Tweet
Wanted to see if anyone has any feedback on the Pedersoli 1816 Colt conversion musket as to quality and accuracy as compared to originals? Were these newly updated recently or the same old musket offered in the past? They look like a nice reproduction from the poor photo, although a bit expensive.
-
-
Re: Thoughts on the Pedersoli 1816 Colt Conversion
Hallo!
I have not seen one in the flesh yet.
'
My suspicion is that they just took the problematic previous 'M1816 percussion conversion" and added the brass pan filler as found on some of the "Model 1854" Russian and /Italian contract breechloader alterations done in 1858 and 1859ish..
CurtLast edited by Curt Schmidt; 05-22-2014, 12:33 PM.Curt Schmidt
In gleichem Schritt und Tritt, Curt Schmidt
-Hard and sharp as flint...secret, and self-contained, and solitary as an oyster.
-Haplogroup R1b M343 (Subclade R1b1a2 M269)
-Pointless Folksy Wisdom Mess, Oblio Lodge #1
-Vastly Ignorant
-Often incorrect, technically, historically, factually. -
Re: Thoughts on the Pedersoli 1816 Colt Conversion
I have owned a couple, including one done as a cone in barrel conversion which I wished I'd never parted with. They are quality pieces. The Colt conversion is problematic from a numbers standpoint and it isn't "fully" a Colt conversion, so let's call it a "drum type conversion." Good strong lock springs. Weird little civilian fowling rifle hammer. Takes an original bayonet easily enough. Somewhat heavy, like the originals were. Unless it is priced right, for the money the Armi Sport US 1842 is still the one to beat.Craig L Barry
Editor, The Watchdog, a non-profit 501[c]3
Co-author (with David Burt) Suppliers to the Confederacy
Author, The Civil War Musket: A Handbook for Historical Accuracy
Member, Company of Military HistoriansComment
-
Re: Thoughts on the Pedersoli 1816 Colt Conversion
Craig,
I have noticed the weird hammer on it as well. Do you think it would be possible to change it with a hammer that would have been more commonly seen on the conversions?
Will MacDonaldComment
-
Re: Thoughts on the Pedersoli 1816 Colt Conversion
Will,Originally posted by Mississippian View Post
At one time I had a Pedersoli percussion conversion with an original M1861 hammer. I acquired it that way, and I imagine it took a lot of time and fitting, but it can be done.
MarkMark TaylorComment
-
Re: Thoughts on the Pedersoli 1816 Colt Conversion
Hallo!
I think there appears to be two versions, "new and older."
The previous has been reviewed and commented on several times in discussions past, it being reworking of the Italian M1777 Charleville with a Colt style side drum but a non-Colt style hammer. (hardest issue to overcome is the incorrect middle band position.)
The one listed on the web site is more like the Russian/Italian contracts that have the remnants of the brass pan beneath the side drum.
Same story here. I had two. And really regret selling the "cone in barrel" I had that was made out of the "M1816."
Aside from trying to find a really rare Colt hammer, yes there is a possibility of finding a conversion hammer where the relationship between the tumbler "hole" and where the nose of the hammer comes down on the cone is on or the hammer nose can be heated and bent to possibly fit.
IMHO, in any event, possible BUT tricky on either count.
Curt
CurtCurt Schmidt
In gleichem Schritt und Tritt, Curt Schmidt
-Hard and sharp as flint...secret, and self-contained, and solitary as an oyster.
-Haplogroup R1b M343 (Subclade R1b1a2 M269)
-Pointless Folksy Wisdom Mess, Oblio Lodge #1
-Vastly Ignorant
-Often incorrect, technically, historically, factually.Comment
Comment