Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Richardsons conversion

The firearms consultant
Has any one had any experience with 38 special conversion of the 1851 Navy? Looks like something fun to shoot. John

I might not always tell you the truth, but I will never lie to you!
0

Comments

4 comments

Date Votes
  • rhmc24
    I converted a '51 Navy repro to .22 RF, sleeving both cyl and barrel. Started with the idea to convert to .38 but found that the bore size is larger than any current .38 cal. The largest .38 bullet just drops thru the bore without engaging the rifling at all. Actually started with a .36 cal Remington repro, converted it to .22RF then did the '51 Navy repro. Bore size problem for .38 cal apply to both.
    0
  • rufe-snow
    The cartridges used in the original 19th century conversions were loaded with bullets that were dead soft lead, with a large hollow base.

    When the black powder propellent was ignited, it was supposed to create enough pressure to expand the hollow base to fill the groove diameter of the oversize rifleing. Weather this was completely successful was questionable?

    Needless to say, modern commercial .38 Special cartridges aren't loaded with dead soft hollow base projectiles.
    0
  • drobs
    Haven't used that one but have had good luck using a 45 LC Kirst Cartridge Konverter in my Pieta 1858 Remington. Cylinder dropped right in w/no trip to the gunsmith. Highly recommend you check them out:

    http://www.riverjunction.com/kirst/konverter3.html

    I have heard that the Richardson's conversions require gunsmithing to get them to work right. Nothing to back that up though. The Kirst is more expensive than the Richardson, but I think the reason behind that, is they work.

    Regards,
    190191.gif
    0
  • The firearms consultant
    Thanks for the info. John

    I might not always tell you the truth, but I will never lie to you!
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity