Need help from Experienced BP owners!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove a burr of displaced material, yes... but do not short the height or spur that goes into the cylinder. Could make you have a cylinder timming issue... Good to see you are havin' fun with your Colt. And My offer still stands on the 1873BP...
 
I'd say that in its present condition the revolver isn't safe to shoot. Once cocked the hammer might fall before you were ready to shoot. I can't see the notch on the hammer well enough to tell if there is a problem there, but suspect there might be.

Unless there is a rear sight mounted on the back of the barrel something is wrong with the hammer nose too. Look at the hammer in the pictures mec posted and you'll see the difference.

I know you want to shoot the gun, but it isn't worth risking an accident. It would be far better to wait until the defective lockwork has been replaced, and the action properally tuned.
 
Sicilian, when I said you should take the gun apart before buying parts, I was only trying to save you some bucks. I really dont give a rat's ass if you
waste your money. And, dry firing IS bad for your gun - several poeple told you so. At this point in your black powder career, you should thank everyone who offers an opinion IN GOOD FAITH, instead of coping a 'tude. And, no one has suggested that you check and see if Pietta parts will fit a Colt...but you do what you want.
 
FWIW, Wish I could have read this a couple of years back.
I had the same gun, In fact I bought the "Signature Series" which included a 1861 Colt Musket, and the revolver mentioned, which was cased in a nice presentation box.

I had the identical problem, and later found out the solution called for a trigger replacement......after I practically gave the revolver away.

Occasionaly I see the fellow who picked it up, and according to him, "it now works like a fine clock"....:mad:

Good thread fellows, great information here!

Respectfully, Russ...
 
Pohill,

Why don't you take a long walk off a short peer! What are getting so bent out of shape about? I didn't come back at you in a bad way. Maybe you should lay off the coffee or something! Dry firing, like I said before, is something I don't do very often at all, but to dryfire one of these guns here and there will not hurt them a bit. If the nipples mushroom after one or two dryfires then something is seriously wrong. I have no idea what you're talking about mentioning Pietta parts, you must have me mixed up with someone else. As for my BP career, I don't have a BP career. I've taken everyone's advice, haven't argued at all, you seem to be the only person to have a problem. You seem a little overly sensitive over something so minor. And if you would have read my post more clearly you would have realized that I had no intention of filing anything until I had a good proper look at things. These revolvers aren't exactly rocket science, you know! Next time maybe you should think before you let go over something so trivial.
 
Russ,

Seems like the trigger is the culprit, at least in my humble opinion. A trigger should not have a "small horn" on one side, and mine does. I did manage to get it working after disassembly and a little cleaning. I have a feeling that filing off the little "horn" on the trigger will completely fix the problem as my hammer looks to be in decent shape. I'm still waiting for a few other opinions about the hammer though. Old Fluff said it was a little hard to tell if the second hammer notch looked alright or not. That's my fault, I don't have a digital camera so I had to scan the parts, they didn't come out very well...the edges look blurred and the scan made the parts look rougher then they really do. I'm sorry you got rid of your Colts...did you take them apart and look at the internals before you gave them to that other fellow? I'm still slightly suspecious of the hammer and will pick up some new parts as soon as I get the chance.

P.S.,

Thanks to everyone for the excellent advice, I apologize if I seemed arrogant or unthankful in any way. I really don't have a beef with anyone and all of the information you guys gave me came in handy, even yours, Pohill. I think you may have taken what I wrote the wrong way, if that's the case let's just forget about the little problem and try to get along. Sometimes, when using a computer and writing everything down, it's easy to take something in a different spirit than what it was originally written in. I really didn't mean to offend anyone, but in life we don't always agree with everything another person says. Something to think about before giving advice to someone. I've given what I thought was good advice and had other people not take it...no big deal. We all have our own way of doing things and there's usually more than one way to skin a cat!

-mario.
 
Old Fluff,

You mentioned a possible problem with the hammer nose? I looked and compared mine with he one in mec's picture and didn't see any difference. Maybe I'm overlooking something? Could you give me a better idea of what the problem might be? Maybe it has something to do with the bad scan rather then an actual problem with my hammer...I hope so anyway. As for the revolver being unsafe, I don't think so, it does seem pretty solid now, but I'll definitely take what you said seriously and be extra careful when I shoot it this week. As for that little"horn" on the trigger, that could (probably is) the culprit, I'm thinking of removing it with a file just like the burr on the hand assembly. What do you think? The worst thing that could happen would be for the revolver to become inoperable again, which would bring me back to square one...getting new parts...which I plan to do regardless, better to be safe than sorry.
 
The Sicilian

There are many problems here, not the least of which is that the Old Fuff is suffering from a medical condition that makes typing very difficult, and he can only work for short periods of time.

