Cap & Ball Revolvers' Cylinder Bores - Bevel? Or?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Oyeboten

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,696
Now...I am wondering...

If one bevel the edges of the Cylinder Bores, a Ball will be in-effect, swaged when Loaded...

An unbeveled Cylinder Bore, having a crisp cylindrical aspect to it's front end or edge, the Ball will be 'cut' and have a thin Lead Ring removed, when Loaded into the Cylinder.


Which would be best for Accuracy and overall everything?

I am kinda thinking the Beveled Cylinder Bores, and, hence 'swaged' Ball once Loaded, might be the better way to go...at leat in my imagination at this point.


Ideas? Knowledge? Experience?
 
Lol...


Well...I might!

I do not know if I would be able to tell any difference.

But thinking about it, it seems like swaging the Ball in would have to be better.

Just wondering if anyone has anything to add or relay.

Wish I had a second Cylinder ( or one that fits anyway, since I have bought extra Cylinders, and none of them fit...), then I could bevel one, and leave the other be, and do my best to see if I can tell any difference in performence or ease of loading or anything else.
 
In fact chamfered, or beveled, chamber mouths are not unusual and often found on some higher priced percussion revolver target models. I have not personally verified the claims of improved accuracy (I doubt that I'd see a difference as poorly as I shoot) but there are a number of people who say it does help them.

I do suggest that you first verify the chamber diameters are properly sized for the bore of the particular gun. Undersized chambers are a common problem with many replica revolvers and it's a first order effect on accuracy. Chambers should be one to three thousandths larger in diameter than the groove-to-groove dimension of the bore. Once that's done chamfering the mouth is reported to be helpful.
 
If you want to go back in time a little, Sam Colt explains why he beveled the chamber mouths - to prevent chainfires (I can post a larger copy).


ColtChamferonapplicationma00colt-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
After reading that I'll say ole Sam was a hell of a salesman.

I concur with mykeal on matching chamber size for barrel grove diameter. I think a swagged ball well give you a larger land contact area.
 
I just got back my ROA cylinder from Clement yesterday. I had him deepen the chambers and chamfer the chamber mouths as much as he thought would be beneficial. I can tell you it's not much. He said he found a few burs and removed them but he beveled the mouths very little.
I asked him to bevel them so it would be easier for me to start bullets but only if it didn't hurt accuracy. I can only assume that beveling beyond a certain amount will hurt accuracy otherwise Clement would have beveled them more than he did.

By the way, Clement does outstanding work and his turn around times are exactly what he says. He also communicates everyday like clockwork.

I haven't had a chance to shoot it yet so I'll let you all know...
 
Here is the front of my cylinder. This is 36 cal and is sleeved. The dia is .357
and I use a .360 ball. It does not shave a ring of lead. The groove dia. of
the barrel is .355

ThePerfectOneCylinder.jpg
 
I bevel mine because on occasion the shaved ring would bind at the forcing cone. The bevel is very slight and I use a case reamer to do the work. One to 3 twists and you're done. As long as the forcing cone is properly spaced from the cylinder I don't see how it could effect acuracy. Also, I've had no gas cutting, which might be a problem on some of the softer steel guns. Never had that problem on either Uberti or Pietta guns.
 
Bevels are sounding good then...


I imagine a very slight pitch, rather than an abrupt one? - and, going no wider a few thousandths...which should not compromise the relation of Cylinder Bore to Forcing Cone diameters, would do.


Interesting...


Interesting that Colts had worked this out back when...( along with progressive Rifling if I heard right, also...)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top