Top Break "Cowboy" Revolvers

Jim Watson

New member
1. The Beretta Laramie, now Taylor NM No 3, is inauthentic. It has the knurled head cylinder retaining screw of the 3rd Model Russian, not the simple lug on the top latch of a real NM No 3.

2. Any large frame topbreak in .38 caliber is going to be like a .38 SAA; heavy and out of balance. I had a real No 3 NM Target in .38-44 Target and it was not as lively as a .44 Russian. Too bad they don't make repros in .44 Special.
 
1. The Beretta Laramie, now Taylor NM No 3, is inauthentic. It has the knurled head cylinder retaining screw of the 3rd Model Russian, not the simple lug on the top latch of a real NM No 3.

I know that. I didn't mention it because I wasn't going into a lot of detail. I also could have mentioned that the Taylor NM#3 is inauthentic because it has an adjustable 'target' rear sight but the standard half moon front sight. S&W did not make them that way. I also could have mentioned that S&W never chambered any of their Top Break revolvers for 45 Colt, and because of certain engineering changes none of the replicas performs well with Black Powder.

2. Any large frame topbreak in .38 caliber is going to be like a .38 SAA; heavy and out of balance. I had a real No 3 NM Target in .38-44 Target and it was not as lively as a .44 Russian. Too bad they don't make repros in .44 Special.

I have a friend who has one of the NM#3s chambered for the old 38-44 round. He usually shoots regular 38S&W ammo out of it. While it may be heavy, that is the model that was favored by 19th Century target shooters, so there must have been something good about it.
 

jackmoser65

New member
What makes no sense to me is that the schofield replicas pander to the cowboy action crowd who can't be burdened with anything less common than the plain vanilla 38 special and 45 colt chamberings but the #3 russian is a 44 russian instead of the more common 44 special.


Regarding moon clips for a Top Break, frankly I can't see the point.
Like I said:

1. Positively eject all empties at once, as a unit, without possibility of the extractor popping over a rim, which happens with the 45 colt's tiny rim.

2. Cheap hardball ammo. Not everyone handloads and sometimes you just want to pop off a few boxes of ammo without spending hours at the loading bench.

3. Lightning quick reloading.

4. For the hell of it.
 
1. Positively eject all empties at once, as a unit, without possibility of the extractor popping over a rim, which happens with the 45 colt's tiny rim.

Yes, I know what a pain in the neck it is if an empty slips under the extractor. 44 Russian rims are pretty small too. The trick to not allowing any rims to slip under the extractor is to flick the gun sideways as you break it open. The extractor is just that, it is not an ejector. Never was. Flicking the gun horizontally as you break it open will let gravity help you, not hinder you.

Regarding the 45 Colt replicas, you can always shoot 45 Schofields in them with their bigger rims, which should help prevent rims slipping under the extractor. Or you can buy a 44-40 Schofield, 44-40 has larger rims than 45 Colt.

Lightning quick for reloads? Not the slightest bit interested. I like to take my time shooting. When I shoot my New Model #3 at a match, speed for reloads just doesn't matter, I can't remember the last time we had a reload on the clock. Even if we did, it would only be one round. Over at the unloading table, it simply does not matter how fast I unload.

Yeah, I reload, what can I say? Can't find 44 Russians or Schofields loaded with Black Powder anywhere anyway.

040_zpsf4nd7gx1.jpg
 
Last edited:

jackmoser65

New member
You asked why and I answered. You do realize that others may have different wants and needs than your own, right? I find the moon clip conversion to be very appealing. Whether others do or do not is irrelevant.

I hand load too but sometimes I'd rather be outside shooting than inside at the loading bench and would never fool with black powder in cartridges any way. YMMV.
 

Hal

New member
Good for plinking with cheap ball ammo.
I guess the idea of "cheap" (factory) ammo isn't part of my thought process.....

I started reloading at the same time I started shooting a centerfire back in the 70's.
Seems like everybody that shot back then also reloaded...

Anyhow, .45 acp and .45 LC both cost me the same so....it just doesn't occur to me that there could be any cost savings - on ammunition,,so,,I seldom if every look at that aspect and look elsewhere to start evaluating the feasibility of doing something.
 

drobs

New member
Some of people like knowing their guns are multi-functional and can be count on for both defense and cowboy action.

Moon clips make the gun extremely viable for self defense / CCW. Like the new Ruger Redhawk 45 Colt / 45 acp - you could carry the gun with 6 rounds of 45 Colt and carry 45 acp moon clips as a lightning fast reload.


I'm curious on the current Taylor's reproductions if they could be made more reliable with black powder cartridges.

Could one lube the base pin bushing with bore butter to keep the cylinder moving freely after being fouled by BP? It looks to have ridges (correct term?) on it.
 

T. O'Heir

New member
The Russian models are Smith & Wesson Model 3's that Schofield copied and modified.
"...one-handed opening..." Other hand has his sabre, the cavalryman's main weapon, in it. .
"...pander to the cowboy action crowd..." There wouldn't be any of the revolver copies without the cowboy action crowd.
 

DPris

Member Emeritus
One would be a bit of a fool to carry one of these concealed as a defensive weapon in the face of so many better choices.

The Taylor's offerings are still Ubertis, and not built for BP use.
No amount of lube will change that.


And as far as using ACPs as a quick reload in the convertible Red .45 goes, you'll be looking at two different elevational POA/POI relationships.
Which you'd run into in a breaktop, too, if trying to switch back & forth between short & long .45s.
Denis
 
Last edited:

Jim Watson

New member
I have a friend who has one of the NM#3s chambered for the old 38-44 round. He usually shoots regular 38S&W ammo out of it. While it may be heavy, that is the model that was favored by 19th Century target shooters, so there must have been something good about it.

I understand it was champion shooter Walter Winans who talked S&W into building the .38-44. I also understand that he eventually went back to the .44 Russian. The Bennett brothers got credit for the .32-44.

The guy I got my .38-44 from had shot .38 S&W in it, just to say he had fired it. He did not report much accuracy. I was prepared to fool with it, cut .357 Maximum brass off to cylinder length and loaded it with "submerged" roundnose bullets. It shot them pretty well, VERY well with one of the fake powders. I never got 'round to Real Black.
 
The Russian models are Smith & Wesson Model 3's that Schofield copied and modified.

????

Schofield worked out his modification to the latch on the American model, not the Russian model.

The first model Russian looked exactly like the American Model except it was chambered for the then new 44 Russian cartridge. The 2nd Model Russian looked exactly like mine, which I posted earlier. The 3rd Model Russian looked similar except it had a knurled screw on the top strap to make removing the cylinder easier.



****************************




Regarding making the replicas shoot Black Powder better: The problem is when the replicas were designed, they were designed for a longer cartridge than the originals. The originals had cylinders about 1 7/16" long, which was plenty long enough for the 44 Russian and 45 Schofield cartridges. But the replica makers wanted to chamber them for more easily available, and longer cartridges such as 45 Colt.

So the cylinders were 'stretched' to accommodate the longer cartridges. But the frames were not stretched a similar amount. So something had to give. The answer was the gas collar or gas ring at the front of the cylinder was made shorter, to fit into the 'non-stretched' frame.

The gas collar is what shielded the cylinder arbor from hot fouling blasted out of the barrel/cylinder gap. When it was shortened, the collar could no longer do its job effectively, and BP fouling tended to build up quickly on the cylinder arbor, causing the cylinder to bind after not very many shots.

Here is a photo of the cylinder of my New Model Number Three. The part protruding out the front is the gas collar. The collar is a separate piece, press fit into the cylinder.

CylinderDetail.jpg





I have aligned the parts in this photo to show how they related to each other. The spring loaded extractor rod will slip inside the cylinder arbor, while the gas collar will slide over the arbor.

CylinderandArbor_zpse02cf7f4.jpg





Here is a close up of the barrel/cylinder gap area of the gun. You can see the barrel extends back and ends close to the front of the cylinder. The gas collar is directly below, extending forward and rubbing against the frame. The gas collar is about .165 proud of the cylinder. The .165 of horizontal separation is what makes the difference. When the gun fires the fouling blasted out of the barrel/cylinder gap hits the gas collar, which shields the arbor. So almost no fouling reaches the cylinder arbor below. It is Black Powder fouling blasted directly onto the cylinder arbor or cylinder pin that causes revolvers to bind up when fired with Black Powder. It is not the width of the barrel/cylinder gap, which some think is the culprit. All the old S&W Top Breaks had an arrangement like this. I can shoot my NM#3 all day long with Black Powder loads and it never binds up. That's the way it was designed.

BarrelCylinderGap02.jpg





This photo shows two cylinders made by one of the Italian replica makers. The cylinder at the front is from a Navy Arms Schofield. Notice how short the gas collar is. It does not provide enough horizontal separation from the barrel/cylinder gap to protect the cylinder arbor from fouling blasted out of the gap. The revolver will bind up after not many shots fired with Black Powder ammunition. Notice the cylinder in the background. It has had a new, longer collar fabricated and pressed into place.

navyarmscylasmcylwbushingenhanced_zpse5e216f1.jpg





Here is a photo of the same cylinder before it had its collar pressed in place. This is the only way to reliably make a modern replica Top Break shoot well with Black Powder. The old relationship of the barrell/cylinder gap and collar has to be reestablished. Of course, to make this work, clearance has to be cut into the frame for the new collar. I only knew one gunsmith who was doing this work and he is retired now.

asmcylwbushingenhanced_zpsb9983956.jpg
 
I understand it was champion shooter Walter Winans who talked S&W into building the .38-44. I also understand that he eventually went back to the .44 Russian. The Bennett brothers got credit for the .32-44.

Thanks! I didn't know that.
 

salvadore

Moderator
Does anyone know if a competitor named Anderton(sp) used a #3 for competition? I h ad a mold designed by him. It worked real well in my 3rd gen colt .44spec. with its .434+ throats and .427 groove. The reason I ask is because I can't find anything about the guy and Drifty knows everything.
 
What did S&W do to make room for .44 WCF in the "Frontier" topbreaks?

Excellent question!

They lengthened the cylinder from 1 7/16" to 1 9/16" and they stretched the frame a similar amount, allowing the cylinder collar/barrel cylinder gap relationship to stay the same. They did this for the 2072 New Model Number Three Frontiers chambered for 44-40 and 74 New Model Number Three 38 Winchesters chambered for 38-40.

Compare the length of the cylinder on my 44 Russian New Model Number Three (1 7/16") in the top photo with the 44-40 New Model Number Three Frontier (1 9/16") in the bottom photo. Note the relationship between the cylinder collar and the B/C gap has been maintained.

myNewModelNumberThree04_zps40e8194f.jpg


New%20Model%20Number%20Three%20Frontier%2044-40_zpsk6dvclfv.jpg





They did the same thing with some of the later 44 Double Actions too, chambered for 44-40 and 38-40. In fact, S&W standardized with the stretched frames and longer cylinders for all the later 44 Double Actions, no matter what caliber they were. This pair of 44 Double Actions are both chambered for 44 Russian and have the shorter 1 7/16" cylinders.

Two44DAs02_zpsa8d18ab5.jpg





This 44 Double Action Frontier 44-40 has the longer cylinder for the longer cartridges. This was done with 15,340 44 Double Action Frontiers and 276 38 Winchester Double Actions (38-40).

smith-and-wesson-double-action-frontier-revolver-44-40-winchester-colt-antique-guns-pre-1898-6_zpszzjchnaj.jpg





So the next logical question is why did S&W stick with the 1 7/16" cylinder for the Schofield model when they could have lengthened the cylinder to 1 9/16" and made the gun compatible with the 45 Colt cartridge? This decision is why the Army had to standardize on the 45 Schofield length round so it could be fired in both revolvers. My understanding is that the Schofield model was developed at the height of the Russian Model contracts with the Russian Government. They produced over 150,000 of this model, and did not want to alter the tooling midstream for a prospective contract with the US government that might or might not pan out. That is my understanding anyway.
 
Does anyone know if a competitor named Anderton(sp) used a #3 for competition? I h ad a mold designed by him. It worked real well in my 3rd gen colt .44spec. with its .434+ throats and .427 groove. The reason I ask is because I can't find anything about the guy and Drifty knows everything.

If you do a search on Anderton Bullet you will get a bunch of hits.

And don't call my Drifty. I hate that.
 

drobs

New member
Dpris said:
One would be a bit of a fool to carry one of these concealed as a defensive weapon in the face of so many better choices.

The Taylor's offerings are still Ubertis, and not built for BP use.
No amount of lube will change that.


And as far as using ACPs as a quick reload in the convertible Red .45 goes, you'll be looking at two different elevational POA/POI relationships.
Which you'd run into in a breaktop, too, if trying to switch back & forth between short & long .45s.
Denis

I don't necessarily disagree with you but can see both sides.
Lots of folks carry outdated less than ideal choices for CCW. Look at all those folks that still carry 1911's...:eek::eek::eek::eek:
 

Ricklin

New member
All about the Benjamins

There was a thread a day or two ago from a gal who wished to CC an 1858 NMA.

If it is all you have, you find a way. Better to bring a gun to a gunfight. To clarify she was running a conversion cylinder, not cap and ball.
 

DPris

Member Emeritus
This concealed carry issue of using extremely poor choices for defensive purposes comes up now & then, regarding older guns or repros of them.

When it does, it's not a matter of using logic to determine an effective & efficient defensive tool, it's a matter of "It's cool & I want to carry it", based entirely on emotion ("like") as opposed to reasoning (efficiency).

The 1911 is far from falling in this class.
It remains efficient, effective, and practical, on several levels.

If the #3 is all you have, then you do what you have to do.
If you do have a choice, you base it on practicality, not nostalgia.

I stand by what I said.
Denis
 

Jim Watson

New member
I would be very wary of cutting a S&W topbreak, even a repro of "modern materials" for .45 ACP. It is only the past few years that we have realized that the many .455 Webley's cut for ACPs are overloaded, even the WWI vintage No VI.
 
Top