Is this forcing cone erosion bad?

[WilsonCQB1911]

My dad has an older Python he bought used years ago. Round count is unknown. Lockup is tight and it has minimal end shake in my not so educated opinion. It has no flame cutting.

I don't know much about revolvers so I can't tell if the forcing cone has eroded badly and needs to be addressed.

Does this look like normal or advanced wear?

Again, I'm not having any actual issues with shooting. Just wanted to see if it needs some maintenance before it gets used further.

Thanks!

 

[red rick]

I would check the gap between the cylinder and barrel .

 

[ontarget]

Looks fine from the angle of your pics.

 

[WilsonCQB1911]

I would check the gap between the cylinder and barrel .

I don't have any tools to do so but I can say that you have to work to see any daylight between the two. You have to get it to the perfect angle to even perceive a gap.

Sounds like I don't need to worry then.

 

[reddog81]

Are you 100% positive it's not little bits of lead on the forcing cone?

Worst case scenario I'd call that minor erosion.

 

[WilsonCQB1911]

Are you 100% positive it's not little bits of lead on the forcing cone?

Worst case scenario I'd call that minor erosion.

I'm certain there is some leading. It looked worse before I cleaned it up with some lead removing cloth. My dad shot dirty lead loads through it he cast himself.

I'm glad to hear all this from you guys. I didn't know what I was looking at but someone told me to check the forcing cone.

 

[JohnKSa]

Are you 100% positive it's not little bits of lead on the forcing cone?

Given that there's not even a trace of flame-cutting, I'm going to second this...

 

[red rick]

A flexible feeler gauge won’t cost much and you could check it if you are concerned , I don’t see anything wrong in your picture and I would be surprised if a Python had to much cylinder gap .

 

[wcwhitey]

Given that there's not even a trace of flame-cutting, I'm going to second this...

Third, keep cleaning. Watch the lead remover cloth on the blue finish but a toothbrush and some bore cleaner. Keep at it.

 

[WilsonCQB1911]

I would check the gap between the cylinder and barrel .

I stand corrected, my dad has some feeler gauges so we checked it.

.004 will pass between the two. .005 will not.

Not sure what acceptable limits are.

 

[red rick]

Sounds almost perfect .

 

[JCooperfan1911]

Get a bronze bristles brushes to it with some solvent liquid.

 

[JTHunter]

I stand corrected, my dad has some feeler gauges so we checked it.

.004 will pass between the two. .005 will not.

Not sure what acceptable limits are.

That's a good gap. I have a Ruger GP100 (.357) that has a gap of 0.009". As others have said - keep it clean.

 

[stonebuster]

I've got a Ruger GP100 that looks like your barrel (not lead either) and not worried about it and .004 B/C gap is about perfect. Copper Chore boy & solvent on the end of brass bore brush and twist is what I use for lead in that area.

 

[243winxb]

OPs Forcing Cone- Normal wear for a well used revolver. Have see a 44 mag with almost a knifes edge on the barrel face. Still safe to shoot.

I do NOT see any leading on OPs forcing cone.

Barrel can be set back & forcing cone recut when needed. But not needed yet.

Had a Colt Trooper barrel crack in the forcing cone. Mostly heat related, during rapid fire with 125 gr max ammo.

My 44 m29- After factory setback 2 years ago. . Not really happy with it. More photos- https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?media/29-2-after-barrel-setback.4114/#media

Needed a new barrel, but this barrel is Mag-Na-Ported.

 

[AzShooter1]

Your forcing cone looks right. Just needs a good cleaning. Use a LEE LEAD REMOVER and your cone will come out as new.

 

[edwardware]

I don't know much about revolvers so I can't tell if the forcing cone has eroded badly

I'll bet a lot of that is actually leading on the face of the barrel. Get a copper Chore Boy pad or brass scraping tool, and scrub-s-dub-dub.

.004 will pass between the two. .005 will not.

I found your problem! You haven't shot it enough, and it's still too new.

That's perfect. Go shoot 50k rounds over the next decade, then call back for a checkup.

 

[WilsonCQB1911]

Ha! Thanks everyone. I'm still learning about wheel guns.

 

[red rick]

I wouldn’t scrub on the forcing cone to much , you will make the wear . It’s only cosmetic and what a revolver looks like when shot .

 

[chicharrones]

View attachment 1083760
View attachment 1083761

That Colt barrel at the forcing cone looks like there is a slight step to the outside diameter. Which makes it seem like lead could be piled up on it?

I'm used to the face of a new forcing cone being machined flat, not a stepped outer diameter. Is this normal for older Colts?

The pic below is forcing cone wear, in my experience. The face has been blasted concave. This gun has only had jacketed ammo fired through it.

View attachment 1083830

 

[WilsonCQB1911]

That Colt barrel at the forcing cone looks like there is a slight step to the outside diameter. Which makes it seem like lead could be piled up on it?

I'm used to the face of a new forcing cone being machined flat, not a stepped outer diameter. Is this normal for older Colts?

The pic below is forcing cone wear, in my experience. The face has been blasted concave. This gun has only had jacketed ammo fired through it.

View attachment 1083830

I wondered about that as well. Modern guns are sharp. I'll admit I don't know a lot about revolvers but my limited research suggested that those bevels are now custom touches done for the sake of improving accuracy.

This is pure supposition on my part but I wonder if as time went by and with modern manufacturing techniques they dropped the bevel as a cost savings.

But I'm the least authoritative reference on this. I know 1911s but not wheel guns.

BTW, any idea of the round count on the gun in your picture?

 

[chicharrones]

I wondered about that as well. Modern guns are sharp. I'll admit I don't know a lot about revolvers but my limited research suggested that those bevels are now custom touches done for the sake of improving accuracy.

This is pure supposition on my part but I wonder if as time went by and with modern manufacturing techniques they dropped the bevel as a cost savings.

But I'm the least authoritative reference on this. I know 1911s but not wheel guns.

BTW, any idea of the round count on the gun in your picture?

Not a lot for a heavily built revolver. I don't keep round count records, but I'd say less than 5,000 .357 magnums in that 6" Ruger GP100 that I bought new in the early '90s. I didn't know until maybe 2010 or so that I shouldn't fire as many factory made 125 grain JHP magnums through it as I did. Apparently those cartridges are notorious for blasting away metal in that area.

That gun is going to be fed mostly .38 Special from here on out.

 

[243winxb]

Now i have to worry about shooting my 337PD to much.

https://www.ssusa.org/content/how-to-avoid-revolver-forcing-cone-failure/



Brownells- "
When cutting a chamfer, you normally do not want to have the internal di-
ameter of the rear-most portion of the chamfered area to be over .020" larger
than the diameter of the bullet of the cartridge that is being used. In other
words, in a .38 Special revolver, which utilizes a bullet that is normally .356"
to .358" in diameter, the maximum diameter of the chamfer should be
.376" to .378" "

 

[chicharrones]

No i have to worry about shooting my 337PD to much.

https://www.ssusa.org/content/how-to-avoid-revolver-forcing-cone-failure/

View attachment 1083852

The barrel forcing cone hole, .020" larger then bullet diameter is perfect. Most measure bigger.

Good link with good photos.

 

[DR505]

Now i have to worry about shooting my 337PD to much.

https://www.ssusa.org/content/how-to-avoid-revolver-forcing-cone-failure/

Yet another reason I like N-Frames so much...my 27s and 28s should be good-to-go forever!