Coal Dragger
member
Probably too flexible, but I might try some aluminum foil.
I find myself perturbed by revolvers
- Thread starter CoRoMo
- Start date
- Status
Coal Dragger
member
Aluminum foil made it in the gap, but just barely and the foil measured out to around .00075. So I'll venture a guess that the actual barrel cylinder gap is in the .001-.0015 range. Very tight.
JRH6856
Member
That IS tight!. Do you shoot cast lead?
Now if you really want a challenge, try measuring the gap on a Nagant M1895.
Now if you really want a challenge, try measuring the gap on a Nagant M1895.
GJgo
Member
If you really want to know, pick up a set of feeler gauges at Sears or an auto parts store. A man can never have enough tools.
OldCavSoldier
Member
In my experience, there is "tight" and then there is "tight"....there is "loose" and then there is "loose." Not all "tight" is good and not all "loose" is bad.
Oh!....forgive me....we were talking about revolvers, weren't we?
Oh!....forgive me....we were talking about revolvers, weren't we?
OP
OP
CoRoMo
Member
Disassembly and Repair
Okay, this is my thread.
Another example of my discomfort with revolvers is disassembly and repair.
I can strip and work on any semi-auto.
1911's?
Don't make me laugh.
Ruger Standard/MkII/MkIII?
I detail strip them for kicks on a Friday night.
Remove the side plate from a S&W?
Oh heck no! I think there is a law somewhere about that. Just don't go there. Don't fiddle with it. Don't tinker around. Just shoot it and clean the two parts that bullets travel through.
I swear. Internet advice has made me gun shy. I'm flat out intimidated by the lowly revolver.
Okay, this is my thread.
Another example of my discomfort with revolvers is disassembly and repair.
I can strip and work on any semi-auto.
1911's?
Don't make me laugh.
Ruger Standard/MkII/MkIII?
I detail strip them for kicks on a Friday night.
Remove the side plate from a S&W?
Oh heck no! I think there is a law somewhere about that. Just don't go there. Don't fiddle with it. Don't tinker around. Just shoot it and clean the two parts that bullets travel through.
I swear. Internet advice has made me gun shy. I'm flat out intimidated by the lowly revolver.
JRH6856
Member
So get a Ruger double action. They have no side plates.
bergmen
Member.
The thing to do then is just stay away from revolvers and stick with autos. There is no law that says you have to have and like revolvers.
I don't like side by side double shotguns so I stay away from them. Same with anything .44 magnum, preferring .45 Colt instead. etc., etc.
Dan
I don't like side by side double shotguns so I stay away from them. Same with anything .44 magnum, preferring .45 Colt instead. etc., etc.
Dan
Coal Dragger
member
MicroTecniqs,
Haven't shot any cast lead through it yet, but I do have some Cast Performance 360gr WFN gas checked bullets that I need to work up loads for. Will also need to pick up some proper feeler gauges to get a real measurement of barrel cylinder gap.
No point in trying to measure a Nagant! As I'm sure you know.
Haven't shot any cast lead through it yet, but I do have some Cast Performance 360gr WFN gas checked bullets that I need to work up loads for. Will also need to pick up some proper feeler gauges to get a real measurement of barrel cylinder gap.
No point in trying to measure a Nagant! As I'm sure you know.
OP
OP
CoRoMo
Member
Missing the point.
I love revolvers!!!!
I just feel so in over my head.
Others have pegged me right; I'm obsessed with them to a fault.I began this thread describing how uncomfortable the act of selecting one is. My most recent post describes how uncomfortable I feel about working on one.
I don't have either of those issues in regards to any other firearm; except for the BLR, I'm not going to take that baby apart to save my life.
MtnSpur
Member
I just feel so in over my head.
And no amount of logic, nor experience to the contrary will change that.
People can discuss this with you til Obama turns Republican and nothing will change. I reckon you have a disease that's terminal. I'll send flowers
calaverasslim
Member
picky, picky, picky. Man made object is never perfect. Long as it locks up great with out slipping, goes bang like it shud, and hits what your aiming at.
