Question about open top hammer position and sight picture

Status
Not open for further replies.

BCRider

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
7,853
Location
Pacific North"Wet" Coast of Canada
So I've got a .36 caliber brass framed '51 that I've sold to a club mate. The gun is in really nice shape but it has/had a few issues. Which may explain why I got it for pretty cheap. I'm trying to correct the sight picture for the guy since the front sight is barely visible over the "horizon" of the rear edge of the barrel.

It's able to shoot now (hammer would not stay cocked before due to a badly rounded trigger sear edge. Made and heat treated a new trigger) but the hammer comes so far back to correctly lock up the cylinder for firing that the notch in the end of the hammer is seeing mostly the top of the barrel and very little of the front sight.

If the hammer did not need to come back so far it would be fine. Even about 8 to 10° less would leave the end of the hammer about .03" higher and up where it could work just fine. But if it is that far up the cylinder doesn't lock up worth a hoot. So does this mean that it really needs a new longer hand so the hammer does not need to come back so far? Of course then I'd need to alter the sear to "catch" the hammer at this new point. But that would be fine since the new trigger would have a longer sear than needed for this new condition. I'd have to check where the "click" for the hand reset occurs though. if there's enough room then I'd be fine with a longer hand.
 
could you use a v file and take some off the sight notch to get a better view.

The issue is that the top of the notch is already too low. I'd forgotten that I can post pictures straight to THR from my 'puter. Here's a sketch of the problem....

1851 sight line.JPG

And to make things worse the gun is still shooting slightly low so we need to skim off a few thousandths from the front sight still. Now there's two ways I can see to correct this. The first, which I tossed out in jest, was to mill out a groove on the top of the barrel.... :D The other which it seems like I'll have to do is fit a new hand that is slightly longer then trim the sear finger until the hammer catches the sear just before the hand goes into lockup against the bolt.

Am I out to lunch on this? is there another way?

As it is now with the barrel occluding much of the sight is that it's very difficult and takes a lot of time to catch the sight picture. And in lower light it would be downright difficult to the point of impossible.
 
What make is the revolver and when was it made?
There should be a 2 letter proof date code stamped inside of a small box on the side of the frame, or Roman numerals.

It may be possible to dovetail a rear sight on to the back end of the barrel and forget about using the hammer notch entirely.
That's been done before resulting in good accuracy.
Then if a new front sight is needed you can always install that too. o_O
 
Last edited:
.......It may be possible to dovetail a rear sight on to the back end of the barrel and forget about using the hammer notch entirely.......

Now that's an option I had not considered. I like that idea too. If I did it that way I guess the other trick would be to cut down the hammer's tip a bit so it's no longer part of the sight picture.

As mentioned the other option, which I'm OK with, is a new longer hand and fit things so the hand and bolt "lock up" the cylinder with the hammer at a slightly more vertical angle. Then trim the sear finger of the trigger to just engage at that point.

I don't have the gun here. He's taken possession of it and there's a bit of legal issues up this way related to getting it back to my place when it's his gun. But it is an older Euroarms. Unlike down in the US black powder reproduction revolvers up this way are treated the same as any modern handgun.
 
You’re might also try fitting a new hand and trigger. Slightly longer hand will reach lockup with less travel of the hammer. That’s what I would do before adding rear sights or raising the front sight.


D’oh!!! I need to remember to read every post before sticking my number 13eee in my pie hole.
 
No problem, all thoughts are good.

While driving home from dinner and a visit with a couple of friends I've already decided to "do it right" and get a new hand. Or possibly make a new hand since making the new trigger out of tool steel wasn't all that big a deal. And it's not like I don't have a pattern to work from. Just need to arrange so I can borrow it back for a week or so. And I only need the new hand since the new trigger I did will need to be made shorter, not longer. So no "metal stretcher" needed.... :D
 
BC,you can stretch the hand you have. First get the trigger/sear length right. Stretch the hand by first removing the spring, heat it red hot and hammer a piece of drill shank against one side and then the other (it'll sorta pinch it longer). Quinch it, clean it up, install the spring (now would be a good time to drill the frame and install a coil and pushrod !) test it. Hopefully, it's too long so you can "fit" it. If it's too short, pinch it again. When it's right or too long, you should harden it.

