Pedersoli Lightnings are shipping again!!!

[Catamount Kid]

So you have them in 38/357 and do they run good?

[Yul Lose]

2 hours ago, Catamount Kid said:

So you have them in 38/357 and do they run good?

?????

[Catamount Kid]

29 minutes ago, Yul Lose said:

?????

What calibers do you have?

[Yul Lose]

7 minutes ago, Catamount Kid said:

What calibers do you have?

44-40 and 38-40.

[Roger Rapid]

I was thinking about this post and I wanted to double back on the idea of slam firing a Lightning rifle. And, taking a philosophical approach, I’m wondering how much of it is the cool factor of slam firing vs just trying to go faster. I tend to think that for any of us,  how fast we can go with any particular gun comes down to familiarity and practice.

 

I don’t own a slam-fire Lightning but I’ve tried a few. I cannot shoot one as fast as I can a non-slam-fire Lightning but that’s because of ME and not because of the rifle. I am used to pushing the foregrip forward, get sight acquisition while I release the trigger, and pulling the trigger. That’s my cadence and I can’t break it. At least I can’t break it without a lot of practice. 

 

Here’s a video of me shooting a .45LC Pedersoli 26˝ octagonal-barrel Lightning at Bordertown last year, or maybe it was two years ago. I’m an El Rey so that’s as fast as I can move and do things. I’m not sure just how much better my time I would have been if I slam fired. AND, if I slam-fired, I wonder if I could have done it with no MISSs.

 

Now that I’m running .45CS, I think I’m a bit quicker but only because of the lower recoil which helps me stay on target. Some day I’ll time myself comparing .45LC to shooting .45CS (CLEAN-ly).

 

I’ve been PMing with a friend about this post who mentioned that he has some slam-fire Lightnings, but shoots them traditionally rather than slam firing.

 

Lastly, for me as an old-fart El Rey, I don’t think I can, or even need to go much faster.

 

RR

 

 

 

 

[SnakeM]

I'm more excited about a reliable clone that will take .38 special than the slam fire feature. Buying for my wife Vixen since she just about wore out her 73 after 25+ years of CAS! 

[usmc69]

I have an original Pedersoli Lightning.  When I first got it I had problems with it feeding .45 Colt factory ammo.  So it got put away as I liked it to much because of the case harding.  I read the Guns Magazine article on the Silver Spur and read the portion that discussed the problems with feeding in the older model.  I used a 200 grain round nose flat point bullet and seat them for an overall length of 1.55" and these seem to work much better.  Was wondering what bullet and what overall length others are using? 

[Roger Rapid]

Hi USMC69...

 

If your Pedersoli Lightning has not been worked on by someone who modified the lifter, it should feed .45LC's like a well-oiled machine. AND, it should feed .45 Schofield and .45 Cowboy Special just as easily. 200RNFP are fine, but you don't need anything that heavy for Cowboy Shooting. For a heavy load,  180RNFP or 185RNFP work just fine. The designed OAL for .45LC is 1.60˝, but because the Lightning has a cartridge stop lever, that allows only one cartridge to enter the lifter at a time, the OAL is really not important. Unlike a '73, the Lightning is not cartridge-length-dependent. The video shown in this post, just four comments previous to this one, shows a 26˝ octagonal barrel Pedersoli Lightning firing .45LC cartridges with 185gRNFP Bear Creek Bullets. And, I'm now shooting .45Cowboy Specials (i.e., .45 shorts) through that rifle with no modifications to the rifle.

 

Can you describe the feeding problems you were having?

RR

Edited August 21 by Roger Rapid
text edit

[Catamount Kid]

Roger Rapid is plenty fast!

[usmc69]

I was seating the bullets at 1.60" and the Lightning took two pumps to get a round to feed.  I read the Silver Spur article in Guns magazine.  In the article it stated Pedersoli said their rifle fed flat point bullets like the loadings from those used in the 19th Century.  That the Lightning had problems feeding the longer 255 grain bullets in use now.  I am now using a 200 grain RNFP with an over all length of 1.55".  Works much better.  The carbine has less than 50 rounds through it.  I bought the Lightning because I am not a fan of lever rifles.  I also have a Ruger New Vaquero that started life as a Birdshead Grip, did not like the way it rolled in my hand so I swithed the grip frame.  I tend to use the same rounds in both guns.

[Yul Lose]

Before I got the slam fire bug I was pretty fast pulling the trigger on each shot but after trying a Colt Lightning for an entire match I was hooked on slam fire. I used to catch myself not slam firing if the targets were spread out a bit but after some practice slam firing just seemed more natural. I’ve even started slam firing my 1897 shotguns now and they’ve had no slam fire modification, they come that way. Some folks don’t like to slam fire, some folks do.

