POLL: Best '62 Police Length?

Which Barrel Length for a '62 Police?

  • 5 1/2"

    Votes: 17 58.6%

  • 4 1/2"

    Votes: 12 41.4%
  • Total voters
    29
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Panzerschwein

Panzerschwein

member
Joined
Nov 19, 2011
Messages
8,122
Location
Desert
Guys in my seemingly never ending quest for a smaller sized (but historically authentic) cap and ball revolving pistol, I am smitten with Colt's '62 Police! But what barrel length?? :confused:

They are (and were originally) made in 4 1/2", 5 1/2", and 6 1/2" barrel lengths. I've decided 6 1/2" is a little too long for what I want the gun for. To me, the 4 1/2" looks great and would make for a very compact and packable pistol. But it appears to have a shortened loading lever over the 5 1/2" gun, and would accuracy be worse over the longer barrels? Uses for this gun would be for recreational fun and as a kit gun.

So between the 5 1/2" and 4 1/2" lengths, which would you chose and why?

uberti_1862_police.jpg

072-r_2728_2.jpg
 
Mine is a 5 1/2 inch. Good balance. Not sure the 4 1/2 would be any better. I do share your concern with loading the 4 1/2.

IronHand
 
Ironhand54 said:
Mine is a 5 1/2 inch. Good balance. Not sure the 4 1/2 would be any better. I do share your concern with loading the 4 1/2.

IronHand
Click to expand...
Thanks, IronHand! Hows the 5 1/2" group? Accurate enough as a possible bunny or bushy tail popper?
 
Between the two barrel lengths I would go with the 4 1/2" just because I like the more compact look about it.
 
The 6.5 is not too long, it's fine. It handles very well because the 1862 is very light and you'd swear you were holding a 3 inch Ruger LCRx.

IMO, the best length is a custom length of 2 inches.
 
Checked the uberti website and they say the 6.5 inch version weighs 28 ounces. That's pretty light ( a good thing IMO) for a BP revolver even a 36 cal. I'd go with the 5.5 inch one which likely weighs around 26 ounces. My 5.5 inch 1858 44 cal remmy weighs around 40 ounces and i wish it weighed less.
 
piettakid said:
Checked the uberti website and they say the 6.5 inch version weighs 28 ounces. That's pretty light ( a good thing IMO) for a BP revolver even a 36 cal. I'd go with the 5.5 inch one which likely weighs around 26 ounces. My 5.5 inch 1858 44 cal remmy weighs around 40 ounces and i wish it weighed less.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I've been wanting a smaller, lighter 5 shot 1858 New Model Police repro for years, but it's never gonna happen. Shame too because, apart from the Adams, I think a New Model Police would prove to be very popular.
 
The 3 1/2” length was also an option back then and is available as a seperate part.

Like you I feel I really need this pistol as well and have contemplated what I’d want. On one hand the longer the barrel the longer the sight radius which certainly is beneficial. However a long barrel also seems an oddity on what is supposed to be a compact pistol.

I’m no pistolero and so I’ve wondered if I could even use such a thing for small game hunting. I typically do better than the majority of those who bring their bottom feeders and shoot at 7 yds despite my shooting at 15, but still not so sure I could reliably pull off head shots. But if that was my goal I’d opt for the 5.5 or 6.5” barrel and buy a 3.5 or 4.5” barrel just to make it the compact pistol it’s meant to be. I believe these guns should be easily loaded in the field though so I’d not likely want the 3.5” version. But then is it worth having a 6.5” and a 4.5” barrel? Seems just purchasing the 5.5” version makes for a nice compromise. Not exactly the compact gun I see it being but still nice.

As to the loading lever on a short barrel you could use a section of pipe as a cheater bar, which is what I’d want.
 
rodwah, you don't have to compromise with just one barrel for the 1862. I'm choosing to chop down the barrel on mine to 2 inches for several reasons, the first being that I bought this used online from a lying bastard who said the bore was in "good condition" and it turned out to look like pitted sewer pipes. I don't care about the accuracy with a 2 inch barrel, I'll be able to make hits out to 10 yards with it and since the 2 inch barrel is so small and takes up so little space, it can easily be carried in a pocket or pouch while the 6.5 inch barrel is on the gun.

So, with the 6.5 inch barrel, you get the max velocity and sight radius you can get, be able to load the gun in the field, and put the 2 inch barrel on if so desired.

If one owns the 1862, there is no reason not to have more one barrel. That's one of the most iconic and valuable features of the open top Colt's: being able to swap barrels. Were this a discussion on best 1858 NMA barrel length, I'd say that question has a lot more behind it worth discussing, but this is about a revolver with interchangeable barrels, so it's really not a big deal.
 
