give me the rundown on these 200 dollar navy colt revolvers

>>33578868
>No link
>LOLWUT

>>33578868
>the idea that i can get a conversion kit for 38 lc seems nice too.
these are not cheap
they will not work with brass framed revolvers which means the guns going to be 250+
the cylinders are 250-300
they cant shoot modern ammo you have to use cowboy loads
with 500 dollars you can buy a real gun hell you can get a 38 special for 250 bucks

>>33578868
>get a conversion kit for 38 lc
not with one of those brass framed navies.

>>33578943
>>33578950
ah i see
regardless is it still something worth getting just for fun?

>>33578868
>give me the rundown on these 200 dollar navy colt revolversim looking for something that's fun and cheap to shoot and black powder seems like a lot of fun.also the idea that i can get a conversion kit for 38 lc seems nice too.anyone have one?


They are fun but get one with a steel frame.

Very accurate, cast your own bullets cuts your own wads, tune theme and grease the action with bisley gun grease . Lovely to shoot, I have one identical to the OPs and steel framed also. Can make my own caps using toy caps and have a ball mill. Chamfer the cylinders, put in a coil spring and bolt stop for fanning

With a shoulder stock and tuning a longer barrel makes a 100 yard gun while the 6 inchers are the most naturally pointing gun you will ever hold.

Will take requests for OC on this thread

>>33579241
>regardless is it still something worth getting just for fun?

Absolutely mine outshoot modern 9mm semis all day long

>>33579247
>while the 6 inchers are the most naturally pointing gun you will ever hold.

5 typo

>>33579241
If your fun involves shooting it a lot with standard loads i'd spend a bit more for the steel frame.

>>33578868
I have one and it seems weak as shit. Shouldn't a 44 cal ball in front of 30 grains of black powder have some kind of kick?

>>33579241
Yeah, if you're willing to put in the time to load and clean them.

I would recommend an 1858 with a steel frame though over a colt. Steel frame lasts longer when using heavy loads, and the 1858 is all around easier to use.

>>33579280

From an 8 inch barrel it's ballistically similar to 9mm in terms of velocity and mass. From a 5 incher it's a lot less. When you consider the weight of the frames on these guns it makes sense that they don't recoil much.

>>33579280
>>>33578868 (OP)I have one and it seems weak as shit. Shouldn't a 44 cal ball in front of 30 grains of black powder have some kind of kick?


Black powder has more a shove than a kick

But the energy is these. They loose accuracy with max loads a rule of thumb is half the calibre in grains tune up for accuracy

>>33579354
>From an 8 inch barrel it's ballistically similar to 9mm in terms of velocity and mass. From a 5 incher it's a lot less. When you consider the weight of the frames on these guns it makes sense that they don't recoil much.

That depends if it is 36 or 44 and whether conical or ball.

A 36 80 grain RB is more like a .380+

>>33579326
>I would recommend an 1858 with a steel frame though over a colt.

Steel frame 1851

I understand the appeal of the Remington 58 in may ways but they just don't point as naturally as a 51

>>33579280

Colt 1851, .44
8 inch 30 grain 3F Triple Seven 140 grain, .454 ball 1020 ft/s 324 ft-lbs 20.40 ft-s

>>33579462

So about the same as regular power 9mm but with a bigger hole and a bit more accuracy

>>33578868
As others have said get the steel frame. The brass tarnishes horribly and is a pain to keep clean. Prepare to disassemble the gun after every range trip for full detail cleaning.

>>33580401

The big issue with the brass frames is that they stretch and go out of spec over time, causing all sorts of problems.

>>33578868

I highly recomend getting an 1858 in steel instead.

However if you really like the styling of the 51, consider getting it in steel so you can later on when you get tired of reloading and cleaning BP shoot 45 schofield through a kirst konverter. I have a sheriff size 51, like your OP, but in case hardened steel. The paw for action wore out pretty fast, though mine was a pietta and I dicked with it all the time.

>>33579247
how would you rate it as a HD weapon?
like its loaded and ready at the bedstand.
are you gonna blind yourself with smoke and have no follow up? how lethal is it?

not that anyone would take one to a gunfight.

>>33581210

I wouldn't trust preloaded black powder for SD comrade. You felon and can't have real guns?

>>33582039
californian

>>33579247
>for some reason needs permisson to post pictures on an image board
Golly, I van't wait to see the stock photos you underage cunt.

>>33582097

the shield is on the pistol list if you can carry, or get a mossman 590. Also you do know what would happen if you defended yourself in anyway in commiefornia?

>>33581210
If you know how to load it properly and have good supplies, it will be perfectly reliable. The smoke isn't going to be that bad for six shots, which is all you're going to get even with the quick-loading 1858 remington

When you get one, you will probably want to reduce the mainspring tension by bending the spring. Make sure it does not grind against the hammer, as this wall have the opposite effect of making cocking easier. Many stock italian guns come very heavy and it will be hard to use one handed or for rapid follow up shots.

Ballistically, 35 grains behind a .44 ball puts you in 9mm territory and it will work well enough.

All that said, you will be in an absolute nightmare trying to get it unloaded and, when capped, it can theoretically be set off if something smacks into it the wrong way. Remingtons are safer than colts and can be stored safely with 6 shots (only 5 on a colt) but don't bang it into things.

All in all, consider sucking it up and buying a normal gun.

>>33582134
We have castle doctrine in CA.

>>33579387
This I have a remington copy its very front heavy.

>>33582190
I would have a shotgun or a carbine if you can't wait and you need a gun right now.

>>33578868
>black powder
>cheap to shoot
nigga expect a quarter a shot minimum with that thing, and that's assuming you're casting your own balls from free scrap lead.

>>33582190

Do we really?

>>33582404
I'm genuinly wondering what in god's name you mean by this. Do you get your powder and caps in one tin and 4 oz qualities online?

>>33582423
Let me spell this out to you.

AT THEIR CHEAPEST a #10 cap is 5 cents each, buying by the 1,000.

AT ITS CHEAPEST Pyrodex is $17/lb and only then when buying 48lbs at a go online to minimize shipping+hazmat, which works out to 0.25 cents per grain, and a *light* charge for a .38cal BP revolver is 14gr so you're looking at 3.5 cents a shot.

You need bore butter or similar to cover your cylinders to prevent a chain fire. It can be made at home fairly cheaply but it's still not free, and commercial bore butter runs about a nickel per cylinder's worth.for it or 2 cents per cylinder for homebrew or repurposed shit like petroleum jelly (you need a fair amount of it).

Then you need your patch, those are around half a penny each even repurposing cleaning patches bought in bulk, or as much as 5 cents each for the pre-cut, pre-lubed, 100% clothing-grade cotton ones made specifically for front-stuffers.

Then you need your cylinder lube, which is cheap enough to not contribute meaningfully to the cost per shot but IS an expense.

Then you need cleaning supplies, you really do have to clean it every 3-4 cylinders through it MINIMUM just to make it so you can actually load the fucker much less shoot it.

>>33582555
So we're talking around 12 cents a shot WITHOUT having to spend a penny on balls or cleaning supplies and shooting powderpuff loads and doing as much homebrew shit as you can (which is cheaper but far more time consuming), or as much as 27-30 cents a shot using commercial everything (including balls) and shooting normal to stout loads

>>33582406
no. youre going to jail and even if you dont get charged they are taking your guns at least.

I have never heard of anyone in CA ever getting their guns back. if a cop takes them. they gone.
they use bureaucratic paperwork and stall until the thing gets destroyed.

>>33582555
Bore butter is not necessary to prevent chainfires unless you use undersized balls.

Patches aren't really necessary either.

You can go about 50-60 shots without accuracy suffering much.

You need to try and abuse your equipment to see what it's potential is.

File: 1464375123743.png (283KB, 426x387px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 426x387px

>>33578868
i used them for 7 years in the NPS. i can run 15 second shots on the 53 enfield, and cleaned them every day all those 7 years.

Dont get a Pietta. they break in a year and are always on sale for shit prices. EuroArms is your best bet for anything made today. They clean alright, they fire well, have correct bores, and you can get some mods for them to make them period correct if thats what you wanna do, BUT if youre looking for pure historical accuracy, go try to find a Parker-Hale. Those fuckers are true shit. Ive held a couple originals in my time, and they have a slight lightness to them. Reproductions are heavier for some reason, couldnt tell you why, they just are, and Parker Hales have that exact lightness which gets my history dick rock hard

but to be completely honest, from a normal ass persons point of view, and not a view from a historical park, i wouldnt even recommend one. you might shoot it ONCE, then youll realize youll have clean the fajjer EVERY time you use it, and even when you dont use it.

hope this helps!

>>33582620
>bore butter is not necessary
Agreed, it's not, but it's a good practice.
>patches aren't really necessary either
Yes they fucking are, holy shit have you ever shot a fucking front-stuffing pistol before?
>you can go about 50-60 shots without accuracy suffering much
And after about the 24th one you're spending 10+ minutes per cylinder loading the damn thing it's so fouled up. And this is dependent on the pistol, I have 2 repro's and one will literally foul out its nipples on the second shot between cleanings. The other makes it about 5.

how feasible are black powders for home defense?

