Uberti vs. Pietta

[bigmike]

Who makes the better revolver? I ordered an Uberti Walker and the fit and finish was aweful. The action was smooth. The Pietta revolvers I have are very well built.

 

[Wes/Tex]

With these two makers it kind of be a manure-shoot sometimes. Uberti used to have it all over Pietta but the times, they are a changing. Pietta started improving their line of cartridge revolvers to keep up with the CAS groups and their percussion line followed. Uberti appears to be resting on their laurels but slipping because of it. Who knows what the future will bring, hopefully Uberti gets with the program with quality control.

 

[necchi]

Well said Wes/Tex !
I've watched this same topic covered for years now on this and other forums and you've summed it up in a nut shell.
I have one Uberti and one Pietta and both are fine, :idunno:

 

[Bobby James]

I remember as a kid my Dad would make fun of anybody who had a Uberti because to him only Colt was a real gun maker. Now years later many people claim Uberti is a well made pistol.

I am no expert but I am under the understand that Uberti is closer to actual Colt dimensions to where Pieta just looks like a Colt.

Both are good and both are bad. Ford or Chevy, Coke or Pepsi, ect.

 

[cynthialee]

Wes pretty much nailed it.

Depends on when the gun was made. If the gun is older, Uberti. If it is a newer gun, Pietta.

 

[Wes/Tex]

Yes m'am, thank you, and even more succinctly
put. :thumbsup:

 

[Hylander]

Wes pretty much nailed it.

Depends on when the gun was made. If the gun is older, Uberti. If it is a newer gun, Pietta.

I just ordered an unfired NIB Pietta 1858 made in 2011, I hope this is considered a newer gun. The Pics the gentleman sent me look Awesome.

 

[Dave Marsh]

I bought mine new in 2010 and they are great with good fit and no problems. :thumbsup:

Dave

 

[jaxenro]

I like Cimarron but the charcoal blue Uberti's are nicely finished

 

Only to reiterate, several years ago it was Uberti hands-down. My pair of Pietta's from about 2005 are rough as a cob. The newer Pietta's are at least as good as Uberti ever was, if not smidge better. I've got eight Uberti guns going back to the mid `80's and my two newer Pietta 1851's are nicer guns as a whole.

The 2nd and 3rd generation Colt's 'look' better but 'are' no better otherwise. Some gunsmiths who specialize in these guns believe the newer Uberti/Pietta guns to be superior and pose fewer problems.

 

[cynthialee]

Doesn't Colt farm out production of their second generation revolvers to the Italians? Pretty sure they are Uberti. I could be wrong.

 

[Zonie]

Not as I understand it.

Uberti supplied the castings and some other parts but the parts were finish machined and assembled in the US.

 

Colt farmed out production for some of 2nd and all of 3rd generation percussion guns. They were all made from outsourced parts. Navy Arms imported and machined raw Uberti parts. They were fitted and finished by Colt personnel. The 3rd's done entirely by Iver Johnson, under license from Colt.

Point is, this was back in the `70's and `80's. The newer Uberti's are better guns. IMHO, the only advantage to the 2nd and 3rd Colt's is that they have real case colors but that is easily remedied.

 

[Rick Son]

So far so good

 

[Hylander]

So far so good

I don't usually like Case hardened.
But that 1858 looks nice, maybe its that Kirst cylinder I see :wink:

 

[M. De Land]

I've been case hardening/coloring single shot rifle actions now for about ten years but still have not done a revolver body. Plan on remedying that in the future.
It's been a long hard slog to research techniques and experiment to find what works and what doesn't. Still barely scratched the surface of all there is to know about it but have learned about and figured out some of the main things to make it work.
Some of the information is rather tightly guarded and hard to discover from those who do it commercially which makes sense.
I've seen a few Turnbull revolvers with cased frames and they were spectacular. Mike D.

 

[smd4]

Who makes the better revolver?

Hi, I'm Steve, and I'm new to BP shooting and this Forum. Here's my story. Sorry it's so long. :redface:

I've always been fascinated by Civil War revolvers, and have owned a couple non-firing replicas. I wanted to get a version of the Colt 1860 Army, and I discovered that firing replicas weren't much more than non-firing wall hangers made of pot metal. So I set about trying to figure out which one to order. In the meantime, I started studying up on the real thing.

Because I thought I could save a few bucks, I went with the Pietta 1860 Army over the Uberti. When it arrived, I was very excited--my first-ever actual BP revolver! The weight felt great in my hand, and the sounds it made when cocked were like music to my ears! The bluing was deep and dark, and I thought the finish was great. At first, I was very happy.

But...

A big part of the appeal of the Colt 1860 to me was the almost "sexy" curves and shaping of the barrel. As I studied originals more, I noticed that the Pietta did not have that curve--the barrel shaping almost had an edge to it, and it didn't curve back up toward the forcing cone, as originals appeared to do. The curve ended abruptly near the front of the cylinder.

Then I noticed that the cutout in the barrel for loading conicals didn't seem to extend as far forward as originals--it seemed too short. Other details didn't seem "right" to me either--the trigger guard didn't have bevelled edges, and the hammer only had parallel thumb grip lines on it, as opposed to a neat crosshatch pattern as on the originals. As I studied it more and more, the stamped manufacturer and warning nomenclature on both sides of the barrel and the deep proof marks on the frame became an eyesore that I couldn't avoid looking at. I defarbed what I could, but that CNC-machined barrel shape--so sharp and straight-- stuck out like a sore thumb to me.

Then I started looking at the Ubertis. I started reading that certain parts, like the cylinders, could actually be interchanged with actual period Colts. I read that they did the castings for the 2nd and 3rd Gen Colts. They had that sexy, curvy barrell, with no sharp edges--it had soft curves like an original. I figured even at $285, that was a lot cheaper than a 1st, 2nd or 3rd gen, and that I should check one out.

When it arrived, I couldn't have been happier--everything about it just seems so "right." Authentically curved barrel that glistens in the light; crosshatch on the hammer, bevelled trigger guard edges, long conical hole under the wedge, and manufacturer information under the loading lever. Even the proofmarks on the barrel are so faint as to almost be invisible. It is truly a work of art.

Now, as for the mechanical part--the bolt on the Pietta did need some work so it wouldn't peen the cylinder notches. And the Uberti does have a short arbor. Both these problems are apparently common with each respective manufacturer.

That said, for me the cosmetics of the gun are paramount, and the Uberti is everything I could want in a Colt 1860 Army. The only thing that would be better would be owning the "real thing." I have yet to fire the Pietta or the Uberti, but for my money, the Uberti Colt 1860 Army is my favorite. My only regret is that I should have just bought the Uberti first. It was only $35 more than the Pietta (at that time), and I should have just paid that slight amount more to get what I consider a far better piece, and saved $250 in the process.

Whew! OK, so much for my first post!

 

[makensmoke]

I have 2 Pietta's one Brass 1858 and a newly arrived 1851 in 44 (I know they were only in 36 originally). I also have an older Euroarms Brass 1851 in 36. The 2 Pietta's I bought new and I am very happy with them. The Euro was used but has been a good shooter.

My choice of maker has been influenced by pricing and I have not been dissapointed yet.......

 

[cynthialee]

I have never been one for insisting on looks over function.

Personally I just like putting powder and lead down the barrel and igniting it. The thing could look like a blaster from star wars and I'd still shoot it.

 

[smd4]

If two weapons are meant to represent the same model, and (assuming) both shoot pretty much the same, I would rather have the more historically accurate piece.