R&D Conversion cylinder doesn't fit.

[fistmil]

Purchased a R&D conversion cylinder for my Uberti "London" Navy. The cylinder rubs on the frame and will not slide completely onto the cylinder shaft. I read the instructions that came with the cylinder and it said some filing or altering the frame may be necessary for the cylinder to fit. Bull! I aint taking a file to perfectly good case hardened frame to make a so called "drop in cylinder" fit. I returned the cylinder for a full refund. Any one else have that problem?

[AtlLaw]

No experience with the conversions but really would like some info on them.  I was thinking of one each for my 36 & 44.

Thanks for your post!   

[bubba.50]

i put an r&d on the ruger old army i had. had to file just a few strokes on the front end-the little round part that sticks out on the front of it(the cylinder, not the gun). think they do this to allow for manufacturing tolerances. it worked fine but was kinda pain in the butt to reload. don't know if this helps or just confuses ya more. just my opinion and worth what you paid for it, bubba.

[Flint]

The conversion cylinders are in the same ballpark in diameter as the cap & ball cylinders, The Colt Navy by Uberti being about 1.534-1.535.  The conversion cylinders I have are 1.535-1.536.  All that I have, several, both R&D and Kirst fit without interference in Uberti Colts.  All bets are off if your 51 is a Pietta.

If your conversion cylinder is/was 1.535, then it's the revolver that is out of spec.  Check the diameter of your cap & ball cylinder, if it is 1.534-1.536, then the conversion cylinder was too large.  If it is smaller, then the gun is out of spec.

[fistmil]

The revolver is a Uberti, 1851 London Model Navy. I purchased it in 1980. I returned the conversion cylinder so I can't measure it. I will measure the original cylinder though. I am not sure what you mean by "out of specs". The gun shoots great and is very accurate. It still locks  up  tight at the full cock position with a very smooth action.  I appreciate your input , thanks.

[P.A. Myers]

I have five R&D cylinders, all worked without alteration. Two Old armys, two Uberti colts and a '58 Remington. I think I got lucky as Italian guns can vary a bit. Conversions are very handy and your R&D could have been sized. That would  then need to be blued unless you wanted to go 'natural'.

Compared to my Schofields the conversions are slow to reload. If I still had to front stuff, I doubt I would still be firing them. Gotten lazy, I suppose.   

[coyotejoe]

I have the R&D 5 shot .45 Colt conversion with the loading gate on the conversion ring on a Pietta 1860. I really like it and don't recall any special problems in fitting it up, but as others have mentioned, guns do vary, even modern ones.
OOPS,  My conversion is by Kirst, not R&D.

[greenrivers]

Yesterday I found and bought a 51 Navy made by Pietta with the intent of buying a conversion cylinder. Has anyone else had problems with installing them on this gun as well? I believe that the London version and the frame of mine are the same. Or am I wrong. Not withstanding minor tolerances of coarse.

[coyotejoe]

"Should" be the same. You'll need to run hollow based bullets in your .36 since the bore is .372-.375" and normal .38 caliber bullets are only .357-.358" diameter and would rattle down the oversize pipe with zero chance for accuracy. In theory the hollow base bullet will expand like a minie ball to seal the bore. The problem with that is that the front of the bullet will still be undersize, won't be centered in the bore and the bullet will wobble badly in flight.
 The .44's are a better choice for cartridge conversion since they have bores of .451-.454" and are thus a good fit for modern .45 caliber bullets.
 The Uberti factory made so-called "Richards/Mason conversions" have bores of the proper diameter for modern bullets.