open top vs SAA

[Newly]

  this has probably been asked time and time again, unfortunately I cannot find it.  I see so many people shooting SAA's, are the Open Tops and Richard Mason Conversions any slower in shooting than the SAA's.  I don't see very many Winners in local clubs that are shooting open tops in categories like Duelist, Classic Cowboy, etc., mostly they are in the "Dark Side" categories.  Don't get me wrong, I would like to try the Dark Side but I don't have much time for cleaning and my wife, well thats another story, suffice to say I might have to sleep outside for a couple of days even if I do take a bath.  Thanks in advance to all those who answer,  I am seriously toying with the idea of buying a pair of Cimarron Richard Masons soon

Newly

[Tuolumne Lawman]

I think it is that the 1873s are so much more prevailent and more numerous.  I have seen a guy with 38 Open tops shoot as fast as any with the SAA.  They just give you more style points with the open tops and conversions.  I shoot an open top and a Remington cartridge conversion.  Everyone is always wanting to handle them at the matches.

[Coffinmaker]

Interesting Premis.  I think it's numbers and misconception.  THE most popular and common handgun in SASS and CAS is the SAA reproduction and the SAA itself.  They were firstest and mostest, closly followed by Rugers (old and new), then the less common and unique examples of "lesser" guns.  There has also been a misconcedption that the Open Top and the Conversions were fragile and broke alot.  For the early examples, this was true.  Not so now.  The buggs are out of the guns with the exception of firing pins on the Open Top and the new ones are better.  Armi San Marco went bust so the pure junk is gone.
The lock works on an Open Top or Convrsion are the same as the lockworks of the SAA copies.  Properly timed and with the right springs, they will run just as fast as any SAA or SAA copy.  Understanding, the guns shot by the top 10 percent of shoters have additional modifications to the lockworks to enable the gun to take the beating.  NO stock SAA or SAA copy will take the beating dished out by the "top guns."  An Open Top in .45 Schofield won't, even with most of the mods.  The locking bolt slots in the cylinder are too shallow.  The rest of the Open Top calibers are fine.
There is no doubt the SAA frame is stronger but for the purpose we use our guns, so what??  The vast majority of CAS shooters would find the Open Tops and Conversions hard to beat.

Coffinmaker

[Advertising]

[Newly]

thank you, everyone for the info, I love the open tops and hope to get a pair come Mule Camp this year.   

[Maverick3855]

Interesting Premis.   Armi San Marco went bust so the pure junk is gone.
Coffinmaker

I'm curious what was wrong with San Marco's?
I have two.
One has about 6000 rounds through it and the other only about 500 but I haven't owned it very long.
The only problem I have had was the barrel wedge needed replaced because it was getting worn but I understand that is common with all Richards type conversions.
The actions on both revolvers are smooth as butter.
I Love em!

[Dusty Morningwood]

I had (briefly) a used ASM 1860 Richards conversion.  Was a very pretty revolver, but you literally could not hit the broad side of a barn with the thing.  Pressured the shop to take it back and bought a Uberti OT in .45 Schofield.  No problems there.  I think the ASM guns were just rushed into production with the expected results of such a policy.

[Maverick3855]

I had (briefly) a used ASM 1860 Richards conversion.  Was a very pretty revolver, but you literally could not hit the broad side of a barn with the thing.  Pressured the shop to take it back and bought a Uberti OT in .45 Schofield.  No problems there.  I think the ASM guns were just rushed into production with the expected results of such a policy.

You guy's have me scared.
My ASM conversions shoot better than I do.
I have 5 Uberti SAA's and the ASM RM's are as accurate as most of them and moreso than my 357 Uberti.
I have a Cimmaron Lightning that I can't hit the broad side of a barn with however (It needs a new home).
I started with one ASM RM and was so pleased I snatched up the next one I stumbled on.
They both have been great pistols.
I have went over them six ways from sunday looking for problems since reading this post and just cant't find any problems.
I still get worried when I hear them referred to as junk though.
I will be expecting them to blow to pieces when I shoot them from now on.
If anyone can buy a pig in a poke it's me.
I was tickled to death with these guns till now.

[Major 2]

Stay tickled to death.... if you have a good one, and there were good ones ....

ASM did make some early guns with less than desirable fit & finish ( the reason was not ability, it was economics )
Companies like Traditions one of the early importers demanded ASM hold to a price....
Seems the importer wanted profits over customer satisfaction.
Navy Arms also offered these guns and took the brunt of Customer dis- satisfaction, along with EMF and Cimarron.
The three latter importers demanded the guns quality be improved and the price was adjusted for the extra time taken by ASM.
Now there is/was the rub, customer liked the price of the early guns but didn't like the cost increase.
Sales dropped then
Cimarron opted out followed by EMF & Navy , and ASM shelved the  manufacture of the guns all together.

