Why are there no conversions options in .44 Caliber?

[SPJ]

The conversions that I have found for the Colt 1860 and Pietta 44 Navy by Howell and Kirst conversions are both in 5 round cylinders in .45 Colt. What I don't understand is why they are not made to take cartridges in .44 caliber like the 44 Special which could be reloaded to better replicate .44 Colt ballistics, and I imagine would allow enough space for a 6th round. Is this possible?

I found a pre-made converted 1860 on Cimarron's site (https://www.cimarron-firearms.com/richards-transition-model-type-ii-44-special-8-in-barrel.html) but I'm not sure if they achieved the 6th round by changing the dimensions of the revolver to the point where it is not an accurate copy of the original conversions. Can anyone tell me if this is the case?

[Abilene]

Howdy SPJ.  Conversion cylinders are generally not made in .44 because the bore of a .44 cap gun is ~.452, perfect for 45 Colt/Schofield/etc.  Kirst did at one time make some .44 Colt cylinders but it required the use of heeled bullets (original style .44 Colt, not the modern .429 inside-lubed .44). 

Yes, the Uberti Army conversions are slightly larger than originals to allow for six 45's.

[SPJ]

Howdy SPJ.  Conversion cylinders are generally not made in .44 because the bore of a .44 cap gun is ~.452, perfect for 45 Colt/Schofield/etc.  Kirst did at one time make some .44 Colt cylinders but it required the use of heeled bullets (original style .44 Colt, not the modern .429 inside-lubed .44). 

Yes, the Uberti Army conversions are slightly larger than originals to allow for six 45's.

So could someone convert one of them to 6 rounds of 44 special, and then either use heeled bullets or sleeve the barrel to 44 caliber?

[Long Johns Wolf]

One of the few conversion artists could do that, SPJ.
Like Jared Baker of Longhunter in Amarillo, TX.
Long Johns Wolf

[AntiqueSledMan]

Hello SPJ,

The biggest issue with converting to 44 Colt is the fact that one could very easily break through the locking notches with the chamber. On the factory conversions they use a larger frame & cylinder, and also use the standard .429 bullet.

On my Howell 1858 Cylinder in 44 Colt, it's diameter is slightly oversized and the notches are not as deep as the original cylinder. Still plenty of room to operate and hold six rounds.

If you are determined to convert an 1860 to a six shot in 44 Colt, you will need to find a smith to build you a cylinder, (very costly).

AntiqueSledMan.

[The Pathfinder]

SPJ, in the beginning, back in the late '80s early '90s, the custom smiths, Millington, Howell, Gren, would do them and did. I had one done by John Gren, an 1860 with navy size grips I found in a little shop in CA, had it done in 44 Colt heeled. John would do them with a lined barrel, but I wanted to savor a little of what it was like back in the day, I know, I'm an idiot. Back then you had to custom order dies from RCBS and a bullet mold from Rapine to be able to feed it. Cases were trimmed 44 magnum that John supplied at the time. When John did an 1860 he had to mill off some of the rear of the water table and then used a newly made straight cylinder, reminiscent of the 1872 open top in order to get all six in without cutting thru the bolt notches. Kinda looks like a cross between a Richards and a long cylinder conversion. While a fun piece, and I learned a lot from trying to feed it (look up some of Mike Beliveau's old work from that time as he tried the same work with heeled bullets) nowadays I just use a pair of Richards II conversions from Cimarron. Although I am the caretaker of an original Colt 12 stop cylinder that looks like it has never been on a gun, so ....

Also check out Hoof Hearted's threads on loading heeled bullets up in the pinned section, he would have most anything you would need and his advice would be invaluable. Gary is the man as far as heeled bullets go.

[Major 2]

SPJ, in the beginning, back in the late '80s early '90s, the custom smiths, Millington, Howell, Gren, would do them and did. I had one done by John Gren, an 1860 with navy size grips I found in a little shop in CA, had it done in 44 Colt heeled. John would do them with a lined barrel, but I wanted to savor a little of what it was like back in the day, I know, I'm an idiot............ 

