Cylinder gap up to about 0.013

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tomahawk674

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
613
Location
St. Joseph, MO
Hello, after a range trip I decided to use my feeler gauge to measure what the barrel to cylinder gap is on my Uberti Navy. It is now up to 0.013, and I know that is not what it was when new. I have already put a brand new wedge in.

I do not shoot heavy loads at all, and I do not use conicals. The gun does not feel "loose", and it still shoots like a laser. I have not felt any lead flying out from the sides, not that I would put my hand up there anyways.

Is this gap an issue? The gun is about 3 years old but it gets shot regularly.
 
Someone knowledgeable once told me that the 1851's are looser built guns that have a looser design, and I think that he was referring to the cylinder play starting out looser as well as becoming even more loose over time.
I haven't heard much of anything else ever said about them becoming looser after shooting normal loads compared to the 1860 Army, but perhaps it's a topic worthy of investigation to see if it's a common occurrence or not.
The caliber isn't mentioned in the OP, is it a .44? :)
 
Last edited:
The 1860 Army is an outgrowth of the 1851 Navy. They are built the same.
This so called 'knowledgeable' person is full of bull poo-poo. It doesn't matter what the caliber is, the gap (.008-012) should still be the same from the Pocket models to the Walkers.
 
Is it steel or brass? I feed my 58 NMA brasser a steady diet of 30 grain loads of FFFG and a .454 ball and the cylinder gap is still very small. you can hardly fit a cigarette paper in there if you really tried. I think the fact that I use lots of chamber grease may help. It could be reducing the friction between the barrel and bullet, putting less stress on the frame. That's just my theory on it. I would suggest using a good amount of grease over your chambers.

Levi
 
The Ubertis traditionally have an arbor to barrel assembly mismatch problem. Check out the Pettifogger pages, as recommended above, on arbor fit.
 
The Ubertis traditionally have an arbor to barrel assembly mismatch problem. Check out the Pettifogger pages, as recommended above, on arbor fit.

I agree.

I have two (2) Ubertis and both needed to have their arbor's shimmed. The frame and lug should make contact exactly when the arbor contacts the bottom of the hole in the barrel. With Ubertis, there is gap between the arbor and hole, hence the need for a shim.
 
Hello,

Yes, my Uberti is a .36 cal steel framed 1861 navy. When new, if I pushed the wedge in too far the cylinder would bind (clean oiled gun) which means the gap was very small. It has been 3 years since, and lots of shooting. The original wedge was becoming very loose so I got a new one. The new one feels smug, so that's good. I guess I should just follow the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" principle. It shoots very very well.

The cylinder gap is still less than my Iver Johnson 38S&W, which has 0.017 ;)
 
If you are good with tabletop gunsmithing, you could fit the gun correctly as per the articles I listed in my previous post and it would be correct for a lifetime.
 
Tomahawk674 said:
The cylinder gap is still less than my Iver Johnson 38S&W, which has 0.017 ;)
Click to expand...
I've got one of those. You can practically fit a dime in the cylinder gap, very smokey to shoot.

I say it's fine until you start seeing problems (lead/powder spitting, timing issues, etc..)
 
For what it's worth, my Pietta '51 (in .44) had a gap of .015" and it shot pretty darned well that way. I took steps to refit the arbor and the barrel-to-frame only as a matter of principle or of dogged determination.

Sorry to learn that your wedge feels smug, but if you like it that way, all's the better. Conceit among gun parts is not something I've had to deal with ;) Anyway it's not the wedge itself so much as how far you push it in, that is, until you get the arbor and frame fitting properly. Then it should come together exactly the same every time from now until your grandkids pass it on.

As you say though; if it ain't too broke... Then again, maybe your great grandkids would not have to come on here and ask the same question if it were fixed sometime soon.
 
The 1860 Army is an outgrowth of the 1851 Navy. They are built the same.
This so called 'knowledgeable' person is full of bull poo-poo. It doesn't matter what the caliber is, the gap (.008-012) should still be the same from the Pocket models to the Walkers.
Click to expand...

I went and checked my practically new Pietta brasser, probably about 400 rounds through it and half of that is conicals, all light loads. Gap is 0.007". So, the .008-.12 spec seems right to me. It will shoot until the gap grows big enough to keep the hammer from popping caps. Sooner or latter, more end shake you have, the faster it'll wear. I wore a brass Navy .44 out, stretched it, in my ignorant youth shooting cylinders full of FFF dupont in it. :rolleyes: I'm being careful with my new one, 21 grains Pyrodex P and max I load it with cornmeal filler.
 
An Alternative Gap Fix

There's another way to close the gap as shown by Smokin'Joe:


Smokin'Joe said:
I have made several shims for my Colt clone cylinder.
I made them in .003, .004 & .005” thicknesses. The
cylinder to barrel gap can be adjusted as tight as I
want. As fouling builds I can move to a thinner shim or no shim
at all and keep on shooting. If the idea of
a shim on your cylinder is distasteful it at least can
be used to determine the gap you want before
machining the components.

IMG_0060.gif

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=7141086&postcount=99
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
junkman_01 said:
The 1860 Army is an outgrowth of the 1851 Navy. They are built the same.
This so called 'knowledgeable' person is full of bull poo-poo. It doesn't matter what the caliber is, the gap (.008-012) should still be the same from the Pocket models to the Walkers.
Click to expand...

You're right. As I think back, he was commenting about the 1851 as being looser than the Remington, not the 1860.
 
Here is my current method of adjusting the cylinder gap. Essentially, I cut off a section of 0.5" diameter round-stock and filed and sanded it to size. This shim finished at 0.055" thick, which provides a cylinder gap of 0.008". This shim is easy to make and produces excellent results, but it's easy to lose when disassembling the gun for cleaning.

DSCN0052.gif

Same shim sitting on top of the arbor. Notably, a dab of silver solder would keep it in place.
DSCN0053.gif
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ClemBert
  • Locked
Measuring cylinder/barrel gap?
2
Replies
41
Views
3K
makos_goods
M
T
  • Locked
No Cylinder Gap on new Colt 1860 Army Revolver
Replies
11
Views
2K
OYE
O
D
  • Locked
Cylinder gap and accuracy
Replies
6
Views
1K
Roswell 1847
R
K
  • Locked
Barrel Cylinder Gap
Replies
2
Views
628
mykeal
M
B
  • Locked
Barrel/Cylinder Gap Spiller & Burr
Replies
9
Views
823
Bluehawk
B
Back
Top