Concerning the hammer nose, it appears on my monitor that the little lip or ledge at the upper/front of the nose (the part that hits the nipple) is missing. You can see it in mec’s picture, and it’s where the rear sight notch is usually cut. You may have it, but the picture doesn’t show it.

I have no idea what the “horn” on the trigger is, but I suspect it is battered metal on the tip of the trigger, caused by the trigger being struck by the half-cock notch when the hammer slips and falls when the trigger wasn’t being held back. If I’m right the trigger is probably ruined, and beyond repair.

The hammer’s full-cock notch is not only a certain depth, but also cut at a particular angle. The trigger in turn has an angle cut on the tip which matches the angle on the hammer. Because the hammer is case hardened any adjustments are usually made to the trigger’s angle. Doing this kind of work correctly requires both knowledge and experience. Once the angle or depth on the hammer’s notch is altered – either unintentionally through battering, or deliberately through filing, grinding, or stoning the part is likely going to have to be replaced.

19th Century cap & ball revolvers were built, not assembled, and they had no such thing as “drop in” parts. Everything was hand fitted. Today’s replicas are for the most part, made the same way. Therefore it is critically important that (1) replacement parts come from the same manufacturer that made the gun, and (2) that these parts are correctly fitted. This is especially true when it comes to anything that reflects on the weight of the trigger pull.

Beyond this, and what has been said by others, there is little more that I can do to help you. Some issues can be addressed by posting instructions on a forum. Others require that the gun or parts in question be actually inspected. You have an exceptionally fine cap & ball revolver, but I think correcting it is going to require someone who knows what he’s doing, and has the gun on a workbench in front of him.
 
Thanks Old Fluff, I agree. I have a friend who knows all about these revolvers but he's away on a Cowboy action shoot and won't be back until the 10th of July. I imagine he even has a few spare parts lying around that I might be able to pry away from him for little or no money at all. The nose of the hammer is fine, it's just a poorly scanned image, nothing more I could really do about the picture quality considering I scanned four dementional parts into three dementional representations. At least you got an idea as to what kind of shape the parts are in, beats a blank.

They advertise "drop in" parts and cylinders, and to a degree some do fit rather well, though, others, not so well. I guess it's the luck of the draw. A buddy of mine has a .44 Remington conversion cylinder and it dropped right in on my Uberti 1858 without any problems. Internal parts are a lot different than a cylinder and I imagine some fitting would be required, depending on the specific part. What do you think about getting stainless steel internals? Do you think they'd last longer than the normal parts that come with the guns? thanks for your help Fluff, I really do appreciate your time and advice, regardless what others may think.

The Sicilian.
 
Mario,

You could start by looking at the hammer alone. If the full cock notch looks good, buy a 5 buck trigger, if it is even that much. The internals of the '51 and up to the Peacemakers we shoot today, are all the same, dimensionally. I don't think the other import makers made theirs any different from Uberti and Pietta or CSA/ASM.

These things were not hand fitted. One off gun parts ended with Eli Whitney, when he invented mass production, all parts the same, mebbe a little hand fitting due to burrs or the like, but, basically, put in a new one, shoot again.

So, buy a new trigger, try it.

Don't jump on Pohill because he says, as I did, that just a couple cycles of dry firing WILL F**K up your nipples, then you complain that even Number 11s don't fit. Don't do it.

Good luck with it. An original Colt '73 trigger will be just as authentic as the whatever generation thing it is. Still Colt. Might cost 3 times as much, but all Colt.

Cheers,

George
 
These things were not hand fitted. One off gun parts ended with Eli Whitney, when he invented mass production, all parts the same, mebbe a little hand fitting due to burrs or the like, but, basically, put in a new one, shoot again.

I seldom disagree with gmatov, but this time I will. The lockwork parts in Colt's single action revolvers starting with the cap & ball models and going through the Army model of 1873 required hand fitting. This was particularly true of hands and cylinder bolts. During earlier times the frames, backstraps, trigger guards, cylinders, stocks, barrels and wedges were serial numbered to insure that the right parts would get back into the right guns after finishing. Shop manuals and books concerning gunsmithing of these revolvers go to great lengths to explain how these parts are fitted. Examining original 19th century examples as well as modern reproductions quickly show evidence of hand filing or polishing in certain areas. The parts themselves were machined oversized at certain points to allow hand fitting, and the practice is still carried on today.

Colt's double-action revolvers, until the 1970's were made the same way. Only then did design changes allow for a large measure of drop-in production.
 
Oldfuff,

I didn't mean no fitting at all, they did do some honing and the like, and if you read the book on the Reb guns, even more.

