Revolver conversion cylinders-- good, bad or meh?

[Jim Barber]

I'm a terrible shot with my revolver, a nice, accurate Rogers and Spencer. I always intend to practice with it, but by the time I'm done with my other guns, I think about all the fussing around I'll go through just to load the d@mn thing, and it goes home, sad and unfired. I literally did not practice at all with it last season, and it showed. For years I've seen and wondered about various manufacturers' conversion cylinders-- most if not all are 45LC, plus those in 38spl for 36 cal revolvers. Having the convenience of bringing actual, primed & ready cartridges to the range, and firing the same gun (or one identical in weight and shape, anyway) as that used in revolver competition seems like a great idea.

Any of y'all have much experience, good or bad, with these things? First and foremost, can you attain accuracy comparable to a regular percussion revolver like a Remington or R&S? Any fussy fitting necessary to get decent timing? Or are you better off just buying a gun that comes as a converted model, like the ones Taylors & Co sells?

Lotsa questions! General feedback or specifics are all appreciated. Winter well, spring is just around the corner.

Thanks!
Jim B.
Grove City, OH

[Jim_Burgess_2078V]

Can't comment on the conversion cylinders as I don't have any. I shoot my Pietta Remington only twice a year - spring and fall nationals. I even won a first place 50 yard revolver medal (Sharpshooter class) at this past fall national. While I don't practice with the Remington, I do practice regularly with other modern pistols and revolvers, .22 caliber and up. While practicing with the revolver one uses in competition is always a good thing, any handgun practice is also beneficial.

Jim Burgess, 15th CVI

[bobanderson]

I have a conversion cylinder that fits my Tom Ball Remington. I found when I tried shooting 45 Colts loaded with traditional bullets, the point of impact was much higher than with round balls fired from the original cylinder. This was caused by the weight difference of the projectiles. Since I did not want to change the sights to accomodate 45 Colts, I started loading metallic cartridges with the same black powder charge and round balls. In this way, I found the accuracy and ease of loading to be everything I needed to be able to practice.
The only drawback for me was the indoor range I use in the winter doesn’t allow black powder. I’m now working up a load with a small charge of smokeless powder (W231) and a .454 round ball lubed with liquid alox. Initial tests showed promise, but be careful using too small a charge in such a large case. I had some squib loads that wouldn’t clear the barrel.

[Chris Sweeney]

Bob;

Consider using Trail Boss powder instead of 231

[Jim Brady Knap's Battery]

I agree. Trail Boss has worked very well for me in several handguns including a 1911. One caution, do not sneeze when you have an open container of the stuff or you'll have a snow storm of little grey donuts floating around. The stuff weighs nothing but takes up a lot of space and 5 grains comes to the base of the bullet in a 45 Colt.

[bobanderson]

Bob;

Consider using Trail Boss powder instead of 231

Thanks, Chris. I shot it today (the post reminded me) and got good accuracy with 8 grains of W231 but there was a bunch of soot that kept tying up the cylinder pin.

Maybe Trail Boss will shoot cleaner?

[Jim Barber]

Gents,

Thanks for all the info. In the R&S I've been shooting .457 round balls. They do get "sized down" a bit by the cylinder upon loading.

Now I'm wondering if I won't need to move down a bit in size-- like Bob mentioned using a .454 in his Ball Remington cartridges-- so they'll fit both the 45LC case and so the finished cartridges will drop into the conversion cylinder itself. Lots to think about!

Also, if anyone has a Rogers and Spencer (Euroarms-compatible) conversion cylinder (or the whole revolver) they need to get rid of cheap, give me a shout! I happen to be cheap. And poor, monetarily speaking. But that's another discussion.

Cheers!

Jim B.
Grove City, OH

[Curt]

Hallo!

I got on the conversion cylinder fad, er bandwagon, a few years ago. But while only one experience is not a good indication or opinion, I did not like mine. :(

I got a Pietta Remington NM1863 Army, and a Kirst cylinder for it. It would not "fit" and would have required some gunsmithing work to go it in.

I sold it off and got a pair of M1860 Army conversions and a pair of M1871/72 Open Tops... and sold off the Pietta and cylinder unfired.


Curt

[Chris Sweeney]

I bought a used Uberti repro 1875 Remington in 44/40. It was actually cheaper than a conversion cylinder, and the gun wasn't stamped "blsck powder only" so I felt better about using smokeless loads. Felt just like a New Model Army. Only down side was getting used to the weird 3 click cocking.

[Muley Gil]

I have a .45 Colt conversion for my Ruger Old Army. It will shoot 3" groups @ 25 yards all day long.