Cimarron Originals with Mike Harvey - What Makes Cimarron Different?

[Marshal Halloway]

Description from YouTube/Cimarron: With so many "experts" dismissing Cimarron Firearms Co. as just another importer, we at Cimarron feel the need to educate the public on what our contribution to Replica Western Firearms actually is. Every day a misinformed historian is claiming to know for a fact that Cimarron is exactly like any other importer, and Cimarron's products are just like everybody else's. Then these guys challenge us, usually on our own facebook posts, saying, "prove me wrong". Of course, we do prove them wrong, and they still refuse the truth! Just as soon as we're done educating that potential customer, another one is popping up saying the same thing. It's like playing Whack-a-Mole all the time! Cimarron's President, Mike Harvey is greatly responsible for bringing most Replica Western Firearms that are available today to market. Why? Passion for the Old West!! Passion for firearms!! Also, because by the late 70's, Mike and Mary Lou Harvey got tired of waiting for somebody else to do it. So please enjoy this spirited history lesson from Mike Harvey himself!

[45 Dragoon]

Thanks Marshal !!

Mike

[Navy Six]

Thank You Marshal, that was interesting. I always liked the "the story behind the story" details. However, after watching this I want to buy a bunch more files!

[45 Dragoon]

 Well I talked to Cimarron a couple of days ago and they "swear" they didn't offer this but I have a new '60 Army (Uberti) that has a silver plated trigger guard (beautiful!!)!! It will get a Kirst Pietta gated conversion cyl.  and it will be a regular "appendage" for me!!! It was actually one of three "new in the box" revolvers that I acquired for my "out of the box" tuned S.A.'s I will be offering soon. I'm using the Pietta conversion because it accepts regular 45C length cartridges. It really is a beautiful handgun!!

Mike

[Buckaroo Lou]

Interesting history. Thanks for sharing.

[Marshal Halloway]

Cimarron's Mike Harvey Harvey takes issue with "fake gun news"

https://www.cascity.com/cimarrons-mike-harvey-harvey-takes-issue-with-fake-gun-news/9196/

[Abilene]

Thanks Marshall.  This was interesting (Mike vents at gun writers, hehe) but the Cimarron You-tube channel has a 3-part "The Story of Cimarron" and part 3, "The Italian Connection" actually goes into more detail about the changes made to the SAA reproductions and the unique Cimarron features, with a little less rambling. 

[llanerosolitario]

Mike Harvey, set the standard for today's replicas, but in my opinion, from a very personal perspective. He got the guns made as he thinks they should be, not as they were.( and probably the old timers were rigth, not Harvey).


What Harvey seems not to understand, is that  no one in those old times wanted a weak hammer spring with  slow hammer fall...so they were not obsessed with "slick actions".

No one wanted "speed", even less the military, when shooting a revolver. They wanted a hammer that will crush any percussion cap or primer, and that's why, if you observe an original 1858 Remington hammer spring, they are extremely thick and stiff...and the same in a Nagant, a Webley, a Colt SAA or a SW no3. They are hard to cock.

"Slick actions" are a thing of the postmodernist aficionado.....introduced by Harvey as an "advance"..not present in original revolvers of the time.

Today, and thanks in a great deal to Harvey, no one in the USA will buy a revolver with a stiff hammer spring. Yes, the action will be  delicious to cock, but that comes at price, like everything in life : a slow hammer,   in a serious bulls eye target shooting competition, where you shoot at a distance 25 meters, one hand hold, that doesn't forgive a single mistake in sigths alignment, means less points...as any shake and unwanted movements of the hand will be multiplied on target,

Then people will show me their targets proving how accurate their revolvers are,,,,shooting two hand held, many times supported, in their backyard. What is ok in "ones backyard" is not valid in competition. And I am talking here  toabout "practical accuracy", what you can get one hand hold, not "potential accuracy", what the gun can get if you were a robot.

