Brass Pietta 1851 using conversion cylinder with reduced load 45LC

G

georgiacatweazle

New member
Need some advice about conversion cylinders. I've heard that using conversions for brass frames are bad due to increased power of 45LC.
But what about if you handload 45LC to the same foot pounds as black powder ? You get the benefit of less mess.

Not sure what the ft/lb of energy would be of 15gr of BP ? 150 maybe ?
45LC average is 400 ft/lb using 40-50 gr of modern powder, so a light load of 10-15 grains and a lighter cast bullet around 150 grains like the .454 ball

The way i see it, if propellant A has the same forces as propellant method B, then it's apples to apples.

I know some folks would say "get a Ruger X model in 45LC" or "get a steel frame Y pistol", yep, but I also don't have an unlimited budget, got the Pietta as an entry level pistol for $149 and want to get as much mileage out of it as I can, that includes maybe using my soon-to-be-purchased entry level Lee press kit which I could maybe experiment with custom 45LC.

Any one have any opinions ?

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • pietta-1851-post-picture.jpg
    pietta-1851-post-picture.jpg
    78.9 KB · Views: 61
Randy Clark offers a 160 grain .45 Colt bullet: http://www.shop.clarksbullets.com/45-Colt-160-gr-45160.htm

A friend of mine used the 160 with Trail Boss powder before he switched over to using black powder cartridges. I have heard other shooters say that Red Dot works well with the 160s. Hodgdon and Alliant have cowboy action load data available.

Some folks use a shorter case, either a .45 Schofield or a .45 Cowboy Special, for light .45 Colt revolver loads but the brass may be harder to find than standard .45 Colt cases.
 
brass frame in a no no and you should use black powder loads with steel frame conversions either way it's your money and your fingers
 
I shoot my brass '51 conversion with reduced loads of Trail Boss powder. I don't know what my fingers have to do with it, worse that can happen is a loose arbor if you use max loads all the time. That goes for black or smokeless. (keep in mind, a pistol with a loose arbor is a wall hanger.)

The real problem with the brass frame is the depth of the channel that has to be cut for accommodating the loading gate of a Kirst cylinder. The bottom of the channel is VERY close to the arbor and if you cut too deep the arbor will eventually push its way through the channel. Brass is much softer than steel and the margin for error is very close. If you use an R&D conversion cylinder, there is no need to cut the channel. You really don't need to cut the channel with the Kirst either, but why pay more if you don't use the loading gate.

Don’t expect anybody to cut this channel in a brass frame for you. If you want to convert a brass 1851, you need to do it yourself and be conscious of the consequences. It is true brass frames will not hold up as well as a steel frame. With proper loads nothing catastrophic will happen, but over time the pounding will takes its toll.

If you can live with pulling off the barrel every time you reload, an uncut brass frame will be happier. I can't live with pulling off the barrel, so I cut the channel very carefully and use reduced loads.

I will coincide that the steel 1851 is really the way to go and not worry. I have both, however, I love the look of the brass and that is my go to pistol. My steel ’51 gets used a lot more and the brass is my “Sunday go to Shooting” gun!
 
worse that can happen is a loose arbor if you use max loads all the time. That goes for black or smokeless.
Click to expand...

That's not true. A cartridge recoil has different effects than a c&b cylinder so a loose arbor may be an early sign. The c&b exerts all the rearward force on the entire cylinder and the first sign will be an impression of the cylinder ratchet in the recoil shield. A cartridge exerts most of the rearward pressure on the cartridge case which slams back into the top part of the recoil shield. I would think that with cartridges the Colt style frame would start to stretch before any other signs were noticed but I have no personal experience with that. I do have personal experience with a c&b cylinder and a brass frame.
 
@TemboTusk

I was thinking about getting one of the non-kirst i.e. Howells.
that requires no mods, just a drop in.
so in effect i'll just need to use the reduced powder charge to match the energy of the C&B load.
 
Quote:
((worse that can happen is a loose arbor if you use max loads all the time. That goes for black or smokeless.))

[That's not true. A cartridge recoil has different effects than a c&b cylinder so a loose arbor may be an early sign. The c&b exerts all the rearward force on the entire cylinder and the first sign will be an impression of the cylinder ratchet in the recoil shield. A cartridge exerts most of the rearward pressure on the cartridge case which slams back into the top part of the recoil shield. I would think that with cartridges the Colt style frame would start to stretch before any other signs were noticed but I have no personal experience with that. I do have personal experience with a c&b cylinder and a brass frame.]
Click to expand...


I took a closer look at the Kirst cylinder and found the shell hits the loading gate ring which spreads the impact to a much larger area of the recoil shield. The ring is an almost a quarter inch thick piece of steel and covers the entire recoil shield.

I think we use the term "stretch" of the frame a bit loosely. The frame itself might not stretch, but the slamming of the c&b cylinder into the recoil shield may cause the cylinder/barrel tolerance to increase.

The loosening of the arbor in my opinion is far worse. To me a loose arbor is gun that is no longer safe to shoot. Again, the worse thing to happen is the barrel might fly off with the arbor in tow. I also think you would notice well before that the arbor was loose. (Best not to be in front of the gun when shooting.)

I agree with all who say you should not convert a brass 1851 pistol. A more in-depth reason why not to do the conversion would be helpful. Hand ringing is not a good enough reason to not try. However, explaining about the loosening of the arbor because of the channel cutting is valid, even the impact of the cylinder causing the a change in tolerances is a good reason not to do the conversion.

Careful channel cutting and light loads may increase the chances of success, but in the end a brass frame is a poor choose for this procedure. That being said, I love my brass converted 1851!

And to be upfront; I did shoot my first brass conversion’s arbor loose. I am more careful now how I shoot the second one.
 
@TemboTusk

Not sure what an "arbor" is. but does that apply to just a kirst conversion ?
i think those ones have the loading gate ? those i probably wouldnt mess with.
 
It sounds like a mess to me. My thoughts are wait and buy a steel frame revolver. The folks that sell these things recommend steel for a reason.
 
And, for less than the cost of a Howell's conversion, you can get a new pietta steel frame revolver... Just sayin' ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top