Not in the least way, you are a kindred spirit .... we are not conformist and never will be 

I'd love to see your 12 stop  ....so very cool

[Crow Choker]

Howdy SPJ.  Conversion cylinders are generally not made in .44 because the bore of a .44 cap gun is ~.452, perfect for 45 Colt/Schofield/etc.  Kirst did at one time make some .44 Colt cylinders but it required the use of heeled bullets (original style .44 Colt, not the modern .429 inside-lubed .44). 

Yes, the Uberti Army conversions are slightly larger than originals to allow for six 45's.

My first round at having and shooting a 'open frame' Colt was a Uberti Colt Open Top model chambered in 44 Special bought in 2008. It's a shooter, mostly load and shoot 44 Colt black powder fueled 200 grain Mav Dutchmans through it. Around a year after getting it I considered 'strongly' to convert my 1860 Colt or one of my Dragoons with a Kirst cylinder and ejector. Didn't care for the Howells as they required the breaking the gun down every time to unload brass and reload-still wouldn't care for or have a Howell. After pricing a Kirst cylinder and ejector unit I found I could just buy a Cimarron Uberti Richards II for around the same cost and not have the need and any cost for fitting. Didn't want to just install a Kirst cylinder without an ejector and have to carry around a wooden dowel to punch out the brass. Wanted to be able to shoot 44's anyway vs 45 Colt. Bought the Richards II in 44 Spec and love every ounce of it. Reload and shoot mostly 44 Colt black powder in it also. Happy with both Cimarron Uberti's, all six shooters. I'm aware I could convert back to percussion on any revolver I buy a conversion cylinder for, but figured there might be times I may wish to shoot whatever revolver I convert both in cartridge and percussion at the same outing. There are many times I do.

A couple of years ago, I had the NTA (Need To Acquire) a 38 Special Colt open style for shooting black powder. I checked the pricing of a Kirst cylinder and ejector assembly to convert one of my two 36 caliber cap guns (1851/1861). Same story, was able to buy a Uberti Richards/Mason model in 38 Special way cheaper. Not slamming Kirst or Howell, those that have them, want them, manufacturer, and or sell them. Just can't see buying those units when you can buy conversion open top models ready to shoot (of course some of them may need a bit of tuning and arbor work, but so will any cap gun you buy to convert or already have). The Kirst and Howell serve a purpose, I believe the Kirst is miles ahead of the Howells, they're pricey to buy and convert, but if someone wants to convert their cap and ball revolver using them, I'm fine with that. No problem with gunsmiths who will convert a cap and ball to whatever someone wants, if they have the need for and dollars, I'm fine with that. Some shooters wouldn't pay the price I've done so on some of my more modern double action revolvers such as my Colt Python's, rather buy some other double action at half the price and enjoy shooting them as much as I do my Pythons. Guess it boils down to "whatever trips your trigger" or what kind of trigger ya like to pull!!!!  Who knows, maybe someday I'll take back every thing I posted for not buying a Kirst and do so.    Take care and stay safe everyone. 

[Coffinmaker]

My Turn 
There are some very appropriate mechanical reasons Percussion Colt revolvers were not converted in the same manner we think of.  The first restriction is the basic frame size.  ALL 36 and larger Colt percussion guns were built on the same base 1851 frame.  There was no real room for expansion.

When conversions became possible (White patent expired), the dimensions of the cylinder were constrained by the original design (1851) dimensions.  The exception was the rebate to the Water Table to allow the stepped cylinder of the 1860.  The back of the 1860 cylinder was still the same dimension as the .36 cylinder.

