The Only-For-Tin-Cans-Pistol

[randyc]

I dunno' but whatever happened in your photo, that Thompson looks very cool - like you refinished and polished the wood a bit !

Never owned a SAA, the closest would be this .44 Remington 1858 reproduction.  The original would pre-date the SAA by ten or twenty years and is "sort-of-a" muzzle loader unlike the Colt.  I never did complete the revolver but I did shoot it - lots of fun and the big cloud of smoke gets the attention of the folks at the adjacent shooting benches.  It's still in the gun cabinet and maybe one of these days ....

   

These old beauties have excellent and accurate performance, exceeding .38 Special ballistics comfortably when loaded to the original 40 grains of black powder.  They have a top strap and are beefier than the Colts of the day.  Maybe that is why convertible cylinders are now available (for .44-40 I suppose) although seems like the hammer would also have to be replaced to make the complete metallic cartridge conversion.

Another interesting feature of the day (which is why I posed the photo) is that pre-loaded cylinders could be carried and switched with an empty one in five seconds or so.  Who knows - the Remington may even have been the inspiration for the SAA ?

[randyc]

OK, should have taken the five or ten seconds required to internet research the 1858 Remington conversion.  As shown below, the conversion consists not only of a new cylinder but an interesting part that adapts the Remington percussion cap hammer configuration to fire center-fire cartridges.

Also, with a fairly simple (milling) modification, the gated loading/unloading port (like a Colt) can be added.  I think it's pretty neat !

   

There are two conversion units available, .36 caliber cap/ball to .38 Special and .44 caliber cap/ball to .45 Colt.  Looking at the photo, the conversion makes the Remington a five-shooter but then safety considerations always suggested resting the hammer on an empty chamber anyway.  I confess that I'm fascinated by this concept but apparently it applies only to reproductions made by specific manufacturers (Italian ones I think).

[Highpower]

(09-03-2017, 04:19 PM)randyc Wrote:  Maybe that is why convertible cylinders are now available (for .44-40 I suppose) although seems like the hammer would also have to be replaced to make the complete metallic cartridge conversion.

Another interesting feature of the day (which is why I posed the photo) is that pre-loaded cylinders could be carried and switched with an empty one in five seconds or so.  Who knows - the Remington may even have been the inspiration for the SAA ?

Some conversion cylinders have a back plate on them that houses a firing pin for each chamber for the hammer to strike.


I've thought about getting one for my Ruger Old Army, but I'm still waiting for the price to come down a bit.
I got my Old Army in stainless though. Gotta love being able to totally clean a BP gun just by holding it under the kitchen faucet with warm water running.  

I think the swapping of pre-loaded cylinders was inspired by the pale rider...  

https://youtu.be/WQuKXGOoqUc?t=53

[randyc]

(09-03-2017, 08:46 PM)Highpower Wrote: Some conversion cylinders have a back plate on them that houses a firing pin for each cylinder for the hammer body to strike.

I've thought about getting one for my Ruger Old Army, but I'm still waiting for the price to come down a bit.
I got my Old Army in stainless though. Gotta love being able to totally clean a BP gun just by holding it under the kitchen faucet with warm water running.  

I think the swapping of pre-loaded cylinders was inspired by the pale rider...  

https://youtu.be/WQuKXGOoqUc?t=53

Nice idea on that cylinder with six firing pins.  I'd bet that it is way more trustworthy than the photo I found !

You have a Ruger "Old Army" ?  In probably hundreds of range trips, I've never seen one and always admired them in the Ruger ads.  Looking at photos, that Ruger looks like the most brutally beefy rock-solid handgun ever made !  One gets the impression that it is even sturdier than the BlackHawk and RedHawk.

But of course Rugers have always been noted for their strength.  I'm a big fan and in addition to the Speed Six and Single Six, I have a Ruger LCR (with laser sight), a .25-06 M-77HV and a Red Label 12 gauge o/u.  All are exceptionally well made and exceptionally functional !

My preference for finishes has always been traditional:  blued, browned or case-hardened, all implying carbon steel.  BUT stainless steel is so incredibly practical that if I had to replace my firearms, doubtless all would be stainless.

And if I shot black powder regularly, stainless would be the ONLY option.  Cleaning those things is a major, major operation as you know better than me !  For me, two choices are available when cleaning a traditionally-manufactured black powder firearm, LOL:

• Hot soapy water, dry as well as you can, wipe down with oil and hope for no rust, examining frequently.
  

