1851 Navy arrived today - little problem

[eagle24]

My Uberti 1851 Navy arrived today. This is my first Uberti and I was pleased with the overall fit and finish. It seems a notch above my Pietta revolvers. I love the feel of the Navy. Everything seemed to function the way it should, so I set in tearing it apart for a good cleaning. Tear down went fine. I washed everything well, coated with bore butter and put it in the oven on 200 for about 15 minutes. I wiped everything down, lubed, and reassembled the revolver. Everything went without a hitch until I put the barrel wedge back in. Light thumb pressure on the barrel wedge and it locks up tight as a drum. I think it is the forcing cone being wedged tight against the cylinder. Not sure what I need to do to cure it??? Should I just shoot is some and see if it loosens up?

 

[pohill]

If the wedge is pushed in too far it will bind the cylinder. In an old Colt patent that I read, it said that the wedge screw on the left side of the barrel, (right side on a Walker) was actually used as a depth set or check for the wedge so it wouldn't go in too far. Try backing that screw out a little.
I'm just curious (and not judging) - why do you put the gun in the oven?

 

[Dithsoer]

I bet that most of the people who respond to you aren't really going to get exactly what you mean. They will say, "back the wedge out a bit" or "the wedge doesn't need to be driven all of the way in", "it will wear in to a proper fit", etc. I know because I just went through the same problem. You barely put the wedge in and it binds the cylinder, right? Way too much of the wedge sticks out on the right side and in order to make the gun function properly the wedge on the left side just sticks out about even with the wedge spring tip. I had this very same problem and I just couldn't get the point across to people that this was not normal. I'm not disparaging the people on this site. In fact, if ANYONE gets the point it will be the High Road members who frequent the black powder section. What I'm referring to are customer service representatives. I tried several (non-High Road) sources for help but just couldn't seem to get the problem across to them.
Did you get the gun from Buffalo Arms? I tried explaining the problem to them but couldn't get it across. The problem is the back of the barrel where the forcing cone is, the part that rides close to the cylinder has not been properly stoned. I sent mine back in and the owner personally handled it and their gunsmith confirmed that this was the problem. Buffalo Arms informed me that they received several Cimarron/Uberti 1851 Navies with this very same problem (all in the same shipment). As the owner put it, the slightest pressure on the wedge and it locks the gun up tighter than snot. However, they were very courteous and took care of the situation. You can try stoning the back of the barrel yourself on a flat India-style stone until you get a proper fit, but if you mess it up, then you risk voiding your warranty and having to pay for a new barrel or to have the seller fix it.
Then again, you may have an entirely different problem and I didn't understand you right.

 

[pohill]

If I misunderstood, and it is a defect in the gun, I would send it back before I did any tabletop gunsmithing that might void the warranty. I know that Taylors will repair or replace an Uberti gun that they sold.

 

[eagle24]

I'm just curious (and not judging) - why do you put the gun in the oven?

I washed it in warm soapy water. Dried it off, coated with bore butter, and put it in the oven for 15 or so minutes to get rid of any moisture. Been doing it for a few years with my Remington, seems to work well and not a trace of rust.

Dithsoer,
You hit it on the head. If I loosely replace the wedge it binds. I have to push the wedge back out until the spring tip is against the frame to loosen it. There is absolutely NO gap between the forcing cone and cylinder. I can probably stone the forcing cone myself if that is the fix. It should'nt be as difficult on an open top model.

 

[Dithsoer]

Do you mind me asking where you purchased the gun from? I was just wondering if the problem is specific to one seller or if it's something more generalized.

 

[Titanvk56]

Just curious, but what is the correct position of the wedge? How far should it stick out on the right side?

eagle24,Your case color on the frame looks real nice...mine is kinda thin.

 

[pohill]

I push the wedge in far enough so that the tip of the wedge spring latches onto the exit slot edge. I know this doesn't always work, but it's a rule I try to follow. I made the mistake with my first BP gun of pushing the wedge in way too far and it peened the metal edge of the exit slot.
Speaking of wedge springs, it's interesting to note that the first gun Colt designed, the Paterson, and his last, the 1862 Pocket Police, do not have springs on the wedges. Not sure what that means ( I don't have an 1862 Pocket Navy so I don't know if they have one).

I wish I could examine an original Colt, in original condition, to see exactly how the wedge was meant to fit. The originals that I've seen always seem to have a nice, tight barrel/frame fit with no wiggle. Better made, better metals, harder metals, softer metals?

 

[StrawHat]

My take on the "correct" position for the wedge is that it is driven in to the spot where the cylinder gap is as fine as you want it and the cylinder still turns.

Colts used a wedge so the inevitable changes could be taken up as the piece wore in/out.

The idea of interchangeable parts was in it's tweens if not still it's infancy. Many things that we "control" today, such as barrel cylinder gap, were not considered 150 years ago.

The replicas are realistically made as well as the old models.

By modern standards they are crude, so are the originals.

And the modern shooter is inclined to use the piece more in a year than many of the originals were used in a lifetime. Even including the war.

I well remember how much work it was getting the revolvers to shoot back in the 60s and 70s. Much of the same things shooters are going through with todays replicas. The originals needed as much tuning as the replicas do today.

 

[pohill]

And the modern shooter is inclined to use the piece more in a year than many of the originals were used in a lifetime. Even including the war.

Good point. We do tend to shoot the heck out of these guns.
I know we have more advanced methods of manufacturing today but are today's metals that much different than they were back in the 1860s? If so, in what way?

