REMINGTON CONVERSION

BMur · #1 03-20-2024, 05:16 PM

Remington Conversion collectors I have a question.
So many different variations but I’m focused on the examples seen in the photos. Several authors claim that conversion ring that is machined onto the back of the cylinder is welded on?

Most of these were converted from cap & ball in the 1870’s. Some a little earlier. These odd ones are very interesting. If someone has one in their collection can you please post photo’s of the back of the cylinder? I’m not a believer that these were welded on in 1870’s. I think they were machined to the back of the cylinder.

I’m trying to understand how they did it.

Murph

Muley Gil · #2 03-20-2024, 06:40 PM

Here's a youtube link to how it was done, back in the day.

how were original remington revolvers converted to cartridges - Yahoo Video Search Results

BMur · #3 03-20-2024, 07:29 PM

Thanks Muley Gil,

The videos refer only to the confirmed factory conversions. I comprehend those completely.
It’s the ones having conversion rings actually machined onto the back of the cylinder that I don’t fully understand.
I’d need to see one. I’ve never held one in my hand with my machinist loop on. Need to see one up close?
Most folks call them gunsmith altered but I’m not buying that either. There are way too many out there and like my photos depict? They have a common theme.
Also, they are done too well. Must have been contracted by a machine shop in significant numbers in my opinion.

I think they were likely line bored, threaded, the ring screwed into the back of the cylinder very tight, then drilled out to match each chamber.

The ratchet is also likely part of that ring which would be a machinist piece of art if that’s true? Need to see one.

Murph

2152hq · #4 03-21-2024, 11:52 AM

The extension is likely Brazed/Silver Brazed (Hard Soldered) to the original cylinder after turning the cylinder down in a lathe the remove the rear portion that supported the percussion nipples.
Brazing/Hard soldering the new cylinder extension into place posed no issues with the conversions as BP propellant was in use.
Some may have been threaded for assembly if the gunsmith had the necessary equipment to do so.

That extension would then be bored straight thru from the front of the cylinder to keep the chambers in allaignment .

These were chambered for cartridges (RF and CF) that were of the Heeled Bullet style. The Bullet and outside dia of the straight cased brass cartridge were of the same dia.
So the chamber is a straight thru bored hole.

The Ratchet portion of the orig cylinder is not removed in the conversion. It is kept in place as it still reaches to the rear face of the breach and engages the Hand as normal for cycling of the action.

The cylinder extension that is made and attached is bored thru in it's center to clear what is left of the center portion of the cylinder when it is turned down but the ratchet portion retained.

Some of these conversions have a back-plate dovetailed into the breech face. The back-plate or face plate retains a small cut out for the hammers new firing pin to slip thru and fire the cartridge.
It also is shaped to allow the cartridges to be loaded and unloaded from the cylinder.

Many of the Face-plates are thin and do not have a loading gate on them. Cartridges can fall free from the cylinder if the revolver is held upright and the clinder is in just the right position.

A thicker Face-Plate allowed a loading gate to be installed with a spring assembly to keep it full closed or open. Often a small flat spring was used.

When these Face Plates were installed, the original rounded recoil shields on the revolvers are frame were cut back or sometimes removed all together. The new face plate extending outward and profiled provided the same effect.

BMur · #5 03-21-2024, 02:24 PM

I’ve never seen any evidence of brazing or gas welding from the 1870’s.
Special order or modification was machined only and machine fit from what I have seen and inspected in hand.
A gas braze would definitely work but did they actually braze that extension on in 1870?
I think we need to see a good photo.
The standard procedure the machinist would use in 1870 from many examples I’ve seen in hand, would be
To drill and pin the conversion ring on or drill, tap, and thread the ring on.
Or like I mentioned they could also center drill, tap, and thread the ring on.
A gas weld I’d have to see it to believe it from 1870.

That’s why I’m curious about this alteration because I’m not sure how they did it.

A photo from a collector is what we need I think.

What peaked my curiosity is several authors claiming the ring was welded on? I’m having problems believing that from 1870.

It’s possible that an original machined installation came loose years later and at that point in time a gas weld was used to make a permanent repair. I think the original machine work would likely still be visible but I don’t know without seeing it.

Murph

2152hq · #6 03-21-2024, 05:02 PM

Are you talking about a Factory conversion,,or one of the many outside the factory conversion done by gunsmiths.?
I was talking about the latter.,,and yes brazing was very commonly done at that time and earlier.
Forge Brazing was common. Furnace Brazing moreso in the factorys.
Brass the common metal for Brazing but Copper also used (Spelter).
Silver/Brass alloy also common as it had a lower melting point.
Colt SAA front sights were Brazed in place with the latter.
SxS shotgun bbl sets had (and still do) have their breech assemblies Brazed together. The ribs then attached later with common lead/tin soft solder.

In a Factory situation, I would think the ring would be fitted by threading it onto the lathe turned extension left after reducing the cylinder in length.
Certainly not a difficult thing to do even in that period with the tools and machinery available in a place like the Remington factory.
A small gunsmith wasn't likely to have that sort of machinery and maybe not the machinest skill, so an alternative like brazing the parts together may have been used instead.

With absolute square faced surfaces, very fine close fitting threads and the new extension then screwed & torqued very tight into position, the seam would be nearly invisible though still there for the eye to see under careful examination.

I'm guessing that a small pin may be used to cross the threads for insurance but it would have to be a blind one inserted from the back face & horizontal to the threads. Right where the orig ratchet and new extension come together.
Seems like that would still be visible though.
Or one could possibly be inserted the same way but inbtw two of the chambers deep enough to lock the extension to the orig cyl. When faced off by lathe turning it would likely not show.

Just some thoughts,

I agree that 'gas welding' doesn't seem to be an attractive attachment method. The shape, thickness and internal configurations(existing chamber sections) don't really lend themselves to the process.

Plus I don't think any sort of Gas Welding that would have been useable for something like this came to be till around 1900.

BMur · #7 03-21-2024, 07:36 PM

That’s an excellent point with double barrel shotgun barrel brazing. Photo 1.
I’ve never seen that method used on an antique pistol. Most front sights are either pinned or pressed on with a crimp joint. I have seen plenty missing though with no evidence of a braze.

Photo 2 is a legit Factory Remington 44 cf conversion cylinder that is one solid piece. Bored straight through for the Remington outside lubricated black powder 44cf. This is not an altered cap and ball cylinder. It’s fabricated from one solid piece.

It’s hard to picture how an extension could be brazed onto the back of the cylinder. There just isn’t much surface area and from my 3 photos I posted in the first post?
I see no evidence of a braze.

Still need to “see a photo”of one of these altered cap & ball cylinders. We can speculate forever until we actually see one.

Murph

BMur · #8 03-21-2024, 07:48 PM

FYI,
I’ve been spending some time reading military records on these “conversions”.
After the Civil War both the Army and Navy had a huge stockpile of cap & ball revolvers. They actually altered several of them in house at various armories. It’s a very long but interesting story that also involved individual ships stationed overseas in various ports ordered to convert and/or correct problems with converted revolvers.
That’s ultimately why there are so many variations that the collectable world keeps calling “gunsmith altered”?
These examples were way beyond gunsmith altered. They represent alterations all over the world in some cases and in others were altered in large numbers after being sold at government auction as an example 15,000 in 1870.
Those weren’t “gunsmith altered”? They were professionally altered on contract. That’s what this thread is about. Large volume altered guns on contract.
I’m trying to understand clearly how this one example was done.
There are actually others but this one variation with the cylinder extension is likely one of 15,000 sold at government auction in 1870.

Murph

BMur · #9 03-22-2024, 01:09 PM

I finally located one with good solid photo’s of the back of the cylinder. It’s definitely center drilled and threaded on as one solid piece that “includes” the new ratchet. It’s an amazing piece of work and they were definitely done in large numbers as a contract piece. Notice the contract number under the barrel?
I’ve noticed that most of them are center fires and they have “factory” hammers so it was likely done at a Major Distributor House that ordered the hammers from Remington after purchasing large lots of surplus cap&ball revolvers.
Just another variation of conversion that I really like. Very impressive machine work on this one. Also notice the Military inspection marks? That also supports that this one was one of many sold at Government auction.

Murph