Converting to .45 was never and option in the 19th century.  Those guns had Iron Frames and Iron Cylinders.  There was insufficient cylinder wall thickness to contain 45 Colt Cartridges and pressures.  The only large bore option was the 44 Colt cartridge with heel base bullets.  The smaller diameter of the 44 colt cartridge with it's minuscule rim allowed 6 cartridges to fit without interference of the cartridge rims and the recesses in the Star.  It must be remembered, the 44 Special and 44 Russian are modern iterations of the 44 not seen in the halcyon days of yesteryear.  The modern 44 Colt also has a much differs case.  The rim of the modern 44s is not far removed from the rim diameter of the 45.  A very difficult "fit" in guns of the 19th century.

Fast forward.  Today dawns along with reinactors and CAS.  CAS shooters clamoring for non historically accurate reproductions of 19th century guns.  Up jumps UBERTI of Italy.  A golden opportunity for profit appears.  Uberti scaled up the size of their 19th century reproductions to just barely accept 45 Colt cartridges.  In fact, it the early days, it was not uncommon for Uberti built Open Top reproductions is 45 to spit out the bottom piece of metal (super thin) of the cylinder locking bolt slots.  As a Gunsmith, I was never in favor of 45 Colt in the reproductions of 19th century guns.  Even in modern materials, the cylinder walls are just too thin.  Anyway, the increase in size of the cylinders also allowed the modern rim size to load without interference all the way to 45 Colt.

I don't personally recall any Gunsmiths converting Colt pattern 19th century guns to 45 Colt.  I knew Robert Millington and Robert wouldn't attempt it with a 6 shot cylinder.  Remember, Iron Frames and Iron Cylinders do not mix well with modern smokeless powders.  Even todays conversion smiths won't put 45 ACP in conversion cylinders because of the high pressure of the ACP round.

This has been the condensed version of "WHY" in this case.

We now return to our regularly scheduled programing.

Hide and Watch   

PS:  I forgot.  19th century .44s were not 44s.  The bore diameter was actually that of a .45.  Heal base bullets allowed that diameter bullet to be loaded in a 44 Colt cylinder (smaller than a 45).  Stuffed into a 44 Colt case which was smaller in diameter than a 45 cartridge.  Today's .44s are 44s.  Well not actually.  Today's 44s are actually .43s.  Oh, and to muddy more, Todays .38s are really 35s so go figure.  Cause .36s are actually almost true 38s.

[The Pathfinder]

Major 2, here is a link to a post I did when I first got the cylinder.

https://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php?topic=60734.msg721625#msg721625

[Marshal Will Wingam]

That 12 stop cylinder is very cool. Thanks for posting that link.

[The Pathfinder]

Some more info on the cylinder.

[Major 2]

I don't recall seeing that before, thanks for the link ...very cool

[SPJ]

Some more info on the cylinder.

Very nice. That seems to match up with the measurements listed in my digital copy of A Study of Colt Conversions by R. Bruce McDowell. Except they listed measurements to the third decimal place.

[The Pathfinder]

I think McDowell had better digital calipers than I do, mine only go to 2 decimal places. I believe by the serial no. on mine that it would fall into the converted percussion grouping, not sure why it didn't go back into it's original firearm.

[Black River Smith]

I am just going to jump in with one idea that I have not seen mentioned by any other poster.

In order to make a 'true 44Colt' the cylinder must be bored straight through so that the heeled bullet of larger diameter fits in the chamber.  Therefore a cylinder step or throat is not being created, which by this day and age standards would 'possibly bring a law suit' when a person used an incorrect magnum length shell with smokeless.  The 44Mag rim, as is, would not fit a 0.484 cut ratchet for the 44Colt but in the newer modern conversions it would create a problem.

That is why most black powder gun - cylinder makers will not produce a true straight bored 44Colt cylinder and the fact that most people cannot buy and will not take the time to load a heeled bullets.  There is not a large enough market.  IMHO.

I know, because I asked enough times of the makers of the Kirst, when I was active in NCOWS and really wanted one also.

