Chapter 2 – Facts and Figures

2.10 Not For Collectors Only – Comparative Data and Hard Facts

 

2.10   2.10.1   2.10.2   2.10.3   2.10.3.1 2.10.3.1.1 2.10.3.2 2.10.3.2.1 2.10.3.3 2.10.4

Not Collectors Only – Comparative Data and Hard Facts Comparing Centaures with 19th Century Colt 1860 Armies Qualitative Comments on Centaures Compared to Italian Colt 1860 Armies Comparing Centaures to 2nd Generation Colt 1860 Armies Comparison of the Barrel Assembly Point of Aim vs. Point of Impact Comparison of Frame and Grip Heavy Duty Centaure Mainspring Comparison of Cylinder Assembly The Difference is in the Details

 

2.10.1

Comparing Centaures with 19th Century Colt 1860 Armies

 

Thanks to the work of gunsmith FROCS #4 Rifle from the U.S.A. and master gunsmith and conversion artist FROCS #50 Luger Master from Austria we can share with you some of their current day evaluations.We apologize in advance if  you perceive all this comparative data and tables a bit on the dry side. A couple of initiates asked for it, however.

Overall measurements and dimensions: Similar to original Colts except for the S curves of the barrel lug and the bullet loading slot.

Outside fitting: It is nice on the Centaures but not as good as we are led to believe by the 1971 Stammel and 1973 Modrau paper in German gun journal Deutsches Waffen-Journal (DWJ). Better than Italians of current production in a number of areas, however.

 

Comparative Key Data	Centaures	19th Century Colt 1860 Army	Italian Colt 1860 Replicas/2nd/3rd Gen. Colt Armies
Chamber vs. rifling groove dia inch	Adjusted at .446″ for optimal accuracy	Rifling grooves ca. .451″	Rifling grooves ca. .451″
Bottomed arbor	Yes	Yes	Usually too short
Arbor contour	Early version period, then tapered or square ended w/o separate grease groove	Period	Period
Rifling of barrel	Shallow, modern	Deep, period	Deep, period
Gas leakage	Little	Significant	Significant
Backstrap	Forged, welded from 2 parts and bent over ‚til 1970; then cast	Forged, one piece	Cast
Frame-barrel transition	„Centaure step“	Period w/o step	Period w/o step

 

Barrel: Centaure pins and the depths of the hole for the arbor in the barrel are different. The distinct S curve on the side of the barrel is sharper-edged, at the same time flatter curved on the Centaures compared to 19th century Colt 1860 Armies.

Screws: They are very similar to originals and almost fit. A bit smaller, Centaure 4.0 mm vs. 1st generation 4.2 mm. Thread is similar, heads are a mite smaller. Not properly fitted and often too short.

Frame recess: Centaures too generous, hammer wobbly (too small, frame recess too big). Mechanical dimensions of hammer notches including safety notch are different.

Hammers: 1st generation Colts have fatter hammers with a pronounced S-contour of the spur compared to steep one of the Centaure, see pictures below. For further details regarding the evolution of the Centaure hammer spur check chapter 2.1.6.1.

 

2.10_1 1860 hammers: “Fat” hammer of Uberti (left) and Colt (right) with “S” contoured spur; Centaure spur is steep and narrow (3rd variation), longer hand of Centaure (center)

 

 

Hands: Centaure measurements are different, smaller pins, narrower, not compatible with 19th century Colts. Well heat treated.

Cam area: Surface of Centaure comparatively rough,

Bolt: Can be made to fit original, well heat treated.

Bolt/trigger spring: Centaure is different (longer, thicker and stronger) but can be made to fit original. Well heat treated.

Wedge: Originals are serial numbered, Centaures are not. Thinner compared to 1st generation but can be used for original. Well heat treated.

Trigger: Centaure hole not exact, quality comparable to Italians. The curve does not correspond to original.

Grip: Centaures have a good fit to metal, good quality wood is used in their making. The backstrap fits original but workmanship does not meet standard set by 1st generation.

Triggerguard: Centaure fits original but workmanship leaves something to be desired.

