Driftwood Johnson, SASS #38283

Nope. I'm not gonna dissect one of those rounds to find out.

PREVIEW? Howdy. As a confirmed Luddite I am having a few growing pains with the new software. I don't seem to be able to find the ability to preview a post before I send it. There is a Preview icon, page with a magnifying glass, to the far right of the text box tool bar. I think Preview is its intent. I have always found this a very useful feature, because I like to edit my post before I send it. I too liked the old way. You all know I tend to get blabby at times and I need to make sure my spelling is correct and see that I am saying what I need to say. I always see my mistakes after the Reply has posted, why should you be different. That was a joke. The Preview was a great feature that allowed me to do that. Am I just not finding it, or is Preview gone? If it is gone, I would really like to see it back. Tried to preview this post too, could not do it before sending. Let us know if the Preview icon meets your needs. However, it seems to be part of the new version of the Software, which can't be easily changed like User Preferences and Settings. Thanks WAIT! STOP THE PRESSES.I should have read your entire message before trying to reply. Lesson learned. Thank you! I just found the teeny tiny preview button at the upper right of the tool bar. You hit the teeny, tiny, microscopic preview button that looks like a teeny, tiny magnifying glass over a teeny, tiny sheet of paper. Then you hit the X that shows up on the far right to return to editing mode. Maybe the preview button could be made a little bit bigger or more descriptive so those of us who are half blind will see it better?.It is basically the same size as the other buttons/icons/tools. Now that you know where it is, I doubt it will be a problem for you. BTW, thank you for bringing this up so everyone can learn from it. Gripe, gripe, gripe, gripe.........I have them too. However, the Administrator "Control Panel" is much more user friendly than it was in the past. I feel like I am up-to-speed, or nearly so, now. I'm sure y'all will be soon.

As you all know by now I seriously dislike the term Period Correct. However the guy all the way on the right in that photo is Geronimo, and you can bet what he is wearing is historically accurate.

Well Griff, as I've said many times, it is the cylinder that contains the pressure of the cartridge firing. The frame, which includes the top strap, does not see the pressure of the cartridge firing. However the frame does see the pounding of recoil, and a thicker top strap will be important in keeping the frame from stretching or otherwise failing from the heavier recoil of the 44 Mag cartridge.

H.K. The most useful photo is #7, comparing two cylinders together.since both cylinders are 44 caliber, that is an apples to apples comparison. Talking about thicker top straps and stuff is all well and good, but the pedal hits the metal, so to speak, in the cylinders, which must contain the pressure of the cartridges firing. It appears to me that the web between chambers is slightly thicker on the Uberti 44 Magnum cylinder than the Colt 44 Special cylinder. A simple measurement with a caliper could confirm this. An even better photo would be a side by side comparison of both cylinders from the rear. Well lit of course, so it can be seen if either cylinder has more metal between the cylinders. A simple measurement would suffice too. I am talking about a photo like this, which clearly shows how much bigger and stronger the 'old model' Vaquero cylinder is tjam tje Iberto Cattleman on the left and the 2nd Gen Colt on the right. All three cylinders are chambered for 45 Colt. I suspect the difference between you Colt 44 Special cylinder and the new Uberti 44 Mag cylinder may not be quite so obvious, but this is the type of photo I am talking about. There are other considerations, such as how deep the bolt cuts are, but a measurement of the metal between chambers would go a long way towards confirming if the Uberti 44 Mag is indeed beefier than a standard Colt or Uberti in 44 Special. There are other things too, the diameter of the Mag cylinder could be larger, allowing the chambers to be set further out, which would increase the distance between them, but getting an accurate measurement on that might take some fancy measuring techniques. But a simple measurement of the diameters of the two cylinders could also be useful. Just some thoughts. The Uberti 44 Mag would have been proofed in Italy with proof loads for 44 Mag, and European proofing standards are actually a little bit higher than American standards. So that 44 Mag should be safe to shoot with standard 44 Magnum ammunition, I suspect it would not be limited to 'cowboy loads' unless that was clearly stated somewhere in the owner's manual.

Well, it's just as well that I am too busy this weekend to go to the show in Marlboro. I have been spending too much money on guns lately. Looking at the Uberti web page they do list 44 Mag as one of the calibers for the Cattleman. But looking at the specs it appears that the only one chambered for 44 Mag is the Callahan model, which comes with either 4 3/4" or 6 1/2" barrel. There is also the 'target' model with 6 1/2" barrel only. So that model probably is heftier to take the 44 Mag cartridge. What say you H.K? I know you have a few Colts. Is your 44 Mag heftier than a standard SAA?

Howdy HK Just curious, where did you find it? I was not aware that Uberti was chambering the Cattleman for 44 Mag, but I just checked their webpage and 44 Mag is one of the listed calibers. Did you find it new or used?

