That is how I see it as well. As it is right now the catch doesn't keep the pin from walking out. I'm not sure if it is worn or just installed improperly. I'll go to Ace Hardware tomorrow and see if I can't get an appropriately sized screw driver. I'll have to square it off with a grinder, but we'll see if I can budge it. It is soaking in Kroil now. Do no harm.
Hopkins & Allen XL No. 8 Army
- Thread starter Johnm1
- Start date
- Status
That is how I see it as well. As it is right now the catch doesn't keep the pin from walking out. I'm not sure if it is worn or just installed improperly. I'll go to Ace Hardware tomorrow and see if I can't get an appropriately sized screw driver. I'll have to square it off with a grinder, but we'll see if I can budge it. It is soaking in Kroil now. Do no harm.
And here is a picture with its little sister
Notice the same 1871 Patent cylinder release latch. Pulling the pin on the 22 does allow removal of the cylinder.
Although I'll go and get an appropriate screw driver and grind it to fit, I won't try to unscrew it until I have resolved the impact of loosening/removing the center pin. I suspect that installing the pin has a dramatic impact on how the hand rotates the cylinder.
Let's discuss that tomorrow.
Notice the same 1871 Patent cylinder release latch. Pulling the pin on the 22 does allow removal of the cylinder.
Although I'll go and get an appropriate screw driver and grind it to fit, I won't try to unscrew it until I have resolved the impact of loosening/removing the center pin. I suspect that installing the pin has a dramatic impact on how the hand rotates the cylinder.
Let's discuss that tomorrow.
indy1919a4
Member
Does the 22 have a name on it..????
.455_Hunter
Member
You never know if Ian might respond to an query. He might know more about the gun that shown in the video. Can you message him on YouTube or post a question in the comments of the video?
It is an XL No. 1. It has the H&A name on it but I understand you could have bought the exact same gun with any of 3 dozen names on it. All made in H&A's facility. It was made around the same time as th XL No. 8. No serial number on the No. 1 and even if there were I might not be able to narrow down a date better than between 1868 and 1899 when the company changed name.
Fun to shoot by the way. Kinda a pain to reload 22 shorts to black powder though. I'm sure it could live through a small diet of smokeless but I don't want to push it. Unfortunately there isn't any 22 short black powder cartridges available. 22 LR yes but not short.
I visited the local gunsmith today. He agrees, the slots are almost certainly to remove the arbor that is the center pin that the cylinder rotates around. Even tried to put a good size screwdriver on it to no avail. It may never come out without being drilled out. I wouldn't go that far. I'll work at it with penetrating oil for several months. If it won't budge I will just leave it as it is. When I shoot it I will dunk it to remove the black powder residue to prevent corrosion.
The gunsmith thought that it would actually be okay to shoot low pressure smokeless loads in this firearm. From the heft of it he is probably right and I don't disagree. But I am unlikely to shoot even the cowboy action loads in this firearm. With the ammunition situation as it is I am going to have to reload for this firearm. I might as well reload for the black powder 44 - 40 original load. I will just have to be fastidious about cleaning it. I now have an appropriately sized screwdriver and I will just keep trying over and over again to make it move.
The more I think about it, if I can remove the Arbor, I don't think there will be an issue in reinstalling it properly to achieve proper timing with the hand and the cylinder stop. I have some time to consider that though. This thing isn't coming out anytime soon.
The gunsmith thought that it would actually be okay to shoot low pressure smokeless loads in this firearm. From the heft of it he is probably right and I don't disagree. But I am unlikely to shoot even the cowboy action loads in this firearm. With the ammunition situation as it is I am going to have to reload for this firearm. I might as well reload for the black powder 44 - 40 original load. I will just have to be fastidious about cleaning it. I now have an appropriately sized screwdriver and I will just keep trying over and over again to make it move.