Arbor: Some Centaures show sloppy fit. The pin is from above through the treads. The hole for the wedge is not properly cut (too much heat treatment?). The dimensions are similar to originals but sloppy, the threads are similar. Early pistols have the square ended bottomed arbor like the original. Most later ones feature a slightly tapered arbor end fitting.

Cylinder: Centaure has a smaller diameter of the rear segment, the locking notches are cut deeper and wider, ratchets are similar to originals.

Bullet loading slot: Centaure is differently contoured compared to the 1st generation Colts. The frame-to-barrel transition of both the 1st and 2nd generation Colts is one continuous line, the Belgian features the distinct Centaure Step.

 

2.10_2 Comparing Centaure (top) to 19th century Richards (bottom): Note difference in “S“-curve of barrel lug and bullet loading slot

 

2.10_3 Typical Centaure step

 

2.10.2

Qualitative Comments on Centaures Compared to Italian Colt 1860 Armies

 

Material used is two to three times better than Italians: Frame, parts, screws are properly hardened. The barrel is very well heat treated. Centaures feature modern, shallow rifling.

Contours and measurements: Are not more exact than today’s Italian replicas. The Italians might have copied the Belgians.

Internal Quality: Tolerances are identical to slightly inferior compared to current but better than contemporary production Italians.

 

2.10.3

Comparing Centaures to 2nd Generation Colt 1860 Armies

 

Today many shooters and collectors alike consider both Centaures and 2nd gen. Colt 1860 Armies premium cap & ballers of the newly made Colt 1960 Army pattern revolvers. Hence, comparing measurements and technical features of them seems prudent.

To assess these differences two (2) Centaures of

# Early 1960 making Civilian 1st variation #C418: Round 3-screw frame, rebated cylinder, carbon steel, traditional finish, and

# Late 1972 production, namely Regular New Model Army (RNMA) 7th variation #12307: 3-screw frame with notches to attach a shoulder stock, fluted cylinder, stainless steel,

were compared to a

# 1980 production 2nd generation Colt Army 1860 #207514: 4-screw frame with notches for the attachment of a shoulder stock, fluted cylinder, carbon steel, traditional finish. The three revolvers of this comparison

The three (3) revolvers were disassembled, visually compared and the parts measured. Measurements are in mm/inch unless otherwise stated, see them pictured below.

 

2.10_4 Centaures RNMA 7th variaton #12307 from 1972 (top), Civilian 1st variation #C418 from 1960 (center) vs. 2nd gen. Colt 1860 #207514 from 1980 (bottom)

 

2.10.3.1

Comparison of the Barrel Assembly

Maker/Serial Number	Colt #207514	Centaure #C418	Centaure #12307
OAL mm/inch	220,8/8.692	220,0/8.661	210,0/8.268
Dia. at muzzle mm/inch	16,70/.657	17,20/.677	17,40/.685
Muzzle	Flat	Crownd/flat	Crowned/rounded
Rifling groove dia. inch	.458	.448	.445
Nr. of grooves in bore	7	6	8
Height of front sight mm/inch	3,30 .130	3,50 .138	4,70 .185
Front sight over bore‘ centerline mm/inch	11,70 .461	12,10 .476	13,40 .528
Wedge L x W x T mm/inch	27,10 x 13,40 x 3,40 1.066 x .528 x .134	27,10 x 14,10 x 3,40 1.066 x .555 x .134	27,30 x 14,10 x 3,20 1.075 x .555 x .126

 

2.10_5 From left comparison of muzzles Colt vs. Centaures: Note difference in crowning

 

2.10_6 From left top view comparison of wedges Colt vs. Centaures

 

2.10_7 From left bottom view comparison of wedges Colt vs. Centaures: Colt is stamped with serial number

 

2.10.3.1.1

Point of Impact vs Point of Aim

 

The Belgians designed and manufactured their Centaures to be reliable, accurate and long-lasting shooting irons, not display pistols. Hence, they were concerned about the guns being able to hit what a person was aiming at. They shoot low or to point of aim, whereas 2nd and 3rd generation Colts and Italian clones always shoot high like the originals from the 19th century.