Yup, put a cookie sheet under the MEC. You'll be glad you did first time you dump shot all over the place so you don't have to vacuum it out of that nice new carpet.

Howdy Again While I'm still on the subject, if I recall the dates correctly, back in the 1920s and 1930s Smith and Wesson obtained a trademark for the way they color case hardened the hammers and triggers on their revolvers. This was an attempt to keep cheap imitations from being imported from Europe. They stamped REG. U.S. PAT. OFF. on the hammers and backsides of the triggers. This was a trademark, not a patent. Eventually the courts ruled against them and they stopped marking their hammers and triggers that way. Back on Topic If they play their cards right, I suspect Standard Manufacturing will be able to sell all the single action revolvers they can make at that price. Colt has a very limited capacity to make the SAA, there are only a couple of employees assembling them, yet they sell every one that they make. I'll bet the owner of Standard Manufacturing did a good job studying the market before he decided to make these revolvers, and if the quality is there I suspect he will sell all he can make.

Howdy The name '1911' is just a model designation given to a particular firearm by the US Army. Other than that it means nothing. The name '1911' is not trademarked. The patents for the 1911 expired long ago, so anybody can make one without infringing on anybody's intellectual property. Trademarks are different. The letter R inside a circle is the symbol for a registered trademark. A trademark identifies the brand owner of a particular product or service. Many things can be trademarked. Symbols or names associated with a particular brand can be trademarked. Trademarks can be renewed indefinitely, so practically speaking they can last forever as long as the company that owns them holds up its end of the bargain. Probably the most recognizable trademark in the world is the flowing Coca Cola script that is written on every bottle and can of Coca Cola. The Coca Cola company is well known as being vigilant about protecting its trademarks. That is because if a company does not actively defend its trademark, the trademark can be rescinded. If a trademark starts out as the intellectual property of a company, but lapses into common usage, the trademark can lapse and the company can loose its ownership of the trademark. Which translates into loosing money. The name Kleenex is a registered trademark of the Kimberley-Clark company. When is the last time you asked for a Kleenex instead of a tissue? That is the sort of thing that drives companies mad, the public generalizing a trademarked name so it eventually looses its status as a trademark. If you go to the Colt web page you will see the Registered Trademark symbol next to the stylized script of the Colt name. If you go to Single Action Army page, you will see the registered trademark symbol next to the names Single Action Army as well as Peacemaker. That means that those names are registered trademarks of the Colt company, and Colt will sue the pants off of anybody who has the gall to stamp the name Single Action Army on their products. They are protecting their trademarks from becoming generalized. American Western Arms made the mistake of stamping Single Action Army on some or their revolvers and Colt took them to the cleaners. If Standard Manufacturing stamps the name Single Action Army on their revolvers, or prints it in any of their literature, Colt will jump on them like a ton of bricks.

Hang my gunbelts? I don't. I have a small duffle bag that my leather stays in between matches. I just roll up the belt and stuff it into the bag. Nobody is going to come and admire my gunbelts.

Howdy I had to listen to the video a bunch of times to hear where he said they were located. Finally I got it, New Britain, which isn't far from Hartford where the Colt factory is. A couple of things. He keeps repeating it is a Single Action Army. If he insists on calling it that, Colt will sue him because that is a registered trademark of the Colt company. He said the gun he was holding had a 4 3/4" barrel, but it sure looked like a 5 1/2" barrel to me. Making the gun in the USA I'm not surprised at the price, you can't build something of equal quality in the USA with Italian labor rates. And yes Chuck, I doubt it will be available here in MASS. You and me will have to keep haunting the back alleys for Colts.

Howdy I shoot Trap just about every Sunday, all year long. During the season I shoot once a week in Trap League too. Other than that I try to get down to the range as often as possible to shoot all those S&W revolvers I have.

Yup, it was probably me. Here are four books no self respecting Smith and Wesson aficionado should be without. There's a newer addition of this one out now, but I like this one better. The 4th edition of this one is out now, but I haven't gotten it yet. An oldie but a goodie.

Dumb Question: Why not just shoot 44 Russian in them? Starline makes 44 Russian brass, I shoot it in original S&W Top Breaks all the time.

Howdy If he is a highly respected smith, and the springs he works on keep breaking, something is wrong. I'm not saying you should mention his name, but hammer springs breaking in a Colt is quite rare. There are several ways to tune a hammer spring so it exerts less force. Done improperly can cause damage. Just for the fun of it, check and see if there are horizontal grinding marks running across your springs. If so, the grinding marks set up what are called Stress Risers, providing a perfect place for a spring to snap in half. Tuned springs should be perfectly smooth, with no horizontal grinding marks left behind. Hopefully your problem will be solved with the Wolff springs.

Yes, I stand corrected. Magna grips were an option on the Registered Magnums starting in 1935. After WWII Magna grips became standard on all S&W Hand Ejectors.

Howdy Again The grips on my Triple Lock are what S&W called Service Grips. The grips on the 44HE 4th Model are what S&W calls Magna grips. S&W did not start using Magna grips until around 1950, but as you say, yours are after market. The Serial Number should appear in four separate locations on a S&W revolver of that era. The SN of record is on the bottom of the grip. The SN should also appear on the rear face of the cylinder, the underside of the extractor star, and on the barrel. With a Triple Lock the SN on the barrel will be stamped in the hollow of the extractor shroud. It will be right up front under where the knurling of the extractor rod sits when the cylinder is closed. If the SNs of the barrel, cylinder, or extractor do not agree with the SN of the butt, then the gun probably did not leave the factory with those parts. Curious there is no caliber marking on this one. As I said, a very few Triple Locks left the factory chambered for 45 Colt, but many were modified for that cartridge by after market gunsmiths. But if a factory barrel was used for a conversion, it should be marked for caliber. Some of the 455 Triple Locks that were sold to England were converted to 45 Colt when they got back here. Are there any British markings on the gun? This 455 HE 2nd Model was sent to Canada during WWI. That is the Canadian Broad Arrow acceptance mark below the thumbpiece. The British version of the Broad Arrow acceptance mark was the same, without the 'C'. The crown shaped mark on the butt is a British proof mark. Sorry, but other than the fact that they are relatively rare, I am not going to go out on a limb and guess at the value of your Triple Lock. Entirely dependent on condition, and originality.

Howdy Again It really does not matter whether you use FFg or FFFg. I used to use FFFg in my 45s and 44s, and FFg in my shotshells, but I got tired of stocking two different granulations. Everything else being equal, you will see somewhere around 60 fps to 100 fps more when using FFFg instead of FFg. You will not get any leading with Black Powder. I don't know why, but I have been shooting Black Powder for a long time, and there is never any leading to clean out of the chambers or bore.

Howdy A decent photo would go a long way towards identifying the revolver in question. There is no mistaking a Triple Lock. The third latch in the underside of the extractor shroud engages a hardened steel insert pressed into the cylinder yoke. The cylinder assembly has been removed in this photo to show the hardened insert pressed into the yoke. Notice the extractor shroud is very tall, to house the triple lock mechanism. Most were chambered for 44 Special. Also 44 Russian, 44-40, 455 Mark II and 38-40. a very few were chambered for 45 Colt. But quite a few were rechambered for 45 Colt. Manufactured from 1908 until 1915, Serial Numbers ran from 1 through 15,375. The SN on any S&W revolver is on the bottom of the butt. Numbers in the crane area are assembly numbers and are meaningless. The Triple Lock was officially known as the 44 Hand Ejector, 1st Model. The third latch was dropped when the 2nd Model came out, never to be repeated. The 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model lacked any sort of extractor shroud. 2nd Models were made from 1915 to 1940. SNs started around 15,376 to about 59XXXX. Calibers were 44 Special, 44-40, 45 Colt or 38-40. I have one that was originally chambered for .455 but was modified to 44 Special. The 3rd Model reintroduced the extractor shroud, but lacked the third latch. Also known as the Model 1926 HE, also known as the Wolf & Klar Model. Chambered for 44 Special. Made from 1926 until 1941, SNs 28,358 - 61,412. The 44 HE 4th Model was made from 1950 until 1966. SNs S75000 - S263000. Became the Model 24 in 1957. None of these revolvers had a model name stamped on them until 1957 when Model Numbers were adopted, but they all should have the caliber marked on the barrel.

Howdy Soft. I have not cast bullets in several years, I buy them from Springfield Slim. However, when I used to cast I was casting pure lead for my 44 Mav-Dutchman bullets, and about 1/20 tin/lead for my 45 PRS bullets. The reason for the difference is that pure lead shrinks more on cooling than lead alloyed with tin. My Mav-Dutchman mold was dropping bullets slightly larger than I would have liked, so I used pure lead so they would shrink a little bit more. I too have S&W New Model Number Three chambered for 44 Russian. I use the soft Mav-Dutchman bullets for it. I size all my Mav-Dutchman bullets to .428 and use them in all my 44 Russian and 44-40 firearms. Over a full charge of FFg, of course.

Never been a problem with me.

Howdy Sorry, but the Cobra/Davis derringers are junk. I bought a Davis 38 Special derringer a long time ago, before they changed their name to Cobra. In addition to the barrels being steel embedded in a cheap zinc casting, the trigger is TERRIBLE. The angle of the full cock notch and trigger on these is very positive. Which means you are cocking the hammer further when you pull the trigger. To pull the trigger I actually had to pull downward as well as back to overcome the poor cocking notch angle. Most of the time it took pulling the trigger with the index fingers of both hands. I would not buy one again.

Yup, that one's on my list.