Mike
 
Thanks Mike. As it happens I've got just the right sort of hammer for this idea. An 8oz cross peen hammer commonly used for starting small brad nails by hand. But that hammer in conjunction with a suitable round pin "anvil" just as you're suggesting would do the job in a fine manner. It's only going to take a couple of thou of stretch too so that's an option.
 
Euroarms seems to back in business with the old machinery? At least thats what I understand?

Have they started producing replacement parts yet? If so that seems to be easiest route?
 
Is your trigger the same as the factory trigger ? Just a slight difference in length from the pivot to the tip of the sear could make a difference in how far the hammer sits back. You can probably order a new trigger pretty cheap and check it. I wouldn't think it came when at full cock you couldn't see the front sight.
 
Is your trigger the same as the factory trigger ? Just a slight difference in length from the pivot to the tip of the sear could make a difference in how far the hammer sits back. You can probably order a new trigger pretty cheap and check it. I wouldn't think it came when at full cock you couldn't see the front sight.

I made the new trigger using the original as a sample. But knowing it had to be fitted I did make it a few thou longer. But when put into the gun even being a touch long it turned out to cock well and that the hand was holding the cylinder against the bolt in the correct "lockup". So clearly the gun was not set up well to start with.

The original problem was that some previous owner had rounded the sear too much to try to lighten and crispen up the trigger. But they got carried away and it would not hold the cocked position reliably. As in hardly at all. Usually failing to stay cocked. So not safe and not usable at all. I gave it a proper angle but that meant stoning away a bit of material and the cylinder lockup was very sloppy as a result. So that was why the new trigger which was made about .03 longer. But with the hand being too short it needed all of that to give an acceptable lock up... .but also sadly left me with the trouble noted here.

So that's why the thread. And why after some considerations I'm going to go with either stretching the existing hand or buy a new oversize hand and fit it such that the hammer has a good sight picture then fit the trigger to suit the new hammer's cocking position.... at least my new hammer isn't a waste. Being too long it's easy enough to remove metal. No need for the "metal stretcher" this time.... :)
 
Is your trigger the same as the factory trigger ? Just a slight difference in length from the pivot to the tip of the sear could make a difference in how far the hammer sits back. You can probably order a new trigger pretty cheap and check it. I wouldn't think it came when at full cock you couldn't see the front sight.

Thats what I was thinking. The sear on the new trigger is way to long and holding the hammer in an over cocked position so its too low on the sight. I don't think the hand would have any effect on that part. the hand just rotates the cylinder into position.
 
Ratshooter,
If the cyl locks up at full cock now ( the hammer is in an over travel position.), when shortening the hammer travel, the hand will obviously be short. Full cock engagement defines " length of cycle ", everything else is fitted accordingly.

Mike
 
Do you have a link to their site? Very interesting.

Jim

Searched but not finding anything yet... I do remember there being pictures floating around the net awhile back though of what the new offerings would be whenever they do restart production. Im thinking it was about a year ago or a little less? Maybe they just havent gotten back up and running yet, but I do distinctly remember wondering at the time if they would offer parts and if the new parts would be compatible with the old... Would help a lot of people out if they did.
 
Ratshooter,
If the cyl locks up at full cock now ( the hammer is in an over travel position.), when shortening the hammer travel, the hand will obviously be short. Full cock engagement defines " length of cycle ", everything else is fitted accordingly.

Mike

Eggzactly how I understood it to be too. Which caught me off guard when the deliberately over length trigger sear on the new trigger actually was able to lock up. I'm a bit embarrassed to admit that I didn't actually sight over the hammer and front sight at the time. The new owner and I only found out about this at the range during his first day out to shoot the gun.

The only other possible reason why it does lock up is if the hand is being pushed out of the pawl and riding over the pawl. But there's nothing felt through the hammer to indicate that this is a possible situation.

The hand is pushed directly by the hammer's movement and is mounted to the hammer. So both things need to be finely in tune so the hand just presses the cylinder against the bolt as the sear ticks into place to hold the hammer back. It's a very finely tuned setup. And clearly if the hand is not stopping the overly long sear from coming into engagement then it's either too short or it's skipping up and over the pawl teeth and riding past.
 
Ratshooter,If the cyl locks up at full cock now ( the hammer is in an over travel position.), when shortening the hammer travel, the hand will obviously be short. Full cock engagement defines " length of cycle ", everything else is fitted accordingly.

