Cap and ball

[boom pop]

I have 1851 and 1860 pietta .44 pistols, will pietta .36 cylinders and barrels work on those frames

[Griff]

The .44 cylinders require the frame to be "notched" to fit.  I don't know if the arbor dimensions are different.  I don't have any .44s measure, maybe someone else does?   But, as the barrels would also require being changed out, there may be an issue with the barrel locating pin placement.  

[Lead Monger]

I can take the 36 cal. cylinder and barrel from my Pietta 1851s and mount them on my Pietta 1860 Army 44s. Functions just fine on the pair of revolvers. Of coarse the 44 caliber cylinders will not fit on the 1851 36 caliber frames but the 44 barrels go right on.

[Major Crimes]

Mine are the same as Lead Monger.

 

I have the 1851 short barrel in .44 and my .36 barrel and cylinder fit the 44 frame.

[Sedalia Dave]

9 hours ago, Lead Monger said:

I can take the 36 cal. cylinder and barrel from my Pietta 1851s and mount them on my Pietta 1860 Army 44s. Functions just fine on the pair of revolvers. Of coarse the 44 caliber cylinders will not fit on the 1851 36 caliber frames but the 44 barrels go right on.

 

9 hours ago, Major Crimes said:

Mine are the same as Lead Monger.

 

I have the 1851 short barrel in .44 and my .36 barrel and cylinder fit the 44 frame.

 

How is the bolt to cylinder fitment?

 

IIRC the 36 cal cylinder is slightly smaller in diameter.

[Lead Monger]

When testing a pair of revolvers with swapped cylinders and barrels I found cylinder rotation, indexing, bolt drop and lockup and trigger reset all worked just fine. Cylinder end-play was not a problem either. I have my hammer faces cut back and polished so they do not strike the nipples and both revolvers fired five chambers each without a hiccup. 
I do not use them mixed in this manner. I like the 51s to be 51s and the 60s to be 60s.

[Major Crimes]

As above for me. My hammers haven't been worked I just fit Slix nipples to my guns and do little else with the Pietta's.

 

I had a pair of Pietta 51's in .36 with spare cylinders and spare short barrels (3" I think?). I sold the .36's with their 5.5" barrels and bought the .44's.  I tried the spare cylinders and short barrels on the 44 frame and had no problems. I haven't used them that way since.

[boom pop]

Thank you all that helps a lot, have a wonderful year

[watab kid]

so i take it the reasoning behind all this is to have the 36 caliber with the larger 1860 grips ? otherwise why bother ? im curious and seriously want to know not being a smart a$$ 

[DeaconKC]

If you have bigger hands [like I do] the Army Grip is far more comfortable.

[watab kid]

that makes some sense - ive wondered at why one would want to change all these bits out , but why not just shoot the 1860 army's from the start ? 

[Lead Monger]

Curiosity plays a big part of it for me. How much interchangeably is there within a frame group. Multiple barrel lengths for a favorite frame would be a common example of parts swapping. Maybe 7.5” and 5.5” barrels for a pair of C Masons or running a favorite pair of 1860 Army frames with 1861 barrels and cylinders just to see how they feel.

[Sedalia Dave]

Easier to swap the grip frame.

 

AFAIK all Pietta open top grip frames are interchangeable.  And AFAIK the same is true for all Uberti open tops. 

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

SEDALIA!!

 

Yepper.  All Pietta Open Top grip frames/sets are a universal fitment.  ALL Pietta Cap Guns are built on the basic 1851 frame and then altered "as required."   Uberti Open Top guns are the same but sometimes take a little more fiddling.  Pietta/Uberti DO NOT interchange.  Lots and lots of fitting to do that.  Uberti also changes the basic frame size starting at the 1862 and going back/down.

 

Forgot.  Every once in a while a stepped 1860 cylinder will fit and 1851 frame.  VERY CLOSE tolerance there.  Usually a No-Go.

[watab kid]

good info to know , fun thread , 

[Cholla]

On the reverse, the grips on my 1860s were too big, so I traded for 1851 grips and frames. Now I can reach the hammer easier. 

[watab kid]

ok , i never heard anyone else mention this but i would probably be in that same court if i were hoping to compete with these , i have smaller hands as well , i suppose that is why i prefered the 51s to the 60s , 

ive actually gotten very fond of my 58 revolvers

[boom pop]

On 3/28/2024 at 12:37 AM, watab kid said:

that makes some sense - ive wondered at why one would want to change all these bits out , but why not just shoot the 1860 army's from the start ? 

Because all my 1860 are .44 and the lead and powder cost less to shoot .36

[Pee Wee #15785]

I changed out a pair of 60 Armies grip frames with the Navy grip frames as they fit as good as the Army grip frames.  If you don't look close you will think they ar 61 Navies.  I liked using them when ever there as a rotating star, worked better than a .36.  I got the grip frames and grips from VTI.

[watab kid]

6 hours ago, boom pop said:

Because all my 1860 are .44 and the lead and powder cost less to shoot .36

i kinda figured that at out after thinking on it 

 

but does it save that much ? 

[Warden Callaway]

Looks like store bought balls are $4/100 higher. But I cast my own from recycled lead so that's not a financial burden.  Last shooting I did with Ruger Old Army I used 19 grains of powder and 19 grains of cream of wheat.  I don't think that's any more than a 36.  I'm not going to any trouble converting from 44 to 36 to save powder and lead. 

[Lead Monger]

I very much enjoy shooting a pair of Uberti 1861 Navy 36s with 15g of 3F Swiss and an eras gone conical. The 1860 Army 44s offer a more visible impact o steel.