S&W Differences

[Captain Hubert Arzhel]

Hi all,

I'm new to the forum and new to cowboy shooting. In fact I'm going to my first shoot today!  In fact I'd love to join BOSS!

I love break-top revolvers, I used to own a Webley Mark IV. 

I'm going to try out some Uberti Schofields today to see how I like them. 

I had a question for all of you that might seem a bit basic but here I go:

What are the exact differences between the main type of replic S&W revolvers that are made today: say the differences between the Schofield, the Russian, and the "hybrid" Laramie?

How exactly do the sights, top lever for the break, grips, etc, differ between the guns?

Thanks!

[Old Top]

Alaskan,

The Uberti replical made by navy arms is similar to the military issue Schofield with the rear sight acting as the release for the swing down of the cylinder and the barrel.  As I understand the Larimie (sp) has a lever latch on the left to actuate the break open feature, it also has adjustible sights which limit it to the modern catagory.  The Russian has a hump back grip rather then the smooth grip of the Schofield.  I beleive that is the major differences in the different models I am sure that I have missed some things but others will correct me.

Old Top

[Books OToole]

I have yet to actualy see and handle a Laramie.  However from the photographs that I have seen, I believe the sights are the same as the 19th century targets sights.  They are not ajustable in the way modern sights are.  With modern S&Ws you just turn a screw.  With the New Model 3 (which the Laramie is a copy of), you loosen two screws that hold in the rear sight in place, slide it left or right and then re-tighten the screws.  Not much differnet than drifting a dove-tailed front sight.

For a good picture of the target sight on an original New Model 3 S & W, go to page 20 of the Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson by Jim Supica and Richard Nahas.

Books

[Hafoc]

Unless you're buying a used Armi San Marco / Cimmaron, which aren't made any more because they had problems, you'll be buying almost the same gun.  Uberti makes their Schofield and Russian replicas.  Beretta owns Uberti (or Benelli owns Beretta and Uberti, or some blasted thing).  Consequently the Beretta Laramie uses most of the same piecesparts as the other two.

OK, edited to remove a couple thousand words and replace them with a couple pictures:

Here, from Uberti's site, is the Schofield latch and sight.  Notice the latch pulls back to open.  The sight is a wide V cut into the latch.  That's what I have, and I don't find it hard to use.



Here, from Beretta's site, is the Laramie latch and rear sight.  Notice it pulls up to open.  The Russian uses a latch that works the same way, although it's different in minor details.



See that little nubbin at the front end of the Laramie's latch?  That's the "standard" rear sight S&W used on their No. 3 revolvers.  It's the only rear sight the Russian has.  The plate attached to the rear of the Laramie's latch, the plate held on by screws and with a notch cut into its top, is the "target" rear sight such as S&W used on their New Model No. 3 Target revolvers.  Because this is adjustable, sort of, it puts the Laramie into the "modern" revolver category.  Now, since the Laramie has the little nubbin rear sight too, I wonder if you could remove the "target" sight plate, shoot using the nubbin only, and thereby shoot in the fixed-sight class?  But that would probably be called an external modification.

I note that in photos the Laramie and Russian have a large, knurled screw in the topstrap above the cylinder.  Maybe somebody who shoots one can enlighten me about what that's for.

As for the grips, what you see is what you get.  The Schofield uses a more "plow-handle" type grip, square-butt, typical of the early S&W Americans and Schofields, while the Russian and the Laramie use a semi-round butt of a kind S&W used on most of their guns on toward the start of the 20th Century.

[DJ]

So, does that mean all of the Beretta Laramies can only shoot in the SASS "modern" category?  Or do they also offer a fixed-sight version?

[Trailrider]

Hafoc,

Now THAT'S interesting, Pard!  Did the Laramie pictured come with the latch having the "two little nubbins" just above the pivot screw?  Mine does NOT have those, the surface being merely a rounded boss around the pivot screw.  Neither did the replacement latch which I bought from VTI!  What serial number range is the gun?  Above L001XX?  Is the "nubbin" sifficient to use as an (admittedly poor) rear sight, just like on the original NM #3, IF you removed the windage blade and the clamp?  (The original NM#3's sights are great for target shooting, if you can actually see them! But I wouldn't want one in a firefight!  Too hard to pick them up. 