When it comes to the finishes. he obsessed everybody with the wrong idea that corners had to be sharp and square at all times, and that some modern production Colts were, in that aspect, inferior to the italian clones..a quite arguable idea...specially when the finish in modern Italian replicas is not as  durable as Colts,  but people still believe that.

in my opinion, importers and distributors  should have focused on improving riflings instead, not allways adequate for  black powder shooting in the modern SAA replicas....and in making a bigger variety of clones, not only the same clone in different "invented" versions, but it's a business, I understand that....if you can make people buy the same gun 3 times, it pays off.

I say improving the riflings, because all original guns are far more accurate than the Italian clones, both in the cap and ball and the Single action. as Mr Harvey does nor practice serious bulls eye shooting, ( he shoots at 20 yards for accuracy  while the international distance is one hand held 25  meters and 50 meters, distances that "dont forgive"), he never paid attention  to this aspect.

Example: Inhave an old Orbea Ona, a copy of a SW double action revolver, far more accurate than any Uberti  Schofield or SAA I have owned, 2, and tested, several. Deep progressive riflings versus modern Italian clone riflings.

The final result is a Colt SAA and. Remington 1858 clone very good for CAS, but useless for serious bulls eye and MLAIC internacional competitions...unless one removes many  of "Harvey's improvements", in actions.

The Germans and the Spanish took a opposite path when they built their Feinkwerbau and Santa Barbara 1858 clones, as Harvey was not there "advising", but collectosrs and target shooters instead ( Santa Barbara hired a World MLAIC champion and the Army Museum to develope their 1858)and they made super accurate revolvers...they centered on riflings, chamber/ muzzle diameter relationship, steel quality and insisted on quite hard hammer springs.....they didn't pay much attention to case hardenied frames, nitre blued barrels and cilinders, and super smooth hammers.

The Santa Barbara revolver was the most accurate revolver I ever had, rivaling my SW K14....much time spent inside the barrel and cilinder, by its designer, finally paid off.

The result: top revolvers. And the latter, the Santa, cost little more than a Uberti in its time or around that.


On the other side, we have the same gun, the SAA,  in 150 versions...overwhelming and monotone,,,..( still waiting for a British Bulldog replica).

As far as I know, I must admit that the manufacturer has the last word when making "other clones". The itlalians rejected to make a Merwin Hulbert replica...too expensive and required much investment.

Talking about clones, here is clone by Orbea, extracted from "Colt  Brevette Revolvers", whose authors, Ron Paxton, and Roy Marcott, who, by the way, experts as they are, no doubt, however failed  to identify its origins, despite de clear Orbea Trade Mark. and the barrel legend in basque ( reading: " this is the strongest revolver made in the Basque Country) and the well documented literarure written about them in Europe ...... a result, I take in a relative way the rest of the info contained in this book,


Yes, the basque made this "advanced" replica, 140 years ago.....Low Hammer, simplified action with less parts, 1858 type,  progressive rifling, ligth weigth. I prefer this revolver, to 3 Italian replicas....

[llanerosolitario]

By the way,, every time Imstopped by their booth at the Shot Show, in the happy pre Covid times, they  treated me in the nicest way, suppling all info requested.

Serious people who deserve all the sucess they have achieved, though I have a different concept, more purist, and less user friendly, than them about classic revolvers,

Cimarron and Italian replicas are to the West, what Errol Flynn was to the real Custer or to the authentic Robin Hood....a romantic view..sometimes literally invented. The real ones, were a bit, only a bit, different, and probably, better.

I am not the only one saying that...many World MLAIC champions agree with me.


Me Harvey "invented" far West guns that never existed such as he conceives them. That's why many gun writers and historians don't care much about his replicas.

[Abilene]

Well, bullseye shooters are very, very much in the minority of purchasers of Cimarrons.  The vast majority of shooters will prefer a lighter hammer spring than standard.  And for those that want a faster hammer fall, springs are cheap and easy to install. 

FYI, Cimarron has had pretty much zero input on Ubertis 1858 replicas.  Mike did have some input on the Remington conversions, primarily just getting Uberti to make it.

[llanerosolitario]

I just put the Feinkwerbau and SB 1858 clones as an example of how to make a good replica.
About the 1858 cartridge conversions, none of them was made in 45 colt..as a result, Uberti had to oversize the frame and make it by forging and electroerosion machining...so what one  is buying is, literally, an invented bigger 1858 made with  high tech industrial processes.

People will buy what they brainwash them to buy. Most people buying clones are not CAS shooters neither, but people who love Old West guns.

[llanerosolitario]

Mike Harvey didnt improve italian clones ...except aesthecally..he just adapted the guns to CAS.....to speed. Nothing to do with the real old West guns.

[45 Dragoon]

Well,  honestly, I'm glad we don't drive Model T's and Model A's today!! When improvements are introduced it gives you options.  It sounds like some folks want to MAKE folks like the old original setup .  .  .  period (a little "brainwashing)!!!  There's not a thing wrong with making improvements in strength, materials used, ease of operation .  .  .    Some folks with arthritic thumbs may not want a heavy mainsprings .  .  .  they are customers too!! 
  Today you can pretty much get what you want, but it seems that some are really ticked off because options are available.  If all reproductions were made exactly like what Mr. llanerosolitario wants, the industry would die.

By the way, just like faster speeds, independent suspension and computer engine management systems being the norm today, it only makes sense to make your "hobby interests" more enjoyable as well!!
Contrary to popular belief, you CAN reduce mainspring tension and still have fast lock time  .  .  . if you know how !!!  Lol!!

Mike

[Coffinmaker]

  Well Heck   

One must understand, Opinions are like some Body Parts.  Everyone has them.  I find myself in complete agreement with 45 Dragoon.  The Replicas (there are NO clones) being made today are just fine.  The "out of the box" mainsprings are sufficiently heavy.  Duplicating the original Colt and Remington is just plain silly.

It is also to be considered, the Colt SAA nor the Remington cartridge guns were never built for, nor intended for, Bullseye competition shooting.  Perhaps excepting the Colt Bisley, purpose built to compete in exactly ONE competition.

Comparing a Finewerkbau to a Daisy Air Gun is just as silly.  guns built to different purpose. 

If all you have chosen to do is find fault with practically everything and truly understanding nothing, perhaps you should find a different subject and a more amenable forum.  Just.  Go.  Away.   

[llanerosolitario]

I knew that I would not be understood.

Anyway, the question is:

How can it be, that every original gun  from the XIX century, from duelling pistols to specially Colt and SW revolvers, has always been, in general, more accurate, if rifling in good condition,  than all the Italian replicas I have owned?

Examples:

Orbea n3 basque copy  of SW model 3 in 44 Russian,,..far more accurate and far more reliable with BP than the Uberti n3 and Uberti Schofields. A HQ copy...heat blued, unbreakable parts inside, progressive rifling....no interruptions when firing BP.

Ludwig Loewe Sw copy of model 3,,,,impressive craftsmanship...far better finished than the Italian copies.

Orbea ONA 455....far more accurate than the two above ....rust blued...unbreakable small parts..progressive rifling,

Remington New model Army,,,far more accurate than Uberti's..more resistant than Pedersoli's. Perfect spring tension, progressive rifling. Resistant small parts. Perfect  Chamber dia/ muzzle dia relationship.....unlike Piettas and Ubertis.

Colt 1860 original...better steel and comstruction (forged)  than the butter easy machining steel, cast parts by Pietta. Heat blued in oven. True case color hardened.

Colt SAA original, from 1900...far more accurate than Uberti and Pietta clones with BP. Progressive perfect rifling that stabilizes lead bullets. Deppresive accuracy in the italians, with BP and lead. Fake color case hardened...inferior industrial blueing in the italians.

El Tigre carbine ..more accurate than Armis Chiappa's....super finished....rust blued, fully forged, unbreakable...gun used by a hunter until recently..made in 1920. Chiapas fake case hardening,,laser cut parts.

