Hammer not reaching nipples on Pietta '51 .44

Status
Not open for further replies.

GMRevolver

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2020
Messages
18
I've recently acquired a Pietta '51 in 44. Initially, it required 2 strikes for a cap to detonate with the stock nipples. I chalked this up to poor quality nipples. They were sized for #10 and even then, fit was inconsistent. I since replaced these with stainless #11 nipples from Track of the Wolf. Even though fit is much nicer, I'm facing the same problem. There's a slight amount of endshake in the cylinder as all revolvers have, and the only way it reliably fires caps is to hold the cylinder back.

Needless to say that this isn't a desirable practice with loaded chambers. I've shimmed the bipples with neoprene washers as a temporary fix but I'm wondering if there's a fit issue that I'm missing here. Do I need to simply order(yet again) nipples with longer cones?
 
Like fingers said. I take the cylinder off then coat the area with lay out dye, but Magic Marker will work in a pinch. Then snap it a number of times to find the high area.
 
Sounds like a little maintainance is in order probably file work BUT I'm just guessing. I had a similar problem in a 1858 and it turned out to be nothing more than the screw that holds the main spring in had loosened up enough that the main spring was not at full tension SO cap initiation was poor.

Bought 2 new mainsprings tightened up the grub screw and its no longer a problem and I still have 2 spare mainsprings.
 
I've recently acquired a Pietta '51 in 44. Initially, it required 2 strikes for a cap to detonate with the stock nipples. I chalked this up to poor quality nipples. They were sized for #10 and even then, fit was inconsistent. I since replaced these with stainless #11 nipples from Track of the Wolf. Even though fit is much nicer, I'm facing the same problem. There's a slight amount of endshake in the cylinder as all revolvers have, and the only way it reliably fires caps is to hold the cylinder back.

Needless to say that this isn't a desirable practice with loaded chambers. I've shimmed the bipples with neoprene washers as a temporary fix but I'm wondering if there's a fit issue that I'm missing here. Do I need to simply order(yet again) nipples with longer cones?

Are the neoprene washers the same as O-rings?
If so you may be the first to use them as shims.

How old is the Pietta and what are some of the details, is it a brass or steel frame?
How large is the barrel cylinder gap?
Mike has mentioned several different things, such as modifying the curve of the hammer was one of them. --->>> https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/saga-of-the-new-62-begins.881603/#post-11784936

End shake can also be caused by an arbor length issue.
There could be more than one problem and more than one solution.
You seemed to have found a solution that worked.
 
I would check for hammer to frame contact, see if the hammer is hitting the curve of the frame about halfway into the inside curve below the nose of the hammer. A sharpie marker used on the hammer or frame should tell you where it's making contact.
 
i had an ancient (well not really ancient but Roman Numerals instead of letters on the proof) Brasser 51/.44 that I was warned was not working and so got it dirt cheap.

After stripping it all the way down and cleaning it I put it together and loaded it up with BP, cornmeal, RLB, crisco, and caps ...and found the previous owner was correct. only half the cylinders fired, though eventually all did after multiple strikes.

Now I like distressed looking Colts and this being a "corn fed Irrate" brass frame gun chose not to polish up that brass frame in any manner.

I cleaned it again after stripping it all the way down (no I did not remove the arbor, but did check to see the rear was not battered) There was a little crud in the hammer channel where it makes a 90 degree turn in the frame and just to get rid of the black line there I tried brushes and Q tips but there it still looked dirty.

I deciced to scrape the line of crud with a dental pick and commenced doing so. I got the tip sort of snagged on something and being expert at the used of Brute Force And Ignorance really went to town on it.....and found out that there was INVISABLE cap debris in the channel. Seriously the copper fragments of former blown back caps had been battered to the point that looking for such with a freaking jewler's loop I had not seen it!

AS soon as this heavy gauge tin foil like patch was removed the gun shot fine.

I guess someone had dry fired the gun enough the cap fragments sort of fuzed with the brass frame to the point I could not see the edges!

Might check for such.

index.php


-kBob
 
Last edited:
It's a steel frame, bought new this year. The cylinder gap when the cylinder is pressed forward is none, the cylinder and barrel are against one another. When the cylinder is pulled to the rear, it's still quite thin. Just enough to fit a razor. I checked the arbor(I believe this is the way it's done) by inserting the arbor into the arbor hole, orienting them at a 90 degree angle then rotated them together. The barrel and frame just barely don't clear by a sliver.

They're washers. They fit merely because they flex(it's all the hardware store had on hand). O rings would likely be better. It's a pain to set the proper length of the nipples each time I install them. Too far out and the caps drag on the frame.

I started some quick work on the hammer and the channel in the frame. They were quite rough. Made a slight difference. I'm using small hand files and I was astonished to see how hard the steel was in the hammer. Much more so than the frame. I might need to pick up a dremel.

I also measured the difference between the nipples fully screwed in and when they reliably contact the frame and came up with 0.025". Long cone nipples will only buy me an extra 0.019".

I guess I'm gonna have to do more grinding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top