Author Topic: Colt Dragoon Pistols (Read 3032 times)

brpc · « **on:** April 11, 2010, 12:58:21 PM »

Are there any significant differences between the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Dragoon models by Uberti? Any reason to choose one model over the other?

El Gringo · « **Reply #1 on:** April 11, 2010, 01:08:21 PM »

Not looking I'd have to guess to look at the triggerguard...square back vs round.
different cuts on the cylinder for the bolt lock up. And something else. (?)

I was comparing the three awhile back and decided on going with the 3rd model if I ever get one.

Fingers McGee · « **Reply #2 on:** April 11, 2010, 03:43:44 PM »

The third difference is the loading lever latch.

jlchucker · « **Reply #3 on:** April 12, 2010, 04:13:29 AM »

A number of years ago, EMF was advertising the 3d dragoon with a little 2-leaf rear sight mounted on the rear portion of the barrel. I ordered one, and got a gun that had a round trigger guard but no rear sight. I don't think Uberti was selling cap and ball revolvers then--late 1970's/early '80's. Various companies like EMF, Navy Arms, etc were marketing a full range of old Colt copies back then, and I had a couple of dragoon versions. Both were well made, but except for loading lever latches and trigger guards they all looked pretty much the same. I had a 2nd Dragoon and the previously mentioned 3d. Both shot high, and I had to have a new front sight made up by a local gunsmith and installed. These days, I expect that the Uberti guns shoot more to the point of aim.

Fingers McGee · « **Reply #4 on:** April 12, 2010, 07:44:26 AM »

Quote from: Jlchucker

I don't think Uberti was selling cap and ball revolvers then--late 1970's/early '80's.

Actually, Uberti has been in the replica business since 1959. I have, and have had, a number of Uberti replicas from the 70s and 80s (as well as 90s and 2000s).

Uberti made a line of stainless steel Colt style revolvers in the early 1980s that I am trying to gather as much info about as I can. Also looking to purchase examples of these stainless steel guns.

Quote from: Jlchucker

These days, I expect that the Uberti guns shoot more to the point of aim.

No, they still shoot high.
FM

bedbugbilly · « **Reply #5 on:** April 12, 2010, 01:43:14 PM »

As an ignorant individual on Dragoons - I've got a question. Is there a problem on the model without the loading lever latch (1st model?) with the loading lever droppingdown when you fire it? (Or am I thinking of a different model that didn't have the loading lever catch?). I've never handled one and I am a "Navy" shooter (.36) but I have to admit, the Dragoons look like they'd be a lot of fun. Thanks for answering a "Dragoon illiterate's" question!

Fingers McGee · « **Reply #6 on:** April 12, 2010, 03:18:42 PM »

BBB, I believe you're thinking of the Walker. It didn't have a loading lever latch like the Dragoons and later Army & Navy pistols. Instead, it had a piece of iron with a nub on the end of it that hund down below the barrel and was was suppoded to hold the lever up. Usually, the nub doesn't engage the flat on the lever enough, and the lever falls. Filing the lever and nub so there is a more positive mating, and bending the arm that hangs down below the barrel usually solves the falling lever syndrome.

I also understand that a bread bag tie workes well too

FM

bedbugbilly · « **Reply #7 on:** April 12, 2010, 05:20:02 PM »

Fingers - many thanks. I was confusing the Walker with the Dragoons and the Walker was the one I was thinking of with the troublesome loading leaver. After reading your reply, I took a quick tour of Uberti's site and took a gander at the Walker and the 3 different Dragoon models. I'm hooked on .36 but maybe someday I'll have to graduate to where the big boys play and get a .44. The only problem is, just like my "hang up" on Navies, I'd probably want all of the three models of the Dragoons . . . . . what can I say? They sure are pretty! Many thanks for the info - I greatly appreciate it!

AtlLaw · « **Reply #8 on:** April 13, 2010, 06:29:34 AM »

I've got a Navy and an Army and I just sent off for a 3^rd Model Dragoon. I love the Navy and the Army's pretty good, but I just HAD to see what the Dragoon was like to shoot!

His lordship. · « **Reply #9 on:** April 14, 2010, 11:41:32 AM »

When I had my Walker I shot mild loads and the loading lever would stay put, but tying it up for the big blast loads should work. I think the 3rd model has the more modern cylinder slots over the square type on the earlier guns. I too am thinking of getting the Uberti 3rd model, never had one before but have picked one up for inspection at the local gun show, it is a heavy gun.

StrawHat · « **Reply #10 on:** April 15, 2010, 01:47:55 AM »

Going from memory,

The Walker, Whitneyville Dragoon and 1st Model Dragoon had oval bolt cuts. The 2nd and 3rd have the square cuts.

