To Buy An Open Top Revolver ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

JayBeeKay

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2020
Messages
82
I've become infatuated with SA revolvers and I have one already - It's a Stainless Ruger SBH Hunter,
But that's a long way from one of the old Colt designs, There's nothing nestalgic about it... No need to elaborate on that.
I'm trying to decide on one of the clones from Italy.
I like the appearance of the Open Top 1871 -'72 series cartridge revolvers.
I understand already that they became obsolete for a reason, but they look cool.

How do they shoot?
What are the maintenance idiocynchracies of that model?
I'm seeing that the barrel is held in position by the wedge and so forth...
Is there anything that I'm not being told that would make that purchase regrettable ?

I'd be ordering it online from Buds, Most likely... Chambered in .38 spl
If I don't bet an Open Top, I'll probably get a SAA type
 
Do you mean top break revolvers? That the barrel and cylinder pivot forward and down for reloading and cleaning. I like that design, seems simpler than the crane that moves the cylinder to the side, but is it as strong for a really hot (accidently) load or can these break loose at the top? I am probably trying to belt and suspender this one, but as a novice, these kind of questions pop into my head.
 
Do you mean top break revolvers? That the barrel and cylinder pivot forward and down for reloading and cleaning. I like that design, seems simpler than the crane that moves the cylinder to the side, but is it as strong for a really hot (accidently) load or can these break loose at the top? I am probably trying to belt and suspender this one, but as a novice, these kind of questions pop into my head.
He's referring to the Colt 1871 (rear loading) open top revolver not the Schofield top break revolver. Of course if anyone out there is giving away a Schofield (original or repro) just send it to me......... ;)
 
I'm not a big SA fan, but I bought an open-top in .45 colt just to play with.
It's very fussy when loading. If the cylinder isn't lined up perfectly, the case rim catches. If you turn the cylinder a hair too far, you can't turn it back and you can't load that chamber without turning the cylinder all the way around.
Since it's strictly a range gun, I can live with that.
1871 w Case.jpg
 
I'm not a big SA fan, but I bought an open-top in .45 colt just to play with.
It's very fussy when loading. If the cylinder isn't lined up perfectly, the case rim catches. If you turn the cylinder a hair too far, you can't turn it back and you can't load that chamber without turning the cylinder all the way around.
Since it's strictly a range gun, I can live with that.
View attachment 1061859
My .44 Ruger has an issue like that - It would be worse if it were chambered in .45.
I'd get the replica SA in .38 spl
I'd mainly be getting it because they're eye candy.
But I don't want to get something that's shoddy and shoots poorly or is a pain to keep it shooting right.
 
Last edited:
If you are going to get one ... get a steel framed model .
Without a top strap the open top is simply a weak design . I had a simple brass framed 1851 Colt Italian made cap and ball revolver , shooting only black powder and lead balls ...the frame stretched , the cylinder pin (arbor ) became so loose in the frame it wobbled and would no longer screw tightly into the frame .
I shot it a good bit but not so much that the brass frame , cylinder arbor and barrel assembly should have become so wobbly and loose that the gun when assembled flopped around .. literally !

If I were to buy another ...and buy a conversion to fire cartridges ... it would be a Remington with a top strap , I would want to shoot it and that brass framed open top is pathetic ... the steel frame may be better but I enjoy shooting ... so I wouldn't take a chance with another open top .
Gary
 
Howdy

The Rollin White patent for revolvers with chambers bored all the way through the cylinder so they could accept a cartridge loaded from the rear, expired in 1869. Previous to that time, Smith and Wesson had exclusive rights make revolvers using the concept of the White Patent. S&W paid White a $.25 royalty for every revolver they made. Which is why the Civil War, fought from 1861-1865 was mostly fought using Cap & Ball revolvers. Smith and Wesson was the only company legally able to make cartridge revolvers at that time, and the largest cartridge revolver they were making was the 32 Rimfire #2 Old Army Tip Up revolver.

plS1uHScj.jpg




This style of revolver was called a Tip Up because in order to reload, the latch at the bottom of the frame was depressed, allowing the barrel to rotate up. The cylinder was then removed and spent cartridges poked out of the chambers using the rod mounted at the bottom of the barrel. Fresh cartridges were loaded into the cylinder, the cylinder was popped back into the frame, and the barrel was rotated down and latched in place. S&W never made any Tip Ups in larger calibers than 32, experimental models made for a 44 Rimfire cartridge were unsuccessful, the design was not suited for cartridges larger than 32 Rimfire. Although this method of reloading seems cumbersome to us today, it was far faster than loading a Cap & Ball revolver, and S&W could not keep up with orders for this revolver, many of which were bought privately by Union Army officers.

pnyiKQo5j.jpg




When the White Patent expired in 1869, S&W was sure the other revolver manufacturers would have their own cartridge designs ready for market. So S&W developed the Top Break revolvers and introduced the first one in 1869. Called the American Model, it was a much more advanced design than the Tip Ups, When broken open, an ejector rose up and automatically ejected the spent brass. Then fresh rounds could be loaded and the barrel swung up and latched in place, ready to fire. Notice unlike the Tip Ups, which rotated the barrel up to reload, Top Breaks rotate the barrel down to reload. This is a 1st Model Russian Top Break. It closely resembles the American Model, the only difference being the American Model fired a 44 caliber cartridge using a heeled bullet, the 1st Model Russian fired the 44 Russian cartridge with a .429 diameter bullet that was the same diameter as the inside of the cartridge case.

poKJU3noj.jpg




During the Civil War there was a brisk business in revolvers converted from Cap & Ball to firing cartridges. Because the White Patent was still in effect, some of these Cartridge Conversion revolvers were converted by individual gunsmiths who did not have to worry about the White Patent. Remington had a contract with S&W to convert a large number of 44 caliber '1858' New Model Army 44 caliber Cap & Ball revolvers to fire cartridges. Remington paid S&W a royalty for every Cap & Ball revolver converted to fire cartridges.




Nobody was more surprised than S&W that Colt did not have a cartridge revolver design ready for market when the White Patent expired in 1869. The Colt Single Action Army cartridge revolver was not ready for the market until 1873.



Which after all this blabbing brings me back to the Colt 'Open Top' revolvers that were 'converted' to fire cartridges. The first of these was the Thuer 'conversion revolver'. This depended on a reverse tapered cartridge loaded from the front of the cylinder, clearly an attempt to get around the White Patent. This model was not financially successful and only about 5,000 were made.


After the Thuer conversions, Colt brought out the Richards Conversion. Patented in 1871 (two years after the White Patent expired). Basically the 1860 Army model Cap & Ball revolver with the cylinder reworked to accept cartridges loaded from the rear, and an ejection rod fabricated to replace the loading lever of the Cap & Ball revolver.

pnoC4rKaj.jpg





The nipple area of the rear of the cylinder was cut off, and a new set of ratchet teeth were machined from what was left. On the left in this photo is the cylinder from a Pietta replical 1860 Army Cap and Ball revolver, on the right is the Richards Conversion cylinder.

pnWJh3Wuj.jpg




A Conversion Ring was screwed to the frame to fill the space where the nipples used to be on the cylinder.

pm2SPD6Jj.jpg




The Conversion Ring had a loading gate so the revolver could be loaded without removing the barrel.

pnY5BEkEj.jpg




The Richards Conversion incorporated a spring loaded firing pin in the Conversion Ring and an integral rear sight. The hammer was flat faced to strike the frame mounted firing pin.

poQ4qNzLj.jpg




A new cartridge called the 44 Colt was developed for the Richardson Conversion. Using the the chamber dimensions of the 1860 Army a heeled bullet was developed that was inserted into the cartridge case. Like all cartridges with heeled bullets, the outside diameter of the bullet was the same as the outside diameter of the cartridge case.

pnFlG8toj.jpg





The Richards Conversion was a financial success, being manufactured well into the cartridge era, but it was expensive to make. In 1862 WIlliam Mason, who was later the chief designer of the SAA revolver, obtained a patent for improvements to the Richards Conversion. He simplified the ejector mechanism, and got rid of the frame mounted firing pin, instead reshaping the nose of the hammer into a long, spike like firing pin. This model became known as the Richards-Mason Conversion.