I have one and it may be the slickest action I have , and accurate at 10yds to 1" POA....
It actually is a bit better than my USPFA Type I prototype.

[Tuolumne Lawman]

I had a pair of ASM 1860 Conversions.  They were awesome!  In fact, I wish I still had them!  Mine shot better than I did, and indexed perfectly.  I sold them  to get a pair of Cimarron R-Ms in 44 Colt instead.  They were great, but wish I had kept the ASMs.  They looked cooler.

My Pard had one, though, (an1851) and it wasn't worth squat!  Didn't index, couldn't hit a horse stanfding at its rump, and ejector assembly broke.  I think he used it for a trolling line weight.

[Major 2]

I concur TL, of the ASM 51's Conversions most if not all I've seen, seemed rushed together, of those most were Traditions imported.

Of the ASM 1860 Conversions ( your two as you stated, WT's of this BB,  another friend's who is a collector & mine ) I know of, all were very nice....


 

[Maverick3855]

I concur TL, of the ASM 51's Conversions most if not all I've seen, seemed rushed together, of those most were Traditions imported.

Of the ASM 1860 Conversions ( your two as you stated, WT's of this BB,  another friend's who is a collector & mine ) I know of, all were very nice....


 

Both of mine are the 1860 model as well.
The actions are smooth as butter and have been very good pistols.
I am in the process of putting an antique finish on them as I type this.
They were actually a bit TOO pretty for my taste.

[Coffinmaker]

Maverick,
Well, since I sorta started the ASM bash, I'll try to explain it a little better.  ASM brought out the Richards type 1 1860, type 1 1861 Navy and 1851 Navy.  The guns were gorgeous!!!  The only problem was only about one in 7 produced actually worked.  There were guns that worked and worked well.  If you have a set that work, hang on to 'em.  Shoot 'em.  Of all the handguns I have, CAS and other wise, the ASM conversions I have are the most accurate handguns I own.  they all shoot itty bitty little groups off the bench.  The all shoot better than I do.  I use to have 9 of them.  I'm down to 7 now.  Some of these guns have over 60 - 70 hours work in them to make them function.  Once they function, they function quite well although I don't recommend fast traditional style shooting with these guns.  They are perfect for the Dualist or Gunfighter.
The conversions pretty much broke ASM.  The warranty work required was massive.  Cimarron, Navy and EMF all dropped the conversions while they still had guns in inventory to sell.  Having six of seven guns sold returned for repair or replacement was more than the "big three" could stand.  Shortly after, they all dropped ASM guns altogether and ASM went bust.  They (the big three)turned them into parts for warranty repair.  Overall, they were porly made and even more poorly assembled.  I picked one up in a gun shop while EMF still stocked them and had to ask why a gun with a .38 spl barrel had a .44 Cylinder in it!!!
The first guns were copies of the 1860 with a non rebated cylinder and no spacer between the barrel and cylinder.  Next up were the 1851s, followed by the 1861 Navy which included a machined recess in the front of the cylinder for a flakey little spacer.  Some think it was intended as a gas ring, twazant, twaz a spacer to help with flakey barrel/cylinder gap.  Some of the 1851s also had the little spacer.  More important than the spacer was/is proper fit of the wedge.
That's sorta it.  For the most part, ASM conversions were crap.  The ones that work usually work great and are tack drivers at targets.  Shoot yours.  I shoot mine constantly.

Coffinmaker

[Grizzly Adams]

Stay tickled to death.... if you have a good one, and there were good ones ....

ASM did make some early guns with less than desirable fit & finish ( the reason was not ability, it was economics )
Companies like Traditions one of the early importers demanded ASM hold to a price....
Seems the importer wanted profits over customer satisfaction.
Navy Arms also offered these guns and took the brunt of Customer dis- satisfaction, along with EMF and Cimarron.
The three latter importers demanded the guns quality be improved and the price was adjusted for the extra time taken by ASM.
Now there is/was the rub, customer liked the price of the early guns but didn't like the cost increase.
Sales dropped then
Cimarron opted out followed by EMF & Navy , and ASM shelved the  manufacture of the guns all together.

I have one and it may be the slickest action I have , and accurate at 10yds to 1" POA....
It actually is a bit better than my USPFA Type I prototype.

Yep!  I also had a pair that were excellent pistols.  Traded them in a moment of weakness.