As always, it's best to have it checked out by a qualified gunsmith first. It would be a shame to lose it if something let loose!

 

That's sound advice as a good first step. I'll have to look pretty hard in this neck of the woods to find a qualified gunsmith--or ANY gunsmith, though. Wish Jim Martin lived nearby.

My main concern with oldies like mine is what escapes the naked eye of even a qualified gunsmith. Microscopic cracks, metallurgical problems, metal fatigue especially.

 

GAD has reloaded ammo with BP. I would recommend using that. I shoot several 41 Long Colts (a Thunderer, two Bisleys, a SAA and an Army Special). All but the Thunderer are safe for modern powder but I still load them at safe levels. I based my decision on the serial number (>200,000 in my cases)

 

If the gun is all original inside and out, I would not want to risk breaking old original parts. once parts are replaced it's not all original ever again...JMO.................M*

 

Very good point, in addition to the issue of safety. And this gun is all original. Thanks for your opinion. This is good input; I'll take all I can get.

 

I thought that serial number is too low for smokeless powder. I seem to remember the serial number has to be 198000 and up.

 

Ah, that rings a bell. Seems I recall also reading that somewhere. Thanks, I'll look it up.

 

Here's what I found in Kopec's "A Study of...", page 122, regarding use of smokeless powder in older guns:

"...the company did not guarantee their revolvers for use with smokeless powder cartridges in catalogs and other forms of advertising until 1898. A notation in Colt's shipping records specifically states that Single Actions serial numbered between #175,000 and #180,000 are NOT guaranteed for smokeless powder use".

Continuing later on Page 122: "What is important to all Single Action Colt owners is the misconception that all revolvers above the #165,000 range are safe to fire with modern factory smokeless powder loads. But extreme care should be exercised in predetermining pressures before using handloads in pre-1898 SAs."

My SAA was manufactured in 1900, SN 193XXX.

Still, I'm wary of using smokeless in my gun, for reasons I've stated earlier in this thread, and after reading some of the cautions posted by others here. I tend to be a bit over-cautious in nearly everything that I do; maybe that's why I've survived nearly 76 years.

I would still like to hear others on the Forum weigh in here. Thanks. I like lots of info before making most of my decisions in life. Unless it's something like buying a 2015 Mustang muscle-car. Then it's strictly emotion and I ignore everyone. LOL

 

If you are nervous then shoot it with blackpowder.

 

Yes, well, for me that would equate to not shooting it at all, because I don't and won't load nor reload ammo. I have neither the time nor the inclination; just read my profile and you'll see why. But then maybe it's best that I don't shoot it, period. That may be my best choice, given my cautiousness. No shoot, no worry. I've enough other things to worry about in this multi-sport activity known collectively as life. I've had the gun for a year and a half without shooting it.

 

It doesn't have the VP (verified proof) on the triggerbow which I believe Old colts said was first seen after 250,000 serial range. I never have known where single actions were safe for smokeless factory loads.....I've shot a million rounds through a 1902 vintage saa with easy hand loads. But they weren't loaded anywhere near a factory load.

 

Thanks, coltsixguns. Makes sense to me.

 

I had a turn of the century 41 saa that I shot several boxes of that white boxed old/current manufactured 41 long colt through years ago and it was pretty peppy but that was back in the day before "I knew better".

 

And this is why 'Cowboy' ammunition is so popular...

It's loaded to a low-enough pressure so as to avoid undue worries, and you can buy it in many venues.

If you have a friend who reloads, 'Trail Boss' is a good substitute powder as well - it's 'fluffy', and does a good job of filling the case, as well as giving a consistency to your loads.

When you do find that mythical 'qualified gunsmith' who can X-Ray and Magnaflux everything - cherish him - he'll be readily identifiable - sort of like a unicorn.

So long as your Colt's tight and in good working order - locking up well and with no gaping holes from an advanced case of 'patina' - it'll probably shoot better than you can hold.

To set your mind at ease, though - buy Kuhnhausen's excellent book on gunsmithing the Colt Single Action Army - it'll tell you of its idiosyncracies.

 

I have read that troubles really begin with misaligned cylinder-barrel were bullet extrusion causes excessive pressures. If it were mine I would send it to a pro to have it range rod tested (all six chambers) among other tests of function. Also might have the barrel cast to determine correct bullet size to also minimize incorrect pressures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Thank you very much, Crowndog. Your suggestion makes a lot of sense, and further supports my wariness about an old gun I know nothing about except for what I can see with untrained eyes.

I hope others who may be considering shooting an old, recently acquired 1st gen SAA for the first time, will take note of this caution and other posts on this thread as well. I've long been dead-set against firing one of these antiques, yet recently my desire to shoot it has caused me to be errant in my course and led me here, asking questions, reconsidering. But... I think that, for me at least, I'd better adhere to my "stick to my guns" position: No shoot very old gun, no worry, no danger, live longer, let me die healthy and in one piece of old age. Live, laugh and love in this multi-sport activity called life. I'll shoot my new 3rd gens instead and be happy with that. And I am. They are great shooters.

Thanks for all the great and thoughtful advice that I always find on this Forum.

 

BearBio mentioned this company makes BP loads. Why not buy from them?

Gad Custom Reloaded Cartridges and Shell Reloading Services

 

How did you get the gun, as in did you pay a lot, pay a little or pay nothing by inheriting it. If you paid top dollar considering the poor finish and it was cleaned up to get maximum buck then I'd just look at and brag on it unless you're good enough to clean it like it was. If so I would shoot it once in celebration of acquisition and then clean it up and go back to looking and bragging 'cause if you keep shooting and break it you'll wish you hadn't. It's all about having your cake and eating it too. If you bought it cheap then it's worth more as an investment than a shooter 'cause you already made money and shooting it will decrease its value but any damage wont hurt too much. If it was great grand daddy's and I was in your shoes it would be worth more to me knowing he fired the last shot through it and I wouldn't crap that up. But then again I've got plenty of other guns to shoot.

 

It's a terrible picture, and it looks much, much better in my hand. It's really nice and it is all original. No history that I know of, no sentimentality, and it Colt-lettered. I paid 2K a year and a half ago on gunbroker. All four clicks, locks up tight, no cylinder wobble nor play, trigger's in the right position, no flaws other than some age patina and a tad of rust specks here and there. Bore is nice, cylinders too. I think it's a good, plain-vanilla SAA with original grips that some rancher used to scare coyotes away from his livestock. I don't really see any signs of hard usage.

So I think I'll preserve it as is and not shoot it. I've three other shooters, and that should satisfy my shooting needs. It lays quietly alongside my 1887 Cavalry, which is a fine piece, and I absolutely will not shoot that one.

Thanks to all.

 

Sounds like you've already made up your mind. I'm OK with that. It's your gun and your health. But in the FWIW department, I have a 1878DA that I can best describe as "worn out". I've shot cowboy loads through it, as Dogface6 mentioned. I load both BP and smokeless, but not 45. Those old Colts are stronger than one might think. My problem is I won't own a gun I can't shoot. To me, your problem is one not so much of safety, but rather the risk of breaking something, which could seriously detract from the value of the gun. Again, it's YOUR gun, and whatever choice YOU make is the right choice for YOU.

 

I shoot my old 1st generation Bisley in a lot of cowboy action matches. They were made to shoot, guns don't slowly "wear out". A spring might break, an engagement may wear, but the gun's not going to suddenly blow up and kill a range full of people because it's "old." All the guns I own are old and I shoot them all. Most guns you buy today have been shot, repeatedly, by generations of owners. Over, and over again. We can stop the heavy breathing now.

 

It's loaded to a low-enough pressure so as to avoid undue worries, and you can buy it in many venues.

I'm not sure cowboy loads can be used in guns that would be better with blackpowder? Seems like I remember there is still some level of pressure difference.

 

Less differences in pressure as in the pressure CURVE.

 

1900, I'd not have a problem shooting mild re-loads or commercial cowboy loads through it. If it locked up tight and was in overall good mechanical nick, I'd be out to the range with it in the morning. Nothing beats shooting the old classics.

Best regards,

 

Me, too - the 'Cowboy' loads were specifically designed so folks could enjoy their older firearms, and I've never had nor heard of a problem.

 

Blackpowder only. Period. I know of a few that have "grenaded". One was an 1878 Model shot with Unique powder by a famous Colt guy who despised blackpowder. He learned the hard way that it doesn't pay to fool Mother Nature.

 

... I think I'll preserve it as is and not shoot it. I've three other shooters, and that should satisfy my shooting needs. It lays quietly alongside my 1887 Cavalry, which is a fine piece, and I absolutely will not shoot that one.

It looks to be a keeper to me. Nice gun! Your gun of course and I have guns I don't shoot very often.

But it is a 1900 gun and the .40cal leaves a lot of steel in the cylinder compared to a 44-40 or 45 or even a 38-40. Modern .41 Colt ammo is under powered and made specifically to shoot in those old smokeless guns. Original load was something close to 20gr of BP with a 200gr bullet. "Modern" ammo can be had I believe in both smokeless and BP versions and none of them will be a full power 20-200 load which wassoemthing like 700fps.. I suspect most would shoot this gun if it were a 38-40. I am partial to the .41 and life is too short, no question suggest shooting it.

41 long colt ammo handgun

Shooting the 41 Long Colt - Starline Brass - Maker of America's Finest Handgun Brass

 

It looks to be a keeper to me. Nice gun! Your gun of course and I have guns I don't shoot very often.

But it is a 1900 gun and the .40cal leaves a lot of steel in the cylinder compared to a 44-40 or 45 or even a 38-40. Modern .41 Colt ammo is under powered and made specifically to shoot in those old smokeless guns. Original load was something close to 20gr of BP with a 200gr bullet. "Modern" ammo can be had I believe in both smokeless and BP versions and none of them will be a full power 20-200 load which wassoemthing like 700fps.. I suspect most would shoot this gun if it were a 38-40. I am partial to the .41 and life is too short, no question suggest shooting it.

41 long colt ammo handgun

Shooting the 41 Long Colt - Starline Brass - Maker of America's Finest Handgun Brass

Thank you, Yahoody, for taking the time to discuss this with me. This is good information you've supplied along with helpful links.

I may yet relent on my steadfastness against shooting it, and go ahead and incur the expense of having the gun given a thorough examination. But the metallurgy remains my chief concern, and while you are quite correct that the .41 has more metal in the cylinder than the 44-40 or 45, and should be stronger, still metal fatigue cannot be ruled out. You can only pressurize, heat and cool metal so many times before failure. Moreover, I've no idea what's been shot in it during its 115 years that may indeed have pushed the envelope.

Regarding metallurgy, I recall that the Navy, when I was a federal investigator examining into why the Douglas A-4's sat in the NARFs for so long before being returned to carrier duty and thus hampering the Veet Nom effort, that it was an issue of metal fatigue in the landing gear spindles. Like bending a paper clip again and again and again until at last the gear failed and made a mess on the carrier deck. Again and again.

I'll not belabor this, but just because something hasn't yet failed, doesn't mean that it won't. Ever. Everything has its limits. As for old SAAs, who knows how many have grenaded in the past 143 years, or if not, how many may yet? And whose?

And so, that said, here I go again into my very cautious mode. My eyesight is too precious to me to risk on an old gun, particularly since I'm nearing my sunset. I'll stick to shooting my new 3rd gens. The odds are better.

Thanks again for your input, Yahoody.

 

You're welcome. .41Colt is an odd enough duck I'd likely not shoot it either. But for different reasons..the lack of bullets and brass!

I've spent a few decades building hand guns. Longer shooting them. Even blown up a few The most recent was a new Colt SAA with factory ammo, which bulged a .45 Colt cylinder. Go figure. That was a gun I was being extra, extra careful with and only shooting factory ammo!

Early on (in the '60s) my Mother fretted about me shooting our family's 38-40 with smokeless. Gun was built in 1911. Or a 1873 Winchester (1892 manufacture date) in the same caliber. I've since shot both of them a lot with factory smokeless. No harm no foul to date. Can't tell you how many words I've penned or time I've spent discussing metal failure...but it has been more than I care to admit. Just none on firearms.

Every gun I have seen blown up..only one was wrecked..a SAA. And all were easily attributed to bad hand loads. I load and shoot a lot on progressive machines these days. And I ALWAY wear very good shooting glasses When you get ready to get rid of that .41 let me know! I'll start collecting some brass for it

 

If it was mine, I'd shoot it, but only with black powder loads. Black powder factory cartridges are pretty readily available, but they are expensive. While I consider the .41 Colt a historically significant cartridge, it does have a rather bizarre configuration; i.e., an oversize bore as standard requiring the use of hollow-based bullets in "inside lubricated" cartridges. For such, I think black powder would probably deliver better accuracy than any smokeless propellant.

The generally accepted cutoff for Colt SAAs supposed to be safe with smokeless powder is serial number 192,000, which means production about during or after 1900 (see Kopec, Venturino, others). Your revolver is pretty close to that cutoff. And I do remember reading--in Mr. Kopec's book, I believe--that there was a significant SAA metallurgical upgrade in 1905. A pretty good case for confining the revolver's use to black powder. Research in old ammunition catalogs from the pre-1920 period will reveal that up until about that year, about as many black powder factory cartridges were still being sold as were smokeless factory cartridges. I wouldn't be at all surprised if such sources revealed that smokeless powder loads weren't yet available for the .41 Colt in 1901.

The mantra of "Have the gun checked by a competent gunsmith familiar with old firearms." offers theoretically very sound advice. Now have fun trying to find such a person. Most gunsmiths are competent enough to replace parts in AR-15 rifles and busted automatic shotguns, and that's about it. It has been my experience that such people will tell you that you must be clinically insane for wanting to shoot any firearm made before 1940. Few understand black powder cartridge weapons at all. You're more than likely pretty much on your own if you decide to shoot the revolver. If the major components are sound--no cracks in the frame, cylinder, or barrel; hammer and trigger interface works properly; lockup is still sound, etc.--it's almost certainly safe to fire with black powder loads.

The risk of parts breakage? If you fire it enough, I suppose you might very well run the risk of eventually breaking the trigger and bolt spring (which usually doesn't require any special fitting at all) or, less likely, the hand spring, which does require the service of a competent gunsmith but isn't a devaluing catastrophe. Other than that, you have to inflict some fairly serious abuse on an SAA to hurt it.

At the end of the day, I know you're not going to use your old SAA as any sort of primary weapon or subject it to any abuse, so go ahead and astound the Glock crowd at the range with some fire and smoke.

Don Kenna

 

...The mantra of "Have the gun checked by a competent gunsmith familiar with old firearms." offers theoretically very sound advice. Now have fun trying to find such a person. Most gunsmiths are competent enough to replace parts in AR-15 rifles and busted automatic shotguns, and that's about it. It has been my experience that such people will tell you that you must be clinically insane for wanting to shoot any firearm made before 1940. Few understand black powder cartridge weapons at all...

So very, very true. I have told countless people to only shoot BP in the old guns and 99.99% say "too much trouble". Kunhausen & antique S&W expert Dave Chicoine adamantly state not to shoot the old ones with any smokeless. I agree, having seen a few blow up, crack, stretch frames, etc. If a person is merely putting convenience ahead of safety then they should rethink their motive. Having lost a finger (non-firearm related) I can assure you it isn't fun. Exploding metal fragments in your hand(s) is not to be taken lightly.

Furthermore, reloading any heel base ctg. is a pain as you need a special crimp die that has to be specially made. It is not for the neophyte reloader to attempt.

 

Scribbler
Thanks for sharing a nice old Colt. Whether or not to shoot it is your call, & I'm not sure what I'd do. Articles I've read suggest 1900 & serial # 192,000 as the time Colt warranted their SAAs for smokeless. I'd say yours is close, it should be safe with BP & that's probably what I'd do, if everything else checks out good.
I have shot BP in the .45 Colt & it's actually a pretty powerful load, cleanup isn't as bad as some would have us believe either.
The bottom line is, it's your gun & you should do what you feel comfortable with.
Again thanks for sharing.

 

Nice single action. I especially like them from that time period. I believe that first decade of the last century was the heaviest production period of SAAs.
It seems like the black/smokeless serial number discussion comes up often on the forum. Personally, I use the 192,000 number as my rule for smokeless. But, none of my first generations see any thing more than a mild load.
My .41 is from 1897, clearly in my black powder range. In my experience, the .41 cartridge, with hollow base bullets, actually performs much better with black powder.
If you decide to shoot it, try the black powder loads. I think the gun is in the smokeless range, but the cartridge begs for black.
Enjoy it, and happy shooting.
POE

 

Interesting cartridge for sure:
Introduced in 1877 by Colt.. from 1877 to 1939

"In the mid-1890s, Colt redesigned the cartridge. They reduced the entire diameter of the bullet to 0.386"OD and lengthened the brass case in order to put both the bullet and its lubrication inside the case. The overall length of both loaded cartridges was about the same. The barrel of the revolver was reduced slightly to match the more popular 38-40 at 0.400"-0.401” groove diameter (this was probably done for manufacturing reasons, not accuracy reasons). This meant that the outside diameter (OD) of the new bullet was smaller than the barrel’s bore, let alone its groove diameter. A hollow-base bullet can be dropped down the bore by gravity alone. The newer soft lead bullet was made with a large hollow base, like Civil War Minié balls. The intent was for the base of the bullet to expand with the pressure of the burning gunpowder to grip the rifling."

I like the oldies...
this is a fun read on the .41

http://harryo.sixshootercommunity.org/

 

I'd appreciate your opinions on whether it's safe to shoot my 1900 mfd .41 Colt SAA, SN193XXX, with modern-day commercial ammo?

It's my understanding that SAAs mfd after 1898 are said to be safe to shoot with smokeless powder (allowing that there are no visible flaws in the gun).

I don't reload, but I'd really like to shoot this beautiful old SAA with store-bought ammo.

Looking forward to your opinions and/or similar experiences.

View attachment 94703

Well, looks like you've decided not to fire it, and so be it. And not trying to persuade you otherwise, but just to point out (as have others) that reloading is not nec. even if you wish to stick to BP. There are factory BP loads (Buffalo Bros. and GAD I believe, here is a link to the BB though currently out of stock and quite pricey).

Still, you did say you really wanted to fire it so I thought it worth pointing out. And yes, sounds like it should be safe for smokeless, and yes, I think I'd err on the side of caution there as well and skip it.

Thanks for sharing this beauty with us, the pic has made my slide show of SAAs that I occasionally run for my own enjoyment (mostly images pirated from this board).