Richards Type II - Huh??

Coffinmaker · September 29, 2007, 08:21:43 PM

Does anybody know anyone, or someone who knows someone, besides a magazine scribe, who has in possession, or who has been in possession of an example of the Type II, any caliber, any barrel length any grip style at all?? One of us who actually has one or has had one to actually play with??
It's been said Cimarron has gotten some in and actually shipped some out, but has anyone actually gotten one to play with??

Coffinmaker

Deadeye Don · October 01, 2007, 06:33:38 AM

Well I know that the ex Bootsie (cant recall his new name) has one in Germany. I also heard Cimarron go some 5.5 Transition models in. Perhaps those went to people that are not here on CAS City. Dont hold yer breath for them to come in. I moved on some months ago. Regards. Deadeye.

Major 2 · October 01, 2007, 07:17:40 AM

Other than the one I handled at Shot Jan. 07 ...only one I know of in the US

NO !
Long Johns Wolf (Bootsie) Has had his about a year in Germany...
I heard of the 5 1/2"ers here , and my FFL called to say he had one coming in, we were not really surprised upon opening the shipment it was a R&M.
So we wait, probably just 60 more days

The Avocado Kid · October 09, 2007, 08:56:10 PM

snipe hunt.....wild goose chase

Abilene · October 09, 2007, 09:35:48 PM

Well, I know the .44 crowd will still gripe

But Cimarron just received nearly 80 Type II Richards, all .45LC with 8" barrels.

Two were engraved

I have no idea how many backorders they have for that model, but I should think some will still be available.

Fox Creek Kid · October 09, 2007, 10:05:36 PM

Abilene, I just talked to Valerie(?) yesterday at Cimarron & she pretty much told me the same thing as you.

I wish Tony Soprano was my cousin. I'd have him & Paulie Walnuts visit the boys at Uberti & see what's the holdup "wid da .44's".

Montana Slim · October 10, 2007, 12:54:59 PM

.44's not ready yet?
Not necessarily a bad thing....by the time the .44s come out, any "bugs" ought to be worked out of production

Regards,
Slim

Coltsmoke · October 10, 2007, 04:21:37 PM

I'm new at this and need some educating,why is everyone wanting the 44 over the 45 longcolt.

Halfway Creek Charlie · October 10, 2007, 04:51:52 PM

One small reason is that 44 Cal. is what the R-M , and R-M II were originally chambered in. 45 LC came after the peacemaker came to be.

Abilene · October 10, 2007, 05:09:41 PM

Coltsmoke,
Another reason is that the cylinder walls are REALLY thin on the 45LC, especially at the bolt notch. You don't want to shoot hot loads in any of the Colt-style opentops or conversions, but particularly with the .45.

Monata Slim,
There really shouldn't be too many bugs with the new gun, since it appears to pretty much be exactly the same as the 1860 Richards-Mason except for the barrel and ejector assembly. The barrel is the same style as the cap'n'ball guns, though presumably made of the better steel that is used on the Cimarron cartridge guns. The ejector mounts into the rammer slot under the barrel, and looks to me to be much stronger than the similar style ejectors on the old Armi-Sport Richards conversions, which tended to break.

Deadeye Dick · October 10, 2007, 06:19:43 PM

Abilene,
What do you consider a hot load? I understand you should fill the case with black powder to prevent an open space. I'm new at this and am trying to reload 44 Colt for the first time. I loaded the case with BP and put a 200 gr. big lube bullet over the top. Too hot? I'm using it in a Cimarron Richards-Mason Conversion. Any advice you or anyone else can give me will be appreciated.
Deadeye Dick
Just realized this is probably not the thread to ask this question in. My apologies.

Abilene · October 10, 2007, 07:44:55 PM

Dick,
I was really referring to smokeless loads. BP is easier on the guns due to the more gradual rise of the pressure curve. Although I have heard of some highly compressed loads of pyrodex that were like magnums. And if I was shooting a 45LC OT I would probably stay away from a full load of 777 as well.

will52100 · October 13, 2007, 10:04:33 PM

You mean like Elmer Keith reportly blew up a 45 peacemaker by using a 350+ grain bullet and grinding black powder to the consistancy of flour and packing about 50 grains in old ballon head brass?

