition. This won't cause a safety problem, but it may have negative effects on accuracy. Some shooters may not be able to tell the difference, or perhaps don't care - but I'm not one of them. Those revolvers made by the main Italian makers as cartridge revolvers in the first place do have barrels that correctly match the respective cartridges' bullet diameter, but they are not intended to be backward converted to c & b.

 

[NobleSniper]

That brings up a question from me. I have one Uberti Walker and another uberti Walker on the way............. I have never owned a cap and ball revolver before. Have owned darn near everything else under the sun and even have done the front loaders. I read where they were not made for .452-.452 balls. I have heard .454 and.457 work the best. What is your opinion? Also, what about shooting conicals? What weight, powder charge, etc? Recommendatiosn on molds for the conical? And my hats off to BIGBADGUN I have been bothering him for days now over gun leather for my Walkers and I think he has finally got me straight on what I want............thanks

 

[scrat]

Ok im going to take a stab at this one. When i first got my Walker i tried .451 round balls. They hardly made a ring when loading. So i went with .454 and now im set. Ok what are we talking about here. there are two different measurements on a cap and ball. The first measurement is the size of the cylinders. i tried .451 and i got almost no lead rings. so i went bigger. now the .451 worked great on my 1851. Why because the chambers bore in the cylinders of my walker are bigger. You need something that will fill our completely the overall roundness of the cylinder. when loading a cap and ball you pour in your desired amount of powder. then wad if you choose then you put the round ball on the cylinder and use the loading ram to press down the ball. You should get a nice cut ring of lead when you press in the ball. This will let you know the ball is sealed into the chamber. That is why we use .454 round balls. However the bore diameter of the barrel should be still at or around .451-.452. If you were to remove a nipple on one of your cylinders then press in a round ball getting that nice cut ring. Then use something to push the round ball out from the nipple area. you will be able to measure the round ball. At that time you will see it more shaped like a bullet than a ball as its sides have been cut down to form a cylinder. the cylinder diameter you will get most likely will be around. .452. ok as for conicals. some use them some dont. i have never been a fan of what i dont have. i have molds and probably 1000 or so round balls so i just never was to concerned about conicals.

 

[madcratebuilder]

scrat's correct, the Uberti Walker takes a .454 round ball, 457's well work to. Spec is a .449 chamber, button rifled .013 deep, 1-48 twist, 7 land-.440, 7 grooves-.466.

 

[pwillie]

Scrat: Are yousaying that the "Colt" would not workas well as the Uberti with a conversion? Willie

 

[scrat]

Nope....

There is speculation on who colt used to make the guns. For one they did not make all the parts. Which is pretty sad. Most were made by the italians and then redone by colt. With that said there is speculation that they will match an uberti. However if you do not have a walker i would advise on getting a uberti. Why because parts are easily available. and if you were to want a conversion cylinder they are already available as well. If you were to buy the colt then you take a chance on what parts may or may not fit and weather the cylinder from a uberti may fit. If you take a look at web sites you will see what i mean. www.vtigunparts.com www.dixiegunworks.com http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/2,303.html http://www.riverjunction.com/kirst/konverteracc.html you will see a lot of parts for the walker from uberti some that say colt also but fail to say first, second, third generation. so now if you already owned a Uberti Walker then purchased a colt walker well then you would be able to find out for sure if the parts were interchangeable. as well as then it would not be a problem on getting conversion cylinders. all i know is that for sure if i had both i would keep the colt original as it is worth a lot more than to change it. for the uberti now if i had two then i would get a kirst conversion on it with loading gate.


Now if you are not going to do a lot of shooting and want a piece of history by all means purchase a colt. if i were to buy one today. i would maybe shoot it a few times. but then case it up and keep it safe. AS for the uberti that gun gets abused like a whore in vegas in a good way though

 

[madcratebuilder]

Everything I have read indicates that Uberti supplied the raw forging for the frame, barrel, grip frame/trigger guard and cylinder. Machining, small parts and finish done at Colt for the 2nd gens and Colt black Powder Manuf. Co. (Iver Johnson) for 3rd gens.

 

[Old Fuff]

scrat's correct, the Uberti Walker takes a .454 round ball, 457's well work to. Spec is a .449 chamber, button rifled .013 deep, 1-48 twist, 7 land-.440, 7 grooves-.466.

Regardless of what a ball or bullet's diameter is to start with, it well end up the same as the chamber's diameter after it is forced (swaged) into the chamber. The only exception would be is if the ball or bullet was smaller in the first place.

Let us say for example, the the chamber diameter is .449". A .451" ball will swadge, but not too tightly. A .454" ball will swage to .449" and cut a nice ring.

Now lets look at the barrel. According to the above specifications the groove diameter is .466" - therefore you will have a .449" ball entering a .466" barrel. Thus the ball is .017" undersized. This is not exactly the best combination if you want the best possible accuracy.

If you go to a metalic cartridge conversion cylinder, chambered in .45 Colt; The bullet which is .452 to start with will expand or be swaged down to the chamber's throat diameter. For argument we wall say that's .454", which will leave the bullet undersized by approximately .012" - which is not good.

But all revolvers are not created equal - which is the reason one has to determine the exact dimensions for their particular gun.

What the poor Old Fuff is trying to get across is that he wouldn't invest big bucks in a conversion cylinder until he had measured the bore in his own revolver to see what it was.

Just for grins, lets look at the specifications for a Ruger Old Army. It had a reputation for exceptional accuracy.

Ball size = .457" Chamber = .453" Bore (groove) Dia. = .451"

Or the Pietta "Shooters Model" version of a Remington .44 New Army

Ball size = .457" Chamber = .456 Bore (groove) Dia. = .456"

Notice that the ball/bullet is not undersized for the bore.

 

[SixShootinSam]

Regarding the compatibility of Uberti parts on a 2nd gen Colt, I can lay that to rest.
I own a 2nd gen Walker, and ordered some spare Uberti parts to see if they would match up.
I can tell you that they do not.
The cylinder stop was slightly different and the hammer pull was amazingly stiff and wouldnt even drop normally with it in.
The cam was differently angled, and the trigger was slightly larger as well, but it did fit.

I was tempted to buy a coversion cylinder too, but after this subtle differences Im not even going to bother.

My advice is definitely to buy a Uberti if you want abundant spare parts and conversion cylinders.

 

[scrat]

Thank you

 

[pwillie]

Thanks Sam! I will use the advice, Willie

 

[sltm1]

Walker Loading Lever Enhancer

Ohhhhh Boooyyy's....I got a goodie!!! I went and shot my Walker yesterday for the first time, Spring is definitely the time for love and I'm in it!! Excellent gun. Shot at 25yds at the end of our monthly ML shoot,(couldn't get closer cause of a creek) and aiming 2" below the paper I'm shooting 3" high, need to do some sight work!! Not bad grouping for off hand though.

The only draw back was the falling lever. Anything over 40g fff and down she comes, and and 45g seems to be what she likes best (yes, I tried 60g). Came home and slept on the problem and came up with what I think would have been a period correct solution. It's a 2 piece collar made out of heavy guage brass that slides on and off the barrel. I dyed it with Ortho Blue and then rubbed some off to make it look old.

It's all hand made and silver soldered together and doesn't come off sliding in and out of a holster. If anyone would like one send me a PM, I'm gonna charge $25.00 each cause there's a lot of finish work.

 

[Old Fuff]

I see that square bullets shoot better then round ones. That one hit right in the middle.

 

[pwillie]

I will make them for 18.00 when I retire...LOL! Looks good,if it was steel.

 

[sltm1]

pwillie, Steel would mar the barrel. If you will make them for $18.00 now, I'll buy all you can produce...and sell them for what I think they're worth. Just so you know, I'm a stickler when it comes to quality control ;-)!
Old Fuff, square bullets are my favorite for that very reason !!

 

[pwillie]

SL! Why not mfg. it with a spring in the end like the Ruger?

 

[sltm1]

pwillie, As a blacksmith, I like to think along those lines when I work on period stuff. Back in the day, the lever fix would have been something simple that could be made with rudimentary tools and materials at hand out in the frontier. Post drills weren't that accurate back then (if he had one), and making springs that small was the job of a specialty company or a watchmaker. This would have been an option that could have been made by any competent smith in under a 1/2 day once he figured it out.

 

[Old Fuff]

Back during the late 1840's and 1850's the issue wasn't as big of one as it is now. Colt (actually Whitney) only made slightly over 1000, which were sold to the U.S. Army. Also the powder charges that were generally used were less. Those that study Colt's history will see that the problem was quickly addressed by putting a latch on the end of the lever, and there is some evidence that a number of Walkers were returned to have the newer system retro-fitted.

During the time that Walkers were being used the most common "fix" was a loop of rawhide lace tied around the barrel. If lost, it was quickly and easily replaced.

 

[fineredmist]

The fix for the "falling lever problem" is simple and can be done in very little time. If you look at the "latch" that holds the lever you will notice that the side facing the muzzle has 2 curved sections near the bottom and that is where you correct the problem. The lever is held in place by the upper curve and it will not lock the lever. To correct this you need to remove the latch and carefully file a flat in the upper curve so it will "click" when you raise the lever. It is a trial and error process so take your time and you will be rewarded with a WALKER whose lever will not drop even with max charges.

 

[pwillie]

Fine Red : That makes sence....I am an old machinist myself,and if you can refit the latch,that may well be the way to go,HMm

 

[sltm1]

Well, I can't please everybody..this is only MY idea on how to make a permanent fix. Seem's that over time, after filing down the curve in the spring, clicking and unclicking the latch would wear out the mating ledges. Same principle on a hunters case pocket watch, if you want the clasp to work problem free for years and or generations, you hold the button down when you close the lid, just like you do when you opened it. That's SOP with watch collectors because that way the interlocking clasp parts will never wear out. Doesn't change the fact that the spring mechanisim might bust though.

 

[Ginormous]

Personally, I think your fix appears quite effective, assuming the upper brass or bronze retaining spring has some phosphorus content to it for springiness.

If I owned a Walker Colt, I'd be all over it. Pretty ingenious in my humble opinion.

 

[pwillie]

From one Far east buddy to another,just come up with another idea...I know you have other ways to keep the rod from falling when the gun is fired.

 

[bigbadgun]

with well over 500 rounds thru my Walker I must say that I have never had a problem with the lever dropping. Maybe im just lucky.

 

[messerist]

I'm thinkin' that's a pretty goldurn clever idear!