Many years ago I bought my Dad an 1862 Police .36 kit as a Christmas present. I believe it had a 5.5" barrel. He just loved putting it together but it may have never been shot. I believe he and his wife sold it shortly before he died in 2010. It was a pretty gun.

Jim
 
TTv2 said:
rodwah, you don't have to compromise with just one barrel for the 1862. I'm choosing to chop down the barrel on mine to 2 inches for several reasons, the first being that I bought this used online from a lying bastard who said the bore was in "good condition" and it turned out to look like pitted sewer pipes. I don't care about the accuracy with a 2 inch barrel, I'll be able to make hits out to 10 yards with it and since the 2 inch barrel is so small and takes up so little space, it can easily be carried in a pocket or pouch while the 6.5 inch barrel is on the gun.

So, with the 6.5 inch barrel, you get the max velocity and sight radius you can get, be able to load the gun in the field, and put the 2 inch barrel on if so desired.

If one owns the 1862, there is no reason not to have more one barrel. That's one of the most iconic and valuable features of the open top Colt's: being able to swap barrels. Were this a discussion on best 1858 NMA barrel length, I'd say that question has a lot more behind it worth discussing, but this is about a revolver with interchangeable barrels, so it's really not a big deal.
Click to expand...

For sure. I’ve contemplated whether a swap of the barrel assembly would be worthwhile. I’m not so sure it is though. It seems less practical that carrying my folding loading stand for my larger pistols, which just isn’t practical.

I like the idea of a longer and shorter barrel, but feel a loading lever is essential for what it is and for shooting fun. So a 4.5” and 6.5” barrel just seems barely worth the while whereas maybe the 5.5” barrel makes for a compromise. If there was even some form of loading lever assembly (maybe one could be created) for a ~3.5” I’d see it more worthwhile to have it and a 6.5”.
 
rodwha said:
For sure. I’ve contemplated whether a swap of the barrel assembly would be worthwhile. I’m not so sure it is though. It seems less practical that carrying my folding loading stand for my larger pistols, which just isn’t practical.

I like the idea of a longer and shorter barrel, but feel a loading lever is essential for what it is and for shooting fun. So a 4.5” and 6.5” barrel just seems barely worth the while whereas maybe the 5.5” barrel makes for a compromise. If there was even some form of loading lever assembly (maybe one could be created) for a ~3.5” I’d see it more worthwhile to have it and a 6.5”.
Click to expand...
The 3.5 inch barrel doesn't have a latch to hold a loading lever and I doubt Uberti is going to change their process to include one.

Go with either the 5.5 or 6.5 barrel, but the 6.5 maximizes every potential in velocity and accuracy for the '62.
 
In 1969 I had a short barreled 1849 Pocket revolver by Uberti. I used it for hunting jackrabbit and rats at short range. The only problem was that the chilled 00 shot I was using seemed to pass through a jackrabbit with little damage and I would have to chase them till they dropped.

Did a good job on rats though.
 
I like the 5.5" length for balance, handling and ease of loading...

Old No7

Some may say the background colors are wrong though...

Colt 1860 Army and 1862 Police 02 (Small).jpg
 
I have a Uberti Police with 4 1/2" barrel. It's not hard to load with .375" balls. The .375" don't shave much of a ring but I have not had any problems with balls creeping forward or with chainfire. I do use lube over the ball with .375".

I have used it with .380" balls as well. They are harder to load. Not really that hard but the loading lever is painful on my hand. I think one could wear a glove and it would be fine. The .380" balls shave a nice ring of lead and I have shot them with no lube, just powder and ball, and I didn't get any chainfires.
 
LonesomePigeon said:
I have used it with .380" balls as well. They are harder to load. Not really that hard but the loading lever is painful on my hand. I think one could wear a glove and it would be fine.
Click to expand...

Another solution is to buy a "wooden egg" at a craft shop, drill a hole on one end (1/2 deep into it), open up that hole to fit the end of the lever, and then slip it over the lever to grab onto as you load -- works slick!

Old No7
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
Finally decided to buy a 1862 Colt Police
Replies
17
Views
1K
Pancho
P
Z
  • Locked
Peacemaker Barrel Lengths?
Replies
9
Views
2K
J-Bar
J-Bar
A
  • Locked
I'm not familiar with some of these terms.
Replies
13
Views
979
AbitNutz
A
Z
  • Locked
Admirering a fine pair of .36's!
Replies
15
Views
1K
BHP FAN
B
R
  • Locked
Best balanced black powder revolver
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
paul harm
P
Back
Top