58 Remmy

[Coop Trawlaine]

Presidio,
Hey!  You are not alone on the reloading thing,,,I don't reload either but I called Ten X where I get my cowboy ammo from and asked, that is how I know what size load I am using.   

Coop

[Marshal Rusty Bore]

I got both!


         

[Presidio]

Hey Marshall Rusty Bore...yer pic didn't quite make it ta snuff?

try clicking on the "image Button" below the Italic button and insert yer image between the markings

[img]insert picture link here[img]

[Advertising]

[Marshal Rusty Bore]

Snapfish don't seem to like me doing that !

[Presidio]

If'n ya kinn send it ta me via emule, I'll see if I kin post it fer ya!

Click on profile fer my email address.

[Marshal Rusty Bore]

There got it in as an attachment!

[Presidio]

Them's sweet, Rusty!

Here's some more photos of muh gear:

Muh Tack nailers:  5 1/2" Pietta '58s w/ 45 LC R & D Conversions


Muh original full rig:  Reloadin' Strips by Longline Charlie, 5 1/2 & another 7 1/2 Remi '58s


And, muh lil' mule cart:  45 LC Puma; Winchester '91 30-30, Winchester Riot 12 ga pump (jest fer a space filler), EMF 12 ga SxS




Kinda went picture crazy, ya'll excuse my pride!  Still awaiting new leather from C & J Traders.  Should have this week - hav'ta show off muh pride some more then;  so ya'll jest hav'ta grin n' bear it fer awhile!

FYI. Yep, I shoot 'em all in the white!

[jiminy criquet]

I've done 3 conversions so far, all Kirst.  Two in .45ACP, and 1 in .38 Special.  I wouldn't worry about swapping back and forth between conversion and original cylinder, as the guns don't seem to like it.  Don't ask me why, but they seem to 'adjust' themselves to the conversions, and don't like switching back and forth.  Besides, once you cut the loading port in, the point is kind of moot under Federal law....you've now 'manufactured' a firearm, and can no longer sell it (without a hassle).

On older manufacture guns, the conversions may require some smithing to get things working with the new cylinder.  My Pietta 1858 Navy manufactured in 1980 required extensive reworking of the innards and an entirely new hammer before the .38 Special conversion cylinder would function.

And if memory serves me, all of them necessitated the refiling of the face of the hammer so that they smoothly engaged the firing pin, as opposed to battering it.  Not 'required' per se, but something I'd recommend when spending that much $$$ for the cylinder in the first place.
---You can tell if this needs to be done by watching as you slowly lower the hammer down onto the firing pin.  The hammer should contact the firing pin (and only the firing pin) squarely, and then squarely contact the frame of the cylinder as the firing pin is depressed.--

I don't imagine the R&D's are any different.  After all, the Italian replicas are not known to be especially made to exacting tolerances.  i.e. Many of them batter the nipples as they come stock from the factory anyways.

[jiminy criquet]

Hey, thanks for the Gad ammo link.  Great site.

[Oldelm]

jiminy.........interesting to hear about your Kirst conversions, especially the Rem Navy .36. That was the gated one, right? Did you get the ejector rod assembly for it, too?  I wonder just what the difference is between the older manufactured replicas and the newer ones which would call for so much reworking of the clockworks to get the Kirst to properly function.

I have a 2004 Uberti '58 Rem NMA for which I bought an R&D drop in, and it worked real smooth from the start, and continues to perform flawlessly.  Your mention of re-facing the hammer is a good point. I know that the Kirst has one firing pin,.....and am wondering, does it angle up from the backplate like the R&Ds?  Here's a closeup of the R&D's angled firing pins (there are 6).....





With my R&D I do notice that the firing pins have been making a depression at the bottom face of the hammer,...here's a pic...



The rest of the hammer does not make any contact with the backplate. I wonder if it would be a good idea for me to cut back the angle of the lower portion of the hammer so as it will strike the pins more squarely, making contact further up towards the middle of the hammer face,...just a tad, so the hammering won't begin to peen over the lower edge where it's hitting closer to now.

Thanks for the info 'bout your Kirst conversions,....

[jiminy criquet]

Actually, I did the .36 before the gated converters came out.  I was expecting they would send me a 'ported' converter (as I ordered it over the web) but they ended up sending me an 'unported' converter ring.  Which ended up being OK, as I decided to ream the cylinder out to accept .357 magnum cartridges...and since I wanted the solid converter ring for that (FYI-reaming to magnum length not recommended by Kirst) ...it all worked out fine.  (I would recommend that you call and specify exactly the type of converter ring you want, otherwise you may end up with whatever happens to be on the shelf.)

As for reworking the innards of the earlier guns, I imagine over time they've changed the specs that they make the guns to, and the converters are made to the 'newer' manufacturing specifications.

No, I did not get the ejector rod.  The cartridges come out faster if you drop the cylinder anyways.

I only ported one of my conversions, (one of the 'old' 6-shot .45 ACP's) and I didn't use the ejector rod on that one either, as I shortened the barrel to 5".  The other one is also a 6-shot .45 ACP, and I got this converter used with the gun...it's one of the early Kirst converters with no milled in spacing between the ring and the cylinder.  That revolver was in bad shape, so I ended up replacing the innards, cutting the barrel to 4 3/8", new front sight, and nickel plating it.  I also nickel plated all the Kirst cylinders (but not the rings).

Here's the .36 1858 Navy (Now it's a .38 Special/.357 Magnum 1858 --stainless with a nickel cylinder...shown with .357 mag and .38 Special cartridges)


Here's them all: 2 stainless, 1 nickel plated (top gun)



Yeah...um...in my opinion the firing pins shouldn't be denting the hammer like that.  In fact, if anything they should be just putting just a little circular mark on the flat face of the hammer, not actually denting it, just marking it.  They seem to be hitting awful low...I like the pins to hit in the center of the hammer if at all possible.  Again...looking at your  1st picture....the face of the hammer should match exactly the angle of the firing pin housing where they meet as the pin is fully depressed, IMHO.

