Comparison - Uberti Remington 1858 from 1978 and one made in 2014

[arsefactor]

Hi folks

I own two Uberti made Remington 1858's. One black powder model from 1978 and a modern nitro conversion. Check out the pics I've linked to further down the post.

The 1978 one was owned by a relative of mine from new before I transferred it to my certificate a couple of years ago. It's had a busy life being shot about once a week for a good twenty years or so at least. It was cleaned and oiled between sessions, so he tells me!
The 2014 one is a brand new nitro conversion from Anvil Conversions. Apart from having a Nitro proofed cylider it's a stock Uberti 1858. I've put around 400 rounds through it in two years.
What you might find interesting is the difference in quality between a pre-CNC machine era Uberti and a modern one, - check the cylinder close-ups - and how little rifling is present on the old one.
To be fair the 1978 one has had a busy life and is thoroughly worn-out. It still shoots surprisingly well, considering it's condition. (Bit like me!) I'll be scrapping it for a new one at some point.

I was wondering if the shallow rifling was typical of Uberti's of this age? Or is it that mine is just plain worn out?

For interest I took some measurements with a Lyman dial caliper;

• Black Powder cylinder chamber dimensions 0.445
• Black Powder barrel dimensions 0.430 on the grooves, 0.437 on what's left of the the lands, best as I could measure
• Nitro conversion cylinder chamber dimensions 0.447
• Nitro conversion barrel dimensions 0.430 on the grooves, 0.455 on the lands.

I'm including a pic of a 0.457 ball I slugged the 1978 era barrel with, you can barely make out the rifling marks.

Anyway I though this might be interesting for someone. Maybe Tac can comment on the rifling question?

Thanks - Paul M.

And the pics ;
Two revolvers together
http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/u...psidisekhy.jpg
Barrel close-ups showing the rifling
http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/u...psfq8z8uf8.jpg
1978 Cylinder
http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/u...psv6oa6vaa.jpg
2014 Nitro conversion cylinder
http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/u...psgjirwb1p.jpg
Slugged 0.457 ball from the 1978 barrel
http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/u...psaaqt3yhs.jpg

[tacfoley]

Well, Sir, I'm touched by your faith in my opinion - your cheque is in the mail, BTW - but have also noticed the apparent disparity in rifling depth between old[er] BP revolvers and those of more modern manufacture. I shoot a couple of BP revolvers in the land where they were made - an original RNMA and a Griswold and Gunnison from the Confederacy. Both have very shallow rifling which might be attributed to great age.

I also shoot two Sniders - both original - with dozens of thousands of rounds down them since 1861 and 2 - the rifling on both is not only as deep and near perfect as can be imagined, but measured three inches down the muzzle are still within the original tolerances for the arm.

As I'm sure you know, I have a ROA here in UK - one that gets shot a LOT - a guest day will get it shot around a couple of hundred times, I'm betting, and the rifling, quite shallow to begin with, is no different now than it was back in 1986 when I bought it. OTOH, my for-sale Walker has rifling that looks like the top of a castle wall, and has had many shots down it over the years without showing ANY kind of wear.

I guess that your older revolver was pretty shallow to begin with.

tac

[CLINT3]

My Rogers and Spencer seems to have shallow rifling. I thought it was shot-out but an 'expert' assured me it was normal.