Which 1858 Conversion Revolver?

Status
Not open for further replies.

NoirFan

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
671
Thanks to information gathered from many fine folks on this forum, I am ready to pull the trigger (haw haw) on my first single action revolver: a Remington 1858 45LC factory conversion with 8” barrel. But now for the last question: which one to get? Looking around I see Uberti, Taylor and Co, Pietta, Cimarron, Stoeger, Lyman and others I’m sure I’m missing. I’m kind of unclear what the relationship is between these brands, are they mostly resellers of the same product or are they original manufacturers? Is there one maker that stands out as being the highest quality or strongest frame? Will I have to do any handwork on it to make it function right?

Any other tips on buying a 1858 factory conversion are appreciated.

1858-new-army-conversion-revolver.png
 
Howdy

Taylors, and Cimarron are importers. They do not manufacture anything.Stoeger owns Beretta, which owns Uberti. Uberti does manufacture lots of firearms. Lyman, sheesh, you are going back a long time now. They have not imported any revolver since the 1970s as far as I can remember.

If you specifically want the 1858 Remington 'conversion' revolver chambered for 45 Colt from the factory, as far as I know Uberti is the only company that manufactures that model, although you may find it being imported by several other companies. I am pretty sure Pietta does not make the 'conversion' Model 1858 that leaves the factory as a cartridge gun.

It appears Uberti only offers the 1858 conversion chambered for 45 Colt.

https://www.uberti-usa.com/new-army-conversion-revolver


It appears Cimarron offers it chambered for 45 Colt and 44-40. But I am willing to bet you that their version is actually manufactured by Uberti.

https://www.cimarron-firearms.com/p...tions/conversion-revolvers-1858-new-army.html


Percussion revolvers that fire Cap & Ball can be converted to fire cartridges using after market cylinders, but as I say, the only company I know of that is making a 'conversion' version of the 1858 Remington that leaves the factory as a cartridge gun is Uberti.

If I can get my photobucket page to boot I will show you a photo of my old EuroArms Remmie that has an after market conversion cylinder added to it. But as I say, it is not the same as the models that leave the factory as cartridge guns. The dimensions are slightly different on the percussion revolvers and the cylinders for them are not interchangeable with the cylinders for the cartridge guns.

OK, here are some photos of my old EuroArms Remmie with its 45 Colt conversion cylinder.

Remmie.jpg

Remmie%20Closeup_zpsrsrzgqkn.jpg




This style cylinder has a removeable back plate with six separate firing pins.

RemmieandCylinder.jpg


There are other conversion cylinders made by Kirst and Howell. The Howell cylinders are very similar to mine, with separate firing pins, the Kirst have a fixed plate in the frame with a single firing pin.



Here is a photo of an actual antique 1858 Remington that was converted to fire cartridges. You can see it has a fixed plate behind the cylinder, much like the one that Uberti is making today. Notice this one does not have an ejector, it still retains the original percussion loading lever. These were converted by Remington, under license from Smith and Wesson, who actually controlled the patent for cylinders with bored through chambers. Most of them were converted to 46 rimfre.

Remington%20Conversion%2002_zpsvg4omdwg.jpg




Regarding your question about needing to do any handwork to make the Uberti 'conversion' function, the answer is no. It should function properly right from the factory. If it doesn't something is wrong.

With the conversions done with the aftermarket cylinders, sometimes a little metal has to be removed from the frame near the bottom of the cylinder to allow the cylinder to drop in place. But the 'conversion' unit that comes from the factory as a cartridge gun should not need any fitting.

Be aware, you don't want to fire any high powered 45 Colt ammo in it. But all firearms made in Italy are proof tested in government proof houses, so you should be able to fire standard SAAMI pressure loads in it.
 
Last edited:
NoirFan

As Driftwood mentioned there are companies making conversion cylinders for the Remington New Model Army in case you can't find one that is a factory conversion model. I have a Pietta Remington New Model Navy that I added a .38 Special conversion cylinder to. Is very well made, fits perfectly, and is very quick and easy to remove the cylinder for reloading.

qSWZhKW.jpg
 
Stoeger is mostly just an importer, owned by Benelli, which is owned by Beretta, which also owns Uberti. Uberti is still operated by the Uberti family in the Uberti factory. Beretta is the top of the food chain.

