i think if we were shooting guns 150 years old it might matter due to metallurgy and machine capabilities as well as who produced it. however, in my experience with modern replicas it really don't matter much. ofcourse brass is brass...
Open cylinder frame vs. closed cylinder frame?
- Thread starter Bowhunter57
- Start date
- Status
black_powder_Rob
Member
ok mykeal, as far as the rear sight goes if one were so inclined they could always get the stock for one of the colt designs and put a tang sight on it. Sorry just thinking outside of the box. All in good fun.
:banghead:scrat
Member
ya but you know you love it. we havent argued about this in a while. maybe since GOC was around
AntiqueCollector
Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2007
- Messages
- 842
I think the open top design is superior for a cap and ball gun. Cap fragments are more easily knocked out, less prone to jamming. Just my experience/opinion. The Colt style guns are accurate when you're used to them, but, the Remington style sights are better for most shooters I suspect. Not as difficult to get used to since they're like any other gun pretty much.
LightningMan
Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2008
- Messages
- 1,029
I will add my 2 cents to this topic, which in my opinion it does more damage to an open top revolvers accuracy and to it's frame is over tightening the wedge by pushing it in past the spring catch. You end up changing the POA and bending that hardened arbor, to soften it. Just my opinion, yours my vary, LM.
Omnivore
Member
Lightening; You're right, if and only if the gun is improperly dimensioned, as I stated i a previous post. The front of the arbor is supposed to bottom out, hard against the end of the blind hole in the barrel. Hence, overtightening or undertightening the wedge a little bit can only change the linear forces on the arbor.
That being said, there are a lot of improperly fit Colt repros out there. It is a relatively easy fix however.
You can test the fit by slipping the barrel as far as it will go over the arbor while rotated, so the frame pin/frame interface portion of the barrel is along side of the frame, rather than against it (remove the cylinder before doing this). The part of the barrel that normally butts against the frame should overlap the frame by only a few thousandths of an inch. You'll find on many Ubertis, for example, the barrel/frame interface will overlap the frame by far more than that-- a sixteenth or more. The arbor is too short, or the frame interface at the bottom of the barrel is too long. Installing the cylinder, pushing it all the way backward against the frame, while doing this test again, will tell you which. You should be able to bottom out the arbor and; a; have the correct cylinder gap and, b; have the barrel's frame interface no more than about ten thousandths overlapping the front of the frame.
This is where the confusion comes from, causing people to say that wedge tension is how you "adjust" for cylinder gap. That is true only if you have a misfit gun. In fact it should be impossible to alter cylinder gap (and POI along with it) by altering wedge tension until you get to the point where the wedge is going to fall out from being so loose.
That being said, there are a lot of improperly fit Colt repros out there. It is a relatively easy fix however.
You can test the fit by slipping the barrel as far as it will go over the arbor while rotated, so the frame pin/frame interface portion of the barrel is along side of the frame, rather than against it (remove the cylinder before doing this). The part of the barrel that normally butts against the frame should overlap the frame by only a few thousandths of an inch. You'll find on many Ubertis, for example, the barrel/frame interface will overlap the frame by far more than that-- a sixteenth or more. The arbor is too short, or the frame interface at the bottom of the barrel is too long. Installing the cylinder, pushing it all the way backward against the frame, while doing this test again, will tell you which. You should be able to bottom out the arbor and; a; have the correct cylinder gap and, b; have the barrel's frame interface no more than about ten thousandths overlapping the front of the frame.
This is where the confusion comes from, causing people to say that wedge tension is how you "adjust" for cylinder gap. That is true only if you have a misfit gun. In fact it should be impossible to alter cylinder gap (and POI along with it) by altering wedge tension until you get to the point where the wedge is going to fall out from being so loose.
Omnivore
Member
Here's the article that gave me my epiphany regarding open top fitting:
http://www.theopenrange.net/articles/Tuning_the_Pietta_Part_One.pdf
Read it and heed it. That guy knows what he's doing. It's specifically regarding the Pietta '51, but the arbor fit concept applies to all open tops.
Here's part two FYI:
http://www.theopenrange.net/articles/Tuning_the_Pietta_Part_Two.pdf
It was posted here in another thread some time back, and I used it to vastly improve my Pietta, as well as get a much better understanding of it:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=383797
Thank you, Pulp!
http://www.theopenrange.net/articles/Tuning_the_Pietta_Part_One.pdf
Read it and heed it. That guy knows what he's doing. It's specifically regarding the Pietta '51, but the arbor fit concept applies to all open tops.
Here's part two FYI:
http://www.theopenrange.net/articles/Tuning_the_Pietta_Part_Two.pdf
It was posted here in another thread some time back, and I used it to vastly improve my Pietta, as well as get a much better understanding of it:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=383797
Thank you, Pulp!
Omnivore
Member
They're PDFs so you need Adobe Reader to display them. You can download Reader for free from Adobe's web site (highly recommended). Once you have Reader you just click on the link and it loads and displays. These particular PDFs are largish files because they contain a lot of photos, so a high-speed connection is a plus. With dial-up they'll take several minutes to load.
1858 Remington Army introduced several design features besides the top strap.
Single screw for the trigger and cylinder bolt.
One piece frame rather than the three pieces in the Colt frame. The barrel in the Colt design is yet another piece, along with the three piece frame. The barrel on the Rem. is attached to the frame -- making the design more rigid, fewer parts.
But mostly -- the cylinder in the Rem. can be removed without tools, which made it practical to load and carry a second cylinder in the field . . . Just short of the advent of metallic cartridge rounds.
1858 Rem. Army converts to a metallic round cylinder --
Buffalo Bill Cody used the 1858 Rem. but never converted to the metallic cartridge cylinder.
During the Civil War, largely because of these improved features, the Rem. would be traded for two or three Colts.
If you're new to BP and looking for a revolver -- avoid brass frames. Get a STEEL frame, and stainless is nice! My first was a 36 Cal. Colt Navy, brass frame . . .
Just got a stainless 1858 Rem, w/ second cylinder. Much improved gun, because of the advanced design concepts!
-----------------------
The Colt Walker -- moving along here -- was designed for General Walker for use off horse mounted calvary (if that's not redundant). Essentially, the walker was a "reapeating carbine rifle" with a short stock (no stock). It was the most powerful handgun on the market until the introduction of the .357 magnum by Smith & Wesson.
Design shortcoming in the Walker is that the load lever is not secured and tends to drop down out of position when firing.
Single screw for the trigger and cylinder bolt.
One piece frame rather than the three pieces in the Colt frame. The barrel in the Colt design is yet another piece, along with the three piece frame. The barrel on the Rem. is attached to the frame -- making the design more rigid, fewer parts.
But mostly -- the cylinder in the Rem. can be removed without tools, which made it practical to load and carry a second cylinder in the field . . . Just short of the advent of metallic cartridge rounds.
1858 Rem. Army converts to a metallic round cylinder --
Buffalo Bill Cody used the 1858 Rem. but never converted to the metallic cartridge cylinder.
During the Civil War, largely because of these improved features, the Rem. would be traded for two or three Colts.
If you're new to BP and looking for a revolver -- avoid brass frames. Get a STEEL frame, and stainless is nice! My first was a 36 Cal. Colt Navy, brass frame . . .
Just got a stainless 1858 Rem, w/ second cylinder. Much improved gun, because of the advanced design concepts!
-----------------------
The Colt Walker -- moving along here -- was designed for General Walker for use off horse mounted calvary (if that's not redundant). Essentially, the walker was a "reapeating carbine rifle" with a short stock (no stock). It was the most powerful handgun on the market until the introduction of the .357 magnum by Smith & Wesson.
Design shortcoming in the Walker is that the load lever is not secured and tends to drop down out of position when firing.
- Status