Frankly I love the 45 colt, but be durned if I'd shoot it in a 60 RM, or even an opentop for that matter. 44 is pushing it as it is even with modern steel and slightly thicker cylinder walls. A good many of the orginals have there bolt notches showing the cartrige through.

Basicly the 44 colt is a sweet round to shoot and easy to reload. My load for it is 25 grains of Graf's 3F black powder and a big lube 200 grain bullet. I could comfortably stuff 28 grains in it and have done it, but it kicks a mite harder and the 24-25 grain load is more authentic. With 24-25 grains I get about 3/32" compression, and that's pretty close to what you want. It hits plenty hard enhough to not wory about being called a gammer, and is accurate and don't punish your hand. I don't know anything about any of the subs, except from what I understand there is not a whole lot of differance between Swiss black powder and 777. Swiss I use in 38 LC because of the shorter case and Swiss gives me a bit more power. I could use 38 special brass, but I've got a bunch of 38LC brass.

Deadeye Don · October 14, 2007, 08:35:29 AM

When I was in t he market for an opentop, Ether Cimarron or Taylors told me they didnt make them in 45 colt because the cylinder walls would have to be milled too thin to support the larger caliber. Somehow, Uberti found a way to do it so it would be safe, but I would be very very careful what I tried to shoot in a 45 colt. Personally, I would still stay away from the 45 colt and go with a 44 colt or 38 long colt/ 38 special. I have the later caliber and love it. Regards. Deadeye.

Pettifogger · October 14, 2007, 10:08:10 AM

Quote from: Deadeye Don on October 14, 2007, 08:35:29 AM
When I was in t he market for an opentop, Ether Cimarron or Taylors told me they didnt make them in 45 colt because the cylinder walls would have to be milled too thin to support the larger caliber. Somehow, Uberti found a way to do it so it would be safe, but I would be very very careful what I tried to shoot in a 45 colt. Personally, I would still stay away from the 45 colt and go with a 44 colt or 38 long colt/ 38 special. I have the later caliber and love it. Regards. Deadeye.

Yep, they increased the diameter of the cylinder so the walls would be thicker.

Fox Creek Kid · October 14, 2007, 11:02:23 AM

QuoteYep, they increased the diameter of the cylinder so the walls would be thicker.

According to the magazine article I have by John Taffin on the Type II the cylinder is EXACTLY the same diameter as the RM in .44 Colt. I think maybe Uberti may have "borrowed" the idea of drilling the chambers for the .45 cal. from R&D, i.e. at a slight angle.

Who knows. Someone here will have to measure one in .45 Colt. As for me and the rest of my loyal & true followers here, the wait for the Type II in .44 goes onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn......

Abilene · October 14, 2007, 11:43:52 AM

When the transition Richards was in the early planning stages I was told by Robert at Cimarron that the cylinder was going to be bigger diameter. But I don't think it is (and I'm thinking somebody, maybe Bootsie, measured his and it was the same as the R-M). You may have noticed that besides the OT, even the Richards-Mason is also now offered in 45LC. I was told that previously Uberti was unable to make the 45LC OT pass proof-testing and that's why Cimarron dropped the idea of carrying that caliber a couple years back, but later (don't know what might have changed) Uberti got them to pass at the proof house, so here they are.

Deadeye Dick · October 14, 2007, 02:56:54 PM

My 44 Colt load is 26 grs of Scheutzen BP behind a 200 gr Big Lube bullet. Is that too much for a Cimarron Richards-Mason conversion?
Deadeye Dick

Abilene · October 14, 2007, 04:11:08 PM

Dick, your load is fine. I should guess it might approximate the authentic load of the period, and these modern guns have far better steel.

Deadeye Dick · October 14, 2007, 05:45:30 PM

Abilene,
Thanks, I'm sure I'll get more confidence the longer I am in the "shootin" business. Recoil is kind of stiff. How does recoil and pressure correlate or does it? Are there any rifles that are period correct made for the 44 Colt?
Deadeye Dick