Colt Barrel Alignment

Status
Not open for further replies.
My whole point in all of this isn't to be "all knowing" but just to identify problems folks have with the revolvers of our hobby. After identifying a problem, (whether with a new copy or just a "would this be better?), I try to offer a " fix" for it and most of them are tried and proven methods that I don't ever lay any type of claim for. Not even the lug lock mentioned in posts above because I'm sure it's been done before. I just want to make our hobby more enjoyable for those that are serious about it.

I don't mind folks disagreeing with me either, there are always other opinions, ideas . . that's how we learn. But, when it comes to pointing fingers and insinuating unfounded and untrue actions about folks, that's a little over the line (whether here or elsewhere).

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
Follow me on Instagram @ goonsgunworks
 
I used to drool over the 2nd Model Dragoon (like the squared trigger guard) but really like the history of the Walker, both for the TX Rangers, but also for Colt. That gun is why we have Colts
Click to expand...

I agree there that the Walker is THE revolver to own and a lot of people think so also. Recently there were 2 Walker Colts on Gunbroker, one a Second Generation the other a Third Generation and people were going nutso over them. Both were well over a grand before I lost track of them so I didn't see the final price, but there were a lot of bidders on both.
 
Denster,
The newer Uberti's do have a tapper or slant cut, don't know what year the 2 that I measured were but, the Piettas (new CM,CN) do not. The slot in their arbor (as I said before) and as far as I know always has been cut from both sides and the left over is filed down and becomes the front surface for the wedge to bare against. That being said, it's a fairly small surface and my 1/4" flat faced set screw is as much a surface as any and works equally well in Piettas and Ubertis!
Just so others know, I just measured a CM dated Pietta that's ready to go and according to the thickness on each side from tip of the arbor to the slot, the tapper would have been opposite from the tapper of the wedge. So, thankfully, the protruding portion left from the slot being cut was the surface needed, not the assumed tapper.

Either way, it's a moot point since I know now that the original design is a straight through cut leaving a fairly small vertical surface for the wedge to contact (left front to be exact).
That means neither modern copy is correct today so mine is as right (or wrong) as either!!


Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
Follow me on Instagram @ goonsgunworks
 
Just want clarification, what Denster is agreeing with is that the arbor should be bedded. What he is disagreeing with is that a set screw should be put in the arbor's wedge slot. Is that the gist of it?
 
LP,
He says my adjustable bearing takes away the tapper in the slot that the wedge would fully contact (Uberti's factory setup). I understand what he is saying. My point is, the Piettas have a smaller contact area than my screw and my screw works in either make of revolver in question (and in those no longer made).

Now that I know that the originals were cut straight through, it's really a moot point.

Some want to argue no matter what . . . .

So I think you are correct.

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
Follow me on Instagram @ goonsgunworks
 
Lonesome Pigeon. I agree with bedding the arbor, when needed, always with Uberti. The arbor needs to bottom in it's recess at the same time the barrel lug meets the frame. No argument there never has been.
Dragoon. Uberti has always had the taper in the end of the arbor. As for Pietta yes there are cuts from both sides leaving a 1/4" pad in the center. That pad tapers across it's length by .012 in the correct direction and corresponds to the taper of the wedge.
Your method of putting a set screw in the end of the arbor, with as you have previously stated has a rounded end, provides only a minuscule point of contact with the wedge. While it is an improvement over guns that are cut straight across ie: Palmetto, SanMarco etc. because it puts the point of contact on the center line of the arbor rather than on one edge. It is still not as effective as the opposing incline plane wedge pack that Colt intended.
While I am at it on other work you do.
The cap pin is effective and some would consider it necessary.
The .002 barrel cylinder gap goes against common thinking but is correct and is the way it should be. Does as much to cut down binding from fouling as did Colt's recess in the arbor which is only vestigial at best on most replicas.
The hammer stop and bolt block are nice particularly if one engages in cowboy shooting doing a lot of fast cocking.
As I said earlier I can agree when I think you are right but not when I think you are wrong.
 
If you inspect a number of original Colt open-top C&B revolvers you will find that the cylinder pin/arbor is usually stamped with a partial serial number up near the wedge slot. This is because they were individually fitted in each revolver prior to being case hardened. As raw parts arbors were made in several different lengths to allow assemblers to insure the arbor bottomed in the barrel's hole - or close to it.
 
The set screws are flat for the most part to get rid of the cutting surface. I round the edge to prevent the same thing. I use a 1/4" screw for almost all of them now except for the small pocket revolvers. This gives more than enough surface area to keep the wedge in place and to do its job.

Old Fuff is correct as the arbors do indeed bottom out.



As far as the original arbor, I measured meticulously and the cut is absolutely NOT tappered. So again, the surface area is as much as needed and my Dragoons and '60 are witness to it.
The correction of the arbor sometimes leaves the wedge opening too large and welding would be an option (along with much more cost) but my adjustable bearing is sufficient and cost effective and I will continue to to use the method for my service.

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
Follow me on Instagram @ goonsgunworks
 
OK this isn't getting us anywhere. You've explained your side I've explained mine. Folks can make up their own minds.
I'm sure you measured that original with the same degree of care that you measured those six new Uberti and Piettas a year or so ago.
Wedges were meant to be a wear part though it would take an awful long time to wear out a properly fit one.
No matter how you finish the end of that set screw it is bearing against a tapered surface and only making minuscule contact.
 
Hellgate, hope you don't leave. But , a feller has to stand up for what he does/believes.

Denster,
You're right, I don't care about convincing you. We'll just have to agree to disagree.
I have over a hundred satisfied customers at this point and hundreds of revolvers out there doing there thing so . . . . . I'm happy, they're happy, that's it!

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
Follow me on Instagram @ goonsgunworks
 
Hellgate, you don't have to unsubscribe. You can just ignore us. Or you can just fade into the dust with your last post and not allow us to appreciate any good information you may have to help all of us out on this forum. This is not a competetive modern gun forum where everyone tries to outdo everyone else with whose 1911 is better than another's.

I appreciate any and all posts/comments on these BP forums as I find that I learn (for better or worse) what folks have to offer. You and I can ignore anything that does not fit within our circle, but other folks might be enlightened by the information provided.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Thanks expat,
That's one reason I tried to stay "in depth" somewhat with explanations so folks that hadn't seen these issues before could understand what we are talking about. These are Learning posts for someone on the side sidelines.

Mike
www.goonsgunworks
Follow me on Instagram @ goonsgunworks
 
Mike, you are presactly correct (if I can make a funny here to lighten it all up).

I have no idea why someone would denounce the work you do. You have come up with some very innovative stuff, and I am waiting to see what your Lug Lock is.

I have never had any work done by you, but I'll go by the testimonies of others who have had work done by you, and also repeat customers that send additional guns to have you work on them. That should say a bunch for Mike's (your) reputation. Your practices are soundly based upon your knowledge of open top Colts and replicas of such.

There are always nitpickers that look for 110% perfection, which we all know is a fantasy.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer nor a paid spokesman for Goon.

He is just a helluva nice guy and a very proficient gunsmith.

Good night, all!

Jim
 
So Mike, me and OP have talked a quite a bit about these Colts. He really likes the Ubertis, but I chose Pietta for a couple reasons. One of the biggest being that I intend to build a shooting "system" based around the 1860, the first part of which being the snub nose with thunderer grip I recently got from Taylors.

Everyone seems to agree that Pietta largely took care of the arbor problems in the newer stuff ( I am assuming this was done when they switched over to CNC?) My issue though will not be JUST in keeping the same gun at POI, but also the different VERSIONS of that gun... IE: I need to keep my 3" barrel shooting the same place after cleaning and reassmbling, but I also need that same frame to shoot in the same place with an 8" as did last time it wore an 8" and likewise a carbine set up...

So.. Is this too much to ask for out of the box? I am HOPING to be able to send the whole kit and kaboodle your way, once I have it assembled, but that could take quite awhile... What can I expect from two or three different barrel lengths until then? And would it help if I used the same wedge for all the barrels?
 
Stormin,
Shouldn't be a problem, I would need all the barrel assys. so they could be fitted and all have the same bbl/cyl clearance.

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
Follow me on Instagram @ goonsgunworks

BTW, each barrel would have its own wedge.
 
Last edited:
A couple of statements confuse me, as they seem to conflict with what I think I know about the factory fitting of the arbor on the percussion revolvers (I don't have an original open top conversion).

As I understand it, the arbor was made without the slot. It was screwed tightly into the frame at the back, then the locator hole drilled and the pin driven in. If the arbor stuck out at the rear, it was filed off.

Then the front of the arbor, which was made long, was trimmed down with a tool that cut the arbor a little at a time until the barrel fit and lined up with the gauge (the cylinder was fitted later). Then, the slot was cut with a drill and a broach and the wedge fitted. The barrel could not "sit back too far", nor could the arbor be "moved back" unless the pin was drilled out and the arbor was re-threaded and turned in a half turn, which would throw off the interface of the barrel and the arbor as well as the position of the slot.

Jim
 
Jim

It sounds like you have read Colt's "Application of machinery to the manufacture of rotating breech firearms".
You've stated the process pretty much correctly as far as you went. Actually the position of the arbor was the reference for all of the machining dimensions of the receiver.
Not sure which statements you are referring to that you find in conflict.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Favor from Colt BP owners
Replies
20
Views
1K
Crawdad1
Crawdad1
K
  • Locked
Barrel Cylinder Gap
Replies
2
Views
626
mykeal
M
ClemBert
  • Locked
Adjusting cylinder gap on a Colt type BP revolver?
2
Replies
33
Views
11K
Norton Commando
N
D
  • Locked
Cylinder gap and accuracy
Replies
6
Views
1K
Roswell 1847
R
N
  • Locked
Arbor Shim for Dragoon
Replies
15
Views
1K
Norton Commando
N
Back
Top