 

[Mausermike]

Before the Bessemer process was invented in the 1850's, steel was a very expensive and difficult to make commodity. Suffice it to say that metallurgy was in its infancy in relative terms to today's knowledge in materials science.

 

[eagle24]

Do you mind me asking where you purchased the gun from? I was just wondering if the problem is specific to one seller or if it's something more generalized.

Mine came from The Possibles Shop. No doubt this is a manufacturers problem. I'm still happy with the quality of the revolver. This does'nt freak me out at all, and I'm not planning to send it back. On my Piettas, I've always just jumped in and done what was needed to make them shoot well, or improve the fit of parts. My recent new 1860 Army required some file work to the grip frame and several spots needed deburring. I expect I will remedy this problem, I just want to see what some of the more experienced folks suggest.

 

[Rebel Dave]

I recently got one of these same 51s from the possible shop, with the same wedge problem. I "honned" the backside of the wedge, (side facing barrel), till it went in not quite as far as the screw, then on the left side, the wedge sticks out about 1/8th in. works good, cylinder does not drag on the forcing cone.. I figure the wedge is a replacable part, so I worked on it, I used 400 grit oxide paper to hone it, and kept checking it for fit, whilst honning. I allways use a craftsman plastic mallet to install/remove wedges.

All in all the .44 51 Navy from possible shop is a nice pistol, and I think well worth the $165.00 price, it's also made by Pietta.

Rebel Dave (still unreconstucted).

 

[eagle24]

All in all the .44 51 Navy from possible shop is a nice pistol, and I think well worth the $165.00 price, it's also made by Pietta.

Mine is the .36 London Navy made by Uberti.

 

[Old Fuff]

Back during the 1800's when Colt made these revolvers, certain parts were serial numbered because they were hand fitted, and it was important that they come back together after the parts were blued, plated, case hardened or whatever and assembled into the finished gun. Usually these parts were:

Frame
Backstrap
Trigger Guard
Stocks
Cylinder
Barrel
Base Pin
Wedge

Yup, the wedge. It is sometimes speculated that when an unnumbered wedge is found in an original gun it is likely an old (or sometimes new) replacement.

Since the wedges in the clones I've looked at don't have numbered wedges I suspect they are individually fitted. This could explain a lot of things.

 

[eagle24]

Since the wedges in the clones I've looked at don't have numbered wedges I suspect they are individually fitted. This could explain a lot of things.

Thanks for chiming in. So I need to work on the wedge pin rather than the forcing cone?

 

[Rebel Dave]

I would not work on the forcing cone end of barrel, this will make barrel shorter and you cannot put metal back on , if you take too much off. Wedges are replacable.


Rebel Dave (still unreconstructed)

 

[scrat]

I Had the same problem with my WALKER when i first got it. If i pushed the Wedge all the way in the cylinder would not move at all. What i did was backed out the wedge until i could barely move the cylinder. Then i took it apart. The front of the cylinder and the rear of the barrel were tighter than ever. On a flat surface with a very fine file i filed down the front of the cylinder almost about 2 thousands of an inch. Then i did a light file on the wedge. On the left side. Now the wedge goes in and the cylinder rotates freely.

 

[eagle24]

Talked to Don at The Possibles Shop this morning. He referred me to Tommy, the gunsmith at Taylor & Company. Tommy said Uberti was making them tight, especially the Walkers and 51's, so that they would remain tight down the road. I'm going to stone (polish) the forcing cone and cylinder face and shoot it. I'm not going to try to cure the binding by removing material, but rather just polish the tooling marks out. I think it will loosen up after some shooting. I can bind my 1860 Pietta if I push the pin in really tight, but this one binds without trying. Thanks for all the input.

Oh, BTW, the comment I made about there being NO gap between the forcing cone and cylinder was'nt too well thought out. There is'nt supposed to be since the cylinder has no bushing to hold it off the forcing cone.......DUH!

 

[Omnivore]

I read here on THR that the wedge should be tapped in, such that you cannot push it out by hand. Distance (or wedge position) would then be a matter of individual fit. I've always used that as the standard, and it's always worked very well for this gun. My Pietta '51 assembles and shoots wonderfully. The cylinder gap is a little wider than I find on current S&Ws, which I figure is appropriate for a BP gun.

I also read here on THR that baking the parts after cleaning is a good way to remove all traces of moisture. I've done it ever since and it works for me. It also means you can grease the parts down afterward, before assembly and the (Bore Butter in my case) melts into the nooks and crannies very well when the parts are hot. I use 150 Deg F, but who's counting.

I find I use more and more lube as I shoot more-- the more lube, the longer I can go at the range without fouling problems.

Trivial side note: The Uberti has the ram screw on the loading lever going in from the right. The Pietta ram screw goes in from the left. Seems odd that something so arbitrary is not being done per factory original. Or did Colt do it both ways?

 

[Tommygunn]

The Uberti has the ram screw on the loading lever going in from the right. The Pietta ram screw goes in from the left. Seems odd that something so arbitrary is not being done per factory original. Or did Colt do it both ways?

Colt apparantly did it both ways. There were 4 basic versions of the 1851 Navy showing some differences.
My first 1851 was an Armi San Marco and had the screw in question enter from the right. Then Pietta had it on the left -- and I have a Uberti from the left. I bought a Uberti 1851 London recently with it in from the right, so I notice Uberti has for some reason changed it. Don't really know why ... but both are apparantly accurate.