44 Pietta Snub

[Dickydalton]

I got mine and finally took it out last week. At 15 yards I hit a target box rouhly 5" X 6" every shot after the first two. I shot 5 different cylinders that i had laoded for other revolvers in advance. it was fun.
I was shooting 454 RB over a lubed wad and 30 grains of Swiss 3F.

 

[hrt4me]

nice bird's head grip

 

[bobthemotorcycle]

Love it. You have a holster in mind? I'm getting a shoulder holster for mine.

 

[Dickydalton]

Love it. You have a holster in mind? I'm getting a shoulder holster for mine.

No, but i sure need one and recommendations are welcome.

 

[William Lincoln]

Those snubbys are enticing but the prices are high.
I see one as a great back pocket pistol for taking out
trash at night--we have bears (use as noisemaker you
can't shoot them out of season- and wouldn't anyways.)
For the person who wants a little something. The design
is very reliable. Unmentionable 38 snubby is only 650 fps
so these should come close if loaded up to max with
T-7 or 4f. Very desirable but never saw one in stainless.
Never saw one in Nickel yet.

 

[Bad Karma]

I believe I’m gonna chop a Pietta. Torn between 3 and 4 inches but I’m leaning heavily towards 4. I’m a tall lanky guy and a round butt 4” unmentionable disappears on me. The 1860 isn’t much bigger...

 

[William Lincoln]

You might be able to just buy a snubby barrel and swap out.

 

[Bad Karma]

You might be able to just buy a snubby barrel and swap out.

Yeah, I’m looking for four inch tube I think, maybe even 4-5/8. My 8, 6, and 5.5” pistols handle nicely but I’m up for something different.

Speaking of which, the Pietta came today... oh boy... I’m an Uberti fan from the 60’s on and, although I have owned Pietta Shooters model ‘58’s, I’ve never owned an 1860 Pietta. This one is new in the box, of recent manufacture and although the finish is very nice, (bluing is deep and clean, the case hardened frame has pleasing color and the grips are beautiful ) I’m pretty disappointed in the action and fit of the revolver. The wedge is ill fitted, with barrel/cylinder gap uneven from top to bottom, the action is well timed with no play in lockup but the hammer pull is atrocious, easily 10# of effort to cock the piece. The trigger pull is 6.5# and as creepy as Biden at a kindergarten. This thing needs serious attention to be even close to a functional revolver. Well, now I have another project.

 

[William Lincoln]

Remember the hammer spring not only ignites it also holds the
cap on. Most replicas need some tuning and adjusting, but
when done are great pieces. Much you can do yourself. Check
out duelist 1954 and Shamans forge bushcraft on youtube for
great videos on youtube for prepping 1860s for the range.

 

[Sparkitoff]

Does anyone know of a conventional pancake or IWB holster that will contain the Snub cap and ball? I mean leather, not a "gasp" nylon one. I know either way is not HC but that's not my point or purpose.

 

[Bad Karma]

Remember the hammer spring not only ignites it also holds the
cap on. Most replicas need some tuning and adjusting, but
when done are great pieces. Much you can do yourself. Check
out duelist 1954 and Shamans forge bushcraft on youtube for
great videos on youtube for prepping 1860s for the range.

Yeah the mainspring is far beyond that point. None of my Colts are even close.

 

[William Lincoln]

There are several videos on lightening the main spring or
replacing it. Check track OTW on that replacement.. A strong mainspring weakens with use. I have always preferred a strong spring because I shoot hot loads in a snubby and I want it to ignite caps reliably,whether they are fully seated or not. And I do not want that cap blowing back under a T-7 hot load. Also, holsters leather for small frame/medium frame
snubbys work. Soften holster some with lanolin based
leather treatment and 15 mins in a vegetable steamer. Take
out warm and push the revolver in tight. Let cool. Try it.

 

[Bad Karma]

First on the agenda is to disassemble and de burr , check the condition of parts etc. The cones fit Remington 10’s perfectly and in unfired condition so I am not overly concerned with blowback. The likely load will be .457“ round ball or 195 grain flat point bullets over 30 grains of 3f Swiss, whichever it prefers. Charlie Hahn will be reaming the chambers .456“ and working on the forcing cone. The cone is rather rough and abrupt so it will benefit from his attention. it is a project but I had thought it might be better than this since I’ve heard so many glowing reviews on the Pietta revolvers. Oh well, I expect it will turn out alright. If not it will be pretty to look at.

 

[William Lincoln]

When you are done you will have a great piece
for carry or back up. It will not drop in value.
I just wish that Pietta would make a snubby
in Stainless or maybe Nickel.

 

[rodwha]

I believe I’m gonna chop a Pietta. Torn between 3 and 4 inches but I’m leaning heavily towards 4. I’m a tall lanky guy and a round butt 4” unmentionable disappears on me. The 1860 isn’t much bigger...

A long time back I was chatting with someone who was fluent in chopping these guns and I recall him stating he found that it took 3.5” to use up service charge of 30-35 grns.

Myself, I mostly carried a 5” early 20h century piece and felt that or a 4” revolver was about ideal for a sidearm for hunting or busting through the bushes. In fact I traded a 4” modern revolver for my ROA. It’s just a nice sight picture and just handy enough. I’ve measured my NMA and see it can go back to about 4.25” and still pull the cylinder unless a pivot point was used on the base pin, and I keep contemplating the worthwhile of spending money on an inch or so.

 

[Bad Karma]

A long time back I was chatting with someone who was fluent in chopping these guns and I recall him stating he found that it took 3.5” to use up service charge of 30-35 grns.

Myself, I mostly carried a 5” early 20h century piece and felt that or a 4” revolver was about ideal for a sidearm for hunting or busting through the bushes. In fact I traded a 4” modern revolver for my ROA. It’s just a nice sight picture and just handy enough. I’ve measured my NMA and see it can go back to about 4.25” and still pull the cylinder unless a pivot point was used on the base pin, and I keep contemplating the worthwhile of spending money on an inch or so.

The guns may use the entire charge but there’s a stiff price in velocity lost with the shorties... It’s not going to be a defensive pistol or used for anything other than targets and small game so that’s ok with me. I would still hate to be on the receiving end of a .457 ball at 500 FPS. Probably ruin your whole day.

 

[rodwha]

First on the agenda is to disassemble and de burr , check the condition of parts etc. The cones fit Remington 10’s perfectly and in unfired condition so I am not overly concerned with blowback. The likely load will be .457“ round ball or 195 grain flat point bullets over 30 grains of 3f Swiss, whichever it prefers. Charlie Hahn will be reaming the chambers .456“ and working on the forcing cone. The cone is rather rough and abrupt so it will benefit from his attention. it is a project but I had thought it might be better than this since I’ve heard so many glowing reviews on the Pietta revolvers. Oh well, I expect it will turn out alright. If not it will be pretty to look at.

Why .456”?

I’ve long contemplated reaming my Pietta NMA cylinder further (it’s .449” now) but those slim cylinder walls just look thin to me. I’ve been told .453” using energetic powders and bullets is doable, but there’s still that hesitation. We read of obturation fixing any small chamber issues but we also see lead bullets these days are always .001” over bore. So why .005” over?

 

[William Lincoln]

Barrel length is determined by ballistics,transport and the use
of the revolver. In close-in use the short barrel is
safer and more difficult to get a hold of by the opponent.
If transported on the person the short barrel is easier to
conceal. The propellant being used determines the
amount of barrel confinement to propel the projectile.
Detectives have long preferred 2 & 3 inch range barrels
because of close range use in structures and where the
gun is pulled during a close-up altercation. Perps will
grab your gun. Short barrels are harder to grab. If you
are going to carry the revolver and use it for possible
self-defense in a high crime,say, parking garage then
follow the cops lead and shorten it--but not too short
(ie 2 1/2--3 1/2 inches). Use fast powder say 4f and
load at least 30 grains. There is an avenging angel
black powder snubby being chrono-ed with T-7
on youtube at over 800fps .If for self-defense max it out.
3" Avenging Angel/Bulldog see duelist 1954 to make

 

[rodwha]

Barrel length is determined by ballistics,transport and the use
of the revolver. In close-in use the short barrel is
safer and more difficult to get a hold of by the opponent.
If transported on the person the short barrel is easier to
conceal. The propellant being used determines the
amount of barrel confinement to propel the projectile.
Detectives have long preferred 2 & 3 inch range barrels
because of close range use in structures and where the
gun is pulled during a close-up altercation. Perps will
grab your gun. Short barrels are harder to grab. If you
are going to carry the revolver and use it for possible
self-defense in a high crime,say, parking garage then
follow the cops lead and shorten it--but not too short
(ie 2 1/2--3 1/2 inches). Use fast powder say 4f and
load at least 30 grains. There is an avenging angel
black powder snubby being chrono-ed with T-7
on youtube at over 800fps .If for self-defense max it out.
3" Avenging Angel/Bulldog see duelist 1954 to make
View attachment 81251

To be fair they weren’t using black powder.

I was coming more from a field carry piece, not concealed, perspective. I equated 4” to being about ideal with modern stuff, but it seems to make sense from a BP perspective since it needs barrel length to work efficiently.

 

[William Lincoln]

Actually, there were shortened barrels used by police in
the 1800's-- not just the Mormon avenging angels. There
are several in collections that came out of Arizona. If I
were buying the 1860 snub then I would consider all the
options. Point being, consistent with this forum, these are
comments related to the 44 snubby. Are there better carry
choices?---sure, but are not dealt with on this forum. But
within our subject matter I added my thoughts on Black
Powder Snubbies. For field use, nothing beats the full
7 1/2 - 8 inch barrel. You get a better sight plane, some
added velocity and more barrel weight to resist muzzle rise.