TruthTellers
New member
Looking at getting one for a .32 conversion, but if the bore is oversize then I'm not going to bother with it.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
1863 Pietta groove diameter?
- Thread starter TruthTellers
- Start date
Jim Watson
New member
I don't know but I understand, I put a .38 conversion in a .36 Navy and eventually ended up having the barrel lined to .358" as a permanent cartridge gun.
TruthTellers
New member
You expect, but don't know. If we were speculating what ball size is required for use with the percussion cylinder is it would be a .310 or .315 because it's a .31, yet it is consistent that owners use a .323 ball.Since it's a .31 I would expect bore size to be .310.
With the being required, I don't want to speculate the bore to have .310 grooves.
You expect, but don't know. If we were speculating what ball size is required for use with the percussion cylinder is it would be a .310 or .315 because it's a .31, yet it is consistent that owners use a .323 ball.
With the being required, I don't want to speculate the bore to have .310 grooves.
.319-.323 will shave down to at least .310. A .32 S&W bullet is .312.
TruthTellers
New member
What if the bore is .314? How do I know that beforehand unless someone slugs it for me and responds to this topic?.319-.323 will shave down to at least .310. A .32 S&W bullet is .312.
What diameter was the .36 Navy bore ... before you had it relined to .358" ?I don't know but I understand, I put a .38 conversion in a .36 Navy and eventually ended up having the barrel lined to .358" as a permanent cartridge gun.
Gary
What if the bore is .314? How do I know that beforehand unless someone slugs it for me and responds to this topic?
Look it up.
Jim Watson
New member
What diameter was the .36 Navy bore ... before you had it relined to .358" ?
Gary
The bore miked .360". We didn't slug it to get the groove diameter but it was much larger, so large that a swaged hollow base wadcutter would not "Minie" to take the rifling reliably.
TruthTellers
New member
OP here. I shot some .45 Colt for the first time in years in a 5 inch Pietta '58 and am reminded of how much fun it is to play around with 19th Century revolvers. I didn't try to push the velocity with my handloads, even at 7.2 grains of Unique there's still a decent kick and it's accurate. Had to hold at 3 o'clock with the sights to hit, but that was part of the fun. Usually I hate fixed sights, but the Remington's are just fine.
So, having been reminded of how enjoyable percussion revolver conversions are I'm very seriously considering the 1863. I don't care for Colt's and all .36's have .375" bores, so converting to .38 is largely impractical, which really leaves .31's as my next option and with 1849 Colt's no longer having conversion cylinders made it means the 1863 is the only one left.
Besides the questions I asked before, I'd like to know just general thoughts on the '63 Pocket Remington, especially from anyone who has bought one the past 5 years. How's quality and do you think they're worth the $400 they cost now?
So, having been reminded of how enjoyable percussion revolver conversions are I'm very seriously considering the 1863. I don't care for Colt's and all .36's have .375" bores, so converting to .38 is largely impractical, which really leaves .31's as my next option and with 1849 Colt's no longer having conversion cylinders made it means the 1863 is the only one left.
Besides the questions I asked before, I'd like to know just general thoughts on the '63 Pocket Remington, especially from anyone who has bought one the past 5 years. How's quality and do you think they're worth the $400 they cost now?