Edited August 21 by Yul Lose

[Silver Creek Jack]

6 hours ago, Roger Rapid said:

I was thinking about this post and I wanted to double back on the idea of slam firing a Lightning rifle. And, taking a philosophical approach, I’m wondering how much of it is the cool factor of slam firing vs just trying to go faster. I tend to think that for any of us,  how fast we can go with any particular gun comes down to familiarity and practice.

 

I don’t own a slam-fire Lightning but I’ve tried a few. I cannot shoot one as fast as I can a non-slam-fire Lightning but that’s because of ME and not because of the rifle. I am used to pushing the foregrip forward, get sight acquisition while I release the trigger, and pulling the trigger. That’s my cadence and I can’t break it. At least I can’t break it without a lot of practice. 

 

Here’s a video of me shooting a .45LC Pedersoli 26˝ octagonal-barrel Lightning at Bordertown last year, or maybe it was two years ago. I’m an El Rey so that’s as fast as I can move and do things. I’m not sure just how much better my time I would have been if I slam fired. AND, if I slam-fired, I wonder if I could have done it with no MISSs.

 

Now that I’m running .45CS, I think I’m a bit quicker but only because of the lower recoil which helps me stay on target. Some day I’ll time myself comparing .45LC to shooting .45CS (CLEAN-ly).

 

I’ve been PMing with a friend about this post who mentioned that he has some slam-fire Lightnings, but shoots them traditionally rather than slam firing.

 

Lastly, for me as an old-fart El Rey, I don’t think I can, or even need to go much faster.

 

RR

 

 

 

 

That was a great run Roger, Gotta get me one of those lightnings!

 

[Roger Rapid]

USMC69... Not sure about the article in Guns Magazine. There are numerous bullet shapes according to bullet manufacturer and they have not changed so drastically over the years. Typically larger bullets sit lower in the shell - below the cannalure (groove in bullet) which means they all protrude about the same above the cannalure (unless they are very short like 160g, etc.).

 

1. If you are having to do two pumps to get the bullet to feed into the chamber then it sounds like the lifter is not staying up. (TO TEST: Pull the bolt back, then move it forward 1/2˝. Push the lifter down with a pencil or small stick. It should only go down with a bit of resistance. If it sort of falls down, it is wrong.)

 

2. If you are having trouble needing two pumps to get the cartridge to come into the action and onto the lifter then it sounds like the cartridge stop lever is not dropping far enough to allow the cartridge to enter the action. (See photo below) (TO TEST: looking down into the action, the green arrow points to the follower that pushes the cartridges into the magazine - that's where you'd see a cartridge. The red arrow points to the cartridge stop lever that drops to allow each cartridge to feed. The blue arrow points to the lifter. Disregard the yellow arrow. About how far is the cartridge stop lever - red arrow - coming up on to the follower - green arrow?)

 

•• Did you buy the gun new?

 

•• I can advise you of who to send it to if you want to get it fixed.

 

Roger

 

 

 

Edited August 22 by Roger Rapid

[Tall Tale Todd]

On 8/14/2026 at 4:10 PM, Yul Lose said:

Yes it would!!!

Yeah, I bet those are nice 😉

[usmc69]

1 hour ago, Roger Rapid said:

USMC69... Not sure about the article in Guns Magazine. There are numerous bullet shapes according to bullet manufacturer and they have not changed so drastically over the years. Typically larger bullets are lower below the cannalure (groove in bullet) which means they all protrude about the same (unless they are very short like 160g, etc.

 

1. If you are having to do two pumps to get the bullet to feed into the chamber then it sounds like the lifter is not staying up. (TO TEST: Pull the bolt back, then move it forward 1/2˝. Push the lifter down with a pencil or small stick. It should only go down with a bit of resistance. If it sort of falls down, it is wrong.)

 

2. If you are having trouble needing two pumps to get the cartridge to come into the action and onto the lifter then it sounds like the cartridge stop lever is not dropping far enough. (See photo below) (TO TEST: looking down into the action, the green arrow points to the follower that pushes the cartridges into the magazine - that's where you'd see a cartridge. The red arrow points to the cartridge stop lever that drops to allow each cartridge to feed. The blue arrow points to the lifter. Disregard the yellow arrow. About how far is the cartridge stop lever - red arrow - coming up on to the follower - green arrow?)

 

•• Did you buy the gun new?

 

•• I can advise you of who to send it to if you want to get it fixed.

 

Roger

 

 

 

 

The Guns magazine article is in the September 2025 edition.  Will copy it and post it tomorrow.  Thanks for the help.