>>33583409
youd be better off with almost any other modern gun but if its what you got its what you got. just cause its not legally a firearm doesnt mean they wont charge you with a firearm crime when they catch your underage or felon ass with it.

>>33582719
>Yes they fucking are, holy shit have you ever shot a fucking front-stuffing pistol before?

We're talking about revolvers. You don't need a patch for them unless you're a weapons-grade autist trying to do some sort of competition shooting with them, and even then serious shooters make their own for pennies to the hundred.

>>33583409
if you keep it loaded, the barrel will rust away. you pretty much have to get it out and load it the second that meme image of that masked dude with the stick legs kicking a door happens. keep that in mind

>>33579247

I've heard of single action revolvers modified so fanning the hammer wouldn't fuck up the internals. Can you elaborate on this?

>>33584312
>barrels
Cylinders and as long as you have tight balls (lead shaving tight), seal with beeswax on the front and have tight caps you'll be fine asl long as you don't live in florida swamps

>>33578868
Brass frames are soft and bend with use. Get an 1858 with a steel frame at least. 1851 brass navy is ok in .36 cal with reduced loads. (22grains+wad)
>still so much fun to fiddle with
>so much fiddling just to load

>>33584567
>not taking the brass frame just to have that Griswold Gunnison style

>>33582620
I use a 5lb tub of cisco I got on sale for $1 ($0.98 + tax) seriously not a big deal unless you're a gear queer for BP, and at that i mostly use it to keep the moisture out of the powder.

>>33584610
I got a brass frame 1858i in .44 the other day, I think my thread is still up. I love how shiny and showy it is.
>ultimate gopher pistol

>>33584501
when i think black powder, i think of a rifle, but youre right

File: IMAG1723.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

Just skip pietta and buy a uberti steel frame 1851 navy. Dixie gun works has them for $275 last I checked. Pic related.

>>33578868
Clyde already did video on this
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Orn36XC4DZQ

File: IMAG1508.jpg (1MB, 1836x3264px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1836x3264px

Mine prefers actual .380 sized balls. The .375 hornady ammo pictured is just slightly undersized enough that my loading plunger picks up the ball when I mash it down and pick it up again. Unsafe if there wasn't a patch beneath it. I'd also recommend heading over to track of the wolf and getting a reproduction colt powder flask for navy and army revolvers. I'll post a photo in a bit.

>>33584363
On these older style revolvers there's no cylinder stop and the internals are a lot less tightly tolerant. If you fire them quickly you can get out-of-alignment fires (worst case the gun explodes) or can jar the internal timings bad enough that it will just break

File: IMAG1680.jpg (847KB, 1836x3264px) Image search: [Google]

847KB, 1836x3264px

Shamelessly posting my ugly bed sheet. The army revolver posted is a pietta. Ran great until the hand spring and trigger/bolt spring went bust. Too lazy to replace them. Great shooter though.

>>33584744
Forgot to mention that pic related has the repro colt flask. It's a pedersoli reproduction so it's already quality in my book. My dumb ass dinged it the other day so I imagine I reduced it's capacity by a few grains kek.

File: Walker45BPM-3.jpg (38KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 800x600px

I'm going to drop this here. .45 black powder magnum out of a 1847 walker. Interesting and popular wildcat cartridge.

File: Bill-the-Butcher-630x354.jpg (75KB, 630x354px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 630x354px

So here's a possibly stupid question. If I wanted something like a old Colt Navy revolver but didn't want to fuck with black powder, are there ones that take modern cartridges?

>>33584867
I know there are cartridge conversions of later revolvers, but I don't think the Colt Navy itself. Maybe the New Navy?

>>33584867
Some black powder revolvers have cartridge conversion kits, yes. Get a BP revolver, and a conversion cylinder, you'll be set. Make sure your frame's steel, brass is too weak to safely serve this purpose.

File: x27170_186.jpg (21KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 600x400px

>>33584867
Yeah. They're called cartridge conversions. You can make one yourself or buy them pre-made.

The good ones operate with a loading gate, similarly to a colt single action army, and will take modern ammunition provided it uses a lead projectile. No FMJ, P+, or hollowpoints, but it's still modern smokeless ammo that can usually be had relatively cheap and commonly.


Pic related is a Taylors & Co. .38 special 1858 New Model Army.

>>33584867
You can get black powder revolvers purposely built with cartridge cylinders. The industry calls them conversion guns but truth is they were built from the ground up in the years leading up to 1873 (I.e. 1871-1872). For the 51 navy you'll only be able to shoot factory loaded or cowboy action .38 special, or .38 long colt.