The only 1858 conversions are made by Uberti. Cimarron, Taylor's, Stoeger, Dixie Gun Works, EMF, etc., are all importers. These days there's no difference between them.
 
Thanks all for the very informative posts and pics of cool old guns.
If you specifically want the 1858 Remington 'conversion' revolver chambered for 45 Colt from the factory, as far as I know Uberti is the only company that manufactures that model, although you may find it being imported by several other companies. I am pretty sure Pietta does not make the 'conversion' Model 1858 that leaves the factory as a cartridge gun.
.

Yep, I am looking specifically for the “factory conversion” in 45 colt. Some of the aftermarket conversions look neat but I wanted the ejector to come installed on the gun. Looks like the Uberti is the only option which makes my choice a lot easier.

Thanks again
 
Purchased from Taylors with the 45 Colt conversion. 45 acp I got from Howell. Have never fired with black powder. Did send the gun to Howell for some extra fitting. They are very nice people to work with!
Uberti Remington 1858 45 ACP, 45 Colt, BP 45 Ball.jpg
 
Uberti. They are better than Pietta.

But why not a Remington 1875 if getting a cartridge revolver?
 
Uberti has a solid reputation and I rank them above Pietta. Uberti also offer the "original" cylinder as an optional to load the gun as it was first designed.
 
Uberti also offer the "original" cylinder as an optional to load the gun as it was first designed.

Really? I did not see that anywhere on the Uberti website. You can buy aftermarket cartridge cylinders for the regular 1858 Cap & Ball revolvers, but I am pretty sure they will not fit the factory 'Cartridge Conversion' model. I could be wrong, but that is what I thought.

Have never fired with black powder.

I have never fired mine with Smokeless. Only Black Powder.

The 1858 Remington Cap & Ball revolver had what I call a 'design deficiency'. There was no raised bushing on the front of the cylinder to separate the opening in the cylinder from the barrel/cylinder gap. This means that BP fouling blasted out of the barrel/cylinder gap gets deposited directly on the cylinder pin. After a few shots, the fouling works its way down the pin where it starts to cause the cylinder to bind. In this photo I have pictured the 1858 Remington at the top, along with its conversion cylinder on the right. Below it is a Colt 1860 Army and its cylinder on the left. Notice how much wider the Colt arbor is than the Remington cylinder pin. Notice too the Colt arbor has a helical groove cut into it. This is to provide clearance for the fouling that inevitably finds its way onto the arbor. Combine the larger diameter arbor with the clearance cut and the Colt replica will keep shooting longer than the Remington replica without the cylinder binding from Black Powder fouling. This even though the Colt also lacks a raised bushing on the front of the cylinder. Yo can see I cut some grooves onto my Remington pin to try to give the fouling someplace to go, but it is not very effective.

arborandpin.jpg




Anyway, the beauty of the 1858 conversion cylinders is they are very quick to pop out and remove from the frame. Every time I reload I wipe the cylinder face off with a damp towel and wipe the cylinder pin. Then I reload and I am good to go for five more rounds. I also load up the cylinder pin with Bore Butter to help keep the cylinder rolling. That's why I went with this style cylinder rather than the ones with a loading gate for reloading. I pop out the cylinder, dump the empties, pop in fresh rounds and pop the cylinder back in place and I am ready to go again. Yes, I did say five fresh rounds, not six. Even though this brand of cylinder has six chambers, I follow the rule for single action revolvers and only load five, lowering the hammer on an empty chamber.


The disadvantage of buying these conversion cylinders is first you buy the Cap & Ball revolver, then you buy the cylinder. In my case I bought my old Remmie so many years ago, 1975 if I recall correctly, that spending under $200 on a conversion cylinder was like buying a new gun for under $200. Today these cylinders are running a bit more, so if you buy the 1858 C&B gun, plus the cylinder you are looking at a sizeable investment.



In 1873 Colt changed the design of their cylinders slightly to include a raised bushing on the front of the cylinder. From left to right in this photo are an Uberti Cattleman cylinder, a Ruger 'original model' Vaquero cylinder, and a Colt 2nd Gen cylinder. The Uberti and Colt cylinder bushings are actually removable, the Ruger bushing is not. It does not matter for the purposes of shooting Black Powder.

cylinderbushings.jpg




This photo of a Vaquero illustrates the principle. The cylinder bushing, visible below the barrel extension, puts some horizontal distance between the barrel/cylinder gap and the front of the bushing. In this way, the bushing shields the cylinder pin from fouling blasted out of the barrel/cylinder gap and the gun can be fired all day without the cylinder binding.

BarrelCylinderGapVaqueroedited_zps16431d2f.jpg




Interestingly enough, when Remington brought out the 1875 cartridge revolver, they did put a bushing on the front of the cylinder. It does not stand as tall as a Colt bushing, but it helped deflect Black Powder fouling away from the cylinder pin.

Remington%201875%20Cylinder%2001_zpssdwc4ree.jpg




It has been a long time since I handled one of the Uberti 1858 Cartridge Conversions and I don't recall if they put a bushing on the front of the cylinder or not. If they didn't, the gun will probably bind up fairly rapidly when fired with cartrdiges loaded witth Black Powder.
 
People seem to have this weird idea that a cartridge conversion is a convertible. Historically, they were not. It wasn't until the modern, drop-in cylinder types hit the market that there was an ability to swap back and forth. Which basically makes for a very rudimentary cartridge gun that has to be disassembled to be reloaded. A factory cartridge conversion, be it an original Colt or Remington or modern Uberti, is not capable of being changed back and forth.
 
I know there are those that will not like this but if I wanted to shoot bp 45lc I would just get a period looking standard 45lc. That way if you wanted to you could shoot regular smokeless 45lc.
 
Not wanting to shock anybody, but smokless rounds are what the factory versions are meant to shoot. Likewise, the cylinders made to fit in modern cap guns are designed that way as well, which is the main reason most folks get them in the first place.

I see that the OP didn't mention shooting bp rounds but the topic was introduced. So, to try and clear the air some, all the setups mentioned are safe with smokless.

As far as getting a '75 or '90 mod., the "conversion" revolver works very well and can be set up just like any fine cartridge revolver. I did one not long ago and was rather impressed with it. The simple rod ejector worked well. The revolver left here with a 3 lb. hammer draw, a 2 3/4 lb. trig. pull and a fully coil sprung action.

Mike
 
Uberti. They are better than Pietta.
But why not a Remington 1875 if getting a cartridge revolver?
The 1858 handles nicer to me. Plus I like the look of the unfluted cylinder and octagon barrel.

Not wanting to shock anybody, but smokless rounds are what the factory versions are meant to shoot. Likewise, the cylinders made to fit in modern cap guns are designed that way as well, which is the main reason most folks get them in the first place.
I see that the OP didn't mention shooting bp rounds but the topic was introduced. So, to try and clear the air some, all the setups mentioned are safe with smokless.
As far as getting a '75 or '90 mod., the "conversion" revolver works very well and can be set up just like any fine cartridge revolver. I did one not long ago and was rather impressed with it. The simple rod ejector worked well. The revolver left here with a 3 lb. hammer draw, a 2 3/4 lb. trig. pull and a fully coil sprung action.
Mike
Thanks for the info, I plan to shoot mostly medium power smokeless reloads, although I’m sure I’ll try BP 45 Colt reloads at some point just for fun.
 
People seem to have this weird idea that a cartridge conversion is a convertible. Historically, they were not. It wasn't until the modern, drop-in cylinder types hit the market that there was an ability to swap back and forth. Which basically makes for a very rudimentary cartridge gun that has to be disassembled to be reloaded. A factory cartridge conversion, be it an original Colt or Remington or modern Uberti, is not capable of being changed back and forth.

Good Point

Pretty much all of the original cartridge conversion revolvers had either a firing pin made out of the original hammer or a firing pin mounted on the hammer. The older flat faced hammer for a percussion cap was done away with. Which makes me wonder about the statement that Uberti's 1858 Cartridge Conversion has the option of using a C&B cylinder.

