Colt Thunderer

atomicsauace

atomicsauace

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
97   0   0
Location
london ontario
I am thinking about getting a Colt Thunderer and would like to hear from someone that owns one.I might look for a project gun.Is there any source for reasonably priced parts?I believe Cimarron(sp?) makes a modern copy and I wonder if parts would be interchangable.I have read that the internals are somewhat delicate but what about the frames and cylinder?
 
The modern "Thunderer" and "Lightning" are single action only revolvers. I have an original "Lightning" in .38 Colt that is fully functional. If I had to find parts, I think I'd be SOL.
 
I have a couple Thunderers, both seem to work fine. Single action only, with lighter loads. If I needed parts, I may break out in tears. Hard to find, hard to work on. If you get a project gun, you may need a parts gun, and the same parts may be buggered in it too. Better to find a good gun, they are still affordable. I like the looks and feel of them.
 
I was looking at one a couple years ago and emailed a gunsmith in the states that works on colts ..... his response was that he refuses to work on them because they are such a pain in the ass .

if a guy had nothing but time , talented , nimble fingers and the willingness and ability to make the small parts needed , it might be a fun project .... kind of like doing a 10,000 piece puzzle ,with no edge pieces and a dozen assorted extra pieces found on the floor added to the box to make it extra hard .
 
That Cimarron copy is a Colt SAA clone with a Thunderer style grip, not even close to the same gun internally. You are out of luck to find replacement parts, and most likely the one you buy WILL be a project gun. Some people don't know they are DA/SA and I've seen a few for sale that were SA only listed as "works fine" and priced accordingly. I owned two and will never touch another. One I had broke hours after receiving it. I fixed it then sold it but it was a PITA. They're like a pocket watch that shoots bullets.
 
The Colt 1878's internals are still spooky to work with, and the 1878 was the improvement on the Lightning/Thunderer revolvers.


It took a while for them to get the double-action revolver down-pat, with all due respect.
 
I have an 1878 with problems. Would like to get it working. It was made 1883, and is die stamped "JP Lower". Lower was a gunsmith in Denver Colorado.
 
I am not too worried about broken parts.I'm a toolmaker and can make whatever replacement parts I might need as long as I have the broken ones to copy.Buying original parts would be best but if I had to make them at least I can use modern tool steels which would be stronger.
 
There is not much that you are going to do to make a part the size of those ones, stronger. The real challenge is in making them fit correctly. Looking at mine, I saw evidence that there was a hella lot of hand filing and stoning done, on several of the small parts.

They are about as big as will fit in the space provided.

The double spring that holds the cylinder stop lever IIRC) in place is as fine a bit of fiddly adjusting as you will see anywhere, and the length of the hammer give a fella a fine lever to bend, break, or otherwise mutilate a bunch of the small parts in the train of events that take place when the action is cycled.
The sear is a recipient of more harm than it should, if the hammer is pulled all the way back and released to fall against the sear surfaces.

Wear in the pivot pints of the cylinder latch and the trigger (?, the two pivots that come out the LH side of the frame, in any case) also adds to the slop, and thus the out-of-time problems that develop, many of which seem to be instinctively handled, by pulling harder on the trigger or hammer, to the detriment of the internal parts...

Cheers
Trev
 
I bought a Thunderer with a broken cylinder lock, missing "grasshopper spring" (its the double spring described by trevj. I bouth replacement parts from Coltparts.com and while no criticism with the supplier, I can only fire the gun double action. I think the problem may be balancing the two sides of the grasshopper spring but everything is concealed inside and certainly not conspicuous as to where the problem is. I certainly would not want to work on another Thunderer

cheers mooncoon
 
The complicated springs are the most trouble... prone to breakage and nearly impossible to find replacements. This was not Colts best design by a long shot. The 78 Colt was a lot hardier and had fewer problems.
 
Remac said:
The complicated springs are the most trouble... prone to breakage and nearly impossible to find replacements. This was not Colts best design by a long shot. The 78 Colt was a lot hardier and had fewer problems.
Click to expand...

It was a product of it's time. William Mason did the design work and layout, and was somewhat hampered, I think, by the space available in a frame that looks like a shrunken SAA.

It is not, by a very long shot, the most complicated gun I have seen of the era. There were some conversions of the Remington Rolling Block into a lever operated single shot, that would have made Rube Goldberg sit back and stammer in awe! I want to say Gemmer, but I don't think that is correct. I have a copy of the patent drawings for that one somewhere. It's truly a mechanical marvel, and you would NOT want it out in the middle of nowhere to rely upon, I figure.

Alright. Did some digging. Freund, Patent number 160762 http://www.google.com/patents/US160762

I have sat and pondered trying to set the 1877 up as a single action only, along the lines of making it a smaller SAA, but that too would take some pretty serious design work to make it happen.

They pretty much just are what they are, and a fella that cannot live with that should look elsewhere for a more ruggedly built gun if he's looking for a shooter to use on a regular basis.

Cheers
Trev
 
The Lightning / Thunderers and 1878's all sound like something I would prefer to avoid.

Is there anything more robust that is found to be chambered in 41LC? SAA only is fine.

I have a very nice 41LC hollow base mold from MP-Molds but I haven't acquired a gun for it yet.
 
1892's are better but still not a perfect design. 1889's have an exremely weak locking system. Someone will be along to say their's locks up like a Bank Vault soon.
And that would be them trying to sell it to you. Because they are still a weak system. You can make them work, but basically you can't let anyone not familiar with the design handle it. They want to grab the cylinder and wiggle it...which is bad for 89's, puts stress on their weakest point. The cylinder latch, which the revolver relies on for proper lockup.
Colt SAA is the trick...if you've 4 -5 K $ to spend, lol.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom