Colt Police Positive vs PP Special Internal Parts

[Johnm1]

Are the internal parts from a Police Positive Special the same/interchangeable with the smaller Police Positive?

 

[dfariswheel]

Within the same era of production, yes.
A very early model versus a later model will have some small changes.

 

[Johnm1]

Within the same era of production, yes.

Thanks. That’s kinda what I thought. A search of parts at Jack First shows all D frame parts in the same category except for an early model category. Even in the general D frame category their are qualifications on what fits what. I should have looked there before asking my question.

I have a 1920’s era PP that will over rotate in quick double action. I had Frank Glenn (he’s close to me) fix a loose screw inside it a couple of years ago and he mentioned that I’d probably experience that. I’m probably going to bring it back to him and see if he can’t correct that. I was just wondering if there are any part sources for him to work with. Jack First makes a new hand and cylinder stop but not many other internal parts. But there are parts guns available. I’ll give him a call and see if he’s willing to give it a try.

I’m unlikely to go tinkering inside a Colt. Especially as there is a qualified Colt gunsmith close by.

 

[Johnm1]

Within the same era of production, yes.
A very early model versus a later model will have some small changes.

(Why can't I write a simple post with a simple question?)

The initial question I asked was not the correct question. I have an older, 1929, police positive and it Chambers the 32 S&W long well. Shortly after I purchased the revolver, something inside the action loosened. I know better than to Tinker with a double action Colt so I brought it to Frank Glenn here in Phoenix. It was a quick easy fix for him, but he did mention that I was likely to see the over rotation in quick double action. And that is true.

I corresponded with Frank recently to see if he could correct the over rotation and he remembered the revolver from a couple of years ago. Apparently, when the revolver was polished and reblued it was over polished on the cylinder creating the over rotation issue. He suggested a replacement cylinder and that wouldn't be a difficult thing for him to replace and time.

But the police positive is somewhat difficult to follow as far as what calbers it was available in and when. I can find the shorter cylinder (1.25") in 32 long colt but not 32 new police/32 S&W Long. The serial number dates the revolver to 1929. I copied this from the Colts formum. https://www.coltforum.com/threads/police-positive-size-difference.58075/

Police Positive was made in two frame sizes. The .32 frame which had a cylinder diameter of 1.25" and a cylinder length of 1.40". ( I think he got the 1.25 and the 1.40 reversed)

The second frame size was the .38 frame which had a cylinder diameter of 1.40" and a cylinder length of 1.40".

When I search for my serial number in the colt serial number lookup database it returns 2 possibilities

1. Year of Manufacture 1924 Model POLICE POSITIVE SPECIAL - cant be this one with a 1.25" cylinder

2. Year of Manufacture 1929 Model POLICE POSITIVE .38 CALIBER (NOT 38 SPECIAL - 1 1/4" CYLINDER LENGTH - INCLUDES POLICE POSITIVE 32 CALIBER)

My cylinder definitively measures 1.25 in Long and 1.40 in diameter. If I read through the minutiae and interpret it correctly, I think this police positive was originally chambered for the 32 Long Colt.

Is that correct?

There appears to be a disconnect between what was written in the Colt forum (possibly incorrect) and what I read in the serial number lookup.

FYI - when I say the revolver was over polished, it was polished enough to remove all of the lettering on the barrel. Other than the serial number, the only other marking left on the gun is part of the rampant Pony on the side plate. It must have been severely pitted before it was reblued. As I indicated above, the revolver Chambers and fires 32 S&W long well. It is conceivable the cylinder was originally chambered for the 32 Long Colt and it was rechambered for 32 S&W long when it was polished and blued.

I actually have dies and brass for 32 Long Colt. So iff my choice in a 1.25" cylinder is 32LC, I'm ok with that.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

If theres enough material, perhaps you could deepen the bolt/stop grooves. Sounds like that cylinder is condemned anyway, so might be worth a shot.
Also, Ive had this issue just from gunk buildup in the grooves, makes sure they are clean.

 

[Johnm1]

If theres enough material, perhaps you could deepen the bolt/stop grooves. Sounds like that cylinder is condemned anyway, so might be worth a shot.
Also, Ive had this issue just from gunk buildup in the grooves, makes sure they are clean.

Thanks @NIGHTLORD40K . The notches are perfectly clean. I don't think it has been fired enough since it was refinished to accumulate any real gunk. It looks immaculate.

When I talked with Frank he confirmed that the cylinder had been over polished. I interpreted this to mean that it had been over polished to a degree that the top of the Notch was not high enough to reliably catch the bolt. I've seen this phenomenon in other refinished revolvers. I don't believe Frank would consider deepening the notches as a fix. I assume the bolt would have to grow as well.

I don't have the wherewithal to try deepening the not hes myself. Even considering that the cylinder is toast. Remember, I'm a tinkerer not a gunsmith. Recently I have come to the conclusion that I am more of a parts swapper than a tinkerer.

The correct fix for this is a replacement cylinder. If I can find the correct one, it isn't a difficult swap nor expensive. I found a 1.25" 32 Long Colt cylinder for $49.

 

[Johnm1]

If it helps, here is a picture of the cylinder that is currently in the revolver and how it it retained.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Those actually dont look bad at all. Could be an artifact of the camera, but doesn't look overly polished either. I dont presume to know better than Frank Glenn, of course.
PP bolt notches are already very shallow. Im looking at mine and I cant SEE much difference.....
I dunno, you may just need a bolt. Also, if the leading edge of the bolt or bearing edge of the slot have a bevel worn into them, it may be possible to square them up.

Just what I would try first. Keep in mind, any used parts you find are going to have wear and may not be much better than whatcha got.

How's the lockup when you pull trigger and hold it? If the cylinder is moving around it could be a contributing factor- wobble in the shaft as well.

Just thinking aloud. You may have already hit the problem on the head.

 

[Johnm1]

I would not like to take these measurements to my grave, but if I measure the depth of The Notches they are as follows:

.046, .046, .047, .049 .043, .051,

Again, has best I can measure, the diameter of the cylinder at The Notches measures as follows:

1.397, 1.397, 1.394, 1.397, 1.400, 1.398

It is very difficult to take pictures from this angle using my microscope, but here are two pictures of the bolt. The blue you see is blue nail polish that I used to try and determine the wear pattern on the bolt. Much like a borescope, high magnification makes everything looks like it is a butchered mess. Looking at the bolt under normal magnification it does not look bad.

 

[Johnm1]

Forgot to answer your question. With the hammer down and the trigger still pulled there is no movement. It locks up tight in single action.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Gimme a sec, Ill bust out my dial calipers.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Now, the probe on my mic is square ended rather than a tiny round rod, so we may want to add a couple thousandths, but my bolt grooves are all measuring between .036 and .039. Given that your measurements are deeper, Id wager they are just fine. Likewise, my cylinder measures between 1.395 and 1.402, so I dont think excessive buffing is an issue with yours either.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

What is the height above the frame of your bolt when extended?

 

[dfariswheel]

Go with the length of the cylinder that's in the gun now.

In the early 1900's Colt generally chambered revolvers to take almost any of the very similar cartridges in the short .32 and .38 rounds.
As example, there was the .32 and .38 S&W.
Colt didn't want S&W's name on their guns, so they just changed the bullet to a flat nose and renamed them as the .32 and ..38 New Police/Police Positive.
Since the cartridges were so similar other then length, Colt usually just straight bored the chamber so any length would chamber.
So, if you have a cylinder that will accept the .32 Long, it'll also shoot the .32 short cartridges.

The First Issue Police Positive had a smooth top strap and the last barrel patent date as 1905.
The Second Issue Police Positive had a grooved top strap and a slightly heavier frame, the last patent date on the barrel as 1926.
This took the usual .32 short cartridges, and the .32 Long.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

I think I may see a problem- the outboard edge of the bolt should be perfectly flat all the way to the tip. It looks like yours is worn/beveled at the tip. Since only the very end of the bolt engages the the cylinder, this could cause skipping and over rotation.
The bolt does taper down as you go inboard- allowing it to drop smoothly into the groove as it rotates- but the outer edge should be square.

 

[Johnm1]

My reply will be delayed. 'Littleman` , my cat decided he needed to take a nap on my legs. FYI - Littleman isn't little. Although he lost some weight recently he's down to 16 lbs from 21 lbs. Vet isn't concerned with his weight. He's just a big cat.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Lol.

 

[dfariswheel]

That's a lard butt cat.

I think that it's unlikely that Frank Glenn missed the problem as being just the bolt. If he said it's the cylinder I'd go with that.
If you can fix him up with a cylinder the same length He can probably fix you up.

 

[Johnm1]

That's a lard butt cat.

I think that it's unlikely that Frank Glenn missed the problem as being just the bolt. If he said it's the cylinder I'd go with that.
If you can fix him up with a cylinder the same length He can probably fix you up.

Yeah, but he's my lard butt cat. And he loves me. When I'm home he's never more than 6' away from me.

The question remains. Would this PP have been chambered in 32 Colt or 32 S&W Long? Or could it have been chambered in either?

I found a couple 1.25" cylinders in 32 Colt. But no 1.25" cylinders in 32 S&W Long. And the internet research left me confused.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

I dunno, it appears to mic. out normally. Maybe someone else can provide some more data points if they have a PP and some calipers.

Of course if Mr. Glenn says get another cylinder, then by all means. I'd definitely let him look at it again before sourcing one though. There's also no garauntee another 60-year old used cylinder is going to be any better....

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Yeah, but he's my lard butt cat. And he loves me. When I'm home he's never more than 6' away from me.

The question remains. Would this PP have been chambered in 32 Colt or 32 S&W Long? Or could it have been chambered in either?

I found a couple 1.25" cylinders in 32 Colt. But no 1.25" cylinders in 32 S&W Long. And the internet research left me confused.

The sellers may not be able to differentiate between .32 New Police and .32 Colt, especially as they may not have the barrel handy. I doubt they would actually list the part as .32 SWL since the guns were never marked that.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

I'm hypothesizing that a true .32 Colt cylinder would be through-bored since the round used a heeled bullet and one for a .32 NP (SWL) would be stepped and throated.

Edit: just read Dennis' quote above about them usually being through-bored. That could well be. Wish I still had my .32 NP to look.

 

[Johnm1]

Go with the length of the cylinder that's in the gun now.

In the early 1900's Colt generally chambered revolvers to take almost any of the very similar cartridges in the short .32 and .38 rounds.
As example, there was the .32 and .38 S&W.
Colt didn't want S&W's name on their guns, so they just changed the bullet to a flat nose and renamed them as the .32 and ..38 New Police/Police Positive.
Since the cartridges were so similar other then length, Colt usually just straight bored the chamber so any length would chamber.
So, if you have a cylinder that will accept the .32 Long, it'll also shoot the .32 short cartridges.

The First Issue Police Positive had a smooth top strap and the last barrel patent date as 1905.
The Second Issue Police Positive had a grooved top strap and a slightly heavier frame, the last patent date on the barrel as 1926.
This took the usual .32 short cartridges, and the .32 Long.

Not sure how I missed your reply in post 14. But I did.

Thanks.

After reading many of your posts I don't tinker with Colt double actions. I was forced to tinker with the S&W early double actions because there just isn't a gunsmith like Frank for those. And I've paid the price in multiple copies of new parts from Jack First. There aren't that many new parts for these.

 

[Johnm1]

@dfariswheel I reread your post 14. Hope I don't come across as being pedantic but the specific question was if the PP made in 1929 was chambered in 32 S&W or 32 Colt? Could it have been either? Mine clearly shoots the 32 S&W just fine but all I can find are 1.25" 32 Colt cylinders. Is there a 1.25" cylinder chambered for 32 S&W Long?

It could have been rechambered when it was refinished. If it was originally chambered for the 32 S&W Long I'd prefer to keep looking for a cylinder in 32 Long. If it was only chambered in 32 Colt I'll pull the trigger on 32 Colt cylinder I've found and just load 32 Colt with the dies I have.

 

[4v50 Gary]

Even though the parts may be the same size, fitting may be required. You can just take a rebound lever out of one Colt and expect it to work in another EVEN if they're both the same type of Colt.