I am most familiar with the Colt Richards Conversion, which in addition to having the ratchet teeth rotated 30 degrees from the original 1860 cylinders and a redesigned hand, had a frame mounted, spring loaded firing pin.

Frame%20Mounted%20Firing%20Pin_zpsi7ncnvli.jpg

Richards%20Conversion%20Cylinder%20and%20Pietta%201860%20Cylinder_zpsibecxwvv.jpg




All of the modern 'convertible' conversion cylinders make use of the original flat faced percussion hammer so they can be returned to percussion configuration .



Regarding my post about shooting Black Powder cartridges in a modern replica with a conversion cylinder, if you're not interested in shooting Black Powder out of one, feel completely free to ignore everything I said.
 
Last edited:
Yep, the gated conversions that utilize the percussion hammer, like this Kirst on my 3rd model Dragoon, can be converted back. It'll just have a huge cutout for capping. Not an option for factory conversions, past or present.

IMG_2503b.jpg
 
Really? I did not see that anywhere on the Uberti website. You can buy aftermarket cartridge cylinders for the regular 1858 Cap & Ball revolvers, but I am pretty sure they will not fit the factory 'Cartridge Conversion' model. I could be wrong, but that is what I thought.
Yes, I'm sure. I have an italian gun magazine with the full review of the gun. The magazine is Armi Magazine Giugno 2014 (June 2014, the gun is in the front cover). It's the Uberti 1858 Conversion New Army .45 Colt with an optional Uberti cap and ball cylinder. They test range it with both cylinders. The optional cylinder costs 1/6 of the gun, more or less.
I don't know if I can post some pics of the article without breaking some copyright rule.
 
Last edited:
Do percussion hammers work well on center fire cartridges where the cylinders do not have firing pins incorporated for each chamber?
 
Do percussion hammers work well on center fire cartridges where the cylinders do not have firing pins incorporated for each chamber?

No. They shouldn't work at all, unless a firing pin has been incorporated into the frame (see pic above in Driftwood's post ).
 
A percussion hammer has a flat face to strike the percussion cap which is sitting on a hollow nipple. The flat face of the hammer
Do percussion hammers work well on center fire cartridges where the cylinders do not have firing pins incorporated for each chamber?

OK, bear with me.

In this photo, the percussion cylinder that originally came with my old EuroArms 1858 Remington is on the left, and the R&D 45 Colt conversion cylinder is on the right. Notice the percussion nipples in the the old Cap & Ball cylinder on the left. The R&D cylinder has a separate cap set onto its cylinder and there is a separate firing pin for each chamber.

EuroArms%20Remmie%20Cylinders_zpsrsyjnt1k.jpg




Here is the hammer of the 1858 EuroArms Remington.

EuroArms%20Remmie%20Hammer%2001_zpsgb0hi6qc.jpg




Here is the business end of the 1858 hammer. The vertical flat is what would strike the percussion cap seated on a nipple. The pointed part above the vertical flat is there to prevent cap fragments from flying out.

EuroArms%20Remmie%20Hammer%2002_zps0i5tayo9.jpg




There is a groove milled through the frame so the hammer flat can strike the cap on the nipple.

EuroArms%20Remmie%20with%20Percussion%20Cylinder_zpsn5t5nutt.jpg




With the cartridge conversion cylinder in place of the C&B cylinder, the same flat of the hammer is able to strike a firing pin mounted in the cap of the cylinder.

EuroArms%20Remmie%20with%20Conversion_zpsp0ckgefv.jpg




With the conversion cylinders made by Kirst, there is a fixed plate mounted in the frame that contains a single firing pin. The 1858 hammer strikes that firing pin no different than with my six shot cylinder.

That is the story with the modern conversion cylinders. They are designed so that they can be substituted for the C&B cylinder and struck by the hammer with out any modification to the hammer.



This is a photo out of R. Bruce McDowell's masterful book, A Study of Colt Conversions and Other Percussion Revolvers. I hope that by giving full credit to Mr McDowell I will avoid any copyright issues. The hammer on this revolver has been altered to fire centerfire cartridges. A firing pin has been fashioned where the flat surface used to be on the percussion hammer and the overhanging lip at the top has been removed. Perhaps new material was welded onto the hammer to fabricate the firing pin, I am not sure. Anyway, it should be clear from this photo that once this hammer was in place, the revolver could never be fired as a percussion revolver again. We can also see the percussion nipples have been cut off of the cylinder, and a disc of metal has been added to the frame to keep the cartridges in position. When Remington converted their 44 caliber 1858 revolvers to fire cartridges, the cartridge was a 46 caliber rimfire cartridge. In that case the firing pin was at the top of the hammer, so it would strike the rim of the cartridge.

R%20Bruce%20McDowell%20Remington%20Conversion%20Photo%2001_zps0jihp59e.jpg




Another photo from Mr McDowell's book showing hammers for the Colt Richards Mason conversions, showing two different types of firing pins added to the hammers. Note that the hammer on the left has the firing pin riveted in place. Again, once these hammers were in place, the gun could no longer be fired with a percussion cylinder.

R%20Bruce%20McDowell%20Richards%20Mason%20Hammers_zpscthmklwa.jpg






A few photos of an original Colt Richards Conversion.Here it is disassembled. Take particular note of the shape of the hammer.

Richards%20Conversion%20Disassembled_zpsdo3g1vnx.jpg




Here a Pietta 1860 Army cylinder is on the left, the Richards Conversion cylinder is on the right. The nipples have been cut off the conversion cylinder and a new set of ratchet teeth have been formed from the center of the cylinder. Those are a couple of original 44 Colt cartridges in the chambers.

Richards%20Conversion%20Cylinder%20and%20Pietta%201860%20Cylinder_zpsibecxwvv.jpg




The Richardson Conversions had a Conversion Ring with a loading gate screwed into the frame, taking up the space where the nipples would have been on a C&B revolver. Notice the nose of the hammer has been cut back.

Loading%20Gate_zpsveoabefw.jpg




On the Richards Conversion there was a spring loaded firing pin mounted in the Conversion Ring. Not a whole lot different than the frame mounted firing pins of a modern Ruger.

Frame%20Mounted%20Firing%20Pin_zpsi7ncnvli.jpg




Again, once it had been converted to fire cartridges, the Richards Conversion could no longer be fired as a Cap & Ball revolver.
 
Driftwood and all
Really appreciate the effort, information and great photos.

There are a lot of reasons to own firearms.
 
Uberti Model 1871-1872 Shoots 45 Colt cartridge.
I can put holes in paper with this as well as any open sight center fire handgun I own. Im not sure who the original designer of this firearm was??? UBerti Open Top 1871 45 Colt.jpg
 
Last edited:
Do percussion hammers work well on center fire cartridges where the cylinders do not have firing pins incorporated for each chamber?
Here is the link of the Armi Magazine web page showing the magazine number I was speaking of: http://www.caffeditrice.com/armi-magazine-in-edicola-il-numero-di-giugno-2014/ You can see the cap & ball cylinder in the gun and the center fire conversion, cylinder and tool sitting near it (but the gun, being a conversion, is sold as a center fire gun; apparently the author of the article just preferred to show the gun as a cap & ball on the magazine cover).
In the case of this Uberti 1858 Conversion New Armi .45 Colt, the hammer is made to fire with the cap & ball cylinder and the center fire shield conversion has the firing pin (and firing pin spring as well) mounted on it just like the shield of a modern revolver. So, with the center fire shield conversion and center fire cylinder in place, the cap & ball hammer hits the firing pin which is in the conversion and the gun goes boom. It's basically an indirect strike, just like a current production S&W revolver.
 
Iron Sight, the '71/'72 "Open Top" was designed by Richards / Mason. It was the first metallic cartridge designed revolver offered by Colt since the Rollin White patent had expired. R and R/M also are responsible for the conversion designs for existing C&B revolvers that sold at the same time as the "Open Top".
The " Open Top" was the parent to the top strap 1873 Mod. P, or Peacemaker, or Single Action Army or the "New Model Army Metallic Cartridge Revolving Pistol" (the "official" nomenclature).

