Ruger old Army

One of the reasons Ruger made the ROA a true .45 is so a conversion cylinder could be put in to shoot long Colts.
Click to expand...
and
If a pistol can use a conversion cylinder that will shoot a .45 Long Colt is it a .44 or .45?
Click to expand...
All of them, with a conversion cylinder, can shoot .45 Colt. They (Pietta, Uberti, and even the ROA) are technically .45's whether shooting .451 round ball or .452 cartridges because the barrel groove diameters are at or greater than .450 and less than .460. Pietta and Uberti (perhaps others as well) undersize the c&b cylinder chambers by a couple thousandths or so, and I guess Ruger does not. The chamber mouth diameter of the Kirst and R&D/Taylors/Howell's conversion cylinders are all greater than .450 so more closely match the pistol barrel groove diameters. The Pietta and Uberti "replica" revolvers are replicas of .44 caliber c&b guns, and back in original time period the measure of a barrel diameter was made between the lands (.44x) versus the grooves (.45x). Since the ROA is not a replica, there is no reason to use the old way and call it a .44 cal. AFAIK, none of the replica or ROA revolvers were made to insert a conversion cylinder, or specifically designed to do so as you suggested, but they should all have the same advantage when inserting a .45 Colt conversion cylinder. Rather than skirting around the issue by asking a question, please explain what YOU think is a "true .45".
 
Last edited:
So, we have established the fact that if something will shoot a 45 long colt then it is a 45 not a 44. That's all I was trying to say. Why argue about it? Case closed.
 
Ah ok. I just didn't know what you meant by a true .45, and I thought you meant that Ruger made a true .45 and the Italian replica makers didn't. My confusion was because there is no such thing as a "true .45", and I knew all the makers were using .45x bore sizes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top