Rogers and Spencer

Anything muzzle loading in here. Old and new, rifles, shotguns, pistols and even cannons!

Moderator: dromia

Post Reply
Message
Author
bally796

Rogers and Spencer

#1 Post by bally796 »

Hi
I was looking at the Euroarms Rogers and Spencer London Grey and the Uberti 1858 New Army Stainless Steel why is their such a bid difference in price? is the euroarms a lot better quality.
Cheers bally
fred2892

Re: Rogers and Spencer

#2 Post by fred2892 »

Not at all, unless you're looking at the walther barrelled r&s. The r&s is a much better design though. It has a larger grip frame for a start. The rem is quite small and will give you a knuckle rap with anything approaching a decent charge. The r&s has much bigger nipple cut outs on the cylinder making it 10 times easier to get the caps on. It is much less prone to allowing spent caps into gaps and locking up the cylinder and finally the cylinder arbour is sealed much better on the r&s so you can shoot for much longer without stripping down for cleaning. I would quite happily pay more for an r&s than a rem. I've owned both models and I only have one of them now.
Jack 1

Re: Rogers and Spencer

#3 Post by Jack 1 »

Fred 2892.

Thanks for that post I'm' actually trying (very hard) to get hold of the R&S and even harder with adjustable sights. I have seen one converted to shoot Bullseye but I'm not sure if that would work. The write up says it need 14.2 grains of Bullseye behind a .44 ball which seems a lot.
Also Kranks told me Euroarms are not making the R&S any more so, they may command a higher price.

Anybody got ideas on the nitro conversion aspect?

Best

Jack
1066
Full-Bore UK Supporter
Posts: 2224
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogers and Spencer

#4 Post by 1066 »

WoW! 14.2 grains of Bullseye does sound a lot I would double check that. My target load in my .357 pistol was 3.6 grains of Bullseye and the .44 Remington nitro conversion I was having a look at yesterday had a recommended load of 4.2 grains of Herco, slower than Bullseye but by too much.
TARGETMASTER
an altogether better trickler
www.targetmasteruk.com
Jack 1

Re: Rogers and Spencer

#5 Post by Jack 1 »

Yes, thanks for that 1066. My thoughts entirely. I'm now going for a Euroarms Rogers and Spencer traditional .44 and use triple 7 powder. I understand something like 11 grains. Anybody got suggestions on the load if so I appreciate them?

Thanks again

Best

Jack
bally796

Re: Rogers and Spencer

#6 Post by bally796 »

This is the only one I have seen http://www.henrykrank.com/index.php?mai ... ts_id=7078 and the cost of the Uberti 1858 New Army Stainless Steel http://www.henrykrank.com/index.php?mai ... ts_id=7115 big price difference
Cheers Bally
Jack 1

Re: Rogers and Spencer

#7 Post by Jack 1 »

Hi Bally
Got an option on a R&S London Grey with target sights @ £450 ish. I thought the answer to comps would be a Lothar Walther barrel but, the way the standard shoots 11.2 grains of 777 that looks OK.
What I have seen are anatomical sights but can't hunt any down on the interweb. In the good old days we had Bowler grips but I don't suppose any of you guys would remember them. Only us old pharts and Jurassic handgunners.
Best
Jack
User avatar
dromia
Site Admin
Posts: 20186
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:57 am
Home club or Range: The Highlands of Scotland. Cycling Proficiency 1964. Felton & District rifle club. Teesdale Pistol and Rifle club.
Location: Sutherland and Co Durham
Contact:

Re: Rogers and Spencer

#8 Post by dromia »

I still have the Bowlers from my Webley break barrel, single shot, 22 target pistol.
Image

Come on Bambi get some

Imperial Good Metric Bad
Analogue Good Digital Bad

Fecking stones

Real farmers don't need subsidies

Cow's farts matter!

For fine firearms and requisites visit

http://www.pukkabundhooks.com/
bally796

Re: Rogers and Spencer

#9 Post by bally796 »

fred2892 wrote:Not at all, unless you're looking at the walther barrelled r&s. The r&s is a much better design though. It has a larger grip frame for a start. The rem is quite small and will give you a knuckle rap with anything approaching a decent charge. The r&s has much bigger nipple cut outs on the cylinder making it 10 times easier to get the caps on. It is much less prone to allowing spent caps into gaps and locking up the cylinder and finally the cylinder arbour is sealed much better on the r&s so you can shoot for much longer without stripping down for cleaning. I would quite happily pay more for an r&s than a rem. I've owned both models and I only have one of them now.
Thanks for that.
Bally
1066
Full-Bore UK Supporter
Posts: 2224
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogers and Spencer

#10 Post by 1066 »

Jack 1 wrote:Hi Bally
Got an option on a R&S London Grey with target sights @ £450 ish. I thought the answer to comps would be a Lothar Walther barrel but, the way the standard shoots 11.2 grains of 777 that looks OK.
What I have seen are anatomical sights but can't hunt any down on the interweb. In the good old days we had Bowler grips but I don't suppose any of you guys would remember them. Only us old pharts and Jurassic handgunners.
Best
Jack
Just a thought if you are thinking about competitions. Using adjustable sight you may have to shoot in an "open" class rather than just BP revolver class.

I had a nice Bowler grip on my S&W Mod 14 .38spec revolver. :cry:
TARGETMASTER
an altogether better trickler
www.targetmasteruk.com
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests