How are black powder revolvers so affordable?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok, I'll just say that these revolvers y'all are pontificating on can be set to some of the tightest, closest tolerances available from the finest makers of single action revolvers today. Of course they don't come that way from the factory but they don't cost $1,000.00-$2,000.00 either!
For example, an open top can be setup with a dedicated barrel/cyl clearance of .0025"-.003". Timing adjusted to perfect timing. With a bolt block and action stop installed, it will have the most mechanically accurate action one can achieve. Converting the flat action springs to coil/torsion springs along with a coil hand spring gives "life of the revolver" service and reliability. It's the same setup you'll find in a Freedom Arms mod.97 (minus the bolt block and action stop!)

These same mods done to a Remington '58,'75 or '90 will make a Ruger blush! (and you won't have a beauty ring around your cylinder!) The one exception is that I don't do barrel set backs so barrel/cylinder clearances are what they are.

As for conversion cylinders, if you want a Dragoon in 45C, where do you buy one? Same with a Walker. The others are offered "new from factory" so if it's a money thing, that's how you go. On the other hand, if you already have a long loved open top or Remi, a new or used cylinder is cheaper than a new revolver. These revolvers are plenty strong enough as a platform for the conversion cyl.

The Italians make a pretty good starting platform that can be made into some incredible S.A. revolvers. I make um every day!

Mike
 
Last edited:
Ok, I'll just say that these revolvers y'all are pontificating on can be set to some of the tightest, closest tolerances available from the finest makers of single action revolvers today. Of course they don't come that way from the factory but they don't cost $1,000.00-$2,000.00 either!
For example, an open top can be setup with a dedicated barrel/cyl clearance of .0025"-.003". Timing adjusted to perfect timing. With a bolt block and action stop installed, it will have the most mechanically accurate action one can achieve. Converting the flat action springs to coil/torsion springs along with a coil hand spring gives "life of the revolver" service and reliability. It's the same setup you'll find in a Freedom Arms mod.97 (minus the bolt block and action stop!)

These same mods done to a Remington '58,'75 or '90 will make a Ruger blush! (and you won't have a beauty ring around your cylinder!) The one exception is that I don't do barrel set backs so barrel/cylinder clearances are what they are.

As for conversion cylinders, if you want a Dragoon in 45C, where do you buy one? Same with a Walker. The others are offered "new from factory" so if it's a money thing, that's how you go. On the other hand, if you already have a long loved open top or Remi, a new or used cylinder is cheaper than a new revolver. These revolvers are plenty strong enough as a platform for the conversion cyl.

The Italians make a pretty good starting platform that can be made into some incredible S.A. revolvers. I make um every day!

Mike
Mike, can you please call me?
 
So I’m just getting into single action revolvers, and I am astounded at the low prices on Western style repros. Looking around at Cabela’s I see new-made repros of guns like the 1858, SAA, and the Walker for $250-400 and I can’t understand how these are so cheap. I’ve always heard that a big part of the cost of guns like S&W and Colt DAs and high-end 1911s were due to the need for hand fitting and / or intricate lockwork, as compared to simpler modern designs. But I can’t imagine the old West designs are any less reliant on hand-fit and -finish than say, a Colt Python. They are also made in Italy so it’s not like they’re taking advantage of cheap labor in developing countries.

Is it because BP guns don’t need as much heat treatment? Or maybe because there are special taxes and licensing involved with making cartridge guns? Probably both, but there must be more to the story. Am I missing something?

NoirFan,

You should buy one of those Pietta BP Revolvers and come join us on the BP forum.
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?forums/blackpowder.12/

Start with a steel frame so you can add a conversion cylinder down the line. Note 44 Cal BP revolvers translate to 45 Colt conversion cylinders. Do shoot it with real black powder to start.

Black Powder smoke is highly addictive. Plus tons of fun. I find that BP revolvers combine 2 of my favorite things - Independence Day fireworks and shooting. Plus there is a ton of things to learn.
 
Quality (or actually lack of it) is what's keeping those prices down. I assume we are talking Pietta and Uberti, right? Cheap steel, cheap heat treatment, cheap finishing & broader tolerances equals low production cost. Just because they are shiny does not mean they are of good quality. They are OK, but they are definitely not good. Accept that fact and live with it, that's it.
Yet the steels and processes are a lot better than what the originals in the 1800s were made with. By many accounts, the QC for Pietta and Uberti has gotten better and the use of CNC machines has helped too.
 
Black powder revolvers are usually made from 12L14 steel and modern ones are usually made from 4140. Black powder produces much lower pressure than smokeless powder so 12L14 is more than enough to handle it. Machining it is much easier than 4140. This is why using smokeless powder in a gun designed for black powder is a bad idea. The metal cannot handle the higher pressure. This does NOT mean that the black powder guns are made of junk metal. They are made of the metal that is best suited for the application. There is no R&D involved in making these. That was done well over 100 years ago. These were also originally designed to be manufactured with equipment that did not use electricity.
 
Well, the only thing that needs to handle pressure is the cylinder. After that, the steel frames are plenty adequate as a platform for the cylinder. The only problem folks may run into are the normal shortcomings from the makers of the particular revolver. Typically, clearances.

Set up correctly with tight tolerances (et al, as posted above) these revolvers can/will be every bit as reliable and have the expected longevity as any fine modern made revolver. I make um every month!! (Well almost!)

Mike
 
A Uberti Walker is still on my bucket list. The OG Hand Cannon. I haven't bought one just because I dont get to the outdoor range enough to enjoy it.

Love those big ol pieces of Italian steel.
 
Well, the only thing that needs to handle pressure is the cylinder. After that, the steel frames are plenty adequate as a platform for the cylinder.

Mike
Well, if that was true then we would be easily able to purchase .357 Mag. top-break revolvers, which, sadly, is not the case. Frame strength is also important.
 
Looking around at Cabela’s I see new-made repros of guns like the 1858, SAA, and the Walker for $250-400 and I can’t understand how these are so cheap.

Howdy

First off, you are lumping replicas of the Colt Single Action Army in with Cap & Ball revolvers such as the Walker Colt and the 1858 Remington.

Not really a fair comparison, because the cartridge revolver replicas usually cost more than the Cap & Ball replicas.

Also, the argument that all the R&D has been done on these over 100 years ago really does not hold water.

I worked in the manufacturing world for many years, and there was always R&D work to be done, whether the product was brand new or just a newer version of an older model. Research and Development costs money, there is no way around that. It does not really matter that the designs are over 100 years old. You still have to make prototypes up from first runs of parts, then you have to tweak the parts to get the final shapes so they can be mass produced. I don't care if you are hand cranking the parts, or making them on the latest CNC equipment. I have seen enough CNC mistakes over the years to know that. You still have to make prototypes up just the same as you had to over 100 years ago, and that costs money.

Of course, with Uberti at least, the R&D work on their C&B revolvers was amortized a long time ago. Uberti came out with their first revolver, a replica of the 1851 Navy Colt, back around the Centennial of the beginning of the Civil War. Back around 1959 or so, if memory serves. So the R&D costs of that revolver was amortized many years ago, and probably does not figure very much into the cost of their C&B reproductions today.

Uberti has very recently introduced a change to their single action cartridge guns, a change which clearly required some R&D money, so that cost has to be amortized over the years.

Comparing the cost of imported Italian revolvers to revolvers made in the USA is a no win situation. Colt has been in financial hot water for years. Even though I own a few Colts, I will be the first to say they are over priced. Of course, the market determines the true price of something, and as long as people keep buying them, that will set the market price. Colt's production of the SAA has been seriously hindered over the last few years, they have been cutting back on the number of assemblers actually assembling the SAA, so production has been reduced to a trickle. So part of it is the law of supply and demand. When a product is scarce, it's price goes up. When it is plentiful, the price goes down. A few years ago, when the United States Firearms Company (USFA) was Colt's most serious domestic competition was still in business, Colt dropped the price of the SAA to match the price of a USFA. So clearly there was wiggle room in their price structure. Yes, I do own a few Colts, but I have never bought one brand-spanky new. All of mine I have bought used. Some are antiques, some are 2nd Gens. And I have paid what the market would bear for them.

