cylinders not the correct length on some replicas 1851 vs. 1860

[CaptainCrossman]

ok here goes- I have an 1851 Navy and an 1860 Army- according to the historical information, the original Colt 1860 Army had a slightly longer cylinder than an 1851 Navy- and therefore the forcing cone on the 1860 barrel was shortened.

comparing my Armi San Paolo 1851 to the Pietta 1860, this is true- the 1860 has a longer cylinder, and shorter forcing cone on barrel, than the 1851

yet I have (2) spare 1860 Army 44 cal. rebated cylinders, for import replicas- that are the same length as the Navy cylinders. These are old cylinders, who knows what brand they are- they aren't original vintage Colts

problem- these cylinders won't work as "spares" on my 1860 Army, there is a huge gap about 1/8" between the cylinder and barrel forcing cone. They are also useless for the 1851 Navy, wrong caliber- although the length does match the Navy gun forcing cone and they mate up/revolve properly on that gun

the cylinders are too short- the only way they would work is if I had an 1851 Navy barrel, and it was bored out to .451" for 44 cal slugs. Then the forcing cone would be long enough to mate to these spare cylinders

has anyone else had this problem ?

these cylinders obviously came off of one of those 1851 Navy hybrids, that are 44 caliber- the historically inaccurate replicas. In their quest to cut costs, they must have been boring the Navy 36 barrels out to 44 caliber, and boring the Navy 36 cal. cylinders out to 44 caliber, to make cheap/quick 44's out of Navy 36 cal parts- instead of tooling up and making the proper length barrels/cylinders that were historically accurate

 

[D.Delozier]

I dont think they just bored out a 36 navy cylinder,as you said they are rebated this is so 6 44's will fit. You could'nt get 6 44's in a standard 36 cylinder.Also you'll notice on those 44 1851 copies the frame has a step cut in it to make room for the larger front part of the cylinder.

 

[williamfeldmann]

Yeah, I agree, those are properly made cylinders for a .44 if they are rebated.

My guess is that you have cylinders made for a 1851 .44.

 

[CaptainCrossman]

thanks for replies

yes, that's what I suspected- I realize the cylinders are rebated for a stepped frame- taking inventory last night, I now have 2 longer rebated cylinders, and 2 shorter rebated cylinders- all of them being 44. Of course, they won't interchange, because the shorter cylinders are about .125" to .130" shorter than the longer ones. So that leaves a big gap between cylinder and barrel, if the shorter cylinder is put in a true 1860 pattern gun.

the short cylinders must be 1851 44 cylinders, to match the long forcing cone on the 1851- for one of those historically inaccurate octagon barrel 44's

agreed- boring out the 36 cal cylinders won't work, not enough material thickness- but I have a notion they started with a large straight cylinder the size of an 1860 Army- then machined it down in the back to rebate it. Then, to make the Navy 36 cylinder, they used the same blanks, but machined it down the entire length of the cylinder. I doubt they had separate castings for the 36 and 44 cylinders- having worked in quite a few production facilities, the blanks would be the same size for both to save costs- just finish machined to different specs.

lesson learned- when looking for spare 44 Colt cylinders, measure the length closely, before buying I've basically got 2 spare paperweights here, unless I find one of those 1851 44 barrels to make these short 44 cylinders work on the Army frame.

 

[madcratebuilder]

The Italian manufacturers build a facsimile, not an exact copy, plus each company uses their own sizes for the various parts. It is normal for parts not to interchange between the same model from different companies. I have a 51 Navy by Uberti made in 68, it is slightly different from a 51 Navy by Uberti made in 98. Mixing and matching parts only works some of the time.

 

[williamfeldmann]

Another thought building off of madcratebuilder.

I used to own both a Pietta and a Uberti 1860 Colt. The parts for those wouldn't interchange easily either. It is possible you have two different makes of cylinders, even if you thought they were the same. Most people who don't shoot BP wouldn't have noticed the differences (for instance gun show folk who are trading.)

