Uberti 1849 Pocket Range Day, with Chrono Results.

[PastorB]

Took my rarely used Uberti 1849 to the range today. When you read my results and trials and tribulations with it, you will understand why it is rarely used. I have made all the mods recommended, heavier mainspring, after market nipples, etc. I know as I write that, someone who is more knowledgeable than me is going to criticize my methods and results, and tell me how to fix my problems. I have been doing the cap and ball thing since 1977, more than most, less than a few. If you are here to tell me how ignorant I am, and how you would do it better, let's just save time and I'll admit that you are vastly superior to me in every facet of life. With that being said, I'll now share my observations about my gun, and my results. If you get better results, you are blessed.

All loads were shot with .330 round ball (the factory recommended size for my gun) I cast from pure lead in an ancient single cavity Lee mold. I know about factory .330 buckshot, it is made with a hard alloy that is exceedingly difficult to load with that stubby lever. My 1849 Pocket has a 4" barrel. I used black powders subs, Pyro P and RS, and Triple 7 3f. I have shot real black in this gun before, but now I save that diminishing supply for my flinters. For the record, Goex 3f is weaker than Pyro RS in my guns, and Pyro P is equivalent to Swiss 3f over my chrono in just about every gun I test. Today, as usual with this gun, I had many cap jams, despite all the mods. Very rarely was I able to fire two consecutive shots. Yes, I am aware of the "Colt Flip". This gun, and it's litter mate, the Uberti 1862 Police just plain suck in this regard. With many of my shots today, the loading lever also fell. I so desperately want this guy to work. I like the look and feel, and it would be a great little gun for hiking, fishing, etc. if it would just work! Maybe the original Colts were better in this regard, or maybe they sold a ton of them just because they are handy, and a gun is better than no gun. My 1849 is an accurate little gun, I can place lethal shots at 50 yards with it, one handed, when it decides to fire. I used CCI #11 and Remington #10 caps with equally dismal results, so it is not a cap issue. With all that being said, I will just copy and paste the raw data from my field notes. I also brought along a Pietta 1851 Navy in .44. Firing that big reliable gun is a pleasure after suffering through the trials of the Pocket Model. Zero malfunctions with it. All loads were lubed with my standard, Crisco, over the ball.

1849 Pocket .31 4" barrel .330 rb. CCI #11

15 gr. 777

800
820
808
839
803

18 gr. 777 CCI#11

957
932
905
1005
943
975
961
963

18 gr. Pyro P Rem. #10 caps

856
895
904
889
889

15 gr. Pyro P. Rem. #10 Caps

759
753
740
743
764

15 gr. Pyro RS. Cci #11

748
731
722
729
726

18 Pyro RS. Cci #11

933
902
884
856
849

 

[ppg1949]

Thanks for your info and effort.

 

[45D]

Yep, those small 5 shooters are typically "jam - o - matics". A cap post goes a long way to remedy that problem.

Mike

 

[Brokenbear]

Thanks ..nice write up

Bear

 

[45D]

Just some "general information" for anyone to ponder.
Smaller revolver actions have to be more accurate (mechanically). Five shot versions even more so.
Your thumb is the only source of power for the revolver. That's why making an action "lighter" ( easier) allows more of the available energy to be delivered to the cylinder "carry up". That's why heavy bolt springs, hand springs and especially main springs are detrimental to the available force to rotate the cylinder.
With a cap gun, the rotation of the cylinder with some authority allows the spent cap to be thrown clear. Any hesitation in cycling can allow any spent caps / cap frags to bind the cylinder. So, even though it may seem counter intuitive, it's better to use force to CYCLE the action than to overcome over sprung actions.

That then leads to the need for the action to be of sufficient "fitment" to not allow throw-by and have a solid lockup.

This post isn't directed at any particular poster and is offered as general information only.

Mike

 

[Stantheman86]

The Uberti small frame pocket revolvers are notorious for being finicky because everything is downsized and shrunken down to make them smaller. The arbor of my 1862 Pocket Navy looks minuscule compared to my Walker.

I don't know if it's a case of, Colt got them right and Uberti struggles with their copies, or maybe little pocket blackpowder percussion revolvers are just inherently less reliable, and the vast majority of original users carried them loaded and reloading was never a plan.....and here we are in the 2020s trying to target shoot and run numerous cylinders through a gun never designed for this...

All I plan to do with my Pocket Navy is add Slixshot nipples so I can use CCI #11 caps and 777 . Sometimes the cylinder doesn't time up correctly if it's in a certain position but if I start out with the hammer down on a nipple or in between chambers, it's fine

Truth be told, Colt DA revolvers have finicky actions too and my Colt Detective Special will drop the hammer in between chambers if I don't pull the trigger in one continuous stroke. No "staging". Colt experts simply say "that's a Colt, pull the trigger like it's designed to be pulled and it works . Play around and it won't work"

So....some Colts are just haunted, maybe you'll crack the code on this one and you'll have to use it an exact certain way with a certain load, and that's it. Some of the Colt repros are like this too.....my Dance and Brother has to be be hammer down , on a nipple , to cock for the next shot or there's a "hitch" that requires me to kinda finesse the hammer. It's slowly going away, so I just use the gun like it likes to be used.

We have to work with this reproduction of 1840s technology which was early revolver technology with fragile actions to begin with. There's a reason why technology advanced away from these.

 

[45D]

Ha!!!!!
Nothing wrong with the technology, everything is from modern attempts at reproduction.

They can be made to run . . .

 

[Super_Trouper]

What aftermarket nipples are you using? Also, have you deburred the face and safety notch on the hammer?

I understand the thought process of a heavier mainspring keeping the hammer from being blown back by gases escaping the flash hole, but it seems unnecessary on proper aftermarket nipples with smaller flash holes. I also imagine the heavier springs could possible cause caps to break apart even worse just from sheer force of them being pounded against the edges of the nipple.

I can also agree from my experience with 45D that a swift snap of the action when cocking seems to help alleviate caps/pieces of caps from falling into the action compared to slowly pulling the hammer back.

Lastly, a cap post installed could be a last resort that may help.

Just some external views. Hope you get it running properly!

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

What happened to the FPS info for black powder?

 

[Felonious]

Did you notice any differences in ignition reliability between Pyrodex and 777?

 

[45D]

Ha!!!!!
Nothing wrong with the technology, everything is from modern attempts at reproduction.

They can be made to run . . .

I'm pretty sure a pocket model (1849) was the top seller of all percussion Colts.
If they didn't work, that wouldn't be the case.

Mike

 

[Stantheman86]

Did you notice any differences in ignition reliability between Pyrodex and 777?

I was also curious

I found 777 to sometimes have a little lag when lighting off