It's easy to bubba the insides of a S&W if you're not careful. Don't take my word for it; it's in the Internet.
Seriously after reading from authoritative sources e.g. Jerry Kuhnhausen's, if you don't have any forethought in what you're doing, you can really cause problems and even have an unsafe firearm. So you're caution is warranted.
get the revolver ...
breath easy and the rest will follow
before you know it you are 40 years further along and still haven t worn it out.
when you finally get rid of it , it will be shot by a next generation , because you bought a solid amercan build like a tank 6 shooter !
breath easy and the rest will follow
before you know it you are 40 years further along and still haven t worn it out.
when you finally get rid of it , it will be shot by a next generation , because you bought a solid amercan build like a tank 6 shooter !
Coal Dragger
member
.... or in my case 5 shooter.
Get a cheap junker that you can learn on. You can discard or sell for parts when you are done with it. Approach this seriously and do your homework before tearing into it -- get a good book. Who knows... you might even make a shooter out of it! Regardless, it would be money well spent to learn the gun and your limitations (if any) with regard to how it works.
kmrcstintn
Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2006
- Messages
- 1,236
dear OP: after reading your posting that started this thread I offer the following feedback...
I think you are overthinking this a bit; you have the right to expect high quality in a firearm you might purchase, yet humans do the final fitting and tuning; experienced as they are in doing this, computers and robots they are not; here's another viewpoint...there's going to be some play since metal expands when heated and if all the parts locked up tight as a snare drum when cold the gun would seize after being fired and the metal expansion; also there has to be enough room for lubricating oil, lead deposits, and burned power/carbon residue or again the gun would seize and all you have is a hammer or paper weight
I think you are overthinking this a bit; you have the right to expect high quality in a firearm you might purchase, yet humans do the final fitting and tuning; experienced as they are in doing this, computers and robots they are not; here's another viewpoint...there's going to be some play since metal expands when heated and if all the parts locked up tight as a snare drum when cold the gun would seize after being fired and the metal expansion; also there has to be enough room for lubricating oil, lead deposits, and burned power/carbon residue or again the gun would seize and all you have is a hammer or paper weight
Driftwood Johnson
Member
Howdy
With over 40 years of experience buying revolvers, perhaps I can add a little bit of common sense.
With all due respect, you need to lighten up.
You know I just read the post about how to choose a revolver and I do not see anywhere that he says that the cylinder should be locked up rock solid when the gun is at battery.
As far as rotational play when the cylinder is at battery is concerned, every revolver manufactured since the 1850s or 1860s has a Forcing Cone at the rear end of the barrel. The forcing cone is nothing more than a funnel. It's function is to gather in any bullets that have left the cylinder slightly out of alignment and redirect them to the bore. I have lost count of how many revolvers I own, probably more than four dozen at this point. The oldest revolver I own is a little S&W No. 1 Tip Up made in 1870. I have revolvers made in every decade since then. Of all those revolvers, the only one that shows absolutely no rotational play when the cylinder is at battery is a S&W New Model #3, made in 1881. The only reason it is so incredibly tight is that it was sent back to the factory in 1965 and completely refurbished, bringing it back to probably tighter tolerance than when it left the factory.
The point is, modern production revolvers are designed to compensate for any slight misalignment when the cylinder is at battery.
Unless you are talking about a custom firearm, such as some of those that have been mentioned, when you talk about a production gun there is going to be a little bit of play in it. If there was not, you could not afford the gun. A tiny amount of rotational play when the cylinder is at battery is completely normal. Trust me on this after buying revolvers for over 40 years.
A little bit of endshake (forward and backward play of the cylinder) is also very common. Not quite as forgiveable as a little rotational play, but I have never, ever not purchased a revolver just because of a little bit of endshake.
Cylinder gap. Jeez, I have revolvers that have a gap of around .002. Most of my revolvers have a gap somewhere in the vicinity of .005-.008. It really is not that big of a deal. One of my old, old revolvers has a gap around .012, and it is not even completely parallel. Yes, that is a bit excessive, but the gun is over 100 years old and has seen some hard times. Yes, I do shoot that gun, although only with low pressure Black Powder loads, and it is not a problem. Just makes for a lot of extra smoke and flash coming out of the gap.