 

[enyaw]

It's always best to buy spare cylinders that are of the same manufacturer and model.
If the cylinders are all the same caliber and model.......If you really want to use the cylinders on the gun then set the barrel back for the smallest one and then mill the cylinders to fit that revamped gun. That way all three would fit.....thing is they all may not have chambers that align with the bore. What good would that be?

 

[ClemBert]

I can't account for differences between two revolvers separated by 30 years however I have read in a few places that Pietta tends to take a lot more liberties with their replicas than Uberti. From my understanding Uberti makes a near identical repro in all the flavors that are meant as copies of the original. If you have a Dixie Gunworks catalog you can see some of the spec on the firearms. You will see how the Pietta and the Uberti are very different in many dimensional areas. FWIW.....

 

[CaptainCrossman]

thanks all for replies, but I have to disagree with some of the logic- you'd be amazed at what matches up amongst makes and years. One really must try and see first, case by case. Allow me to digress:

My 1851 Navy 36 cal. brass frame 1980's vintage Euroarms Armi San Paolo- it broke the frame- in 1994 I bolted on a CVA Armi San Marco 1860 Army frame, it cinched right up and fixed the gun, with minor fitting. This year 2009, I cinched on a Uberti 38 Special cartridge cylinder and conversion hammer, again with minor fitting- and it's shooting just fine- frame-barrel-cylinder-cone lengths all matched up- and these parts spanned 25 years and 3 different Italian mfrs.

If I followed the "stick with same mfr." mindset, my Armi San Paolo gun would be scrapped now, because ASP is out of business, and the frame I put on was an ASM for an 1860 Army. The "oem approach" is a severe limitation to gunsmith projects with these pistols. It pays to mix/match and try, and be a scrounger to some extent, and learn in the process.

Actually the parts interchange between makes/models/years/mfrs. is a lot better than one would think, because for the most part the Italian mfrs. follow the basic Colt design specs.

Another example- I bought a Uberti cart. cylinder, it would work in my ASM 1861 Traditions 44, length was perfect, if gas ring was turned off/removed to actually fire it. But for length, the Uberti cyl. was actually a better fit front to back, than the original ASM cylinder.

What we have here is with these short 44 cyls. is a case of 1 or 2 mfrs. producing a historically inaccurate gun, by changing the physical dimensions of the major structural parts. They used Navy 36 barrels, and Army 44 cylinders, to make hybrid "1851 Navy 44 caliber" guns. They did this by boring the Navy octagon barrels to 44, and cutting 1/8" off the length of the Army cylinders- to match the long Navy forcing cone.

It appears to have been done to shave costs, or perhaps respond to higher market demand for 44 cal. guns, using available inventory parts, or clear idle inventory. Having worked in manufacturing/production for 10 years, I've seen this often- it's all too common, and easy to spot in a product. For instance all our front panels at one shop were the same core plate, but had different silk screenings on them, or a few more holes drilled in them.

Below is pics of the 2 variations of cone length, and 2 variations of cylinder length. The 3 shorter cylinders are all correct for Navy length, one is 36 cal, the other 2 are 44 cal rebated hybrids. To the far right in picture of 5 cylinders, is 2 longer rebated cylinders- they are true 44 cal. Army 1860, and the "correct" Colt spec for length.

barrels- the octagon Navy barrel is the correct caliber 36 w/long forcing cone, and the 2 other barrels are 44 cal. with short forcing cones- to match the longer Army cylinders.

The short rebated 44 cylinders, will only work with a long forcing cone Navy barrel in 44.

 

[CaptainCrossman]

here's what happens when the ASM barrel is put on an 1860 frame, with the hybrid short 44 cal rebated cylinder- there is a 1/8" gap between cylinder and barrel, too large a gap.

