Macmac
Member
Mustanger1 , Are these the same part? Is there any differences you can see?
51' smithy help? (likely to be moved)
- Thread starter Macmac
- Start date
- Status
Mustanger1
Member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2007
- Messages
- 29
I never had any reason to compare them to one in a gun. If you want I can take one of my ASM's apart, I have several 1851's, and compare them to the one in the gun. Couldn't do it until tomorrow evening but be more than glad to if you want.
Im283
Member
Mac, if you want me to try to order parts let me know I will give it a go.
I have VTI's phone and have ordered from them previously.
But I suspect new parts would just set this project back to square one considering all the work you have done to the existing parts.
Anyway its your call Mac, let me know if you want me to do anything.
I have VTI's phone and have ordered from them previously.
But I suspect new parts would just set this project back to square one considering all the work you have done to the existing parts.
Anyway its your call Mac, let me know if you want me to do anything.
Last edited:
Macmac
Member
Im283, If I want more parts I will ask.. I figure by llate this afternoon to know if one more bead of weld will be something we need or not. If not we go with the bolt again. If we do the hammer gets a weld and I m right back creating the cam.
The first weld could have worked. This second weld is an attempt to speed things up. Unfortunatley, each weld has unwanted waste, which has to be cut away. Probably hard silver solder would not be hard enough, but it would sure lay down better. Speed isn't the issue is it? No need to answer that I know speed isn't the issue, quaility is.
There is an old mechanics saying.
You can have Quailty.
You can have Fast.
You can have Cheap.
Pick one.
Mustanger1 , I don't need you to take the guns apart, but was more wondering if you had spare parts, that you could look at side by side, prehaps sliding an 8 penny, or maybe a 10 penny common nail in the screw hole, so as to align the parts.
More over to see if the 51' bolt and the 60' are exactly the same, as new unfitted parts.
One other comparision, isn't that important, but if you pulled the barrels and the cylinders of the frame, and then held the frame straigh on, pointing directly at you face.
See hard, the angles the top of the ball on the bolt sticking up thru the frame is?
Is it more level with Earth, or more following the angle of the frame cutout for the clyinder? maybe something in between???
IF you have a micrometer, I might like measurements from below the ball on the bolt to wha ever point on the ball is the highest point.
This is more or less to satisfy my curiosity, so don't go wild and tear lots of stuff apart.
The first weld could have worked. This second weld is an attempt to speed things up. Unfortunatley, each weld has unwanted waste, which has to be cut away. Probably hard silver solder would not be hard enough, but it would sure lay down better. Speed isn't the issue is it? No need to answer that I know speed isn't the issue, quaility is.
There is an old mechanics saying.
You can have Quailty.
You can have Fast.
You can have Cheap.
Pick one.
Mustanger1 , I don't need you to take the guns apart, but was more wondering if you had spare parts, that you could look at side by side, prehaps sliding an 8 penny, or maybe a 10 penny common nail in the screw hole, so as to align the parts.
More over to see if the 51' bolt and the 60' are exactly the same, as new unfitted parts.
One other comparision, isn't that important, but if you pulled the barrels and the cylinders of the frame, and then held the frame straigh on, pointing directly at you face.
See hard, the angles the top of the ball on the bolt sticking up thru the frame is?
Is it more level with Earth, or more following the angle of the frame cutout for the clyinder? maybe something in between???
IF you have a micrometer, I might like measurements from below the ball on the bolt to wha ever point on the ball is the highest point.
This is more or less to satisfy my curiosity, so don't go wild and tear lots of stuff apart.
At this point I think you should consider a new ASM hammer. The location and shape of the bolt cam is critical, and you may not be able to get this with a weld if you have nothing left of the original cam to work with.
Should you get a new hammer I would, after preliminary fitting, case harden the lower part where the cam and trigger notches are with Kasenit, which is available from: www.brownells.com (item # 479-001-100). This will not effect the cosmetics of the hammer after it is assembled.
It seems that all of the Italian makers have gone to investment casting the hammer with the cam being an integral part. The hammers themselves are colored to look like they were case hardened, but in fact aren’t. As soon as the soft cam wears the only solution may be to replace the whole hammer. This frankly is for the birds, and very few if any buyers know about it.
Hammers made for the second issue Colt’s may, or may not still be available from: www.e-gunparts.com (part # 177770) were made from castings provided by Uberti, but finished by Colt. While expensive they are really case hardened, and not just colored to look like it.
