I need answeres....original conversion cal.

[Bryan Austin]

I've been reading till my brain hurts.

Can someone explain to me the steps to which Remington made conversion cylinders? I see cylinder changes, some with doors and some without. I see tapered looking rimfires and some with later centerfire. Was the rimfire a .44 bullet or .45 bullet...same with the centerfire!!!  I'm gonna go take BC powder and a nap!

[sundance44`s]

Jack I know ya aren`t looking for another read ..but this is just one page and it will answer alot of your questions  http://www.riverjunction.com/kirst/history.html

[Bryan Austin]

That did shed some more light. I first saw this in Tom's movie, "This was brilliantly portrayed in Tom Selleck's film Last Stand at Saber River". Funny that I just read that too in the article you posted the link too. This is waht started my quest to understand the conversion time table. It was the calibers that started confusing me. Am I to understand the the original field conversion was .46 caliber rimfire cartridges...to fit the bore.....and later converted to six-shot .44 caliber centerfire (44-40?). This would be too small for the bore as it so states later in the article.

So the Remington conversion never used the 45 Colt metallic cartridge?

Also, the conical bullet. Was it not the hollow end to be able to expand to fit the bore when shot? I read that this was used more than most people think. My question there is that the loading rod plunger is round, will it not deform the conical bullet?

Just call me "Grasshopper"...and one day I will be able to take the pebble from your hand!

[sundance44`s]

Jack I`ve never used the conical bullets in my cap and ball cylinders ..From what I`ve read of others trying them ..they have to be loaded with care because they don`t like to load straight ..hard to get good accuracy. Seems nothing shoots straighter than a round ball load
I can get good accuracy useing a 45 conversion cylinder and loading .250 or .255 gr bullets in them ...with lighter bullets accuracy suffers . Shooting at SASS range the lighter bullets work fine . I like to target shoot alot at much greater ranges with mine .

[cetme]

yep the remington conversions made around 1868 were 46 rimfire and no loading gate . Remington also made a cylinder not unlike the R&D drop-in's allowing loose ammo or fixed cartridges. I don't have the book in front of me but krause publications has a great coffee table book on the history of the conversion revolvers.

[Bryan Austin]

Would it be possible to drill the back side of the 44-40 .429 bullet to get a conical? Maybe it will expand to fit the .451 bore?

[cetme]

http://www.amazon.com/Metallic-Cartridge-Conversions/dp/B000K2962Q/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1218582097&sr=1-3

[Bryan Austin]

I saw this but forgot to copy the link!

Mike Venturino's book states that there were 158,885 first-generation Colt single action revolvers chambered in .45 Colt, as compared to 71,291 in .44-40, which was the next most popular chambering. Lots of old percussion Colts were "converted" to fire the .44 Colt cartridge. Then there was the Colt 1872 Open-Top, which was chambered for the .44 Henry rimfire cartridge which was used in the 1860 Henry and 1866 "Yellowboy" rifles. There were probably less than half a dozen Remington 1875 revovers chambered in .45 Colt, as most were either .44 Remington or .44-40. Merwin & Hulbert apparently did not make a .45 (to my knowledge), but chambered their Army model in .44 M&H and .44-40. Smith & Wesson started out chambering their #3 revolver in .44 Henry. S&W later came out with the .44 American, and then the .44 Russian. The .45 S&W (or .45 Schofield) round was introduced later, and was developed specifically for the military.

There is potential for real confusion in the terminology. Bore size in blackpowder guns and percussion revolvers typically refers to the land-to-land, or "minor" bore diameter. Bore size in cartridge revolvers generally refers to the groove-to-groove, or "major" diameter. The grooves are usually around .006"-.007" deep, so a .44 caliber percussion revolver would have a minor bore diameter around .440," and a major bore diameter of .452"-.454". When you convert a .44 caliber percussion revolver to fire cartridges, it could thus be considered a .45. Cartridge conversions were very common on the frontier, and .45 Colt cartridge conversion cylinders for modern-made .44 cap & ball replicas are becoming increasingly common today.

However, when the .44-40 was developed, I believe it was actually intended for a .427" bore, and commercial .44-40 loadings with cast lead bullets generally have them in .427". At some point, nominal .44 caliber bore size was increased to .429", so today's ".44's" are actually closer to .43's.

In any event, .45 Colt was by far the most popular chambering for Colt Single Action Army revolvers, but I think it is possible that the .44 may have had an edge in sheer numbers on the frontier, when you factor in all four of the "big name" sixgun makers (Colt, M&H, Remington, and S&W) in addition to the cartridge conversions and the various imported guns. The .44, in all of its myriad variations, was immensely popular. I have no production numbers to back it up, but that's my opinion.

This is interesting.

Crooked River Bob

[Wolfgang]

Sundance44s wrote : "Jack I`ve never used the conical bullets in my cap and ball cylinders ..From what I`ve read of others trying them ..they have to be loaded with care because they don`t like to load straight ..hard to get good accuracy. Seems nothing shoots straighter than a round ball load"

The conical bullets I've bought from Cabelas have a narrower base that fits into the chamber so that they will load straight.  They shoot GREAT ! . . . but too damn expensive.  I haven't found a mold to make a hollow base like them.  Haven't looked hard enough probably.   

[Flint]

There were several generations of Remington conversions, with and without loading gates, different backplates, and with and without ejector rods.  Remington seemed rather fond of rimfire cartridges, perhaps because it is the easiest conversion for the hammer nose.  The closest Remington cylinder to the R&D conversion had rimfire hammer nose slots in the backplate where R&D has the firing pins.

Most of the early 44 Cartridges, both rimfire and centralfire, used 45 caliber heeled bullets, as the conversion bores were 45 caliber.  The later internal 429 bullets came much later after the factories reduced the bores to 44, and the bullets were then hollowbased so the older revolvers could use them.

44 Colt, 38 Colt, 44 Henry and 44 American were all heel type bullets of the same diameter as the cartridge case, as some were used in a cut-off cylinder originally bored for cap & ball.  It was the 44 Russian inside-the-case bullet that started the 429 bore for 44s, and begat the 44 Special and 44 Magnum.

[Bryan Austin]

44 Magnum.

That would be Elmer Keith right?

[Bryan Austin]

Flint how about this? From an article..... "Blue Book of Modern
Black Powder Values™" Second Edition. By Dennis Adler
http://www.riverjunction.com/kirst/history.html

The 1858 Remington New Model Army appears to have been the first percussion revolver converted to fire a metallic cartridge, produced by Remington in 1868-69 (while the White patent was still in effect) and converted to chamber five .46 caliber rimfire cartridges. Later versions were converted to six-shot .44 caliber centerfire, and.......

Is this what you mean by early rimfire (.46 cal.) and early centerfire (.44 {44-40} cal.) ?

Seems to make more sense when related to this:

There is potential for real confusion in the terminology. Bore size in blackpowder guns and percussion revolvers typically refers to the land-to-land, or "minor" bore diameter. Bore size in cartridge revolvers generally refers to the groove-to-groove, or "major" diameter. The grooves are usually around .006"-.007" deep, so a .44 caliber percussion revolver would have a minor bore diameter around .440," and a major bore diameter of .452"-.454". When you convert a .44 caliber percussion revolver to fire cartridges, it could thus be considered a .45. Cartridge conversions were very common on the frontier, and .45 Colt cartridge conversion cylinders for modern-made .44 cap & ball replicas are becoming increasingly common today.

However, when the .44-40 was developed, I believe it was actually intended for a .427" bore, and commercial .44-40 loadings with cast lead bullets generally have them in .427". At some point, nominal .44 caliber bore size was increased to .429", so today's ".44's" are actually closer to .43's.

[Flint]

Some early 44s were 44 Henry rimfire and 44 S$W American centerfire.  The 44WCF came later with the 73 Winchester, later chambered in the Colt SAA.  No conversion was chambered in 44WCF.

S&W made 3rd models in 44 Henry, 44 American and 44 Russian.

Colt conversions were chambered in 44 Henry centerfire, 44 American and 44 rimfire, (as well as 38 rimfire and centerfire) but the 72 Opentop was chambered in 44 Henry rimfire style cartridges, so the conversions actually used a more modern cartridge than the 72.  The SAA was actuall first tested in 44 American before the 45Colt.

Yes, caliber designation was originally by the land diameter, which is the bore before rifling, hence 44 and 36 caliber, which groove diameter are actually 454 and 375.  The conversions, using the cylinder's bore as a chamber had cartridge cases the size of the chamber (45 and 38)  They therefore required heeled bullets of groove diameter, as seen now on 22 rimfire.

Later revolvers were made with reduced bore diameters and cartridges had internal bullet seating with a hollow base, which will work in both bores.

[Hoof Hearted]

email me:

buckoff@alltel.net

I CAN HELP YOU

[Bryan Austin]

email sent

BTW I did purchase  Metallic Cartridge Conversions firearms guns history yesterday. Waiting for it to arrive!!!!

[Bryan Austin]

Sorry I had to do it. Sure, its just a movie but what ya think? Early civil war conversion or just "Hollywood"? No ejector rod, no loading gate. What ya think? Another shot looks like the firing pin is made into the hammer.

[Bryan Austin]

Ah hah, like this one Oldelm posted.