Cimmeron Spencer

[Drydock]

Anyone seen one of these yet?  Being as I have one on order . . .

[Fox Creek Kid]

Sarge, it's the same Armisport Spencer with only the barrel marking possibly changed (I'm thinking). Then again I haven't seen one. 

[Drydock]

I knew it would be from Armi-Sport, just wondering about the markings and perhaps the quality.  One of the reasons I'm getting it is it lists at a better price than the Taylors right now.  That and the dealer could not get an answer from Taylors last week when he ordered.  I have had pretty good luck with Cimmeron in the past.

[Advertising]

[Wes Tancred]

I have recently obtained a Cimarron Spencer carbine in .56-50, for the same reason cited: a lower price than Taylor’s. It is marked Cimarron, and is of very high quality, with excellent fit and finish. The only other difference I can discern, in comparing my gun to photographs of Taylor’s Spencers, is that the breech-block (and I mean just the block itself, not the assembly to which it is attached) is blued, rather than colour case hardened. All of the other case hardened parts appear to be the same in both models. I wonder if Armi Sport have made this change for the Cimarron models only, or if it now extends to all versions? 

[Drydock]

Just recieved mine, and noticed the same thing.  Other things were that Cimmerons markings were less obtrusive than Taylors, and the Case colors are darker than my Taylors .45.

[Two Flints]

Hi,

I've been reading this thread with some interest and I sent an Email to Armi Sport in Italy regarding the differences, if any, between the Taylor's Spencer and the Cimarron Spencer.  I received the following Email from Susanna Chiappi of Armi Sport.

"no problem in replying to (any) question.  There are no differences between Taylor's and Cimarron Spencers, the only change is importer's name on the barrel.  Cimarron has specific requirements on Sharps but not for the Spencer.  Best regards. Susanna ARMI SPORT"

Just thought I'd pass along her reply.

Two Flints

[Wes Tancred]

If accurate, the message from Armi Sport implies that all Spencers they make now have the blued breech-block. I do not consider the feature to be particularly negative, although it is a variation from the original construction. It does appear that the high quality of the Cimarron Spencers is equal to that of the guns supplied by Taylor’s. It would be interesting to know the reason for the blued breech-blocks, so I just sent Armi Sport an e-mail message with this specific question. I shall report on the reply, if I receive one.

[Wes Tancred]

I must say that the people at Armi Sport have a superb organisation. I received an excellent reply to my message, from Susanna Chiappa, in less than two hours! As I suspected, Armi Sport have made the change to blued breech-blocks for metallurgical reasons: it is an improvement. 

Here is the message (I hope that Ms Chiappa will not mind my posting it here):

Dear Mr. [Tancred],

The reason is that we wanted to have a good hardening process on the
breech block, which we could not have with colour case hardening, so
after hardening now we make a normal blueing process.

If you have any additional question, just let us know, we'll be glad to
assist you.

Best regards.

ARMI SPORT
Susanna

Gun companies, in general, are better than most in terms of customer service, but the responsiveness and candour of Armi Sport are most impressive. And in the Spencers, they have made a beautiful gun (inside and out) at a very reasonable price.

[Fox Creek Kid]

The reason is that we wanted to have a good hardening process on the
breech block, which we could not have with colour case hardening, so
after hardening now we make a normal blueing process.

That's just plain BS IMHO. What the hell does hardening have to do with a blued block? Shiloh Sharps case colors their blocks and they are plenty hard. No offense, but I just don't buy that answer.

[Wes Tancred]

You have a good point. I think that Ms Chiappa may have used the word “hardening” to mean heat treatment of the breech-block; thus, the implication is that the process of case hardening, which involves heating in a furnace to a temperature of 1,700 degrees Fahrenheit or more, is incompatible with the heat treatment. If I am not mistaken, the need for greater receiver strength at the turn of the last century, when smokeless powder was increasingly used in sporting arms, led Winchester to cease colour case hardening their actions (notably on the 1885 falling-block single-shot model), since they used a heat treatment process that was not compatible with case hardening.

I should think that Armi Sport could still provide the original look with a faux finish, and perhaps they will eventually do that. This, of course, presumes that the case hardened finish on the Spencers is not already a faux type, though it looks convincing and extends to the unseen surfaces.

I must confess that I, too, am surprised that a tougher breech-block is needed for the Spencer, given the characteristics of the .56-.50 black powder cartridge. Perhaps it is anticipated that some shooters will attempt to use somewhat injudicious smokeless loads. Only those Shiloh Sharps in .30-40 Krag, .38-55, and .45-70 are warranted for use with smokeless powder, but if these models have colour case hardened breech-blocks, then clearly such a block can be made that will withstand smokeless loads in relatively powerful (and high-pressure, in the case of the Krag) loadings (and presumably without a firing pin bushing, though I have not seen a Shiloh Sharps in these calibres). The decision at Armi Sport may have involved other considerations, as well, such as material costs, or the use of magnum pistol primers by shooters, which could batter the block. But I do think it significant that only the breech-block has been changed to a blued finish, on a gun with a plethora of colour case hardened parts. It hardly seems possible that this change was made for the cost savings involved in making one less part in a case hardened finish. This is the sort of topic that becomes more interesting, the more it is thought about........ 

[gotzguns]

my in intrest in these threads is the responce that armi-sport sent back so fast. this shows that they are interested in shooter feed back. we should keep the factory informed on a regular bases of problem and wants. i've been trying to get any of the cowboy gun makers to bring out a henry and 66 in 44colt or 44 russian. enough  input from the shootin public may get that to happen. keep those letters coming in . gotzguns

[Drydock]

Gotz, Cimerron imports both a Henry and a 66 chambered for .44 special.  These will cycle a .44 Colt (only .06 shorter) as is, with only a slight mod to the lifter needed to cycle the shorter russian round.

[Wes Tancred]

I think that what Gotzguns desires to see offered in the market are Henry and 1866 rifles with original frame and carrier dimensions. The available reproductions have longer frames and carriers to accommodate cartridges like the .44-40 and .45 Colt. A fair number of shooters would like these guns in the original dimensions, and chambered in a round as close as possible to the .44 Henry central fire that was used in some 1866s. Such a Henry would appeal to me, but an even bolder idea would be to re-introduce the .44 Henry rim fire, and rifles of original dimensions chambered for it. These cartridges should be loaded with black powder, and the cases could be made of aluminium (possibly anodised in a brass colour) to considerably lower the costs. There are CAS shooters who do not reload ammunition, who would welcome relatively low-cost, “shoot-once” large calibre rim fire cartridges. Revolvers could also be chambered for such loads. I would purchase such guns as these, despite the fact that I do reload. 

It would be nice to see these rifles with the original drop to the stock, too. Uberti reduce the drop, as do other firms. My USFA Lightning rifle is a superb gun, but I wish that they had kept the original, greater drop. Note that these reductions in drop do not involve changes to the receiver geometry. Only the wood butt stock is different than originals, having a pronounced upward curve. Some original rifles have this, but not to so great a degree. Greater drop is a benefit when shooting rifles with crescent butts in the proper manner. 

I have obtained a very positive impression of Armi Sport, both from the beauty and very high quality of my Spencer carbine, and from their extraordinarily fast and candid responses to enquiries. Note that Susanna Chiappa is clearly a member of the family that owns Armi Chiappa, of which Armi Sport is the replica gun division, and Kimar is the division that produces air guns, blank-firing guns, signal guns, and training systems. It seems that Armi Chiappa are eager to treat their customers well! 

[Fox Creek Kid]

...but an even bolder idea would be to re-introduce the .44 Henry rim fire, and rifles of original dimensions chambered for it. These cartridges should be loaded with black powder, and the cases could be made of aluminium (possibly anodised in a brass colour) to considerably lower the costs.

I'm afraid the insurance costs would be prohibitive for manufacturing BP cartridges today and the tool up costs as well as the vast majority of die hard Darksiders are reloaders, hence the market just isn't there IMHO. Probably lesss than 2 - 3% of CAS shooters shoot BP.

[Wes Tancred]

Well, the rim fire cartridges could be offered in smokeless loadings too. I am sorry that my suggestion was worded to seem to rule this out. I think that smokeless rim fire .44 cartridges, with aluminium cases, could be made cheaply enough that shooters would purchase them just for the convenience. It would take a bold introduction of guns and ammunition, but remember that Winchester 1876 replicas are now available in obsolete chamberings, and even our Armi Sport .56-.50s are in this category. These guns are selling despite a lack of a “mainstream” source of loaded ammunition. The two commercial sources of loaded .56-.50 (Buffalo Arms and Ten-X) use black powder, and this leads to your other point. Cartridges loaded with black powder are again commercially available, albeit from relatively small outfits. But now even Goex, hardly a one-man operation, sell such cartridges........ 

[gotzguns]

this is the type input from the shooters we need more of. i agree i don't think that commerical 44 rim fire would fly. but 44 russian would be so close ti would. you can shoot it in any 44 colt pistol, its in production, and it wouldn't be that big of a deal to retool the 1860 henry and/orthe 66 yellowboy. its doesn't seem possable that a few short years ago the thought of a repro 76, or spencer, or 87 was ever going to happen. yet her they are. enought input to the gun makers and it will happen. ive always thought a good reto-fit kit to modifie the 44/40 henry or 66 would go over well with the current owner of those two rifle. i don't see how hard that would be. maybe a american gunsmith with some ablity will think about this. if he does ill send him two rifles tomarrow. i would love to have a henry and 66 in 44 russian. so come on gunsmiths think about it. how did we ever build the space shuttle( ok i guess thats not the best example) but you know what i mean. gotzguns

[Fox Creek Kid]

Ten X is not BP loads but rather a BP "substitute" the last I knew. As far as Buffalo Arms ammo I don't know. GOEX did not "make" BP cartridges but rather they have a joint venture with Stewart Dawge I believe, that makes BP cartridges. As an insurance man, I'd like to know their coverage.    Personally, I think it's only a matter of time until some idiot blows up an 1876 repro with smokeless rounds as it it still a toggle link action. Those that are hardcore "Darksiders", such as myself, are few & far between. From a liability standpoint it would be insane for an American company to introduce say a 45-75 cartridge firearm. If you don't believe me then mosey on over to the SASS Wire & read some of the posts of those shooting smokeless in the Chaparral 1876 repro. Insane. Absolutely insane.    Tammy, the owner of Taylor's, told me that EVERY importer of Henry rifles has been sued at least once by some idiot for a magazine detonation.

[Drydock]

Goex bought out Black Dawge lock stock and powder barrel, and moved production to their Louisiana site.  So now Goex is in full BP cartridge production.

No one is going to tool up for additional model production, when you can shoot .44 Colt and Russian in Cimmerons .44 special 66s and Henrys.  Cimmeron is the sole importer for these, as there is not enough demand for additional importers to add these to their stock.

Folks are indeed stupid, which is why the 1876s will never be offered in a modern full production caliber.  It will be a handloaders proposition, so when the idiots blow themselves up, it'll be their own damn fault.

One of the reasons Armi Sport will NOT offer the Spencer in .45 Colt, despite the round being a perfect fit in that action, as someone would surely try to put .454 casull type loads thru it. 

[Wes Tancred]

Fox Creek Kid, you are right that the Ten-X ammunition is loaded with a black powder substitute. I apologise for the error. However, I can state that the Buffalo Arms .56-.50 cartridges certainly are loaded with black powder, since I have fired them in my gun.

As Sgt. Drydock has well explained, Goex do in fact produce black powder ammunition for commercial sale. I am a bit surprised at your concerns about liability. While the making of black powder on a commercial scale is somewhat dangerous, with a certain probability of explosion, the loading of cartridges with black powder can be a very safe operation, even on a large scale. The major ammunition companies in the U.S. offered some black powder ammunition up to and beyond WWII, without incident. The spectacular explosions that have been associated with black powder have occurred at powder mills. And as for liability once ammunition is in the hands of consumers (shooters), I would point out that cartridges loaded with black powder are the safest that can be put into any firearm.

I do think that there is a potential market for the reintroduction of large calibre rim fire ammunition. This market need not be very large to justify an endeavour to satisfy it. The 1876 Winchester is a case in point. This is a large, heavy rifle chambered in cartridges that have long been obsolete. The shooter whose sole concern is function can choose more modern designs like the 1886 Winchester, which has been reproduced. The 1876 is suitable only for side matches in CAS, so the large market for main-match guns is closed to it. Despite all of this, one brand of replica 1876s is already on the market, and another will arrive soon.

The Henrys and 1866s in .44 Special do not totally satisfy the desire on the part of a number of shooters for very accurate replicas. I think that guns like these, with original frame and carrier dimensions, would find a market. And if they were introduced in .44 Henry rim fire, with the concurrent introduction of reasonably priced ammunition, the package would be so appealing it could spark a new area of interest in the vintage gun shooting field. But that is simply an opinion, and I could be wrong........

[gotzguns]

i agree with wes. there are many who would go for the real thing. but if it would be enough to make production profitable is another question. i think the center fireammo will always out sell a rim fire just because of the saving of being able to reload and custom your ammo to your rifle or shooting style. the 44 russian is so close to the 44 henry it would seem a natural to take off. the shift to more historical correct firearms and ammunition is a natural progression of this sport. the new 76 rifle is going to cause some changes in the side events as will the spencer. this could be a new phase to cas.it will only take some more shooters to get involved and it will happen. ihope it does. i reallylike the historical correct shooting.thats what i like to reproduce. the real weapons and ammo to see and feel the what the people of the 19 th century had to work and live with. gotzguns