Guns – Page 4 – The ExhaustNotes Blog

A .458 Win Mag No. 1

By Joe Berk

About 20 years ago I bought a .458 Ruger No. 1, but until recently, I had not shot it.

I first saw a .458 No. 1 when I was in the Army at Fort Bliss, Texas. Bob Starkey (who owned Starkey’s Guns in El Paso) had one, and that rifle was stunning. I had just bought a .45 70 No. 1 from Bob and I didn’t have the funds to buy the .458. But man, I sure wanted it.

Bob Starkey’s personal .458 Win Mag was a custom rifle built on a 1903 Springfield action. I asked Bob what firing it was like. “Well,” he said, “you’re glad when it’s over.” Call me a glutton for punishment, but I immediately knew two things:

- - I had to have a .458, and
  - Someday I would.

I’ve since owned several .458 Win Mags, including a Winchester Model 70 African (long gone), a Browning Safari Grade (it was a beautiful rifle based on a Mauser action; I’m sorry I let that one go), a Remington 798 (also based on a Mauser action), and my Ruger Model 77 Circassian. Every one of those .458 rifles was surprisingly accurate. If you reload and you’ve ever thought of buying a .458, trust me on this: Take the plunge. With cast or jacketed bullets and light loads, .458 Winchester Magnum rifles are very easy to shoot.

Back to the main attraction: My .458 No. 1. Technically, the Ruger .458 No. 1 is called a Ruger No. 1H. The H designates what Ruger calls their Tropical rifle; I’m guessing the Tropical’s heavier barrel means the H stands for heavy. The .458 No. 1 is big, it is heavy, and it just looks like it means business. You might say it’s the Norton Scrambler of elephant guns.

When I saw this No. 1 advertised on the Gunbroker.com auction site, it pushed all the buttons for me. It was a .458, it had beautiful walnut, it had the older red recoil pad (a desirable feature), it had the 200th year inscription, and it had the early Ruger No. 1 checkering pattern.

Every once in a while over the last two decades I’d haul the .458 out of the safe to admire it, but I had never fired it. I was thinking about that a couple of weeks ago, and I decided my failure to get the No. 1 on the range was a character flaw I needed to correct.

With my light .458 Win Mag reloads, the No. 1 grouped about 12 inches above the point of aim at 50 yards. When I examined the rifle more closely, I saw that the rear sight was abnormally tall compared to the rear sights on my other No. 1 Rugers, and it was already in its lowest setting. Evidently the previous owner discovered the same thing (i.e., the rifle shoots high), he took the rear sight all the way down, and then he sold it when it still shot too high. Lucky for me.

My first thought was that the forearm was exerting undue upward pressure on the barrel. I loosened the screw securing the forearm to address this and tried firing it again, but it made no difference. It wasn’t the forearm that was causing the rifle to shoot high.

I realized I needed either a lower rear sight or a taller front sight. The rear sight was already bottomed out, so I couldn’t go any lower with it. I think Ruger put the taller rear sight on the .458 to compensate for the recoil with factory ammo. I have some 500-grain factory ammo so I could fire a few rounds and find out, but I don’t want to beat myself up. The heavier and faster factory ammo bullets get out of the barrel faster than my lighter and slower loads. With factory ammo the muzzle doesn’t rise as much before the bullet exits the bore, so with factory ammo the rear sight has to be taller to raise the point of impact. At least that’s what I think is going on. The bottom line is the factory ammo shoots lower than my lighter, slower loads.

The factory .458 load is a 500-grain bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2000 feet per second. Those loads are designed to DRT an elephant (DRT stands for “Dead Right There”). My needs are different: I want a load that makes small groups in paper targets while drawing ooohs and ahs from everyone on the range (you know, because I am shooting small groups with a .458 Win Mag). Doing so with lighter loads on paper targets keeps both me and Dumbo happy.

If you are reading this and thinking I was obsessing about this situation, you would be correct. I don’t know why, but when a gun is misbehaving I tend to get tunnel vision. I continued to look at the rear sight and started thinking. I knew I needed it to be lower by about a tenth of an inch, so I thought perhaps instead of using a sight picture where the front bead was concentric with the U in the rear sight blade, I could rest the bottom of the front sight’s gold bead lower in the rear sight. I fired five shots with a normal sight picture and then another five with my “lower in the rear sight” concept, and son of a gun, the two groups were right on top of each other. Both were still about a foot above the point of aim (which was 6:00 on the bullseye). What they say about peep sights is true, I guess. Your eye will naturally center the front sight as you squeeze the trigger.

Out there on the range, I kept thinking about this as I stared at the rear sight. It was a nice day and I was the only guy out there. An idea hit me. The rear sight blade is removable (it’s held in place by two screws that loosen to move the blade up or down), and the rear sight leaf (to which the blade attaches) has a much wider and deeper U. Could I remove the blade altogether and use the wider and lower U of the rear sight frame as the rear sight notch?

I had my gunsmith’s tool kit with me and I took the two tiny screws out (the smallest screwdriver in the kit did the trick). I was sweating bullets (pardon the pun) about dropping either of those screws (I knew if I did I’d never find them), but the screwdriver blade is magnetized and it held onto them. With the sight blade removed, I fired five rounds, and voilà, I was in the black. I fired another five, and they went right on top of the first five. The group size, with open sights at 50 yards from a .458 Win Mag, wasn’t too bad. In fact, it was essentially identical to the group size with the rear sight blade in place.

I knew I needed to lower the rear sight, but by how much? The Ruger’s sight radius is 17 inches (the distance from the front sight to the rear sight), and the distance to the target (on which the group was about 12 inches high) was 50 yards. Remember when your junior high school teacher told you that algebra would come in handy someday and you didn’t believe him? Well, today was that day for me. Here’s how it shakes out:

(distance rear sight must be lowered)/(sight radius) =
(12 inches)/(5o yards)

Solving for the distance the rear sight must be lowered (let’s call it x), we have:

x = (12 inches)*(17 inches)/(50 yards*36 inches/yard) = 0.1133 inches

My first thought was to call the Williams Gun Sight company because I assumed Williams made the sights for Ruger. I’ve worked with Williams before and I knew they have excellent customer service. When I called them, I learned that they didn’t make the sights for my Ruger. The guy who took my call had a reference document and he told me that in the early No. 1 days, Marble made the sights. I called Marble, but I struck out there, too. The Marble’s sight base is different than the Ruger’s. While all this was going on, I examined the rear sight more closely and I saw a small Lyman stamp on it. So I contacted Lyman. Their guy told me they haven’t made sights for the Ruger No. 1 in decades.

At that point in my quest to find a lower rear sight, I was up to Strike 3 or maybe Strike 4, so I called Ruger directly. The pleasant young lady I spoke with at Ruger told me they could not sell me a lower replacement sight for my .458 No. 1; they can only sell what originally came on the rifle. So I told them I wanted a replacement rear sight for my .30 06 No. 1 (it has a much lower rear sight). I had to give them a serial number for my .30 06 (which I did), and they were happy to go with that. Ruger charged me $20 for the replacement.

After a week’s wait, I had my lower rear sight from Ruger. I drifted the old rear sight out with a brass punch and I installed the new one. The distance from the top of the old (tall) sight to the sight base is 0.505 inches. The distance from the top of the new (lower) sight to its base is 0.392 inches. Subtracting one from the other (i.e., 0.505 inches – 0.392 inches), I found the new rear sight was exactly 0.113 inches lower than the old rear sight. My calculation was that the rear sight needed to be lower 0.1133 inches lower. The fact that my calculation is almost exactly equal to how much lower the new rear sight is has to be coincidental. I just love it when things work out. Mathematically, that is. You might be wondering how the new rear sight worked out on the range. Quite well, thank you.

The first three shots through the .458 Winchester Magnum Ruger No. 1 with the new rear sight at 50 yards, without making any sight adjustments. I simply drifted the rear sight into the No. 1’s quarter rib and centered it by eye. All three shots would be scored in the X-ring.

You know, if I had mounted a scope all the above would have gone away. The scope would probably have enough adjustment range to compensate for the rifle shooting high. But a scope seems somehow out of place on an elephant gun, and I like shooting with open sights. I’ve read a lot of comments from older guys describing how they need a scope to cope with their aging eyes. I’m certainly an older guy with the inevitable attendant vision degradation, but I’ve gone the opposite way. I find shooting with open sights makes me feel younger, and getting tight groups with open sights is its own reward. I first learned to shoot a rifle using open sights, and doing so again makes me feel like a kid.

Next up will be trying a few shots at 100 yards. Stay tuned.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A Tale of Two 1911s

If I had a dime for every article and Internet post comparing the 9mm to the .45 ACP cartridge (and the guns that shoot them) I could probably pay cash for a new Ferrari. That said, I make no apologies for this being another one. In this case (and for this article), one of the variables I have sort of eliminated is the gun. Both are Springfield Target model 1911 autos in stainless steel. They’re the two pistols you see in the photo above.

Here’s a macro photo of the 9mm cartridge (designed in 1901; also known as the 9×19 and the 9mm Luger) and the .45 ACP cartridge (designed in 1904). Both of the rounds shown below are my reloads, which I prefer over factory ammo for many reasons. We’ve written a lot about reloading both cartridges, and you can find those articles here.

I like these kinds of photos. The photo shows the 9mm cartridge (arguably the most popular handgun cartridge in the world) and the .45 ACP.

For this comparison, I used the Springfield Armory magazines that came with of the two 1911s. Here’s what the ammo looks like in the magazines.

Loaded .45 ACP and 9mm magazines. The .45 mag holds 7 rounds; the 9mm mag holds 9 rounds. I’ve read that the average number of shots fired in an armed confrontation (not counting military actions) is less than two.

The Springfield target guns have nice features, including click adjustable rear sights, dovetailed and pinned front sights, ambidextrous safeties, target triggers, skeletonized hammers, and more. I didn’t like the two-piece guide rods that came with both guns (you need a tool to unscrew the two-piece guide rods for takedown). Another two-piece guide rod issue is that they constantly unscrew. I immediately replaced those in both guns with one-piece guide rods.

A few of the features included on these Springfield 1911 target models are skeletonized hammers (a useless feature, in my opinion), a click adjustable rear sight (a very useful feature), an extended grip safety (another useless feature), and an ambidextrous thumb safety (yet another useless feature). I prefer wraparound Pachmayr-style rubber grips, but the Springfield Armory exotic wood checkered grips look cool.

The Springfield Target model front sights are dovetailed and pinned to the slide. The one on my 9mm still came loose when the retaining pin backed out. The .45 front sight has stayed put. You can see the one-piece guide rod below the barrel; it’s a feature I added to both 1911s.

What has been a disappointment on the .45 Springfield was that the stainless steel was not properly passivated (it came this way from the factory). The gun exhibited minor corrosion in a few spots after a while, which is unacceptable for a stainless steel firearm. It’s the only stainless steel gun I’ve ever owned that did this. The corrosion comes right off with a bronze bristle brush and the steel beneath it then looks pristine, but you shouldn’t have to do this with a stainless steel firearm, much less one purchased new.

My 9mm 1911 had a problem with its front sight. The pin securing it in place backed out under recoil. I contacted Springfield about that and they sent an oversized pin. It similarly backed out. I applied Loctite to the pin and very lightly peened the edges at the top of its hole in the front sight, and that seems to have fixed the problem.

Neither of the above issues should have been present. I’ve purchased three new Springfield Armory firearms over the years and every one of them has had an issue. My Springfield M1A rifle had two issues: The magazines were extremely tight going into the receiver, and the ejected .308 cartridge cases were striking and damaging the stock. I sent the rifle back to Springfield. Springfield fixed the magazine fit issue (that fix worked) and they attempted to address the cartridges impacting the stock (that fix did not work). The cartridge cases still hit the stock after being ejected (even after Springfield did a ham-fisted job removing wood in the impact area), so I put electrician’s tape on the stock where the spent cases impact before I take it to the range. The rifle is quite accurate, but damn, you shouldn’t have to deal with issues like this on a new gun. I believe these things speak to a generally sad state of affairs in Springfield’s quality assurance and process control. But I’m going off track a bit. Let’s get back to the topic of this article, and that’s the two 1911 Springfields.

Corrosion on the Springfield Armory .45 ACP 1911. I believe the stainless steel was improperly passivated. I removed the tarnish/oxidation with a bronze brush and it has stayed off.

My .45 reloads. I’ve been shooting this same recipe for more than 50 years. It works, so why mess with it? .45 ACP brass can be reloaded many, many times (and this brass has been).

In my most recent outing with both 1911s, the .45 was significantly more accurate. I believe that to generally be the case when comparing the .45 ACP and 9mm Luger cartridges, and this range day was no exception. The 9mm load I used was a 124-grain Xtreme plated roundnose bullet over 5.5 grains of Accurate No. 5 propellant. The .45 ACP load was a 230-grain Missouri cast roundnose bullet over 5.6 grains of Unique propellant (an accuracy load that always works for me). I shot the targets shown below on the 50-foot West End Gun Club handgun range using a two-hand hold supported by a rest beneath my hands.

The 9mm 1911 grouped just over 2 inches, which is typical for this load. This same handgun has done much better with other loads, which is outlined in earlier blogs on 9mm cast bullet loads and 9mm jacketed bullets loads.

The 9mm grouped okay, but not great. I’ve shot other loads in this handgun that were much more accurate, but I didn’t have any of those loads in the ammo locker the day I went to the range. If you would like to know about this, you can read about my 9mm ammo development efforts with the 9mm 1911 (and other handguns) using cast bullets and jacketed bullets.

Groups with the Springfield Armory .45 ACP 1911. Point of aim was at 6:00 on each target. Shooter fatigue is what opened up the last group.

The .45 1911 grouped very well. It’s a funny thing: The 9mm 1911 has way less recoil than the .45 and the trigger on my 9mm 1911 has been tuned to perfection by good buddy TJ (you can read about that here), but I shoot better with a .45 (and I always have). The .45 1911 barks like a Rottweiler and it kicks like a mule, but the thing is just flat accurate.

So there you have it: Another take on the rehashed ad infinitum 9mm versus .45 ACP argument. If you have an opinion, please weigh in with a comment or two below.

If you would like to read a bit more about how to shoot a handgun well, that story is here.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

SIG Alert

By Joe Berk

No, I’m not talking about the SIG Alerts we get here in California when there’s a traffic jam on our freeways. This is about a sale at SARCO, a preferred military surplus outlet, on SIG police department trade-ins. When police departments upgrade to different weapons, they sometimes sell their older handguns. That’s what’s happening here. What makes this sale special, in my opinion, is that the trade-in guns are 9mm SIG P226 sidearms. You follow the blog, and you know that I consider the SIG P226 to be the world’s finest handgun. With a SARCO price on the P226 at just over $700, I think it’s a great deal.

My SIG P226. I consider it to be the world’s finest handgun.

I’ve never seen SIG P226 police trade-in guns for sale. It’s a hell of an opportunity to pick up a great handgun at a bargain price. I once owned a Smith and Wesson Model 659 police trade-in and it confirmed what I thought about police sidearms. They are carried a lot and shot very little. That means there might be some cosmetic shortfalls (holster wear, etc.), but the guns’ internals are probably in superb shape.

A Smith and Wesson Model 659 police trade in that was a lot of fun. Like most police sidearms, it was carried a lot and shot little.

I’ve purchased military surplus equipment through SARCO before (in my case it was a replacement gas cylinder for my M1 Garand, which fixed my rifle’s cycling issue). SARCO is a reputable outfit.

SARCO’s SIG P320 police trade-in pistols.

SARCO is also selling SIG P320 police trade-ins. I don’t have any experience with that model, so I can’t tell you anything about it (other than that it’s SIG, so it’s probably good). The SARCO price on the SIG P320 police trade-in is only $425; that’s a superb deal.

What might be fun is to pick up either handgun from SARCO and send it to good buddy TJ (at TJ’s Custom Gunworks) for a full cosmetics and action job. That would be fun. If you have ever entertained any thoughts about picking up a SIG or a custom pistol, this might worth looking into.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A Four-Screw Navy Arms Repro Colt 1860 Army: Part 2

By Joe Cota

When I got home yesterday from a routine 10-year colonoscopy exam (the prep was the worst part), I took a short nap, later in the evening the little lady went outside for something and brought in a package that had been sitting unguarded on my front doorstep probably since mid-morning. To make matters worse, it had been shipped it in a clearly marked ASUS Workbook computer box, complete with carry handle!

I opened the package today and the gun far exceeded my expectations! Man, this piece is so very cool. The Navy Arms box is complete with some minor scuffing. All the paperwork is present as near as I can tell.

Here are two pages from the catalog. You can click on the two images below to see larger versions that make reading the print easier.

There is also a color catalog. My gun is letter C in the catalog photo which proclaims it to be “one of the finest muzzle loading pistols in the Navy Arm line.” After handling the gun, I believe them. Oddly, nothing in the package I’ve seen in my brief review indicates that this gun was manufactured by Uberti, but the Uberti crest stamped inconspicuously on the frame tells me that it was.

The AB stamp on the gun translates to a 1976 date of manufacture. Totally unexpected by me, the frame, hammer, and loading lever are all beautifully case color hardened steel. Oh, man the photos don’t do any justice to the vibrant colors! The barrel is a highly polished deep blue having a mirror-like finish. The brass trigger guard is a little dull, but not tarnished at all after spending the past 48 years in its oiled plastic bag time capulsule. Oh, and that super fine ocean battle scene either engraved or rolled onto the cylinder is simply immaculate! The walnut stocks deep grain really showcases this piece.

Well, I have to catch up on my office work today, so I am just put everything back in the Navy Arms box for now. Maybe I’ll have some time over the coming weekend to clean it up and put on a fresh coat of oil. Until then I imagine there will be a considerable amount of daydreaming about this piece going on upstairs.

For now, enjoy these updated photos. The gun still hasn’t been cleaned. I Can’t wait to shoot it. Yeah, I know, I know. There may be a few folks who say the gun has survived 48 years without being fired and should stay that way. Well, it probably had been proof fired in Italy at the factory, but there is no evidence of it except for the factory proof markings. My thinking is that this isn’t an original Colt 1860 Army and I paid only a couple beans for it including shipping, so why not wake it up from its long hibernation and have a blast?

We forwarded Joe’s photos and request for info to my good buddy Paul, who is our resident blackpowder firearms guru. Here’s what Paul had to say:

Those two extra screws are for a shoulder stock. You remove those screws and put the shoulder stock on then secure the stock with those screws. That gun is desirable because of that feature. If he had the shoulder stock it would be worth three or more times what the gun alone is worth. That gun looks like new – I wish I owned it! Not too many people purchased a shoulder stock for those guns that’s why you don’t see them often and when you do they cost BIG MONEY.

There were a few different styles being sold back in the ’60s & ’70s. I looked on YouTube for some questions that I had and found that some of the shoulder stocks did not need to remove those screws. The stock only used those screws to pivot the stock attachment area on, then the claw would grip a notch in the bottom of the grip frame. Some guns would be cut under the recoil shield on both sides of the shield for the front of the shoulder stock to hook under so they did not need those screws. Have a look on YouTube to get a better picture of what I am referring to. By the way it looks like a great gun!

Good inputs, Paul, and thanks very much for the explanation!

More Tales of the Gun!

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A Four-Screw Navy Arms Repro Colt 1860 Army: Part 1

By Joe Cota

What is it supposed to be a copy of?

My “new” in the box never fired Colt 1860 Army clone was imported by Navy Arms some 45 or so years ago. It hasn’t arrived yet but should be in the mail any day now.

After purchasing it, I was looking more carefully at the photos and I am a bit perplexed. It definitely had four screws. The barrel is stamped “Model 1860 Army Cal 44.” This one appears to be by Uberti.

I had never heard of a four screw Colt 1860 Army before, but I had seen online photos of what I believe was described as a four screw Colt 1861 Navy.

These are the only photos I have for now and they are not really all that clear. The guy says it’s still covered in packing grease and he’s only had it out of the plastic bag twice in the 40-some years since he bought it, including last week to take these photos. It looks like it might have some sort of cylinder engraving, but wouldn’t that be a Navy and not the Army model?

Does anyone know what we have here? Did Navy Arms import a lot of these four screw early Army versions, or more of the standard three screw guns? Was this gun made by Gregoreli & Uberti, Uberti, or is it something else?

Were these guns good shooters? I’m not expecting too much out of it as I know it won’t be anywhere near as nice as my Uberti 1858 New Army (which is shown above), but heck, it was almost free. I never pass up the opportunity to buy interesting and unique guns at bargain prices.

Stay tuned for Part 2 when I finally see what it is I bought.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A Custom .22 Magnum Colt Paterson Conversion

By Joe Berk

Here’s another fascinating custom revolver that showed up in our Uberti Facebook page. It’s from good buddy Steve, who sent additional photos and is allowing us to use the story here on ExNotes. Here’s what Steve shared with me:

I have an original Paterson in its original configuration of .36 caliber (I mean an original Uberti Paterson, of course). I searched for years for a way to buy a conversion cylinder for it. I stumbled across this and could not pass it up.

A little history on this one…the way it was converted was the gunsmith milled down a Harrington and Richardson .22 barrel and sleeved it into the Paterson barrel. Then he used standard .22 Magnum sleeves in the cylinder The loading ramp was milled such that it pins the base of the round in, so there was no need for a loading gate.

The barrel and frame are actually the original blue steel. The gunsmith dip stripped the parts then meticulously polished them to a bright shine. I just keep it well oiled.

Steve, your .22 Magnum Paterson is a great looking gun. Thanks for allowing us to share it here. For our ExNotes readers, the Paterson was the original Colt revolver patented by Samuel Colt in 1836. The revolvers are called Patersons because they were manufactured in Paterson, New Jersey. Colt built these and then went bankrupt and shut the gun business down. He unsuccessfully pursued other business interests and then was contacted by Captain Samuel Walker of the Texas Rangers, who had used Colt Patersons against the Comanches to great effect. Captain Walker told Samuel Colt about that and how he thought the revolver was a very effective weapon, and the two Sams (Colt and Walker) designed the 1847 Colt Walker, which we’ve written about before.

If you’re wondering why Steve’s Uberti Colt Paterson replica appears to have no trigger, it’s because the trigger retracts into the frame. It extends when the revolver is cocked. That design was eliminated on the Colt Walkers, which had what we now view as a normal trigger and trigger guard. The Paterson did not have the loading lever common to later Colt blackpowder revolvers, which greatly slows the Paterson loading process.

Uberti no longer lists the Paterson in its menu of reproductions (I’ve already checked, as posting this blog whet my appetite for a Paterson reproduction). Pietta (another reproduction revolver Italian manufacturer) does, but they show the Paterson as out of stock. These replicas sell for big bucks when they come on the market (typically for something in the $750 to $1000 range), but that’s trivial to what an original Colt Paterson would bring. Those have fetched a million bucks.

Another bit of trivia…you may think you’ve never seen Paterson, New Jersey, but if you watched The Sopranos (an HBO crime drama TV series currently available on MAX and set in New Jersey), you’ve probably seen Paterson a few times and not known it. There are at least a couple of Sopranos scenes at the falls in Paterson (one in which Mikey Palmici throws a guy off a bridge, and another where Hesh threatens to do the same). Ah, New Jersey…I’ve never been to Paterson, but the next time I’m back in the Garden State I’m going to hit some of the spots featured on The Sopranos. When I do, I’ll post it here on ExNotes.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

The Autry Museum Colts

By Joe Berk

I haven’t been to the Autry Museum in Los Angeles since 2018 when I took the photos you see here. I’ll get out there in the next few months. It’s one of the great destinations in the Los Angeles area, and what makes the Autry even better for me is the extensive firearms display.

I found these photos when I was poking around a bit on an external hard drive. For this blog, I’m including only the Colts in the Autry Museum. I only photographed a few of firearms I saw there. The Autry had more Colts, as well as Winchesters and other firearms on display.

The photos were a challenge. Each of the guns you see here was behind glass, and the lighting was fairly dim in the firearms display area. I was using my D3300 Nikon with its standard 18-55mm lens, shooting at ISO settings of 800 to 3200. These are not conditions conducive to capturing good images. I did the best I could.

The sixgun you see in the photo above is an original Colt Walker, one of the one thousand guns Sam Colt manufactured for Sam Walker in 1847. The last original Walker I know of that sold went for a million bucks. We’ve mentioned the Colt Walker in an earlier ExNotes blog. I bought the Uberti reproduction; the reproduction Uberti Walkers sell for just over $500.

The Autry Museum firearms collection features several Colt black powder revolvers. In addition to the Walker up top, here are a two more I photographed. The first one is a .36 caliber 1851 Colt Navy that belonged to Wild Bill Hickok. The second is a .44 caliber 1860 Colt Army. It’s quite fancy and it probably belonged to somebody famous, but I don’t know who (and that gives me a good excuse to get back out to the Autry Museum).

As you might imagine in a museum dedicated to the American West (and one carrying the name of a famous cowboy star like Gene Autry), the Colt 1873 Single Action Army revolver is well represented in this collection.