Replicas of this model are currently manufactured by Uberti. Here is a link to the Taylors website showing Richards Mason conversions. Note they are all out of stock at this time:

https://taylorsfirearms.com/hand-gu...evolver/c-mason-revolver-1860-army-model.html




The last of the Colt 'Cartridge Conversion' revolvers is commonly referred to as the Open Top (even though they were all of an open top design).

Replicas of the Open Top are currently manufactured by Uperti. Notice the Open Top lacks the stepped cylinder of the earlier models, and there is a small rear sight mounted to the rear of the barrel.

https://www.uberti-usa.com/army-conversion-navy-conversion-and-open-top-revolvers



Other than my antique Richards Conversion, I do not personally own any modern replicas of the Colt Conversion revolvers. A friend does have a pair of Uberti Open tops chambered for 38 Special and he loves them. He only shoots them with cartridges loaded with Black Powder. They have a loading gate on the side of the frame so they do not need to have the wedge driven out and barrel removed to reload them.

I would recommend that relatively light loads be fired from any replica Colt 'Conversion' revolver. These revolvers have steel frames and are proofed in Italy to standards slightly more stringent than American SAAMI standards, so they should be compatible with modern SAMMI Spec ammunition. But because they lack the top strap that the later Single Action Army revolver had, the frame and barrel connection is clearly not going to be as strong as a revolver with a Top Strap.

Like this:

poneYa7Rj.jpg
 
I had an Cimarron Open Top "Navy" in .38 Special, which I always claimed it was a replica of a non-existent gun. The Open Tops were are .44 R.F. and "Army" models.

100_9988_zpsns1tqqix.jpg

The gun was surprisingly heavy for its size, owning to the amount of steel at the breech end of the barrel. But it just felt nice, comfortable, when gripped. And with mild loads was a sheer pleasure to shoot. Two problems, minor though they be. First was sighting in the gun. Shot 'way low and had to do some filing on the front sight:

100_0018_zpsmunuvo5f.jpg

Another problem was those impossible sights. The rear sight is a Vee notch on the breech end of the barrel, and the front is a tiny arc near the muzzle, which I believe was either brass or German silver.

100_9988_zpsns1tqqix.jpg

But, all-in-all, the gun was beautiful, well fitted and finished, very handsomely finish in my opinion, and just a dandy gun to shot if you weren't too particular about group size. At fifteen yards, hitting a gallon sized paint bucket is considered good for this little gun. Again, maybe someone else could have done better in the accuracy department.

100_9980_zpsjkivsp3n.jpg


Bob Wright
 
JayBeeKay, the 1871/72 open top is a nice revolver!! It was the First cartridge revolver designed to be such from the ground up (it wasn't a conversion of anything). As far as the "strength factor" goes, I'd take the Open top any day over the almost nonexistent front section with the skinny tapered framed, thin top strap Remington !! Lol!!!
The Open Top is a robust open top design (lots O meat everywhere!) with its S- lugged barrel !! By the way . . . they don't come in a brass configuration!!!! I would stay away from the .45C version simply because of how scary thin the cylinder walls are but my .44 was a most excellent shooter!!

The Ruger platform is an excellent platform of course, the Remington is also a nice platform but they aren't Rugers . . . the '71/'72 Opentops aren't Rugers either . . . but I think they'll get you closer . . .
that's my opinion of course.

Mike
 
Have a Richards-Mason style Uberti replica, and like it quite a lot. Mine has the octagonal barrel, and is noticeably muzzle heavy. The trigger is quite light, and the sights aren't too bad for what they are, a notch on the hammer and a brass stud on the barrel. The stud on mine came adrift, and I staked it back in place.
Load 'full charge' .38 wadcutters, which are of about the level of the old 148 RNL; they are mild shooting.
Mine has seen a fair amount of shooting, but still less than 300 rounds. There was a lengthy discussion elsewhere here about the wedge holding the barrel; I won't try to revisit it here, but the wedge only needs to be tapped in 'till snug.
For the OP, go for it if you can find one. I PM'd a possible lead on a used one, if you like.
Good luck,
Moon
ETA
Driftwood, thnx for the education on the open tops. You have a bunch of great stuff.
M
 
Thanks for all the helpful information, Guys
I forgot to check here for a day and finally checked - to find everything very useful and interesting.
I appreciate the explanations of the conversion model. It explains why the unusual dimensions of the cylinder and loading gate are the way they are.
 
I love the Open Top. For me, it is the most refined and usable of the "topless" Colt cartridge guns. Mine are .44Colt, which may explain the tight fit of the .45Colt in the loading port. Mine started life just like this, fitted with TruIvory. I loved the gun so much, I later had it engraved and then fitted with real ivory. For me, the .38's are just too heavy and imbalanced.

Open%20Top%2003.jpg

IMG_9888b.jpg

Shown with an 1860 Type II and 1851 Richards-Mason.

IMG_9503b.jpg
 
I love the Open Top. For me, it is the most refined and usable of the "topless" Colt cartridge guns. Mine are .44Colt, which may explain the tight fit of the .45Colt in the loading port. Mine started life just like this, fitted with TruIvory. I loved the gun so much, I later had it engraved and then fitted with real ivory. For me, the .38's are just too heavy and imbalanced.

View attachment 1062033

View attachment 1062034

Shown with an 1860 Type II and 1851 Richards-Mason.

View attachment 1062035


I'd want a shorter barrel if I got a .38, because people expect you to use a 1 hand hold when shooting a cowboy gun and it would obviously be barrel heavy
 
Mine are .44Colt, which may explain the tight fit of the .45Colt in the loading port.

Howdy CraigC

44 Colt? I assume you are not talking about the historic 44 Colt cartridge, with a heeled bullet and the outside of the bullet the same diameter as the outside of the case. I have not put my caliper on one in quite a while, but I seem to recall the bullets were right around .451 in diameter. Are you talking about a cartridge with a bullet similar to a 44 Magnum or 44 Special, around .429 in diameter? The reason I ask is I just looked up Uberti's Open Top and they seem to only be chambering them for 45 Colt and 38 Special.

pnFlG8toj.jpg
 
To answer the OP's question, if it's made by Uberti the arbor is short, that's the big pin the cylinder runs on. It's a simple fix by putting a washer or 2 in the hole the arbor fits into and using them to adjust the barrel to cylinder gap. The ones I have seen lately have been very nicely fitted and finished other than the short arbor. Once these are set up properly they are really great shooters and feel good in the hand. I am considering getting one myself.
 
44 Colt? Are you talking about a cartridge with a bullet similar to a 44 Magnum or 44 Special, around .429 in diameter? The reason I ask is I just looked up Uberti's Open Top and they seem to only be chambering them for 45 Colt and 38 Special.

Sad to hear that the 'new style .429 inside lubed' .44 Colt is losing out to the .45.
Like Craig says, the .44 is MUCH more compatible (over the .45) with the frame cut out for smooth effortless loading and unloading.
Guess the market just is what it is though.

Mine are .44Colt,
Mine is an earlier Traditions .44 Colt that was made as a 7 1/2" blue/case.
44 Colt conv 1.jpg
44 colt conv 2.jpg
Since I had plenty of new looking guns, I decided this one would be shorter for spinning and that it would be aged a bit to start.
IIRC, no one was selling the 'antique' versions at the time.
My load is 4.5 grs. of 231 with the RCBS 200 FN cast at 30/1. I've put over 3500 of these through and it's still going strong.

JT
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top