What "improvements"? Non progressive Riflings that are far inferior to the old progressive ones? Industrial blueing versus rust or heat blue ( true long time heat blue, not temper blue as in the copies)? "Slick actions"  versus fast hammers?

The clones are not better,,, they are inferior in construction to the old guns, they are less accurate, the small parts break more,...they just bright more, have slickers actions and are avaiable in more options and can shoot smokeless without trouble.

That industry, by the way, has created few jobs in the USA,,,Mike Harvey, like  Bushnell, another american heroe, created a lot of jobs,,,,in foreign lands.

[Abilene]

I knew that I would not be understood.

Anyway, the question is:

How can it be, that every original gun  from the XIX century, from duelling pistols to specially Colt and SW revolvers, has always been, in general, more accurate, if rifling in good condition,  than all the Italian replicas I have owned? ...

In my opinion, the answer to your question is that you could not afford a modern reproduction made to XIX century specs.  Me neither.  I could afford about 2 or 3 versus the 17 or so that I own.  And the company could not be successful.  Pretty simple, really.

[llanerosolitario]

This what Hege did to create a superb 1858 replica ( just an example that could work on the SAA, unlike what Harvey's deep knowledge dictates):

They took a Pietta Frsme, threw away the crappy Pietta barrel, installed a match  barrel instead, modified Pietta chambers so they will match the barrel, and installed a super fast mechanism: it was just exactly what  Remington did in its time, 120 years before.

once again, the original was far superior to the clones. So instead of "improving" the originals, they returned to the origins to make a good revolver.

Harvey never gave importance to the barrels, taken for granted that they were good...as well as to chamber diameters. The result: pretty clones that don't shoot as well as the originals.

[45 Dragoon]

I suggest you go into business and produce the kind of revolver you want.  My business is taking the Italian imports and making them mechanically perfect as it can be. Set up with perfect timing, a modern torsion spring action, a light action that my customers want, and very tight tolerances. My customers are happy, I'm happy.  These revolvers don't cost anywhere near what they would cost with all the work I do if it were done at "the factory". Like Abilene says,  most folks wouldn't be able to afford a $2,000.00 +  plinker .  .  .  and that would be just the factory offering.

Mike

[llanerosolitario]

In my opinion, the answer to your question is that you could not afford a modern reproduction made to XIX century specs.  Me neither.  I could afford about 2 or 3 versus the 17 or so that I own.  And the company could not be successful.  Pretty simple, really.

Except for the high cost of old times finishes, the price would be the same. The gain twist barrels were standard 140 yearsago...even among belgian and basque clones, they make a big diference and with modern machinery the cost will be the same or little more.

The answer is that Mike Harvey didnt pay attention to this, and brainwashed the customers into thinking that a good quality revolver must:

-have a slick action (wrong, only good for CAS, not for survival or accuracy)

-have square edges (wrong)

-have wonderful polished brigth finishes ( original guns tended to have moderate or low luster blueings, specially rust blue military revolvers).

-only Colts and some Smith and few Rems dominated the gun scenery in the West, so no foreign guns or other domestic designs( wrong).

-original guns were mainly hand made ( false in revolvers).

-the steel is better in replicas than in the originals (not true in cap and balls...Pietta uses softer steels in them than Colt did)


And many of us, just have a different opinion.






-

[45 Dragoon]

Let me see, the Colts of the 19th century could not handle a 357 mag round, the Co!ts of the 20th century could.  Better materials.
Colts SAA's never been chambered in 44 mag. Uberti's SAA repros have and still are. Better materials.
The Walkers of the 19th century could barely handle the max charges they were set up for, the repro Walkers can shoot max all day. Better materials.
The term "slick action" is too vague .  A "tuned action" means a corrected action, one that won't self destruct, timed and sprung for its intended role.
An easy functioning SA is absolutely fine for survival.

And, a Colt SAA costs the same today as it did in 1875  - they aren't falling off of trees!!
An Italian repro of a Colt SAA cost a 1/4 of the price of a Colt and you can get it in 44 mag.

The point is, they sell, sales keep companies in business. If you can do better .  .  .  do it.

Mike