Author Topic: Colt Open Tops (Read 2308 times)

greenrivers · « **on:** December 14, 2011, 07:37:47 AM »

While picking up another revolver last week an open top Colt clone made it very clear that it was coming home with me. Not being one to cause undo stress, I agreed that the price was very reasonable and that it should. I have always had a soft spot for these graceful looking revolvers, and as I lost my .38 Special in another trade, felt that this would do justice to that gap. Just wondering if there is a following out there for these revolvers and how well they are liked? At the moment, all I know is that this one is a Navy Arms and looks to be in nice shape.

44 Man · « **Reply #1 on:** December 14, 2011, 03:04:11 PM »

I agree with you, those are beautiful revolvers! I have often thought I would enjoy owning and shooting one of those, but other priorities have intervened. Let us know how you like it (and how big the grin is when you shoot it!) Enjoy! You may just get me enthused enough that one of those will move closer to the top of my list. 44 Man

greenrivers · « **Reply #2 on:** December 15, 2011, 01:40:59 AM »

Thanks 44Man, I will post results and pictures soon. Too bad that the funds for the important things have to take a back seat. I definatly understand that! But you can be asured that I will do my best to help you decide in favor of one. What else can friends do? A while back someone posted a picture of one on here and that is what brought it back to mind for me. I need to thank that guy.

pistoleer44 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 19, 2011, 03:14:04 PM »

I own one that was originally chambered in 44 Colt but someone swapped out the cylinder for a 44 special. I love it but thye one I love even more is the 1860 Army, RM conversion in 44 Colt.

Both are great revolvers

AtlLaw · « **Reply #4 on:** December 20, 2011, 09:13:41 AM »

Can't wait for the pictures! I wore out the Uberti site lookinh at theirs!

A short barreled old model '72 flat top in 38 Spl! YUM!!!

greenrivers · « **Reply #5 on:** December 21, 2011, 01:05:22 AM »

Yesterday seemed like a good day to get out, so it came home with me. I have a pretty good stash of ammo left from the Lightning I traded off so it will get shot today. The finish and fit on this Navy Arms is really nice with a high polish finish. The CCH on the receiver is somewhat dulled but still clear. It appears that it was never holstered as no bluing wear shows where it would typically be. As I am not looking for it to be a tack driver, it will have a long, long visit. It is just plain nice to look at. It looks like rain this afternoon, so this morning it and the 7.3 grain load of Unique that was suggested to me for the Colt are headed for the test range. I have the owners manual and camera out for later. Can't say I am looking forward to that though. Old dogs?

greenrivers · « **Reply #6 on:** December 21, 2011, 04:51:31 AM »

Just back from a little informal shooting with the open top. This gun is really fun and means business! Just off hand shooting at twenty five yards, but it kept them all on the paper. It handles like it looks. The rain was beginning to hit the target on top of my head before I left, but I fired twenty five rounds through it and wished I had brought more. I also brought the Colt SAA and the loads recomended. I had loads of 7, 7.1 and 7.3 grains of Unique under the 245 gr. cast. No question that the 7.3 is the load for this revolver. Now down to that camera manual.

44 Man · « **Reply #7 on:** December 21, 2011, 02:46:46 PM »

Glad that load worked for you. I have to say I enjoy a gun with a pristeen finish as much as the next guy, but I also enjoy and respect a gun that shows a great deal of holster wear. It shows the gun was enjoyed and carried a lot. I wish when Ken shortened the barrel on my Colt he had not refinished it at the same time. No, not worried about collectors, but it did have a good start at some holster wear on it. Thought about taking a little polish to it and putting the holster wear back on, but that would be dishonest, got to just get it the hard way.
Here's a pic of my old Hy Hunter 44. This one has spent a lot of time on Bobby's hip. He practally lived in the woods. I would hope that someday my Colt could show holster wear like this.

coyotejoe · « **Reply #8 on:** December 25, 2011, 09:14:01 AM »

Greenrivers, who made your open top? Which model, 1851, 1860 or 1861 or the 1872? Uberti has been making them for quite a while but before that Navy Arms marketed some made by Armi SanMarco. The ASM guns were actually closer in size to the original Colts but they only chambered them in .38 special, whereas the Uberti's are a larger gun, large enough for .45 Colt. There were lots of problems with the ASM guns, I really wanted one and tried three before I gave up on them. On the other hand I had two Uberti's, an 1872 opentop and a Richards/Mason 1860 conversion, both in .44 Colt and both were good shooters but just enough larger than the originals to spoil the lines for me. Soooo- I got a Kirst Konverter for my Pieta 1860. Shooting light bullets, 180 grains or so, it shoots pretty close to the sights I had zeroed for the roundballs from the percussion cylinder. The common 250 grain .45 Colt loads shoot excessively high.

StrawHat · « **Reply #9 on:** December 26, 2011, 01:32:05 AM »

Well, not an Open Top, at least not an Model 1872, but I enjoy my ASM Richards conversion of the 1860. ASM for all thier faults, made decent replicas but not perfect ones. Mine is chambered for the 44 Colt and I like it.

I use a 200 grain RNFP over a charge of black powder. Not an earth shattering load but a fun one to shoot.

coyotejoe · « **Reply #10 on:** December 30, 2011, 09:46:33 AM »

Great that you got a good one and .44 Colt, I wanted a .44 but gave up on ASM after three poor examples in .38 special. First was a Navy Arms brand, very nice looking and about the slickest out of the box action I've ever handled. But accuracy was poor due to chamber throats which measured .363". Then I tried two Traditions brand and they were not nearly as well finished as the Navy Arms, one would not work at all and the other had the base pin hole bored crooked, not parallel to the barrel, so that the barrel pointed noticeably left of the frame and cylinder. It grouped pretty good but nearly three feet left at 25 yards. LOL

StrawHat · « **Reply #11 on:** December 31, 2011, 01:07:20 AM »

Quote from: coyotejoe on December 30, 2011, 09:46:33 AM

...Great that you got a good one and .44 Colt...

It did not start out as a good one! The trigger pull was probably 3 or 4 ounces, much less than I like on a handgun. All the internals were soft so I replaced them with other brands that I could harden. Even the hammer was soft enough to be useless within one year. I reworked an 1860 hammer and made sure the notches were hardened. I like the looks of this one, even if it is a little different from the originals. I may have to find a second one but other projects are ahead of that search!

greenrivers · « **Reply #12 on:** January 01, 2012, 02:12:19 AM »

It looks like I got really lucky for a change. Mine is the .38 Special and does shoot to p.o.a.. Though it shows little holster ware, when torn down for cleaning the ware is obvious. It was made by Navy Arms and looks just like yours TopHat. I thought that all of the conversions were considered to be "open tops"? We took it with us for a second time Friday, and my daughter not only loved it, but did very well shooting it. But she also did well with the .44 mag.. I believe that the internals in this one are soft as well. The trigger pull is no more than two lbs. but does not push off, and breaks clean. I too will be looking for internals to harden and replace as this is not only a good shooter, but just plain has a lot of nostalgia and eye apeal for me. I did get the camera going and downloaded to the host sight used by the forum, but can not for the life of me see how to transfer them here. I will as of the first of the week with help. Only three pics at a time can be stored by them?

coyotejoe · « **Reply #13 on:** January 01, 2012, 05:03:30 AM »

Glad to hear you have a couple of good shooters, daughter and revolver.

Navy Arms doesn't actually make guns, they are just an importer like Cabelas. The term "open top" is used generically. All Colt percussion revolvers and cartridge conversions of those revolvers are "open top", but there also is one specific Colt model, the 1871/72 Open Top which is not a conversion but was designed and built specifically as a breechloader for metallic cartridges. The original 71/72 open top was chambered for .44 Henry rimfire but since that ammo is pretty scarce these days the Uberti replica is chambered for .38 special, .44 Colt, .44 special and .45 Colt. The 1860 Army model cap & ball revolver wasn't large enough to hold 6 rounds of .45 Colt ammo, the .44 Colt was developed expressly for those conversions. So the Uberti replicas of conversion revolvers are built on the larger 71/72 open top frame. Colt also built an open top .22 rimfire revolver, cute little thing.
If you're interested in these guns I recommend Mike Venturino's books "Shooting Colt Single Action Revolvers" and "Shooting Six Guns of the Old West", especially the "Six Guns" book as it isn't limited to Colt. He gives a good bit of the history of the guns and data for reloading them with both black and smokeless powders.

AtlLaw · « **Reply #14 on:** January 01, 2012, 05:10:42 AM »

Hey Joe, do you know if the 38 spl. '51 "conversion" model is made on the Navy frame or the larger open top frame?

coyotejoe · « **Reply #15 on:** January 01, 2012, 06:00:00 AM »

No, I really don't Richard, nor do I know who could tell you. I know the ASM gus were built on the same frame as the cap & ball revolvers but as you've seen here, those ASM guns had a lot of problems.

greenrivers · « **Reply #16 on:** January 02, 2012, 12:27:50 AM »

Sounds like I had better get the book and catch up a bit. This forum opens up a whole new horizon of interests and knowledge. I would really like to have one of the .22 conversions, but it sounds like lightning striking twice is unlikely. I have never seen one even offered for sale, but feel very fortunate to have the one I now have and in the caliber that I wanted. Now if I can find a good deal on a Hornet barrel in carbine length for the T/C............This addiction will never end! I hope.

coyotejoe · « **Reply #17 on:** January 02, 2012, 04:34:27 AM »

They are interesting. When Colt began converting the C&B revolvers to cartridge they had to design the cartridges themselves. Thus we got the .32 Colt, .38 Colt and .44 Colt cartridges, all originally using the heeled bullet design wherein the forward part of the bullet was sized to fit the bore of the C&B revolver with the outside diameter of the case being the same as the bullet diameter with just a short heel at the rear of the bullet being reduced to fit inside the case. That's the way .22 rimfires are still made today.
The Colt .22 opentop was not a cartridge conversion but was designed and built for the .22 short cartridge, it was a tiny little pocket gun which only weighed about 8 ounces. My dad had one many years ago and I shot it a few times but it was basically a useless little gun. Here's a link to some photos of the .22 opentop.
http://www.gunvaluesboard.com/i-have-a-colt-open-top-pocket-pistol-.22-cal.-7-shot-with...-10485930.html

And here's a link to Mike Venturino's books. I highly recommend him because he is one of the very few gun writers who doesn't just repeat what he's read or heard but speaks from actual experience of casting bullets, loading cartridges and shooting them in original historic firearms and his books are not expensive.
http://www.mlventerprises.com/

painted horse · « **Reply #18 on:** January 02, 2012, 07:22:07 AM »

I bought a Cimmeron 1872 44colt a few years back. Like the OP, I saw it in the gun store and it just kept saying, "pick me, pick me," so I did. First I'll say it is very nicely done (pretty typical for Cimmeron in my experience) case color finish, nice blueing, stocks with a good finish and fit very well. All in all, nice gun..the ONLY problem was the timing, the cyl didn't match up with the loading gate. Called Cimmeron, (nice folks) and they said send it in, and while discussing the gun in general as to being a 44 colt, he said it should also chamber 44sp. I told him it would'nt, he said we'll fix that also. I now have a 1872 open top in 44sp. It is also surprizingly accurate and a pleasure to shoot. I've been using 205gr. LRNFP with bullseye powder. My only "druther" would have been maybe the 7 1/2in instead of the 5 1/2. I'll also add that this "style" seems to fit my hand better than the SAA type, they just feel "right". Good luck with yours.....I sure like mine.

rbertalotto · « **Reply #19 on:** January 27, 2012, 01:09:12 PM »

I just finished converting a set of Cap and Ball to cartridge.
Pietta 1860 Colts to 45LC. I'll be shooting Cowboy45 Special brass with 170g Big Lube 45SLIM bullets. There ain't nothing like the 1860 Army in the hand.....

greenrivers · « **Reply #20 on:** January 28, 2012, 03:43:59 AM »

Painted horse, I have to agree about the hand fit. I believe that it is why I took to the 51 Navy. The length and angle of the grip is very "natural". I will not be giving up my Colt SAA soon, but see the Slim Jim holtster getting used a lot more. The little .38 special seems to have the same effect as a .22, it makes most folks a better shot and that includes me. Plus being very fragile in the powder and lead department. Daughter just got back from college with her degree in Environmental Sciences and already has moved my 10/22 from my place to hers. I can see a tussle coming over the .38, and at 120lbs, she is tuff!
rbertalotto, I would just like to offer my service as a storage facility for those two Pietta's. There seems to be just enough room in the safe!

painted horse · « **Reply #21 on:** January 28, 2012, 03:37:59 PM »

Rbertalotto, how do you go about converting over to cartridge and if you don't mind my asking, what kind of cost is involved? I have a couple 44 cap and ball revolvers that get very little use, (to darn much work) and I must say your's are very, very nice. I could see doing that myself....