Incidentally, hammers made by any of the makers will fit THEIR models 1851 Navy, 1861 Navy and 1860 Army models. If you don’t find a part listed under your particular model check out the other two. The same can be said about all of the other lockwork parts, including in particular, cylinder bolts.
Should you get a new hammer I would, after preliminary fitting, case harden the lower part where the cam and trigger notches are with Kasenit, which is available from: www.brownells.com (item # 479-001-100). This will not effect the cosmetics of the hammer after it is assembled.
It seems that all of the Italian makers have gone to investment casting the hammer with the cam being an integral part. The hammers themselves are colored to look like they were case hardened, but in fact aren’t. As soon as the soft cam wears the only solution may be to replace the whole hammer. This frankly is for the birds, and very few if any buyers know about it.
Hammers made for the second issue Colt’s may, or may not still be available from: www.e-gunparts.com (part # 177770) were made from castings provided by Uberti, but finished by Colt. While expensive they are really case hardened, and not just colored to look like it.
Incidentally, hammers made by any of the makers will fit THEIR models 1851 Navy, 1861 Navy and 1860 Army models. If you don’t find a part listed under your particular model check out the other two. The same can be said about all of the other lockwork parts, including in particular, cylinder bolts.
Im283
Member
+1 Mac
Old Fluff the original cam was/is on the hammer, probably was just worn down from use??.
I presume that's the case, but because of the cam's location it is very difficult to correctly shape the weld, and the shape, diameter and location is critical. I said, "should consider" on purpose. If the original hammer can be correctly fixed it should be, but at some point the issue of getting a new hammer should come into consideration. If the cam isn't right all that will happen is that additional bolts will be installed but still not work. Or if one does work but the cam is too high the bolt will soon break. Colt made the cam seperate from the hammer for good reason, and replacement was one of them.
Macmac
Member
Old Fuff, Bingo!
""""It seems that all of the Italian makers have gone to investment casting the hammer with the cam being an integral part. The hammers themselves are colored to look like they were case hardened, but in fact aren’t. As soon as the soft cam wears the only solution may be to replace the whole hammer. This frankly is for the birds, and very few if any buyers know about it.""""
The cam was partly sheared off maybe 1/3 of it. In this way the left limb slipped off before getting to half cock.
There is enough left to follow the pattern.
I have a little cloth bag of casinite right here in a tool box.. My main use of it is to case harden the faces of a frizzen, for better spark. The method I use leaves the front face, facing the gun from th WRONG end, soft, so just the flint strike side gets cased. This leaves the impact of a strike in such away as to not snap off the frizzen. I heat sink away heat from the pan cover as well.
With all you know which is selfevident I wonder have you worked on flint locks, meaning the lock itself?
I once hammer forged a file thin, and hot riveted that shaped section of the file to a frizzen. The file pieces was not welded to the frizzen. Then just the file was re-hardened in place. Talk about sparks. The first test snap I happened to be in mocs, not wearing socks on my feet, and the sparks sort of tickeled my feet
I had seen a picture in a book of a gun in a museum and just had to see how that would work..
I am back for the day, so more info will be forth coming next time I post...
I hope I don't need that 3rd bead, but if I do it will happen, and I will have less to say. If this 2nd weld suits the gun action, then I will have more to say.
Tell me about the screw pin to bolt relief please? As it is now the fit seems right, not to tight and not too loose.
If you can, tell me what the cause is for the bolt to break flush with the ball?
""""It seems that all of the Italian makers have gone to investment casting the hammer with the cam being an integral part. The hammers themselves are colored to look like they were case hardened, but in fact aren’t. As soon as the soft cam wears the only solution may be to replace the whole hammer. This frankly is for the birds, and very few if any buyers know about it.""""
The cam was partly sheared off maybe 1/3 of it. In this way the left limb slipped off before getting to half cock.
There is enough left to follow the pattern.
I have a little cloth bag of casinite right here in a tool box.. My main use of it is to case harden the faces of a frizzen, for better spark. The method I use leaves the front face, facing the gun from th WRONG end, soft, so just the flint strike side gets cased. This leaves the impact of a strike in such away as to not snap off the frizzen. I heat sink away heat from the pan cover as well.
With all you know which is selfevident I wonder have you worked on flint locks, meaning the lock itself?
I once hammer forged a file thin, and hot riveted that shaped section of the file to a frizzen. The file pieces was not welded to the frizzen. Then just the file was re-hardened in place. Talk about sparks. The first test snap I happened to be in mocs, not wearing socks on my feet, and the sparks sort of tickeled my feet
I had seen a picture in a book of a gun in a museum and just had to see how that would work..
I am back for the day, so more info will be forth coming next time I post...
I hope I don't need that 3rd bead, but if I do it will happen, and I will have less to say. If this 2nd weld suits the gun action, then I will have more to say.
Tell me about the screw pin to bolt relief please? As it is now the fit seems right, not to tight and not too loose.
If you can, tell me what the cause is for the bolt to break flush with the ball?
During my mis-spent youth I did all sorts of awfull things...
Some of the 18th century locks were made with serrated back faces on the frizzen before they were hardened. A hard frizzen in necessary to get any sparks at all. You're the first one I've heard of that hardened the back face while using a heat sink on the rest of the part. I know that some of the original frizzens were packed in clay to retard hardening some surfaces.
On some bolts the slot between the two limbs is made with a square cutter that leaves a square cut with sharp corners at the front. The sharp corners can and do cause stress risers that can lead to a crack. A better way is to use a cutter that leaves a "U" shape. Some 'smiths will polish the inside surfaces of the slot to remove tool marks that might have the same effect.
If the shank of the screw is sliding freely through the hole in the bolt you should be O.K.
To prevent the limb on the bolt from sliding off the cam, the bearing surface of the cam MUST BE 90 degrees to the hammer or slightly undercut. That's another reason Colt made the cam using a pin mounted through a hole in the hammer.
Last edited:
Im283
Member
Mac, I think I broke that messing with the part. Did I not tell you that?
Anyway that part did not break because of any action involved with the gun.
Macmac
Member
I had the idea it broke when you were shooting the gun. The written word and me don't always get it!
Anyway The hammer is as good as it will ever be. The cam is in close contact, meaning that it moves the bolt down with no delay in the action, and is staying down at 1/2 cock. By the TIME you get to full cock the hammer has cleared the limb. So the bolt snaps off the cam.
I have the fasted possible bolt action.
I checked the bolt and all of these bolts the slot between the two limbs is made with a square cutter that leaves a square cut with sharp corners at the front.
However the one I am using has more metal in width. I have no tool that can fit between the limbs to measure how thick the limbs are.
Once the bolt cleared the cam coming from full cock, beacause i had no choice but to add metal, and it is added looking like an egg on a car cam shaft too!
I pulled the ALL the parts from the frame and used black marker on the "ball", then installed everything EXCEPT the hammer, and drew a scribed line in the marker.
Then I installed the hammer and drew another scribed line.
I removed ALL the parts once again and can see a nice single scribed line.
SO NOW is cutting the ball to size time.
I get one chance to get this right.
I have 2 choices it seems.
Level the high left side facing the frame in my face, or stay with the contour.
need to edit in the figures on pg 1..
Old Fuff, yeah I figured square at the working cam sufarface was a + it is square as I can make and fairly square, amd if any slope exisits it is to the hammer wall.
When I got it, the slope was running off and is partly why welding was done.
With out welding there is no way I know to add metal. I will see if the stainless rods say what alloy they are, but what ever they are they are hard for stainless steel.
This is all polished now at the cam. The working edge is polished and the cam face is also polished.
Bolt specs:
The orginal is 0.242 heavy or what i would call .2425"
The one in the gun as it came so the 2nd bolt is 0.263"
The one I am working with is uncut, at 0.271" at factory specs.
0.271"
- 0.263"
---------
0.008"
__________
0.271"
-0.2425"
------------
0.0285
hmmmm
Somewhere between these answers if what i want...
Anyway The hammer is as good as it will ever be. The cam is in close contact, meaning that it moves the bolt down with no delay in the action, and is staying down at 1/2 cock. By the TIME you get to full cock the hammer has cleared the limb. So the bolt snaps off the cam.
I have the fasted possible bolt action.
I checked the bolt and all of these bolts the slot between the two limbs is made with a square cutter that leaves a square cut with sharp corners at the front.
However the one I am using has more metal in width. I have no tool that can fit between the limbs to measure how thick the limbs are.
Once the bolt cleared the cam coming from full cock, beacause i had no choice but to add metal, and it is added looking like an egg on a car cam shaft too!
I pulled the ALL the parts from the frame and used black marker on the "ball", then installed everything EXCEPT the hammer, and drew a scribed line in the marker.
Then I installed the hammer and drew another scribed line.
I removed ALL the parts once again and can see a nice single scribed line.
SO NOW is cutting the ball to size time.
I get one chance to get this right.
I have 2 choices it seems.
Level the high left side facing the frame in my face, or stay with the contour.
need to edit in the figures on pg 1..
Old Fuff, yeah I figured square at the working cam sufarface was a + it is square as I can make and fairly square, amd if any slope exisits it is to the hammer wall.
When I got it, the slope was running off and is partly why welding was done.
With out welding there is no way I know to add metal. I will see if the stainless rods say what alloy they are, but what ever they are they are hard for stainless steel.
This is all polished now at the cam. The working edge is polished and the cam face is also polished.
Bolt specs:
The orginal is 0.242 heavy or what i would call .2425"
The one in the gun as it came so the 2nd bolt is 0.263"
The one I am working with is uncut, at 0.271" at factory specs.
0.271"
- 0.263"
---------
0.008"
__________
0.271"
-0.2425"
------------
0.0285
hmmmm
Somewhere between these answers if what i want...
Im283
Member
Mac said
Well I guess that is sort of correct. I shot the gun one day, took it apart for cleaning and when I re-assembled it the hammer would not work and the cylinder would not turn. When I tried to figure out what was wrong the part broke. So while it is correct that I broke the bolt, the gun had stopped working before that happened.
This next part is probably laughable to someone like you who knows what you are doing, but for shaping the bolt could a mold (wax?) be made of the bolt indention on the cylinder? And the bolt shaped to be consistant with the indention on the cylinder? Okay that is probably stupid.
Well I guess that is sort of correct. I shot the gun one day, took it apart for cleaning and when I re-assembled it the hammer would not work and the cylinder would not turn. When I tried to figure out what was wrong the part broke. So while it is correct that I broke the bolt, the gun had stopped working before that happened.
This next part is probably laughable to someone like you who knows what you are doing, but for shaping the bolt could a mold (wax?) be made of the bolt indention on the cylinder? And the bolt shaped to be consistant with the indention on the cylinder? Okay that is probably stupid.
Macmac
Member
Not a very bad idea, but it would requier a test bolt. One that has the same fit but no ball. Thusly the bolt would be all metal except the ball would be cut off and a wax ball made on the base of the bolt left over.
This would result in a cast of what the real bolt needs to be. I haven't yet cut the ball.
I want to see what Old Fuff has to say, and review everything he has said.
I am sure he will, but if for any reason he doesn't I can still get this.
What I am mainly interested in is which way to go. Square up the bolt ball or angle it like it is..
I know it is over sized. Making it smaller is a no brainer, but which method is the best?
Your original is squared level with Earth, so is my 1860.
Now I don't know how Old Fuff knows this stuff, but he does. He knows it so well he can type it with out much thought, and it works out, and I can see that he KNOWS.
I know I can make it work, but I want it to be the best you ever had it ... Old Fuff knows how to get that. Me: I'm waiting for a few more words, I am pretty sure he will tell us..
I think this thread is great. I get to learn more, and I belive you are.
That 2nd bolt you had that working awhile. What do you recall about getting that to work?
That bolt was locking on the frame, and caused some of the damage, but it worked right? The ball on that one is bigger than the original by 0.020" heavy, which is midway between numbers on my micrometer as apx 0.0205, almost 0.021"
That figure 0.020 is bigger than old cars with points gap, and not much smaller than old car plug gap.
Taking that much metal off with no cares is a no brainer. Any fool with a grinder can take that and more in a second on any grinder..
So it is a matter of finess to remove a near amount maybe, and have it still take a polish, and not look like a butcher job.
I still have a few tricks waiting.
One is use feeler gauges and see what the distance is between the clyinder in several places, knowing no clyinder is really round; and the frame.
I can and was planning to stick a dob of wax in a cylinder lock slot, not that the one I choose is like any of the others either, and perhaps check a few of the others as well.
That done with the bolt as is.. Have a look at the wax and see if any gets pushed out and where any stays... I assume you are following this line of thought.
If I worked on only things I ever knew before I wouldn't get much work done eh? I have worked on a great deal of things far older than I am. People expect me to know all these things like somehow I should too!
Oh sure I know all about chrystler 331 engines made in 1953 when I was 2. Oh yeah, sure..
That one turned out as who ever wrote the book for these marine engines had no clue. 2 engines, one clockwise, and one counter clockwise in for a total over haul. I mean everything was rebuilt, starters to gennies, carbs to manifolds, everything.
Well that book had the same firing order for both engines. WRONG
I was gifted with a restoration on a 56 Porsche 356 B. I think the B was for bathtub, or something. Anyway I said yes, and that car was in mixed boxes with mixed parts as if a giant dumped all the parts in a refer box, and shook it, then dumped a little bit in about 8 other boxes.
There was 1 piston in each box, and the connecting rods were in other boxes with ft bumper parts, and parts of the trannie were in with interoir parts. Tha whole car was in bits and pieces not just the engine.
I drove that car myself on the test ride. I just love it when no one else wants the job..
This would result in a cast of what the real bolt needs to be. I haven't yet cut the ball.
I want to see what Old Fuff has to say, and review everything he has said.
I am sure he will, but if for any reason he doesn't I can still get this.
What I am mainly interested in is which way to go. Square up the bolt ball or angle it like it is..
I know it is over sized. Making it smaller is a no brainer, but which method is the best?
Your original is squared level with Earth, so is my 1860.
Now I don't know how Old Fuff knows this stuff, but he does. He knows it so well he can type it with out much thought, and it works out, and I can see that he KNOWS.
I know I can make it work, but I want it to be the best you ever had it ... Old Fuff knows how to get that. Me: I'm waiting for a few more words, I am pretty sure he will tell us..
I think this thread is great. I get to learn more, and I belive you are.
That 2nd bolt you had that working awhile. What do you recall about getting that to work?
That bolt was locking on the frame, and caused some of the damage, but it worked right? The ball on that one is bigger than the original by 0.020" heavy, which is midway between numbers on my micrometer as apx 0.0205, almost 0.021"
That figure 0.020 is bigger than old cars with points gap, and not much smaller than old car plug gap.
Taking that much metal off with no cares is a no brainer. Any fool with a grinder can take that and more in a second on any grinder..
So it is a matter of finess to remove a near amount maybe, and have it still take a polish, and not look like a butcher job.
I still have a few tricks waiting.
One is use feeler gauges and see what the distance is between the clyinder in several places, knowing no clyinder is really round; and the frame.
I can and was planning to stick a dob of wax in a cylinder lock slot, not that the one I choose is like any of the others either, and perhaps check a few of the others as well.
That done with the bolt as is.. Have a look at the wax and see if any gets pushed out and where any stays... I assume you are following this line of thought.
If I worked on only things I ever knew before I wouldn't get much work done eh? I have worked on a great deal of things far older than I am. People expect me to know all these things like somehow I should too!
Oh sure I know all about chrystler 331 engines made in 1953 when I was 2. Oh yeah, sure..
That one turned out as who ever wrote the book for these marine engines had no clue. 2 engines, one clockwise, and one counter clockwise in for a total over haul. I mean everything was rebuilt, starters to gennies, carbs to manifolds, everything.Well that book had the same firing order for both engines. WRONG
I was gifted with a restoration on a 56 Porsche 356 B. I think the B was for bathtub, or something. Anyway I said yes, and that car was in mixed boxes with mixed parts as if a giant dumped all the parts in a refer box, and shook it, then dumped a little bit in about 8 other boxes.
There was 1 piston in each box, and the connecting rods were in other boxes with ft bumper parts, and parts of the trannie were in with interoir parts. Tha whole car was in bits and pieces not just the engine.
I drove that car myself on the test ride. I just love it when no one else wants the job..
Macmac
Member
I knew it! Haa Haa haa evil grin... 
The attached picture is of an 1873 Single Action Army, but the lockwork between it and the 1851 Navy is the same except for the hammer and hand. This front view will show you the relationship between the frame, bolt and cylinder.
==================================================================================
Sorry guys, but I don't seem to be able to upload the drawing in either .jpg or .doc formats. See if you can download the attachment into your computer. It's a Microsoft WORD 2000 document.
==================================================================================
Sorry guys, but I don't seem to be able to upload the drawing in either .jpg or .doc formats. See if you can download the attachment into your computer. It's a Microsoft WORD 2000 document.
Last edited:
Im283
Member
I only ever installed one replacement bolt. That would be the bolt that was in the gun when I shipped it to you. I never had that in working order, everything I tried failed.
You can see my crude grinding marks on it. I got it to fit in the frame ( I thought) and into the cylinder but it never worked.
Macmac
Member
working on some way to open it
Im283
Member
deleted by me
Last edited:
Macmac
Member
Last edited:
Macmac
Member
mod's delete my compute had a spazam thank you
Last edited:
Im283
Member
- Status