The guards are different but I don't recall which guard was on what revolver. My 2nd Dragoon has square bolt cut and square guard.

This is what my Italian replicas are like, it may or may not resemble how they came from Colts in the 19th century.

trainsteeter · « **Reply #11 on:** May 17, 2010, 04:40:26 PM »

I purchased a third model dragoon from colt in 1976 and did some research on it and found that it has features of first, second, and third models. Now don't think I have any proof of this but I really think Uberti is the company that built the reissue colts. It has been a few years since I researched it but think the cut out in the barrel, the loading lever latch, maybe trigger guard are mixed. The first model has some internal difference (more like the walker) in the orig. third model the barrel cut out is larger. It is a great gun to shoot, I enjoy it much more than the walker, the walker does'nt balance well. The dragoon weighs about five lbs loaded, and is fun to shoot at longer ranges.

AtlLaw · « **Reply #12 on:** May 17, 2010, 04:46:05 PM »

Quote from: trainsteeter on May 17, 2010, 04:40:26 PM

The dragoon weighs about five lbs loaded, and is fun to shoot at longer ranges.

I haven't had a chance to shoot mine yet, but I can't wait!

One thing for sure, handling a Dragoon makes an 1860 Army feel posatively TINY!

StrawHat · « **Reply #13 on:** May 18, 2010, 03:36:49 AM »

Quote from: AtlLaw on May 17, 2010, 04:46:05 PM

I haven't had a chance to shoot mine yet, but I can't wait! One thing for sure, handling a Dragoon makes an 1860 Army feel posatively TINY!

That's true, but wait till you fire the Dragoon and then grab a Baby Dragoon or one of the other Pocket Models!

Somewhere I have a photo of my Walker snub, my 1860 snub and my Pocket Police. If anyone is interested, I'll post it.

Oldwolf · « **Reply #14 on:** May 18, 2010, 09:10:10 AM »

I have a Whitneyville ("Transitional Walker") Dragoon.

As far as I can tell, it is the same as the 1st Model except that the backstrap is steel.

AtlLaw · « **Reply #15 on:** May 18, 2010, 09:14:11 AM »

Immagonna carry mine with me deer hunting this year, just in case!

StrawHat · « **Reply #16 on:** May 19, 2010, 03:03:01 AM »

Quote from: Oldwolf on May 18, 2010, 09:10:10 AM

I have a Whitneyville ("Transitional Walker") Dragoon.

As far as I can tell, it is the same as the 1st Model except that the backstrap is steel.

Oldwolf,

Maybe I am not reading your post corrrectly but the transitional model used the frame of the Walker with the cylinder and barrel of the Dragoons. The backstrap is steel but the grip shape is different also. As is the back end of the frame.

Oldwolf · « **Reply #17 on:** May 19, 2010, 04:41:24 AM »

StrawHat - Maybe you can teach me something. You might be right, it does look like the grip frame shape is different on my Whitneyville and a 1st model. Except for that and the steel back strap, I don't see any other difference.

Am I missing something?

Uberti Walker

Uberti Whitneyville

Uberti 1st Model

madcratebuilder · « **Reply #18 on:** May 27, 2010, 08:13:08 AM »

Quote from: Oldwolf on May 19, 2010, 04:41:24 AM

StrawHat - Maybe you can teach me something. You might be right, it does look like the grip frame shape is different on my Whitneyville and a 1st model. Except for that and the steel back strap, I don't see any other difference.

Am I missing something?

Uberti Walker

Uberti Whitneyville

Uberti 1st Model

You got it, the Whitneyville Dragoon used up the last 100 or so Walker frames.

Flint · « **Reply #19 on:** May 28, 2010, 12:09:44 PM »

Open up the gripframe and you will see that both the Walker and the Whitneville have the folded mainspring. The 1st-3rd Model Dragoons have screw mounted flat mainsprings.

The rectangular locking bolt is a better device than the oval, notice how Colt changed, and about every revolver you can find has a rectangular bolt and notch. For fast shooting (if that's possible with a Dragoon) the rectagular bolt would be preferred. The oval bolt head and notch are more prone to overtravel when cocked fast.

For shooting the 3rd Model Dragoon, for fun and plinking, the earlier versions.

Oldwolf · « **Reply #20 on:** May 28, 2010, 03:18:11 PM »

Plus, milling an oval is harder than a rectangular slot.

Flint · « **Reply #21 on:** May 28, 2010, 05:09:29 PM »

Considering what Oldwolf said, yes it is easier. The oval slot has to be milled with an endmill and walked for its length. The rectangular slot is cut with a Woodruff Key cutter, a simple easy cut. The bolt head as well is easier to shape than the oval one.