[Yul Lose]

One thing to keep in mind with the slam fire Lightnings, they don’t have to be slam fired. Pulling the trigger for each shot works just fine if that’s what you want to do.

Edited August 22 by Yul Lose

[usmc69]

As promised the Guns magazine article.  

 

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

Remember when reproduction Lightnings first appeared and there was much speculation that they would come to dominate the game?

Didn't work out that way.

And, in a strange way, I think it's good that they are basically an also ran.  That way, those of us who like and use them get to stand out from the crowd. 

 

 

[Roger Rapid]

H.K... You're always thinking "outside the box!"  

 

So, I think there was a bunch of stuff going on. First, we didn't have a John Wayne-like movie star to bring the Lightning to the forefront. Then, the Lightning didn't have a big fancy lever-loop to spin the gun around and cock it fancy-like. Unfortunately, there wasn't a movie called "Lightning '84" for James Stewart to show it off like he did in "Winchester '73." (Although I do remember one movie were a cowboy was carrying a Lightning but I don't remember the movie's name.) And I don't think there were many prop or armorer (the the person who manages all the guns on a movie set) guys who had Lightnings in their truck. Then the small-ish frame of the Lightning made it look more like a squirrel gun than a macho COWBOY GUN. And that takes us from the American cowboy film star to the early Cowboy Action Shooter who had the great misfortune of buying a Taurus and forever owing the reputation of "naah, that thing won't work!" I remember how many snide remarks I got when I carried my first (Pedersoli) Lightning up to a stage around 2014 or so; There was so much chatter I thought I had my fly open!!! Wow!  "That won't run!"  - "They don't work" - "A Lightning??" - "Thinking of buying a real rifle?" ... and so on and so forth. Great way to settle down to shoot a carefree stage!!!!

 

Around the same time, I saw a new Taurus stainless steel Lightning at a gunshop in Glendale, CA and I remember commenting to the shop guy that I planned to use it for cowboy shooting. He said "Well, you can use it for cowboy shooting, but I wouldn't recommend it!"   Nice!    (Yes, he lost a sale - I didn't buy it.)

 

So, maybe a Lightning is, as you said, an "also ran" - like a Marlin. Well, almost like a Marlin. But I know one thing for darn sure: You and I love 'em!!!!!

RR

Edited August 25 by Roger Rapid

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

Roger, I agree with you completely.   A lot of factors combined when the Lightnings first came out that majorly impacted their lack of popularity.   The lack of an iconic movie or TV show was absolutely a factor.   Interestingly, there is an episode of The Rifleman where one is hanging on the wall in the gunsmith's shop.   I think that's the only time I ever saw one.   

In the midst of all the hype, I decided I wanted to have one, just to have one.  I was fortunate to see a Taurus, an AWA, and either a Beretta or an Uberti, I can't remember for sure what the third one was.   Anyway, the Taurus action felt light dragging two pieces of sandpaper against each other the Beretta/Uberti was smooth by comparison, but it felt clunky somehow.   The AWA was as smooth as butter and just felt right as I worked the action.   Bought it and never looked back. 

First few times I took it to a shoot, especially at a big multi day affair, I got a lot of stares of curiosity that turned into sort of surprise when it ran well for me.  (Disclaimer, I am a bottom of the pack shooter speed wise.   But I have gotten pretty good with the Lightning over the years.   Some people have said I run them well.)  Now, folks that know me are surprised when I show up with one of my Winchesters.  When I travel to big shoots, it's the Lightning all the way, but it does not turn heads like it used to.   I think folks have become accustomed to seeing them on occasion.

Anyway, getting back to the "issues," I will agree that the hit or miss to poor quality of the early ones really hurt any generic interest in the gun.   The Taurus was a disaster no matter how you slice it, but being less than half the price of the others, that's what people bought, and it did a number on the concept.   It also gave credence as to how Colt gave up on the gun because they could not work out the problems.    All I know is that all of my Colts work just fine.  By the same token, my AWAs have been flawless, but I admit to the reality that while they work well for some, they were disasters for others.  Of course, the difference between AWA and AWA-USA fits in here, but most folks don't KNOW the difference.   The Pedersoli versions have always had a reputation for being good guns, and were also the most expensive option.  Maybe that scared more people off?   The USFA was so rare that it probably didn't contribute to the overall picture one way or the other.  The Uberti/Beretta version (I think one made the other, even though it was marketed under both names) I don't know much about other than my initial experience at the gunshop.   Most of what I have read is not positive.

All of that adds up to data that would cause many to not bother.

I remember a conversation I had with Lassiter once.   He said words to the effect that people will spend over a thousand dollars for a new copy of the Winchester 73, and then spend hundreds more sending it out to be tuned to run the way they want it too.   Yet somehow, the exact same scenario with a Lightning means it's junk to be avoided.   He had a point.

Now, the heyday of the Western movie/TV show is long gone.   Occasionally we get one, but not very often.   I wonder what would happen if a new one came out where the hero made high profile use of a Lightning. 

Not holding my breath.

Edited August 24 by H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619

[Catamount Kid]

What a wealth of information here.

i’ve only been to a handful of matches - at least one person has wanted to buy my Thunderbolt at each one-

‘but I’ve only seen one other lightning clone shooter.

 

in the late 90s a guy at work recommended I try cowboy shooting.  I was working 80 sometimes 100 plus hour weeks that year and never did.  I don’t know what class he shot, but he recommended an external hammer coach gun, said my Blackhawk couldn’t be used, plus I would need  another pistol.  And a lightning.  I don’t even know who made them then.  A few years later I was again working with them, but some pretty serious hours, three little kids, etc. and never took them up.

 

sometime between the late 2004 and 2014 I heard you could shoot Blackhawks, picked up a good deal used  twin to mine, had gotten the lightning, a Chinese external hammer coach gun, -but was still active duty military, was shooting USPSA with a son some, and didn’t know anyone who shoot sass where I was.

in 2014 at my post military retirement I did meet an older guy at work who shot sass.  He said yes, shoot the Blackhawks, but use an 1897 or hammerless coach gun, and asked if I had a lever gun in 38/357 to go with the Blackhawks.  I fixed an heirloom 1897 by replacing the broken mainspring, bought another old one to cut down, slicked up my Rossi 92-
 

‘’but

‘never got around to going to a match with him.

between 2014 and now I had added a second Chinese external hammer coach gunand- a Chinese 1887 clone, and a Marlin 45 colt.  

 

just to play with at the range.

 

i finally did start going to some matches this year.

the Blackhawks work fine, even with the 6.5 inch barrels and basic holsters.

without a fast two mod, my 1887 is slow.

my 1897s work fine but i hate loading one at a time.

i haven’t used the hammer coach guns in a match and my heritage coach gun is way too tight even with some work.

 

the Rossi I took off my peep sight and put a buckhorn back on and works fine.

i haven’t tried the Marlin.

i only have one single action 45 colt.  Its an old Armi Jager Dakota HEGE imported into Europe that ended up in the states with uncle he gave me.

i could grab a Pietta marshal or something and use those pistols with the Marlin.  But… if the Dakota breaks there are not parts anywhere for it.

 

people tell me I should get a sass pair of new vaqueros, but I never see any in stock.

they also tell to get an 1873 and a short kit and slick it up.

 

but…

I still want to run a lightning.

Just too much of my childhood with the 1890 I guess.

for those that do have a ton of time with the lighting-

I used 140 grain truncated cone, and an OAL of 1.545.

that bullet and length is my most successful.

even better when loaded in 357 brass instead of 38.

i worked down with bullseye to 3 then 2.7 grains and everyone seems happy im not shooting too strong rounds at the matches now.

 

im at a point after polishing the internals on the thunderbolt where i can run tube after tube of dummy rounds of my load with the 357 brass -it has eliminated the occasions failure to feeds on the same OAL and same bullet in 38 brass I was having.

 

but…

‘with live fire I still sometimes get the extra round out of the tube under the carrier.  
 

is this something you guys get with your lightning clones as well.  I mean basically the clones other than the just out silver spur.

 

if so, do you do something to the carrier stop, or some other factor that solves this?

 

[Red Oak]

I'll take mine in 44-40

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

My AWA .44-40 had a magazine plug in it to limit capacity to 10 rounds.   Not only was getting rounds 8, 9 and especially 10 in VERY difficult.   I did get the cartridge under the carrier problem a couple of times.

Took out the spacer.   Both problems went away.

Make sure your gun has no spacer.   If it does, remove it.   If it doesn't, I am at a loss.

Edited August 26 by H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619

[Roger Rapid]

 

H.K. … I had not heard that Colt ceased production because of problems with the Lightning rifle functioning properly. Interesting. It was my understanding they got into a legal hassle with Winchester over making repeating rifles. And yes, I agree on removing the restrictor - what Pedersoli calls a “magazine limiting device." Here’s what the one looks like that Pedersoli used to limit the magazine to 10 rounds in their 26˝ Lightning. This restrictor weighs 475 grains compared to a loaded .45LC cartridge with an 185g bullet that weighs 310g. It’s entirely too much “mass” and it retards the movement of the cartridges in the chamber when working the rifle fast. Removing the long aluminum bar also helps to reduce the amount of force needed to load cartridges through the loading gate and into the tube.

 

 

 

 

 

Catamount Kid…. Cartridges under the lifter are caused by a cartridge going over the cartridge stop lever and under the lifter when the lifter is up. The stop lever is the part that releases each cartridge as the action begins to open and then prevents the next cartridge from entering the lifter as the bolt continues to open. The problem is especially found with .357/.38 cartridges because the diameter is smaller than .45LC and the margin of error is greater. It’s a simple fix on the Pedersoli Lightnings because it uses an independent cartridge stop lever whose height - distance the lever comes up - can be easily adjusted. On the original Colt Lightnings, and on the Taurus, USFA, AWA, and Uberti Lightning clones, the stop lever is part of the rocker arm, and the height is not easily adjusted. However, check the reducer in the magazine - the small tube at the end of the magazine that centers each cartridge in the .357/.38 versions - to see how much slop you have around the cartridge in that reducer. You can make a new reducer with a smaller bore to make the cartridge fit more snugly in the reducer, or better yet, with the bore in the reducer being off center and positioned so that the cartridges sit lower in the tube. As a result, it would move the center of the bullet down slightly which gives you a tiny bit more bite of the cartridge stop lever to keep the cartridge in the tube.

RR

[Catamount Kid]

Thank you.  I was literally thinking of welding a skosh onto it, then polishing a touch off trial by error.

 

this might work better.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

As I understand it, the "trouble" with Winchester was created by the Burgess lever action rifle.   Winchester saw it, made a few prototype revolvers, and then the people in charge of Winchester showed them to Colt.   This led to the "gentleman's agreement" that Colt would not make lever action rifles, and Winchester would not make revolvers.   If such an agreement was actually made remains debated to this day.

But in any case, Colt did stop making the Burgess, and Winchester never started making revolvers.

But nothing was said about pump action rifles, so Colt started making the Lightning.

That's the story.  It may or may not be true.

As far as original Lightnings go, I find them to work just fine.  I don't know if they had a bad rep back in the day or not.  But I have heard many comments that they did.   Usually with the proviso that it was only the earliest ones that were troublesome.

Who knows?

[Sasparilla Groz]

I have been enamored with the Lightning rifle for a while.  I had the opportunity to pick up a beautiful Uberti version in .45LC.   

 

Feeds great.

 

Will not reliably extract.  I think the best I got was 5 rounds in a row.   200gr RNFP with Starline brass. 

 

@Roger Rapid or anyone have any recommendations on how to fix the extraction issue?  

 

Reply here or IM if you can help.   My goal is to run this in a match with my Schofields and hammered coach just for fun.  Thanks all!

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

Sasparilla, good luck with the Uberti.

Unless the innards are radically different from the AWA, your Uberti should run Schofields just fine.  

As far as extraction failures go, the fact that it'll do some and then not the rest is flummoxing to me.   A wild guess is that the extractor is worn and may need to be replaced.

I did have a failure to extract problem with one of my Colts, but it was every time.  I sent it to Lassiter.   I am no gunsmith. 

[Roger Rapid]

H.K. Uriah

Yes, that's the story I knew about Colt and Winchester and I've heard it from a few different sources so I think it's generally accurate.

 

Sasparilla Groz:

Unlike the other Lightning clones,  your Uberti Lightning has an ejector built into the bolt. It's small spring-loaded plunger that forces the shell to kick up as soon as it clears the chamber's mouth. Two things are important for good extraction and ejection: 1) the extractor must have good down pressure as it grips the shell so that it reliably pulls the shell from the chamber without releasing it early. 2) The ejector spring must be as heavy and long as the one shown here or the plunger will not have the force needed to kick out the shells.

 

Here's what your extractor parts parts should look like (pivot pin, extractor, extractor spring bolt:

 

 

Here's what your ejector parts should look like (bolt, securing pin, spring, and ejector:

 

Note how heavy the ejector spring is.

 

RR

 

 

[Cemetery]

On 8/14/2026 at 3:59 PM, Injun Ryder, SASS #36201L said:

Received yesterday, 8/13/26. I am not sure when I will be able to test fire. I have "test cycled" and it worked fine. 

 

 

Any updates on test firing, or with shooting a match with this?

[Injun Ryder, SASS #36201L]

2 hours ago, Cemetery said:

 

Any updates on test firing, or with shooting a match with this?

 

Unfortunately no. I am awaiting hip replacement surgery in October (followed soon after by a knee replacement) and am on crutches with limited mobility.