 

[CaptainCrossman]

so then try a long cone 36 caliber Navy barrel- it matches right up

problem, the cylinder is 44 cal, the barrel it 36 cal

you can see what they did, to use up spare parts in the factory

they took Navy barrels, bored them to 44, and used shortened rebated 44 cylinders, to make complete hybrid 44's

 

[CaptainCrossman]

one more- this is a new Pietta cylinder on a 1994 ASM frame, with ASM barrel- cinches right up, this would work- because in this case, both companies stayed true to the original Colt specs- the whole idea of a Colt, Remington, etc. was interchangeable parts within the gun design parameters- the guns should mix/match within patterns with minor fitting, like this

 

[CaptainCrossman]

now the last straw- the same ASM frame from the last 3 posts, with the original ASP barrel, and Uberti cylinder- cinches right up front to back, the frame-cylinder-barrel distance is dead nuts on, no gap. This is how it "should" be, if the companies just follow the Colt specs- this is (3) different company castings, spanning 25 years, that fit- year made should mean nothing, it was Colt's intention all parts must interchange within the pattern. The Italians should take heed. This mod was a proto requiring more work, i.e. turning down the cylinder, relieving frame, regrinding frame notches deeper, etc.- but this gun then shot a 3 shot group with all holes cutting into each other at 20 yards, then hit a tin can twice, and smashed a bottle at the same range- using only the front bead sight. I still have not put a back sight on it, just learned how the gun shoots using front bead. Loads are 125 grain round ball or 148 grain wadcutter w/5 grains Bullseye in 38 Special. No loading gate, the barrel removes easily to reload, just pull the wedge. Eventually I may grind a loading port into the frame. It's amazing it could be this accurate with this conglomeration of parts, but that's the truth. I fired 3 shots and thought I hit the target once with a keyholed wadcutter, then walked up and looked- all 3 shots were cut into each other in a triangle.

 

[crstrode]

Never thought I'd say this

Yup - I agree with Captain Crossman.

All manufacturers should make parts that are compatible with all others.

Ford parts should fit a Chevy

VW parts should fit on a Nash

White Castle square meat patties should fit on Jack in the Box mini-sirloin burger round buns.

 

[CaptainCrossman]

That's a bit of a stretch- you're on a of a fact finding bender there, and need to look some stuff up- your sarcasm underscores your ignorance of the subject.

It's called interchangeable parts.

GM used the same 4-barrel carburetor on all their cars from 1965 until 1981, a Quadrajet- it fit Cadillac, Buick, Chevy, Pontiac, Olds, GMC, with minor metering/jet changes. It came that way from the factory.

all the cars also shared the same distributor cap, points, condenser, spark plugs, rotor. All the starters were the same except for a quick change nose cone. Olds and Pontiac used the same bell housing. Buick, Olds, Pontiac all used the same automatic transmissions. Buick-Olds-Pontiac-Chevy all used the same manual tranmission. Buick-Olds-Pontiac-Chevy all used the same rear axles.

all master cylinders were identical on Buick-Olds-Pontiac-Chevy 1964-74 within body styles.

Buick-Olds-Pontiac-Chevy all used the same frames for mid-size A-bodies, and F-bodies, 1964-74. The frames were drilled for all available engine, Chevy-Buick-Olds-Pontiac, and would accept 4 different big blocks, and 4 different small blocks- all on the same frame.

Ford and GM used the same 3-speed manual transmissions in the 1960's, it was built by Ford, and sold to GM.

Ford used a GM Quadrajet on their 429 engine.

Chevrolet V-8 engines were used in GMC truck, Camaro, Pontiac Firebird, Chevy truck, Impala.

All the front windshields for GM A and F bodies interchanges, 1964-72, as well as the side glass and roof gutter trim.

all the automatic transmissions used the same torque converter housing

And this is just what I care to type in, off the top of my head. The actual interchange of parts is massive in scale, to the point that a cross over reference book has been printed for over 70 years now, just so people can look up and know what interchanges, it's called a Hollander Interchange Manual- that leads to the question, where have you been, and what is the level of your automotive technical experience ??? Why didn't you know this ?

http://hollanderinterchange.net/about.php

I've got a Degree in Automotive Technology, and worked in the drivetrain rebuilding business, with my own garage, for 12 years, until 1997. I've been building cars and engines since 1981. Guns are one of my other interests.

