Conversion cylinder for pietta 1858

[fordwannabe]

I am in the market for a conversion cylinder for my steel framed pietta in 44. I am willing to bet the farm, that somebody here has a lot of experience with these so...which one to get? I have seen several makers and don't know beans about them so could somebody steer me in the right direction. THANKS. Tom

[Hawkeye2]

There are 3 makers out there, Kirst, R&D (Howell Old West Conversions) and Taylors & Co. The Kirst is more expensive but offers options the others don't such as a loading gate if you wish to modify your revolver (which transforms it into a regular cartridge gun and therefore subject to all applicable laws). The R&D and Taylors are virtually identical. I put a Taylors .45 Colt in a 5.5" Remington Pietta that I bought from Cabela's a couple of years back. I bought it for a little under dealer's from a friend who had fired 2 cylinders full through it and decided he didn't want to go that way. It dropped in with no work whatsoever and is timed perfectly but that's not always the case. Any of the conversions may require fitting to the hand and bolt, possibly more depending on the gun. If you buy Taylor's cylinder they will (or used to) fit it for free if you send the gun. There are two things that you need to be aware of: The guns themselves will only handle Cowboy Action loads as they were never designed for hot smokeless loads and the cylinder is very thin under the bolt locking notches. The other item is that the twist is really too slow for an elongated projectile and your accuracy will probably suffer. My experience is limited to 4 guns with conversions all in .45 Colt but none would shoot as well off the bench as they will in the Cap & Ball configuration. That said they are more than adequate for Cowboy Action Shooting but match quality they ain't.

I just noticed that R&D offers gated cylinders, hadn't seen them before. Taylors doesn't. I'm not sure why anyone would want a gated cylinder for a Remington as I can load one faster and easier by taking the cylinder out than I can my 73 Colts through the gate.

[M. M. Wright]

I recently converted a Pietta 1860 with a Kirst cylinder. The instructions say to use a dremel and an afternoon to make the loading channel but I cheated and took it to the mill. Bit of a challenge to get it secure but 10 minutes later the channel was done. Absolutely no other changes needed. It is now a 5 shooter with pins to rest the hammer on between chambers and the cartridges (45 Colt) must be loaded a little short so they don't stick out of the cylinder. Cowboy loads work just fine. I shoot black in mine but am sure smokeless cowboy loads would be fine.
Your Remington is so easy to change cylinders on I would probably go with the cylinder that doesn't need the frame modified.

[Pete44ru]

.

The R&D/Taylor's cylinders fit nicely into a BATF loophole for those folks living in areas where metallic cartridge revolvers pose a buying/selling/possession legal difficulties, because AFAIK they are considered a part/accessory, ergo not falling under BATF "firearms" guidelines.

Several years ago, I grabbed an R&D cylinder for my Ruger Old Army, and it worked very well with commercial .45 Cowboy loads, but required a sight adjustment when switching from the muzzleloading cylinder to the metallic cartridge cylinder.

I sold it, and stuck with the issue cylinder only, for 2 reasons:

1) Re-zeroing every time I exchanged the cylinders turned out to be a PITA.(most likely an issue with every make conversion)

2) Reloading the R&D cylinder required the tiresome chore (when shooting a lot) of removing the cylinder from the cylinder frame, then removing the conversion cylinder's back plate to empty/reload the chambers manually (aka: poke them out, one by one).


IMO, although it's a fact of life, the reality of going through the extra steps takes some of the spontaneity/fun out of shooting C&B revolvers for me. (YMMV, of course)

If I wanted to do it again, and decided to accept re-zeroing with every cylinder swap, I'd choose the Kirst/loading gate conversion for it's loading convenience.


.

[Old Ironsights]

.

The R&D/Taylor's cylinders fit nicely into a BATF loophole for those folks living in areas where metallic cartridge revolvers pose a buying/selling/possession legal difficulties, because AFAIK they are considered a part/accessory, ergo not falling under BATF "firearms" guidelines.

This.

Depending on the State, the poor *** whose Ex has "Lautenberged" him into defenselessness (or the poor non-violent/regulatory/political "felon") has the ability to RKBA under BATFE "muzzlestuffer" Rules.

Still, some insanely dictatorial jurisdictions declare even BB guns to be "firearms" in terms of invalidating an individual's GD given RIGHT to (defensive) RKBA.

Others draw the line at "metallic cartridges".

Regardless, if I am too "dangerous" for RKBA then give me 3 hots and a cot... otherwise, leave me the hades alone.

Period.

[fordwannabe]

I neveer thought of them not being as accurate as the cap and ball loadings. I assume it could be worked out with proper loading of a light bullet or round ball????

[Bob Hatfield]

I have a Kirst 45 Clot conversion for my Pietta 5.5 inch 58. I load and shoot 200 grain RNFP to get the point of impact down. If you shoot regular 250/255 grain bullets it will shoot very high. So if your going to convert you need to stay converted and adjust the sights. The newer Pietta's are supposed to have a quicker twist maybe to help with bullets vs balls.

Mine does not have a loading gate but it is easy to take out the cylinder ala Pale Rider style. Timing was perfect. The Kirst has a dummy area to lower the hammer on.

Bob

[Old Ironsights]

Remember, all of these (un)Civil War era pistols had essentially the same ballistics... "Shoot at the (belt) Buckle". Easy POA and with a 6"-12" rise hits just about right on a K12.

I've regulated all my .44 C&B to 200gr for use with Conicals (I use the REAL) and Cast Lead "cowboy"/Umarex cartridges.

[Ysabel Kid]

I've got the Howell/R&D conversions for most of my cap & ball revolvers, and really like them. No experience with the others though.

[fordwannabe]

Well a new Howell conversion cylinder is on the way. We shall see how it works for me. Thanks for all the input. Tom

[Old Ironsights]

Really the biggest/only significant functional difference is in those units which are line bored vs those that are angle bored (?) (term?)

IIRC the Kirst units *for the ROA* are Line bored and are true to the barrel/forcing cone. Many (most?) of the cylinders for every other C&B are "angle bored" and are not actually true to the barrel (because allowing for the difference in case wall and cartridge rim = slightly off true)

FWIU this is one of the biggest reasons ALL of these units say "Cowboy Loads ONLY" (i.e. soft lead, low velocity), because jackets + pressure + offline = Bad Mojo....

[fordwannabe]

What is considered a cowboy load using unique with a 230 to 250 grain bullet?

[JerryB]

A club that my grandson and I shot with for a little while told me that my .45 Colt load was to heavy and would tear up their steel targets. I loaded 7.8 grains of Unique with a 255 grain bullet. They told me to drop it down to 5 or 6 grains. Needless to say we didn't stay there long.