Something to note in Driftwood Johnson's excellent photo of the RM Conversion (parts view), is the combination spring (which appears to be original stock). The trigger side is the "wide" (more power) spring and the "narrow" (less power) side is for the bolt. The Italians have had it backwards for ever!! This is why locking notches get beat up and trenches get dug in cylinders. The trigger needs the tension for safety, the bolt only needs about 3 lbs to function correctly.
In my experience, the Italian combination springs have been equal width (most common) or when attempts have been made to do it "correctly", it's exactly backwards. Just thought I'd point out what they should be like . . .

Mike
 
Here is the link of the Armi Magazine web page showing the magazine number I was speaking of: http://www.caffeditrice.com/armi-magazine-in-edicola-il-numero-di-giugno-2014/ You can see the cap & ball cylinder in the gun and the center fire conversion, cylinder and tool sitting near it (but the gun, being a conversion, is sold as a center fire gun; apparently the author of the article just preferred to show the gun as a cap & ball on the magazine cover).
In the case of this Uberti 1858 Conversion New Armi .45 Colt, the hammer is made to fire with the cap & ball cylinder and the center fire shield conversion has the firing pin (and firing pin spring as well) mounted on it just like the shield of a modern revolver. So, with the center fire shield conversion and center fire cylinder in place, the cap & ball hammer hits the firing pin which is in the conversion and the gun goes boom. It's basically an indirect strike, just like a current production S&W revolver.

I respectively submit that is not the same gun the OP was talking about. You say the hammer on that version is made to fire the Cap & Ball cylinder. Which means to me the hammer has a flat face to fire percussion caps. I have not examined the current Uberti 1858 conversion in a long time, I had one in hand when they first came out. But I suspect this version has a firing pin on the hammer to fire cartridges. I could be wrong, it has been a long time since I handled one.
 
Howdy Again

Iron SIght:

Nice photo of your Open Top. I like that you have the hammer cocked, showing the way the firing pin is mounted to the hammer. The Open Top is easy to recognize because it was the only 'conversion' revolver that had the rear sight raised up at the rear of the barrel.

45 Dragoon: I'm not sure if C.B. Richards had anything to do with the Open Tops, I seem to recall that the patents were granted to William Mason, who was also the chief designer of the Single Action Army.

The Open Tops were notable in that they were never an actual 'conversion' revolver. They were designed as cartridge revolvers from the beginning.They were chambered for a 44 Rimfire cartridge, although apparently some were converted to fire the 44-40 cartridge later. According to Mr McDowell, the specific cartridge for the Open Tops was the Stetson 44 Henry cartridge. There is a photo in Mr McDowells book, but I am probably already pushing things posting his photos. This cartridge used a proprietary swaged bullet. Unfortunately Mr McDowell does not list the powder charge or bullet weight.

45 Dragoon: Thanks for the information about the split trigger/bolt spring. I never realized that, learn something every day. Here is a closeup of the lockwork parts, with a better view of the spring. I never noticed one leg is wider as you say. I do recall when I took the revolver apart that I thought the spring might have been a modern replacement spring, because the blue (or fire blue, or what ever it is) shows almost no wear. So I thought it was a replacement. Perhaps it is a replacement, just an original replacement spring. It has been over a year since I took the gun apart and I really don't feel like taking it apart again right now. This Richards revolver is a stalled project. Everything functions perfectly. My intention was to actually fire it. I bought some 44 Colt brass from Starline, and a bullet mold and crimping tool for heeled bullets from Old West Bullet Molds in Colorado. I cast up a few bullets, but they were a bit undersized. The owner of Old West Bullet Molds opened up the mold a tiny bit, but my blood lead count is a bit high, so I have stopped casting bullets for a while. Also, I discovered that 44 Russian brass chambers just fine, and my thought was to load 44 Russian brass with the OWBM heeled bullets, the thought being that the Russian brass would hold a bit less powder. I don't want to stress the iron of the old cylinder.

Anyway, thanks for your comments about the spring.

Lockwork%20Parts_zpsyp9gsrnf.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top