companies cut costs and standardize where they can- Colt did it, and so do the Italian replica mfrs.

likewise, most Colt 1851-60-61 parts interchange, all built on the same basic frame- and many Walker-Dragoon parts interchange, built on the same early large frame, and many pocket/police small frame Colt parts interchange. I've spoken to a guy who had a 5 shot Colt replica, he put a 6 shot cylinder on it from another Colt replica, and it worked perfectly and indexed with no other changes.

no one said a Colt part would fit a Remington, which is what your flame post insinuates

 

[CaptainCrossman]

http://www.vtigunparts.com/store/shopdisplayproducts.asp?id=15&cat=Uberti+1860+Army


look at the parts list, the same parts are listed with "1851-60-61" in brackets after the part description

many parts are the same within that medium frame family

every mfr. doesn't make the gun different ! The majority of the firearms follow the Colt pattern blueprint, from all the imports- because that's what the consumer is looking for.

it's common knowledge amongst gunsmiths, they've been mixing/matching Colt, replica, Ruger, etc. parts for decades now- on the same guns- when they do repairs.

many of the C/B parts are identical for the cartridge conversions as well

I believe you're hijacking this thread with a flame post, because you've got an axe to grind over the "brass frame" issue- judging by your other posts elsewhere, per below:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3460624#post3460624

crstrode
Junior Member
Join Date: 2008-08-14
Posts: 11
Colts Rule!
Congrats on you purchase - you made a good choice.
However, there were not nearly enough of the Colt shooters chiming in to counter them Remington boys!
I've got a bunch of the Colt type revolvers. Got two of them from Cabela's and I could not be happier.
I've also got one of the 1851 style Colts in 44 caliber with a brass frame. I've shot a load of balls through it with no signs of wear or looseness or any of the other hogwash that you'll read here and elsewhere.
Like others have said, one is not enough.
Be sure to get one of the Colt type revolvers so you can see why they were so popular - the Colts will serve you well.
If they were good enough for Wild Bill Hickok, they're good enough for me."


crstrode: Wild Bill used a real Colt w/steel frame made in USA- not a brass frame gun made in Italy, sold by Cabela's- there's a difference. If he had the choice and the price was the same, I'm sure WBH would prefer a steel frame too. He didnt' use the brass frame Confederate guns, which were available at that time.

 

[gmatov]

This is becoming boring. a person who identifies himself as an air rifle shooter digs at us for shooting REAL BP stuff, BUT with BRASS, that worst of all metals?

I give up on that part.

Cheers,

George

 

[gmatov]

CC,

"they've been mixing/matching Colt, replica, Ruger, etc. parts for decades now- on the same guns- when they do repairs."

Which Ruger and the like parts are the very BEST you can buy?

Your comment above says that ALL parts are within spec, else such as Ruger would NEVER buy them.

I do not think that a cylinder can be this or that length for a particular pistol.

Cheers,

George

 

[Gaucho Gringo]

CaptainCrossman the interchange of auto parts goes even deeper than that, different auto manufactures using the same parts that were not a part of the GM empire. My American Motors Built 1963 Rambler was built in Kenosha, WI. The V8 engine block was cast in a GM foundry, used a Delco-Remy starter, distributor, master cylinder, brake shoes and wheel cylinders. It used the same rear shock absorbers as 55-55 Chevrolet. It used the same automatic transmission that was used by Ford and Studebaker that was built by Borg Warner. You could go on and on about interchange parts in the auto industry. It is too bad it is not this way today, but since the 1970's over half the cost of a new car is meeting safety and emission standards. I drive a 1970 Plymouth Sport Fury with 98,000 miles and a 1972 Dodge 3\4 ton pickup with 132,000 miles and I feel safer driving them than any new car built in the last 30 years. These two vehicles will last me until I die or at least another 15 years of driving.

 

[Smokin_Gun]

The Shorter Cylinders are most likely Armisport, not to be cinfuesed with ArmsSport.
I have had one of them... I called it a .44 Scholfied C&B Cyl. had a long forcing cone.