[Hafoc]

Trailrider,

Well, dagnappit!  Looks like you might have caught me n a lie.  Forgive me, Pard- I took Beretta's word about what they make.  I figured they would know, if anybody does.

The Laramie picture is a close-up from Beretta's own web site.  You would think they'd use a picture of their own gun... so is the latch they showed a prototype, a kind they had before they made yours, or is this latch with two sets of sights a newer design? 

There'd be a market for the two-rear-sight latch.  After all, the one big gripe I've heard about the Laramie is that it has to shoot in SASS Modern because of that "target" rear sight.  If that came off, it would be a good way to get around the problem. 

DJ, that's all I know about the subject.  I've read forums here and otherwhere, and I've browsed the rule book, and it looks like the Laramie is in fact restricted to modern category.  Or at least it WAS.  Pity, since it's anything but modern in the dictionary definition of that word.

[E.R.Beaumont]

Howdy Pards and Pardettes.

Alaskan, Pard the history of the Model Number Three, as I understand it is as follows. The first ones were chambered in .44 Henry Flat.  The handle was refered to as "saw handle", and the latch was on the barrel.  The next thing was to chamber it in.44 S&W central fire.  This model is refered to as the American, and was the first breachloading,central fire cartridge revolver issued to the U.S. Army.

The American model parented two offspring, one was thew Russian and the other was the Schofield.  The first Russians were just American models chambered in .44 S&W Russian cartridge.  The Schofield was a Variant of the Number Three frame size.  The Schofield was named after Maj George Schofield of the U.S.Cavelry, he patented several improvements to the #3 one of which was moving the latch to the frame for easy onehanded opening.  S&W chambered it in .45 S&W cartridge for trials as the US Military revolver.  Somewhere between five and eight thousand revolvers were purchased by the Army, and another eight to ten thousand were sold to civillians and others.

The Russians loved their revolver, but thought of ways to make it better for them.  They got the changes made to the grip profile and triggerguard that became its most distimguishing features.  Several hundred thousand Russian Models were made by S&W and its liscensees Ludwig Lowe, the Tula arsenal, and others.  The New Model Three was the last of the large frame single actions made by S&W.  I consider the New Model Number Three, to be the epitome of the Social Single Action Revolver.

As I say this is how I understand the history of the S&W Number Three frame size, I sure hope the other pards out there will make any corrections and additions needed to make this correct and helpful for you.  I have examples of all three of the Uberti/Beretta clones, Schofield, Russian, and New Model #3 ( Laramie).  I like them all, but I think that I am going to like my Laramies best.

Well Hafoc, Pard that sure was an interesting picture there of that Laramie latch there.  Maybe I will have to see if the latch from a Russian will fit the Laramie.  I will let everyone know how it went.  If it works I would presume that one could just order a Russian latch from VTI.  Without the moveable blade the Laramie should be good for all of the non-modern shooting catagories.

That is all I think I know.
Regards, Beaumont

[Trailrider]

Hafoc,

When you take someone else's word (or picture) for it, it ain't lying! No problem, at all Pard.  I'm just as confused by that photo as you are! Looks like they crawfished on that design with the extra nubs on the latch.

E.R.B,

Ordering a spare latch for a Russian may or may not work.  It will probably take some fitting.  My spare Laramie latch doesn't fit when I swap with the original!  Have to fit it myself or have a 'smith do it.  Big thing is NOT to take any material off the FRAME, so the original will still work right.  Looks to me like it could be a might tricky to do, as there are two lugs on the frame where the latch surfaces touch the frame surfaces.  Fitting them up TOGETHER may be about like trying to fit a new two-bolt breechblock to a Mauser-action rifle.  The locking surfaces of the latch are NOT flat, but concave so they will slip over the top of the lugs on the frame, but lock up tight in the full-down position.  Since I have problems filing a flat surface on a piece of metal, dispite a degree in manufacturing, I may leave it to a smith. 

The other thing that will have to be done on the spare Laramie latch is to build up the nubs on the front end of the latch, where the pivot screw boss is and then file a notch in it.  Shouldn't be too difficult once the case hardening is cut through.  Of course, this has to be done mostly at the range so you can sight the gun in whilst filing!

