Open Tops and R-M Conversions?

[RLMartin]

Until I got interested in SASS I'd never heard of either the Richards-Mason Conversions or the Open Tops manufactured by Colt. It seems that my collection is now lackiing examples of each of these short lived models. Since I already have several SAAs and clones in .45 Colt, and an 1873 Winchester clone in .45, I'm thinking maybe I should pick up an Open Top and a R-M Conversion, maybe in .38 Spl and an 1866 Winchester in .38 also so that I can use them just to change things up with my .45s every now and then. Aside from the cool factor, what are the pros and cons of the Open Tops and Conversions? I was thinking one of each. No one says you have to have a pair of the same gun right? Might even try my hand at BP cartridges with these.

[Seldom Seen #16162]

You'll get more smoke with 44 Colts.

[macinaw]

Pros: Point naturally, no "real" sights, Just look down the barrel.

 

Love to shoot mine, have had a clean match with them.

 

Cons: Fire pin on hammer is weak, I had a hardened steel one put on by the Smiths shop.

 

I have 72 Open Tops in 45

[George Rodgers]

If you are serious about black powder, I recommend that you go with 44Colt and shoot the 44Russian Cartridge. You can fill up that small case with black powder and forget using fillers. A 44Russian black powder round is just right.

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

If you are serious about black powder, I recommend that you go with 44Colt and shoot the 44Russian Cartridge. You can fill up that small case with black powder and forget using fillers. A 44Russian black powder round is just right.

I have a pair of '72 Open Tops in .45, but .44 is more historically correct. Regardless, I use .45 Cowboy Special and Schofield cases in mine, with black powder and smokeless. Both cases work very well.

 

RL, the OTs use a one piece cylinder where the R-Ms have a conversion ring attached to the back of the cylinder. The conversion ring includes the loading gate, where the open tops have the gate as part of the frame. Additionally, the R-M rear sight is a notch in the hammer (and may have one in the top of the conversion ring), where the OT has the sight milled into the top of the barrel, just forward of the cylinder. Either way, the sight picture is marginal as compared to an 1873.

 

I had to spend some $$$ to get mine to work right even tho they were purchased new. Once that was done, they've been great. Never had a problem with firing pins.

[Virgil Ray Hality, SASS# 37355]

Speaking from experience, when I bought a pair a few years back, it took a lot of tweaking to make them reliable enough for two handed shooting. If you shot one handed, not so much tweaking needed. The biggest problems were 1) the needle like firing pin which I had replaced with some good solid hardended pins. Symptoms, pierced primers and light strikes.

2) Next was over and under cylinder rotation due to cocking with off hand thumb.

Some determined tweaking and time and a few parts and I have a pair of worthy Open Tops in 44 Colt.

 

Like said above, the most naturally pointing revolvers I own.

[Doc Flimshaw Sass# 73310]

Firing pin is only problematic on the '72's not on the richards mason conversions. Don't be surprised if you have to put in some extra gunsmithing money though.

I have two r/m conversions and it was well worth it.....Doc

[Slowhand Bob, 24229]

I like mine but wish I had gotten the short barl version in 38. Normally I prefer the bigger caliber BUT on my RMs it meant the larger Army grip frame, which I do not like. Under light use shooting duelist they have held up well so far but they are part of a nice stable and do not rotate to the top that often. If Cimarron or Taylors would come out with the earlier Richards conversion with the better placed rear sight, I would sell mine and get them! These were offered by another maker years ago but had terrible QC problems, or so I'm told.

[Charlie Whiskers]

I have 1 of each.72 is a 7 1/2 inch and the RM is a 5 1/2.Had to replace the firing pin on the 72 just recently,but other than that have had no problems with either.Replaced it with the hardened steel US made pin from VTI.Had my gunsmith do it,but watched him and all you need is a pin punch to drive the keeper rolled pin out and the new firing pin came rolled pin.They are natural pointers and I've gotten to where that's what I shoot all the time now.Used to shoot my 75's all the time til I got these.Mine are in 38.

[Three Foot Johnson]

Love 'em! I've got three 5 1/2" '72's in .45 Colt and three 7 1/2" 1851 RM's in .38 spl. There were/are two different firing pins on the '72's, and one style is very thin and bends easily after a few cylinders. One of mine had this one, but a grade 5 bolt chucked in the lathe and a bit of time turning a new one to the proper contour solved the problem.

[Oklahomabound]

I have and shoot as my main match guns a pair of 1851 Richards Mason Open Top Conversion revolvers in .38 Special and they shoot Black Powder Cartridge and produce smoke just fine. POA is POI with these guns.

[Conejo Kid #51342]

RLM

 

I have a pair of RM conversions in 38S made by ASM in about 1990. First, the guns are very cool and always get a lot of comments. The guns point naturally and feel really good in your hands.

 

Now having said that the early guns (including my ASM models) have soft metal. Also the timing was WAYYY off and required a lot of work by C & I store. Even so, the guns have problems such as the aforementioned tendency to over rotate.

 

Bottom line is the guns are just not as durable, smooth and consistant as the 1873 Colts, Colt clones and Rugers. If they were, you'd see a bunch of them competing in SASS.

 

I've lobbied long and hard with the TG's here in the West to petition the Wild Bunch to establish an "Open Top" category -- but to no avail. While the TGs will argue next week about adding lots of "age based" categories; other more interesting (and historically correct categories) have fallen by the wayside. Well I can still hope -- and maybe someday we'll have a Wild Bill Category (for open tops and RM conversions). It was of course - Wild Bills favorite gun and he had a pair that he bought just before that fatefull journey to Deadwood. The rest -- as they say -- is history.

 

CK

[Badlands Beady]

Until I got interested in SASS I'd never heard of either the Richards-Mason Conversions or the Open Tops manufactured by Colt. It seems that my collection is now lackiing examples of each of these short lived models. Since I already have several SAAs and clones in .45 Colt, and an 1873 Winchester clone in .45, I'm thinking maybe I should pick up an Open Top and a R-M Conversion, maybe in .38 Spl and an 1866 Winchester in .38 also so that I can use them just to change things up with my .45s every now and then. Aside from the cool factor, what are the pros and cons of the Open Tops and Conversions? I was thinking one of each. No one says you have to have a pair of the same gun right? Might even try my hand at BP cartridges with these.

 

I've only been into CAS for a couple of years and, like you, there were classes of guns I'd never heard of until I discovered the various online catalogs. I also discovered that I'm never going to win a match, so I ignore the competitive parts and go for style points. At the moment, the only conversion I have is the 1858 Remington (btw, the conversion ring is attached to the frame, not to the back of the cylinder), plus an army and a navy open-top. I sold my Richards Type II and two Richards Mason conversions in .38, 'cause I'm trying to cut back to as few calibers as I can; I'll be getting others in .45 colt, later on.

 

Anyway, a lot of the comments you've been getting only apply if you care about match points, shooting fast, and all that. Virtually none of them do if you're as relaxed about it as I am. If you buy a brand-new open-top, there's an excellent chance the firing pin won't be a problem, for example (a new, improved pin can be installed in minutes). Also, the '72 army-grip open-top has the most comfortable feel for my size-10 hands.

 

And if you're into conversions, don't forget the long arms. I have a '65 Spencer which only holds 5 rounds, so I have to stop and reload "on the clock." Even this is fun and gets style points, 'cause I use a period-correct Blakeslee Box (a leather box on a shoulder strap, carrying aluminum tubes of bullets). The Lightning pump-style rifle has a bad rep, but I've noticed that, again, the complaints mostly come from those cowboys who are trying to outshoot a Gatling. If you're more interested in the gun than the clock, there shouldn't be (m)any problems.

 

Buy what interests you, learn how to use it, and Have Fun!

[RLMartin]

Thanks guys, sounds like even those of you who have had problems still like the guns once you get the bugs worked out. I haven't shot a match yet. Due to illness, I missed what would have been my first match last month. I plan to shoot Duelist and I'm more in it to have fun than to compete, I doubt I'll ever be fast enough to be a top competitor, which is OK with me because I'm just not competitive by nature, so having the cool factor going for me is about all I'm interested in. I've only been to one match, strictly as an observer, at the club I plan to join and shoot with most, and while some are quite into the period clothing, most seem to shoot Rugers or SAAs, so I may be a little apart from the crowd with the OTs and Conversions. As much as I love the SAAs, without a doubt one of the sexiest guns of all time, the lines of the old C&B Colts and the similar lines of the OTs and Conversions, just really appeal to me also. I think when I do decide to get a pair I'll stick with .38 just to avoid adding another caliber to the mix, as I've already got .38 SPL revovlers I load for.

[Slowhand Bob, 24229]

Bad Lands, your comment about grip size/style is very pertinent to our selections of the old cap and ball Colts. There will be those who have hands ranging from long enuff to palm a basketball to shorter than a kids size, and the limitations of this really needs to be considered. It is said that once upon a time Colt offered all sorts of custom options for their guns, well I think the sellers of modern clones should do something similar. How about Taylors, Cimarron and the Pietta importers offer grip size exchanges on their new guns? Even a reasonable surcharge for using such an option would be a lot cheaper for us than buying whole guns that we know will need new grips as soon as we get them. My choice has always been the big calibers but the Navy grip while I am sure that there are others that prefer it the other way around. In the process they would no doubt need to push Uberti and Pietta to tighten up on the machine specs for those models! I have about a dozen Colt styles that I have been playing musical grips with and all but about three of them are pretty much even swaps and only one is so far out as to require new over sized grip frames to work. Wouldnt you know it is one of my RM Conversions and the problem seems to be that the frame wasn't finished square where the two top grip frame screws attach to the guns frame??? These two photos show an idea that didnt work for me with swapping grips around, look closely to see if you can find the differences. http://home.comcast.net/~gakracker/site/

[Badlands Beady]

...and I'm more in it to have fun than to compete

 

Here's a tip:

 

DON'T EVER SAY THAT OUT LOUD!!!!

The "Competitors" here are in the majority, and will bury you under protests that competition is fun. They absolutely refuse to acknowledge that competition isn't fun for everybody, or that you you can have fun without competing. They also assume that a newbie who asks about guns and leather is asking about speed outfits and "race-ready" guns. There's also a sizable group who insist that, rather than buying leather and guns that you can afford, you should just save up and get something "worthwhile."

 

Which brings me to another subject. If you're on a budget, don't buy a complete outfit unless you can get it cheap. My current outfit is a belt and buckle bought off a Civil War reenactment web site, two bullet pouches, three model '87(?) military flap holsters (the one from Dixie Gun Works will hold anything in the Uberti catalog)(two of these were bout used), and one I had special-made for my Wyatt Earp Peacemaker with 10" barrel. I can carry two guns of different calibers in leather that cost a total of ~$125, vs, say, $300 from El Paso Saddlery or one of the other names. Another thing, since you're interested in transition guns, civilian holsters didn't come in until after the Civil War, and the very first ones were military with the flaps on or cut off.

[Slowhand Bob, 24229]

WARNING: This post may contain many examples of poor spellin and grammar so be forewarned and do not proceed if such insults you!!!

 

 

I am definitely not good at the competition part of it BUT do like to shoot in those style matches when the writers do it creatively. Then there are the matches that some people refer to as fun matches, lots of different goings on at every stage, and I think these are a ball if the writer doesnt out think himself with to much poop. In our area we have matches that highlight both styles of "fun" and I'll take that over being locked into one way or the other anytime. As I said, I'm never at the top of either but can you guess who is, the same guys that win one will win the other also. The biggest pile are the handful of shooters who openly disparage one way or the other and refuse to get along and brag about it openly. "I do not want to shoot there its just 10,10 and 4 every stage" or "I refuse to shoot their match because they use KDs or Texas Stars". Though I do feel those Hard A-- attitudes do hurt the game overall, the individuals who participate in this selfish behavior can revel in the fact that while I am shooting the 'bad match' they get to help the wife catch up with the dishes!

 

Budget gear is going to be different for everyone and there are certainly pards on here who would call what I use budget gear. Where the rub comes is when we try to find the difference between budget and cheap leather, guns or other equipment. I now have a dozen or more hats and out of those I paid slightly over a hundred for one, with the rest valuing down to three or four dollars each at Good Will. My favorite of all is an old well worn cheap wool felt that I bout on clearance at Wally World for about five dollars. The brim was wet and flattened while at the same time I stuffed the crown to remove the shape and to top it off I purchase a hank of real human hair at a wig shop and attached it inside the hat. Now old baldy has plenty of stringy hair when the hat goes on.

 

As to the leather, I will not get into that as I know guys who have been shooting from beat up old Mexican leather for years and are proud as a pumpkin to show everybody what a deal they got on it. Most give them a polite smile and ease away but what makes you happy is all that counts IF the money is coming out of your pocket. The WIRE can be a bit tricky when asking for advice on leather, you ask for something under three hundred and you get flooded with recommendations of makers who charge double that for their bottom tier rigs. Ignore those whose links take you to pricing well above your stated level. Im not sure if they are showing off their money or truley just do not understand that all of us do not come from the same financial background.

 

Though a bit more of a book than most would tend to buy, 'Packing Iron' seems to be the best resource for gun leather around. True civilian gun leather does predate the Civil War by a pretty good margin and flapped holsters were actually made for civilian applications quite frequently. If you ever get a chance to look inside the book, check page 62 for a belt and holster, with pistol, that is dated 1840-1850. Though looking very similar to a Slim Jim, it actually predates them since the books date them to the early '50s. With its single shot percussion pistol tucked in it actually looks a bit gamy. The outstanding rig that has been mentioned on here multiple times is on pg 83, an early Slim Jim that looks like it was made just for a Competitive SASS shooter in the Frontiersman category. While on that page look across to the one on pg 82, some early fast gun hand actually cut away the trigger guard leather on an early Slim Jim (1860-1865) to facilitate his draw??? One of the things that make a holster fast is how high the gun sets in it and several of these old Slim Jims are well fitted to their guns and carry them high and accessible, rather than in the deep over sized pouch of the later cowboy. I think when a man opted for and paid the cash price of a repeating weapon in those days, he was either wealthy or a serious fighting man who saw tthe true value of these new style weapons. Sorry to get off the original subject so far but I do love the history part of our game a great deal.