1873 and three screw

[gnappi]

I've never opened a 3 screw, well since I only own one and never had a reason to open it no surprise there. On the other hand I own several 1873 clones and the most recent purchase had the bolt fail and while replacing it I was amazed at how easy it was to disassemble and fix. It also had me wondering how such sophisticated mechanical layouts and machining was done without electricity and modern close tolerance machines.

Anyway it got me thinking how similar are the two guns aside from the 4 click and 3 screws + the gripframe mounting scheme and dissimilarities like the hammer mounted firing pin and two piece grip frame of the1873?

Sacrilege here... while the 1873's may not be as strong as a Ruger 3 screw with modern steel, I prefer and enjoy shooting the 1873's more.

 

[contender]

Having been inside OM 3-screws, and NM 2-pin guns,, I will say the 3-screws are MUCH easier & more fun to tinker with.

 

[gnappi]

Wow! now you have me wanting to break open my .41

 

[flyingtiger]

3 srews are so easy to repair. Try putting a super blackhawk gripframe on a single six.. you will like it

 

[contender]

If you've never taken down a Ruger 3-screw,, you should do it,, even if just to clean & lightly oil the internals. You will suddenly get a desire to own a few more of them.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Agreed on the relative simplicity of Ruger three-screws. If you can do an 1873 you can likely do a three-screw. Just pay careful attention to where the parts go.

IMHO the only slightly tricky part is the bolt spring and its lower end anchorage. It's not immediately apparent how that goes.

What the neck . . . give it a try.

 

[Johnnu2]

I may be "slow", but I've found significant differences between the innards of the 1873 (Colt style) and the Ruger 3 screw. Nothing that would significantly cause a problem, but definitely different parts and assembly.

J.

 

[JAYDAWG]

If I can do it, anyone can!
Just don't make the rookie mistake I made, taking the strut spring retainer off.......

 

[Ale-8(1)]

If I can do it, anyone can!
Just don't make the rookie mistake I made, taking the strut spring retainer off.......

Note that the pawl spring on the back side of the frame should be installed with the little plunger into the frame first . . . not the spring.

I also note you didn't remove the bolt pivot screw thru the frame. That's not really a bad idea because getting that reassembled can be tricky, and you really don't need to remove the bolt for a good cleaning.

 

[LAH]

They are simple.

 

[Hondo44]

OM Ruger SAs and Colt/colt clones are both simple to work on.

The real difference is ENDURANCE due to coil spring modern design; Ruger's claim to fame.

Colt weak points: trigger/cyl latch leaf spring, cylinder latch split leg design, although an excellent and simple design for the era. And with modern metallurgy in steel and springs, much greater longevity than in the past.

Proud addicted owner of:
24 Ruger SAs (old and new models)
15 Colt SAAs - 1st gens, 2nd gens, 3rd gens, and Post 1999 3rd gens (removable cyl bushing)
3 USFA
2 Cimarrons

 

[Johnnu2]

If I can do it, anyone can!
Just don't make the rookie mistake I made, taking the strut spring retainer off.......
View attachment 94170

JAYDAWG, that's NOT a 3-screw (which is what the OP is asking about). It's a New Model and is VASTLY more difficult to assemble than a 3-screw. Don't want to confuse the OP.
Just sayin'........... upon CLOSER examination, I stand corrected and BLIND. It's a 3-screw
J>

 

[Sugar River]

JAYDAWG, that's NOT a 3-screw (which is what the OP is asking about). It's a New Model and is VASTLY more difficult to assemble than a 3-screw. Don't want to confuse the OP.
Just sayin'
J>

Sure looks like a 3 screw to me........

 

[Richbaker]

JAYDAWG, that's NOT a 3-screw (which is what the OP is asking about). It's a New Model and is VASTLY more difficult to assemble than a 3-screw. Don't want to confuse the OP.
Just sayin'
J>

New model with a flat gate and no transfer bar?

 

[Wyandot Jim]

It also had me wondering how such sophisticated mechanical layouts and machining was done without electricity and modern close tolerance machines.

Several years ago, there was a video of a rifle being built in Colonial Williamsburg using the tools of the 1700s. It showed how a barrel is made and the rifling was cut along with many other items being made.

This is the link. I found it very interesting. Back then a close tolerance machine was a file.

A 1969 promotional Movie from Colonial Williamsburg Virginia Showing the process of creating rifles in the 1700’s

 

[JAYDAWG]

JAYDAWG, that's NOT a 3-screw (which is what the OP is asking about). It's a New Model and is VASTLY more difficult to assemble than a 3-screw. Don't want to confuse the OP.
Just sayin'
J>

Well, in your defense, I did take the pic before I took out the 3rd screw that holds in the cylinder indexing bar/latch(?), and the flat gate..........

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Sorry Johnnu2, but that is definitely an OM "three-screw" Ruger.

Don't want to confuse the OP.

 

[Johnnu2]

Well, in your defense, I did take the pic before I took out the 3rd screw that holds in the cylinder indexing bar/latch(?), and the flat gate..........

YUP, you're right..... I must be going BLIND....
Apologies,
J.

 

[Hondo44]

Been there, done that, especially trying to see photos on my cell..........

 

[contender]

Yeah,, we are all guilty of quickly looking at something,, and "seeing" something different.

I once saw a person from behind,, that appeared to be a female,, then it turned into a guy from the front. Oops!

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Yeah,, we are all guilty of quickly looking at something,, and "seeing" something different.

I once saw a person from behind,, that appeared to be a female,, then it turned into a guy from the front. Oops!

Saw that happen in a bar one time. Came very close to a knockdown.

 

[Johnnu2]

Yeah,, we are all guilty of quickly looking at something,, and "seeing" something different.

I once saw a person from behind,, that appeared to be a female,, then it turned into a guy from the front. Oops!

I have a feeling that happens a lot these days...

J.

 

[gnappi]

OM Ruger SAs and Colt/colt clones are both simple to work on.

The real difference is ENDURANCE due to coil spring modern design; Ruger's claim to fame.

Colt weak points: trigger/cyl latch leaf spring, cylinder latch split leg design, although an excellent and simple design for the era. And with modern metallurgy in steel and springs, much greater longevity than in the past.

Proud addicted owner of:
24 Ruger SAs (old and new models)
15 Colt SAAs - 1st gens, 2nd gens, 3rd gens, and Post 1999 3rd gens (removable cyl bushing)
3 USFA
2 Cimarrons

Yup! I ordered three spare bolt / cylinder latch springs for my Colt clones.

I have one Colt, a 22 mag New Frontier from 1959? and have not shot it much but I have not needed to be inside it.

 

[kendog]

I have found that a little dab of oil on the screw heads goes a long way to keep from scratching the anodizing off of the grip frame. Works on OM and NM.