Picture request

[Enzo_Guy]

I'm requesting pictures of Cimarron/Taylor's/Uberti 1851/1860 R-M conversion with the 4.75" or 5.5" barrel.  I'd be interested in pictures of the different finishes, particularly original and nickel.  This might be a bit of a stretch but if anyone has ivory or pearl grips that would also be cool.

Thanks a lot in advance, pictures of these revolvers are proving tough to find online.  Everything I find is either the 7.5" barrel or if it is a short barrel then it is a black powder with the loading lever.  Just trying to get a good look at one because I am thinking about taking the open top plunge in .38 Special (also considering a Remington 1858 conversion).

[Slowhand Bob]

I think I just saw a used short barl Uberti R/M Conv for sale over on the SASS Classifieds.

[Bangor Dan]

The seller Ultona on Gunbroker is currently listing a 5 1\2" '51 Navy RM Conversion...blued & color case hardened finish. Has a couple of nice photos.

[Abilene]

Dang it, my response disappeared.  I will make this one shorter:
Mine in 5 1/2" with charcoal blue finish and Bar-S Tru-ivory grips: http://www.davidscottharper.com/photos/Engr_RMs.jpg

A pair that started out as 7 1/2" and were cut down to 4 3/4", before Uberti started making that length.  Pic is halfway down this page, click small pic to see bigger pic: http://www.runniron.com/showcase/index.html

I have pics of some longer-barreled conversions and OT's in nickle and antique finish, but don't have them on the web at this time. 

There's another pard on this board who loves the shorter barrels on conversions, maybe he will have some pics to post.

[Enzo_Guy]

Thanks for the responses guys!

Found another one one Pietta's site.  It was a nickel plated one with a short barrel and white grips that had dice on them (it's the last handgun pictured on their main US products page).  It's a shame none of the conversion cylinders are nickel (or at least I have yet to see one), because Pietta makes some pretty sweet special editions in nickel.

EDIT: Found out Howell (formerly R&D) makes their 1851 cylinders in a stainless variant.  I'm not sure how a stainless cylinder would look with a Pietta nickel 1851.  I think if I opt for nickel I will just get a factory conversion from Cimarron or Taylor's just to make sure it matches and doesn't look goofy.

[Enzo_Guy]

Oh, and I'm sure this question has been answered here before but once again I didn't find anything when I searched what the differences between a Richards-Mason Navy and an 1872 Navy?

http://www.texasjacks.com/CartGuns/OpenTops-Convs.htm
Texas Jacks has them both listed and the 1872 Navy is a good bit cheaper.

[Abilene]

The conversions have a conversion ring, the OT does not.  The OT recoil shield is part of the frame, similar to the SAA.  The conversions have the rear sight on the hammer nose, the OT's have the rear sight on the rear of the barrel.  The 1860 conversions and OT's all have round barrels, the '51 conversion is octagonal with a brass post front sight.  The '51 is only Navy grip, the '60 is only Army grip, and the OT's come Army or Navy grip for the 7 1/2" barrel, and only Navy for the shorter barrels.  Guns with Navy (brass) gripframes cost less than steel Army gripframes, hence the '51 being less than the '60,  OT's cost less than conversions.  The Type II costs the most because of the more labor-intensive ejector mounting design.  Anyway, that's why the Navy OT is the least expensive of these guns.  I'm a little surprised it is that much less.   But then that is MSRP anyway, I'm not sure if there is as much difference in dealer prices.

[Enzo_Guy]

The conversions have a conversion ring, the OT does not.  The OT recoil shield is part of the frame, similar to the SAA.  The conversions have the rear sight on the hammer nose, the OT's have the rear sight on the rear of the barrel.  The 1860 conversions and OT's all have round barrels, the '51 conversion is octagonal with a brass post front sight.  The '51 is only Navy grip, the '60 is only Army grip, and the OT's come Army or Navy grip for the 7 1/2" barrel, and only Navy for the shorter barrels.  Guns with Navy (brass) gripframes cost less than steel Army gripframes, hence the '51 being less than the '60,  OT's cost less than conversions.  The Type II costs the most because of the more labor-intensive ejector mounting design.  Anyway, that's why the Navy OT is the least expensive of these guns.  I'm a little surprised it is that much less.   But then that is MSRP anyway, I'm not sure if there is as much difference in dealer prices.

Great info!  I'm slowly educating myself on these early cartridge and conversion guns.

Something else that also recently came to my attention: the grips on the 1851, 1860, and 1873 SAA are all very similar.  Now I already knew that the grip frames were interchangeable, but since the selection of grips online is pretty slim for the 1851 and the SAA is probably only rivaled by the 1911 for the amount of different styles offered I am interested in this.  Do they mean that someone with an SAA could order 1851 grips and file them down, or since grips are shipped oversize could an 1851 owner order SAA grips and file them down to fit?  If I purchased an 1851 and could file aftermarket SAA grips to fit, that certainly opens up my options for ready-made grips I could order off the web.

[Enzo_Guy]

For anyone following this thread, I found a good picture of a pair of short barrel Open Tops with pearl handles: