Cas City Forum Hall & CAS-L
CAS TOPICS => Gun Reviews => Topic started by: Kent Shootwell on September 22, 2017, 11:38:43 AM
-
I have in hand an original 1860 Colt and have begun comparing it with my replica. I advise that no one should do this! Now I have a lot of work to do. I have been studying it beside my replica and there are many details that must be addressed on the Pietta. The contours of the barrel, the ratchet of the cylinder, depth and contour of the chambers, thickness of the trigger, screw head shapes, loading port at rammer, rammer catch contour and checkering, arbor shape and this is at first glace. I'll take pictures and give details if any feels this would be of interest.
-
I advise that no one should do this!
Sounds like good advice!
-
This sound like it will be a very informative posting. Thanks for, what I hope is a detailed evaluation.
Will be very interested in what makes the originals so much more dependable and functional, over the repros.
-
Oh Bother!! :-\
Kent, Why on earth would you want to do that. The current crop of reproductions are just that. Reproductions. They were never intended to be exact duplicates. They aren't suppose to be duplicates. They are suppose to "look fine from the Freeway."
Going to the trouble and effort, not to mention expense of trying to turn your reproduction into a duplicate will become an exercise in futility. I have another word but I'm trying to be practical and kind.
BRS, The answer is really simple. Uberti takes care with their Roll Stamps and their marking. Uberti doesn't appear to give two cents for the mechanical issues. Pietta isn't doesn't really bother much with Roll Stamps and marking. Pietta does care about the mechanicals. Neither do much about correct hand fitting at the time of manufacture. A Pietta takes much less fettling out of the box than a Uberti. Both require some ministrations BEFORE they go into service.
The original sample examples were correctly fitted at the time of manufacture which resulted in good functionality. Reliability was achieved with Caps of a different nature. Original Caps were actually Water Proof and required a manly great whack to set off. NONE of the guns from those halcyon days of yesteryear were ever expected to be run as hard for as long as we run them for CAS. I think being super critical of the current crop of reproductions is a dis-service. Expecting them to be a mirror image of the sample example will only bring disappointment. Accept them for what they are. Good looking reproductions.
-
Now I've got the colt down to bare bones and have to pick a starting point. The arbor on the Colt has a step that may improve the way gas is routed away from the cylinder, I will add that feature to mine. And the screw heads for the stock attachment can be reduces some.
As to why do it, the three t's cover that. I have the Time, Tools and Talent. No one is forced to follow my project but for those that want to watch or ask questions Just join in for the ride!
-
KS,
I've commented about the "gas ring" before. The Uberti's have this as barely a notion but Pietta just omitts it altogether. I noticed this when observing a couple of originals. The original 1st gen parts also differ in the thickness of the bolt arms ((the left one is much thinner) and the combination spring (the bolt side is also much thinner). The bolt in today's Uberti is most like the original with a rather thin left arm. I think Sam woulda had a fit to have action parts as nice as the current Uberti!! Pietta's action parts are getting better but bolt arms are still much too thick (still like '70s parts!!) and the hand has too much of an angle up top.
Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
Follow me on Instagram @ goonsgunworks
-
Well Heck Kent .....
I can well understand the three "Ts" I have had the three Ts gang up and result in some strange projects from time to time.
Now that I have gotten my Hyper Critical Crap out of the way ...... let us see what you do. If you don't mind .... I do fully agree with your assessment of the Stock Attachment Screws. Very annoying. Really rub my trigger fingers the wrong way. I have had an ongoing project to refuse and smooth the Stock Screws on my guns that have them. I have also reduced a set of those screws to the shank, re-slotted, and fit flush with the frame. Kinda neat if not authentic. I also re-install the Stock Screw on the Hammer Pivot Screw side with RED LocTite. I won't admit to why I do that.
Curious are I about the "Step" or "Notch" in the Arbor. I have never been curious enough to pull a Pietta Arbor and chuck it up inna lathe. Plus now that My lathe is gone, I can't. Intrestingier and intrestingier. Gunna be fun to follow .... yepper.
-
many differences are intentional to prevent unescrupolus individuals converting replicas into fake originals.
-
Some fakes have been made but most collectors will pick out any thing I'm doing. The real Colts have progressive rifling amongst other things. The manufacturing of replicas don't bother to do a lot of details to sell a product that satisfies the market that only requires a gun " that looks fine from the freeway". I enjoy detailing my guns to work well and celebrate the quality that we once expected of them.
Now shall we get back to refining this pistol or have I up set enough folks to just keep it to myself?
-
Now shall we get back to refining this pistol or have I up set enough folks to just keep it to myself?
My Good Kent -
I delight in your efforts and the color-case that you are able to achieve.
There is nothing at all wrong with taling "what you've been given" and making into "what you want".
I myself have picked up a piece of crap junker basket case relic original Colt Lightning frame and barrel, but
it is in such pathetic condition it is only fit for display (as it stands). So, I intend to derust, smooth out, fill in, reline, and put modern
double action guts into it so it will at least go bang now and then. If it had any value to anyone else, I would not have been able to get it for the pittance I paid, so ....
Refine Away My Dear Kent, and pray continue to post your work!
If anyone asks "why do that?" I reply "Why the hell not?"
yhs
prof marvel
-
"Three Ts"...Gets me in trouble all the time...Love it! (watching this thread. I just might learn something!)... ;)
-
Oh my NO!! Oh please let us REFINE!! I really like the work that your do. Please continue with the voodoo that you do so well!!
Gonna be a great threat to follow!! You betcha!!
-
Doing the easy things first, the shoulder stock screw slot needed to be cut to nearly threw the head then were turned down by .020" on the o.d. and thinned a lot with a nice dome. Here's a before and after example. Next the trigger got contoured and thinned. The Pietta is the thick short one before working. Note that the Pietta trigger is quite hard and required grinding to shape. I cut the groove into the arbor as I spoke of before but since I had all ready done my bone case coloring on the frame it was done in place rather then pulling the arbor.
-
Looking forward to following this thread, should be very interesting.
-
The latest thing I've done is reshape the loading lever catch. The Pietta has a sudden bulge with straight line cuts for gripping and the Colt has a gentle curve with coarse cross cut checkering. The next step will be the big one, contouring the barrel. Here's the Colt that you can compare with your 1860 replica. Plenty of metal to remove!
But now I have two shot guns to work over for friends so the pistol will take the back seat. Both shot guns will get all new wood, rebuilt actions and color case hardened.
-
How are you going to reverse the twist in the barrel without relining? Maybe you should have started with a Uberti?
-
The Colt has gain twist rifling so that is beyond the scope of the program. Also note the round part of loading lever comes back farther on the Colt. That won't be addressed as well. What I'm doing is just removing and reshaping metal that could easily of been done during manufacturing. No attempt will be made to remark it as a Colt. It's just a replica not a reproduction, there is a difference.
-
Great thread, this.
Professor Marvel, why don't you post a thread on your Colt Lightning re-do?
-
Kent,
So after seeing your attempts, I decided to clean up; polish and 'fix up' my Pietta 1851 & 1860.
So I have a few questions about the arbor fix in posting 4. These questions apply to the original and I will then proportion them to the Pietta.
1) What is the largest diameter of the arbor?
2) What is the diameter of the cut step?
3) What is the length/distance from the grease groove cuts to the back edge of the step cut?
4) What is the overall length of the cut indentation?
5) Is the step cut like? Dished/radiused or flat cut
Also, are the grease grooves cut in a 'V' shape like a screw thread or flat like the Pietta (just deeper)? I would like to change these on the Pietta for better grease fouling lube volume.
Thanks
BRS
-
Mr. Smith, I no longer have the original Colt but will try to fill in some blanks for you.
1 the arbor fit was about the same as the Pietta although it is smaller, that is the Colt cylinder would not fit the Pietta. Basically the major diameter of both are straight.
2 the cut step is .020" deep per side or .040" smaller then the major diameter.
3 the best way I can explain the groove width is it begins just inside of the cylinder hole with the cylinder pushed back and ends right at the face of the barrel.
4. The cut is flat and smooth with square corners.
The grease groove of the Colt is square thread of a tighter pitch then the Pietta. I didn't measure the depth but it appeared to be about the same.
Of note is the arbor hole at the front of the Colt cylinder is sharp rather the having a chamfered edge like the Pietta.
-
Kent,
That description of placement will work just fine. That is all I will need to make the cut.
Thank you for the time and effort to provide me the info.
-
Kent,
Again thanks for that info. About 45 min to one hour -- for the calculations, measurements, filing, measurements in-between and finishing. That fix is done.
I think I will deepen the grease grooves, also. That will take a little more time to do correctly.
Thanks
BRS
-
GREAT THREAD! Thanks
-
Im enjoying reading this.
-
Well I finished the back barrel contour on the Pietta 1860. The only reason I did the contouring was because paper cartridges, would not work and I am interested in making and using them. The issue was -- they would not go past the squared off side shoulders of the Pietta.
So, it took me 3 hours over a two day timeframe just to file the shapes. I contour the back shoulder and deepened the bullet entrance cavity. I am meticulous, took my time and did measuring around arbor face and curvatures around the wedge. I do still need to sand and re-blue the work but..... that is not the most time consuming part of the job.
In my opinion the Pietta has a lot of metal and did not suffer any weakness by doing this alteration. Now both round ball and conical paper cartridges insert and roll into position under the rammer with ease.
Thanks for starting this thread and providing the necessary info. It was fun but tedious --- but the revolver now functions 'like / similar to' an original.
Also, the Pietta 1851 Navy did not require any modifications in order to get the paper cartridges to work.
-
I am finding this to be a very interesting thread. I enjoy tinkering with cap and ball revolvers to make them run better. Thanks for your time and efforts.
Regards,
Jubal Starbuck
-
B.R. Smith, won't you post a photo or two of your improved 1860 replica. I'm interested in your work as would others.
Starbuck, sharing is what makes this site work. I live to serve. ;D
-
I will try and post some pictures before I do the final blueing, so area altered is visible.
But a caveat to my last post is -- if you do not '''like the bullet cavity shape''' change that first. Or else, you will be doing what I am now having to do that is re-working the side radiusing to follow the new shape of the cavity.
-
Attached are pictures as requested.
First is the right side of barrel. Second is the straight on of the rear of the barrel. Third is the left side of barrel. Fourth is barrel attached to frame.
Please note that I did cut my own profile into the barrel above the bullet cavity. I did do this on purpose so that it did not resemble any pattern that I saw on an original Colt. I did not like the Knife edge or the tapered drop to the cavity that I saw on originals from pictures from the internet, so I did what the Pietta allowed and what I liked. Plus the metal thickness would require a lot of work to get to the proper Colt image.
The fourth photo also allows you to see the deepened groove between the cylinder and the barrel and the increased depth of the grease grooves on the arbor.
-
One other thing I did while cleaning up these revolvers was to modify the hammer face slot, as per the Bottom Dealing Mike suggestion and video, so that fired caps would 'hopefully' not stick and jam the action.
-
Making the slot in the hammer face thinner (as in just wide enough to allow the safety pin to clear) will go a long way towards keeping the caps from "sticking" to it. This is how the originals were.
Mike