I tried the lower rear blade I bought from VTI and got it sighted in for windage. Had to take about .040" off the right edge of the blade once I got it tightened in the sight clamp, so it wouldn't stick out the right side!  Could have filed the inside of the notch, of course.  Gun still shoots about 5-6" high!  That's with several different loads and bullet weights.  Calculations show I need to file the notch down about .062" to drop down into the center.  And THAT'S using a 6- o'clock hold on a round target.  But I don't LIKE using a 6 o'clock hold!  I hold center on all my other guns.  That way if you don't HAVE a round target, you just put the top of the sight on where you want to hit.  So the gun will still be shooting high.   Putting a higher front sight on wouldn't solve the problem since the sight itself is high enough already.  And the sight appears to be soldered into its slot.  If it was pinned like the original NM#3 front sights were.

The other thing that I find an annoying deficiency with the Laramie is the fact that it won't take Starline .45 Schofield brass...the rims are a couple of thousandths too thick.  Barretta has STATED in an e-mail that the gun was NEVER DESIGNED TO TAKE THE SCHOFIELD ROUNDS!  Now, since SAA's and even the Uberti Schofields WILL, with no problems, why not do it to the Laramie?  And why not make the gun in .44 Special or .44-40.  If they are afraid people will pump up the .44 Specials to magnum range, why aren't they afraid of people using the .45's with those hotter loads?  Chambering the Laramie in .44-40 might not be economical for today's market (see Ruger, Sturm, New Model Vaquero), but at least it would have been AUTHENTIC!  About 5000 NM#3 were chambered in .44-40 and .38-40.

If it sounds like I'm not altogether pleased with the execution of the Laramie, it's true...sort of...  For what they charge, I think Barretta could have done better.

BTW, "when I get a round tuit" I intend to work up some loads for the .45 Special that Adirondack Jack sells.  Because of lower recoil, they will probably shoot higher, so I'm not doing anything radical with the sights until I find a load that shoots 230 - 250 gr loads around 720 ft/sec before messing with the sights.

[Will Ketchum]

I sure wish that they would have just made a clone of the NM3.  That would have solved most of my issues with the Laramie .   I'm not certain it has been approved by NCOWS yet and since it isn't really a clone of any original guns it might not be .  If it were the movable sight would be okay since they were available.  NCOWS doesn't have a "modern" class so that isn't an issue.

I have never understood the SASS modern class.  Once the gun is sighted in there is no advantage   Even period, original revolvers such as a vintage Bisley flat top must shoot in the "modern" class even though there isn't anything modern about it.  These sights are what we called "movable" in the old days as opposed to truly "adjustable" such as the Ruger Blackhawk or the S&W Model 29.

If anyone ever comes out with a true S&W NM3 clone I'll buy a brace and retire my originals

Will Ketchum

[Hafoc]

Will,

When I speculate about the why of rules I usually get it wrong.  Which won't stop me from speculating that the real issue with adjustable sights was at least partly about the notches and blades of modern sights being easier to pick up than old style fixed sights.

Might have been appearance too, and authenticity.  Since it would seem that at the time the rule was written, there wasn't much in the way of movable sights on reproductions, it's possible the only adjustable sights they considered were the bulky modern target type.

I suspect that now it's a custom- do it because that's how we always did.  (shrug)

Peroid-correct, for those who worry about that, and modern for those who don't, might be more in line with what some people would like.  But unless I'm mistaken, there's NCOWS for that.

[E.R.Beaumont]

Howdy Pards and Pardetts.

Well Pards, I pulled a latch off of a Russian to try it with the Laramie.  Here is what I come up with.  First, you can change the latch over, but it will take extensive fitting.

Not only will you have to fit the latch to the frame, you will also have to fit it to the hammer.  This of course means that you will have to get an oversized latch for fitting, and I think you better know what you are doing. 

My Laramies are in .38 S&W Spcl.  I would have prefered a caliber that started with a four, but the hot price was for .38 spcl pistols.  These things shoot awfully high, it is going to tale some highspeed loads to lower the point of impact to point of aim.  Heck you might mill off the sight and mill a dovetail into the rib.  Now can we change that notch rear sight for an appature sight?

As to the .45 S&W rims being too big, will the new .45 Russian cylinders take the Schofield rims. if so will the cylinders interchange?  The Schofield cylinders might be enough different so as to not fit, but???

That is all I think I know.
Regards.Beaumont