I am very new to this forum, but I find that the more I read of what Old Fluff has to say, the more I agree with him. Particularly his point about how few shooters actually read a shop manual for the guns they are complaining about.
I am looking at Jerry Kuhnhausen's Colt Single Action Shop Manual right now. He recommends a barrel cylinder gap of .006 for jacketed bullets and .008 for lubed lead bullets. He has modified that statement slightly for Ruger single action revolvers, calling out .004-.006 for jacketed bullets and .008+ for lead bullets.
You know when the Army first tested the 1911 in 1911 they ran them through all sorts of torture tests, including making sure they functioned after being covered in sand, dirt, and mud. A highly tuned target 1911 may not pass such a function test, its tolerances may be too tight. But the classic 1911s were made to slightly looser tolerances so they could be mistreated and keep on shooting. Its no different with a revolver. The key elements of a revolver are open to the elements, they are not protected from the elements down inside the slide. Get too tight a fit between the bolt and the cylinder stop slot and a little bit of dirt may stop the thing from working. Get all the slop out of the action and you may find that you start getting some throwby when you start shooting double action fast and furious.
I am a dyed in the wool fan of S&W, I have been collecting them for over 30 years. I have such confidence in S&W products (pre-mim anyway) that unless I see signs of obvious abuse, I have no reservations whatsoever about taking an old Smith home after just a few cursory tests. They are so well made that you have to really do something terrible to a Smith to ruin it, and that kind of abuse will be obvious.
Maybe I am that guy you want to be. Confidence in firearms only comes with experience. You can read all the stuff on the internet you can find, but the bottom line is you will only be confident after you have some experience under your belt.
I remember very well how scary it was the first time I removed the sideplate from a S&W. I took one look at all those parts in there and put the plate back on and probably did not take it off again for about 20 years.
Consider buying this book:
http://www.gunbooks.com/sw.html
You can find it many places, including Amazon. It is the best book in print about how to disassemble, service, and reassemble a S&W. Remember, don't pry the plate off.
Kuhnhausen also has excellent books about Colts, Rugers, the 1911, and a bunch of other guns.
FINALLY!!!
If I wuz you I would go out and buy another nice old S&W Model 10. There are a zillion of them out there. Lots of police trade ins. You are not going to spend a lot of money on it. I can almost guarantee you that it will work just fine. Shoot that gun a lot. Get used to it. Forget about worrying about a .003 gap or the cylinder locking up with no motion at all at every chamber. Consider it a learning experience. Buy the Kuhnhausen book and learn how to take it apart. It is not rocket science, if you have the manual dexterity to take a 1911 or a Mark II apart you can take a S&W apart too.
Go buy a nice old Smith and have fun with it.
With over 40 years of experience buying revolvers, perhaps I can add a little bit of common sense.
With all due respect, you need to lighten up.
You know I just read the post about how to choose a revolver and I do not see anywhere that he says that the cylinder should be locked up rock solid when the gun is at battery.
As far as rotational play when the cylinder is at battery is concerned, every revolver manufactured since the 1850s or 1860s has a Forcing Cone at the rear end of the barrel. The forcing cone is nothing more than a funnel. It's function is to gather in any bullets that have left the cylinder slightly out of alignment and redirect them to the bore. I have lost count of how many revolvers I own, probably more than four dozen at this point. The oldest revolver I own is a little S&W No. 1 Tip Up made in 1870. I have revolvers made in every decade since then. Of all those revolvers, the only one that shows absolutely no rotational play when the cylinder is at battery is a S&W New Model #3, made in 1881. The only reason it is so incredibly tight is that it was sent back to the factory in 1965 and completely refurbished, bringing it back to probably tighter tolerance than when it left the factory.
The point is, modern production revolvers are designed to compensate for any slight misalignment when the cylinder is at battery.
Unless you are talking about a custom firearm, such as some of those that have been mentioned, when you talk about a production gun there is going to be a little bit of play in it. If there was not, you could not afford the gun. A tiny amount of rotational play when the cylinder is at battery is completely normal. Trust me on this after buying revolvers for over 40 years.
A little bit of endshake (forward and backward play of the cylinder) is also very common. Not quite as forgiveable as a little rotational play, but I have never, ever not purchased a revolver just because of a little bit of endshake.
Cylinder gap. Jeez, I have revolvers that have a gap of around .002. Most of my revolvers have a gap somewhere in the vicinity of .005-.008. It really is not that big of a deal. One of my old, old revolvers has a gap around .012, and it is not even completely parallel. Yes, that is a bit excessive, but the gun is over 100 years old and has seen some hard times. Yes, I do shoot that gun, although only with low pressure Black Powder loads, and it is not a problem. Just makes for a lot of extra smoke and flash coming out of the gap.
I am very new to this forum, but I find that the more I read of what Old Fluff has to say, the more I agree with him. Particularly his point about how few shooters actually read a shop manual for the guns they are complaining about.
I am looking at Jerry Kuhnhausen's Colt Single Action Shop Manual right now. He recommends a barrel cylinder gap of .006 for jacketed bullets and .008 for lubed lead bullets. He has modified that statement slightly for Ruger single action revolvers, calling out .004-.006 for jacketed bullets and .008+ for lead bullets.
You know when the Army first tested the 1911 in 1911 they ran them through all sorts of torture tests, including making sure they functioned after being covered in sand, dirt, and mud. A highly tuned target 1911 may not pass such a function test, its tolerances may be too tight. But the classic 1911s were made to slightly looser tolerances so they could be mistreated and keep on shooting. Its no different with a revolver. The key elements of a revolver are open to the elements, they are not protected from the elements down inside the slide. Get too tight a fit between the bolt and the cylinder stop slot and a little bit of dirt may stop the thing from working. Get all the slop out of the action and you may find that you start getting some throwby when you start shooting double action fast and furious.
I am a dyed in the wool fan of S&W, I have been collecting them for over 30 years. I have such confidence in S&W products (pre-mim anyway) that unless I see signs of obvious abuse, I have no reservations whatsoever about taking an old Smith home after just a few cursory tests. They are so well made that you have to really do something terrible to a Smith to ruin it, and that kind of abuse will be obvious.
Maybe I am that guy you want to be. Confidence in firearms only comes with experience. You can read all the stuff on the internet you can find, but the bottom line is you will only be confident after you have some experience under your belt.
I remember very well how scary it was the first time I removed the sideplate from a S&W. I took one look at all those parts in there and put the plate back on and probably did not take it off again for about 20 years.
Consider buying this book:
http://www.gunbooks.com/sw.html
You can find it many places, including Amazon. It is the best book in print about how to disassemble, service, and reassemble a S&W. Remember, don't pry the plate off.
Kuhnhausen also has excellent books about Colts, Rugers, the 1911, and a bunch of other guns.
FINALLY!!!
If I wuz you I would go out and buy another nice old S&W Model 10. There are a zillion of them out there. Lots of police trade ins. You are not going to spend a lot of money on it. I can almost guarantee you that it will work just fine. Shoot that gun a lot. Get used to it. Forget about worrying about a .003 gap or the cylinder locking up with no motion at all at every chamber. Consider it a learning experience. Buy the Kuhnhausen book and learn how to take it apart. It is not rocket science, if you have the manual dexterity to take a 1911 or a Mark II apart you can take a S&W apart too.
Go buy a nice old Smith and have fun with it.
Last edited:
jrmiddleton425
Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2011
- Messages
- 663
There is indeed a problem here; YOU are it. You're obsessed with trying to find a mechanically flawless specimen, which probably does not, and never will, exist.
I have a 1976-78 S&W 27-2. Not one of the chambers locks in place without some play, I'd be surprised if the cylinder gap ran less than .004, and it's a bit out of time in double-action.
It is still more accurate than I can shoot it.
I have a 1976-78 S&W 27-2. Not one of the chambers locks in place without some play, I'd be surprised if the cylinder gap ran less than .004, and it's a bit out of time in double-action.
It is still more accurate than I can shoot it.
- Status