• Leave it dirty except for bore and cylinder, wipe down and hope for no rust, examining frequently.
  

Cheers !
randyc

[Highpower]

I'll have to dig it out of the safe and get a picture I suppose. Beefy is a good word. The maximum load is basically the same as a Colt Walker. If you can stuff it in there it will work.  

My usual load is to fill all the chambers to the top of the cylinder, and set a wonder wad over each. Seat the wads then seat a ball over each wad. Stacks up perfectly leaving the ball sitting right at the front edge of the chambers.

This is from the Ruger owners manual.

Quote:

POWDER CHARGE

It is safe to use as much Black Powder as the chamber will hold, leaving room for the bullet. This maximum loading is usually not the most accurate loading, however.

You have certainly got your cleaning regimen down pat, I'll give you that.  

[randyc]

LOVE to see photos of the Ruger !  Since this is a gunsmith forum, I'm probably the only one here that has only seen the ad photos.

The Colt Walker was an awesome piece of gear but probably not as strong as the Old Army - just an opinion of course.  Superior mechanical design, better metallurgy and so forth ... and since Ruger says that you can top off thoswe chambers, you just gotta' know that there's a LOT of safety margin, they are known for conservative designs !

[randyc]

Here's a real horror story and a true one that I posted it in the wrong forum:

Like most male kids, I was obsessed with firearms.  Although I'd been given a rifle (.22 Remington Targetmaster) for my 11th birthday, handguns were more interesting.  Around this time (late 'fifties) "zip guns" were often mentioned in books and movies.  The idea seemed pretty cool to me, although I'd never seen one or even heard a reliable report that they functioned.

Being handy with tools but not real bright, I decided to make my own so I could carry it to school and show my buddies.  Looking around the house, I scrounged up some likely looking parts and started working.  The "barrel" was a short piece of aluminum tube from an old coffee percolator, one end of which I plugged with a sheet metal screw.

I found a cheap cigarette lighter, sort of chiseled it apart and then mounted the spark wheel + flint so sparks would be thrown toward the "barrel".  The "barrel" was mounted to the "handle" temporarily and a touch hole marked.  After drilling the touch hole, I put everything back together.  I already knew what I was going to load the thing with.

I snitched one of Dad's 12 gauge turkey loads and carefully cut it open.  I poured some of the powder down the "barrel" - no attempt at measuring.  I stuffed a little wad of Kleenex on top of the charge and dropped one of the shots (number 3 or whatever whatever Dad was using at the time) on top, followed by another Kleenex "wad'.

I was really pumped by this time, the thing actually looked functional and my seventh grade engineering skills pronounced the design completely safe, based on my comprehensive firearm design experience, LOL.  So I took the thing out behind the barn (we lived on a farm in Tennessee) for proof testing.

Holding it in my left hand at arm's length, I spun the little cigarette lighter wheel with my right forefinger (I remember all of this vividly).  Nothing happened so I repeated the process.  I'm not sure that I actually heard anything but my face went numb immediately.  As craftily as I could, I made my way into the house and into the bathroom so that I could see the damage.

Staring at my face in the mirror, there was a screw parked in the bridge of my nose, point imbedded firmly.  I jerked it out with a pair of tweezers from the medicine cabinet.  I have no recollection of what I told my parents and when I think of that incident, I still get cold from the thought, "one inch to the left or one inch to the right".

[TomG]

Interesting project.

I've often wondered, but never investigated the concept of using a sabot shot shell in a rifled barrel as a means of expanding the pattern. Shotguns are incredibly effective for home defense (against snakes of all types), but have a very small pattern at close range. It seems to me that a spinning load of shot could be expanded to a more ideal pattern size.

Tom

[randyc]

(09-05-2017, 09:28 AM)TomG Wrote: Interesting project.

I've often wondered, but never investigated the concept of using a sabot shot shell in a rifled barrel as a means of expanding the pattern. Shotguns are incredibly effective for home defense (against snakes of all types), but have a very small pattern at close range. It seems to me that a spinning load of shot could be expanded to a more ideal pattern size.

Tom

Sounds reasonable.  Or maybe an inverted cone-shaped wad to spread the pattern ?

[Mike E.]

Using an inverted cone shaped wad sounds scary, with a bulged barrel possibly the least undesirable outcome.