Just that most of the parts WERE interchangeable, and still are. WE are the ones who insist on NO crescent of chamber when looking down the barrel with a light WAY better than any they could have. A range rod to see if there is misalignment is all well and good, today, but, hey, are you really shooting at a 1 inch sticker, or trying to hit the paper and get it small enough, say less than 3 inches, to come here to brag a little.

A thou off the bolt here or on the other side is immaterial. If it prevents the action from cycling, sure it needs attending to. If it is so close the pistol shoots to POA or POI, why would you try to improve on perfection?

I have either got to buy or make a Ransom type rest to see just what these things can do, held fast..

We got posters who brag that they always shoot "duelist", and they say they consider that to be one hand, and I don't believe they are actually shooting sub 1 inch groups. Pardon me if I am wrong, if you can shoot that good, and get 6 people to witness it, then post again, with links to your testifiers.

Most of us are hard pressed to get 'em into 3 inches at 25 yards. I don't think we are all of failing eyesight, nor just plain incompetent. I CAN shoot into an iinch at 200 yards with my CF 6 m/m 284, AND my 7 m/m Rem Mag.

Done, now,

Cheers,

George
 
sundance44s

I have to agree .. maybe some folks don`t really know the distance they are shooting ... they may be calling 15 yards 25 ...because they really don`t know ... there is a huge difference in shooting 25 yards and anything closer ... i do a lot of bench shooting ... and a 2 inch group at 25 yards even from a bench is hell to do ... and at 10 or 15 yards my remmies will hold a 2 inch group from the bench ..but at 25 .. quite a difference story , but i have the distances marked off and measured with a tape . The local club where i shoot started out with the pistol compition shooting at 25 yards after one shooting match all but 2 guys dropped out and didn`t want to shoot anymore ..lol . most couldn`t hit the paper at 25 yards . so now we shoot at 15 yards and it made a huge difference .
 
The fine art of pistol shooting must have slipped...:(

During my youth, which would have been back during the late 1940's, bullseye target shooters (of which I was one) shot timed and rapid fire at 25 yards, and slow fire at 50. All of this of course was with iron sights and using only one hand. At the time, 3"/5 shot groups @ 25 yards were not unusual, fired in strings of 20 and 10 seconds. Under 5" groups fired during 5 minutes of slow fire at 50 yards were also not unusual. Of course the competitors were using .22/.38/.45 target pistols and revolvers as made at the time.

The FBI's combat course was fired with ordinary .38 Special revolvers with 4" barrels, at B-27 silhouette targets at ranges running from 7 to 50 yards, and the better shots could keep their shots inside the K-Zone (center of mass) at 100 yards. :eek:

On one occasion I shot a 5-shot/1-hole group running about 1 1/2" at 25 yards using an original 1851 Navy Colt. No, I never repeated that performance, but clearly the gun could have done it.

On another occasion I found a "junker" brass frame Navy reproduction, which for some reason shot like a-house-a'fire until I shot it loose. On our 50 ft. indoor gallery range I could usually interlock 3 or 4 out of 6 shots into one hole, and then pop the little NRA logo's in the corners of the target.

Ah, those were the days... :D
 
I gotta agreee with Old Fluff. A friend of mine (Fifty years old) shot my Remington 1858 and the first time shooting it he got a 2' group duelist at fifty feet. He shot it again with a two hand hold and decreased the group size to 1 and 1/2" inches! Goes to show what a good shooter can do with one of these guns. This was at fifty feet, but regardless, for someone shooting one of these guns cold it is an excellent example of good marksmenship! He regularly shoots with a 1911 .45 at 25 yards and put all his rounds within a 3" bullseye, great shot this guy, hope I can get as good as him eventually.

I think my buddy could repeat that shooting at 25 yards (75 feet for those people who don't know how far 25 yards is :scrutiny: ) Most ranges are marked off in ten yard incriments so people should easily know how far away they are shooting at their target. If they don't then they need glasses or they like to lie to themselves. After shooting for two months with these cap and ball revolvers my group size has steadly decreased. If someone can't hit the paper at 25 yards after a few hours worth of practice they should probably find another sport. The challenge isn't hitting the paper, it's reducing the group size to under 6" at 25 yards. If I could hit within 3" inches everytime I shot at 25 yard distances I would be very satisfied with my performance...consistantly, not that "miracle" group that may have taken a few hours to finally get. I'm just happy that I'm improving and having a lot of fun. I don't expect to shoot 1" groups at 25 yards or even 2" inch groups at 25 yards off hand duelist within the next ten years or so, but I can always hope, can't I?

So even though these revolvers are capable of shooting 2" groups it is few and far between to find a guy that can shoot them consistantly. George is right about the 3" inch thing for the most part, unless the shooter is just really excellent. Maybe I just haven't seen enough people shooting BP to really know for sure? Of course people are going to post their best effort, would you scan a sh*tty target group or scan your best effort?
 
Of course people are going to post their best effort, would you scan a sh*tty target group or scan your best effort?

Lol! I re-used my worst ever target because it didn't have any holes in it!! :p

They advertise "drop in" parts and cylinders, and to a degree some do fit rather well, though, others, not so well.

That's true, I have 3 pietta 1858's and I've checked the internal parts for interchangability and they don't swap between pistols...they are custom fitted to the gun they are in and won't work in another gun. Sometimes you might get a good enough fit, but mostly you would have to customize the part to work with the rest of the lockwork.
 
sundance44s

Thats true most public ranges have the yardage marked .. but i know a lot of us shoot in the out back .. old dry gulches , dumps ..the woods behind the house etc. and some times what looks like a long shot for a pistol is really only 15 yards or so ..shooting at a marked 25 yards makes one hell of a difference ... i`m old dead eye at 15 yards with my remmies .. but when i move it out to 25 yards mabe i don`t see so good anymore ..lol ( i did shoot expert in the military with a 45 acp ...but that was 35 years ago and now i wonder how i did it ) but if i ever make a come back it will be with my weapon of choice a 1858 44 Remmie !
 
Hahaha,

Very true sundance! 25 yards is a whole different ball game compared to fifty feet! I was shooting pretty good yesterday at fifty feet (I warm up at fifty) but as soon as I moved out to 25 yards things got rather...sloppy. Last time I did great at 25 yds., maybe it was the new loads I was using? I was shooting a cartrige gun. I would have shot my BP revolvers but I forgot my powder! :banghead: Won't let that happen again :D Maybe I should just start out at 25 yrds. instead of warming up at 50 feet? A good shooting buddy of mine told me to shoot to my ability, not to move up until I can group small at fifty feet but some of the older guys on the forum here said I should just practice at 25 yards. I'm hell of confused now! Any really good target shooters here have any advice on the best way to improve (besides simply saying practice, practice, practice)?

Sicilian.
 
sundance44s

Sicilian my last 6 months in the military were at group Baltimore, man was i bord not enough time left for a duty station assignment .. luck have it there was an indoor range in the group building so every night me and the gunners mate spent many hours shooting the 45`s and the range was 25 yards only .. after about 2 months of shooting every night i requalified and shot expert with the 45 acp .. so moral of the story when ya ain`t sitting on a stool eating those blue crab cakes and beer .. shoot ..shoot shoot . lol
 
I bought an army 1860 made by Lyman from a freind for 20 bucks I ordered parts from dixie gun works ( 10 yrs ago) they required some minor fitting but the gun shoots excellent at 50 ft. Good considering it didn't work at all when I got it but he told me up front it needed work. I recently bought a ( I think ) navy 1858 44 cal. from traditions made by pietta w/ kit for $200 I have been trying different ball sizes and loads sometimes it shoots accuratly at 50 sometimes I can't hit the paper. Practice, patience, finding just the right load will make the difference. I also shoot better with a gun after I have had it awhile and get used to it. It has taken me several trips to the range to get my t-c penn hunter 50 cal zeroed in 2" groups at 100 yrds I am hoping to improve that next time.
 
I should have added that I used 4f goex in the army lyman. I have been using pyrodex 3 in the the 50 cal. and navy. I am going to get some fffg to try in the others I like goex better.

the 44 navy I am not sure on the year of replication, but it has a full brass frame the top (over the cylinder ) is open 8" octagonal barrel.

I don't want to impose on your thread, but my ? is not worth starting a new one :eek: :)
 
I think it's an Army, not a Navy, at least if it's an 1858. FFF is the stuff to use in these revolvers, FFFF probably burns too fast, possibly giving you bad accuracy, ask the older guys, I'm only moderately experienced so far. I've got a Hawkens rifle made by TC that I still haven't fired yet, I'll check it out eventually, probably when the weather turns cooler.
 
Four-F black powder is intended to be used for priming flintlocks, and is generally too fine to use in pistols or revolvers. Two-F or Three-F is recommended for them. When using a black powder substitute follow the maker's recommendations.

If the powder is too fine, and packed as it is supposed to be in a revolver chamber, you get in effect a solid charge, which is actually slower to ignite then a courser powder that has space between the graduals. Obviously the powder in a flintlock pan is not packed and Four-F powder ignites quickly.
 
Shooting at 50 feet is great, if you CAN'T hit the paper ar 25 yards.

Once you adjust either the sights or the hold, you should go to 25, or even 50 yards.

If you can get it on paper at 50, and into a little group, then you can brag. And I will give you a high 5 for it.

I have only belonged to half a dozen shooting ranges, gun clubs, actually, never been to one that is marked off in ten yard increments.

Are you guys talking about pay per hour ranges?

Cheers,

George
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top