Richards-Mason conversion/transition v. open top

[Tombstone Tex]

Howdy folks, I am thinking an open top of some sort is needed in the near future. So there is my dilemma, I really like the looks of a richards-mason, the overall style just speaks to me. However, I have discussed drawbacks with a pard about them, such as the rear sight being on the hammer versus mounted on the barrel like the normal open tops, caliber and grip size differences etc.

 

So I will put it to the fire, who has both and has used both? What is your preference and why? I don't shoot with anyone on a regular basis that I know of that uses an open top of any sort, even one of my pards that shoots C&B almost exclusively does so with the Remingtons....so it would be tough to get my paws on one to see how they feel, point etc.

 

Thanks for the help!

[Zeb Gray, #36839]

I've shot RM conversions with 5.5 inch barrels for a number of years.  I widened the notch on the hammer when I first got them.  In truth, I don't see the rear notch when shooting.  I've only shot 1872s a couple times, so little experience there. 

 

[Lawman Mays]

I had a Uberti 1871 early version. I really like the look it and the feel in my hand. But, it just wasn't suitable for CA Shooting. Screws would come loose, the barrel was too tight, had several squib rounds, and if the wedge was just a little too tight, I couldn't open the loading gate. Things like this which added up.

[Captain Clark]

Having owned and shot both, I actually like the RM sight notch in the hammer slightly over the open top rear sight on the barrel. It does give you a longer sight radius  which adds to their natural pointability IMO. All of mine so far have been in 45 Colt or Scofield which I have been happy with. The grips on all of mine currently are the 1860 / Army type versus the Navy / P model type which they are available in. The barrel length is your personal preference, I trend toward the 5.5", but have had shorter and longer as well. They are cool, add style points, and are easy to clean and maintain.

They are great for when you want to mix it up and try something a bit different!. Good luck and enjoy

 

PS.... My RM's run good enough that THEY won a state match shooting B Western last year!

{ God know it had to be the pistols, not the operator...}

[Tombstone Tex]

45 minutes ago, Captain Clark said:

PS.... My RM's run good enough that THEY won a state match shooting B Western last year!

 

 that is a great line. I honestly hadn't thought of the longer sight radius, then again, as Zeb indicated, most of the time we use our front sight only when firing through a stage, excepting fo course those odd longer shots we might need to take and slow down a minute. But definitely adds style points no matter what!

 

Did you ever have any work done to yours? Because I had thought about exactly what Lawman was referencing moreso about the wedge being too tight, but that will be the same with both the open top and the RMs.

 

Thanks for the replies so far!

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

From the standpoint of a retired Gunplumber,  ALL Uberti made Open Top design guns suffer the same maladies.  The most egregious is the Barrel to Arbor fit which is horrible and is an "immediate" fix item.  If the Barrel Arbor fit is not correct, the barrel can and will jam the cylinder when the wedge is seated, the Barrel/Cylinder will never be correct, End Shake will never be correct and you may have a problem with your head space.  Without first correcting the Barrel to Arbor fit, any other work is simply wasted.  Once correctly fit, the guns can be really really nice CAS guns.

 

Practically speaking, the RM will have a much longer sight radius although the hammer nose sight may need opening up.  I personally prefer the Open Top as one can add cylinders and barrels to shoot three different base cartridges.  Very Very versatile.

[El Hombre Sin Nombre]

I have the navy open top and it's one of my all time favorite guns. I don't shoot it as often as I would like (curse of having too many cool guns), but I do enjoy it a lot. I bought mine through Long Hunter, so it came really fine tuned and with a correct arbor fit. I shoot nothing but black powder out of mine and it has never once failed me. It took some getting used to the look of the rear sight on the barrel, but for me it turns out I like that style. I honestly am not sure if I have ever missed a sass target with that gun, which coming from mean says quite a bit. I do like the look of the RM's a lot and I once borrowed a buddy's set of 51 RM's with the 5.5" barrels. I do believe those are the perfect gun fighter guns, as the heavy octagon barrels makes it so there is virtually no recoil. Unfortunately, I don't load for or own anything in 38 special, and the bigger calibers in the RM only come with Army grips. That makes me wonder, has anyone tried to put Navy grips on a 60 RM? If so, was it a difficult feat to accomplish?

[Diamond Curly SASS#57086]

I shoot and own both the 71 Open Top and the RM open top in 45 Schofield. The barrel to arbor has been addressed on all of them which is necessary as stated before. I have not had an issue with either of the rear site placements at the range targets are now set at most ranges. That was not true in the past and both sites are small if shooting longer distances. I like the way all of them feel in my hand. I also shoot only Colt clones in my C&B revolvers again because of the way they feel to me. It would be difficult decision to make if you are not able to pick up one of each models and compare. Good luck!

 

[Tyrel Cody]

Anyone have a link to the instructions for fixing the Uberti arbor fit?

[Diamond Curly SASS#57086]

6 minutes ago, Redwood Kid said:

I have the navy open top and it's one of my all time favorite guns. I don't shoot it as often as I would like (curse of having too many cool guns), but I do enjoy it a lot. I bought mine through Long Hunter, so it came really fine tuned and with a correct arbor fit. I shoot nothing but black powder out of mine and it has never once failed me. It took some getting used to the look of the rear sight on the barrel, but for me it turns out I like that style. I honestly am not sure if I have ever missed a sass target with that gun, which coming from mean says quite a bit. I do like the look of the RM's a lot and I once borrowed a buddy's set of 51 RM's with the 5.5" barrels. I do believe those are the perfect gun fighter guns, as the heavy octagon barrels makes it so there is virtually no recoil. Unfortunately, I don't load for or own anything in 38 special, and the bigger calibers in the RM only come with Army grips. That makes me wonder, has anyone tried to put Navy grips on a 60 RM? If so, was it a difficult feat to accomplish?

I changed out the grip frame on my RM to a Navy frame with only minor adjustments. I prefer the Navy grip size as well.

[Zeb Gray, #36839]

Mine are .38 Special 1860 RMs with navy grips shooting smokeless.  I bought them used & they were slick from the start.  Don't know who did the work.  Never had any problem with cylinder drag. 

[Rooster Ron Wayne]

I have both sets and conversions of the 1860 also .

I personally think the 1871-72  Open Top is the best setup to go with .

But I like the looks of the RM the best .

All will need work right out of the box .

Rooster  

[El Hombre Sin Nombre]

15 minutes ago, Diamond Curly SASS#57086 said:

I changed out the grip frame on my RM to a Navy frame with only minor adjustments. I prefer the Navy grip size as well.

That's encouraging. I would love to know what the minor adjustment entails. You've got me very curious now.

[Dusty 32263]

I have a set of RM in 44 colt 8” barrel army grip. I was not happy with the 8” barrels I could not find any RM 5.5 barrels but was able to get open top barrels had them fitted and am very happy with them. I still use the hammer notch over the rear sight.

[Goody, SASS #26190]

I really like this sight configuration. Too bad the guns are no longer made and had a somewhat sullied reputation when available. ASM 1860 conversions.

[Hollifer A. Dollar]

I have both, one is a set of 1872 open tops in 45 Colt, 4-5/8" bbls, the other is a set of 7-1/2" 1851 RM conversions in 38 special.  Both are great guns, have been converted to coil hand springs & have the arbor spacers.  The RM 38s are a good bit heavier overall & a lot more muzzle heavy, so they have a very different feel.

 

Holler

[Jabez Cowboy,SASS # 50129]

I have and Shoot both, Open-Tops are 7 1/2 inchers and RMs are 8 inches ...

I really prefer the Navy Grip Frame !!!

I slightly prefer the Balance of the Open-Tops over the RMs, very small difference but there ...

I shoot FCD and these guns are a dream for Cleaning ...

I also prefer them to be chambered in .44 Spl. ...

I think I would buy Open-Tops over RMs, but enjoy Both..

 

Jabez Cowboy

 

Jabez Cowboy

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

Tyrel Cody:

 

Yepper.  Well, not exactly a link.  Larsen E. Pettifogger penned and excellent tutorial on the set up for the Open Top guns from Uberti.  It can be found on "The Open Range."  The Open Range is now a "read only" site but contains a ton of great information.  Scroll down and you'll run into Larsen's Tutorial.

 

Changing out the Grips is simple.  Expensive but simple.  Uberti standardized their frame dimensions some years back.  Uberti Grips fit Uberti guns.  So .... One may simply swap with someone else who wants your grips.  Or, often, VTI Gunparts will have grip "sets" in stock that have the complete trigger guard, backstrap and wood that have been fit to a mule at the factory.  The fit may not be "absolutely" perfect but will close enough to not bother with.

[Springfield Slim SASS #24733]

I have 3 '72 Opentops converted to 44-40, and all converted to Navy grips. Shooting BP I have had no problems with them. I have a pair of Smith Shop firing pins but have not needed to change them out yet, not in 3 years of shooting. My wife has a pair of '72's in 45 Colt, used to be mine. They also work fine for her in smokeless. All are 7.5" barrels. The rear sight is not a problem as I rarely use it, these point so well.

[Abilene, SASS # 27489]

A few things.  1860 Richards-Masons and 1860 Type II Richards come in .38, .44, .45, and all have Army grips.  '51 R-M with octagonal barrel is .38 only and Navy grip only.  Opentops are available with Navy grips in all barrel lengths, but the  Army grip is only available in the 7.5" barrel.  Certainly gripframes and grips can be changed, but that can be pricey unless you sell or swap your take-offs.  The pointy firing pin problem with the OT's is a thing of the past.  The conversions have a different firing pin, and it can pierce some brands of primers.  A lighter mainspring and/or dulling the tip a bit fix that.   The conversion ring can come loose and rotate slightly, causing the hammer to hit the side of the cutout.  Not a common problem, but it can happen, and the OT's  with no conversion ring would not have that issue.  As for the oft-mentioned barrel to arbor fit,  that was a problem for a long time but may not be currently (?).  My Type II is about a year and a half old and did not have the problem.  I have heard of others with recent guns without the problem.  It is possible Uberti has fixed that, but there may be plenty of "old stock" guns out there that still have the issue.  I  think we are discouraged from putting links to other forums on the Wire, but if you Google "Pettifogger open top" the first thing that pops up is what you want.  And if you do need to correct the arbor to barrel fit, it can be done temporarily if needed by dropping an appropriate washer down the arbor hole in the barrel (thanks Coffinmaker!).

 

I shoot conversions, not the OT, but my sight picture is placing the front sight on top of the hammer nose and aiming at the lower part of the targets.

[Captain Clark]

4 hours ago, Tombstone Tex said:

 

 that is a great line. I honestly hadn't thought of the longer sight radius, then again, as Zeb indicated, most of the time we use our front sight only when firing through a stage, excepting fo course those odd longer shots we might need to take and slow down a minute. But definitely adds style points no matter what!

 

Did you ever have any work done to yours? Because I had thought about exactly what Lawman was referencing moreso about the wedge being too tight, but that will be the same with both the open top and the RMs.

 

Thanks for the replies so far!

Yes the RM's have had work done on them. The arbors have been fitted, corrected or whatever the current term is being used. I have had the forcing cones recut and they have lighter springs in them both now. I had mediocre results with lighter hammer springs in my 1871 / 72 open tops, an occasional FTF so the originals were put back in.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

Conversions or open tops?  Conversions or open tops...

 

Well, I have used this....

 

 

The lack of an ejector rod is kind of annoying, but nobody makes one as far as I can tell.   Still, the loads I use are so light they usually just fall out anyway.

 

On the other hand, there is this...

 

 

It's a little bit of pain removing the barrel to reload every time, and while a gated cylinder is available, I was not gonna cut a real Colt, even if it is a second generation.

 

But finally there is this...

 

 

This one has it all, and is much less cumbersome than the Walker or the Dragoon.     I left the barrel latch on in case I ever want to shoot it cap and ball someday.   Functionally, this is pretty identical to the 1872 open tops, or so I have read.   I don't own one.

 

But, even with the cost of the conversion, these pistols still cost a little less than a brand new cartridge gun.   In any case, all are fun to shoot.   Can't go wrong with any of them, IMO.

[El Hombre Sin Nombre]

11 minutes ago, H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619 said:

 

But finally there is this...

 

 

This one has it all, and is much less cumbersome than the Walker or the Dragoon.     I left the barrel latch on in case I ever want to shoot it cap and ball someday.   Functionally, this is pretty identical to the 1872 open tops, or so I have read.   I don't own one.

 

But, even with the cost of the conversion, these pistols still cost a little less than a brand new cartridge gun.   In any case, all are fun to shoot.   Can't go wrong with any of them, IMO.

Who makes that ejector rod/housing? I'd love to put something like that on my Kirst Dragoon.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

55 minutes ago, Redwood Kid said:

Who makes that ejector rod/housing? I'd love to put something like that on my Kirst Dragoon.

 

The "Konversion" of this pistol was indeed done by Kirst.  Cylinder, ring, cutting of frame and ejector housing all came from them.

 

When I had them convert the Walker, they told me that they do not "yet" make ejectors for the Dragoon or the Walker.   Don't know if or when they ever will.

[El Hombre Sin Nombre]

Thanks, H.K. I want to take the loading lever off of my dragoon, as the recoil of cartridge rounds and big bullets is always making it drop. But in order to do so, I would want something in that empty space to replace it. If it's an ejector, well even better.

[Tully Mars]

I have a pair of .38 RM's with Navy grip and octagon barrels. I've had a love hate relationship with them until I shot with Jedi Knight. The issue was over rotation of the cylinder, I tried all kinds of fixes, Jedi told me to put grease on the arbor. That did the trick! I bought them used and had to fix the arbor length by using Pettifogger's instructions.

 

These are my go to Black Powder guns! I love shooting them now that their reliable! I have no experience with the open tops.

 

Tully

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

2 hours ago, Redwood Kid said:

Thanks, H.K. I want to take the loading lever off of my dragoon, as the recoil of cartridge rounds and big bullets is always making it drop. But in order to do so, I would want something in that empty space to replace it. If it's an ejector, well even better.

 

Ironically, my Walker never drops the loading lever, but the Dragoon does.

 

 

 

 

[Tombstone Tex]

Wow, lots to think about here, thanks for the replies. Now I have a follow up a bit. I do have an 1860 army c&b pistol, so for those that run the rm, understanding it has army grips, it is identical to the grip of the 1860 army? So by handling that I'll get an idea if I like it or not with that grip? I don't shoot the c&b much which is why I'm asking. My main match guns are currently a pair of colt saa, one is nickel, the other is blue with cch which is why I'm asking.

[WymoreWrangler SASS 46187L]

I've been shooting a pair of RM 51's for about 15 years,  and also have a pair of 71-72 open tops as backups, you really don't sight a open top, they naturally point so all you have to see is the front sight over the hammer and pull the trigger...

[Abilene, SASS # 27489]

27 minutes ago, Tombstone Tex said:

Wow, lots to think about here, thanks for the replies. Now I have a follow up a bit. I do have an 1860 army c&b pistol, so for those that run the rm, understanding it has army grips, it is identical to the grip of the 1860 army? So by handling that I'll get an idea if I like it or not with that grip? I don't shoot the c&b much which is why I'm asking. My main match guns are currently a pair of colt saa, one is nickel, the other is blue with cch which is why I'm asking.

 

Tex, is your '60 an Uberti?  If so, the grip and gripframe are identical to the '60 conversion (and the OT's with Army grip), except that the cartridge gun has a steel triggerguard instead of brass.   If your '60 is Pietta, it may be slightly differently shaped but should feel close.

[No Horse Hair, SASS #77464]

 

I would love to add a pair of Open top or RM conversions to my  Cowboy shooters. But my hesitation is to the "innards". I have experience with Pietta/Uberti cap guns and also shoot a pair of Pietta cartridge guns . The internal parts of the cap guns are what you expect for the price they sell for, as others have said , they are kit guns and you better keep a few spares. What about the open Top, R-M conversions?  Are the inside parts comparable to the '73 colt clone guns? I personally  know of a  cylinder split on a  45 caliber open top (fired only with cowboy loads).

[Rafe Conager SASS #56958]

I have a set of Richards conversions with army grips, a set of 45 open tops with army grips,and a set of 38 open tops with navy grips, I have big hands so I like the army grips, I widened the sights on my Richards conversions. I like them both the Richards are a little heavier, I shot them for years with no complaints full black powder loads, both point great. You won't be wrong with either one. Glad to be of no help.

Rafe    

[Tombstone Tex]

9 hours ago, Rafe Conager SASS #56958 said:

Glad to be of no help

Hahaha, it is a lot of help actually, this whole thread is honestly. I was talking with a friend and said I'd end up with both eventually I'm sure, meaning the RM and an open top.

 

11 hours ago, No Horse Hair, SASS #77464 said:

Are the inside parts comparable to the '73 colt clone guns? I personally  know of a  cylinder split on a  45 caliber open top (fired only with cowboy loads).

 

That is a solid question as well. I have parts for my Colts because like anything that is used heavily, you will wear certain things out, springs can only go so far, but when was that open top with the split cylinder made? I know that was one reason folks used to say that they aren't reliable in 45 colt, but I thought that would've changed by now.

 

Plus, as everyone has said, we know the arbor needs work, that has been a consistent theme with the work needing done on them, but nobody said anything about the internals otherwise, normal action job? Not many guns, if any, are suitable for this game right out of the box or any type of regular shooting it seems without having someone work the action a bit.

[Abilene, SASS # 27489]

Besides changing the main spring and trigger/bolt spring for lighter ones, I've done nothing to my Transition model and it has felt fine and has good timing.  YMMV.  Those springs are the same as the Model P's and others.  The bolt, hand, and trigger are similar design, but slightly different.  Of course, the hand has a leaf spring for a "weak point" but none of my 5 conversions, going back to 2000, have ever broken one.