Javascript DHTML Drop Down Menu Powered by dhtml-menu-builder.com
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 17, 2017, 04:07:53 pm

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
* Home FlashChat Help Calendar Login Register
Currently there are 0 Users in the Cas City Chat Rooms!
Cas City Forum Hall & CAS-L  |  Special Interests - Groups & Societies  |  STORM (Moderators: RRio, Major 2)  |  Topic: Uberti Richard-Masons and Open Tops-frame/cylinder size difference? 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Uberti Richard-Masons and Open Tops-frame/cylinder size difference?  (Read 803 times)
Poodleshooter
Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« on: July 05, 2017, 12:35:34 am »


Is there a noticeable size/weight difference between the Uberti 1851 RM, 1860 RM and 1872 Open Top frames and cylinders in .38 Special vs the same model in .45LC or .44 Colt? (Ignoring the obvious army/navy grip frame and barrel length differences).
Do the .38Special 1851RM and .38 Special 1860 RM share the same frame/cylinder/conversion ring, or is the 1851 RM smaller? How do both of those in .38Spec compare in size to an "early" 1872 Open Top model in .38?

Importer pics and specs are useless for this purpose, since they don't often use the exact photos, and the weights appear to be the "factory guesses" (the Army and Navy grip models claim to have identical weights).
In my hand, I can feel a significant difference between a .45 Colt Cattleman and a .357 Cattleman (the latter feels heavier and front heavy to me). I'm wondering if the RMs and Open Tops are the same.
   
Logged
Major 2
"Still running against the wind"
Deputy Marshal
Top Active Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10282


Cracker Cow Cavalry


« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2017, 01:00:57 am »

"...I can feel a significant difference between a .45 Colt Cattleman and a .357 Cattleman (the latter feels heavier and front heavy to me. "

The reason is simple

45 Colt is lighter  .454 bore has less metal ( Barrel & Cylinder ) than the .357 bore  

EDIT: see below
Logged
Abilene
Top Active Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2293



WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2017, 08:25:29 am »

What Major 2 said about weight.

The Uberti 1860 R-M and 1860 Type II conversions in .38 have the exact same non-stepped frame and non-rebated cylinder as the 1851 R-M.  The .44 and .45 '60 conversions have the stepped frame and rebated cylinder (as you mentioned, Cimarron only pictures the stepped frame in their catalog/website).  That is why I was able to put a Navy grip frame on a .38 Type II conversion to turn it into a '61.  Because of the heavier barrel style of the Type II, that gun in .38 is heavier than my '51 conversion in .38.
Logged

Coffinmaker
Top Active Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4254


« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2017, 12:29:50 pm »

Whoah,  This question series made my head hurt .....  Shocked

The answer to your first question is YES.  Abilene covered it nicely.  Also, an 1851 .38 R-M barrel can be installed on an Open Top.  44 and 45 60 R-M barrels cannot.

I have not had opportunity to compare Conversion Rings and Cylinders between like caliber R-M conversions.  There is no interchangeability between .38s and the 44/45 R-Ms.  The 1851 R-M is "similar" in size to the Open Top.  The only difference between an "early"  Open top and "later" Open Top are the Grip Sets.  Navy vis Army.

There is a weight difference between R-M Conversions and Open Tops.  An Open Top is marginally lighter.  There is also a similar difference in weight between 38s vis 44/45.  The 38 is heavier barrel length for barrel length (smaller bore).

Factory weight figures from Uberti are ALWAYS estimates.

Coffinmaker
Logged
Major 2
"Still running against the wind"
Deputy Marshal
Top Active Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10282


Cracker Cow Cavalry


« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2017, 01:01:10 pm »

I went back edited mine..... kinda didn't  read what I was trying to convey

 38 interchangeable barrels  OT to R&M

44 & 45 same frame  interchangeable.....

I mis wrote what I meant , read and learn from the Coffinmaker & Abilene , they are the sages  Smiley

Logged
Poodleshooter
Citizen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« Reply #5 on: July 06, 2017, 09:49:03 pm »

Thanks gents.
The comments on the .38 Richards barrel being heavier than the RM 1851 profile (presumably an 8" vs 7.5") was definitely new to me, as was the fact that a .38 RM barrel can mount on a .38 1871 OT frame, and that open tops are slightly lighter than the same caliber/barrel length/grip frame equivalent RM. I had suspected that the .38 barrels would be heavier, but as I couldn't compare the outside measurement of the round vs octagon barrels, it's difficult to even guess at weight without handling all of the varieties.

Last time I was at Taylors they had a whopping two open tops/conversions in stock, only one of which was a .38.
One useful thing I did discover was that Uberti has addressed the ejector rod problem in the .38s by changing to an ejector rod that tapers to a narrower diameter in the middle of the rod, instead of using the same  straight rod used with .45s that would hit the cylinder wall. One of the gals there was able to demonstrate that .38s could now be ejected without fiddling with the cylinder, though she mentioned that there was probably still plenty of stock with the old .45 rod style remaining. No sign of them in their parts array yet, however.
 
Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
Cas City Forum Hall & CAS-L  |  Special Interests - Groups & Societies  |  STORM (Moderators: RRio, Major 2)  |  Topic: Uberti Richard-Masons and Open Tops-frame/cylinder size difference? « previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.049 seconds with 22 queries.