A bunch of years ago I had a friend who was in the Single Action Revolver business, he was building and selling a replica of the Remington Model 1875 revolver. He was having all the parts made in the USA, and they were being assembled in the USA. He was charging top dollar for them. No, I don't remember the price off the top of my head, but he was charging what it cost to make them along with a reasonable profit for his effort. Probably a bit more than a 3rd Gen Colt was going for at the time. He has since passed away, but I will never forget he told me that it only cost about $100 for the Italian import cartridge revolvers to be built and shipped to the US. Everything else was import duties as well as handling costs and profits for the import companies.
 
Last edited:
Cylinders handle pressure, frames handle backthrust. ;)

This.

Also, the way the thrust acts on the frame is different with conversion cylinders & conversion guns. With C&B, the thrust is at the center of the cylinder. With conversions, unless it's a screw-on cylinder cap, the thrust is directly behind the cartridge. Ergo, far more leverage to tweak things where there is a weak top strap, and especially no top strap.
 
beag_nut,
I believe the issue was concerning the conversion cylinders made for the cap and ball revolvers they are produced for. That, as far as I am aware of, would be R&D, Howell, Kirst and Taylor's.
I wasn't speaking in worldwide generalities that any steel frame S.A. revolver can support a cylinder rated for .454Casull. Just because A car can go 200+ mph doesn't mean ALL cars can go 200+ mph.

So, as far as my post above, the frames that the various cartridge conversion cyls. are made for are plenty strong enough as a support platform for the particular ammo used in the particular cyl per the cyl manufacturers stated limitations. There ya go.

Of course, that could change in the not too distant future though. There could be some "high horse power" Dragoon models coming out . . . .

Besides, it's been long understood that the top break design is better on paper . . . .

Mike
 
Last edited:
This.

Also, the way the thrust acts on the frame is different with conversion cylinders & conversion guns. With C&B, the thrust is at the center of the cylinder. With conversions, unless it's a screw-on cylinder cap, the thrust is directly behind the cartridge. Ergo, far more leverage to tweak things where there is a weak top strap, and especially no top strap.
Yep!
 
"Of course, with Uberti at least, the R&D work on their C&B revolvers was amortized a long time ago."

I think that has a lot to do with it. Uberti has been making cap n' ball revolvers since 1958. There seems to have been design and production process changes along the way but costs are spread out over 60 years.
 
Thanks for all the replies. It was just weird to me that an all steel and wood revolver with fitted lockwork and polished blue finish could be sold for less than a molded plastic semiauto with drop in parts. Not to mention the BP guns have a lot less economy of scale on their side. The taxes, licensing, and steel standards/machining arguments make sense but I feel like there’s still a piece missing somewhere. Maybe lower QC also has something to do with it since BP guns are mostly used for recreation rather than defense.
 
NoriFan,
I can assure you, as I posted above, the revolvers I have are all ready for self defense! In fact, as I posted, my converted S.A.s are by far, more mechanically accurate than most of what you'll get over the counter. I don't see the need to keep "degrading" arms that have been offered for so long as "recreation" weapons!
The fact is, your new "molded, plastic, semi-auto" has tooling, molding, and build costs that are far above the cost of these "recreational" all steel and wood revolvers we find "fit our needs". There's an old saying about "NOT looking a gift horse in the mouth" . . . .

Mike
 
NoriFan,
I can assure you, as I posted above, the revolvers I have are all ready for self defense! In fact, as I posted, my converted S.A.s are by far, more mechanically accurate than most of what you'll get over the counter. I don't see the need to keep "degrading" arms that have been offered for so long as "recreation" weapons!

A covered wagon can still get you across the country, too, but not nearly as efficiently or reliably as a modern automobile.

Muzzle loaders are fun, but the slow loading and susceptibility to environmental factors are a big detractor for defensive use.
 
NoriFan,
I can assure you, as I posted above, the revolvers I have are all ready for self defense! In fact, as I posted, my converted S.A.s are by far, more mechanically accurate than most of what you'll get over the counter. I don't see the need to keep "degrading" arms that have been offered for so long as "recreation" weapons!
The fact is, your new "molded, plastic, semi-auto" has tooling, molding, and build costs that are far above the cost of these "recreational" all steel and wood revolvers we find "fit our needs". There's an old saying about "NOT looking a gift horse in the mouth" . . . .

Mike
Not denigrating anything , I’m just a DA revolver guy trying to understand the historic SA revolver market. And I think it’s safe to say most of the cowboy style imports are bought for re-enactment or CAS, not hunting or defense, nothing wrong with that.

It’s just that for a long time I’ve understood that the cost of a manufactured good in a first world economy is mostly labor, and old west designs would seem to need a lot more hand labor than a Glock or similar. Hence my confusion at the low prices - although some posters have already partly answered the question.
 
I am guessing that in addition to natural market forces and differences in metallurgy dictated by BP vs. smokeless that another price driver is regulatory compliance and liability insurance costs for modern firearms.
 
MachIVshooter,
I agree, cars are better than wagons and cap guns are slow to load. Again, I don't shoot cap guns, mine are all dedicated cartridge shooting revolvers. I've always shot S.A.s (since I was a kid. I'm 61 now) and they are what I'm comfortable with. And, mine are as modern as a Freedom Arms 97 or 83 except that they are 6 shooters (FAs are generally 5 shooters). Like the FAs, they have a coil handspring, a coil- torsion trigger spring and a coil-torsion bolt spring and a flat mainspring. This includes my converted open tops, and any '73 Colt pattern copies I have as well as the Remington pattern. What FAs don't have that mine do is a bolt block and an action stop . . . . maybe mine are more modern that theirs?! Hmmmm . . .
For the record, I have a car, never owned a wagon. :thumbup:

NoriFan,
I understand you are a DA fan and so am I, I'm just more of a fan of S.A.s than D.A.s. I would submit to you though that Big bore Freedom Arms S.A.s are sold more for shooting silhouette and hunting. Those folks that use them probably would have no problem using them for SD either. Likewise, Ruger BHs are primarily used more for hunting as well. I'm pretty sure the S.A. is still the preferred handgun for most of the handgun hunting crowd.
As far as the price of nice Italian copies being affordable, it's never bothered me. :)

Mike
 
Last edited:
It’s just that for a long time I’ve understood that the cost of a manufactured good in a first world economy is mostly labor, and old west designs would seem to need a lot more hand labor than a Glock or similar. Hence my confusion at the low prices - although some posters have already partly answered the question.

I can't speak for the firearms industry, but in several industries, yes, the cost of a manufactured good is mostly labor (and sometimes profit for the company).

I mentioned some things related to this above, but let me throw in another factor: Quality Assurance.

Let's say I make 100 cylinders. How many of those are installed into finished revolvers? If all 100 go into revolvers, I probably have a process that requires minimal QA personnel (at that step, anyway). If 90 go into revolvers and 10 wind up being scrapped then someone had to inspect all 100 and determine that 10 were bad. If there's a batch test in the process I may destructively test one cylinder out of 100 to show the batch is good (that means I need to pay people to run the test...).

I suspect that Glock does a lot more QA than Uberti - because Uberti doesn't have to. Remember they're fundamentally using an old design, which had to work despite greater material variability than we have today. They may have enough designed safety margin on their cylinders (or whatever part you like) that they don't do any QA at the cylinder level. If Glock had that much margin they'd probably try to save weight by reducing the margin; that means more QA to find parts that fall below standard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top