One of the 1873 Single Action Army revolvers on display at the Autrey Museum belonged to Theodore Roosevelt. His initials are carved into the ivory grips.

There were also a few Colt double action revolvers:

In addition to the early Colt revolvers, there were three Colt Pythons:

This is a crop showing some of the engraving detail on the revolver above.

The Museum also displayed an engraved 1911 .45 Auto. This 1911 was manufactured by Colt and several other manufacturers (as is the case even today; Colt still makes the 1911 and so do many other companies). The 1911 shown here had the trigger guard cut away. The idea behind removing the trigger guard is that it allows getting off a shot more quickly. The modification is not something I’d want.

There was one more Colt I should mention: A Bulldog Gatling gun. Richard Jordan Gatling, the Gatling gun inventor, never operated his own factory. All U.S. Gatlings were manufactured by Colt in Hartford, Connecticut. They were also made under license in Russia military by the Orloff company.

Uberti replicas of the Colt Walker and the Colt 1873 Single Action Army.

We’ve done other blogs in the past on the Colt Walker and the Colt Single Action Army (including the two replica revolvers you see in the photo above), other Colt black powder revolvers, and variations of the Gatling gun. Those blogs are here. You might also want to pick up our book on the Gatling gun.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

An Aldo Uberti Encounter

By Joe Berk

We recently started a Uberti Firearms Facebook group, and the response and growth has been phenomenal. Within 10 days, membership grew to more than a thousand people. One of those new members is my new good buddy RJ, a Uberti owner and Hollywood stunt man. He posted an interesting story in the Facebook group, I asked if we could show it on ExNotes, and RJ graciously consented. The photo RJ refers to is the one at the top of today’s blog.

Here’s a pic of my iron frame Henry. I have a kind of a neat story how it came about.

In ’92 I was the armourer for “Buffalo Bills Wild West Show” at EuroDisney in Paris. I was constantly getting new guns and swapping guns out through our provider, a gun dealer in Paris. Most times it was someone I knew but every once in a while a new guy made the delivery.

One evening before showtime, I had been prepping a 66 carbine and a delivery showed up, brought to us by an older new guy with several firearms. I had a yellow boy carbine spread over the work bench and I was stoning the parts. The guy asked me what I was doing and I told him these guns are a little “clunky” when I get them and I have to smooth them up for the girls who played Annie Oakley. So he gave me a rundown on what he’s brought while I put the gun together.

I asked him how long he’s been with Maratiaee and he’s said he’s not; he’s just delivering and going to take in the show. I introduced myself and said, “I’m RJ Preston.” He said, “It’s a pleasure, Sir. I’m Aldo Uberti.”

Oh man, I just told Aldo Uberti his guns were clunky!!!! It turned out we became good friends and I told him I would love one of the iron frame Henrys. He offered to build me one personally, so I told him that the iron frames all had three-digit serial numbers. He said he had some three-digit frames set aside.

In about a month he asked which distributor I want the gun sent to in the United States. My dad and Val at Navy Arms were friends and we had done business with Navy Arms since the mid-’60s.

I had to wait until I got back to the US to see it but what a peach: No varnish, oil finished wood, under 300 serial number, an action smooth as butter, and with A.U. stamped on the inside of the right sideplate. It was already sighted in and it was a tack driver. It came with a Uberti company envelope and the invoice said “NO BALANCE DUE” with a short note enclosed. “Here’s one that’s not clunky, enjoy.”

He was a great guy. Rest in peace, Aldo.

What a story and what a rifle! RJ, you are one lucky guy. Thank you for sharing your story with us.

If you would like to join our ExhaustNotes.us Facebook group, it’s here. If you would like to join our Facebook Uberti Firearms group, it’s here.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

Paul’s New .40 Caliber Flintlock

By Joe Berk

Good buddy Paul recently told me about a custom crafted flintlock rifle he bought from rifle maker Tom Caster at a steep discount because the stock had been broken. A stock break sounds like a major defect, but actually it is not that uncommon and repairing the broken stock, if done correctly, makes the stock stronger than new. Paul is a serious black powder shooter and he builds custom rifles, so he knows what he is doing here. Both Paul and Tom gave me permission to share this story.

Here’s what Paul wrote to me about this rifle:

When I first saw it I had the same reaction as you. It ticked off all my boxes for a rifle of this style and caliber as I did not have a .40 caliber muzzle loading rifle. They are supposedly an accurate target rifle. He sent me a target that he shot at 25 yards and seven of the ten shots were around a 2-1/2″ cluster which is not bad for the first time the rifle was shot.

I asked Paul about the accuracy. Here’s what he said:

That flintlock target is good for the first outing of the rifle. From there you will test out different powder amounts, different patch thickness and ball diameters if you want better groupings. The .40 caliber is mostly a 50-to-75-yard gun so you would be hunting squirrels or small game up to small deer. A lot of states only allow .45 caliber and bigger for deer hunting, so the .40 caliber is used for varmints and target work.

Here’s the story on this rifle from Tom Caster:

I finished up this pretty little .40 cal Armstrong rifle last week and was putting a coat of wax on the stock when it slipped off my table and broke in two at the wrist!

Scrapping was never really considered (too much work into it) because I have always been about fixing things that happen on the job or in the shop. It was a pretty clean break, so I set it up in my two vices and glued it back together with Tite-Bond II. After that set up, I drilled a 3/8″ hole from the breech down thru the wrist 8″ deep and glued in a 3/8″ hickory RR in place. After drilling out the holes in the rod for lock screws and the sear area, I sealed the inside up with epoxy.

The crack barely shows now but it is there when you look close. The stock should be fine to use now.

Some guys would use a steel threaded rod instead of wood dowel, but I didn’t want to add any more weight to a 7.6 lb. rifle.

I plan to sell it after the first of the year at a discounted price if anyone is interested.

After another inquiry about the rifle, Tom added the following:

As far as the wood choice goes, I purchased this “in the white” from the estate of my old friend Fred Schelter. He purchased the Getz barrel and had Fred Miller (I believe) inlet it and pre-shape the stock in 2000-2001. Whether it was his wood or Miller’s, I don’t know. He had two Armstrong stocks done this way at the same time, one was a .50 cal (sold) and this .40 cal, rifle. Fred S. did the carving and inlay of the patchbox, butt, toe plate, nose cap, and trigger and guard. He had made the forend escutcheons for the barrel keys but didn’t inlay them.

Both stocks were inletted and drilled for a large Dlx. Siler Flintlock, but only one lock existed and it was curiously interchangeable. So I had to buy a second lock to complete this one. I fashioned a new trigger for a lighter pull and made a patchbox release, side plate and sights. Then I did the engraving and finish work.

…so, now you know…the rest of the story!

Tom Caster

In his email to me, Paul included several photos from Tom. As the photos show, the detail and workmanship on this rifle are stunning. Take a look:

It will be interesting to see if Paul shoots this one. I’m going to visit with him again (hopefully in the not too distant future) for a trip to the range. I’ve never fired my Colt Walker (it is a black powder revolver) and I know very little about shooting these weapons. Paul knows a lot, and I hope to get educated.

As I mentioned at the start of this blog, repaired stocks are not that big a deal. I had an experience where a seller did a poor job packaging a Ruger No. 3 he sent to me. I had the repair accomplished and the stock refinished by a competent shop, the rifle looks better than new, and it is now one of my favorites. It is exceptionally accurate, too. You can read that story here.

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

Four .45 ACP Revolvers

By Joe Berk

When most folks think of the .45 ACP cartridge, they think of the 1911 and other semi-auto handguns. The big .45 also makes an ideal wheelgun cartridge, especially in N-frame Smith and Wessons. I own four (the ones you see above) and I shoot them all.

The .45 ACP Revolver Story

Smith and Wesson forayed into the .45 ACP revolver business when Colt couldn’t keep up with the demand for its 1911 semi-auto in World War I. The Army asked both Smith and Colt to make .45 ACP versions of their large-frame double action handguns, both manufacturers did, and the Army designated both revolvers as the Model 1917.

After the World War I, the 1917 revolvers became available to civilians. Colt left the .45 ACP revolver business, but Smith and Wesson soldiered on, and to this day Smith still offers several different models.

Shooting .45 ACP ammo in a revolver requires a clip. You have to snap the rounds into the clip so they will fire and extract in a revolver. At one point, the 1917 revolvers were popular enough that Remington introduced the .45 AutoRim cartridge, which is a rimmed version of the .45 ACP that allows use of the cartridge in a revolver without the clip.

.45 ACP rounds in a star clip. I have a tool that makes it easy to insert cartridges in the clips and remove the empty cases after shooting. In World War I, clips held only three rounds (you needed two to load six rounds in a 1917 revolver).

A .45 ACP round (left) and a .45 AutoRim cartridge (right). Note the difference in rim configuration at the base of each cartridge. I’ve experimented with both ACP and AutoRim brass in my .45 ACP revolvers; both deliver comparable accuracy.

Over the years Smith and Wesson has manufactured several .45 ACP revolver models. I’d like to own them all, but there’s only so much room in the safe and Susie’s willingness to indulge my gun collecting. The four this blog addresses are:

- - The Model of 1955
  - A Jovino snubnose
  - Smith’s reincarnated and Turnbull-finished Model 1917
  - The Performance Center Model 625.

Info on each follows.

The Model of 1955

Smith introduced the Model of 1955 as an alternative to the 1911 semi-auto for bullseye target competition. Mine was made in the 1970s. I bought it from Rutgers Guns in Highland Park, New Jersey shortly after I left the Army (Rutgers Guns had no connection to Rutgers University other than geography). I paid around $200 for it new.

A typical Model of 1955 three-shot 50-foot group. This gun shoots everything well.

The Model of 1955 has Smith and Wesson’s target trigger and target hammer, and it has target sights (with a Patridge style sight in front). It originally had checkered grips, but shortly after I bought it I put a set of smooth grips on it. I think the smooth grips both look and feel better. Back in the day, you could purchase those grips new for around $25. Today, a set from that era (like the ones you see above) would fetch $300 to $400. The Model of 1955 has the highly polished and deep blue finish that is the hallmark of earlier Smith and Wesson revolvers. It is a beautiful handgun.

I never tried a load in the Model of 1955 that didn’t do well; every powder and every bullet combination I loaded grouped well. In the nearly 50-years that I’ve owned this revolver, I’ve only seen one other guy on the range with the same gun. I asked him what load he used and he told me the gun likes everything; every load he ever tried shot well, too. That said, the load I use is typically 4.2 grains of Bullseye and a 200-grain semi-wadcutter bullet. I use Lee’s Deluxe 4-die set and I crimp the bullets with their factory taper crimp die to assure easy chambering and to prevent bullet pull under recoil (although recoil with this load is light).

The Jovino Snubbie

The Jovino snubnose revolver is a rare animal, one of 650 customized by New York City’s John Jovino Gun Shop (which no longer exists; when it closed, Jovino was the oldest gun shop in the country).

The Jovino snubnose .45 ACP revolver. It’s a real rarity.

Back in the 1980s, Jovino’s built custom guns. Their main clients were the NYPD and other police departments, so many of the Jovino customs tended to be duty-oriented carry weapons. Jovino bought 6 1/2-inch barreled Smiths like the one you see above and turned them into 2 1/2-inch snubnose revolvers. The conversion was not just a simple chop job, though. Here’s what Jovino did to these guns:

- - Shortened the factory barrel to 2 1/2 inches.
  - Installed a crane lock to replace the ejector rod lock.
  - Relocated the red ramp front sight.
  - Rounded the butt to the S&W K frame round butt configuration.
  - Tuned the double and single action trigger.
  - Radiused the hammer spur.
  - Polished the trigger face.
  - Fitted Pachmayr rubber grips.
  - Reblued the cut barrel (the new bluing is actually a bit darker and more polished than the stock bluing).

The original grips that came with the Jovino snubbie were rubber Pachmayrs, but I wanted the look of ivory grips. That’s when I found out that the Jovino guns did not have a standard N-frame rounded grip profile. It took a lot of patient sanding and polishing to get the fake ivory grips to fit. I like the look.

The grips look good. So does the revolver. One of the Jovino custom touches was to round the hammer spur profile. I like what they did.

The double action trigger on the Jovino is incredibly smooth. The slick trigger and the red ramp and white outline sights work together well, and the gun is very accurate. I’ve never seen another one of these guns on the range, so the exclusivity factor is there, too.

Smith and Wesson’s Reincarnated 1917

Smith’s resurrected Model 1917 .45 ACP revolver, shown here with AutoRim ammo.

About 20 years ago Smith and Wesson introduced a reissue of its World War I Model 1917 for a very short time, and as part of that deal, the new Smith included Turnbull color case hardening. I saw one of the Turnbull 1917 revolvers at a local Bass Pro and it sat in the display case for months. Bass Pro had it marked down to $695 and it still hadn’t moved. I asked the kid behind the counter what they would take for it; he read the price tag and told me $695. Would you consider less, I asked. I’d have to ask the manager, he said, looking at me and not moving. Why don’t you do that, I answered. He finally realized his job was to sell stuff and I was a real live customer, so he took off in search of the boss.

“We’ll take 30 off,” Junior said when he returned.

“Is that percent, or dollars?” I asked.

He smiled. “Dollars.” It was still a hell of a deal, so I pulled the trigger. Today if I wanted to sell this gun I could probably get $1500 for it. But I don’t want to sell it, and I never will.

Another view of the 1917, its glorious Turnbull color case hardening, and .45 ACP ammo loaded in clips.

I don’t shoot my Turnbull 1917 all that often; my preference is the Model 625 described below. The 1917 groups well, but its small checkered grips are punishing. This is another cool gun. I’ve never seen another one on the range.

Smith’s Performance Center Model 625

The Performance Center is Smith’s marketing shtick for guns that have been slicked up a bit, which is Smith and Wesson’s way of saying they build Performance Center guns with the attention to detail that used to be standard on all Smith and Wessons. This one has a good trigger, a different barrel contour, blended edges on the front of the cylinder, and probably a few other niceties I can’t remember right now.

This revolver originally had clown-like, awkward, red-white-and-blue grips. I quickly swapped the goofy factory grips for what were advertised as rosewood grips from a third-party vendor (they weren’t rosewood at all; they were instead fabricated of cheap laminated and dyed wood, as I found out when I refinished them). But my custom grips fit my hands much better, and this is an extremely accurate revolver. I also installed a red ramp front sight and a white outline rear site. The white outline rear sight Smith sells today has barely-visible gray lines and the red is not as bright as it used to be, but they are better than the gold dot front sight and plain black rear sight that came on the gun (I don’t like gold dot front sights).

Six rounds at 50 feet, standing, from the Performance Center .45 ACP Model 625. This revolver has grips I refinished and a red ramp and white outline set of sights. The target shown here was shot with the 200-grain semi-wadcutter bullet and 6.0 grains of Unique.

My usual accuracy load for the 625 is a cast 200-grain semiwadcutter bullet (sized to .452 inches) over 4.2 grains of Bullseye. Another load that works well is the same bullet with 6.0 grains of Unique (it’s the load I used on the target above).

After reading about the above Smith and Wesson .45 ACP revolvers, you might have two questions: