Steel Skeletal Stock?

[sourdough]

I believe the shoulder stock aspect of the 1938 Federal Firearms Act only applies to cartridge guns.

Hawkeye specifically stated assembling it with a conversion (cartridge) cylinder, which would make in an SBR (short barreled rifle) in accordance with the National Firearms Act of 1934 unless the revolver has a 16" barrel or longer (Gun Control Act of 1968).

When replica BP C&B revolvers started appearing in the late 1950's, the NRA went to bat for owners of such revolvers with shoulder stocks, persuading the Treasury Department not to consider them as SBR's, even though the NRA refused to run advertisements in the American Rifleman for companies selling BP replicas of any type for a very long time. Don't take my word for it: William B. Edwards, "Civil War Guns", 1962.

Hawkeye also accurately observed that the Cimarron stock photo of the revolver was a cut-for-shoulder-stock with the "4th-screw" escutcheons removed. Easy enough to do, and if one does not like the looks of 2 empty threaded holes in the frame, 2 short set screws can be installed in place of the escutcheons. Just make sure they

As an aside, I don't like either the skeleton stock (aesthetics) nor the Pietta "remedy" stock (again, aesthetics) for a 3-screw gun. That is why my stocked guns are 4-screw guns using the Colt Type 3 design. I have an ASM 1860 Army fluted cylinder 4-screw in a cased set with a shoulder stock. The stock fits the Army grip frame assembly well. I also have a Pietta 1851 Navy 4-screw with the 1860 Army grip frame (not historical but they fit with the 1860 stock). Regrettably, I only have one Type 3 stock at this time, but I am looking for another at a decent price, rather than the going price of $275-$300+ per copy.




Just my $.02 worth.

Jim

 

[Bad Karma]

Hawkeye specifically stated assembling it with a conversion (cartridge) cylinder, which would make in an SBR (short barreled rifle) in accordance with the National Firearms Act of 1934 unless the revolver has a 16" barrel or longer (Gun Control Act of 1968).

When replica BP C&B revolvers started appearing in the late 1950's, the NRA went to bat for owners of such revolvers with shoulder stocks, persuading the Treasury Department not to consider them as SBR's, even though the NRA refused to run advertisements in the American Rifleman for companies selling BP replicas of any type for a very long time. Don't take my word for it: William B. Edwards, "Civil War Guns", 1962.

Hawkeye also accurately observed that the Cimarron stock photo of the revolver was a cut-for-shoulder-stock with the "4th-screw" escutcheons removed. Easy enough to do, and if one does not like the looks of 2 empty threaded holes in the frame, 2 short set screws can be installed in place of the escutcheons. Just make sure they

As an aside, I don't like either the skeleton stock (aesthetics) nor the Pietta "remedy" stock (again, aesthetics) for a 3-screw gun. That is why my stocked guns are 4-screw guns using the Colt Type 3 design. I have an ASM 1860 Army fluted cylinder 4-screw in a cased set with a shoulder stock. The stock fits the Army grip frame assembly well. I also have a Pietta 1851 Navy 4-screw with the 1860 Army grip frame (not historical but they fit with the 1860 stock). Regrettably, I only have one Type 3 stock at this time, but I am looking for another at a decent price, rather than the going price of $275-$300+ per copy.




Just my $.02 worth.

Jim

I’ve never had my grub hooks on the skeleton stocks but it looks like it has a shorter length of pull as well. The only shoulder stocks I have used were the Type 3 and the LOP was generous. Seemed to keep the revolver a comfortable distance from the shooters mug. Still, protective gear is in order.

 

[rodwha]

I’ve never had my grub hooks on the skeleton stocks but it looks like it has a shorter length of pull as well. The only shoulder stocks I have used were the Type 3 and the LOP was generous. Seemed to keep the revolver a comfortable distance from the shooters mug. Still, protective gear is in order.

I’m not aware of such a stock. Mind sharing a bit more?

 

[Stantheman86]

So basically no one knows what the skeleton stock fits but it's for revolvers that aren't cut for the wood stocks?

They expect you to add your own screw to fit the skeleton stock?

In a couple days I'll see what arrives.

 

[Tom A Hawk]

So basically no one knows what the skeleton stock fits but it's for revolvers that aren't cut for the wood stocks?

They expect you to add your own screw to fit the skeleton stock?

In a couple days I'll see what arrives.

A replacement hammer screw is provided which the stock hooks over.

 

[Stantheman86]

Now it makes sense .

 

[Stantheman86]

It looks like the Skeleton Stock is an exact repro of a later stock used with Colt 1873's with long barrels.

It's historically accurate they just can't have people using them on cartridge revolvers like was said above . Luckily our muzzleloading weapons are pretty much exempt from all that NFA stuff.

 

[Bad Karma]

I’m not aware of such a stock. Mind sharing a bit more?

Jim, @sourdough has pics up at post 21. The standard Colt shoulder stock.

 

[Tom A Hawk]

I have a four screw Uberti, cut for shoulder stock. Where can I purchase a wooden stock made to fit it? I have read that stocks from DGW don't fit Uberti's well.

 

[rodwha]

Jim, @sourdough has pics up at post 21. The standard Colt shoulder stock.

Those stocks are longer than the ones found for the 4 screw guns? I thought those looked about the same.

 

[sourdough]

I have a four screw Uberti, cut for shoulder stock. Where can I purchase a wooden stock made to fit it? I have read that stocks from DGW don't fit Uberti's well.

I only have one Uberti revolver and it is a Whitneyville Hartford Dragoon, so I cannot speak much about stocks for Uberti 1851 Navy/1860 Army/1861 Navy revolvers. Since the attachment stock is basically a clamp-on item, and no screw threads are involved concerning this, I would think a Pietta Type 3 stock would work on an Uberti 1860 revolver. The stocks from DGW I have seen are Piettas, whether they are for the 1860, the 1851, or even the Remington NMA. The Pietta Navy and Remington stocks are for 3-screw guns and use an extended replacement hammer screw with 2 heads for the stock yoke to fasten "properly", but are not anywhere near historic. The Pietta 1860 stock is a Type 3, but there have been differences in the manufacture concerning the length of the housing for the "J-hook" (for lack of a better term) and also the length of the threaded portion of it.

Refer to my post#21 photos of a Pietta stock (of unknown date of manufacture) with my ASM 1860 Army BD/1994 and also my Pietta 1851 Navy AZ/1990 with 1860 grips. The stock fits both revolvers well. However, the Pietta Navy was sold to me in a cased set with that 1860 Army stock and it did not even come close to fitting well with the Pietta Navy grips. I don't have photo of that configuration, but I guess I could do a photo of it if anyone was really interested.

Here is an example of the differences:



Notice the differences in the length of the J-hook housing.

Since I am a Pietta fan, I have been looking at the Pietta 1861 Navy CFS to use with the Type 3 stock I have. The problem is that the Pietta does not have the attachment recess on the bottom of the steel backstrap. WTF? Why even market a 4-screw CFS frame with the wrong backstrap? Another Pietta snafu, IMO. The Uberti 1861 is correct.

I am a devoted addict about shoulder stocks, for what that is worth. I know that it was not a very practical thing that Sam Colt wanted to sell to the US Army, whether it was for the 1851 Navy, the 3rd Model Dragoon, or the 1860 Army, but he did so because he wanted to sell products mainly with US Army contracts.

I have very many photos of non-factory shoulder stocks created for Dragoons and Armies.

Just because.

Regards,

Jim

 

[sourdough]

Stan,

Have you received it? I am very curious as to how it fits your revolver(s). It does not appear to have a "nub" (for lack of a better term) on the J-hook to engage the milled recess on the bottom of the backstrap. I wonder how that will work securing that portion of the stock to the revolver grip. I think that one could drill and tap a blind hole in the top of the "hook" for a round head screw that the head would be fitted for the backstrap recess if the revolver has one.



Awaiting your observations and your recommendations.

Thanks in advance!

Regards,

Jim

 

[Stantheman86]

It should arrive tomorrow, I'm looking forward to seeing if this thing is any kind of useful.

 

[Stantheman86]

Stock came with two different sized (diameter) hammer screws.

I didn't put the screw in this Uberti '51 Navy, not sure I want to use it on this one yet. Looks like it would fit nicely. The part where the Hook goes on the screw is a little wider than the frame, maybe to allow for manufacturer variance. Unless 1860 Army revolvers have a slightly wider frame?

My Dragoon frame was too wide for this but I imagine a determined person with a file could open the stock hooks up.

Looks like the hook that goes under the grip will mar up the bottom of the grips and grip frame so make sure you don't use it on a gun that you absolutely must keep pristine.

 

[sourdough]

I didn't put the screw in this Uberti '51 Navy, not sure I want to use it on this one yet. Looks like it would fit nicely. The part where the Hook goes on the screw is a little wider than the frame, maybe to allow for manufacturer variance. Unless 1860 Army revolvers have a slightly wider frame?

My Dragoon frame was too wide for this but I imagine a determined person with a file could open the stock hooks up.

Looks like the hook that goes under the grip will mar up the bottom of the grips and grip frame so make sure you don't use it on a gun that you absolutely must keep pristine.

The frames of the 1851/1861 Navy and the 1860 Army are the same width. The 1848 Dragoon frames are wider, as you noted. Colt used iron/steel backstraps instead of brass backstraps because the softer brass did not hold up well at the bottom attachment recess.

I am curious why two different screw sizes were included if the stock won't fit a Dragoon.

Regards,

Jim

 

[Tom A Hawk]

The frames of the 1851/1861 Navy and the 1860 Army are the same width. The 1848 Dragoon frames are wider, as you noted. Colt used iron/steel backstraps instead of brass backstraps because the softer brass did not hold up well at the bottom attachment recess.

I am curious why two different screw sizes were included if the stock won't fit a Dragoon.

Regards,

Jim

Its curious indeed since the screw mounting heads are of different diameters and only one fits the recess in the stock.

 

[Rifleman1776]

Though we don't talk about them here I would like to caution everyone who has a conversion cylinder and a shoulder stock. If you go to the range and assemble the gun in that configuration you are in violation of Federal law.

I wondered about that.

 

[Stantheman86]

I'll have to take a closer look at the screws later, I'm getting ready for work now.

Maybe they include a Dragoon/Walker screw in case you want to open the attachment up to fit. The clamp for the butt will adjust to fit them.

It might be worth trying to "squeeze" the frame attachment to get a little tighter fit.

 

[sawyer04]

Let me know how you like a cap and ball revolver going off 6 inches in front of your face. I didn't.

Yep, believe I'll pass on this one. Looks good, but six inches is a little too close.

 

[William P Sepessy]

Mine just came in yesterday. Saw the two nickled screws and figured one was Uberti and the other Pietta?--just a guess so far. I did see where the larger screw head won't quite fit the stock. Looks pretty nice--except the four small rust spots--just my luck. They almost cleaned up but since I will actually use this thing and will probably put my own scratches on it--oh well. Looking forward to trying this out.