I agree with that 100% and it makes perfect sense. It sounds like the hand is short and the hammer is overcocked making the sights too low. But it also sounds like the OP has a handle on it. I bet he gets it working. Its neat how every part interacts with every other part. And they all have to be as designed to work correctly. These may be primitive guns but there was nothing primitive about the genius that went into the design and execution of them.
 
Neat in one way but a curse in others. Due to how things stack up in this style of design it's a good reason why we don't see such designs being mass produced for really cheap. Although with today's ability to hold tighter tolerances perhaps we COULD see a return of a good single action revolver that doesn't require a lot of hand fitting.

The design really is amazing and inspired when you consider the thinking that went into making just those few small parts do all that stuff in a precise order and timing. It may require some careful hand work to make them function optimally but the fact that they can be made to do so is just icing on the cake.

Things are set up and I'll be picking up the gun later tonight. I think I'm going to start with Mike's idea of some "micro blacksmithing" :). But if that doesn't work out then I'll take the hour drive out and back to pick out and buy a new hand which is oversized and work it down.

Stay tuned to this Bat time and Bat station for more news as it happens.... :D
 
Now that's an option I had not considered. I like that idea too. If I did it that way I guess the other trick would be to cut down the hammer's tip a bit so it's no longer part of the sight picture.

As mentioned the other option, which I'm OK with, is a new longer hand and fit things so the hand and bolt "lock up" the cylinder with the hammer at a slightly more vertical angle. Then trim the sear finger of the trigger to just engage at that point.

I don't have the gun here. He's taken possession of it and there's a bit of legal issues up this way related to getting it back to my place when it's his gun. But it is an older Euroarms. Unlike down in the US black powder reproduction revolvers up this way are treated the same as any modern handgun.
Perhaps he can ship frame and internals seperate and it would be as shipping parts not complete gun.
 
Perhaps he can ship frame and internals seperate and it would be as shipping parts not complete gun.

That won't work because I have to have the frame and cylinder to test the fit and travel of the hand and later on the fit of the trigger to cock the hammer just a whiff before the cylinder is locked up between the hand and the bolt. The fit of the stuff in these Colt style guns really is all done in sort of a "chain" with each fit relying on the fits of the other things around it.

Sorry I didn't get back to this until now. Been busy with other things for the past week and a bit. Did a bit more on it last night though.

So clearly the hand was too short requiring the hammer to need to move too far back. Turned out that the old hand was soft enough to cold work it. But cross peening it to make it longer wasn't enough. I managed to beat about an extra .015 or so out of it but needed another 20 thou or so. So I made one out of some O1 ground stock and cut off the end of a drill for the proper size pin. Drilled undersize and press fitted together with some Loctite 680. The hand is fitted now and the cylinder is going into lockup with the hammer's nose high enough now that we've got a better sight picture. So now I just need to shorten the trigger's sear by a little to achieve hammer cock right at or just a whiff before the pressure point of cylinder lockup... and install a new taller front sight since we likely filed off too much before due to the low rear notch condition... The fun never ends.... :D

First time I've fitted a long hand. Learned a lot. Mike, if you're reading this either nod in agreement or toss in anything I might have missed.....

First off it has to be short enough to catch the proper pawl.... it started WAY over length to be sure. I shortened it so it caught on the proper pawl. But it was "right there" and I couldn't cock the hammer back because there was no clearance to let the hammer rotate back far enough to retract the bolt. Three or four trimmings with each getting noticeably closer and I felt just a slight "tick" of the bolt not quite being totally out of the way. One more light lick of the file and I was getting a nice smooth retraction THEN pawl push. This maximized the lift of the hand and minimized the rotation of the hammer so now the sight picture is where it should be... but just barely since a bit of the nose was filed off by a previous owner.. which is part of the problem.

So now I just need to shorten the trigger sear a touch to let the hammer cock just at or a slight whiff before the cylinder locks up between the hand and bolt.

I'm aiming for the "whiff before" due to the bolt being a touch loose in the frame and allowing the cylinder to very slightly rotate past center. It's still good for the hammer to fall in cleanly but I figure that if I leave it with just a barely felt rotational float of about half to one degree that it might self center the chamber to the barrel to a better degree. Or at least let the forcing cone do its job.... Sound about right for the circumstances?

Oh, I called my buddy that bought it and asked if he wanted to come back over and watch again. He was keen when we made the new trigger so he could learn more about the gun. This time around he wouldn't have made it for a few days and said to just go ahead. But then he asked me why I don't just buy a new part. And this is where the Home Shop Machinist's thought process kicks in and I reply " Well, I'd still have to fit the new part. And it's a 45 minute drive each way. And it'll cost probably $15 to $20 for the part plus about $10 for gas. And in that same amount of time or less I can make the part for free from stuff I already have on hand". I could almost hear him shaking is head in wonder over that... .:D

Got to go out for the day so I'm hoping I can trim the trigger sear tomorrow and get the job finished and this gun working well again. It was part of a pair I had to buy to get the really nice .44. The intent was always to sell it and finally it's happening. But between some work the .44 needed and the issues with this .36 I can now see why I got them for so cheap. To be fair the seller did tell me about a couple of the things. But I had no idea it would take all this to get this one running correctly. A good learning process but it's not like I don't have other projects....
 
That won't work because I have to have the frame and cylinder to test the fit and travel of the hand and later on the fit of the trigger to cock the hammer just a whiff before the cylinder is locked up between the hand and the bolt. The fit of the stuff in these Colt style guns really is all done in sort of a "chain" with each fit relying on the fits of the other things around it.

Sorry I didn't get back to this until now. Been busy with other things for the past week and a bit. Did a bit more on it last night though.

So clearly the hand was too short requiring the hammer to need to move too far back. Turned out that the old hand was soft enough to cold work it. But cross peening it to make it longer wasn't enough. I managed to beat about an extra .015 or so out of it but needed another 20 thou or so. So I made one out of some O1 ground stock and cut off the end of a drill for the proper size pin. Drilled undersize and press fitted together with some Loctite 680. The hand is fitted now and the cylinder is going into lockup with the hammer's nose high enough now that we've got a better sight picture. So now I just need to shorten the trigger's sear by a little to achieve hammer cock right at or just a whiff before the pressure point of cylinder lockup... and install a new taller front sight since we likely filed off too much before due to the low rear notch condition... The fun never ends.... :D

First time I've fitted a long hand. Learned a lot. Mike, if you're reading this either nod in agreement or toss in anything I might have missed.....

First off it has to be short enough to catch the proper pawl.... it started WAY over length to be sure. I shortened it so it caught on the proper pawl. But it was "right there" and I couldn't cock the hammer back because there was no clearance to let the hammer rotate back far enough to retract the bolt. Three or four trimmings with each getting noticeably closer and I felt just a slight "tick" of the bolt not quite being totally out of the way. One more light lick of the file and I was getting a nice smooth retraction THEN pawl push. This maximized the lift of the hand and minimized the rotation of the hammer so now the sight picture is where it should be... but just barely since a bit of the nose was filed off by a previous owner.. which is part of the problem.

So now I just need to shorten the trigger sear a touch to let the hammer cock just at or a slight whiff before the cylinder locks up between the hand and bolt.

I'm aiming for the "whiff before" due to the bolt being a touch loose in the frame and allowing the cylinder to very slightly rotate past center. It's still good for the hammer to fall in cleanly but I figure that if I leave it with just a barely felt rotational float of about half to one degree that it might self center the chamber to the barrel to a better degree. Or at least let the forcing cone do its job.... Sound about right for the circumstances?

Oh, I called my buddy that bought it and asked if he wanted to come back over and watch again. He was keen when we made the new trigger so he could learn more about the gun. This time around he wouldn't have made it for a few days and said to just go ahead. But then he asked me why I don't just buy a new part. And this is where the Home Shop Machinist's thought process kicks in and I reply " Well, I'd still have to fit the new part. And it's a 45 minute drive each way. And it'll cost probably $15 to $20 for the part plus about $10 for gas. And in that same amount of time or less I can make the part for free from stuff I already have on hand". I could almost hear him shaking is head in wonder over that... .:D

Got to go out for the day so I'm hoping I can trim the trigger sear tomorrow and get the job finished and this gun working well again. It was part of a pair I had to buy to get the really nice .44. The intent was always to sell it and finally it's happening. But between some work the .44 needed and the issues with this .36 I can now see why I got them for so cheap. To be fair the seller did tell me about a couple of the things. But I had no idea it would take all this to get this one running correctly. A good learning process but it's not like I don't have other projects....
It’s often better to be handy than handsome... I’m both so I have that going for me.
 
BC, sounds good. You can clean up the the loose "bolt in the frame " by installing a bolt block (one of the BEST things you can do for longevity!!).

Mike
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top