Which has stronger lockwork?


PDA






couldbeanyone
June 27, 2011, 01:23 PM
Which has stronger or more durable lockwork, an 1858 Remington or an 1860 Colt army? Of course I am talking replicas. What parts would be most likely to break in each of them? I am not concerned with which is stronger for heavy loads, just which has the better lockwork mechanisms. Thank you for your wisdom and input in advance.:)

If you enjoyed reading about "Which has stronger lockwork?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
mykeal
June 27, 2011, 01:35 PM
I don't believe one can distinguish between Remington's and Colt's lockwork design with regard to strength. The replica manufacturer's execution of the design, meaning choice of materials, processing and quality inspection, is of much greater importance. And that can depend on when the gun was made as well, as those parameters change over the years.

tpelle
June 27, 2011, 02:25 PM
I don't know about "strongest", but I think that the Colt style is easiest to tune so that it is easier on the parts and so will last longer. Keep in mind that the hammer, hand, and bolt, as well as the springs that power them, are pretty much the same between Colt and Remington. However, if you look at the cylinders, you will see something on the Colts that is not present on the Remington - the lead on the locking notch.

On a properly tuned Colt the bolt leg will slip off of the hammer cam before the cylinder is aligned with the barrel - actually the bolt releases up into the lead and is held there by spring pressure. As the cylinder completes its rotation in alignment, the bolt spring then pushes the bolt up into the notch as it aligns.

So two of the three events that occur - aligning the cylinder with the barrel by pressure of the hand, and the sear dropping into the full-cock notch - can be separately tuned to happen together just by adjusting the length of the hand, and the third event - the bolt dropping into the lead - can be adjusted independently by adjusting the length of the bolt leg, just so that it comes up into the lead. Makes it a lot easier for a gun butcher like me to get it all right.

On the Remington, with no lead into the cylinder locking notch, I think that all three events have to be tuned together.

Am I right?

Mizar
June 27, 2011, 03:45 PM
With or without а lead - the only difference is in the wear marks pattern. Remington and Colt timing is adjusted the same way.

Boris

tpelle
June 27, 2011, 04:25 PM
Mizar, so you're saying that the bolt on the Remington should drop ahead of the locking notch as well?

I'll have to go home and look at my Remington New Model Army clone. Plus I have some pics of original Remington revolvers, so if that's the case they should show drag marks from the bolt.

Not doubting what you're saying.....I'm just trying to get my head around how it works.

I do know that my Pietta 1860 Army was badly peening the locking notches because the bolt was hammering into them as it went to full-cock. A little quality time with a Swiss file and it's timed perfectly now.

J-Bar
June 27, 2011, 09:10 PM
I have never owned a 58 Remington...no comments. I have experience with 1851 and 1860 Colts and their replicas. Broken handsprings and broken bolt/trigger springs are the most frequent and frustrating mechanical failures. Trigger/bolt spring can be replaced with a wire Wolff spring. Handspring modifications are available if you are interested. There was another thread that discussed them, but I don't know how to link to it. Help?

Mizar
June 28, 2011, 01:07 AM
Tpelle, both Remington and Colt do use almost identical lock work - it is logical that they should operate in the same way. There are some very good threads in this sub-forum dealing with Remington 1858 timing - I did not discover the hot water with my statement. The heavy peening on the Pietta replicas comes from bad timing, improper bolt face geometry - the bolt is hitting the cylinder with his right edge, difference in hardness between bolt and cylinder and simple use.

Boris

arcticap
June 28, 2011, 02:20 AM
Which has stronger or more durable lockwork, an 1858 Remington or an 1860 Colt army?

In theory their lockwork may not be much different but in reality the Remingtons seem to have less need for repairs and replacement parts.

SAA
June 28, 2011, 02:26 AM
On the Remington, with no lead into the cylinder locking notch, I think that all three events have to be tuned together.

Am I right?

No. The timing would be the same. It is impossible to time the bolt to drop exactly into the slot at all cocking speeds. The bolt must drop to the cylinder before it enters the slot.

zimmerstutzen
June 28, 2011, 04:30 PM
It matters lesss about the style repro than manufacturer and quality control. IN the "old Days" retail chains would go to Brescia Italy and say I want untis that wholesale for $29.99 each. And they would get schlock. For $39.99 each, the guns might have hardened parts and thin bluing over the machine marks. For $49.99, the internals were all hardened and the parts polished. Same manufacturer, same production line, just different grades of quality control. Things have changed a bit. The lower end is of much better quality than 40 years ago, but still prone to some internal breakage problems. SOme of the lesser quality manufacturers have thankfully shut their doors. Although, I suspect we may see Indian made revolver repros in a few years. Some of the Indian made muzzleloader pistols are good looking from outside the display case. I just don't know about buying one.

tpelle
June 28, 2011, 06:25 PM
OK, I went back and looked at the Remington pics that I have saved to my PC and use as a screensaver slide show. You can clearly see the marks on the cylinders where the bolts release against the cylinder, then drag into the locking slot.

Here's the pics:

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c354/tpelle/Remington_Conversion.jpg

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c354/tpelle/Remington_New_Army.jpg

You can clearly see the marks in the top pic.

Guess I'll be fitting another bolt, huh?

SAA
June 28, 2011, 11:39 PM
Guess I'll be fitting another bolt, huh?

Why?

junkman_01
June 30, 2011, 06:35 AM
Every Remington type revolver I have ever seen, both original and repro, have drag marks. It's the nature of the beast.

tpelle
June 30, 2011, 08:18 AM
Because I don't like the bolt hammering into the locking notch - if should engage like a Colt does, which is to drop off the hammer cam and contact the cylinder AHEAD of the notch, and just drop into the notch under spring pressure.

My reference to fitting another bolt was that I just did this to my 1860 Army.

Mizar
June 30, 2011, 01:20 PM
tpelle, just take your old bolt and file about a 3mm (0.12") radius at the back corner (towards you) of the left leg. Try that first - you may not need a new bolt if it's dropping late.

Boris

If you enjoyed reading about "Which has stronger lockwork?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!