1860 Army large screws for shoulder stock

[Snooterpup]

Hello to all. Anyone else hate those protruding shoulder stock side screws on most of the 1860 Army replicas?
The darn things just don’t look or feel good either.
The civilian models are great but hard to find.
My solution was to buy 12-28 screws, cut off the heads, peen them over and dress them down and polish. The next step was cut to length, cut slot for screwdriver. One screw can be screwed into the frame through the open hole on the other side. A “modified” allen wrench made into an offset screwdriver will install the last screw from inside the frame. Not as pretty as the civilian model but a world better the those enormous clunky screws sticking out of the frame in my humble opinion.
Good day to all,
Snoot

 

[45D]

Me too me too !!!!

Mike

 

[RiverRat]

I removed the right side screw, it bothered my trigger finger. I made a screw/plug out of wood and works for me.

 

[wiscoaster]

I think the screws are OK. They look like they're actually "functional" to the uninformed. I don't see any need to make the suggested alteration. It doesn't do anything to enhance function. Sorry. But you did do a good job on what you did, anyway.

 

[Jaegermeister]

They’re authentic and that’s what I want.

 

[45D]

I think the screws are OK. They look like they're actually "functional" to the uninformed. I don't see any need to make the suggested alteration. It doesn't do anything to enhance function. Sorry. But you did do a good job on what you did, anyway.

They may be "OK" to some, but some screws are more prominent than others. Some competition shooters find them bothersome ( there's the "need") so it's a nice alternative. Like most things personal, it's personal so there ya go.

They’re authentic and that’s what I want.

Don't understand about the "woke" and "feminized" though.

Mike

 

[Snooterpup]

Me too me too !!!!

View attachment 325103

Mike

Thanks Mike, I’m honored to have such talent in agreement.

 

[Jaegermeister]

I deleted that. Whiskey got in my way again.

 

[Snooterpup]

Thanks Mike, I’m honored to have such talent in agreement.

I read or saw that the vast majority of either US Army and civilian model 1860’s did not have the shoulder stock screws though almost all had recoil shields cut. If you have a stock you probably need those screws.
Perhaps someone knows the numbers.

 

[Snooterpup]

I think the screws are OK. They look like they're actually "functional" to the uninformed. I don't see any need to make the suggested alteration. It doesn't do anything to enhance function. Sorry. But you did do a good job on what you did, anyway.

Those screws also did nothing to enhance function unless one happens to have the ‘rarer than hen’s teeth’ shoulder stock. If losing the screws makes the gun more comfortable it could be argued it makes the shooter more accurate. Then it might just ‘enhance’ function.
Just ask @RiverRat and @45D

 

[45D]

I read or saw that the vast majority of either US Army and civilian model 1860’s did not have the shoulder stock screws or the cut recoil shield. If you have a stock you need those screws.
Perhaps someone knows the numbers.

There's also a stock for the Navy that fitted on an extra long hammer screw that had an extra proud head and a matching nut for the right side. That would be an option for an Army (may need a Navy bs and tg as well, can't remember).

Mike

 

[Snooterpup]

I read or saw that the vast majority of either US Army and civilian model 1860’s did not have the shoulder stock screws though almost all had recoil shields cut. If you have a stock you probably need those screws.
Perhaps someone knows the numbers.

Correction! Colt produced 200,500
Model 1860 revolvers. After around serial # 50,000 Colt dropped the four screw model. Less than 25% of Colt 1860s were four screw models. Why almost all reproduction 1860s are four screw is anyone’s guess.
Source: Duelist 1954 “ Three Generations of Colt’s 1860 Army Revolver.
(For the uninformed)

 

[wiscoaster]

...If losing the screws makes the gun more comfortable it could be argued it makes the shooter more accurate. Then it might just ‘enhance’ function.

True; can't argue with that logic. They don't bother me, though, so it's a personal preference.

 

[Jappo]

Pietta makes a so called 1851 in 44 caliber in a steel frame. No notches or extra screws. But it comes with an octagon barrel. Just change out the barrel and walla, a civilian model of an 1860

 

[Snooterpup]

Pietta makes a so called 1851 in 44 caliber in a steel frame. No notches or extra screws. But it comes with an octagon barrel. Just change out the barrel and walla, a civilian model of an 1860

I wondered about that too and have two ASM revolvers, one is a fantasy .44 1851, the other an 1860 in .44. I thought they would interchange but they would not. The cylinders are identical but the frames are not. The 1851 frame is a bit longer at the water table to make up for the shorter forcing cone on the 1851 barrel. Thanks for the hint, perhaps Pietta would interchange but not on my ASMs.
I see Uberti makes a civilian 1860 that is really nice. Three screw, no cut recoil shield, and brass back strap. This gun probably never existed either but I want one!
See Duelist54’s review of 2023 Uberti 1860.

 

[Jappo]

I wondered about that too and have two ASM revolvers, one is a fantasy .44 1851, the other an 1860 in .44. I thought they would interchange but they would not. The cylinders are identical but the frames are not. The 1851 frame is a bit longer at the water table to make up for the shorter forcing cone on the 1851 barrel. Thanks for the hint, perhaps Pietta would interchange but not on my ASMs.
I see Uberti makes a civilian 1860 that is really nice. Three screw, no cut recoil shield, and brass back strap. This gun probably never existed either but I want one!
See Duelist54’s review of 2023 Uberti 1860.

Guess ASM did things different. An 1860 was an 1851 converted to 44. The water table was cut, the recoil shield was cut and the extra screws added. And of course a 44 barrel and rebated cylinder.

 

[Jappo]

The original 1860 barrel actually had a shorter forcing cone, allowing for the longer 44 cylinder. Probably what ASM did.

 

[TrophyGuy]

Congratulations on a clever and well executed fix. You have inspired me to try a similar fix on my ASM 3rd Dragoon. I foolishly pulled these screws and lost them, leaving two little portholes into the lock work. Question: How did you secure the threaded plugs to keep them from wandering into the lock work? Loctite? Can’t see any peening punch marks to secure.

 

[45D]

Congratulations on a clever and well executed fix. You have inspired me to try a similar fix on my ASM 3rd Dragoon. I foolishly pulled these screws and lost them, leaving two little portholes into the lock work. Question: How did you secure the threaded plugs to keep them from wandering into the lock work? Loctite? Can’t see any peening punch marks to secure.

You might see if Uberti screws will fit (I don't have an ASM to check). If so, I'll be happy to turn them down for you.

Mike

 

[Mikekj]

Pietta makes a so called 1851 in 44 caliber in a steel frame. No notches or extra screws. But it comes with an octagon barrel. Just change out the barrel and walla, a civilian model of an 1860

Walla walla wallaby?