Uberti vs. Colt Sig Series

[AlexanderA]

The DIY fix for the Uberti short arbor is a $1.75 Dillon Locator Button # 3 part no. 14060 and is explained in the Uberti Tuning Treatises 3 & 4.

Why go to the trouble of making this permanent modification when you can have the same result by placing washers of the appropriate thickness and diameter on the end of the arbor prior to each assembly? You can keep
a supply of the washers in your shooting bag.

By drilling the arbor -- if you don't do it precisely -- you stand a chance of ruining your gun.

 

[bannockburn]

drobs

Excellent tutorials on fitting the Dillon Locator Button! Thanks for posting them!

 

[drobs]

Why go to the trouble of making this permanent modification when you can have the same result by placing washers of the appropriate thickness and diameter on the end of the arbor prior to each assembly? You can keep
a supply of the washers in your shooting bag.

By drilling the arbor -- if you don't do it precisely -- you stand a chance of ruining your gun.

I agree with you, I think drilling the arbor in unnecessary. The button could simply be filled down to fit and either glued to the arbor or left loose.
There's more than 1 way to skin a cat.

The point being is that the fix really isn't that difficult.

 

[CraigC]

The point being is that the fix really isn't that difficult.

Agreed. It's certainly not worth all the tin hat ranting & raving that has been done over it.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Why not permanently put the correct thickness of material in the arbor hole?

Adding material to the end of the arbor is a fix for that particular barrel assy.with that particular frame. If an extra barrel is a possibility, the thickness for that one will probably be different. The arbor "shortness" (or depth of arbor hole) isn't a consistent number. Keeping the arbor a so called "stock length", you can " fit" your barrel, a couple of barrels, a hundred barrels to the same arbor in your frame.
That way you don't have to keep up with a constant supply of washers (which would all need to be a fairly close tolerance). The overall fit and dimension of the revolver will be less consistent with loose washers. Keeping the arbor "stock" allows you to still drill the end and install a set screw (cutting end dressed to a smooth surface) to act as an adjustable bearing for the wedge (nothing to do with arbor length).

Either system (button on the arbor or button in the arbor hole) will allow for a much more precise revolver. Fixing the hole allows you more options. (By the way, drilling the arbor isn't that hard to do!)
Some will say a split washer will work. Possibly for mouse loads but for normal to full house loads, it's just a single coil spring that won't do the job. It will still allow movement between the two assemblies (which is the problem for those that don't know).
To some, it may seem to not be a problem, and that's OK too (it's your revolver), but the wedge isn't a barrel/cylinder clearance adjuster!

It seems that some folks are fine fussing about the shortcomings of the Italian offerings and then gripe about having to "fix" them. What's even more amazing is with just a few technical issues taken care of, they can end up being the most mechanically accurate /close tollerance revolver in your collection (it's a common statement I hear)!! It's all about sticking to a set of numbers and not deviating from them. It's not necessarily being anal, it's more about precision.

Mike

For the record, I don't own a tin hat, I don't rant and rave.I just agree with the issue that Larson Pettifogger points out in his excellent writings. We just address the "fix" differently. It's the same issue that Raven fixed in CraigC's 3rd Dragoon.

 

[CraigC]

Raven? That was Hoof Hearted.

 

[45 Dragoon]

My mistake then, I thought you had said Jay had done the conversion.

Mike

 

[CraigC]

No, I talked to Jay about doing an 1860.

 

[Tommygunn]

Why go to the trouble of making this permanent modification when you can have the same result by placing washers of the appropriate thickness and diameter on the end of the arbor prior to each assembly? You can keep
a supply of the washers in your shooting bag.

By drilling the arbor -- if you don't do it precisely -- you stand a chance of ruining your gun.

This has been my solution.


I do own a 1871 Opentop that, unbelievably, has a correct length arbor, as per test noted in earlier poster's attachment. I wonder how that happened?
Hey ---- I'm happy it did.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Tommygunn, that method doesn't work anymore ( old test). If you'll just drop a small washer in the arbor hole and reassemble your '71 open top . . . . you'll be able to do it. That means, there's room between the end of the arbor and the barrel assy for that washer +. That's the true test.

These revolvers have a keyed arbor cut which will only let you complete the installation of the barrel assy when in the correct position. Turning the barrel to the side isn't a true test of how far the arbor will enter the arbor hole. Yours would be the first I've heard of and I have yet to have one in the shop.

I'm not calling you out or anything and you could in fact have "the one" that is correct, I just caution you on the test you're using. It's not a valid test on newer opentops.

Mike

 

[Tommygunn]

Tommygunn, that method doesn't work anymore ( old test). If you'll just drop a small washer in the arbor hole and reassemble your '71 open top . . . . you'll be able to do it. That means, there's room between the end of the arbor and the barrel assy for that washer +. That's the true test.

These revolvers have a keyed arbor cut which will only let you complete the installation of the barrel assy when in the correct position. Turning the barrel to the side isn't a true test of how far the arbor will enter the arbor hole. Yours would be the first I've heard of and I have yet to have one in the shop.

I'm not calling you out or anything and you could in fact have "the one" that is correct, I just caution you on the test you're using. It's not a valid test on newer opentops.

Mike

The first thing I tried was popping a thin washer in the arbor .... it would not cinch down and allow the wedge to be reinserted. The "90°" test was done second and also seemed to indicate it was the right length-- although aparently it is not a good test (I did not question it as it seemed to confirm the washer test ....). I have a number of Uberti revolvers of Colt design, and this IS THE ONLY ONE I HAVE that seems to have the correct length arbor.
Perhaps I should say "theoretically." Is there another test that wouldn't involve intricate measurements using micrometer sensitive gauges or devices?

 

[Stormson]

For the extra money involved, ya JUST shouldt HAVE to. Ok.. If there where LESS money involved I could see that.. But clamering to do Ubertis work for them? I STILL dont see it.

I know, I know, none of the fanboys wanna hear it.. Youd think it was a 5th gen glock or something. And there is a hell of a lot of good info in this thread for anyone that WANTS go that route, and even I thank you guys for that.

But the fact REMAINS, you shouldnt HAVE to pay $200, just to do the factories job FOR them. And ya shouldnt HAVE to pay extra, then pay extra again to have someone ELSE do the factories work for them.

I mean, if the lowly, worthless piece of junk like Peitta can do what it takes to fix a problem that the "almighty gods" of black powder cant? Then the simple FACT its NOT because the "cant"... Its because they know they CAN and get AWAY with it. Companies respond to bottom lines.. THATS when complaints matter, not before. As long as they KNOW they can sucker folks into paying more for an ALREADY broken product? Then why WOULD they ever fix it?

It will take ALL.. or at least most.. of us standing up and saying "Hey. I shouldnt have to fix YOUR problem" before they do.

Until we do? Well.. Theyre still selling 5th gen glocks too.. Difference is, I bet you dollars to doughnuts that glocks actually WORKING on the problem.. cos SOOO many people have spoken out against it. How about Uberti? ANYBODY think for one SECOND that Ubertis actually working on the problem?

Its the ONLY way ya get stuff DONE these days from what I can tell. Squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that.

Shrugs.. Whatever. My lowly piece of junk worked outa the box.

 

[Tommygunn]

......

 

[maint1517]

......

I feel the same way Tommy.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Tommygunn, lol! That's awesome!!

Don't know why I didn't throw this in before but, just the good ol "drive the wedge in and see if you can lock up the cylinder" test! If you can, the arbor ain't touching. Of course, doing that test, you've got to make sure the wedge isn't just bottomed out against the barrel. That would give a "false" pos.

What make is your '71? As I said, it's totally possible that it's right, (if it is, it is! )!!


Stormson, where do you get $200.00 from? Washers are cheap and JB Weld is cheap. I use a single S.S. plug now instead of a shim stack but the principal is the same. The arbor fix is the last step I do and it's the quickest thing done on a revolver. The way I look at, it's an exercise done on every open top copy made (except later Pietta's) and worth doing if you're serious about having an excellent, accurate O.T. If you're happy with Pietta's why do you care about Uberti and their "inferior" product? I mean unless you want a Dragoon series or a Walker copy, it doesn't matter if it's new or used, it'll have a short arbor . . . . no matter who the maker is.
Pietta did a good job with the arbor situation for sure but, every O.T. they sell is the same unit. They make fantasy configurations and different barrel lengths to change things up but, a Pietta is a Pietta is a Pietta. Uberti on the other hand makes "Horse Pistols", Belt Pistols, and Pocket Pistols and in correct scale. Quite an extensive product line. Along with those offerings, the finest action parts ever available. As far as I see it, you still get what you pay for and the best thing of all is . . . . they can all be made into some of the most excellent shooters folks have ever experienced!!

Mike

 

[Tommygunn]

45 Dragoon, the 71 Opentop is a Uberti. The date code (just checked) reads "CI" but I can't find my date code sheet to find when that was. The gun was actually purchased new at a gunshow, maybe 2014? 2015ish?
One thing I'll say is that the gun's cylinder has a "collar" that is made, seemingly integral to the cylinder (not 100% sure about this) that is apparently a Uberti introduced design intended to mitigate against gunpowder residue gumming up the cylinder with the arbor. Trying to drive the wedge in further, to me .... seems not a very good idea. Possibly it would bind the cylinder against BOTH this collar and forcing cone?
I have always tried to be careful reassembling this ---- and other --- repros. The cartridge conversions and opentops that Uberti has made have introduced differences, atleast from the cap and ball guns, if not original Colt made opentops, such as the aforementioned antigumming collar, as well as a screw above the wedge with a chord cut-out. I honestly don't know if originals had that, or not. But I try to reassemble the gun exactly as it was originally. As I said, the tiniest washer I have made it impossible to replace the barrel to frame. I did not try to force it beyond what I thought reasonable at the time, but tried to keep the alignment straight, since obviously the two parts must properly align to fit together in the first place (!).

I "think" this Opentop might be correct .... which sorta begs a question; if Uberti Colt's all have short arbors, what did they do wrong on mine?

I have to admit I do not have your expertise or experience with fixing this probkem, or working on other aspects of these guns. I can only say I am unable to show my Opentop has a short arbor.
I'll also say this; Yes. IT IS A REAL CONDITION. I'm not claiming it is not. I have Colt Ubertis I bought in the early 1990s. I'd never heard of short arbor then. I also have modern Ubertis.
All of these cap and ball guns have short arbor. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. 1990s-present.
Some of my 1990s Ubertis have been shot a lot of times. All seem ok with no mashing of wedges, or metal around the wedge slot. But all have washers in them now.
Maybe I did get lucky with that 1871 Opentop. Maybe. I'll take my luck anywhere I can find it!

 

[dickydalton]

All I know is that I yearned for a C-Series 1851 Colt Navy and found this one. I then sent it to Mike (AKA the GOON) he sent it back as a precision shooting machine that was accurate and able to fire in excess of 100 times without fouling up and misfiring. If Stormson thinks he's ever going to get a gun like this for $149.00 at Cabelas then he is foolish.

1851

• dickydalton
• Apr 2, 2018

 

[Stormson]

Mike, Im talking about the fact that they charge around $200 more for the same models. And that if they can make such wonderful parts, WHY cant they do the same for arbor? Ive heard the line too many times about how much it would cost them, slow production, ect.. Then HOW did the lowly Pietta garbage pull it off?

Just seems to me that they are SNUBBING the customer. If a nobody like Pietta can do it, then the mighty Uberti could do the same..

 

[bannockburn]

dickydalton

Sweet! One truly handsome looking revolver!

 

[woodnbow]

Mike, Im talking about the fact that they charge around $200 more for the same models. And that if they can make such wonderful parts, WHY cant they do the same for arbor? Ive heard the line too many times about how much it would cost them, slow production, ect.. Then HOW did the lowly Pietta garbage pull it off?

Just seems to me that they are SNUBBING the customer. If a nobody like Pietta can do it, then the mighty Uberti could do the same..

Well they don’t. And apparently their customers haven’t complained about it. You have but you buy Pietta so why would they listen to your complaints?

 

[Stormson]

Well they don’t. And apparently their customers haven’t complained about it. You have but you buy Pietta so why would they listen to your complaints?

Because there is a REASON I buy Pietta. Dont you think Id like to have an Uberti or two? As a matter of principle I refuse to pay premium prices for something that needs to be fixed right out of the box. Bargain basement prices sure. Used maybe. But brand new??? Why the hell would I pay for a brand new Lexis that needed new breaks right from the factory, when I can buy a chevy that works for half the price???

Why listen to me? Because Im not a fanboy who will simply bend over and take it.... Or even go so far as to make excuses for their behavior... Im one of the MANY lost sales that they DIDNT make. And wont, at least new, until they can provide premium quality, ALL AROUND, for the premium prices they expect. I may be the only one standing up and SAYING it... But I am FAR from the only one who says it with their wallet.

Moneys money... And you make money with MORE customers, not less.

 

[woodnbow]

Because there is a REASON I buy Pietta. Dont you think Id like to have an Uberti or two? As a matter of principle I refuse to pay premium prices for something that needs to be fixed right out of the box. Bargain basement prices sure. Used maybe. But brand new??? Why the hell would I pay for a brand new Lexis that needed new breaks right from the factory, when I can buy a chevy that works for half the price???

Why listen to me? Because Im not a fanboy who will simply bend over and take it.... Or even go so far as to make excuses for their behavior... Im one of the MANY lost sales that they DIDNT make. And wont, at least new, until they can provide premium quality, ALL AROUND, for the premium prices they expect. I may be the only one standing up and SAYING it... But I am FAR from the only one who says it with their wallet.

Moneys money... And you make money with MORE customers, not less.

I’m guessing they’re happy with the margin and market share they have now or, as you say, they’d make the manufacturing adjustments needed to correct the fault.

I’m probably one of the people you’re calling a fanboy, I’ve handled many Pietta revolvers, ASM, Centaure, original Colts, Remington and Uberti. For a using gun I like the Ubertis. I like the fit and finish, the dimensions, (except the NMA, Uberti is more correct but the grip is too small for my hand) the overall quality of the guns... since I have to look at it as well as shooting it, I prefer Uberti, then the right Centaure, ASM next and Pietta is a distant fourth place. Just my preference so I either fit the button or dress up a washer to fit the arbor/barrel interface. It’s not a large enough issue to get wrapped around the axle about IMO.

Btw , you should rethink the Lexus, my wife is on her third and they really are worth the extra bones especially compared to the Chevy. Now, if only they built a truck.

 

[CraigC]

Please give an example of this "premium" you're ranting about.

 

[denster]

I agree with you, I think drilling the arbor in unnecessary. The button could simply be filled down to fit and either glued to the arbor or left loose.
There's more than 1 way to skin a cat.

The point being is that the fix really isn't that difficult.

Drilling the arbor or at least drilling clear through into the wedge slot should never be done on a Pietta or Uberti open top. Doing so damages the taper that is in the end of the arbor slot that is the same angle but opposite to the wedge and is important to locking them together. Most folks aren't even aware that it is there. It's purpose is to develop a wedge pack of two opposing incline planes and is also present on original Colt open tops. Some lesser brand clones have the arbor slot cut straight through and the wedge only contacts the inboard corner of the slot. Not a god thing.

 

[denster]

45 Dragoon, the 71 Opentop is a Uberti. The date code (just checked) reads "CI" but I can't find my date code sheet to find when that was. The gun was actually purchased new at a gunshow, maybe 2014? 2015ish?
One thing I'll say is that the gun's cylinder has a "collar" that is made, seemingly integral to the cylinder (not 100% sure about this) that is apparently a Uberti introduced design intended to mitigate against gunpowder residue gumming up the cylinder with the arbor. Trying to drive the wedge in further, to me .... seems not a very good idea. Possibly it would bind the cylinder against BOTH this collar and forcing cone?
I have always tried to be careful reassembling this ---- and other --- repros. The cartridge conversions and opentops that Uberti has made have introduced differences, atleast from the cap and ball guns, if not original Colt made opentops, such as the aforementioned antigumming collar, as well as a screw above the wedge with a chord cut-out. I honestly don't know if originals had that, or not. But I try to reassemble the gun exactly as it was originally. As I said, the tiniest washer I have made it impossible to replace the barrel to frame. I did not try to force it beyond what I thought reasonable at the time, but tried to keep the alignment straight, since obviously the two parts must properly align to fit together in the first place (!).

I "think" this Opentop might be correct .... which sorta begs a question; if Uberti Colt's all have short arbors, what did they do wrong on mine?

I have to admit I do not have your expertise or experience with fixing this probkem, or working on other aspects of these guns. I can only say I am unable to show my Opentop has a short arbor.
I'll also say this; Yes. IT IS A REAL CONDITION. I'm not claiming it is not. I have Colt Ubertis I bought in the early 1990s. I'd never heard of short arbor then. I also have modern Ubertis.
All of these cap and ball guns have short arbor. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. 1990s-present.
Some of my 1990s Ubertis have been shot a lot of times. All seem ok with no mashing of wedges, or metal around the wedge slot. But all have washers in them now.
Maybe I did get lucky with that 1871 Opentop. Maybe. I'll take my luck anywhere I can find it!

That anti gumming collar as you call it is a gas ring and was also on the originals and carried over to the 1873 SAA. With the open tops with the gas ring it is imperative to have the arbor length exact to keep from binding up the cylinder.