No sense damaging the guns by having the cylinder/hammer batter each other...as by time you buy the cylinder and revolver, these 'conversions' end up being more expensive then an actual cartridge pistol
(By the way, Numrich is great for innards and spare parts)

Hope that helps some.

[jiminy criquet]

I'm looking at that picture a little closer....are you sure that notch wasn't already in the hammer?  I'm thinking I see a faint ring above the notch in the hammer...right where it should be.  Maybe my imagination?

[Oldelm]

jiminy........Your Remmies look great!  Nice job with all the work you've done! It's good to hear what others' experiences are with these conversions,.... because as time goes by ,I'll be picking up more Rems to install conversions on....., all the info is helpful.

I'm going to do as you suggest and file my hammer so as its face matches the angle of the firing pin housing. That faint ring you see on my hammer is from previous percussion cap firing on the face. I think the hammer is becoming dented by the R&D firing pin for two reasons. First is that the R&D firing pin steel is much harder than the Italian hammer steel, ...and second, I could use to lighten the hammer spring so it doesn't come down with so much force. Stiffer springs are more necessary in shooting  cap & ball percussion, but can be too excessive a force for cartridge ignition.

Nice picture of your Rem Navy .38/.357 with the cartridges laid out like that.

[Smokin Gun]

Oldelm was that your .44 5 1/2" Rem? Will talk to you later about my Pietta 1858 Target, K?
Jiminy really like your Rems, especially the Armi San Paolo. I have one that is Patina aged and may be a rather old one... has U.S. marking on right side serial numbers that would date back to a late Dec 17 1861 Old Army with no prooof marks and a stock dovetailed site. Fooled me and a Collector till one of my Pards in a forum read that I found DDG under the grip. Real nice OL' rev. Somebody did a good job on it.  like the size of the Armi San Paolo it's a hair smaller, is yours that way too compaired to say a Uberti or Pietta?

SG

[jiminy criquet]

Thanks for the compliments.  Yes, the .44 Armi San Paulo has a small frame...very similar to the 'Navy' style frame of the 1980 .36 Pietta I've got.  Compared to the .44 Pietta, which is rather bulky looking, the small frame style is probably my favorite.

And that's another neat thing about the Armi San Paulo's ...they are (sometimes?) marked like the originals.  Mine says '.44 CAL. NEW MODEL ARMY' on the left side of the barrel.

Yes, the front sights were dovetailed at the factory, like the Uberti's.  Mine was made in September 1997 for EuroArms, although it looked older when I purchased it

[Jubel]

Pappy, River Junction sells the 6 shot 44 Colt gated cylinder and has the Heeled 44 ammo but it's a bit pricey. I went with the 45 Colt chambering only I shoot 45 S&W Schofield which is like shooting a 38 in a 357 if'n you know what I mean. Plus the Schofield round is more friendly for smokeless loads and will still take a hefty 28 grains of BP under a 225 grain boolit so still a potent round and history correct too boot for the 1870's.

[Smokin Gun]

So Jiminy, Armi San Paolo did make them like that with U.S.  Gov. type markings, and accurate serial numbers for Dec 17 1861? And no BP or Italian markings at all, would this one be a non-proofed one... or not made for export? Cause it seems too perfect a job to have been defarbed.

[jiminy criquet]

Honestly, I don't know...I seem to recall seeing some replica blackpowder pistols with martial markings on them coming out of Italy, but I don't remember what or when.  Mine has 'FOR BLACK POWDER ONLY - MADE IN ITALY' on the right side of the barrel and the Italian proof markings on the frame.  You may want to contact Euroarms (who now owns Armi San Paulo, I believe), and ask them about your revolver.  If you PM me, I'll give you the email address contact that I used a few years ago...not sure if it's valid now.

Here's what they said about mine:
--------------------------------------------------
"Regarding your enquiry the revolver was manufactured in September 1997 by ARMI SAN PAOLO.
The markings (letters \PN\ with a star above it, nearby a faint crest ...the crest consists of
crossed swords over a shield, with what appears to be a bird sitting on top) are those from the Italian proof test house. PN stands for Polvere Nera (Black Powder).
You can find them on the Blue Book of Gun values in the markings section."
---------------------------------------------------

In any event, if someone was so inclined it wouldn't be too difficult to mark one and age it similar to an original after the fact....(you ought to see all the counterfeit tomahawks selling on eBay for example).  When one can make a profit of $1500+ for an investment of $300 on an Italian replica....the incentive is certainly there.

[Smokin Gun]

Thanks Jim I do have Euroarms info and they sent me a parts list. The one I have like I said has fooled the best of them, even a collector who travels the Globe and writes for a pretty Prominant magazine and. Does test with a strong Uberti backing. Anyway  the only European markings at all are a triangulated DDG under the right grip on the frame...these 3 intials are the Original owners of Armi San Paolo. That's the only way I found out the Mfg. of it. Does that paint a better picture of the authenticity counterfiet as it may be? It looks like the real deal.  Showed it to a guy at a gunshop my friend works at, told um $2000 and its yours , he said seems like a fair price...shoulda sold it...LoL!

[jiminy criquet]

Never underestimate the talent of a counterfeiter, as some of the stuff that they put out can easily be classified as works of art themselves.  While it may not be an 'original', it's certainly more valuable than a stock 'replica' pistol, IMHO.
Mine has a similar marking under the barrel, but it appears to be 'DGG'.