Richards Conversions

[Slowhand Bob]

Is the reason no one has been willing to give us another version of the Richards Model because of the poor reputation of the of the first imports offered?  It is without a doubt my favorite conversion on the Colt styles.  It was the only one to put the rear sight in what would become the traditionally recommended place.  Why has Uberti made such an obvious attempt to avoid this model?  Have they not noticed how much people are paying for the few working versions of the earlier clones that remain.  I personally think it would outsell all the other open tops and wasn't it the first?

[Pettifogger]

I don't recall that Uberti has ever made a Richards.  If you realized how few of these things are sold it's a wonder Uberti even continues to make them.  Considering the size of the market, they have done a good job with their product line.

[Raven]

Based on having built a few 1st Richards, My Guess is that they won't be building them any time soon.

1. They would need to be built oversize so that they would chamber 6/ .45 Colts
2. .44 is out of the question for several reasons reasons. If they made the barrels for modern .44 people could load Magnums, a liability issue. If they left the barrels in .44 percussion, healed base ammo is not commercialy avvailable. So They can't make them from percussion guns
3. As compared to the Open Top and the Richards Mason there is much more machineing to be done.
4. IMO the retail for this gun if made CORRECTLY by the Italians would be in the $800 to $1000 range. And would probably not be commercialy viable.
5. In order to offer us what we want and still be able to make a profit the Italian companys "cut corners" The 1st Richards just isn't a gun you can cut corners on.
6. It would need to be built on a completely new line.....There is enough variation in the frames of the perccusion guns that installing the breach plate must be done according to the individual dimensions of the frame being machined.
7. It would be very expensive to tool up for the 1st Richards and will require sales of many thousands of revolvers.

When working on the Thuer conversion we discovered why Uberti will never mass produce them....All the internal parts of the ring must be hand fit and then the ring must be hand fit to the revolver it will be installed in. The 1st Richards requires a fair amount of hand fitting to work correctly.

I think thats why they leave the building of 1st Richards to the little guys.
Raven

[Advertising]

[Long Johns Wolf]

Raven, I agree with most of what you say but decided not to agree with #2.
Uberti made and make all their Colt Army type conversions including the Richards Transitional (R2) and the Open Tops in .44 (Colt) and some also in .44 Special caliber, with the .429 inside lubed bullets.
If memory serves that was the first caliber that ASM and Uberti used when they started the conversion program back in the 1990s.
So, their should really be no liability issues regarding magnum loads, particularly since Uberti is offering these pistols also in the not PC but hotter .45 Colt cal.
On the other hand if one were to have an Uberti R2 altered into a R1 by replacing the conversion ring and altering the hammer, through a competent gunsmith he or she would probably charge ca. € 250,00 or $ 325,00 for that job.
The key issue seems to be the overall acceptance of the conversion/OT type pistols. I have no idea how many of their R2 are sold but the price bracket of $ 800,00 for an Uberti R1 as you are suggesting is probably a fair assumption. It is probably also a fair guestimate that a conservative ratio could be 80 (R2) to 20 (R1) during the launch period of a Richards.
From this side of the big pond that ratio is likely to change to 50/50 soon in line with the growing interest of the PC oriented fraction of  CAS competitors in conversions/OTs.
Long Johns Wolf

[Coffinmaker]

I agree with Raven. 
We are a small segment of the gun market.  Those of us who have a real preference for Conversions, are an even smaller percentage of the market.  When you tool up to make something, you must have enough of a market to amortize the the machine tools and make a profit.
ASM tried to come close.  Not quite correct, but close.  From 4 feet, looked real good.  They were crap though and that was a shame.
the best we could hope for is a different hammer and breach ring for the Type II which would also look good from 4 feet, but wouldn't be "authentic."
Uberti scaled all the cartridge "Open Top" guns to accept 6 .45 Colt, which I strongly disagree with.  Not enough meat in the cylinder.  .44 is just fine so long as you cut the chambers too short to accept anything longer than .44 Colt although I prefer .44 Russian.  There is just too great a pressure difference between BP and Smokeless.  Some fool is always going to stuff a heavy charge of smokeless in a small case just cause he/she thinks a magnum Open Top would be cool.  Until the first shot.
I'm going to build myself a set of short barrel/shorter barrel conversions with Kirst parts on Pietta guns, in .45 (ACP I hope) to shoot with Cowboy .45 Special cases.  A 5 shot cylinder is just fine to keep it safe.
They won't be 1st Model Richards, but they'll still be way cool.

Coffinmaker

[1860]

I think they could make them in 44-40, the comercial 44-40s of today are fairly mild, atleast the ones I've seen.  I'd be willing to pay if they were as well made as the 72 opentop, that thing is a tank and shoots BP all day long..

I have 2 of the .38 ASMs in the s/n range of 3K, I completely rebuilt them both using Uberti parts & some handmade, including the fouling collars on the end of the cylinders as found on the Uberti's.  They are both 100% reliable and function well with BP but they didn't come that way.  They are by far, my favorite cowboy hand guns and while not really a copy of anything made back in the day, they are alot closer than any Ruger.

I agree with the marketing comments above, we are the vast minority of shooters, the Richards are hard to make and would be expensive.  And I want another one...or Two...!!

60

[Slowhand Bob]

I really think it could be done better than it was and though the market is down right now, lets hope it can come back one more time.  I have seen far far to many "never gonna happen"  statements in the last ten years only to have manufacturers prove them wrong and several of those "never wills' have actually had two or more manufacturers jump in.  The Richards was done, though not right, and I can only guarantee one thing, do it again, but right this time, and I am in for at least several.  Do not try to create tanks, offer them up in the shorty C45S, 44 Russian five shooters if necessary, and 38s.  Those of us who want them to look, feel and shoot like originals are willing to buy another set of reloading dies!  I would bet they could could be manufactured cheeper than a Uberti '76 and would sell a lot more.  As to the factory set-up, I'm thinking small, as in using 90% of the production line already producing for the existing black powder line and please do not use that oversize stuff being used for the current Conversion offerings.  Since Uberti is already commited, this would be one for Pietta to pick up the torch for AND I am the only guy in SASS who much prefers their Navy grip frame much more than Ubertis!    

[Short Knife Johnson]

I have in hand right now an Uberti 1860 Open Top built as a Richard's Conversion made in .44 Colt (With a .429 inside lubed bullet).  I just bought it used, like new in the box, last month with 2 boxes of Black Hills ammo.  I don't know how old this gun is. 

The grip frame is not brass, but fire-blued as is the barrel and cylinder.  The box will be rounded up for the exact model designation and I will put up pictures when I get home in a few days.  If I find a brass grip frame, it very well might be swapped out.

This thing shoots way high with smokeless powder, but there are designs to load with black once all cases are empty.