[greyhawk]

So could someone convert one of them to 6 rounds of 44 special, and then either use heeled bullets or sleeve the barrel to 44 caliber?

Rim size beats you on most of these conversion attempts - you might be able to through bore the cylinder but then the walls are paper thin and the rims overlap at the back end - one of the early 6 shot conversions actually had the new cylinder bored at a slight angle to accomodate this.

[SPJ]

Rim size beats you on most of these conversion attempts - you might be able to through bore the cylinder but then the walls are paper thin and the rims overlap at the back end - one of the early 6 shot conversions actually had the new cylinder bored at a slight angle to accomodate this.

I was wondering about angled bores. I know that the Kenny Howell 1858 conversion cylinders are bored with holes at a 1/2 degree angle in order to allow 6 .45 colt rounds. I was wondering if that would work better in the 1860 cylinder too. I'm not sure if the Kenny Howell cylinders have the holes angled inward to the axis, out outwards though. My first thought in the case of the 1860 would be to angle it outwards and take advantage of the extra mass at the stepped end of the cylinder. Besides that I figure you could deal with the rim size by manually grinding down the rims on each cartridge case you use to match the rim diameter of the .44 Colt. I'm surprised I can't find any semi-rimmed cartridges in .44 that could be used

[Professor Marvel]

Thanks for the cylinder info SPJ, I do not yet have McDowells book and that saves me a lot of trouble.
Of course, it is important to know that McDowell probably used a micrometer rather than calipers. even digital calipers are not as accurate
as a good micrometer.

As you stated, rim size can be an issue. Those fanatics motivated indiduals that prefer to do it the hard way have taken the
route of shaving existing case rims, etc on a lathe to achieve their goal.

I myself, as an ignorant poor college student , took a Navy Arms 1851, bored out a spare .36 cylinder, turned down the ratchet side (backside)
with a bastard file,  and actually ground off almost 1/4 to 1/3 of the rim of a handful of .38 specials  to get them to clear ... I was planning on
using 3F Goex and Lee .36 concicals. They did look remarkably ugly...

I never did get up the cajones to load and fire them tho...

Ah But I did make .36 paper cartridges using .38 spcl HB wadcutters and zigzag papers. They looked great, but .... were a little loose.,
When I fired the first one, I got a chain fire  and all six went off. My  Later version paper cartridges used larger .375 - .380 conicals.

yhs
prof marvel

[SPJ]

Thanks for the cylinder info SPJ, I do not yet have McDowells book and that saves me a lot of trouble.
Of course, it is important to know that McDowell probably used a micrometer rather than calipers. even digital calipers are not as accurate
as a good micrometer.

As you stated, rim size can be an issue. Those fanatics motivated indiduals that prefer to do it the hard way have taken the
route of shaving existing case rims, etc on a lathe to achieve their goal.

I myself, as an ignorant poor college student , took a Navy Arms 1851, bored out a spare .36 cylinder, turned down the ratchet side (backside)
with a bastard file,  and actually ground off almost 1/4 to 1/3 of the rim of a handful of .38 specials  to get them to clear ... I was planning on
using 3F Goex and Lee .36 concicals. They did look remarkably ugly...

I never did get up the cajones to load and fire them tho...

Ah But I did make .36 paper cartridges using .38 spcl HB wadcutters and zigzag papers. They looked great, but .... were a little loose.,
When I fired the first one, I got a chain fire  and all six went off. My  Later version paper cartridges used larger .375 - .380 conicals.

yhs
prof marvel

I'm a poor ignorant college student too. So I'm glad to learn from those who have gone through the work I can't afford. I do have that fanatical motivation, but not all the resources to satisfy that drive. Here is a link to were I downloaded my copy of that book https://b-ok.org/book/1281189/64ae87.  How come you had to grind the rims .38 spls? In an 1851 cylinder there should be enough clearance for 6 cartridges without rim overlap. Is that an issue unique to the Navy Arms model?