The more I think about it, if I can remove the Arbor, I don't think there will be an issue in reinstalling it properly to achieve proper timing with the hand and the cylinder stop. I have some time to consider that though. This thing isn't coming out anytime soon.
indy1919a4
Member
Hey that is a cool 22, ever considering shooting 22 Flobert rounds in it.. (No Powder) and then another I have used is 22 colibri.. This is a powderless round. I have seen No real issues.
https://www.aguilaammo.com/ammunition/1b220337/
What I do find amazing is how many times that design is used by so many companies.
indy1919a4
Member
Per the bb caps, I have just seated them in a little harder buy rolling the heads on a board also I have tried a touch of glue..opps forgot it was 22 short..
.455_Hunter
Member
CCI also makes a CB .22 short. I have used them in my old black powder H&Rs.
I have a bunch of the 22 Shorts. I pull the bullet and powder and fill with black and reseat the bullets. PIA though. Been considering getting the RF dies for that. They do exist.
I’ll have to try to push the BB’s in harder. Never thought of that.
I’ll have to try to push the BB’s in harder. Never thought of that.
As it turns out there is a contact Ian button on the Forgotten Weapons website. I sent him an e mail.
So, I'm in the market for whatever I can find on H&A as far as books go. Here is what I have located so far:
Hopkins & Allen Revolvers and Pistols - Carder
Charles E. Carder
Hopkins & Allen Arms Co. Fifty Years of Gunmaking 1867 - 1917; Vorisek
Joseph T. Vorisek
By the title the Carder book looks like it would be the most useful. But there isn't much in the write ups fo either. Anyone have either or another that might be appropriate? Above are from Cornell Publications and are reasonable.
Hopkins & Allen Revolvers and Pistols - Carder
Charles E. Carder
Hopkins & Allen Arms Co. Fifty Years of Gunmaking 1867 - 1917; Vorisek
Joseph T. Vorisek
By the title the Carder book looks like it would be the most useful. But there isn't much in the write ups fo either. Anyone have either or another that might be appropriate? Above are from Cornell Publications and are reasonable.
So far I’ve only given it a token try. After a couple of days soak I will try both ways. Thanks for the thought.
In order to gather components to reload I need to slug the bore. It seems I ought to be able to push the slug from the muzzle into a chamber and retrieve the slug through the loading gate. Does this make sense to you?
The chambers are quite a bit larger than the bore so i dont see it getting stuck. I just don't want to create an issue.
The chambers are quite a bit larger than the bore so i dont see it getting stuck. I just don't want to create an issue.
indy1919a4
Member
I never thunked of doing such a thing with something like this with every thing so confined.. In theory you should be right.. But wow my mind see so many what ifs.. Good luck on that.. It is kind of a rare gun to experiment with.
Blue68f100
Member
Use pure lead, oil the bore before you drive it through. Use a brass rod (NO WOOD) or Al. Once it starts it goes pretty easy.
Well I was wrong. There is a serial number that puts it mid-production in 1875. Believe it or not there is a resource for production dates. It actually has quite a few manufactures. A little hard to navigate though.
http://www.american-firearms.com/american-firearms/Manufacturers/START.html
So the siblings were manufactured about a year and a half apart.
indy1919a4
Member
indy1919a4
Member
One of the reasons documents are so hard to find for your Hopkins and Allen (Merwin & Hulbert also) firearms.
The great Hopkins and Allen fire of 1900..
The great Hopkins and Allen fire of 1900..
By all accounts Hopkins and Allen were astute businessmen who understood the Firearms business. In 1898 they came out of bankruptcy after the failure of Merwin and Hulbert who owned 50% of H&A. They also lost a rifle partner in that time frame as well. There was also the contract with the Belgian government that was never paid for. Had it not been for a series of bad business issues I wonder if H&A could have survived against The Big Three. There has always been a market for inexpensive firearms. And they seemed to have that part of the market pretty well figured out. The fact that they could produce quality firearms was just a bonus. Had they been able to overcome they're inexpensive Market presence who knows we might have a big four today.
- Status
